november 12th now i've been through other management changes, too, and when we he's we lose and we lose more than half the time we husbands. >> i support this move i think it's important to watch management we've been talking an allocation strategy and to wait for some of us on the board is usual for me it's not that it is liquid investment skerl we have investments it's about the fact there's been a sell off and potential 16th of marketing when there's a big sell off because management changes it means everything else is walking around without a stock to write

this down you know waiting to see how things shakeout isn't necessarily the smallest thing especially commissioner bridges mentioned has better performances and fees you looked at a one or 5 or 10 number i support this. >> i support ratification of the replacement of it i have i guess two questions. >> telling me what happens from october 15th when the committee met and the 3rd of november that triggered execution when we know for a year there are on the lock list and we know there's a sell off on a monthly basis of $25 billion and knowing that at that time the meeting took place that the sell off continued.

>> what triggered. >> again, it would come back to the daily headlines the ford 40 k they didn't say the dollar amount but one hundred and 15 percent of assets probably north of billion dollars so like san francisco and ford and other deferred coming plans there's a government or governance process so the first i can't remember who mentioned it the 15 plus billion dollars come out of the fund in october and november there's a whole slew of thousand gifted plans just ford was a big one i mentioned like six or seven other big plans knowing there is a rush of other plans that are following the

governance process we decided it was best to move ahead and no upside waiting another 8 days and it bend the participants that's all to the good. >> second issue we accountants have a new company on board correct. >> yes. >> how long will this company pay under the emergency hire. >> we will not consider the back and forth as an emergency hire we went through a deep analysis on 3 activity managers and we looked the van guard funds we don't view this as a hire h it is conservative option that stills is like to like in

the sense of replacing pimp could we defined as having opportuneic it is similar but more conservative and significantly lower fees. >> mr. chair, i was torn i have to tell you locally they've been around for a long personally, i was when you know the two firms and i'm sure commissioners know it's a tough decisions because they're great performance and the structure is great and if we had more funds and assets i'll probably say give them part of that they're well replaced in the industry. >> the chair will entertain a motion to rectify the pimp could. >> so moved.

>> second a discussion. >> seeing none, 96 passes unanimously >> i was going to say i appreciate this interaction. >> good call item 9 please. >> commissioners this recommendation is simply to rectify an unintended consequence of what is going gadsby yard currently has a stable eventual fund its managed income fund is one hundred self-wrapped and we know the stabled value currently works we have an outside more than one organization that provides the wrap so what is happening the

parents are paying the wrap twice we're going to be removing the income fund from the wrap guidelines to it the planters will only be paying one. >> it's a confusing topic i'll audio the reason the fund had to be double wrapped was 0 the market has rebounded so the market for the overlay stable fell to 96.590 in august of 2012 and we were looking at the gifted wraps the wraps provider were not comfortable having that managed income section of that not one hundred percent wrapped now the ratio has improved 98.6

as of september we can safe the fee schedule will drop 2.2 basis point a 5 percent drop and that's the driving force the the recommendations. >> thank you. i'll open up for public comment on item 9 close public comment commissioners. >> mike. >> i'm not sure everybody knows what with wrap is. >> this is question period and can you define wrap. >> can i define that. >> sure it's in the event that the book that the market value rate follows the book value paid out for withdrawals that fell there was a deficit that insurance contract essentially would be what would kick in.

>> what's the price for the insurance. >> about 25 to thirty basis point have you 4 currently prior to the acquisition a so one of the great things that gal yard we have wrap from 25 to - >> entertain a motion. >> a recommendation is there a second. >> second. >> commissioner now it is the mind if you know of comments. >> on the motion (laughter). >> you can also have an opportunity to keep it in sync so the past wraurltz are done at the unit value; is that correct.

