Good morning and welcome to the March 18th, 2006 meeting of the good defined contribution plans committee.

The meeting is now called to order.

Will the clerk please call the roll?

Thank you, Chair.

Member Rogani?

Here.

Alternate member Harland.

Absence.

Member Colville is absent.

Alternate member Zelaski?

Here.

Member Kang.

Here.

Member Tunsen is absent.

Alternate member Knox.

Here.

Member Gardella.

Here.

Alternate Member Anderson is absent.

Member Hochstra?

Here.

Alternate Member Tran is absent.

And Vice Chair Levison?

Here.

Alternate member Contreras is absent.

Chair, we have quorum.

Okay, just so the committee knows.

Um Chair Hookstra is not feeling well today.

He's asked me to chair the meeting.

And I have agreed.

Um like to remind the members of the public that if you'd like to speak on an agenda item, please turn in a speaker slip before the item begins.

After the item is called, we will no longer expect uh accept speaker slips.

You will have two minutes to speak when you're called on.

We'll now proceed with today's agenda.

You're gonna lead us.

Please rise if you are able for the opening acknowledgments in order in honor of Sacramento's indigenous people and tribal lands.

So the original people of this land, the Nissanon people, the Southern Maidu, Valley and Plains Miwok, Patwin Winton peoples, and the people of the Wilton Rancheria, Sacramento's only federally recognized tribe.

May we acknowledge and honor the native people who came before us and still walk beside us today on these ancestral lands by choosing to gather together today in the active practice of acknowledgement and appreciation for Sacramento's indigenous peoples' history, contributions, and lives.

Thank you.

Please remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands.

One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

Okay, we are going to start with the consent calendar.

Item one, and I will give the committee a heads up that we change the order of some of the items today.

So we'll start with item one.

We will then move to three, four, and five, all nationwide.

Then we will go to item two, the budget.

Once the budget's established, we'll select who's gonna go to the Nagda conference item seven, and we'll end with item six for the chair and vice chair for going forward.

So let's start with item one, the minutes.

Um I will say I um for our December meeting when there was a lot of confusion about what the motion was for the um recommendation on hold status and and whatnot for our funds.

I went back to listen very carefully to the video, and there were it kept skipping over the important parts where Rosh was clarifying, Brad was asking questions, I was asking questions.

So I think what's in the minutes is what we and we intended to do, but I couldn't verify it.

I don't know if you've listened to the video.

I've tried several times.

Um I did go back and listen.

I also checked in with Rosh to make sure that what I thought occurred is what occurred, and then I had provided edits.

Excellent.

Um then we're assured that the minutes are correct.

Excellent.

Any questions from the committee?

Any speaker slips from the public?

Thank you, Chair.

We have no speakers on the consent calendar.

Okay.

And is there uh a motion to approve the minutes?

And is there uh a motion to approve the minutes?

I'll make a motion to approve.

Second.

I'll second.

Okay, I have a motion by um member King, a second by member Gardella.

We're changing the process for voting now.

It's uh voice vote according to the clerk.

So all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any posed?

Any abstain?

The motion motion passes 70.

Thank you.

John, are you ready to talk about that?

Um, I can do a brief interest on this.

So um John, we did move them some things around here.

So this is regarding the 2026 NAGDA Art Capel President's award, which recognizes excellence and public sector defined contribution plans.

Uh this award is intended to celebrate visionary leadership and dedication to enhancing the financial well-being of plan participants.

In my discussions with nationwide, John and Rosh.

It's my understanding that nationwide would lead the charge on getting an award submitted on behalf of the city of Sacramento's plans.

Um, I think you might be looking at our pet plan transition.

Um, I could be wrong about that.

I'll let you speak to what you're looking at.

Um, and so John is here to just provide an overview on what that process looks like.

We do want to make sure that something gets submitted this year and um take any questions or feedback from the committee regarding the process.

So with that, I will turn it over to John.

Thank you, and good morning.

Yeah, so a couple of ideas we have, and we have a rough draft.

So the NAGA deadline to submit is April 10th, and we will plan on submitting not only not only one for the 2005 calendar year, but also one for the current 2006 calendar 26 calendar year.

Um the draft that we created is roughly, and I'll and I'll read, I guess, just one paragraph.

It's uh regarding fees and the impact that fees have uh really driven down costs and improved financial outcomes.

And so again, we have about a four-page draft, and it's it still needs to be reviewed by Ross.

He's on vacation, and we're gonna add some statistics here.

But uh it says through rigorous oversight and openness to innovation and a tireless commitment to fiduciary excellence, the city delivered transformative improvements that significantly reduce costs, enhance investment quality and strength and retirement readiness for thousands of employees.

These initiatives reflect your leadership and plan governance, and stand as a model for public sector and plan sponsors nationwide.

And so we have examples of what these what these fee reductions were based on uh specific fund changes over the over the years, and and the numbers will be phenomenal.

And again, uh we plan on submitting my idea again.

A couple of ideas we had.

One was the PEP.

We do have some data around that.

I thought the fees is a bit more impactful, and so I'll send a draft over, Samantha as soon as it's uh as soon as it's ready, probably I would say middle of next week to review, and then we'll also need a quote uh to submit.

So there uh they have pretty specific uh recommendations and rules for these submissions, and we submit many each year for again our most valued clients like the city, and so fingers crossed we'll have some success.

John, can you provide information on what type of quote you would be looking for from who?

What should it be?

Sure.

It's it's really just just uh a quote from anyone that's that sits either on the committee or even yourself, Samantha, that talks about the value of the plan.

We can even assist with writing it for you or anyone else, and so we usually take the first draft, and then then uh we provide that to anyone who's interested in putting their name inside the award.

So it's up to the city.

Maybe the committee can have a discussion of like a point person for me to reach out to a specific committee member regarding um getting our quote done and any follow-up that we need to do directly.

That's part of the criteria, so that's something that we'll insert in to the to the award submission.

So I'd I'd like to cover the content first.

Um we had a discussion a year ago.

This item was on our agenda a year ago with uh a plan to submit last year.

Um what we talked about at that time, as I recall was a kind of uh his historical cumulative view of where we've where we started and where we are today over the last 10 years.

So really starting uh nationwide got selected in the in you know 2015 in the RFP, and everything changed in terms of transparency for the participants, fees went down, uh the the um performance of the of the funds that were in the in the lineup were improved, and I thought Rosh had some uh an initial look at what the impact was to participants in terms of not only savings on fees, but in um having higher performing funds, the what that did for the participants.

A little harder to calculate, but I think he I recall last year he was gonna work on try to figure that out, and I I think the the whole history of of how we've worked for the participants to um give them better retirement outcome.

I I think that's the compelling story for um you know for the art cable award, which is as I recall it talks about um you know uh measurable impact on participant financial security and well-being is what I'm seeing in the staff report.

Now it sounded like John that there's gonna be two applications, and I I I thought there were two different deadlines as well.

I thought one was April, and then the then there was another one um for just for the art cable award, which was June.

June.

Yeah.

Okay.

Um so I don't know if there's any feedback from the committee on on the approach that I just uh yeah, Ross and I did discuss too about this, and a lot of some of the data we have came came from Ross around the fees and the fee reductions that we've done sort of over the last many years.

So we've included some of that in there already, but we're gonna expand on it.

So the draft that we have done is just something to get started, but we have definitely some work to do, but again, it'll it'll be more comprehensive than what I discussed.

And the consolidation then under one record keeper of all the plans.

I mean, that's a piece that's I'm I'm hoping that that uh improves um uh customer service for our participants.

Uh you know, just from again from the transition uh 10 years ago.

We used to have somebody occasionally in historic city hall from ICMARC that would be here one day a week, maybe.

You know, we we we know Rick is everywhere all the time, and and that's a huge benefit for our participants, as well as the participation of this committee representing the participants and advocating for them and um putting a greater focus on the plans.

I think all of that is a is just as a one big picture, one big piece altogether is is the story that I I'd like to see told, and if if you can do that, um in terms of Samantha's suggestion about um feedback, uh if that includes also reviewing drafts, I mean uh is there still a problem with sending it to everyone as a blind copy and getting some feedback, or I don't know how that works anymore.

Well, I think it's a just it's the ability to manage all of that, get it all done under the specific timeline and uh working with nationwide um to get it done as well.

Um I think uh we do want to refrain from sending out something to everyone and trying to coordinate that under the Brown Act.

I would advocate establishing you know one primary point person for me to communicate with on this, and that the committee feels competent that that point person is gonna be helpful, timely, informative, and we take that approach anyone want to be that point person.

I'm I'm happy to do it, but I'm I wanted to make sure that someone else who wants it more uh are you raising your hand, Brad?

Okay.

Is there an objection if if I take the lead on that?

Okay.

Is that the direction you were looking for, Samantha?

Murray, will you please do it?

I I do have in my mind what I'd like to see.

I think that helps get us going.

Um what else?

I just have one more question clarify so I understand the deadline and working this into what we're gonna have to do internally.

April 10th is the deadline to submit.

Can you just clarify on the deadline again and what exactly has to happen by April 10th?

Because today is what is today?

I don't even know.

I'm sorry, March 18th.

Yeah, I'll need to check with Nagda.

I have a contact there.

I sat on the awards committee, so I'll check with I'll check with her and get the exact dates because I know you want the art cable.

So I know that general awards are due April 10th, so the submissions due.

Uh but the art cable is a little bit later than that.

So it's June, right?

I'll confirm.

Okay.

When it when it's due.

If if in fact it is, it has to be by April 10th.

We still have time to do that.

So either way, I think we're fine.

Okay.

But I'll confirm with I already actually made a note to confirm with my contact.

Thank you.

Uh you know, my perspective is the the art cable award would is is the primary.

I didn't know there was going to be something else, but I think that historical perspective of uh establishing the committee, improving significantly the return on investment of participants, better customer service access, um you know, better uh funds with better performance uh history.

All of that is for me the sustained achievement focusing on participants that I think makes the most compelling case.

Um I mean my perspective if the April deadline is gonna keep you from meeting the June deadline.

I I'm okay if the April deadline doesn't happen.

I um I I'd say focus on the art capital award, but so uh also to I mean to unburden both of you.

Yeah, I think this item was specifically focusing on getting that art capable award submittal done.

Um I think from hearing from the committee in the past, that would be our goal is that award, right?

Thank you.

Yes.

Any objections to that?

All right.

Okay, so there's no vote required on this item receive and discuss, and we have done that.

Anyone from the public want to speak on this item?

Thank you, Chair.

I have no speaker slice for this item.

Okay, no vote.

Uh we are moving to item four, the nationwide fourth quarter report.

Okay, thank you.

Is there a way to share this laptop on the screen?

Okay.

Yeah.

Jadit.

And um I just want to uh provide the committee an update.

Of course, it in January.

The committee did um recommend that we move forward with the contract with fiduciary consulting group.

Um we are very close to um getting the signatures on that.

Thank you to Ryan, who actually was a huge help in in expediting the um CAO's review process on that.

Um so we're close to getting the signatures by both parties that are required for it to get scheduled on council, and I think we're tentative a meeting early April or mid-April council meeting, so certainly in plenty of time to have them back for our June meeting, and um they will catch up on any reports as well to catch up on for that.

