welcome to the retirement board meeting. this meeting is held being held in i guess hybrid format still is that right? no, that's old notes. um. before we begin. i'd like to remind all individuals attending the meeting. that all health and safety protocols and building rules must be adhered to at all times. failure to adhere to these rules and requirements may result. removal from this room. we appreciate you cooperating with these important rules and requirements and the interest of everyone's health and safety. please also note that there's hand sanitizer stations available throughout the building and each elevator. in massacre available if people need them. madam secretary,

please call the roll. mr bridges. present. mr driscoll. present. mr gandhi. president. prison supply. present. mr thomas. president. and commissioner helfand is absent. we have a forum. great. item number two. madam secretary, please call the first item. thank you. item number two is communications. we walk on the public's participation during public comment periods. there will be an opportunity for general public comment at this meeting after closed session and there will be an opportunity to comment on each discussion or action item on the agenda. each comment is limited to two minutes. please note that city policies along with federal, state and local law, prohibit discriminatory or harassing conduct against the employees

and others during public meetings and will not be tolerated. moreover public common is permitted only on matters within the jurisdiction of this meeting body and thank you for joining us president spying. thank you, um madam secretary, please call the next item item number three is closed session. all right. so. let's move to close session. thank you. madam secretary, please call the roll. thank you, commissioner bridges. president. mr driscoll. present. mr gandhi, president. president supply president. mr thomas. present. thank you. we have a corn. great. so. hmm. i'm

gonna make a motion. uh huh. to not disclose items held in closed session under wait, yeah . under san francisco administrative code section 67.12, a second. motion made by me. seconded by commissioner thomas are there any members of the public who wish to make a comment on this item? seeing none. public comment is closed. and. great so there's been a motion made by commissioner saffy. seconded by commissioner thomas. can we do the all can we do we have to do a roll call? can we just do all those in favor? we can do all those in favor. okay? great. all those in favor. i'm like. all those

opposed. great guys have it. motion passes. madam secretary, please call the next item. item number four general public comment. any members of the public wish to comment under general public comment today. seen none. i'm going to hand it over to our ceo ceo who has received some of the comments today. thank you. i will read this into the record. ah received via email. good morning . my name is kea agra by and i'm , the housing campaign coordinator at the private equity stake holder project. i'm testifying in support of the residents of southern towers and .

test test test test

>> thank you, item 5. action item. approval of minutes from the february 16, 2023 retirement board meeting. >> is there a motion? >> so moved. >> motion made by commissioner driscoll, seconded by- >> second. >> seconded by commissioner thomas. this is for approval of the minutes of february 16, 2023 retirement board meeting. any member of the public who would like to comment on this item? seeing none,

public comment is closed. motion by commissioner driscoll and seconded by commissioner thomas. all in favor? >> aye. >> all those opposed? motion passes. madam secretary, please call the next item. >> item 6, action item. consent calendar. >> motion to approve the consent calendar. >> i move we adopt the consent calendar. >> second. >> motion by commissioner bridges and seconded by commissioner driscoll. any members of the public who wish to comment? seeing none, public comment is closed.

>> for whom we expect to make a

recommendation at the march board meeting however poorly drafted documents by myself that included language that requested approval of semifinalist so thank you to commissioner driscoll for pointing that out, otherwise we would have failed to-well, would have failed to adhere to the document you guys approved. again, this rfp was issued november 1, we received responses from 3 firms by the deadline. upon receipt of those proposals, assigned staff which include myself, allison, anna lang (indiscernible) public equity and (indiscernible) who oversees fixed income along with-all reviewed the proposals, scored them, and we

subsequentially arranged virtual meetings with each of the three respondents and these virtual meetings focus on three primary topics, first with clarity around fee proposals, the operational due diligence proposal and each had a manager data base we wanted to make sure we were clear on what fees we were paying there. similarly, we wanted to dive into each manager database and understand how current they were in terms of their notes, both investment due diligence, operational due diligence and finally get a sense of their ability and thoughtfulness around portfolio construction. based on evaluation of the two initial steps, it is there assigned staff's recommendation the retirement board approve-for this particular rfp. i provided additional data for both firms but note both have a global

research presence. both have well maintained deep data bases of manager research, robust operational practice and strong commitment to esg considerations. again, the memo provided provides statistics that compare both firms. if unexpected step that we want to be respectful of the language in the rfp that you approved, we are asking the board approval to put these two represent our semi-finalist. if you approve these two is bring back a finalist recommendation next month. >> just a-quick question. this is only for public market investment consulting? >> correct. in october the board approved two separate rfp, one for public market research, which is the one we are discussing and a separate one that is the general consultant, the consultant to there and board on asset allocation and risk

management. our intent is bring semi-finalist to the board- >> do we have one now? >> (indiscernible) >> do we have a public market investment now? >> (indiscernible) >> they do both? >> they do. >> they didn't make the final? okay. great. thank you. commissions, need a motion, please. you have a question? i'm sorry. go ahead. >> make sure i understand both, because did bring both of these last year, so as part of the one for the recommendation, you bring back the recommendation for this the finalist and then the recommendation for the separate one for the board-will the board interact with- >> to be clear, our intent for this rfp is staff will bring a recommendation for finalist next month. >> next month. >> the general

consultant, our intent is have the semi-finalist present to you- >> that's what i wanted to know. >> that wasn't a requirement of the rfp? >> it was for that-there was a distinction- >> that is what i wanted to clarify. >> got it. that group needs to present. >> correct. >> that is why i wanted to make sure the board understood-because we haven't heard the consultants? >> correct. >> who are the finalists? are we allowed to say yet? let's just wait. >> i want to make sure- >> okay. >> it is a important role. it is the board consultant. they also work with staff on asset allocation, risk management. the board will have a presentation and our intent is to have that occur next month. >> all will take place next month. i want to make sure everybody understood the distinction between the two.

>> thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioner driscoll. >> i'll focus to start with. not trying to put any bias in the next round of due diligence on this search, but it is a huge difference in terms of-when i look at the client count to staff, huge difference between the two firms. maybe it makes a difference, maybe it doesn't. in the rfp submitted to the board, are there examples of investment recommendations they made to clients? >> there are. >> only gone through the first several pages. okay, thank you. secondly, i notice mercer does discretionary consulting, makita does not. is that a major difference? >> they do discretionary consulting as well. >> they are doing ocio function. different thing. >> there are

distinctions between the two firms and our job then to kind of distinguish among them and see the best fit for our needs. >> i assume you will be focusing on the service that are provided that we are interested in which are not discretionary? >> correct. the form of discretionary management presents some amount of conflict so that is what we have to think about. >> there is a conflict and it can effect the compensation. again, just this has come up before. >> that concludes my questions on this issue. >> thank you. >> motion on the e floor. move to accept staff recommendation with approval of mercer and meketa. and, i think the recommendation is approve the semi-finalist, correct? >> yeah. >> just to clarify, the motion would be to approve meketa

investment group and mercer investment llc as semi-finalist for public market investment consultant services. >> motion made. seconded by-- motion by driscoll. i just clarified. motion by commissioner driscoll, seconded by commissioner thomas. are there any member of the public that wish to comment on this item? public comment is closed. motion is made by commissioner driscoll, seconded by commissioner thomas. any discussion? all those in favor-- >> aye. >> opposed? okay, motion passes. madam secretary, please call the next item. >> thank you, item 8, discussion item. report on investment performance retirement fund for the quarter