>> correct. >> seeing nothing he will all in favor, say i. that passes unanimously thank you very much call item 10 please. >> this is a recommendation (inaudible). >> commissioners at the deferred compensation committee there's been discussion on whether we should pair down the options for the participants there's been various reasons two many options they might be frozen u.s. bancorp unable to see which ones but the prominently one at the october 15th committee meeting aging let me see presented actually two or three options with respect to the mid cap funds and the recommendation before you now is the option that the

committee choose and that would be to implement element the mid cap value and investment options those if approved similar investments are available within the remaining options we also wanted to make sure that the boards knew that if, in fact, the members or planters in the fund wished to remain in one of the option you can, in fact, invest in them throw the self-brokerage option we have some members of the public they were interested in the mid cap funds with respect to how we're going to handle any transition from the target bay funds their current e currently held we're not presenting anything to the board because in our next deferred compensation committee meeting we'll be reviewing the

guide path easements and we anticipate a recommendation where to map the assets and bring it ca back to the board for the next meeting. >> anything to add. >> this elements two funds the mid cap has 1.67 cap and it is tiny it reflect that many of our planters is overwhelmed when they looked at the target fund and the brokerage city is one the goal so really simplify the roster for the average participants that research has shown they go into paralyze and

if they're two conservative they're not happy with the donation but to simplify the line up low participation and the low funds has experienced personnel changes and put them under watch and performance is similar to that fund it allows us to eliminate funds that are under watch. >> just doing smith and combining it gives the manager to move the ability between two has been been discussed. >> we could create something for the white label a accomodation between what we discussed among the committee

meetings not going two year down the simplification. >> what do you think about it. >> angela's has small we don't have compensation plans that have any idea cap we only see small caps we're comfortable with the mid cap as the case mid cap 4 that option is the stability low priced stock fund of all the funds really in the universe it's hard to pinpoint that style it moves around and shows very tun ethnic it is s a good fund for participants that wants it to move around. >> i'd like to add one point from the participants those folks who have money in the

growth funds we'll be transferring that to the core fund you, however, the participants get a 60 day nose and thirty days they'll get 60 days notice to move the money if it, it's there are on the day of the transfer want to put that read into the record. >> we'll opening it up for public comment for this public comment any questions. >> anyone want to entertain a motion of adoption? discussion on the motion all in favor, say i. your passes unanimously thank you very much call item 12 >> - 11 sorry. >> this is an item (inaudible).

>> commissioners have you before you the monthly manager report which is self-explanatory we're happy to answer any questions you might have. >> thank you after it's submitted i'll open up for public comment and if not close public comment and open up for questions. >> i want to make one comment on the final page or the next to the last to 6 since we've rolled out the bowl measure 3 hundred and 36 folks that go open 0 gold maker and make up the gold maker ems gold maker was a product or tool that was significant and plays a significant part in our recommendation and credential as far as the third party in october we have 2 hundred and 64 hosts e votes who enrolled in gold maker. >> commissioner driscal.

>> where did they move the money from and please report that at the come on committee to share that with the full board. >> yes. i'd like to do that. >> great call item 12. >> actually - >> jen even though the services corridor it's been a long multi process and research project called for back in 2006, the research report was viewed and the engross draft and issued in

june of 2012 we've got ann harper here to present this to the board and also have phil on the phone in washington, d.c. testifying to the academy i'd like to mentioned that bill was on the implementation committee for the gadz be standards and great reach for the board. >> bill can you hear us? >> that's a no. >> (laughter). >> bill try speaking. >> hi can you hear me. >> yes. >> some of us can. >> okay. so we're here to provide an overview of our report and answer questions you may have we have a slightly

different format but briefing summarize the report and what it is used for and explain how it is comparing. >> this report is used four only accounting purposes there's a complete diversion from 9 and it reports the information for the gadz by financial statements all the schedules and notes to the disclosures and the information that needs to be provide by our automatic where are and included schedules for gadz by the 68 the standards informative the city's financial statements so the first reporting diet for the retirement system under the new gadz by standard is june 30th, 2014, whereas for the city they're not required to implement until

june 30th, 2015, so the city then has a choice to whether or not use november i'm sorry 2018 or 2015 as their masturbating so the gadz but if clicked in the report if the city elected to have a june 2015 date tha there's one report for that purchase i've talked about that between the funding and now i'm going to give highlights to the changes and difference in the old gadz by and new gadz by and how they differ first item is really all different terminology under gadz by so you're used to hearing actually accrue ability under

gadz by those have been replaced with new terms and total pension liability the net pension liability is the u a l or unfunded address call the fiduciary net position so it's just a terminology change and some of the calculations are a little bit different you have to get used to a new set of verbiage so starting with the total pension liability when is the accrued liquidate in gadz by criteria is that the systems that have something like your supplemental this differs from the liability we don't include the explicit colonel la for when