Um, but we do have nationwide here, John again, and their standard report that they typically provide.

And um, so John is here to go through that report and and ask any questions.

Of course, this you know, we usually look at um Rosh's report, right?

That looks very different from this, but this nationwide provides these plan reports every quarter as well, and they've been included.

Um so with that I will turn it over to John.

Thank you.

We'll start with the plan summary, which hopefully you can all see on your computers in front of you.

Excellent.

So we break it out with the various columns.

So this this starts on October 1st and ends on 1231.

You can see there's the 457, there's the 401A is combined, and then the totals.

So the plan started roughly 883 million way back on the first of October.

Then we we add in contributions, subtract off distributions, and I'll go through this in a little bit more detail.

Subtracting fees, adding in loans, and then the gains loss of the market, which was about 10 million positive.

The plan ended roughly 889 million dollars as of the end of the year.

The top right corner of that page.

The the that header seems a little confusing.

Yeah, we custom made this and we our reporting team just you just pulled one of the names of one of your plans and just left it on the top.

So we'll fix that next year.

All plans all it is.

Oh uh yeah, yeah, okay.

I actually have another question.

Um I was curious why the 457 balance is higher than the 401A.

I the reason why I'm asking is because we're at least is my employment uh whenever that started.

I'm required to put into the 401A, but the 457 is optional.

So I'm just curious like what drives that higher balance on the 457.

I I can answer that.

The the 457 has been around for 70.

40 years, 1975.

And um and the and every employee is eligible to be in it, including people like myself who still have money in there.

401s are limited to very few unions that negotiated for, even though it's mandatory once they're negotiating once they're negotiated.

Um but it's really the the the duration of how long the plan has been around.

And then also on the 401A plans in the labor agreements for the rep units that are do have to, or the NREPRESO, um who do have to mandatory participation in it.

It's you know it's capped at maybe two percent on both sides, five percent and four percent, whereas your 457 plan, you're eligible for the whole IRS annual limit, the age catch-up provisions, the three-year pre-retirement catch-up.

So but yes, 19 the mid-70s is when our 457 plan started.

75.

So I mean, the 401 wasn't mandatory.

Well, the the law might have made it mandatory for a while, but how we implemented it was we it was like open enrollment.

You could you could go into it and then you can go out of it at open enrollment and uh interpretation of the law finally changed and said if your union's if you know if you're if your units in it, it's mandatory.

It's also higher.

Believe it or not, that chose to not contribute and also not get the city's match.

Crazy.

Ash, I hope you have both.

Yeah.

And the RS limits higher, 24,500 for this calendar year in the 457 plan, and so much higher limit, but those are great explanations.

Yeah, most rank and file members don't have the 401.

Then we also have the PEP balance.

I just jumped forward to page four.

So we see the very uh very beginning balance there.

We transitioned around 21 million-ish into the PEP plan back uh when it came over for mission square.

So you can see the activity ended at around 30.9 million.

So this plan is growing pretty fast, faster than we thought originally.

And then we have a breakdown of all of all the various PEP plans that the city offers.

But mainly we focus on the 457 plan.

And we did get the header right on this one, luckily.

So the 457 plan, I'll spend a little more time on this as it's the largest plan.

Otherwise, the report would just be too too big.

But I'm gonna jump because we're gonna talk about each of these, but mainly on the overview when we look at this, and we have slides after this that talk about all of these various numbers.

But we again we see the average balance, or I'm sorry, the asset balance on the upper left, and participants of the balance around 5100.

You can see the average balance right in the middle of that page, 137,000 uh up about 800 from the quarter prior.

54 new enrollments in that quarter.

We had 56 the quarter before that.

And so again, I'm gonna go through each of these in a little bit more detail, starting with participation.

The upper left again, we have total participants right below that average balance.

The median balance is right in the midpoint.

So if you wanted to know well, what is kind of the median in the plan, that's if you looked looked at every single balance and just uh looked at the one right in the middle.

So there are some larger account holders that drive that average up.

Your average asset classes, it's very healthy.

Your your overall diversification is really good, an average of almost four asset classes per participant.

That's excellent.

We love to see that because you again your employees are choosing to diversify their investments.

That little wheel just shows the planned assets by employment status, and so 53% of the assets held by your participants are still working for the city.

And 44% are terminated, and then we have some other that's basically payroll coding, but so it's around a 53 to 44 percent split.

I do have plans that have more assets with terminated participants and active, so that does exist, but again, we're focused on those tournament folks to make sure that they don't roll out.

Then on the on the just to the right of that, we break out Roth usage, and so your participants have the have the ability on the election to select pre-tax or after tax, Roth is after tax.

There are 1237 participants who have selected to invest in Roth after tax dollars of 23.9 million dollars.

And then finally below that, we break out our pro account, which is our fee for service managed accounts, service, and have 1925 participants.

John, can you go back um to um like the overview page?

So uh it looks like there's more money going out of the plan than coming in, is that right?

Correct.

Yeah.

Is are there any thoughts on how we could turn that around?

I'm gonna move to the distributions page, which will give a give a larger breakout of what's occurring.

So if you look in the middle of the page under current period, we compare current to prior.

And it's roughly it's a little bit less in fourth quarter than even third quarter.

But if you look at the total that went out the door is 12 million, and 7.2 million of that is rollovers, and rollovers are done by folks who have separated service from the city, and so those are again make up the bulk of money out.

Um so the strategy, at least that I would see, would be to focus on the folks that are retiring or separating service.

Many of them are rolling over to their new jobs, many of them are rolling over to an existing account they have set up with a possibly a financial advisor.

Uh Rick didn't have any comments in his section around that, but we see that, and we see that at every plan, not just Sacramento.

We see that around pretty much across the board with large custom plans like yours.

We're seeing increased rollovers and increased distributions pretty much on every plan.

And so uh unless we can talk to them one-on-one, it's it's tough to stop the rollovers.

And we acknowledge that though though we try, but once we get the request, we need to process it immediately.

So there won't be any delays once those come in a nationwide.

So a strategy around that.

So I've spoken to our marketing team around that.

We we'd like to do a campaign, that's one of our ideas.

I'm gonna try to have Jill out.

Since since we don't have any way to do virtual, I'm gonna try to fly her out.

She's in our home office to talk about maybe a campaign around that for this year.

That was my idea.

Possibly our Nagda submission for 26 would be something like a rollout or even a distribution campaign to try to try to limit that, but no other real thoughts around that, just that again, most of it is to roll outs.

John did I hear you correctly?

Did you say the rollover amount is factored into the total distribution amount?

Okay.

Yeah, so seven out of the twelve are rollover.

So more than half of the money going out the door is from folks who have separated service from the city.

Thank you.

You made a comment about virtual.

I I didn't understand what you were saying.

Yeah, uh if there's a way to, I know there's no way to get someone on virtually.

Uh so our marketing contact wasn't able to fly in today to the meeting, but I'd like to get her out for the next meeting to try to talk about some campaigns that we're gonna focus on for 2026.

Yeah, the directions been for our Brown Act body meetings that are presenters and attendees are here.

So I've been talking to John about getting the marketing director here.

Didn't we have uh fiduciary training from a person in Kansas City online?

How did that happen then?

I can only state what I know today for current practice.

If that's potentially changing, we can talk to the city clerk's clerk's office about that.

It was definitely a change from during COVID.

We allowed for virtual participation participation, and then at some point the the roles changed.

Yeah.

I'm talking about last year.

We had uh our our fiduciary training was an attorney from Kansas City, and he did he was not here in in the office.

He was not here present, he was on the screen.

So if something's changed in the last year that makes that not possible, I'd like to know that, but otherwise, I don't know why that wouldn't also be available to nationwide.

We can check with the clerk's office on current what would currently be allowed.

I want to comment um, you know, in benefit services.

I do have employees who reach out to me or participants who have separated employment about their rollovers to something else.

I do always remind them how low our fees are, that our investment lineup is reviewed at at a minimum quarterly, um, that we have a committee um reviewing all of this and making sure that we have a um strong suitable investment lineup that hopefully provides options for people at all stages of their life with these plans.

The feedback that I get the most when I try to encourage them on the benefit of staying in our plan is one, yes, they are often going to other employers and they just want the simplicity of managing one plan, or if they are retired, um they have multiple different types of um investments, and they too are looking for the simplicity of just being able to manage all of that under one house, basically, right?

Like they might have a 401k and they have an IRA, and now they have 457 and 401A, and um, especially when it comes time for them to having to do their RMDs, and um, so that is what I hear the most is they're just looking to simplify life for themselves and in managing what they have to do and keeping it just all under one umbrella.

And so just wanted to share that.

Is it is it not possible to accomplish all of that under our our plan with nationwide?

Can they roll in and and or are there some plans that just can't roll in?

Well, if you have a if you have a balance here and you keep your balance, then you'd be able to roll in.

But if you took a full withdrawal, then you would no longer be but I meant if someone's talking to benefit staff and says I I want to move it all to one place.

Can the answer be sure?

Move it all here.

Yeah, your plan accepts other forms of roll-ins from other from other but it does I don't think it it does not accept all just you it does not accept inherited IRAs, inherited 401ks, yeah.

In anything inherited.

I don't I was under the impression you can't enroll uh roll in like an individual IRA into the 457 plan.

Yeah, it would have to be a 403B, 401k.

It's very specific plan types that can roll in.

Um so and that's where this comes on people who worked in the private sector and or just whatever.

They're looking at the feedback I get is they're just looking for simplicity to be able to manage this under one.

People are looking for advice and they're being heavily solicited by friends, family, relatives because these balances going out the door are typically your larger balances, and because they work their careers usually not in all cases, but uh everyone wants these accounts to roll over for themselves because their financial advisors are making commissions in many aspects and situations.

So people need to understand what they're doing when they're rolling over, and a lot of times they just move it.

And but there are pitfalls and there are the buyer bewares, and we do get a lot of questions about hey, I you know, can I roll it back?

I wish I wouldn't have done it.

We hear it all the time, and if they roll it all out, they can't.

So Rick's message is always well, leave some money in inside the plan over $5,000 roughly, five to ten thousand dollars.

And if you want to come back, you can because a lot of people realize maybe they made a mistake.

And um, so that does happen.

That's why I was gonna ask you.

You actually tell them that, right?

That if they leave the plan, they can't come back.

Yes, yeah, and we put then our materials that um we have a you know, a handout that all of our retirees get when we meet with them, encouraging them that to leave some balance so they can roll in.

And John also touched on something else that I will talk to folks about when um they're inquiring about rolling out, is I you know, I try to get as much information from them as they're willing to share with me, and they do bring they are being solicited for sure.

I'm being solicited, and I'm just because my name is out there on these reports or whatever, right?

I get cold calls all the time from my own personal investments, so to speak.

And I'm like, how did you get my phone number?

How do you know who I am?

Um so yes, the solicitation is heavy.

I do remind these individuals, like it's not free to get to go to some of these other things and get what you think is um an advisory model for your investments.

You're typically gonna be paying maybe one percent of your assets every month.

It's a hundred basis for for those fees, and I try to remind them like there are many avenues available in our plans.

If you stay in them, we have the quarterly financial planning services now that's included in our contract.