ended december 31, 2022. >> great. i believe is that you again as well kurt? >> we have allen joining online. >> thank you allison. for the record, can the people hear me? >> yes. >> good. for the record, allen martin nepc the board incumbent. i did have another board call this morning around sbp and appreciate being able to do this by phone. if you turn to page 14, you have in your materials the final q4 report from 2022. seems like history with all that happened lately. covers periods ending 12-31. since the report was produced a lot happened. the smp was up 6.7 percent in january, down a half

percent in february and cr down 2 percent in march. in march if you looked yesterday the smp had given up everything that generated through the year. today it is back up roughly 2 percent so been a very very volatile period. ads a backdrop to discuss the numbers you see in front of you, to context that, you recall during the first three quarters of last year, we had both negative returns in stocks and bonds. that is something that is only occurred 9 times in 30 years, and despite a rally in q4, u.s. stocks were down 18 percent for the year and the bloomburg down 13 percent. so, a 60/40 portfolio during 2022 returned negative 16 and a half percent. that is the worst annual return on a 60/40 portfolio in a hundred years with

the two exceptions of 1937 and 2008, so that is the environment the report is contexted against. the median public fund with a aum greater then a billion was down 10.9 percent as you see here, the median public fund of all public funds down 12.7. diversification helped, but it still resulted in negative returns. as you see here, your return for the year, negative 10.37 percent was in the second quarter. the top line again to remind everyone is total fund net of fee time weighted returns including the overlay for various periods fallowed by the ranking in this public fund greater then a billion universe. it is important to note that all your

returns greater then one year despite the challenging q4 are significant above 7.2 percent, the plans assumed rate. that is generally not true for your public fund peers. this period has been damaging enough as you saw to many of them, that for selected periods they actually dropped below that 7.2 percent number. also noted for all periods greater then a year, you're in the top 1 percent of your peer group and on the next page you'll see the same is true. don't flip yet, but the same is true for 10 year and longer periods. you recall our success was primarily due to a well diversified asset allocation strategy with significant allocations to private equity, private credit and real assets, and a active public market equity strategy, which emphasized

technology, bio tech, healthcare in china. virtually all those allocations were challenged in q4. the lag in private equity valuation start #d to show up. we long known about that. i think you understand that private equity valuations lag by a quarter so that meant the private market returns still reflect equity returns that were strong, which certainly wasn't the case in the first quarter, and the other strategies you had, the rising interest rate environment we are now in for the first time in a long time has significantly hurt so called longer duration strategies. technology, healthcare being among those, and so strategies like venture cap can capital, technology healthcare and china had significant reversal in the year. q4 as you see here, you

earned 1.9 percent. i would point out if you annualize that it is fine return but in the hundred percentile of your peer reflecting what was in usual in all these things had reversal in that period of time. line 2 is your policy index, which is what you would have earned if your allocations maintained at target and each asset class return matched the benchmark. with exception of one year you will see longer term results still exceeded your policy and over the 5 and 10 year period, which included the difficult 4th quarter, exceeded policy by 2 percent in one case and 1 percent in another. that could be thought of because it is net of fee as in alpha, and an extremely strong number in terms of results. you also note all the results exceeded as you see here, a 60/40 global

portfolio and 60/30/10 portfolio. you recall in 2017 and 2022, we chose to adopt asset allocation policy which was expected to generate less volatility then our peers. you see in the tables below, in fact, let me go back one page, if that's all right, just to capture-if you look at the lower right tables there, you see in terms of volatility, over both a 3 and 5 year period, the volatility of the fund as measured by standard deviation was in the bottom 4 or 5 percent of your peers. if you combine low risk with very strong equity returns to try to normalize and compare your fund to other funds with different asset allocations, that is done through what is called the sharp ratio, which ask merely taking the return on your portfolio, minus the risk free rate for the period,

which was very close to zero, and dividing that by standard deviation. that is what is called the sharp ratio, and in that ratio again, a risk adjusted return per unit of risk taken or volatility risk taken, you are in the top 1 or 2 percent of your peers. and then lastly, the sor tino ratio for frank sor tino, university of san francisco professor, measures your down-side volatility, versus the risk taken and again, in that statistic, top 1 percent. at the end of 2022 the fund value of $32.6 billion slightly higher then 9-30, but well below the $37.2 billion of 12-31-02. the next page has the longer term results and wasn't going to go through those, but if you flip one page forward you see it adds a prior results and see very longer term. i did add a few

charts to focus on the longer term horizon and highlight the progression of returns over the last 6 years. if you turn to page 17, i apologize are these three pages i would have ordered differently. recall what we said in 2017 is we wanted to generate more stable returns going forward. at that time, the trailing 5 year standard deviation of your returns had been roughly in the top 40 percent, so close to the middle. you can see as you move forward to where we are today, you're trailing 5 year standard deviation as mentioned earlier is in the bottom 3 or 4 percent. meaning good. less volatile then your peers. if you then go to page 15, so forward, here are your return rankings for the same period and again, it is the ranking of your returns. you see in 2017, you were thin top 5

percent of your peers so you had been doing well and you can see going forward we moved from the top 5 or 6 percent of your peer group, to the top 1 percent we talked about earlier. and finally, if you look at page 16, which is risk adjusted returns, risk return per unit of risk, again we started fairly competitively, top 10 percent and it moved progressively with the asset allocation changes you approvaled and the manager the staff recommended to be selected and moved into the top 1 percent. that's all i was going to say. if there are any questions i turn now to compliance. for that we go to page-three pages forward to page 18. column 3 is the percentage allocation to each asset class on 12-31. column 4 is the long-term board

approved target, which will be reviewed. we are working with staff currently to revisit the long-term asset allocation process. you note all your allocations are within range with the small exception of real assets and private equity which are less then 1 percent over target. if you remember in the prior quarters, private equity, largely to due to the outstanding success of your program, had actually gotten up to 33 percent, which was significantly over the 30. the valuation catch-up process what is called it denominator effect, has brought us down close to the range and expect that to be adjusted in the quarter we go through. neither of those overerages are due to any bad planning, they were the consequences of markets that are now being normalized. so, again, all of the allocations are within range with the

exception of those two and reasonably close to long-term targets. page 20 reports on cash-flow for the portfolio. on the one year period, that minus 1 percent return for the year was a negative $3.7 billion in investment returns, and your net payout contributions, less benefits or benefits minus contributions was all most $800 million for the period. if you look at the three years, this is what you normally expect as a mature plan. you expect to see a negative cash-flow, contributions will be less then benefits paid. that averaged about $600 million a year, and then your asset return over the last three years including the last period was a positive all most $7 billion. the one thing i wanted to highlight because it influences the

asset allocation planning is, the success of this program had lead you as you know, to be one of the few public funds that were over-funded. that is good news, but the consequence of being over-funded is your actuarially projections no call for reduction in contributions going forward. that is always welcome to the people that sponsor that, but the contribution levels are the distribution level stay high, so the negative cash-flow we will experience going forward will be bigger then what you see here,ing and that suggests that liquidity will become a issue as we look at the asset allocation process and we'll rely more on investment returns going forward because the negative cash-flow will increase. wanted to point that out and we'll discuss that further. the good news, you can never relax, you

have dund extraordinary well and good for the contributors but also means going forward we have to generate those higher returns and more consistently. with, the next few pages are risk and return charts. let me just do two of them. if we turn to page 21, on the left you see the difficult one year period we talked about. each of those points is the risk or the return and volatility of a public fund greater then a billion. the return is plotted on the vertical or horizontal-the vertical axis, the volatility on the horizontal. you are the dark blue circle lower left. we did better then the median fund in terms of return and the volatility as we talked earlier, significantly less. in one way this is different from the next three charts is our policy index for that period actually had a

higher return, but a higher volatility as well. the next few charts are more typical of the longer term and if we go to page 22, you see the 5 and 10 year results, so for 5 years the total fund return of 7.94 percent, you are the highest dot on that chart, meaning the best performing fund in this universe. not saying there are not other funds outside the universe that did better but you were the top performing fund. one of it the least volatile as you can see, and the return of your actual portfolio relative to the light blue circle is both higher in return and lower in volatility. that is a highly desirable characteristics. it says the actions taken by staff and approved by you in terms of manager selection and portfolio positioning have both added return and reduced volatility to the total results.

