>> i like to call the meeting to water. please join me in the pledge. >>[pleage of allegiance] >> will call please. all commissioners are present. >> on our calendar, i will continue item number 15. i request the item to come back with us in a memo. performed by our consultant in our staff

regarding -- commercial loan portfolio. i believe it is in our best interest to see the background. this recommendation in the light that prima is one of our best performers, and as a manager and one of our longest standing managers. in addition to that, i would like to have analyze the issue of our custodian, who was also responsible for reporting, and i would like to commission to know whether it is a prima reporting issue, or our custodians issue and if there is any difference between the two of them. then, i would like to continue item number 17 and direct staff to bring us that item back into meetings. one meeting to be a discussion

item first, and the second to begin an action item that is a very large issue economically, to our organization. i would like is to have time to hear the full background of it, be able to reflect on it, be able to get public comments and whatever due diligence whatever commissioner wants on the subject matter and be able to vote on it the subject matter that >> i would request the audit would take the discussion to potentially september meeting for action. >> july and august is fine. august and september is fine. >> okay >> okay, could you please call item number one. >> one election of board vice president. >> i think commissioner has a question. >> number two in the

[inaudible]. my pages are ms. correct >> i am not sure. >> item number one will be election of vice president. i will open it up for nominations. >> my -- worth put in the wrong section coincidentally. >> i would like to -- >> i will call it in the worker i reckon i said. >> i would like to nominate her my burner widget for vice president. >> commissioner o'driscoll >> i nominate commissioner stanford for vice president that >> any other nominations? seeing none i will open up for election for vice president. >> good afternoon, i am patrick -- here on my own time. i speak in support of commissioner my birder's nomination. again

commissioner stansberry. stansberry's plans beneficiaries of his parents. during the february discussion on hedge funds, in his motion to reject thoughtful amendments to the hedge fund rfp in march, for two examples demonstrate his lack of credentials to become vice president. by contrast, i have witnessed numerous examples of my birder with tics due diligence on a number of issues, including due diligence regarding the sale of the concepts currency over light hedge funds debacle, questions about fossil fuel investment, the investors, questions regarding investing in hedge funds in february, and important key amendments to the

hedge fund rfp in march. since i began attending our meetings, alarmed about the hedge funds, i have ranked you commissioners abilities with my birder most effective. followed in descending order by commissioner bridges, matt chris, cohen, asking jordan, driscoll and in dead last place, stansberry. you do not want dead last becoming vp. do you? >> any other public comment? >> thank you so much. i really cannot add more to the accuracy of patrick shaw's report. one thing i would like

to say is that her has continuously been open and responsive to the retirement board members concerned. has address difficult issues that are not popular, but always seeks the truth and facts and figures. he historically has integrity in whatever he says and does. something that i have found lacking in this process. especially regarding hedge funds. the openness of the board to communicate with a retirement plan members. i think he would be an ideal person to serve as a plans vice president. thank you. >> any other comments? seeing none, all close public on. do commissioners have any comments? seeing none, i will do rollcall on the two nominees an all-star with commissioner o'driscoll. >> which is the process that

you are describing? >> just vote whether it is my birder or stansberry to ship idle for commissioner stansberry to jeff paskin-jordan -- >> i vote for myself thank you much for the comment >> bridges: my birder >> commissioner stansberry >> [inaudible] >> vice president: cohen >> my birder >> and i will vote for my birder congratulations mr. moderator. >> item number two is the election of board president. i will open up for elections payment >> i like to nominate cohen for vice president >> any other nominations? seeing none, all close nominations and open for public comment number two which is the election of pres. >> thank you former, or soon-to-be former president

matt chris. i am speaking in support of the nomination of commissioner cohen for president of this body. her tenure as a member of the board of supervisors, makes a well-qualified to become your board president,. commissioner cohen however can carefully weigh advice to your deputy city attorney. assigned to ers and [inaudible]. importantly, commissioner cohen should ignore any legal advice ms. porter provides that is premised on the city attorneys so-called good government guide. as i noted during her may meeting ethics commissioner t 13 had stated in open session at ethics commissions meetings that the good government guide

carries no weight in law. which i interpret to mean it is not worth the toilet paper it is printed on. commissioner cohen, any base received from ms. porter that is premised on the good government guide should be taken with a grain of salt, or better yet, ignored. >> any other speakers seeing none, all close public comment and open up for comments by the commissioners. seeing none,, i will do the rollcall vote tonight commissioner driscoll >> i am reflecting on those comments. excuse me i do recall what i said last year. that opinion has not changed. however for the good of the board and the system, i will

will not yes for ms. cohen >> paskin-jordan >> yes >> vice president my birder >> yes enthusiastically back >> commissioner bridges >> yes >> the stansberry. >> yes >> v `map is both yes congratulations. >>[applause] >> the new president will take the helm and take it from here. thank you colleagues. mr. driscoll >> the comment i would like to make in the commission of our terms of reference.. people in