We do have manage the pro account, um, if that's something you're more comfortable with, and those fees are quite low compared to what you're gonna go out and pay um for individual investment advisory model, and then we also have the self-directed brokerage option, which opens up the whole world to you, right?

Basically, and your money markets.

So lots of reasons to stay.

These are communications, at least I know I have with participants, just because I try to let them know you have to understand what this is gonna cost you if you do this, right?

But again, most feedback I get is they just want simplicity, they want easy, especially as they approach that RMD age, and having to manage RMDs from all these multiple.

And every ad you see now from various providers is consolidate simplicity, have have all your accounts in one place.

So, John, are there any products that we're not currently offering that we could offer that would be a benefit to participants to be more of an encouragement to stay or to roll in things that they can't roll in now?

Are there products that we could offer within our existing plans?

Uh products, I mean just off the top of my head, just I mean, there's if you wanted a deemed IRA, you know, there's there's an IRA products, I don't know, like Sacramento Fire offers an IRA to their employees.

That would only be really for someone who's already maxing this out.

It's another opportunity to invest.

But product wise, I mean, I I just think it's it's hard to stop people from rolling out.

It really is.

And uh I can sure take a look, but there's not much else we can offer industry wide, because these products that are offered are I'm sorry?

Adding to that conversation, so it is heavy solicitation.

Yeah, I mean, when I left the city, people were trying to get my money too.

So it is a lot of peer pressure to move your money to whatever plans.

Simplicity is always good, keep your money close.

But I also think there's an opportunity for nationwide to be just like the other competitors where they're asking us to provide, well, give me some of your statements so I can see what you're offered.

So when people are transitioning out of the city and they're thinking about the rollover, it's okay.

Well, what are they offering you?

Let's see what they're offering you so we can kind of have that conversation and it opens up that conversation for you to have with them so they're more educated and can make a better decision.

Yeah, yeah.

John, for your for other plans of similar to ours uh that you work with, how concerned are they related to these um rollouts?

Is this a big topic of conversation for them?

Um you know it varies.

Um I was at a large county plan a couple weeks ago, a couple billion in assets and not a care in the world.

Um it's usually highlighted by someone like Ross, you know, when it did when that when he does us cash flow, the consultants usually pause and say, take a look at the trend, and it sometimes can be alarming.

Uh depending on the numbers, right?

But I'm seeing it negative almost across the board.

Uh rollouts and distributions are up.

And it's I think it's just the economy.

I mean, sometimes I do have a plan in center California that's never been cash flow negative, and we can't figure out why.

It's just that in 15 years, they've never had a quarter.

And I went back and looked.

Uh, it's just the personalities of your employees when they leave and the choices that they make.

But are they concerned?

I mean, they they look at patterns and trends, but at the end of the day, there's nothing they can really do except for educate.

We do that.

We have the best rep in the entire country having these conversations day, you know, day after day after day.

Rick is heavily focused on keeping money in the plan, as as we are too.

I mean, we send out emails up to up to monthly for anyone over 50 to let them know that they should stay in the plan.

So our our target marketing changes uh as you age to convince folks and educate folks to leave the money in the plan.

So uh, but I I would say it's mixed.

I have a lot of plans that care heavily, and a lot of plans that they really don't.

Yeah.

I know Rosh highlighted the there was of just a few years ago, money was more money was coming in the plan than going out.

Yeah, yeah.

And he indicated that when we're looking for a record keeper and a record keeper wants to decide should I try to get the city of Sacramento's business, the fact that the plans are growing in size, and if it's an asset-based fee, that means the income to the record keeper is gonna go up.

That's very beneficial to the record keeper, like nationwide or voyage or or the other.

Anyway, yeah.

So it that I assume the opposite is true.

The money's going out.

You're you want our business, and you know that your income's gonna go down when you take our business.

We take it personally, and we we want to keep everyone in the plan.

I can't imagine why you'd want to roll out personally, especially here with the fees you have and the oversight you have, the investments you have.

There's no reason to really unless you can find something better.

Uh but a lot of people just don't take the time to really investigate or compare the two, put it side by side and say what am I gonna pay at my next provider versus what am I paying here?

A lot of people don't even know what the fees are, so it's an it's partly education.

Sure.

But heavily concerned, I mean, we don't want it to lose anyone.

I've a question.

So uh as Samantha mentioned, like when people go to retire, a lot of times they want to consolidate, and maybe they can't roll in, like I have TSP from the military.

I don't know if I could roll that into this account.

I haven't looked into it, but uh what I see in our members at the fire department specifically is a lot of spouses are employed elsewhere, and the spouse and our member will go to like a Schwab or a Fidelity to move all their funds into one.

There's no ability probably for us to roll a spouse's 403B into this account because it's just another name.

So I think at least with our members, that's what I see a lot of them coming out for is to go put all their money in with their spouses into one uncount for the two of them.

Yeah, and have we have meetings with Rick to try to retain our members from we explain the fee process and everything, like if you if you do go to Schwab, you're gonna pay.

Yeah, Rick meets with every department about it.

Yeah, so it's a heavy focus of his.

Absolutely.

Yeah, appreciate the comment.

Well, I I know part of the contract with nationwide is marketing plan.

Um I'm hoping that sometime this year we come back with a report to talk about what our marketing should be, and maybe we can develop some uh plan on this subject, or we'll come up with a better subject.

Great.

So since we're on this page, you can see RMD is the third line down, also went up considerably.

If that's retirement, that's uh that's required minimum distribution.

Fourth quarter is always the largest of the year.

Most people wait till the fall, late fall to take those out.

So roll-ins were up, RMDs were up, uh, most were up, except for self-directed.

We have we had fewer money or fewer transfers into Schwab in the fourth quarter by about 900 grand.

But this gives you a little bit of a of a pattern from last quarter to this quarter, but it's about the same overall as it was in the third quarter.

Just the numbers shifted a little bit.

So we'll move up.

Uh I'm gonna jump back up to optional strategies.

And optional strategies, this is page 10.

The only thing to point out that we haven't pointed out is on the kind of the top row, the Roth average balance.

We've we've looked at Roth money, Roth participants, the Roth average balance of around 19,000.

And then below that, we have your self-directed brokerage account information.

Schwab does also Schwab also provides their their own quarterly report, but there's about 12.7 million with Schwab, 66 participants use Swab, and you can see the average balance is much higher than the average balance in your plan, which is usually always the case.

Uh every plan I have, their Schwab balances are gonna be larger.

And so just wanted to point that out.

Um, about just under 200,000 for those for uh for um sorry for those participants.

Money in, we've talked about money out, but money in, so in the middle of that page again, current period 8.3 came in, 10.4 came in last quarter.

The salary contributions is roughly the same.

We had fewer roll-ins in the fourth quarter than we did the third quarter.

Uh and then if you look at that little wheel chart down below, then it shows where the money is coming in and what investment options.

And so we we don't label this perfectly, but if that if you look at the bottom of the wheel, 31% of all new money that's that's coming in is going into large cap stock funds, roughly 28% is going into target date fund.

So those are the two most popular investments, at least for new contributions coming into the plan.

And like most plans, the other investment options aren't as utilized.

So, for example, small cap, mid-cap, not really utilized much.

Fixed assets, so people who want something safe, only six percent of new money is going into something safe.

So your participants are heavily utilizing the market, whether it's equities or fixed income.

So it's about a 90 94 to 6% ratio.

So they're taking advantage of the markets.

As far as assets go, we looked at new money, current money where current money's sitting on the upper left.

We have your allocation overall in your plan.

So 16% of the assets in your plan are with target date or asset allocation, 8.9% bonds, 13% fixed, internationally 11, large cap.

OWS has a large percentage of 37%.

So again, this is with ex this is with existing money in your plan total, and then we break it out again by participants in each asset class, and then percentage.

So we won't take a deep dive into this, but just wanted to share that overall statistic around where the money is currently sitting in your in your deferred comp plan.

And then we list it out by fund.

So what is the most popular fund in your plan?

Ross also does this with his report, nothing new.

The only difference is that we add participation.

So if there's ever a fund change that needs to be done, we know how many participants are gonna be receiving the nationwide uh flyer or mailer and or email that we send out, the notifications, and then we look at trends in the far right column, how many transfers uh kind of net happen in each of your investment options.

So no big numbers to really talk about, no big trends, uh, but just wanted to again share your investment options from the most popular down to the least popular down to that 2070 for those very young participants who are just starting to do that.

The target date funds uh as a uh as a whole, just not particularly popular.

Not yet, but they're growing.

We're gonna see the numbers growing.

The trend is again more contributions in, so I think over time those numbers will will be growing.

All right, moving on to loans.

Your active loan balance in the upper left, there's eight million outstanding.

Eventually that'll be repaid back to nationwide.

There's 597 current loans that are active.

And looking at trends, we opened 52 and closed 38.

So the number of loans is growing slightly.

The upper right of this page is your current average loan balance, 13,657.

So if you want to know well, what's the kind of the average loan amount out there?

That's that's your answer.

So the IRS allows you to borrow up to $50,000 and/or up to 50% of your account balance.

So your participants are roughly in line with what we see with other large plans across the country of your same size.

It's about the same.

It's always around 12,000, $13,000 per per loan, and you're no different than other plans.

Your plan allows two types of loans, general purpose, which is for any reason up to five years, and or primary residence, which is up to 15 years.

So you can select which one works for you.

Again, it has to be your primary residence.

You don't have to do 15, you can do something up to 15.

We have loan modeling on our website as well as our call center to let you know what your payment would be.

Um so again, those are your options.

Um, not much else to really talk about except for we dispersed 882,000 in loans and received back 933.

So any participant can take a loan, or do you have to be actively employed, working, contributing?

Uh you mean as far as folks that are terminated?

Yes.

Yeah, I believe we set that up to allow yeah.

So to me, that's another benefit of keeping your money in the plan.

I don't I don't know whether the other uh places people are rolling them out to allow loans like this.

Yeah, the committee we amended the plan a few years ago to allow separated employees to take loans with the hopes that two kept them in the plan.

Most plans haven't done that.

So I I think that by the city actively being proactive, you know, to let the retirees and folks separated from service do that.

I think that's a win.

So we we like to see that.

And then wanted to share another slide around enablement and engagement.

This is something fairly new that we've been adding into our our quarterly reports.

Things like e-delivery.

So how many uh how many city participants have opted out of paper?

Well, 75% of your of your folks don't want paper.

So when we send notifications out, they're gonna be electronic.

Online accounts, Rick's heavily focused on this.

Every time he meets with one of your employees, the first thing he asks is well, do you have an online account?

And if and if and if they don't, he'll get them set up.

So 86% of your total number of participants have one.

Distributions, most are being done online nowadays, so that's a that's also a great thing.

It's uh much safer and faster.

On the upper right, we have 95% of your beneficiaries on file.

It's about as high as we've seen.

It's hard to get above 95%, though we'd like to if possible.

We send out emails twice a year in February and November to anyone who doesn't have a beneficiary on file with nationwide.

It's also on their statement.

If there's no beneficiary, it'll say no beneficiary on file, and they can update it by going to the website or by calling us and giving us the name, we'll take it, take any direction that we can get.