the chart version of that is on page 25. these are the same statistics, so i wont go over them in detail. we already discussed the return of 7.94 was the highest in your peer group. hold on one second. the highest in the peer group. the volatility or standard deviation was in the 5th percentile of the peer group. you want to be low thin measure and the sharp and sortino ratios are discussed further on. what we want to do now is look at the atbution. why did we do better then our policy in any one period and that would start on page 30 for the one year result. for the one year result, if you recall 10.37 negative. the policy index was down 9.18 which means we under-performed policy

by 1.15 percent. this chart attributes that either to positioning or allocation, meaning where we over-allocated asset classes that did well and under-allocated the asset classes that did poorly, or-and or, did we have managers that out-performed their bench marks within the asset class? the allocation effect minus 14 basis points is very small. that is what you hope. we are not taking a lot of risk how we position the portfolio relative to the targets. it is negative in this case, but small. that leads the selection effect of negative 1 percent as the result of manager selection. this looks at a year. if you were to go down that excess return column, you'll see the major contributors to

under-performance were public equity. those were the classs that didn't do well and china which continues to be a challenge. large est economy in the world but all kinds of political risk around investing in china. you see absolute return trailed the benchmark. we talked about the benchmark is (indiscernible) plus 5 which is aggressive benchmark. 1.04 percent trailed that and you say liquid credit did not do as well. again, positioned against a neutral portfolio, detractor. the flip side is private credit. earned 5.6 percent in the market core fixed income was down 5 percent and private equity continues to do well. the cash number is a large negative and that has do with mechanics of a small part of the portfolio being in

cash and leverage and equiatized product. we are still working with the custodian to appropriately model that, so that has not been a contributor in this period. i think that is largely due to the fact that the equiatized cash position when you equiatize cash in a market where equities go down, you have negative effects, but it is small as we'll see. in terms of atribution on 5 year basis, page 32, here is longer term, more stable and more representative of the whole portfolio over the period. 7.92 percent was the actual return we reported earlier. the benchmark policy did 5.85 percent. again, you see that allocation, in this caiz it is positive, but it is also small,

which is what you would desire to have. you'll also note that the selection effect is now 2 percent positive, and that's net of fees to remind everyone. it is alpha type number. the primary drivers of that success are again, private equity and private credit, both of which substantially out-performed the benchmarks. the detractors, if we did this a quarter ago, the public equity would have been a strong positive contributor. in this period over the 5 years, public equity was a detractor to performance and so, the very strong returns we generated from a active strategy and public equity investing over the last 5 years were significantly challenged by the very down quarter that

we have. the results over the long-term are fine. the near term has been a reversal. i also suggest that your staff did not go out and sell these securities, you still hold them by in large, but is being revisited in terms of the validity of the underlying assumptions going forward. thrats that's something that will come up as we go forward for asset class and asset liability study. that was the atribution. the remaining pages add a lot of detail. i are was going to try to summarize them for you, and if we want to look at the more granular results, happy to do that. the following pages get into asset class returns versus competition and look at a more granular view of the components. we still have difficulty as i mentioned separating returns from leverage, i can tell

you over the period since we report with and without leverage, the impact on cash equiization and leverage on returns at the total portfolio level is very small. for the one year it was negative 14 basis points, which i suggest is probably mostly due to cash equitiization. anna would have the more detailed breakdown in terms how much is leveraged and how much is cash, but it wasn't a significant impact ck that is good because this is not a period where either of those had been a particularly strong performer, but important to do that going forward in the long-term. most segments of public equity unperformed by local equity and small cap held up. it want uniform, by the major strategic bets on technology helths care and bio tech were eroded by the 4th quarter result.

private credit where you have 8 percent of your portfolio, generated 5.6 percent in the year, which i mentioned if that was left in core bonds you would have lost 8.2 percent of your money. that is a extremely important contributor to overall performance. public markets under performed by in large, the managers in the asset class did welt in the benchmark so under performance isn't you picked managers that did poorly relative to the strategy, but the over-weight to the segments was a negative contributor. the detail of the managers is available to the board and happy to take detailed questions but i wanted to stop there with that summary. >> commissioner driscoll. >> let's go back to page 14.

want to understand something. the policy index numbers are listed. going to 10, 15 and 20 year numbers, do those numbers reflect what the policy infect at the time or using the current policy using- >> no, it is the former joe. it is the policy that existed at that time times those returns compounded through time as the policy index changed. >> so it captures how we changed policy? >> it does. >> how we decided to be more liquid and (indiscernible) staff recommended? >> yep. >> okay. >> the performance there as you note is quite competitive. your combination of policy over time was good. your results have done even better then that, so yes. >> that part is fine. i guess the thing i want to perhaps illustrate or tell you which you already know, but there has been certain amount of

speakers against what we have done in the asset return. maybe the asset return has not quite hit the target we hoped it shall return, but the addition of absolute return had a positive effect. not that we know fixed income would not do-fixed income has been doing the last couple years. but it actually didn't simply reduce our volatility, but actually has contributed to the total return. >> yes. >> not getting volatility down. >> not as high as expected, but that is indeed true. >> looking for a reason to stay staff well done, but our members are listening and watching what we are doing. we have been with absolute return over 5 years we are not satisfied yet but it achieved a major reason for doing it. thank you.

>> that is correct. thank you jeff. >> commissioners. is there a motion? sorry. is there any members of the public that would like to comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. madam secretary, please call the next item. >> thank you. item 9, discussion item. chief investment officer's report. >> thank you. i'll hit a couple standard items. discuss sbe since sure it is on everybody's meend and provide a update on some of the strategic initiatives within investments.

the first as of the end of february, the estimated plan value is $32.9 billion. since we last met, one deal has closed. it is not in your materials because it closed after the materials were sent out, so i'm reading it into the record. at the board meeting on february 16,ing the retirement board approved in closed session up to 100 million to (indiscernible) spurs investment in global investment close on march 1, 2023. this investment is classified as global macro investment within the absolute return portfolio class b safari 2. turning to silicon valley bank, which is very much been in both the financial news in the local news and just about every new source

available. wanted to touch on that and assure our stakeholders and assure this board that the team here has been very very active in monitoring the situation, and the impact on the assets of this fund this far has been minimal, and let me tell you what i mean by that. we have exposure to through equity investments, and we have exposure to sbb by partnering in the private markets with funds who (indiscernible) or portfolio companies in those funds bank. the public market side, our investment was minimal, less then a million dollars at 0.003 percent of the total fund. so, not a significant impact. with respect to our private market partners and the funds they hold, with the action of the fdic over the course