the audience as well as the board met we wonder why we do not follow our own terms of reference, which he again adopted last month about rotating the officers between elected and appointed members. i wish i could explain why we have not done that again, but we did. >> thank you very much. mr. clerk, call the next item read item number three discussion item public comment >> all right. i got two cards in front of me. please, at the podium >> thank you. commissioners, i am leaving the four addendum 23 today on the executive directors, performance review.. so i can attend today's

commissions meeting to seek expedited review of the two ethics complaints against commissioner wendy paskin-jordan met comically, people presume i wrote either of the complaints. i assure you i did not. given your public comment guidelines, i am commenting out one item 23. as executive director was contributed to the lack of transparency and lack of communication with plan beneficiaries in that, the records response i received, it appears she never responded to a written records request. commissioner my vote had placed involving due diligence on [inaudible] connect to that extent she appears to about started my birder's fiduciary duty diligence duties and

egregiously and greatly hindered additionally, there is the three month delay of the march 11 meeting minutes. with staff prepares. and, another concern, that he may have overridden ur instructions specifying appointees to ers hedge fund selection committee. you should conclude, absolutely, no-confidence in mr. -- >> i cards here, k walker and sylvia lynch. >> good afternoon, commissioners. this is out of

step kind of because i think the more important items that are coming up, but if something i wanted to say before when the hedge funds were being discussed. one of the -- one of you had said that it seems like you thought we were going to lose our pensions if the -- completely, if the fund was not funded to a certain percentage. when the statement was, no retiree will lose their pension based on investment policy set by the board. each retiree has this right to their pension. well, the concern about hedge funds had to do with not that, because everybody in the room, i would say, was either labor or very well-versed in what divesting was. so, we were really concerned about the hedge fund per se, and you know, what experts were saying,

you know that were not hear about them and about this taking, and it seemed like you are relying on a default position saying that maybe two consultants, whatever, they have a vested right for their pension so maybe we can take a little more risk in ordinary circumstances. i did not like the sound of it. i also did not -- wanted to say that we at least people i talk to -- were more concerned about the code is, you know and proposition c and the damage done by that then this basic pension money. the city and county and the mayor, and the union, so-called the paid leaders when after us. so, we wanted to make sure that this fund was funded at the market rate level. you know, and with hedge funds in the mix, it was too much risk and the fees were too high, etc.

you know the arguments that were made. and other lawsuit was one in terms of some of that class, and then the city attorney with some sort of vehicle stop on it, we are back where we were but even if that did win, they are still 8000 of us and the lower paid when they were working, there are sei you -- and those that were the longest that were not included in the suit that feedback that gave back certain number of people vested rights and talk about the code of conduct this is like a constant thing with the city and county. nothing is written in stone. so you have all the people that are the most does the less endowed financially losing out once again. so, you know, we are still here picking you apart in terms of the vestments. that is why it has to do with keeping up with >> time >> thank you. >> congratulations. ladies

and gentlemen, just following up on kate, her comments [inaudible] certain -- regarding our investments i just heard a discussion and thank you pres. cohen for providing your one copy. regarding merely an supervisor cohen announcing 125 no dollars investment in homeownership opportunities. brought to 1500 middle-class families. i find it very discriminatory against single plan retiree participants who do not even meet the requirements to apply, and how can this board consider -- and maybe i am wrong. review dues guys did get information regarding this program. how can you consider putting an investment in housing, affordable housing loans, without reviewing item

-- resolution or bob shaw's due diligence analysis of the fiscal soundness of this investment? i am trying to get -- and i really appreciate pres. cohen's previous conversation with me regarding being interactive with the plans members. i need to understand how this is fiscally going to improve our retirement fund investment. i also want to know about shaw's due diligence report, which patrick shaw has been asking for months and months and many months. where is it? do you have actual possession of this report? again, this plan for help affordable and low income housing, the parameters that you have to meet to qualify for a loan, i could not do it. supplant people that are retirees can qualify. single retirees, what provisions are being made for them if it is it

only families? i find this chris discriminatory. thank you. >> are there any other members of the public there would like to speak during general public comment? is now, if not does not attempt seeing none, public ominous" it >> could you call the next item to ship item for approval of the minutes of the may 13, 2015 retirement board meeting >> is there any discussion on this item numbers? >> on the modern >> motion moved by victor mathis. is there a second for this item? >> second >> vice president my birder. this motion passes with the public comment. >> thank you pres. cohen. i placed the records request for the draft of may 13 minute prior to this meeting. once again my 150 word written testimony is attached at the

end of the minutes. not incorporated in the body of the minutes, where my testimony belongs. when deputy city attorney katie porter answered commissioner cohen's request for clarification on may 13, porter pulled out her song and dance about the city attorney so-called good government guide. importantly, porter noted at the end of her response to cohen that porter is aware the sunshine task force has repeatedly ruled the written testimony belongs in the body of the minutes. if you look at page 4 of these draft minutes from may 13, it is very clear in that second to last paragraph that ms. porter "noted that the sunshine ordinance passed task force took the position that the written summary should be included in the text of the

minutes for the agenda item where the public comment was made." if one of you does not make a motion to order drs staff to revise these minutes, and the minutes of march and april, where they pulled the same stunt, and they do not put it back where it belongs, i guarantee you i am going to file an official complaint, which with his sunshine ordinance task force, which i can guarantee pres. cohen that i will win. >> i believe that. before you file that, if you do not mind, giving me an opportunity to meet with them to discuss to find out what the thinking is.