So we are we are missing five percent, but 95% is pretty good, way above the benchmark.

Same with emails, 96% email rate.

That's really good.

It's about the highest that I've seen.

An online enrollment, about half and half, half do it traditional way on paper, half do it online.

So happy there.

And then very bottom row, this is just our software, which gives a retirement readiness score called my income and retirement planner, the usage for the last quarter, and some various data there.

So that's that's mainly Rick's appointments.

Him uh he's also heavily focused not only on e-delivery and things like online accounts, beneficiaries, but also our software, which gives you a retirement readiness score.

All right, some other metrics going back to 2019 growth of your plan.

I think I think uh Vet Ross puts this in his report as well.

But we're gonna hit that billion dollar mark, and we're gonna hit it soon if the market cooperates.

So we're very excited about that.

We're pushing 900 million, we're we're right there now.

Um pro account activity.

We were asked to add this into our reports, which we did.

This again is our fee-for-service managed account product.

We just list assets and participants for all of your plans, the totals in the far right column.

So we we added that in to make sure that there's information.

Our CFP summary, again, we're we're offering CFP services dedicated to the city through a dedicated financial planner.

Who lives in Sacramento?

And we hired this person to be in Sacramento specifically for your city, and this person's services now our Northern California block of business, but we have reserved him for you, and we reserved, I believe it's five days a quarter for his services, and this is again uh free financial planning to anyone who wants it.

We've always offered it, and we we offered it through our call center, and we still do.

So if someone can't meet uh with with with a dedicated financial planner, they can still set up an appointment to set up a virtual meeting.

But this just shows the totals, kind of that third row from the bottom that to the that 2025 year in review.

We had 115 scheduled meetings, 92 of those were initial meetings.

We had 54 data review meetings, some education meetings, 17 uh plans were reviewed, and then we had seven cancellations in his schedule.

The plans are the full financial plans.

So, in order to get a full financial plan, there's a questionnaire.

It's usually a couple of meetings to you know to uh not only set it up but to run it and then review it.

And so this is this is in addition to what Rick offers.

If someone comes to Rick and says, I want a financial plan, Rick will then refer them on.

So this is in addition to Rick statistics.

We'll get to those in a second.

Uh first we wanted to share website activity.

So on the left-hand side, we had 16,830 logins in the fourth quarter, less than we had in the third quarter by about 5,000, but or really 4500.

And what are folks doing when they log in?

We had 19 change or allocation, which is future contributions going into different investment options, 468 deferral changes, and 15 exchanges, which are fund-to-fund transfers from one fund to another.

And then our call center metrics to the right of that far right column.

We received 1209 phone calls in the fourth quarter.

I saw that.

Um to be honest.

But it was a it was a large change.

Yeah.

Calls abandoned just means they hung up before they reached the service rep.

I can comment.

I was having trouble logging in.

Maybe you had a bunch of calls for that.

I I know I was having trouble logging into my account.

So maybe I wasn't alone.

1200 Brad calls into the Yeah, I called 1218 times.

No.

So Rick Rick wanted to provide his service recap.

Rick is our as you know, he's he's a he's a very special person.

He's out there at five in the morning.

He works late at night.

He goes everywhere.

He had 304 individual consultations.

He had seven on-site meetings, 31 site visits.

He also wanted me to say that he was at all six fire captains meeting at the fire department.

And they're heavily engaged, as always.

Um Rick's one of his favorite locations to go to.

He did a lot of education campaigns, flyers, emails, calls.

You you can see he had various webinars in the month of December.

He also sent out ongoing emails to new employees two times a month, various follow-up emails, reminding for new accounts to try to get enrollments.

Did some rollover mail campaigns, and then on the right, all of his work sites that he visited in the fourth quarter.

So various fire stations.

He likes to see every fire station several times a year, and he gets there.

South PD, North Pity, fire headquarters, again, fire captains meetings, uh, pretty much everywhere.

And then recurring sites that he visits every single quarter.

You can read the list.

Rick knows everyone, goes everywhere.

Um, if you need him, let us know.

Um questions about his activity.

Yeah, so it's so something to brag about.

The art cable award.

We'll try to consolidate this in.

Yeah.

So I'm gonna pause.

I know we've we've discussed a lot.

Wanted to see if there's any other questions about any of the data.

Overall, your plan is exceptional.

Uh all of your metrics are second to none.

Uh, your average balances are high, your deferrals are high, your folks are contributing, they're investing properly, uh, they're being seen by Rick, uh, they're calling in to the call center, they're using the website, the tools and services they have available to them.

Not much else to say.

Yeah, a quick question.

Uh appreciate all the information that you put together.

Um, going back to the where you listed the contributions where they're going primarily into large cap.

Um most large cap funds are heavily weighted toward a small number of holdings, you know.

Like the SP, yeah.

Yeah, right.

So is there any thought or consideration, maybe a diversifying um some of the options, some of the things out there to kind of hedge against, say if you know, NVIDIA tanks and and uh takes half the market with it.

Um is that you know something that that could be out there, something we could discuss and and maybe offer that?

Yeah, so we offered last quarter uh on December 2nd and December 9th, we had presentations on December 2nd it was about enrolling, but a lot of that is investing.

Also, it's all mixed in.

And then on the 9th, we had one just for investing.

On the 11th, that's also investing.

Uh so we're trying, we're we're doing specific seminars for that for that exact topic.

Yeah.

Because in the old days, I've been doing this a long time.

It was always it was always fixed in large cap and nothing else, right?

So we're moving away from that from that trend into other things like target aid funds.

And so the numbers are are moving.

They haven't moved as fast here as some other plans, but they're moving and they're moving into target aid funds.

So the trends are happening, just not as quick as probably they should.

Right.

Okay.

We do have that as an item for Rosh to discuss at the June meeting.

Yeah, I mean, I think that that'd probably be helpful, you know.

Right.

Yeah.

Definitely if especially if the the most of the money that people are contributing is going to the one area, you know, try to get that diversified as much as we can, especially current market conditions.

You know, who knows what direction we're going, and if AI doesn't take off like it should, and you know, we could see some definite uh, you know, things that people may not want to have to deal with, and always having more options would be better for that.

Agree.

Just in general, how do you feel about having three funds in each category?

So we don't overwhelm participants with too many choices.

Yeah, I mean, I think I think that's definitely a good idea, a good start.

Um, you know, it's it's the it's which those what those three are.

Right, yeah, we have to make you know, we have to analyze and make sure there's not too much overlap in them, make sure that they're they're you know, if we had three, they all three offered different things based on, you know.

So if in large cap somebody has different objectives, then um just putting it in the seven biggest names they could find.

Yeah, definitely that would be helpful.

I do have a thought on this, which is I think a lot of it goes back to the investment policy statement.

I do have a thought on this, which is I think a lot of it goes back to the investment policy statement, and I you know that policy basically outlines three tiers of funds.

Tier one is the target date funds, tier three is the Schwab or the personal choice retirement account, self-directed accounts.

What we're really talking about here is tier two, which is when you log into your nationwide account.

What are the funds that you have available?

The investment policy basically outlines a series of indexes that then follow, you know, they basically direct kind of the selection of funds that flow up to those indexes.

I think we could be a little more strategic in terms of the indexes that we've selected.

So just as an example, you know, it does this traditional large cap, medium cap, small cap.

Um you kind of go through the list, you you get to international.

There, you know, there's just one set of international.

Like, I I think just in that example, there's a whole array of international indexes we could be looking at is as opposed to just a single type of index.

And so um I would definitely be open to exploring that a little bit further and just kind of broadening the the types of indexes that we've outlined in our investment policy.

Other questions for John?

John, I think in the interest of time, um, if the committee doesn't have any further questions on this specific item.

Um if you had an intent to continue going through each slide, I think we could pause on that and um they have all the materials and then um because we want to make sure we give enough time to the survey results and discussion surrounding and the other items.

So but any other comments or questions for on this item.

From the public on this item.

Thank you, Chair.

We have no speaker slips.

Are we ready to move on to okay?

Next item then uh this was a anyway.

This was a receive and file, no direction.

Oh, I'm sorry, there was no normally with Rosh, we've got direction, but not on this one.

No direction, other than we we talked about some future topics to cover.

Okay.

Okay, survey item number five.

Let me um, yeah, so uh John's gonna review nationwide's 23 and 24 participant survey results.

Um, also um I think the committee we need to touch on and have nationwide maybe give an overview of kind of what their standard survey looks like that goes out to participants, um, where they're gonna he's gonna discuss the results of those today and the committee have a discussion today on any additional types of surveys that the committee may want to accomplish or touch on in the future that is outside the scope of nationwide's just traditional um participant surveys, and maybe we can learn a little bit based on that discussion.

Maybe we can learn a little bit more from John today on the ability for nationwide to do other types of surveys.

Um are those do is there a cost associated, or is it something where the committee would need to figure out some other method to conduct any other type of participant surveys that it wants to do?

So with that, I'm gonna turn over to John to um the primary thing right now is just to go over nationwide's 23 and 24 survey results.

Yeah, and the quick answer is we we have standard survey questions, but if the city wants to modify those uh to review those, we can.

And we just got the 20 2025 survey results back in the last week, which I have not shared, which I can put on a future agenda.

We have a new survey vendor, so our surveys have been expanded from the 23 and the 24 version, so more data.

So Samantha, I'll share that with you since we just got it back.

But your saber your survey results in general are very good.

And I won't read everything and it's and it's fairly short, but some key takeaways.

Your plan participants are satisfied overall nationwide, more describing the quality and partner of services delivered as excellent.

And I'll share again those those stats.

High advocacy and likelihood remain with the plan after retirement.

And as views of the economy have improved, uh, so has the assessment of plan performance with more feeling the plan has performed well.

The 23rd survey was done during a market decline.

Uh the 21st survey, uh, the market was okay.

Uh so keep that in mind.

But again, the overall results are very, very good.

In 2030, we had 155 respondents.

We had 107 in 2024, and then I skipped the touch point usage, but participants overall uh make frequent use of the resources available to them, both digital again, uh, the website call center, and they really appreciate Rick who is here at called retirement specialist for his professionalism and ability to explain your plan.

So Rick got really good marks as always.

So this is this is the main page, the overall plan satisfaction.

You can see on the left-hand side that 76% of the respondents are in the top two categories of extremely satisfied and very satisfied.

So we're we're very happy with that.

In 2024, we had 76 percent again, the exact same number are in the top two quadrants.

So that is really what we're what we're looking for.

Most are again very, very happy.

Uh we didn't get responses back for reasons for satisfaction for everyone, so the numbers aren't aren't huge in this category, but it just in general, uh they did respond of good quality service and helpful customer service and easy access and things like that.

Dissatisfaction, there are always gonna be folks dissatisfied in 23.

It was mainly market conditions, but some people feel uninformed, limited investment options, but again, we're not sure what limited means.

There's tens of thousands of those available, you know.

You you can't offer everything, but yet we sort of can with Schwab.

Um there's education needed around Schwab.

Um, so you can kind of read the rest.

But overall, our marketing team is very happy and very pleased with the results.

The survey results in 25 are even better than this, but we're proud and we're very happy with what we've seen both in 23 and 24.