of the weekday and past weekday and by monday where they back-stopped all depositors that mitigated risk in the market place and those partners were able to continue to operate. at the same time, in talking to many of our partners they were taking risk-measures to evaluate the situation, determine various partnerships and act-should the fda not stepped in. the good news here is with respect to those investments, there has been no significant issue on cash-flow. this team will very closely continue to monitor any impact on individual stock holdings, impact on regional banks and what is going on in the broader market, because it is times like these where volatility is introduced into the broader market and that means there are some managers with certain strategies that can

benefit and are some managers with strategies that may face pressure, for instance the 2 year yuld on monday was 13 standard deviation event move, so managers that had exposure the wrong way to that thinking that rates were going to continue to rise, we may start to see effect of that and there are other managers that may have taken opportunity of this location to step in. time-we'll see how this all flushes out over time. the good news here is the diversified approach to investing is one that is designed to manage through volatile market environments. are there any questions before i turn to the strategic initiatives? >> i saw the information you provided about the direct

investment, but you said you are in conversations with related managers looking for exposure in terms of the relationship they might have had investment from, or relationship to silicon valley bank. have you done a deep analysis on the impact? >> so, we looked and have spoken with our private market managers that they themselves who have banked with svb or those with portfolio companies there is not significant impact on cash-flows or the operations of those businesses. they all went to infull court press mode as the situation was evolving to mitigate the risk, but at this time the fdic stepping in, there isn't a significant impact for private market managers. >> commissioner driscoll.

>> because i think--this report is the graph that shows the market value versus actuarially value. last month a few people misunderstood our funding ratio. we were below hundred percent last month but it moved a little bit, but overall our ability to deliver every pension check is still just as great as it ever was. >> absolutely. thank you for asking the question. i will reiterate we manage liquidity and total assets closely and will continue to without a doubt continue to meet our pension obligations. >> so the liability we are still in the 99 percent range, something like that? i know the numbers will change in a couple months but anyway, thank you. >> other questions? >> i can turn to the slides that are in the

materials. wanted to take the opportunity today since allen went through the detail performance to focus my remarks more closely and provide you a update on the strategic initiatives that i talked to you in the past about and give you a update of things we discussed in december. to go through that, first i highlighted we are focused on better utilizing technology and our team has done a funomnaul job started to on-board a new investment management software platform. made a lot of progress there and think it will help the team manage workflows, manage information and make robust decisions. we talked about enhancing portfolio construction. thank you for the support that was a big step in the process and to give a example of where that might impact a big macro issue going on, i think the question

came up earlier how we are positioned relative to macro issues. if we take global equity as a example, we put in guardrails to make sure when we take risk in that asset class only so much comes from country effect and so much from sector effect and so much coming from stock selection effect so that is precisely one tool we have at our disposal to manage ringe in a environment where macro risk increased. we will be coming back to you on the absolute return guidelines. we had good comments today about the role of that asset class and we have been having detailed discussions and debates how we can most effectively structure that asset class to put it in oo position to continue to succeed and deliver what we want it to deliver for the total fund. again, a little tie today the

question on macro issue, the team continues to evaluate themes where we are invested. we have been having extensive conversations, particularly on china with not only our managers that invest in china with geo political experts and macro advisors to understand the dynamics in that market place. we will have further discussions on that over time. we made progress in terms of recruiting talent where we hired private credit and asset allocation and have a positionope in in private equity we are active ly looking to fill. also continued to evolve the investment process. we are making progress as talked earlier in terms of external consultant and really incorporating operational due diligence into our platform and if we were to take

silicon valley bank as a example, we are making sure we understand how our managers manage cash and have compliance and systems set up. you can see why doing the appropriate diligence up front is important. and then finally, on portfolio construction as allen mentioned earlier, we are actively working with nepc and the team here internally on the updated asset liability study and making sure we have robust process to include the traditional asset liability approach and really incorporating the needs we will have in coming years for liquidity given the dynamics allen outlined. a lot to cover but i wanted to convey over the course of really only handfull months we made a lot of progress on a lot of these initiatives.

>> because how it worked out successfully and in the last months isn't a huge indicator, however the tilt towards china worked out rather well for us, particularly how it is done regionally. now they are forecasting growth rate of 5 to 5 and a half we were assuming 9 and lowered to 6. i assume you and your team are factoring all those issues when you figure which way to tilt and how you are able to move money between managers and subasset classes? >> absolutely. the discussions we are having generally say is how much exposure do you want in china and if you are in china what are the possibilities of opportunity and this market environment given the trends of our government, of the chinese government, there are certain areas that we want to avoid and certain areas we want to stress and that is where partnering with knowledgeable managers in the space is critical. >> great. thank you.

>> any other questions, commissioners? nope. any members of the public that wish to comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. madam secretary, please call the next item. >> thank you. item 10, discussion item. differs compensation committee report. >> that's going to be presented by-- >> by the chair. >> yes. you have your mic on? thanks. >> thank you mr. president. differed compensation committee met on february 22, 2023. my report is as stated here. we approved the minutes. we also had great discussion on the preliminary target date funds and glide path

recommendations and asset allocation. (indiscernible) give a complete detail on the discussion points listed in the report and the approved proposal for target date funds reenrollment which is key and crucial. it is something we must get done and that will be discussed in detail. additionally, we finished our meeting with approval to begin the manager search for the process underlying the target date fund investment and that is important as well. you have a few items coming before the board in the next few months as we finalize a lot of the important details. at this time, i'll move forward in the next item that comes up on the differed compensation committee to go into detail and all the items outlined in my committee report. thank you mr.

president. >> thank you. anything else? perfect. any questions from commissioners? okay. great. any members of the public wish to comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. thank you, commissioner. madam secretary, please call the next item. >> thank you. item 11, discussion item. sfdcp monthly report. >> i think your mic is off. >> can you hear me okay? okay, thank you so much. good afternoon commissioners and thank you president for the item and to commissioner chair bridges for the report. as you recall, i provided a full quarterly report last month, which captures much of the activity of the sfdcp. attached to the icem is the

most recent monthly activity report for reference. that includes plan asset, demographic and investment information, money in and out and loan information. please let me know if you have any questions, otherwise i have a few small updates for the board. congratulations to chair, leowna bridges on her reappointment. we are fortunate to have hur leadership and guidance from commissioner driscoll and thomas and look forward continuing working with you for another 5 years. on to business, we have been working with the record keeper on the mandatory provisions as a result of secure 2.0 act. these were provided in last months for your reference. due to the requirement of catch up contributions being raw, and identify participants less then $145 thousand, we are opening dialogue with the

controller pay roll office on the business requirements needed to create a project for this additional coding in the pay roll files that goes back and forth between voya and the city. there is a lot of work at the moment. there are also optional provisions as a result of secure 2.0 such as emergency savings account. those options are being reviewed by staff. we are focusing on the mandatory ones first before bringing any recommendations on the optional provisions we should recommend enacting. the target date fund transition that commissioner bridges had referred to is on track. we have a meeting on april 12 to bring the final glide path recommendation to the dcc hoping they forward with recommendation to the full board at the april meeting, so next month we will bring or final recommendation on the glide path. that meeting at the dcc will also include a

cyber security update, which covers how it is protected and the barriers put in place to protect our participants. so, next month we will definitely have more information for you and we look forward to you blessing our recommendation. we also have our newest sfdcp counselor, his name is michael wade who will serve the police department. you can find his bio on sfdcp.org. we have been working directly with police to get the word out valle internal department e-mails and journal. michael wade has a military background and believe he is a great fit for police. you can find a listing of all the departments dedicated to each counselor on sfdcp.org. the q2 stable value credit rate is not yet available. should be closer to the end of the month.

