Fresno County Board of Retirement s9

BOARD OF RETIREMENT FRESNO COUNTY EMPLOYEES’ RETIREMENT ASSOCIATIONApril 15, 2009Trustees Present:Alan Cade, Jr. Michael Cardenas Nick Cornacchia Vicki Crow Eulalio Gomez James E. Hackett Steve Jolly John SouzaTrustees Absent:Phil LarsonOthers Present:Ronald S. Frye, Alternate Trustee Les Jorgensen, Fresno County Retired Employees Association Regina Wheeler, Fresno County Retired Employees Association John Ernst, FCERA Member Naomi Loadholt, FCERA Member Shari Leibold, FCERA Member Irene Sapp, FCERA Member Barbara Sheffels, Linea Solutions Akio Tagawa, Linea Solutions Thomas J. Tusan, Attorney for John Johnson – FCERA Member Jeffrey Rieger, Reed Smith, via tele-conference Susan Coberly, Senior Deputy County Counsel Roberto L. Peña, Retirement Administrator Becky Van Wyk, Assistant Retirement Administrator Elizabeth Avalos, Administrative Secretary 1. Call to OrderChair Cade called the meeting to order at 8:36 AM. 2. Pledge of AllegianceRecited.3. Public Presentations Regina Wheeler, Fresno County Retired Employees Association (FCREA), informed the Board that, effective May 1, 2009, FCREA will become Retired Employees of Fresno County (REFCO). In addition, Ms. Wheeler noted that Les Jorgensen and John Kallenberg are the only members authorized to speak on behalf of REFCO. 04/15/09 Regular Meeting 2Thomas J. Tusan, stated that he represents FCERA Member John Johnson and noted that a favorable decision was issued on the [disability] case in December 2008. Mr. Tusan inquired as to the delay for a final approval from the Board of Retirement.Roberto L. Peña, Retirement Administrator, noted that Administration will research the matter and report back to the Board.Consent Agenda/Opportunity for Public CommentTrustee Souza pulled Consent Agenda 7 for discussion.Les Jorgensen, FCREA, pulled Consent Agenda Item 10 for discussion.A motion was made by Trustee Hackett, seconded by Trustee Jolly, to Approve Consent Agenda 4-6 and 8, 9, and 11. VOTE: Unanimous (Absent – Cardenas, Crow, Larson)*4. Summary of monthly statistics from the Retirement Association Office on buybacks, retirement benefit estimates, public service, age adjustments, final compensation calculations, and disability retirement applications for February 2009 RECEIVED AND FILED*5. Public Records Requests and/or Retirement Related Information Requests from Marion Miller, FCERA Member; Marc Sorondo, Investment Management Weekly; Elizabeth Hamelin, Hogan & Hartson LLP; Nancy Gordon, Thomas Reuters; and Michael Trefz, Wedge Alternatives LLC RECEIVED AND FILED*6. Update of Board of Retirement directives to FCERA Administration RECEIVED AND FILED*7. Quarterly Trustee Travel and Anticipated Travel Report Trustee Souza noted that the Trustee Travel report incorrectly reflects that he had incurred $87.75 in meal charges during the CALAPRS General Assembly and requested that the report be changed to reflect that no meal charges were incurred. Administration acknowledged the error and agreed to update the report with the correct information.A motion was made by Trustee Jolly, seconded by Trustee Gomez, to Approve Consent Agenda Item 7 with noted changes. VOTE: Unanimous (Absent – Cardenas, Crow, Larson) RECEIVED AND FILED 04/15/09 Regular Meeting 3*8. Correspondence dated April 3, 2009 to John Navarrette, County Administrative Officer regarding the recommended topics for discussion at the upcoming Joint Meeting of the Boards on April 30, 2009 RECEIVED AND FILED *9. Unaudited Financial Statements for Fresno County Employees’ Retirement Association for the period ended December 31, 2008 RECEIVED AND FILED*10. Actuarial Study regarding the impact that recent unfavorable market returns may have on the market value of assets and employer contribution rates in their future actuarial valuations. The study compares results of Actuarial Value of Assets for 5, 7, 10, and 12 year asset smoothing periods Les Jorgensen, Fresno County Retired Employees Association, commented on the importance of the information contained in the actuarial study and inquired if and when the study will be discussed in an open forum.Roberto L. Peña, Retirement Administrator, stated that the study will be discussed at the upcoming Board of Retirement and Board of Supervisors Concurrent Meetings scheduled for April 30, 2009 at 2:00 PM. Trustee Cardenas joined the Board at 8:42 AM.A motion was made by Trustee Jolly, seconded by Trustee Hackett, to Receive and File Consent Agenda Item 10. VOTE: Unanimous (Absent – Crow, Larson)RECEIVED AND FILED*11. Approve One-year Contract Extension for financial audit services by Brown Armstrong as agreed to by the Board on April 2, 2009 RECEIVED AND FILED; APPROVEDAdministration noted that Attorney Jeffrey Rieger, Reed Smith, was not yet available to discuss Agenda Item 12 and requested that the Board hear Item 13 at this time. The Board agreed.13.Discussion and appropriate action on Member request for Compromise Agreement for Overpaid Benefits - John Murphy Becky Van Wyk, Assistant Retirement Administrator, opened discussions by noting that Administration has received a request from John (Sean) Murphy to modify his repayment provisions for a non-final compensation overpayment identified during the recalculation of members’ final compensation.04/15/09 Regular Meeting 4Ms. Van Wyk noted that Mr. Murphy stated that he is unable to repay the overpayment due to his recurring medical condition and, therefore, requested that FCERA accept a lump sum payment of $2,318.57 and relieve him of any further repayment obligations.A motion was made by Trustee Souza, seconded by Trustee Hackett, to accept the lump sum payment of $2,318.57 and relieve Mr. Murphy of any further obligation. VOTE: Yes – Cade, Cardenas, Gomez, Hackett, Souza. No – Cornacchia, Jolly. (Absent – Crow, Larson) MOTION PASSED.RECEIVED AND FILED; APPROVED12. Discussion and appropriate action on whether FCERA’s Non-Service Connected Disability retirement allowances calculation method should change and whether FCERA’s policy regarding overpayment of retirement benefits should be applied with respect to payments to retirees that were based on the formulas FCERA has been using since 2001 Roberto L. Peña, Retirement Administrator, opened discussions by reminding the Board that at the January 21, 2009 Board meeting a discussion took place regarding the calculation of Non-Service Connected Disability (NSCD) allowances using formulas that are not included in the County Employees Retirement Law of 1937 (CERL) or in the subsequent FCERA settlement agreement that established new benefit formulas for service retirement allowances.Mr. Peña stated that this practice was recommended by County Counsel in a letter dated October 19, 2001 which concluded that post-settlement disability retirement benefits should be computed based on an enhanced formula commensurate with the enhanced benefits extended to service retirees under the Settlement Agreement as intended by the parties at the time it was adopted. Mr. Peña noted that at the January 21st meeting the Board directed Administration to share this information with the Board of Supervisors. However, Administration shared the information with County representatives first in an effort to expedite the process.On March 26th Attorney Jeffrey Rieger, Reed Smith, and Mr. Peña had a phone conversation with John Navarrette, County Administrative Officer, Kevin Briggs, Interim County Counsel and Janelle Kelley, Deputy Chief County Counsel, regarding the issue. Mr. Navarrette took the position that this was a retirement issue and that the County would decide if they needed to take any action after reviewing any decision made by the Board of Retirement.Mr. Peña noted that Administration notified all affected members of this issue by letter and phone and notified other appropriate agencies or organizations as necessary as directed by the Board.04/15/09 Regular Meeting 5Attorney Rieger, via tele-conference, stated that Reed Smith is not aware of any legal basis for FCERA to pay NSCD allowances in accordance with the terms of the non-CERL “section 31727.11” and the non-CERL “section 31727.21” and recommended that, based on a plain reading of the law, NSCD allowances for FCERA general members should be based on section 31727 and NSCD allowances for safety members should be based on section 31727.2. This change should apply to all existing and future NSCD retirees.Attorney Rieger further recommended that FCERA apply its policy regarding the overpayment of retirement benefits with respect to past payments to retirees that have been based on “section 31727.11”.A motion was made by Trustee Jolly, seconded by Trustee Cornacchia, to Accept the recommendation of legal counsel that based on a plain reading of the law, NSCD allowances for FCERA general members should be based on section 31727 and NSCD allowances for safety members should be based on section 31727.2. This change should apply to all existing and future NSCD retirees. At