do recognize a colonel la when their granted we advertise that over 5 years a little bit different of colonel la issue and the pension lobbied you see in the report the june 20th o 30th 2014 the liability from the june 30th information data we use 2014 data there a little bit different in the timing of the liability that is calculated the net pension liability or the unfunded under gadz by is calculated for all systems needed to use the value of market assets there's no longer the term actual value of assets what talking about gadz by they've thrown that term out and everything is recorded on a

value basis that gives me more uniformity another big difference is the annual pension expense that the city is to report on their financial statement and the city the expense is no longer their contribution that was made to the plan for that year there's an independent calculation and independent of funding that's also the reason why we're giving you a completely separate report for accounting so it's divorced from the funding expense under the new system is more volatile it was the acceptance of the employer contribution and in some years it will be close to the actually

contribution and other years far away the main reason for the volatility is because of the timing of what you recognize the losses so some changes are changes in benefits and combadz by says you have to have a faster recommendation for the pieces and investigative losses to recognize the funding policies calls for 20 years we're www.roanokecountyva.gov the dates you're going to see that apprehension spent be more up and down with the market and especially, since we're volley ball things on a market basis as well pension expense for 2014 is viewed lower than the contribution it was made and the expectation we're showing in the report was one hundred versus

the actual contribution of $533 million the difference is mostly due to the good investment return for june 30th in 2014 which was about 17 percent so at this time i ask answer specific questions about the reports or a couple of exhibits i could show you the schedules to after overview with figures and stuff to our questions. >> opportunity to look at our full report and the exhibits so that's i'll open up for public comment on item 12. >> seeing none, i'll close public comment and i'll open it up for questions by the excision

commissioner driscal. >> i'll mark you may have answered the questions i want to clarify another set of schedules we want to push and schedules is different from what the city does the san francisco control that briefed on this great they've been briefed okay their decision is there a schedule? those schedules and disclosure of more information i noted the discount rate from 7.8 to 7.2 i'm not sure how that occurred those changes will not trigger a change in the contribution rate because i'm asking the cash flow question >> it has not effect on the

flow. >> so the difference of the amortization is a good disclosure by doesn't effect the city. >> no. >> with the controllers help do the bond agencies; right you have to explain a myriad of changes we've not had to explain this in particular because we've not been a resort and most public plans were not recorded i'd like to take you back to who we first started talking about the gadz by respirates requirements that was a test you can use our assumed return and we want you to project how far anti your money will take you in paying benefits and any part of that stream of benefits for every employee at a give point

in time that's not payable you'll have to use the municipal bond rate in that he 2012 we are that at an assumed point of return we were 6 points apart the city said they have no interest in getting the investment return fin tuned we were evangelist this given year this has nothing to do with how i fund a pension but and you report is part of the reason 7.258 in 2013 we closed the funding policy on the on the u a l and the gains and losses and changes that helped to get the

interest rate to be higher as the funding rate. >> this is an excellent question the bond rating agencies will be pleased we didn't have a shortfall that required us to have used an assumption less outstanding our assumed rate so those are excellence results for this year i'm glad we're pursuing this you've brought up the supplemental colonel la my question is the spill cola a prospective base or a illuminate about the supplemental cola. >> it's not a utility on a contingency base they're going to eastern the expected return no cola in the future in reality

we know the markets don't have that rate so we will go be paying a supplemental cola that's an assignments so we we grant the supplemental cola that benefit that liability is a loss to the plan it gets amortized over 5 years we're recognizing elsewhere supplemental colas as they happen. >> under gadsby by you have to value the plan so the utility is removing the second hurdle anothers value but it is volley ball as written in the charter and some should be overturned by a court of law. >> this is referring to all

cola plans with the feature. >> i want to i understand eir regardless of the latitude an attractive pay bank but if we get to the one hundred percent pay out that requires a lot of for thought are we're going to wait until itors we talked about funding page 4 as the cola assumptions based on one hundred percent funding level and 2015 the zero is 2020 and that's the assumption. >> all the assumptions are calculating the gadsby by liability so in our funding evaluations we're assuming zero. >> right. right and so someg