that can be found on sfdcp.org. it should be interesting to see how it impacts our investments, and ben taylor from calen should be able to cover that shortly in the next item as part of the semi-annual update. that is all i have for my monthly activity report. happy to take any questions. >> any xhegzs commissioners? nope? okay. great. any members of public wish to comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. presentation, right? >> yes. that was my

presentation. i'm done with this item. >> okay, great. okay. so, thank you. madam secretary, please call the next item. >> item 12, discussion item. review of sfdcp inest havement performance for second half of 2022. >> thank you. this is the semi-annual performance report. calen is our investment consultant and ben taylor from calen is here to provide a report on the investment performance. ben is starting to share his screen. ben, please proceed. >> thank you, can you hear me okay? >> yes. thank you. >> great. so, i'll just go through the brief highlights here and be happy to answer questions with regard to specific managers or (indiscernible) it is certainly the [difficulty hearing speaker due

to audio quality] fundamentally there are a few things to update. defered compensation plan is valued $4.3 billion down the prior year $700 odd million and broader decline then seen in the overall market. with respect to the targeted finds the performance is 0.41 down to plus 1.65 over the 6 month period of time. prior 6 months reporting on. the shorter longer term results both remain strong (indiscernible) across the board. still performing quite well mostly driven by the selection throughout the glide path. with respect to the watch list there are a handful of items we need to discuss with respect to managers. lsv (indiscernible) 3 and 5 year performance. this

isn't a ongoing concern, this is mostly related to first quarter 2020. (indiscernible) strong and significant ahead of benchmark. growth fund does rank in the third quaur tile and behind the index. significant portion is driven by the t row price fund and in particular performances (indiscernible) mostly driven by the tech holdings and security selections within tech. that's one that would qualify for watch list. we wanted to explore action with respect to these funds in the future in addition to looking at a (indiscernible) growth index fund over time. we'll be coming back to you with potential action on that in the future, but in the meantime just a watch list criteria to report on for the investment policy. (indiscernible) bond fund is one of the

component funds. utilized within the target funds. not directly offered as investment option. it did change to (indiscernible) with respect to wells fargo and (indiscernible) over 37 overall the difference is difference in duration. rates have been rising so under-performed. that will have benefit as well down the line once the rate increases stop and can benefit from the longer duration. (indiscernible) any questions initially with respect to the watch list before i proceed with (indiscernible) ? hearing none--i won't rehash our versions of them, but fundamentally call your attention to the bullet point on the left hand side.

there are 38 quarters in hundred years or 10 (indiscernible) stocks and bond together. (indiscernible) bad year for diversification and what we have seen with respect to stocks and securities being significantly effected by central bank policy inflation in a way that is fairly unique in history that undermined the diversification (indiscernible) that has been discussed at length earlier in today's meeting. another visual representation to which the returns are or not abnormal with respect to the equity market right here. just pointing out the frequency of which you (indiscernible) you can see on the bottom [audio cutting in and out]

moving ahead these have been addressed. i'll move to the [audio cutting out] largest fund with over a billion dollars in assets. (indiscernible) perform well no concerns with respect (indiscernible) significant amount of large cap equities is why we keep pace (indiscernible) noted earlier with respect to (indiscernible) >> ben, you are cutting in and out, so don't know if your connection- >> i'm sorry. still occurring? >> not now. >> okay. i'm not sure as to why. i should have a stable connection. hope it doesn't occur-let me know. i'll be brief. as noted there is a very very close performance with respect to

benchmark for the target date funds as noted earlier. it is mostly a bit of relative out-performance on the target retirement benchmark. fairly close to benchmarks in near term but all performing (indiscernible) the last year similar story, very very close and the further we go out we get persistence (indiscernible) the targeted funds have a lower equity allocation then the current glide path (indiscernible) relative to peers which doesn't impact relative performance. [audio cut out] on this chart is to help everyone read the chart briefly, green indicates there is no issues that trigger investment policy statement concern. indicate a third quaur tile performance and the goldish color indicate a 4th

quartile standard measured. you can see large cap social equity, this is reflective of the (indiscernible) -this means that it is benchmarked against the core but has a bit of growth orientation and are this time period that was not beneficial. this will move around with respect to peer group performance over this timeframe by virtue of construction of the fund and are relative differences relative to core mutual funds (indiscernible) value equity you see what i noted with respect to near-term performance. large cap value funds doing well over the last year, the last quarter. the three year return being right on and little worse off because of the 2020 (indiscernible) that is something we have been aware of. you can see

the last year return performing [audio cut out] again, those trends continuing with respect to the last quarter returns as called out earlier [audio cut out] >> ben, can you make sure you speak into your mic, because you are continuing to cut out a bit? >> i will do my upmost, yes. i will get as close as i can get to my lap top. is this better? >> yes are. thank you. >> with respect to other funds of-i'll move to those that have an impact with respect to investment policy. international equity, this blue color is indicative of the peer group, and that's not a source of concern for us from

performing as expected. performing better then benchmarks in the most recent quarter and over longer term. the equity index, this is a difference with respect to ranking that is causing this. it is an effect of value prices for international equity index. real estate, short term but mostly related to differences in the compensation of holdings relative to the benchmark and this will move around over time but not a major concern from our perspective with relative performance. just note for the longer term performance, for the real estate fund, this is blend of morgan stanley and principle so the principle real estate return is listed below which is the (indiscernible) 24.9 versus 24.5 so in line with benchmark over the last year. different then last quarter, but a wash-out over time. with respect to the targeted fund component returns, just couple

notes. wells fargo (indiscernible) short duration bond fund as noted this is principally duration difference relative to the benchmark and peers. not a source of concern long-term. the high yield fund, just the general note, this will move around a bit, but when you see the benchmark performing in the top percentile, that is consistently interested of performance pattern and this does move around as well. the three year return that was the 99 percentile. moving glonel infrastructure, there will be differences in the benchmark. there is a significant amount of securities here. in particular things like, infrastructure related to data center and technology and as those are in and out of favor you see these move up and down compared to the benchmark. no concern there either,

even though it hits the 3 year and not 5 year. same story for the principle global real estate security cip for relative performance. significant difference with respect to (indiscernible) and valuation cycles. no concerns as well with respect to this investment. i'll pause and see if there are questions i can address or if you like me to cover anything with silicon valley bank, signature bank or (indiscernible) >> any questions, commissioners? >> commissioner driscoll. >> the other parts of this portfolio. question about one particular manager. >> what manager would you like to discuss? >> i want to cut off if you are going to continue talking. >> i'll done. >> you are done, okay. >> you are muted. hit

the button again. >> thank you. i assume new work with t rowe price with glide path design is going well? >> yes. >> regarding t rowe price and the growth manager mutual fund, how is that going? >> less well. [laughter] there is significant security selection issues, predominantly in the tech sector in that fund for some time. >> are you recommending that this commission or the board should continue to be patient with them? >> our discussions at this point have not gotten to the point we recommend a search, but we are preparing to recommend a search if it does not recover and potentially worsen, we will likely come back with recommendation for a replacement search, but at this time-