this time the Board heard from FCERA members and/or their counsels regarding the hardships and legal issues that could be created should the Board elect to reduce NSCD allowances to those who were granted allowances based on the formulas in question. Thomas Tusan, Attorney at Law, suggested that the Board adopt an agreement that would allow the affected members to continue receiving the enhanced NSCD benefit.The following members addressed the Board: Naomi Mugai-Loadholt  John Ernst  Les JorgensenAttorney Rieger reminded the Board and public that it is the role of the Board of Supervisors (BOS) to grant retirement benefits and the Board of Retirement (BOR) to administer the benefits.Discussions, questions, and comments followed regarding the BOS’s role in potentially re-introducing the code sections to the legislature in an attempt to include the enhanced NSCD benefit into law. Attorney Rieger stated that it is an avenue that could possibly be pursued and cautioned that, in the event new legislation was passed, there could be potential issues related to granting benefits retroactively.Discussions, questions, and comments followed regarding the history of the Settlement Agreement as it relates to the NSCD retirement benefits and County Counsel’s 2001 opinion. 04/15/09 Regular Meeting 6Attorney Rieger stated that, ordinarily, the County and FCERA cannot grant, administer or pay benefits that are not authorized by the CERL. Because the Governor vetoed AB2063 [the enhanced benefits], “section 31727.11” and “section 31727.21” never became law and they were not (and could not be) adopted by the County.In addition, Attorney Rieger stated that the terms of “section 31727.11” and “section 31727.21” do not appear in the Settlement Agreement and that the concept of a disability retirement allowance is not even discussed in the Settlement Agreement. It was noted that basic rules of contract interpretation preclude an interpretation of the Settlement Agreement that would create new NSCD formulas when the Agreement is silent on the issue.In response to a question from Trustee Souza on whether the County or other employers were aware of this issue, Mr. Peña stated that, in addition to the phone call with County representatives, letters were sent to the affected members, plan sponsors, and employee representation units advising them of today’s discussion. Mr. Peña noted that representatives of the County and other employers were invited to participate in the discussion; however, none were present to speak on this issue.A motion was made by Trustee Souza to Table the issue and agendize it for discussion at the upcoming April 30, 2009 Joint meeting with the BOS.Mr. Peña reminded the Board that this item was scheduled to be discussed with the Board of Supervisors at the joint meeting. However, the limited time scheduled for that meeting reduced the number of topics that could be meaningfully discussed and the Board had directed to Administration to bring this item back to the Board for discussion.Trustee Crow joined the Board at 9:40 AM.Due to no second, Trustee Souza’s motion died.The motion was restated as follows:To accept the recommendation of legal counsel that, based on a plain reading of the law, NSCD allowances for FCERA general members should be based on section 31727 and NSCD allowances for safety members should be based on section 31727.2. This change should apply to all existing and future NSCD retirees. ROLL CALL VOTE: Yes – Cardenas, Cornacchia, Crow, Gomez, Hackett, Jolly, Cade. No – Souza. (Absent – Larson) MOTION PASSED.04/15/09 Regular Meeting 7In response to a question from Trustee Gomez regarding the amount of overpayments made to the members, Mr. Peña noted that approximately $170,000 in additional payments have been made to members that are receiving NSCD allowances. The amount of additional allowance for each member ranges from $7.95 per month to $740.52 per month.Discussions, questions, and comments followed regarding the Board’s Overpayment/Underpayment Policy and the available options for recovering the overpayments. A motion was made by Trustee Hackett, seconded by Trustee Souza, to defer the Underpayment/Overpayment Policy and not collect the NSCD allowance overpayments. The following members addressed the Board regarding the recovery of the overpayments: Shari Leibold  John Ernst on behalf of Elaine Williams  Brooke Laney on behalf of Irene SappIn response to a question from Trustee Jolly about the legal impact, if any, to