And then plan up, yeah.

How many participants are you asking to put uh to be part of the survey?

Uh yeah, we didn't we didn't have that that number.

I believe we send it out across all participants in your 457, and it's through a third party.

So we've heard that not all emails either go through some go to spam, uh, but we're seeing roughly I think in 25.

I need to look and see how many we got.

I know that Brad asked already.

Um I'm not sure of that number, but I'll find out.

So you're saying you sent I don't know, 4800 or whatever emails out and only a hundred and fifty five people.

I'll double check the the total number as I don't know.

I just assume that we sent it to everyone because why wouldn't we?

Um but we're not yeah, so we got right.

I don't I don't think we limit the surveys to anyone.

So does every does anyone on the committee remember getting an email asking for okay.

I completed my survey.

Uh huh.

Excellent.

And you are a decision maker, yeah.

I completed my participant survey.

All right, maybe I did and I don't remember or yeah, it doesn't again it comes from a third party, so it might it might be why it's doesn't come from nationwide.

So what is T2B in the chart on overall plan satisfaction?

T2B is the top two benchmarks, uh extremely satisfied and very satisfied.

We combined them.

Can you put uh a key somewhere?

So I searched for what that meant and I couldn't find it.

Yeah, the 25 version does.

It's a little bit again more you don't have that in front of you, but the survey that we just completed has a little bit more detail on that, and it has a better legend, so it'll have better explanations as well.

Only 8% of the people uh are satisfied because of low rates and fee structure.

I I mean I don't maybe they just really don't understand.

Again, the 23 the market was down, everyone was everyone was mad.

It was a bad it was bad timing, but it went and we still scored well, uh, which is which is of kind of the beauty of this.

But I agree.

Uh people people don't understand.

We wish they did.

Isn't that still any resentment from 10 years ago when it went from never appearing on their statements to suddenly seeing a fee on their statement?

People got upset then.

I never hear anything about that.

I don't think the majority of the planned participant population understood one way or another.

Um I recall back in December, or whatever would have been that first quarter, I think, in 17 where we all saw our statements for the first time, fielding some phone calls around that.

I thought this was free.

Right.

Um, so that was explained, but that's not something I ever hear.

Yeah.

Um I don't think the conversations I have, the everyday participant is just putting their money in, never logging in, not looking at it, you know, they're like, it's they're you know, I start getting hearing more as people are getting closer to thinking about retirement and do I have enough money to retire?

That's when they all start really paying attention.

Um, at least that's my experience here.

Um yeah, if you took a poll and say what's your what's your fee on your deferred comp plan, I don't think anyone would know.

Yeah.

No.

To the dollar.

I mean, yeah.

Well, it at least it's on everyone's statement.

You think it's it couldn't be any more clear if you wanted to find it.

Yeah.

But that's a huge change.

Another for me, that's another benefit that we can add to our award.

I mean, it was hidden.

It was hidden, people didn't know what they were paying, and and now they do.

And Samantha talked about paying one percent for an outside advisor.

That's a hundred basis points.

Yeah.

We're charging one and a quarter basis points.

And someone would prefer to spend a hundred basis points.

Um, yeah.

Look, I I get the solicitation calls regularly, and they push and push, and they're gonna give you everything if you pay them that.

But yeah.

Yeah.

So people have relationships and people want advice.

So for us to do any kind of a customization on a survey, what what would that require?

Nothing, just just uh just some input.

When we get ready to launch the survey, all I have to do is send over the sample questions, and then if the city wants to mod you know to modify those.

I've done that with other plans and they like the questions, so I haven't ever had a plan change it or or even modify it, but we're happy to take input.

Do you ever put questions in?

And this is done in political surveys.

There, I think they're called push results, where you're you're trying to get a message out, and so you ask it in a question to raise an issue.

Um, like, do you like the fact that you know our fees are so low?

I mean, just or do you like the fact that if you roll out and you don't roll everything out, you can you know you can still come back in.

I mean, just to ask a question that they might not even know that there's a feature there, but it at least gets them thinking about the issue.

Yeah, we can get so smant.

I I can get our survey, we I have a survey contact.

We we we can get him on to our maybe our next monthly call and we can walk through what the options are.

We use a third party vendor for those surveys, and I'm not sure I don't I don't know enough about it to know if they're limited as to the type of questions it has to go through our compliance team also, but I don't see why not.

I would just suggest that um so the idea of push polling is what you're referring to is when you're trying to manipulate the results of a survey, and I'm I don't think that's what you're going for, right?

Not to ch well.

I kind of want to separate them strategy from your like objective.

You want your polling to be objective so that you're getting like a true visibility into like what the sentiment is.

You don't want to like push it one way or another, but I don't want to push the answer one way or another.

I want to push that information out, and then people can understand that there's features there that they might not have known about and and the potential benefit.

And then if they say I don't see that as a benefit, then we'll know well, that's not gonna work when we try to encourage people to stay in the plan.

But if uh no, I'm not trying to manipulate the the answers we receive.

I'm trying to manipulate information that our participants have.

Thank you for asking for clarification.

Maybe we use the word promote information to our participants.

Well, I think maybe the because we're talking about how eight percent only were happy with uh fees.

It was probably higher than that, but it looks like people could only choose one thing when they chose what they were most happy with.

So that could reflect the last thing they did or the last person they talked to.

Is there a way to maybe make it so they could choose four or five, six different things if they're happy with all of them?

And then that would give us an indication, you know, maybe 70 percent are happy with the fees.

We'll check again.

We have we have a new vendor who's it's a bit more comprehensive, but I can definitely check to see because I I don't know if about the old surveys to know.

Right, yeah.

Yeah.

What about any questions that's just in for other data gathering for us?

Like I look at my statement quarterly once a year, every few years, or any kinds of maybe maybe other types of questions that help give us more information about what participants are actually doing.

What would that be beneficial at all?

No.

Just putting on ideas to consider.

We'll do a deep dive.

His name is Mark, and or sorry, Scott.

Um we'll I get him on a call and we'll figure out what it is that we can do with the surveys.

Yeah.

Maybe just as information for us, maybe not for us to have a discussion at our next meeting.

Is just what it what's the survey look like?

You know, what what are the questions?

How many are there?

So we at least know if we if we try to make any adjustments, what we're what we're starting with.

Are you talking maybe bring a sample survey to the next uh quarterly meeting?

Yeah, it could just be an attachment to the report just as an FYI, and then if it if it anyone Yeah, I'm sure I could get the I think there were like five or six questions, but I can I can definitely think that 20 questions would would take the participation rate way down.

Let's not do that.

Um I was just gonna make a comment about there is a balance on how many questions before someone gives up.

Oh, yeah, and they don't finish.

They say it takes 15 minutes to explain.

Yeah, we don't know.

Yeah, I'll find out.

Honestly, don't know the exact numbers for 23 and 24.

I wasn't provided the details, but for 25, I think we have more of those details that you're looking for, and it's more pages in this.

I mean, I don't want to do a lot of tinkering if we're gonna make it worse, but I I want it to be valuable of something that we're we want to know.

Okay, any other member questions or comments?

Anything from the public.

Thank you, Chair.

No speaker slips on this item.

Okay, then we are done with provide direction.

I think we've provided some direction on item five.

Okay, we are gonna circle back to item two, which is the budget.

Um let me see.

We gotta move chairs or uh John, are you willing to sit in that chair and pull up this next report too for us?

Absolutely.

I think I just minimized it.

Yeah, happy to let me go to the happy to help.

Let's see here.

Um, close this.

Yes.

And this and this oh, Jacob, are you helping?

Thank you, Jacob.

Yeah, I think I closed the agenda by a mistake.

All good.

Great.

Okay.

Um, this item is about the administrative allowance account budget for calendar years 2026 and 2027.

Um, Vice Chair Levison has done quite a bit of work again and provided a written summary and some proposals providing an amended calendar year 2026 budget for consideration and then a calendar year 2027 budget for the committee's review and approval.

Um the committee did pass a budget already for 2026, but um we looked at actual expenditures and um discussed ongoing needs, and so that is where we've landed with recommending an amended 2026 calendar year budget.

So with that, and I'm scrolling down right now to get where back here down the report.

I'm sorry, I'm just trying to get to the page.

Um we're really we're gonna be looking at the budgets, so I can help John out.

Um so John, if it's possible to scroll to page 21.

I'm gonna do some background description first before we want to.

I just want to help John get to the right page here.

21 is attachment five, where we show the amended calendar year 2026 and proposed calendar year 2027.

Um with I believe one is with reserves, and then there's an attachment further down.

Um there's a little bit different allocation related to those reserves.

So with that, I will turn it over to Murray who did thankfully all of the work on this for the committee.

Thank you, Samantha.

And thanks for um working with me.

And um I'll uh I'll go into some detail.

Uh the first thing I want to say is in the staff report itself, it says that there are two budget options for consideration and items in attachments five and six.

They're not really two options, there are two ways of looking at the at the uh the proposal uh and the and the the past and the future of the budget.

One shows the the reserves and the fund balance, and one doesn't.

That that's the only difference.

So option of uh attachment six was meant to focus on strictly what's what's the budget with with not looking at the uh just deleted lines rows from the report.

That's the only difference.

So this um John has up attachment five right now on the screen.

I think that is really the that's the one that's the the most comprehensive.

It shows the fund beginning fund balance, how much money comes in, how much money goes out, and where where the fund balance lands.

Uh I guess everyone should be at least be aware of that.

But if you just want to focus, I don't you don't want to see the fund balance information and go to attachment six, and those rows have been uh removed from the report.

Um so a number of things happened since the last year.

First of all, we're gonna be doing uh the investment policy statement, or I'm sorry, the fee and um the fee and uh expense policy statement says that we're going to adopt a budget every year, and it's gonna be multi-year.

We we could do more than two years.

We've just landed on on a two-year budget.

So if we're gonna do 26 and 27 this year, next year we're gonna do uh 20 uh 27 and 28.

We'll we'll make some adjustments to 27 because we'll have some actual numbers going forward.

Get the things will be more refined.

But we we had a number of things change in the last year.

The most significant probably was that our investment consultant selection was done, and the result is with uh fiduciary consulting group being selected for five more years, is their fee was less than we thought it was gonna be, so we budgeted at $60,000 a year.

They're only charging $50,000, so we had 10,000 that we don't need to budget for that.

We also budgeted 40,000 every five years to do an RFP for record keeper.

They've included the cost of that RFP process in their annual fee, no extra charge for that.

So we don't need to spend eight thousand dollars a year for five years to get to the 40,000.

So that's money that's that's not needed.

So uh we've had a interest income that's uh the administrative allowance account uh sitting in uh in one of the mutual funds is earning because there's more there, it's earning a little bit more.

And um those are the biggest changes in why expenses are down and revenues up a little bit.

Uh also in putting the report together, uh Samantha helped me figure out that I uh I made some errors in the prior version from a year ago.

This version corrects them.

It even goes back to correct actual results from prior years because they were incorrectly shown.

Um a lot of it had to do with um I changed the format of the report last year to show how much we were putting away for future RFPs, and I accidentally considered that as an actual expense out the door.

It wasn't, it was just moving from the left pocket to the right pocket, no actual expense.