>> i would prepare it now. thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioners, i had asked mr. taylor to cover this page because we are in the middle of our targeted fund design, and calen is ultimately responsible for the manager selection, so this is where we see the performance of the underlying managers, and the t rowe price as investment manager they recommend the asset classes. i want to make sure we go over that and aware of that prior to our meeting next month where we bring the final recommendation to the board. >> please understand, the board is ultimately responsible for anyone who manages money in the defered comp plan, not just a consultant. >> understood. thank you. >> any other questions? any other questions? do we need to take action on that? any

public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. madam secretary, thank you for your presentation. >> thank you. >> commissioner bridges- >>b mr. president, i like to thank mr. taylor and calen group and (indiscernible) her team. they put a lot of time into this entire process and working together and trying to get us prepared to bring recommendations back to the board, so just wanted to acknowledge their work and the time they put into it. >> thank you. thank you for saying that. we really appreciate it. >> i appreciate that as well. >> thank you. >> thank you. okay. please call the next item madam secretary. >> thank you. item 13, action item. review and approve s fers travel reimbursement policy. >> commissioners, with this item i want to

highlight what we are reviewing seek your approval and explain why we are reviewing it today. our travel expense policy which had been a scheduled-part of a broader policy, hasn't been reviewed since 2010. since 2010 we have ride sharing and other areas so it was prudent from just a governance perspective, evolution of travel to update this policy. we also wanted to make sure that it provided guidance on areas that maybe it been silent on in the past where perhaps if i looked at the controller's office policy, and may had language that is-that makes sense and clarifies things that we went ahead and incorporated concepts like that into our policy. and i wanted to insure that for our travel as we have had in the past, but we continue to be focused on appropriate

documentation, we need to spend these dollars prudently and make sure we are documenting they are prudent and reasonable when we spend the money. why are we bringing this to you today? number one, travel certainly has picked up post-covid and as we discussed in the past, central to our fiduciary deuta duty is meet managers conduct dill diligence and conduct education seminars and take that seriously and travel expense reimbursement is part of the broader process of fiduciary responsibility. since i have been on-board, there have been increasing obstacles for our team to get their travel reimbursement expenses approved, and it has taken significant staff time and growing staff time to get this addressed. we have

individuals that on their personal credit cards are sitting on travel dollars, which is for board business, and importantly, we fund these travel expenses out of our fund, and so why i wanted to bring this to you today is to make sure the board is in full agreement in terms of what our policy is, understand why we are spending these dollars and provide support going to forward so we can move forward and get expenses approved per our policy, and have our team travel as we need to do for our mission and fiduciary duty. any questions on the changes that we recommended? >> what are the changes you recommended? >> they are red-lined.

>> mr. president-- >> commissioner bridges. >> yes. to our ceo, cio, you hear me okay? when you say delay and processing is that delayed because of going through controller's office and all the points of processing? is that part of the bottleneck you are experiencing? >> correct, and making sure that our policy is the one that is fallowed. >> right. so, the policy that you are recommending here today,eme polk trying to see if it will make it easier and seemless for star and spers going through the same process or going to complicate. i know the process is not the best for the city overall, i know that for sure. >> so, the logistical and technical aspects of it-part of the challenge is that there is a spers policy and

controller's policy. >> exactly. >> we have gotten to the point where anything that is different in our policy from the controller's policy has not been approved. i want to make current our policy and have the board acknowledge this is the spers current policy. >> to our president who is probably more familiar with the controller's policy more sewn then i am, do most departments have their policy the same as controller? >> all the city and county of san francisco travel reimbursement goes through the controller. so the issue here is, there is the policy hasn't been updated in a long time, so the ceo, came to me, called the controller and controller said he is committed working to get this right. one thing they asked for was, can you please update your policy. >> right. >> and look for areas of

overlap. just highlight something. for example, they have a certain rate for hotel reimbursement. if there is not an easily accessible hotel within a certain area, if there is food not easily accessible then they have flexibility to go above the rate that they-they are probably less inclined people ask for first class-that's not going to happen. i just-let's be honest. that is very very- >> (indiscernible) >> to be clear, first class travel isn't allowed according to this policy and what we- >> just wanted to say that for the record, because that is one thing he highlighted with me and i i said under no circumstances-anyway, we just making sure our policy lines up with the policy and if there is areas of difference there is reason and it is clearly spelled out. >> and if it is helpful for the commissioners, as part of this process i did reach out to other plans in the state to understand their policy. not

again that their policy is right but they are subject to similar conditions, situations, legislation et cetera and some of the language that i did add in regarding hotel reimbursement is similar in that it is a individual staying at a hotel that is greater then the gsa rate. we required additional documentation to explain why that is necessary. >> and i would most conference hotels are above the rate because the conference hotel rates where they want to stay where the conference is, the rate (indiscernible) i know about that from the local state and federal level. the federal government says the gsa rate. if you look at the comparison, it is always going to be different. at that point you have to make a decision to stay at the conference hotel or find a hotel within the rate. >> our policy has two

buckets. if it is a conference with a conference designated hotel, we will pay for that conference hotel at the conference rate. >> at the conference rate, that is what i mean. >> then we have a set of criteria if it isn't a conference related event. >> that makes sense. i know the gsa rate. it changes every rate. the federal government changes the rate every single month and it is based on occupancy rate in that particular city. for example, in dc during spring it rate is higher so something to keep in mind to monitor and not sure who monitors that. it is an interesting scenario. i have gone (indiscernible) that's why i know it. >> any other questions, commissioners? okay. thank you. i think that was for-wait. we actually have to make a motion. any

members--you do have a question? >> (indiscernible) >> okay, go ahead. >> to approve the reimbursement policy (indiscernible) >> good job. is there a second? >> second. >> seconded by commissioner bridges. any members of the public that wish to comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. motion made by commissioner thomas, seconded by commissioner bridges. any additional discussion folks? nope. okay. all in favor? >> aye. >> those opposed? no. the ayes have it. madam secretary, please call item 14. >> thank you. item 14, discussion item. review of audited financial statements and supplemental schedules for years ended june 30, 2022 and 2021 and communications to the retirement board for the year ended june 30, 2022.

>> commissioners. i would like to introduce you to christine lee, she is our finance manager. christine became finance manager when jim borel retired in 2021. this is her first appearance before you but i wanted to give you some highlights as to what she does for us. she oversees all the trust fund accounting not just for spers but sfdcp and retiree healthcare trust fund which you don't oversee but spurs is responsible administers. instrumental prepares the budget you approved last month and liaison in the controller office with respect to that. she is also the point person and principle liaison for the department when the controller accountant prepared the financial statement jz that is before you today. christine, i'll turn it over to

you. >> thank you. good afternoon. every year spers conduct financial audit and issue financial statement and mgo is the auditor that performs fiscal year 22 audit. today we have (indiscernible) the audit director and (indiscernible) yang, the assurance supervisor to make a presentation to the board and answer any questions that you may have. >> great. >> thank you. i want to take a moment to thank the board of retirement giving us the opportunity to come in and present the results of our audit. i also want to take a moment to thank staff and management, everyone for all their assistance provided to us during the audit. an audit we ask a lot of questions, we do a lot of testing, ask for a lot of documentation to support all the amounts and conclusions that management has

reached in creating the financial statements. as mentioned we performed audit ending june 30, 2022. as a result of our audit we issued three reports. the first report is in the financial statements themselves in the second two reports are in a separate document addressed to the board of retirement. so, as far as the audit results, the first report is in the very first section of the financial statements themselves and this report is the main reason why we do the audit. it is where we provide our opinion on the financial statements and we are happy to report we issued a unmodified opinion on the

financial statements for year ending june 30, 2022 and unmodified opinion is the highest level of assurance that a independent auditor can give a organization regarding the fair presentation of the financial's. we issued our report february 3, 2023. there are a couple additional items in the report we want to highlight. the financial statements themselves are prepared by management in accordance with generally acceptsed accounting principles and we audit the financial statements in accordance and also with government auditing standards and government auditing standards there is a little more work we have to do which i'll explain in the next report. lastly, on the opinion on the financial statements in our independent auditor report we included a emphasis of matter, paragraph. it is something we want to highlight or we put in the report to highlight for the