forgiving the overpayments, Attorney Rieger stated that the Board’s current policy was developed with consideration of the IRS’s requirement to take reasonable steps to collect overpayments with appropriate interest. However, after hearing all the facts, the Board has the discretion to determine if recovering the overpayments is “reasonable and appropriate”.Discussions, questions, and comments followed regarding the actuarial valuation as it relates to the funding of the NSCD allowances. Mr. Peña noted that, although, the NSCD benefit is accounted for in the actuarial valuation, the benefit is not fully funded in that its liability is amortized over a period of time.Chair Cade restated the motion was restated as follows:A motion was made by Trustee Hackett, seconded by Trustee Souza, to defer the Underpayment/Overpayment Policy and not collect the NSCD allowance overpayments. ROLL CALL VOTE: Yes – Cardenas, Cornacchia, Crow, Gomez, Souza, Cade. No – Jolly. (Absent – Larson) MOTION PASSED.13. Discussion and appropriate action on Member request for Compromise Agreement for Overpaid Benefits - John Murphy Please see discussion immediately following Consent Items.RECEIVE AND FILE; APPROVE04/15/09 Regular Meeting 814. Discussion and appropriate action on presentation of FCERA Strategic Plan Business Initiative regarding the Information Technology Roadmap Assessment Project presented by Akio Tagawa, Linea Solutions Roberto L. Peña, Retirement Administrator, opened discussions by reminding the Board of the FCERA Strategic Plan and its importance to the long-term success of the Retirement Association. Mr. Peña identified the Information Technology Roadmap initiative as part of the plan and, through a Request for Proposal process, hired Linea Solutions (Linea) to perform a benefit needs assessment. The purpose of the project was to prepare a thorough assessment of FCERA’s information technology needs to ensure implementation of an Information Technology (IT) plan with optimum systems, conversions, resources, security and the like to properly meet FCERA’s information systems needs and serve as a springboard for FCERA’s goal of providing members with quality service in a cost-effective manner. Barbara Sheffels, Linea Solutions, stated that FCERA requested the assistance of Linea to conduct a feasibility study and risk assessment of the organization for the purposes of understanding the path toward modernizing the organization with respect to IT.Additionally, Linea was asked to review FCERA’s current level of dependence on the County’s Information Technology Services Department (ITSD), and to assess which, if any, areas FCERA would be better served by establishing internal, standalone IT infrastructure.As a result of the information gathered, Ms. Sheffels noted the following: The current annual cost of maintaining the IT systems is low, so Linea is only recommending one major change. Migrating application servers in- house with the addition of one more FCERA staff member that would work in IT to maintain these machines; otherwise, much of FCERA’s dependence on ITSD should remain as it currently is.  Data in the current IT environment, namely the information held in the Watson-Wyatt Pensions System, do not send up any red flags, so there are no predictions of any unusual obstacles during the implementation of these initiatives.  Processes in Benefits and Accounting function largely in a manual mode. They rely heavily on manual administration or updating and much of these could and should be enhanced given the current state of Information Technology.  Important information is only available in a non-electronic format. It is highly recommended that these items be imaged or converted into a searchable format 04/15/09 Regular Meeting 9Ms. Sheffels noted that, based on the assessment, initiatives were confirmed and incorporated into a “road map”. The initiatives are as follows:Primary Initiatives New General Ledger Financial System  Replacement Pension Administration System  Electronic Document Management System  Disaster Recovery/Business Continuity Plan  Setup, Hiring and Training of Additional IT Staff MemberSecondary Initiatives Case Management/Workflow Automation  Web Self-Service/Member Portal  Reporting system/Reporting toolsIn response to a question from Trustee Cornacchia regarding using “off the shelf” software as compared to “customized” software, Mr. Tagawa stated that the majority of the software will be off the shelf. However, due to FCERA’s