Um, but the spreadsheet counted as an expense, and so our totals were wrong.

That's all been fixed, that's all been corrected.

Samantha keeps track of fund balance in an alternate method, and her numbers and what this report shows are now exactly matching.

So we feel good about that, and we're also matching up with attachment.

I think uh four is the one that shows every every uh every fee that comes into the administrative allowance account and every expense that goes out.

There's an you can you could total up annually how much is going in, going out that also matches up with the with the budget, and so we're we're in sync there.

Um see what else do I want to say.

uh four is the one that shows every every uh every fee that comes into the administrative allowance account and every expense that goes out there's an you can you could total up annually how much is going in going out that also matches up with the with the budget and so we're we're in sync there um see what else do I want to say and I think um you know in working with Murray on getting this report done and all the um data there's sometimes a timing issue of a service is performed there the invoice goes to um to be to nationwide to be paid to go to fiduciary group so um it may the actual expense coming out of the allowance account may not hit to the next calendar year even though we receive so there's some timing with that and um that too is where we landed on trueing up at the end of 2025 starting with 2026 uh we worked on that right marie exactly yeah um and just I have to admit one other mistake I made in the last year's budget was I I don't even I know how I didn't see it I I assumed that we paid highest uh all 5000 dollars in 2025 and we didn't um they went to a new invoicing system and they're behind and so we only paid them 25,000 dollars and they may catch up at some point we may pay them more than 5000 in a year but each contract year is for 5000 and it goes back to the timing issue that Samantha was just talking.

So the the errors we figured out they've been corrected there's no material um impact other than the unrestricted the unallocated amount is higher than we thought which leads to one of the questions that we're asking the committee to consider is we've got more money that we don't have a purpose set aside for than we should have the fee in uh fee and expense policy says the unallocated should be minimally near zero it's going to be in the uh it's gonna be a hundred and eighteen thousand dollars at the end of this year and potentially a hundred and thirty six thousand dollars at the end of next year so first we've taken care of do we have 50 percent of of annual budget set aside for unanticipated expenses we do every year for going into at least the next six or seven years do we have enough money set aside for the next RFPs we we do or we will we're gonna put money in every year to make sure that in 27 28 we have money to do an RFP so that's fully funded and we still have over a hundred thousand dollars that we don't have plans for and so the fee and expense policy statement addressed that and said that we could temporarily suspend the collection of or reduce the amount of the monthly explicit asset fee which is the dollar fifty that everyone in the 457 gets charged for a duration of time as recommended by the committee that is a potential future agenda topic for us to consider.

So we're we're we're taking a dollar fifty from everybody in the in the uh 457 per month 18 dollars a year that's going into the administrative allowance account we have more money in the administrative allowance account than we think we're gonna need for the next number of years we could take you know four or five six months and say people won't pay that fee the wrinkle on that is that each of the labor agreements are very specific that the fee will be charged every month so there's gonna be some labor relations in uh involvement in potentially doing a um a waiver or an amendment to an LOU to change the the mandatory everyone has to pay it to hey is it okay if we don't charge it for some months of time but that's uh that's not a topic for today that's just raising the issue making sure you know about it and we can certainly bring that back to a future meeting there are a couple other questions that are in the staff report that were raised um we've allocated money for um education uh outside of what nationwide provides outside of going to the NAGDA conference um and we uh this more more for participant education we've we've never come up with a project on what how to spend that money on should we come up with a something to very specific to uh uh assist our participants or should we take that money away from that funding line and move it somewhere else we could move it to the you know we don't know what we're gonna do with it line which just increases the amount of money that we have that we don't have anything set up for so that's probably not the ideal it the more the better I idea is to find uh a a good use for it that benefits the participants directly sure does that does it have to come from nationwide for those education no this is um no I mean it

We could move it to the you know we don't know what we're gonna do with it line, which just increases the amount of money that we have that we don't have anything set up for.

So that's probably not the ideal.

The more uh the better idea is to find uh a good use for it that benefits the participants directly.

Sure.

Does that does it have to come from nationwide for those education?

No, this is um no.

I mean, it it could be I don't know.

I've I've heard of other plans.

Um, you know, I don't know, giving a $25 gift card if you take these steps to um you know make sure that your financial plan is is on track.

I mean, there's there's a whole host of ideas.

I I haven't thought them all through, and and and probably things that we haven't thought of to just to to guide our participants to encourage them.

Um I don't know if you have if you have ideas.

Um, no, I mean in this past year we did use some money for city driven communications about the transition of the plans from mission square to nationwide postcard mailings, um letter mailings that was approved by the committee to spend some money on of the admin allowance account budget to do that.

So it could, you know.

Um I think we would also want to hear from Rosh on what some of his other plans have done, figure out what we want to educate participants on and the best use of money surrounding that.

Um aside from the plan transition notices, we haven't used any funds for specific targeted um plan driven education.

Yeah, it's it's participant education and events, so it it could be you know, uh it could be a brown bag.

I mean, I you know, to encourage people to come see Rick.

If if if we're if we think we're having trouble doing something like that, and and and maybe we're not uh but it's all participant based.

It's it's not uh or we give it back to the participants by not charging them the fee for you know some months.

Um fee holidays and fee reimbursements are two of the most common and typically a fee reimbursement, but we can do either administratively, whatever you choose.

You know, if there continues uh we've had a lot of conversations and discussions about participants rolling their money out, you know, and that being a concern for the committee.

Um you know, perhaps it's a very targeted um campaign for people who have separated service or maybe they are of a certain age, and that's coming from the city, um, maybe just a postcard or something that then points them to more information somewhere else.

I don't think I really clued in until you said it, John, that once I reached age 50 for sure.

My nationwide marketing emails I feel like increased.

Um you said that earlier.

Messaging changes, yeah.

The messaging for sure.

Depends on the stage of your career that you're in.

Um, I don't there is a lot of email.

We all get bombarded um in our personal email, at least I do every day with all kinds of stuff.

Um, so maybe it's a different approach of some kind of direct mailing or direct education surrounding that topic, if that's where the committee thinks a focus should be right now.

It's really up for the committee's discussion to um for any ideas surrounding.

Yeah, we have the capability to do custom anything, um, whether it's webinars and when when we bring Joel out, who is your marketing contact?

I mean, we have custom flyers, custom campaigns, custom.

I mean, if we we offer a custom uh marketing communication plan, which and then we'll track trends and everything, so we have the capability to do that.

Yeah, I think part of the conversation is who does something need to happen that comes from a specific source.

Does it if it comes from the city, is it looked at from a different perspective than if it's coming from we can track use uh so if if it's email driven, we can track who opens emails.

We send we always send them twice.

Um, if they open it, we don't.

If they don't, we send a second follow-up, usually within four weeks, and we can track that too.

So whatever campaign we generate.

Oh, that explains open rates.

Open rates from the city will be open at a much higher rate than coming from us because they're gonna probably assume it's spam, and they do that quite often, but again, we can track that and I'll report that back to you.

I think it should be a joint campaign.

I actually have it written here in my notes, but I definitely think that's an opportunity for the city to get information so employees know that it's important because the rollovers are things that we're looking at and it's a challenge.

I think we should focus on that so people are educated about what what myths are there out there about rolling over your funds.

Do I need to take my money when I leave?

And the answer is no, but most people don't know that.

So I definitely think that there should be a push for the city to get that information out or the committee in partnership with nationwide, so people take it a little bit more serious because it's coming from both ends.

Yeah.

And people don't understand, and it's not their fault.

I mean, financial services, it's a very complicated industry with hidden fees everywhere and and language that they're not used to reading.

And there's so many examples of that where people just don't want to read a prospectus or read what they're given form ADVs that they're just not gonna do it, and they don't understand it.

And that's just an industry trend that we've seen, and so it's and lots of lack of interest, um, they make rush judgments to do things.

There's a lot of reasons, but I agree.

Coming from both, I think would be there's a responsibility on the participant to do their research.

So I wouldn't all put it on whether it's the city or nationwide, but I definitely think that there's even if you don't understand it, is your money at the end of the day.

You should want to know where it's going and what it's doing, and what you're paying.

Yeah, absolutely.

One of the most important things that we can say is that we're we're doing all of this transparent uh discussion about you know less than a hundred thousand dollars of of fees a year.

I mean, some for some, you know, for those of you who do your departmental budget, uh under a hundred thousand is often considered an insignificant fund to spend several hours on, but it's participant money.

We can't take it lightly, we don't take it lightly.

That's why we do it every every year, and we want to make sure that that the participants are getting the value for what they're being charged.

Um sorry.

Um we we have a proposed budget, we have some amendments for calendar year 26 that are um uh the second page of each budget document.

It's the um the columns that are in in light blue.

That's what's being proposed to uh amend calendar year 26 budget and proposed for calendar year 27 budget, and we've had some discussions were there.

I think there were a couple other questions that we were asking the committee consider.

So we talked about the unrestricted fund balance.

Um we could have that discussion about you know the extra hundred thousand that we have already collected.

What should we do with it?

Should we reduce it, give it back to the participants by not charging them?

That can be a future agenda item.

We talked about um the participant education and events line item that we have money set aside for, but we've never had a project identified.

We've talked about that.

Um we don't need money for the next RFP until probably the 2030s, because fiduciary consulting group is going to handle the next one in 27, 28 at no extra charge.

But we want that we want the um the funds to be ready for when we need them.

So we've got some funds already uh set aside, and we're gonna reduce for the next couple years how much goes into that account until it's fully funded, and then we won't be putting any money into it.

Is that the only plan that's gonna need an RFP?

Um, or is there any other plans that you know I think we we just did the PEP plan, but um is there is there anything else maybe coming down the pipe?

Well, the what we would do, so the the contract with nation with nationwide is through 2028 eight.

And so hopefully starting, you know, about a year from now, we can talk about the process for it will have been 12 years that nationwide will have been our uh record keeper.

Do we want to do an RFP?

If we do um uh Rosh and his team will do that at no extra time.

Right.

Is there any other plans that will need outside the nationwide that will need an RFP in that?

We're doing internally the what we just accomplished, which was selecting an investment consultant.

Originally we had budgeted for that.

Samantha felt that she could she and her team could do that with without cost and do it internally.

And I I don't know how did that how did that go for you and your team?

Uh well, it was a team of one, me, and um it went fine.

You know, at this point I've done so many RFPs.

Um every RFP I do out of benefits, it all goes to our REOs for prior review questions.

I mean, we have the process down.

I will be retired by the next you know, go around.

So I can't I can't answer for the future, but um the process is pretty specific on a procurement.

It's yes, I was just I was just wondering if there was any new plans that might roll out for different you know no, I have no knowledge public safety maybe or anything.

Okay, we have our 401A, R 457, our pet plans.

We are in a stage of the contract cycle where we're not close to really doing another RFP yet.

Um, 401A, 457, whatever that discussion looks like in 20 late 2027.

Um I mean, I think I think everyone here knows that.

Yeah, but that is an RFP.

I'll be retired.

Will there be any additional costs to the members for uh looking into the CITs?

Uh looking into the CITs yeah, for if we're gonna go to collective investment trusts, would there be any uh there's nothing okay?

I'm just trying to make sure we don't miss it.