board direct somewhere else in the financial statement and this being that the financial statements dont proport to report the financial position of the city and county of san francisco as a whole. the emphasis of matter doesn't change our opinion, has no effect, we just have to put that in and bring it up in this instance. any questions in the financial statements or independent auditor report before i move on to the next report? >> any questions? no. thank you. >> the next report that we issue, has to do with internal control and compliance. when we perform a audit with the government auditing standards we are required to consider and report on internal control for financial reporting. we dont provide assurance, but as part of our audit if we become aware

of deficiencies that rise to a level of define as material weakness or significant deficiency thin controls, we have to report those to the board in this report. we are happy to report that for the year end june 30, 2022, we didn'ted and offered effectively. the second part of the report has to do with compliance with laws and regulations, contracts or agreements. part of the audit with government auditing standard we have to review laws, regulations, city code, plan provisions for items that could have a material effect or material-directly effect the

financial statements and make sure there is no non-compliance and happy to report there again that there were no such matters of non-compliance. again, we dont provide assurance on the controllers or compliance but had there been any material we are required to report that here. our last report we have is known as the required communications. what our required communication report is, at the end of or conclusion of every audit we are required to proport certain matters and items to those charged with governance and overseeing the entity in this case the board of retirement. i broke it out into three different groups. the first has to do with qualitative accounting. accounting we think that quantitatively we have numbers, we are balances and there is a lot of qualitative items. the

first being accounting policy manage chooses or uses to record the transactions into the general ledger and report in the financial statements. the significant accounting policy management uses are identified or discussed in note 2 to the financial statements in the note of disclosures. for the year end june 30, 2022 there were no new accounting policies, no significant changes to the existing policies and more importantly, none of the policies that management uses lacks authoritative guidance or consensus, so nothing out of left field that they are using trying to justify a transaction. the next item under the qualitative aspects have to do with accounting estimates- >> for note 2, can you point to a page number? >> yes.

>> sorry, got spun around flipping through the pages. >> sure. it is on page 20 of the financial statement report. >> thank you. >> yes. going back to the qualitative asset for the county and there is under u.s. gap and accrual basis of accounting there are balances in item in the financial statements and note disclosures that where management has to make estimates. we are required to point out the significant estimates in the financial statements. the first one being in the note disclosures themselves. it has to do with the what is called in the accountsing world the total pension liability and net pension liability. it

translates to the accrued and unfunded liability. this is significant because it is based on actuarially calculations and what the city and county of san francisco have to report as a net pension liability in their financial statements. the significant estimates are the determination of the determined contributions which are done by actuarially studies and complex calculations and finally the fair value of investments, specifically relating to the what i call the turn of investment or real assets, private credit and equity and absolute return. what we do to audit the significant estimates is in the case of-anything actuarially related so calculations of that determined contributions or the total pension and net pension liabilities, we actually have a consulting actuary. they go through the assumptions and calculations and

review sample data to make sure the information that is disclosed in the financial statements is reasonably as it relates to standards of practice and also u.s. gap. fair value of investment, what we do to get comfortable with management estimate is select samples, do testing of our own for publicly traded or equities or bonds or fixed income and then for the alternative investments we go and are obtain quarterly information for net asset values and look at audit ed financial statementss of the investment funds themselves and make sure they received unmodified opinions rchlt look to see who the auditor is, make sure it is reputable firm. look through the valuation policy and procedures to make sure they follow the required accounting standards and the funds are not reporting concern

issues that could effect the ultimate valuation. moving to other matters, we are happy to report we didn't have significant difficulties during our audit. we didn't have disagreement with management and as far as we know management wasn't consulting with any other accounting firm looking for second opinions on transactions. lastly, there were not any uncorrected financial statement misstatements and management signed our representation which is the last item we need, last piece of audit information we need to issue our reports. with that, that concludes our presentation on the financial statements. happy to take any questions. >> seeing no questions, thank you so much for the presentation. appreciate it. any members of public wish to comment on this item?

seeing none, public comment is closed. madam secretary, please call the next item. >> item 15, action item. review and approval of actuarial audit consulting services, request for proposal. >> good afternoon commissioners. the board monitoring the reporting policy specifies a frequency of every 5 years for the actuarial audit. the last audit was 2018 so it is time for a new one. i provided a updated rfp and happy to answer any questions. i do have one change. in the introduction section, the rfp drafted in february, early march we updated our website, so there is a reference that says the very last line of the introduction where it says, see

about spers and publications. it should read, see resources and publications. i am again happy to answer any questions. >> any questions? commissioner driscoll. >> no, just move adoption of issuing the rfp. >> great. second? seconded by commissioner bridges. any members of the public wish to comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. motion made by commissioner driscoll, seconded by commissioner bridges. any additional questions? discussion? seeing none, all those in favor say aye. >> aye. >> all those opposed? the ayes have it. motion passes. thank you so much. >> thank you. >> madam secretary, next item.

>> item 16, discussion item. review of quarterly retirement services dashboard. >> commissioners, you have before you the quarterly dashboards that we have prepared that really highlights the retirement service operation division. it should be self--explanatory. there are two separate reports. one is for the end of the year and there is one for the quarter and i'm happy to answer any questions. >> i got one question. it is productively related. looking at--page 4. connecting with members and processing applications. i'm looking at the count of applications going up slightly faster. i

know we added a few attorneys. and yust wonder if we will ever get the case load down? >> in disability? specifically respect to disability? >> that is a lot of attorney work. case count--there seems to be more applications coming in then cases settled or closed. >> well, the goal is in hiring the new attorneys to work the cases, that we would in fact catch up and stay even, so it is hard for me to tell you right now. i had noticed that we have a lot of applications coming in and i thought of that as well, but it is too soon to tell whether that will be the case, because the attorneys that are on-board now are really focused on taking care of the back-log, and we made significant progress with respect to that, the back-log is still there. >> okay, thanks for this page for this data. we'll continue to watch it to see if it really turns down. thank

you. >> great. thank you. any members of the public wish to comment on this item? seeing none, public comment's closed. madam secretary, please call the next item. >> item 17, discussion item. chief executive officer's report. >> handful of items to update the board on. first, reminder, the form 700 filings are due, so if you haven't completed that, please do so. >> what's it due date? >> april 3. >> april 3. one says- >> we'll--april 3.