thank you. >> is the first order of my business. i will grant your wish. >> thank you i appreciate that. other any other members of the public there would like to talk on the item for? seeing none,, item for public comment is close. a motion was made by commissioner mattress and seconded by commissioner mike >>[reading] >> this question to ship may amen my second motion to good the minutes in the appropriate point of discussion and conforms with what mr. shaw has requested? >> guesstimate any discussion on on that kubrick please let the record reflect will let staff to include public testimony in the minutes. >> as requested >> as requested. not simple house by number is there any discrepancy? all right. >> it is unanimous thank you. >> thank you >> item 5 approval of the

minutes of the march 11, 2015 retirement board meeting. >> all right. is there any public comment -- let us take discussion person i will go to public comment. >> movie item with one change on page 19. item number eight, to delete the words, one if not. that will make the selection panel five member panel, which was what was discussed at the commission meeting. >> i will second the motion. >> which take -- >> can you be exactly what the change in china make >> on page 19 there are 84 point. a bullet point number eight, line number for eliminate the first three words. one, if not, not. then it should read and to employees of public entities with subject

matter expertise. >> so it can be a consultant other than the board's general consultant. okay. this is a minutes thing, i just want to understand the availability of two employees of public entities subject matter extends that the time to put into the project, if not the simple project. >> to the chair >> whether it is or is not the minutes need to reflect with the claimant was that day and the claimant was [inaudible] and the agreement was for two in-house. one within the city and two outside. so, it is not a matter of us reading into it. it is not a matter of ease. it is a matter of reflecting what the discussion was and what the vote is. >> okay so another change has

occurred since this was done whether not [inaudible] would consider that it would require board motion to reconsider. there has been another change i understand the consultant since the statement has made a couple months ago but again it is all based on given the tools to staff but these are the minutes will vote up having to talk to at the uptime. >> sure. so there is a motion to amend the minutes. is her second >> yes i second >> a second has been made. discussion? >> yes i concur with the perceptions of commissioner mattress and those are my recollections also. also, there was some comment by asking -- i think that would a good shine of government to ship with the tool amendments made to the minutes. one, the deletion on page 19 made by

commissioner makras and also a amendment proposed by commissioner mitre lets it to include written testimony of patrick manet shot. is her second on this amended motion? >> yes >> okay seconded by commissioner microtek. it is his amendment so that somebody can commissioner makras >> i will second >> the makers accepted both amendments. are we ready for a vote? any other discussion? public comment? >> i would be remiss by the not thank you for saving me all that work. it takes hours and hours to schedule sunshine hearing. i will see mr. mickens next week by the sunshine hearing that it has dragged on for months. i

placed another records request. i am sorry. i placed another records request for the third draft of the twice postponed march 11 minutes, prior to this meeting. i appreciate commissioner mitre microtek and makras moving my testimony to where it belongs here before i need to ask you for him if i could, introduces motion to fix the april minutes. it has the same from the windows fixed in march and may. again, i am hoping one of you will -- i am hoping this motion will pass. comparing the three versions of the march 11 minutes, i see drs that has finally added on page 19 the summary of the eight items thoughtful amendments

requested by board commissioners, which went missing from the previous two drafts of these minutes. in which commissioner stansberry had brazenly attempted but failed, happily, to try to squash. with the arrest general consultant wrongly added to the hedge fund selection committee and had to public entities then appointed. you guys pass this motion in march. commissioner driscoll raises concerns -- i heard you. to keep those eight items exactly as past,, in march. >> any of the public on?

seeing none, public comment is close. motions have been . seconded and i think were ready for boat tmac the same house in call. motion passes. okay the consent calendar not >> please call the next item >> item number six consent calendar >> any discussion on this item ? consent item number six? no discussion? are it will take public comment. no public comment. i need a motion to pass this item. >> i move it past the consent calendar >> a motion made by my guillen seconded by makras. this motion passes. same house in call. same house same call.

>> item number seven report on the performance of retirement funds for the quarter ended march 31, 2015. mr. coker >> thank you very much. >> before we get into the guts of the report, what i would like to convey is that this is the last schedule meeting for -- to service our consultant, though continue for our fund contribution plan. i would like to make special acknowledgment and appreciation to -- in our 20 year tenure as the consultant for our plan. leslie has served with distinction, class, and 6x. we are top quartile performing defined-benefit plan over