specific needs, customized software will be needed as well. Discussions ensued regarding various types of software. In response to a question from Trustee Crow regarding the necessity, if any, of moving the IT infrastructure as a dedicated, internally administered, standalone unit, Mr. Tagawa stated that by having the infrastructure in-house, FCERA will gain more control and have greater flexibility over testing, training, and production environments. Akio Tagawa, Linea Solutions, gave an overview of the timeline for implementing the key initiatives as follows: Assumption is that the work will begin in July 2009  Much of the work is centered around the acquisition of a new Pension Administration System (PAS) to replace Pensions/Watson Wyatt  Many of the activities will be running concurrently based on the PAS schedule  Activities span from July 2009 to June 2015  IT consultants will be necessary or FCERA will run the risk of not being able to complete the initiatives successfully or in this time frame.The timing of the various primary and secondary initiatives has been spaced based on the knowledge of the implementation phases of these projects. 04/15/09 Regular Meeting 10Therefore they have been stacked, in some instances concurrently, so that if the projects are staffed appropriately, they should still be manageable. Mr. Tagawa gave an overview of the costs for implementing the initiatives and noted that estimates were produced by phase and quarter and take into account FCERA’s fiscal year of July 1 to June 30. The cost projections include estimates about how much will need to be spent at what points in time. Many projects start out with larger payments and finish with large milestone payments, with more consistent, lower amounts in the middle.Mr. Tagawa noted that the cost estimates [approximately $6 million] include the cost of hiring outside consultants and resources and the cost estimates associated with the necessary hardware.Mr. Peña commented on the importance of the IT modernization project and recommended Board approval.A motion was made by Trustee Jolly, seconded by Trustee Crow, to Approve the IT Roadmap as presented. VOTE: Unanimous (Absent – Larson)RECEIVED AND FILED; APPROVEDRoberto L. Peña, Retirement Administrator, requested that the Board hear Agenda Item 16 at this time because the representatives from AIG were available via tele-conference. The Board agreed.16. Discussion and appropriate action on marketing the Fiduciary Liability Insurance for Fresno County Employees’ Retirement Association from April 30, 2009 to April 30, 2010 Becky Van Wyk, Assistant Retirement Administrator, opened discussions by reminding the Board that its current primary fiduciary insurance policy is with American International Group, Inc. (AIG) and noted that this name has been in the headlines recently as a primary culprit of the financial downturn.Ms. Van Wyk stated that, since it is time to renew the fiduciary insurance policy, she contacted FCERA’s insurance broker (Alliant Insurance Company) to request that the program be “marketed”, that is, look to additional insurance companies for coverage. Although Alliant is very willing to do this, they requested that the Board acquaint itself with the steps that AIG Insurance Group has taken to distance itself from the financial arm of the company. In response to a question from Trustee Jolly regarding the last time the fiduciary insurance program was marketed, Ms. Van Wyk noted that it was last marketed in 2002.04/15/09 Regular Meeting 11A motion was made by Trustee Jolly, seconded by Trustee Gomez, begin the marketing process for the primary fiduciary insurance coverage and to not exclude AIG from the process.The Board heard a brief presentation from representatives of AIG [now AIU] regarding its recent restructure. It was noted that all reports indicate that AIG’s losses occurred in the Financial Products Division and that the insurance groups were strong and well funded. AIG recently restructured and transferred its commercial insurance group, foreign general unit and other property-casualty operations into a new unit called AIU Holdings Inc., with management and brand distinct from AIG. Ms. Van Wyk noted that if the Board elects to expand the marketing and select a different fiduciary insurance provider, it should also consider obtaining a policy that would cover any items discovered after the policy termination date. The Board agreed.Trustee Souza departed at 11:51 AM. Alternate Trustee Frye joined