in the ceo report you may have noticed i changed the design of the forward calendar hopefully to make it easier for you all to see what is coming up next. it will make us easier for you. we have a lot of activity for the month of april with respect to committee meetings. and then finally, just wanted to share, i have gotten a few questions about committee meetings and in person attendedance, versus

remote attendance and can get into all the details as necessary, but too clear for committee meetings, participation is in person. there are very narrow exceptions and those exceptions are limited and limited to only two times per year, so for all intensive purposes, the committee members and board members should plan to attend those meetings in person. are there any other questions? >> any additional questions? i think earlier there was a comment, public comment about cim. what is-just-i dont know if you know off the top of your head, but what's our investment with them and can you describe that a little further? >> sure. if tonia you want to describe some of the

details you have in terms of the investment. i do want to share and will turn it over to tonia, we looked extensively at this matter, we take our partnerships seriously and want to understand how our managers invest. we had multiple conversations with cim to understand this particular property. their approach to incorporating esg in the process and approach to mitigating risk and importantly , their approach to following the law and we are comfortable based on all the conversations that the manager-comfortable with our investment and the approach they have taken in managing a property and taking these into consideration and i'll turn it over to tonia. >> before- >> if we are going-it sounds like we are getting more into

the weeds here of a inquiry that isn't on the agenda, so it might be a good idea instead of hearing from tonia today, unless that was part of your ceo report and didn't look like it from the materials. >> we are not allowed to ask about anything that comes up the meeting related to public comment? we have the ability to inquire about previous investment. >> if there is something on the agenda to suggest to the public that is the item that would be discussed but don't believe there is a an item that would have put the public on notice. if weant to get into something more in depth we put that on the calendar for future meeting. >> mr. president, if i have may make a request for the next board meeting we hear from staff from cim

investment and my concern also is this investment, you heard from tenants not just on the east coast but this started in los angeles and beyond so it moved much further. we heard from unions so i really want to have a complete breakdown and understanding because we have a constituency that is very concerned and since we are fiduciaries i'm concerned as a fiduciary that we made the right decisions and investment choices for this investment. i like to hear more about it at the next board meeting. >> that's fair. i just say in general, it would be good to know the extent of our investments with them and some of their practices in terms of property management. it is one thing to say they are following the law and another to say there is concrete data. if we can know what the specific number of evictions

and other related entities and if there is losses so we can get a full report on the next agenda,ing that would be helpful. >> (indiscernible) >> any other commissioners? >> just on the subject, in terms of the manager who manages this has a significant amount of capital with us, or we have with them to manage, does anybody foresee problems we should act between now and the next board meeting, besides gathering information and having discussion with them? >> we have been looking into the matter and can address these questions in detail in the private market investments we have to think about that, and two, there's no need for a special meeting. >> we can wait a month. thank you. >> great. just to add on to it, we heard numerous

comments and allegations of union busting on behalf of some of their companies that are owned by cim as well. it is my understanding we have limited exposure or no exposure but what i like included in the report a component that deals with their engagement with these other companies that they own that engage in union busting. >> okay. >> i think we have given enough direction and if there is additional direction maybe you can contact ceo to ask her to shape the agenda item through me. any other comments or questions for the ceo's report? just because it is in the news this week and i know the banks are working with credit swish and [audio cutting in and out] >> not in addition to

what i shared earlier. we are monitoring it closely and sometimes the financial market, things move quickly, but as of 2:30 this afternoon, i think the comments i shared earlier reflect where we stand with respect to our assets and business. >> thank you. seeing no other comments, any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. item 18. madam secretary. >> item 18, discussion item. retirement board member good of the order. >> any comments or concerns from commissioners? anything they want to announce? >> i just wanted to thank you for the ceo for reformatting the calendar. it is so much more reasonable now. i appreciate that. >> great. >> you're welcome. >> anything else? okay. any members of the public wish to comment on this item?

seeing none, public comment is closed. item 19. >> item 19, adjournment. >> we are adjourned. thank you. [meeting adjourned]

♪♪ >> thank you for coming to the talent dance performance and talent show. [ applause ] >> today's performance and talent show. ♪♪

>> public recreation has every bit of the talent and every bit of the heart and soul of anything that any families are paying ten times for. >> you were awesome. [♪♪♪] ♪ homelessness in san francisco is considered the number 1 issue by most people who live here, and it doesn't just affect neighbors without a home, it affects all of us.

is real way to combat that is to work together. it will take city departments and nonprofit providers and volunteers and companies and community members all coming together. [♪♪♪] >> the product homeless connect community day of service began about 15 years ago, and we have had 73 of them. what we do is we host and expo-style event, and we were the very force organization to do this but it worked so well that 250 other cities across the globe host their own. there's over 120 service providers at the event today, and they range anywhere from hygiene kits provided by the basics, 5% -- to prescription glasses and reading glasses, hearing tests, pet sitting, showers, medical services, flu shots, dental care, groceries,

so many phenomenal service providers, and what makes it so unique is we ask that they provide that service today here it is an actual, tangible service people can leave with it. >> i am with the hearing and speech center of northern california, and we provide a variety of services including audiology, counselling, outreach, education, today we actually just do screening to see if someone has hearing loss. to follow updates when they come into the speech center and we do a full diagnostic hearing test, and we start the process of taking an impression of their year, deciding on which hearing aid will work best for them. if they have a smart phone, we make sure we get a smart phone that can connect to it, so they can stream phone calls, or use it for any other services that they need. >> san francisco has phenomenal social services to support people at risk of becoming homeless, are already experience and homelessness, but it is confusing, and there is a lot of waste. bringing everyone into the same space not only saves an average of 20 hours a week in navigating the system and waiting in line

for different areas, it helps them talk, so if you need to sign up for medi-cal, what you need identification, you don't have to go to sacramento or wait in line at a d.m.v., you go across the hall to the d.m.v. to get your i.d. ♪ today we will probably see around 30 people, and averaging about 20 of this people coming to cs for follow-up service. >> for a participant to qualify for services, all they need to do is come to the event. we have a lot of people who are at risk of homelessness but not yet experiencing it, that today's event can ensure they stay house. many people coming to the event are here to receive one specific need such as signing up for medi-cal or learning about d.m.v. services, and then of course, most of the people who are tender people experiencing homelessness today. >> i am the representative for the volunteer central. we are the group that checks and all the volunteers that comment participate each day. on a typical day of service, we

have anywhere between 40500 volunteers that we, back in, they get t-shirts, nametags, maps, and all the information they need to have a successful event. our participant escorts are a core part of our group, and they are the ones who help participants flow from the different service areas and help them find the different services that they needs. >> one of the ways we work closely with the department of homelessness and supportive housing is by working with homeless outreach teams. they come here, and these are the people that help you get into navigation centers, help you get into short-term shelter, and talk about housing-1st policies. we also work very closely with the department of public health to provide a lot of our services. >> we have all types of things that volunteers deal do on a day of service. we have folks that help give out lunches in the café, we have folks who help with the check in, getting people when they arrive, making sure that they find the services that they need to, we have folks who help in

the check out process, to make sure they get their food bag, bag of groceries, together hygiene kit, and whatever they need to. volunteers, i think of them as the secret sauce that just makes the whole process works smoothly. >> participants are encouraged and welcomed to come with their pets. we do have a pet daycare, so if they want to have their pets stay in the daycare area while they navigate the event, they are welcome to do that, will we also understand some people are more comfortable having their pets with them. they can bring them into the event as well. we also typically offer veterinary services, and it can be a real detriment to coming into an event like this. we also have a bag check. you don't have to worry about your belongings getting lost, especially when that is all that you have with you. >> we get connected with people who knew they had hearing loss, but they didn't know they could get services to help them with their hearing loss picks and we are getting connected with each other to make sure they are getting supported. >> our next event will be in march, we don't yet have a date

set. we typically sap set it six weeks out. the way to volunteer is to follow our newsletter, follow us on social media, or just visit our website. we always announce it right away, and you can register very easily online. >> a lot of people see folks experience a homelessness in the city, and they don't know how they can help, and defence like this gives a whole bunch of people a lot of good opportunities to give back and be supported. [♪♪♪]

>> tuesday march 21, 2023. we can hear the wind gusting outside. we hoping everybody is taking precautions to stay safe during this weather. secretary morewitz, please call the roll. >> sure. [roll call] >> commissioner chung will offer the ramaytush oholone land acknowledgment. commissioner chung.