OB Min 2012-08-23 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

noted that the fund could possibly perform better and the unfunded liability could be less and the second item is that the Oversight Board can make the decision if something goes wrong. Ms. Christensen asked if the i1-12 payroll was typical and Mr. Ponty confirmed it was. She would like to discuss the staff time allocations at some point. Vice Chair Roberts asked if this was added to the ROPS and Ms. Ramirez said that this was not part of the ROPS. Member Navas said that his present inclination is to address this every year. He said because of the uncertainty on the percentage to pay he likes the year by year approach. Vice Chair Roberts asked Legal Counsel to look at the fairness issue associated with this and the legal perspedive on this issue. Mr. Labadie said that there are a couple approaches: 1)to lock in for five years, 2)develop a payment schedule and update it via each ROPS, 3)address it as part of an agreement. Ms. Ramirez said that another option is to just ask for the unfunded liability. Ms.Thompson said that cities have been experiencing the brunt of the risk as the State takes the funds away from the cities, and she does see this as a risk because it could be disallowed should the law change. Ms. Christensen said that as a commitment the Oversight Board could just pay it each year from the residual,this would be an agreement through the ROPS. Ms. Labadie said that this could be done but it would be complicated. Mr. Lyon thanked Mr. Ponty for his leadership and his conservative approach and he would prefer a'�solid ground"approach. Chair Holland said that one approach is more certain and the other is just a bet. Ms. Christensen asked about the"freshness"of the numbers and he said these are for 2010. There were different points made and the risk was discussed on all fronts and approaches. Vice Chair Roberts made a recommendation to accept this recommendation and wrap this up now. One Member asked for a 10-year average and Mr. Ponty said staff could do it but the 10-year data will not tell the full story because the benefits changed in the last five years. Mr. Labadie said that there is a little time to resolve this because this will only be on the 4tn ROPS. Mr. Lyon asked if there is a conflict of interest for him since he is a recipient of the retirement packages. Mr. Labadie said he did not think Mr. Lyon should be disqualified. The Chair summarized the consensus which was to table this item and have staff review the numbers since 2006 and look at those averages,across those years, and bring back this original recommendation with the addition of such research. Mr. Ponty said that pushing this out another month is not a problem. Member Navas suggested making the payments and keep the money in a trust. Mr. Ponty said that the cleaner approach would be to bring back an agreement to review each year and base that years'payment on that year's actuarial information. Vice Chair Roberts said that he prepared to vote either way but he is concerned with the"the pay as you go" approach since it might have a higher risk and he likes a decision that is binding for a five year period. The Chair concurred that there is a risk with the"pay as you go"approach. The final consensus was to have staff come back with: 1)a five-year plan that looks at the existing data (as presented today), 2) include a��pay as you go" alternative,and 3)the option to look at an average which goes back to 2006. Mr. Ponty covered details on unfunded retiree health benefits. He explained the computations supporting the figures of$3.2 million. One Member asked if the unfunded liabilities are coming down and Mr. Ponty said this has not been observed here. Questions were asked about vesting levels and Mr. Ponty provided details. One Member questioned the allocation of staff and how the City Manager spent 30%of his time on Redevelopment Agency matters. Mr. Ponty said that there is a lot of daily business including negotiations and legal work the City Manager and City Attorney had to do for the Redevelopment Agency. Ms. Christensen inquired if there wasn't a Community Development Manager that handled much of the work. Mr. Ponty said that there were a lot of high level matters. The Board thanked Mr. Ponty for all that work. 9. Set Date and Agenda for Next Board Meetings Brian Ponty