They're gonna handle all I just want to make sure we don't miss it.

All the RFPs.

I mean that's what they said they would do.

Okay, yeah, I mean, our our structure through the city's procurement process and how we use planet bids and the requirements of what have to go into an RFP.

It's a partnership between the city staff person who's gonna do that work and our consultant who's gonna help us, um especially when it comes to vendor outreach, the question and answers, reviewing the documents.

I mean, it was very much a partnership between myself and Rosh to get the um the RFP back for when we got the PEP plans.

Um, but it's just the way we're structured with our procurement process that city staff are you know doing all that work in the system getting out to plan it bids.

So um I think that through that process too, fiduciary consulting group learned that okay, let's reassess our ability to assist the city in doing this with their procurement process and keeping our our fee flat for 50,000.

So then the last question that we were asking the committee to look at is um right now the unanticipated expenses line is uh designed to fund to be budgeted at 50 percent of that year's budget expenses.

We could and other plans have used a number greater than 50 percent to keep as you know what if things should change.

Um it it do it it doesn't have a huge impact on the amount of money that would go into that.

So I think I estimated that if it went to 75 percent instead of 50 percent, it would change the um the amount set aside by 20 18,000 dollars, something like that.

Not not a lot, it won't take it won't take all of the 118,000 that we don't have allocated it up, but there I mean it's if you felt that a higher percentage was was important to keep set aside specifically earmarked for unanticipated expenses.

That's another thing that we could add to our discussion about how to how to change the budget for the for the following year.

So I don't have anything else to say on the budget.

Happy to answer questions, or we can go to a motion if the public is not weighing in uh no speaker slips from the public.

Did you have question?

No, I was gonna make a motion to uh approve the items.

I'll second.

Okay, I have a motion from member Kang and a second from members Olaski.

Any other discussion on the motion.

All in favor or say aye.

Aye.

All right.

Anyone opposed?

Anyone abstaining?

Okay, the budget has been adopted for the next two years.

Thank you.

And then our last.

Thank you, Murray, for all your hard work on that.

I know that was a fairly large document, and it took you a lot of time.

Samantha helped me figure out the mistakes that I made.

So that's um and thank you, Samantha too.

Didn't mean to forget you.

Um I enjoyed doing it actually.

So we our next item is number I'm sorry, next to last item.

So number item seven, which is the budget for the NAGDA conference coming up in September in Orlando.

This is where we normally well, I'm sorry, I'm jumping ahead.

No, please.

I welcome it.

This is where we normally letting John get up here on the okay.

Thank you, John.

Uh yes, so the 2026 NAGDA conference will be held in Orlando, Florida, um, September 27th through September 30th.

Uh the main sessions uh being on really starting Monday, September 28th, and then ending Wednesday, September 30th.

Um I've done some estimated costs looking at the NAGDA website and going out and looking at the hotels.

Um I'm sorry, the the host hotel with the discount and taxes.

Um I did do some research on just Southwest Airlines flight.

Of course, um flight are uh dynamic pricing and can change periodically, and then um we know what's going on with fuel prices right now as well.

So that remains to be seen of what pricing might look like once someone were to go um purchase tickets.

Um typically we do follow just the general daily meals and incidental expense rates.

However, I know that sometimes meals are provided or people attend certain meals.

So I've given kind of a broad expense per attendee.

Uh, when we've done this in the past, we have seen maybe expenses come in a little bit more just based upon what flights actually end up costing, um, ground transportation or parking needs, whether it's at the airport or getting to and from the airport where the conference is and into the hotel.

So I do recommend.

I was recommending a budget of at least 1600 per attendee.

Um we or the budget was just approved, and typically you see a motion selecting a specific number of attendees, but based on past experience of when these discussions come up and how much budget is available and how much money it might cost to send someone to the conference.

Uh you don't see a recommendation selecting a certain number of attendees.

I'd like the committee to have that discussion and um see who can attend, who can't attend, who might be interested.

Um, and you all see what the potential budget is in allocating expenditures towards it.

Um, I think Murray has some updated cost estimates that you would like maybe to consider uh uh a budget for attendee when considering what it might cost to send one someone.

Is that correct, Murray?

Yes, I I I think the numbers in the staff report are a little low.

I I would recommend that we expect that the per person cost is gonna be about 2400 dollars.

Okay, and there is 12,500 for set aside in the budget that just got adopted for this conference.

The the budgeted amount was a little bit higher because my registration, the reimbursement for last year's conference didn't happen until I think the first week of January, so it's in the 2026, but 12,500 new spending for the 2026 conference is is in the approved budget, so that could um allow five people to attend.

So I think the appropriate thing to do is to see who who'd like to go and see if we're over five, and then if we are, we figure out who are the five, and if we're under five, then we'll spend less than we we have allocated.

Um a quick comment.

Uh now that you are the planned administrator, is there any way I can talk you undergoing this year?

Please.

Well, as much as I would like to attend this, I know it's always fallen to open enrollment.

And there is no way for me.

No way, Jose.

That is it's just not possible for me to get done what needs to be done for open enrollment and attend this.

An open enrollment has to happen.

I tried.

It's not a choice for us.

So I know Katisha can attest to I knew that was gonna be the answer, but I had to try, you know.

So I maybe someday when you're on the retiree board, you'll go.

All right.

Thank you.

Trying to get rid of me already.

Uh so who would like to go to the conference?

It's it's come in cra I mean Jeremy, Brad, have been in.

I attended last year.

It was it was a great conference.

Me being new to this committee, I learned a ton.

I networked a lot.

I met a lot of people who I've still in contact with with questions and stuff like that.

Um I'd love to attend again.

Uh if anyone hasn't been, I would suggest going.

It was a great learning experience.

The the classes are good.

And and again, the networking uh is a big part of it that you just meet other people from cities our size and how they operate their their business.

And um, yeah, if there's an opening, I would attend again.

So let's start with uh let's just go down.

Uh Ash, would you like to attend the conference?

Uh thank you, but um I have a toddler at home, and it's just not uh a good time for me to travel at this time.

Uh yeah, the timing doesn't work for me, so I'll pass on this week.

Sure.

Gee.

Gosh, timing never works for anybody.

Um I would like to attend as seeing that I will likely be on this committee for the foreseeable future.

So yeah, you can put my journalists.

Okay.

Okay, we have one.

We have Mr.

Huckster.

Yeah, I'm gonna I am not going to attend this year.

Not gonna have time.

Okay.

Jeremy said you would, so we have two.

Okay, we'll check in with um I'd like to attend.

We're at three.

Do you think any of the folks who are not here?

Um uh Jason Bader attended one time when he was an alternate member, but it was virtual, he didn't attend in person.

Virtual is not an option anymore.

Um so we have Sharon G and Katisha, you're the alternate, correct?

Is King gonna still be on the committee next year?

Does anybody know?

Or will there be a I I'm just asking.

I don't.

I mean, I guess I could ask you know someone else that question, but they're not here.

Yeah, um, or even Matt from uh your alternate.

Um we can ask him tomorrow.

Okay, all right.

Um so for three for sure.

Do we wanna leave it a little more open-ended with uh like a fourth or fifth if if people choose after the meeting to I I think that's a good idea, you know.

If you know, give uh maybe give people uh say another month to uh when when's the deadline to enroll?

I think the price increases in July.

Oh okay.

Oh, so we have time.

Yeah, we wanted to do this now so that those who said they're going can put it on their calendar, so you don't miss miss out.

Okay.

All right.

So how about a motion to allow up to five, up to 12,500, which is the budgeted amount?

And all right, I'll second it.

Okay, we have uh uh motion from uh member Knox, seconded by Member Huxtra to allow up to five committee members, three identified so far, uh Kang Levison and Gardella, and uh and holding those two spots for our other two um Tunsen and Anderson and uh Brad's alternate Brad has an alternate too.

Okay, yeah.

Uh is there an alternate in your office in the no in in the in the treasurer's office.

I I think actually Jason's gonna be the alternate now.

Okay, we'll check with him.

I will okay.

Okay.

Okay, so we have a motion and a second.

Uh all in favor.

I anyone opposed.

Anyone abstaining?

Okay, thank you.

That passes on to item six.

Do we have to extend the meeting?

Not if we have two.

Yes, we do.

Pursuant to council rules procedure, chapter 8d6.

We must uh take a vote to extend the meeting.

Is there a motion?

Unless we can do it in three minutes.

We didn't start at 10 o'clock.

I know I know my item is next.

I know that'll take a few minutes.

So I'll make a motion to extend the meeting.

Second.

Okay, we have a motion by member was it hookstrap?

And second by members I'll ask you to extend the meeting as required by the council rules.

Uh chair, I heard Member Rogani uh make the second.

I'm sorry.

Your ear better than mine.

Okay.

I stand corrected.

Um anyone opposed?

Anyone abstaining?

Okay.

Go ahead, Mr.

Clerk.

Oh, and for the record, there was no public comment on item seven.

Uh so the next item is item six, selection of chair and vice chair for calendar year 2026.

Uh my name is Jacob Redberg, administrative analyst from the office of the city clerk.

Uh, in accordance with Sacramento City Code Section 2.40.170.

Uh, this commission is annually required to select a chair and vice chairperson to serve for the upcoming calendar year.

Uh members may nominate another member or themselves for the chair or vice chair positions.

Uh the newly elected chairperson and vice chairperson will start their terms at the next regular meeting.

Um per that section of the city code, no person shall serve more than two consecutive years in either role.

Uh so the member uh everyone is currently eligible.

Well, my apologies.

Everyone is currently eligible eligible to serve as chair or vice chair except for uh current vice chair Levison and current chair uh hoch strap.

Uh typically the nominations will be heard separately, first for chair and then for vice chair.

Um thank you, and I'm available for any questions.

I have a question.

Are you saying that the I to clarify the in that let's just look at the chair?

So Brad has been chair for two calendar years in a row, so uh my understanding is that for that specific for chair, he would not be eligible for that.

Right.

He's correct, and additionally, he was vice chair for uh two consecutive years as well.

So he has um I think um he was just vice chair in 2023.

Double check.

Oh, correct.

So uh my apologies.

Uh current chair hookstra is eligible to serve as vice chair as he as he only served in 2023 in that designation.

So the the two-year limit is specifically to two years chair and then vice chair, two years vice chair.

They're divided up that way, right?

Correct.

Thank you.

So just to be clear that so can Murray be the chair again.

Uh sorry, city clerk.

Um I agree that I pull up the code section.

I don't see anything, any reference to consecutive years.

It just says chair and vice chair, to no more than two years, uh, two calendar years.

In a row or ever.

Thank you for the correction.

Uh yes, it's just it's just two years.

So um Vice Chair Levison, you served as uh uh chair for the commission.

It looks like uh at least 2021 through 2023, so before the change in 2.40 to to limit it.

Um then is vice chair for 2024 and 2025.

So at this point you would not be eligible for either uh position.

However, you would be eligible to serve as vice chair as you only served for uh one year.

Right, okay.

So Murray can no longer be chair or vice chair, correct.

So Ryan, is that how it reads?

It's two two years forever.

Yeah, that's how it's set up right now.

So I guess yeah, in theory, if the body never changes, we might run into a problem one day.