the Board.Chair Cade restated the motion as follows:To begin the marketing process for the primary fiduciary insurance coverage and to not exclude AIG from the process. VOTE: Unanimous (Absent – Larson)RECEIVED AND FILED; APPROVED15. Discussion and appropriate action on FCERA Strategic Plan Business Initiative regarding the feasibility of an Internal Investment Position presented by Roberto L. Peña, Retirement Administrator Roberto L. Peña, Retirement Administrator, opened discussions by reminding the Board that as part of FCERA’s Strategic Plan discussion and deliberation at the February 20, 2008 Board meeting on its importance to the long-term success of the retirement association, your Board agreed that given its limited financial, board and staff resources it was important to focus on certain strategic directions or business initiatives over an 18 – 24 month period. One of these initiatives was the internal investment position feasibility project. The purpose of the project was to determine the viability of establishing an internal investment staff position at FCERA to provide additional and/or enhanced oversight of our investment function, investment consultant and investment managers; especially, at a time when the retirement plan was set to reach the $3.0 billion asset size. Specifically, the project required benchmarking the position against other organizations similar in size and operations to FCERA, determining how the position fit within FCERA’s investment function/process and any possible changes that might be needed depending on the recommendation on this issue. 04/15/09 Regular Meeting 12Mr. Peña noted that notwithstanding the decrease in plan assets from about $3.0 billion in October 2007 to the estimated $2.0 billion at the end of 2008, Administration pressed forward with the project as it was realized through research that asset size is only one of the factors to be considered for this decision. Mr. Peña stated that the research revealed that there are four retirement systems with asset balances below $1.0 billion and none has an investment staff position. They also have the least number of account portfolios or investment managers to manage ranging from 14 to 17 account portfolios and 12 to 15 investment managers. In fact, one of these systems has an equity mandate invested in 21 different mutual funds rather than in direct accounts with investment managers. There are six retirement systems with asset balances over $3.0 billion (ranging from $4.0 to about $8.0 billion) that share some investment data similarities among them. All of these systems have at least one, if not two or more, investment positions on staff, including a Chief Investment Officer and they have a relatively large number of account portfolios and external investment managers. Specifically, the number of account portfolios among these systems range from 24 to about 45; while the number of investment managers range from 19 to about 45, a drastic difference to the smaller systems above. This last point appears to be a direct result of their more complex, higher risk and reward approach to their asset allocation mandates which in many cases include investments in riskier, less transparent and more time-consuming mandates than the smaller systems. Some examples of these mandates are alternative investments, absolute return, hedge funds, commodities, etc., to name a few.The other nine retirement systems, including FCERA, have asset balances in the $1.0 to $3.0 billion range and they are more similar in size and operations to FCERA. Five of the systems, including FCERA, do not have an investment position on staff, three other have either and Investment Officer or an Investment Analyst on staff while the last one has a Chief Investment Officer and an Investment Analyst on staff. The number of account portfolios among these systems range from 11 to about 36; while the number of investment managers range from 11 to about 27.Mr. Peña stated that FCERA has the highest number of account portfolios of this group with 36 and the highest number of investment mangers with 27 and noted that the research strongly suggests that the FCERA investment operations can support an internal investment position, either at the Investment Officer or Investment Analyst level. Mr. Peña noted that, although FCERA would benefit from the investment position, Administration acknowledges a need to balance the need for this position with the current financial environment and the budget