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 re

mr. driscoll >> the first question is when asked that information about wellington wellington has been on a watchlist because that started in april that is where there is no number for them. i know angela is leaving but mr. coca can you ask the staff to prepare a number on april 30 >> share >> we will make it 10 years in month but the numbers are how were supposed to evaluate [inaudible] >> question two, commissioner mitre which it does ask for some basic us permission up relative underperformance in the equities pursue the benchmark. when the important things about this kind of paste dissolves into the problem township because our manager performs included township terminated by results are there. so whether not how much that would account for the 46 point underperformance atchison issue. the third point has to do with --. my basic question is, is there an opportunity cost adding convertibles to the equity portfolio? uncomfortable with that however this is -- individual performance issue. report talks about the employment to our stock ratio based on a being does however i am wondering ho

mr. driscoll, believe it or not, that this may not be the way to go. i firmly believe that this type of investment should be given -- give the opportunity to wrong, late the developers. we give larry ellison and proud playground which run all four for 11 nine dollars of it his -- could have a yacht race. give google given opportunity to twitter back have them give you the millions of dollars. have the mayor asked him for 150 were 300 million but please do not ask the plan participants who cannot even qualify for this type of housing and have us foot the bill. so, please reconsider this. this i think is the man's quest to be the progressive mayor -- i am sorry that no one is buying it. >> my emotional reaction to this first. okay, i would approve of dipping into our pension funds provided we get a 4% return on our investment in you put up at least housing collateral. to use firefighter language by this proposal should be hosed down. now i find what is really remarkable mothers absence of documents. is no documentation regarding this proposal. there is n