But for now, yeah, it's just a chance.

Well, if someone better step up this year.

That was gonna be my question.

Uh can does the nominee have to be a chair or can or I'm sorry, a committee member, or can it be uh an alternate?

Uh preferably it would be from the regular, or not even preferably, it would need to be from the regular members.

Yeah, we can't have an alternate be chair or vice chair.

Okay.

What's what's confusing to me is that count uh you know uh a labor management committee spent uh over a year coming up with bylaws, there was a consensus on them, council adopted the bylaws, they haven't been rescinded, although there's some discussion to rescind them, but they haven't been, and the bylaws have different rules than what the city code does.

But the bylaws have no limitation on length of service.

Um their only limitation is that it has to be a uh a primary member.

Um so I'm just confused about what's the right thing.

If I if I recall from prior discussions, like it's in the code, and what's in the code, I don't know, supersede is the right word.

Is that the right word?

Like basically, as it's in the code, that is the code was adopted more recently, so probably take that to the most recent decision would trump the older decision.

I mean it's similar to where we have policies, labor agreements, city charter, like things one may be in something, but then the charter, you know, there are there is a progression of things that can occur that changes something that was technically below it for lack of a better word in an order.

I think we got that figured out.

I would like to nominate Ash Rugani for the chair.

Um I appreciate that.

Um I don't know if I really have the bandwidth at this point to to commit to it, so I would happily delegate to to another member to serve in that role.

Um, but I'm also just trying to do the math here and figure out.

I mean, I I think we have other members who could who could serve.

So I would prefer not to.

I'll just put it out there.

But I do appreciate that.

Is there a volunteer before we start?

Arm twisting.

Do we have do we have to have a decision today?

Is it well?

I mean, that's another conflict between the bylaws and the and the ordinance.

It's um but we and I just want you know, the role, the primary role of the chair and the vice chair is to preside over the meeting, keeping the meeting on task, the items on task in order, um staff reports and that sort of thing is done internally through um the director of human resources or their designee.

Um, but the primary role of the chair and the vice chair is here at the meetings, um, presiding over the meeting and keeping the discussion moving and on task.

You just run the meeting, Ash.

You don't, it's no extra work.

It's funny.

I staff uh commission and our our chair of that commission is very active and pursues like many uh projects and pushes things forward through the commission.

So um that is like one of the the pieces of context that I have here, but um you know if it is just kind of that minimal role, I'm I'm happy to do it, but also just happy to see if anybody else is interested as well.

Can I ask what would happen if there was a motion to uh have Brad be chair and there was was a vote?

Would I mean what what would be the implication of voting to do something that the code says we can't do?

Who's gonna enforce that?

I don't think the city would be able to recognize that as a valid vote, so it the it would be as if the vote never happened.

I had to ask Jeremy, were you gonna say something?

No, I thought he was.

I think Chi has been waiting patiently for a couple years now to step forward.

She's gonna go to the conference.

She's a way for the conference.

Wow.

I will say I would be happy to be vice chair the next round uh after Brad is unable to, but I think this round, um, I don't plan on being a vice chair.

It's available right now.

Oh well, that was my nominee.

Keep talking.

Could you Patrick?

Could you lift our arm up while you're over there?

Um, it this sounds like something that the idea was a good one to allow for rotation because people were feeling that it was being uh dominated by by someone, but this is what happens when we're not free to choose from all members.

Um I'm looking for for anyone on staff to give us some suggestions on what to do here.

Well, so far I've heard a nomination by uh current chair hoekstra, nominating uh member Rogani as chair, however, member Ogani has declined that nomination.

There was no second, also and there was no second.

I was gonna second.

I was gonna ask if Jeremy is interested.

I mean someone we haven't heard from not particularly.

Um yeah, I don't know.

Yeah, I've been a chair.

I've I've very busy as well, just like you.

I'm not a new role I'm looking to take on.

Oh my gosh.

If nobody else is interested, I'll I'll volunteer to be the chair.

Bless you, Patrick.

All right.

So I I will nominate Members Alaski as chair, seconded by member hookstra.

Any discussion on that?

Uh just a point of clarification.

Is uh members Alaski, you are now the primary uh member for your seat, not an alternate member.

Right, yeah.

Okay.

That's changed since we put the agenda.

Then John sent an email out to relinquish his primary designation.

Yeah, it this was very recent, yes, prior to all of the reports getting done and everything.

Yes.

Thank you for the clarification.

With that, we can this is uh uh an acceptable nomination.

So I have a motion from uh vice chair Levison with a second from uh Chair Chair Hoekstra.

Chair, if you'd like to all in caller do we need to do a roll call on that?

You said no, no.

If you'd like to call the vote, yeah, yeah.

All in favor, please say aye.

All right, anyone opposed?

Anyone abstaining?

Congratulations, Patrick.

And um we need a vice chair in case like today someone needs to fill in.

You know, I think we do important work here, and so I will volunteer for the vice chair.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, uh I will move that uh member Kang be our vice chair.

All secondary second by member hookstra.

All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Anyone opposed?

Anyone abstained?

Uh congratulations to our new officers.

You'll be presiding over our June meeting and going forward.

This will, you know, you'll you'll have two years and then you won't be able to do it again.

Uh is there anything else?

Um let's see, where are we on the agenda?

We have um public comments for items not on the agenda.

Um chair.

I have no speaker slips for matters not on the agenda for public comments, and as well as for the record on the chair vice chair item.

Uh, there was no forget that.

Thank you.

There was no uh public comment.

Okay, um somewhere I have my agenda.

There is yeah, just that leaves us with uh just member comments, member comments.

So are we on member comments?

Yeah, uh I have a comment.

Please it's kind of a bombshell.

Uh this will be my last year on the committee.

So I just wanted to give you I'm giving you a one-year notice.

So 2026.

You said last year.

Well, this will be yes, this calendar year will be my last year on the committee.

I just want to say thank you, Brad, for your participation and your you know all the input that you put in in the committee.

Thank you.

Thank you, T.

Um.

And I'll figure out.

I mean, I we got a year, but I'll reach out to the because I represent the um represented uh group, and so we'll put the word out amongst the unions and stuff on to find a replacement.

And maybe uh I forget the alternates name.

I don't know how to say this last name.

Trans Tran, thank you.

Uh and I'll talk to him as well, of course.

Do a quick update on where we are and re um reconfiguring the committee.

Um I can what do you feel comfortable?

I think if you'd like to say something, that would better be coming from a member at this point.

Okay.

I don't want to violate any related to labor conversations.

Okay.

So um I think everyone on the committee is aware that there was a city proposal in June to reconfigure the committee structure, primarily to remove the um the need to have the the Brown Act apply.

It's it's not a mountain, it's not a matter of public policy, it's not something it's it's more of an internal administrative committee that I'm sure most departments have.

You know, who's the employee of the year, um, what's our strategic plan for the next year gonna be, those are often done internally, and just there's no public money involved, there's no public um need for uh this to be broadcast live and have the public aware of what we're doing internally with with uh the money that's in participants' paychecks, what they do with it after they've been paid.

Um and so there was a letter of understanding sent to all the unions and the retiree association in November.

The city um worked on that, and the unions and the retiree association submitted a response to that uh last week.

There was supposed to be a meeting negotiating session this afternoon.

We were we received a email from labor relations yesterday that said uh the meeting today is canceled.

Um given the retirement of the human resources director, the city's approach now is to wait for a new human resources director to be hired.

Presumably, you know, get uh start working, get get familiar with the operation of the committee.

I it's I assume that means the human resources director will continue to be the plan administrator as delegated by city council.

Um so that's months into the future, and in the interim, we'll continue operating the way we've been operating.

So we have a calendar that council adopted in the fall for all of calendar 2026, our meeting schedule, June, September, December, those meeting dates have been set.

So when Brad's talking about um, you know, what what's happening in the future?

It sounds like it's for the for this calendar year.

I'm assuming it's just gonna continue status quo.

I I don't know recruitments take longer than some people hope they take.

Um and then it makes sense to have somebody on on on board and and get started.

Um one of the things that I just I feel the need to say is that we we've had the issue of the bylaws on the committee agenda one time, March of 2023, our our meeting.

John Colville asked for that to be on the agenda.

We did we had a discussion, and that was the only time the committees talked about it.

One of the points that he raised several times during that meeting was the way the committee seems to be operating is different than what was in the staff report that created the committee, and he said several times.

Well, the staff report said this committee was to be advisory only.

I finally went back and read the staff report.

It's it's three pages, pages one and three are boilerplate, page two.

There's the meat of it.

The word advisory or any other word similar to it does not appear in that staff report at all.

In fact, what's in the staff report is and this is on paraphrasing is that it talks about this the city have the obligation to uh to its plans, and the city recommended that those obligations be taken over by the committee.

I to me that's the exact opposite of very limited.

It it seems very expansive.

Nevertheless, we're going through a process now.

And what we've what's been on hold in the interim is uh three and a half years ago, this committee recommended changes to the fee and expense policy statement.

I don't believe that's ever been sent to city council for approval.

And two and a half years ago, the committee recommended changes to the investment policy statement.

I don't believe that's ever gone to council.

Now that we know that we're going to be operating under the current structure for a bunch of months, I'm hoping those documents can go to city council so that we can finally get them official.

We it's just been so long.

Um so I I hope I hope that happens.

Anything else for member comments before we adjourn?

Um, I just wanted to quickly add um I keep hearing about the fiduciary training, and I think Rosh, that's something he offered to provide.

I wasn't sure if that happens in our open meeting session or if that's something that we schedule offline between meetings, and if it's with all members or just a subset.

Um, but I just wanted to throw it out there, it's something I'm interested in, and just to kind of better understand what our role is, whether and I I will say I've heard kind of both sides of the coin that we kind of are a fiduciary, that we're not a fiduciary, so um, I guess I would hope to get some clarity through that training.

And all I can tell you is what I I think um not what I think, what I've read from California attorneys writing about the rules in California and how they apply to retirement boards and how the government code says if you've got a deferred compensation plan, it's considered a retirement board.

Uh and so the California Constitution talks about if if you're on one of these boards or if you are a board and you're one of the members of those boards, you you're you have fiduciary obligations.

Uh and I've talked to competitors of Rosh and asked them.

So let's say we don't make the decision about which funds are in the lineup, we only make recommendations about which funds are in the lineup.

Does that change whether we're fiduciaries or not?

And uh I haven't found anyone yet who says, oh, if that's all you do is make recommendations, then you're absolutely not a fiduciary.

They've actually said the opposite that making recommendations or making the decisions is considered very similar, and that and you you you should have your fiduciary training because you're you're it's a fiduciary action.

Um even if we weren't, I think the training itself is useful because it talks about how we can make sure that what we're doing is in the best interest of participants, and I think that's what we're here for.

So I is was it specifically in Russia's?

I think it was in specifically in their contract that they would provide uh training.

Um like I said, last year or maybe the year before, we we did have this attorney from Kansas City on the screen.

Um, and he there was very little time for questions, and he obviously had a clock going, and when his time was up, he signed off.

But uh any other member comments.

Okay, well, the March 18th, 2026 meeting is adjourned.

Thank you for participating.

Thank you, Mark.