realities in the upcoming fiscal year.Mr. Peña recommended that the Board allow Administration to move forward with the work related to developing and establishing an internal investment position for FCERA with the intent of making the position available for the 2010-11 fiscal year. This approach will give Administration time to develop the right position for the 04/15/09 Regular Meeting 13 organization and more time for the current asset allocation changes to be completed and implemented before the new position is implemented and our new investment staff is in place.A motion was made by Trustee Jolly, seconded by Chair Cade, to allow Administration to move forward with the work related to developing and establishing an internal investment position for FCERA with the intent of making the position available for the 2010-11 fiscal year. VOTE: Unanimous (Absent – Larson) RECEIVED AND FILED; APPROVED16. Discussion and appropriate action on marketing the Fiduciary Liability Insurance for Fresno County Employees’ Retirement Association from April 30, 2009 to April 30, 2010Please see discussion following Item 14.17. Discussion and appropriate action on SACRS Board of Directors Elections Final Ballot A motion was made by Trustee Crow, seconded by Trustee Gomez, to Approve Item 17 as presented. VOTE: Unanimous (Absent – Larson)RECEIVED AND FILED; APPROVEDRoberto L. Peña, Retirement Administrator, pulled Closed Session Agenda Items 18.A.2. and 18.A.3. as there was nothing to discuss.18. Closed Session: A. Conference with Legal Counsel – Actual Litigation - pursuant to G.C. §54956.9(a)1. Fresno County Employees’ Retirement Association v. Public Pension Professionals 2. North Central Fire Protection District v. Fresno County Employees’ Retirement Association 3. Marsha Stillman v. Fresno County Employees’ Retirement AssociationB. Conference with Real Property Negotiators – pursuant to G.C. §54956.8Property: 1713 Tulare Street, Fresno, CA 93721 Agency Negotiators: Brian Decker of Colliers Tingey Negotiating Party: Any potential qualified buyer Under Negotiation: Price and terms of sale04/15/09 Regular Meeting 14C. Disability Retirement Applications – Personnel Exception (G.C. §54957):1. Christopher Guerra 2. Velma Young 3. Frank Riojas19. Report from Closed Session18.A.1. Nothing to Report.18.A.2 Pulled.18.A.3. Pulled.18.B. The Board approved a purchase agreement in the amount of $775,000 with BNR Properties to purchase the Fresno Station Business Center subject to due diligence and other contingencies by both parties. VOTE: Unanimous (Absent – Larson)18.C.1. Christopher Guerra – Decision – To approve the application for Service Connected Disability benefits based on the Findings of Fact and Decision. VOTE: Unanimous (Absent – Larson)18.C.2. Velma Young – Decision – To approve the application for Service Connected Disability benefits based on the Findings of Fact and Decision. VOTE: Unanimous (Absent – Larson)18.C.3. Frank Riojos – Decision – To waive Rule 23 in this specific case only. VOTE: Unanimous (Absent – Larson)20. Report from FCERA AdministrationRoberto L. Peña, Retirement Administrator, reported on the following:1. The COLA UAAL refund project is on target with checks scheduled to be mailed April 30, 2009. 2. The Retiree COLA calculations have been completed. 3. Administration will return to the Board on June 3, 2009 to request an extension of 2 of the 5 Business Initiatives (Members Service Quality Measurement Plan and Stakeholders Relations Program). 4. Administration will request that the Board of Supervisors approve the Retirement Coordinator Supervisor position on April 28, 2009. 5. The John Johnson disability case will be agendized for the May 6, 2009 Regular Meeting.04/15/09 Regular Meeting 156. The Communications Packet contains articles discussed at the meetings and encouraged the Trustees to read them at their convenience. 7. The SACRS Conference Packets have been distributed. 21. Report from County CounselSusan Coberly, Senior Deputy County Counsel, had nothing to report.22. Board Member Announcements or ReportsThe Board Members had nothing to report.There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 12:42 PM.Roberto L. Peña Secretary to the Board04/15/09 Regular Meeting

Fresno County Board of Retirement s9

Details

Download

Copyright

We respect the copyrights and intellectual property rights of all users. All uploaded documents are either original works of the uploader or authorized works of the rightful owners.

Support