Fiduciary to our beneficiaries, not as a fiduciary to the citys general fund. So i would strongly disagree with no. 6. Supervisor chiu i would disagree jqkbu well. Supervisor elsbernd finding 7, again this is like no. 5, studies show that public funds with low risk Investment Policies performed as well or better than those with risk studies. That. Other studies say the opposite but yes this statement is factually correct. Supervisor chiu i would disagree with that statement. I think the suggestion of that statement is that we should be looking at low risk Investment Policies and im not sure if im comfortable with saying that. Supervisor elsbernd fair enough. I appreciate it. We will disagree with that finding. All right move to the recommendations. Recommendation no. 1, San Francisco employees retirement system board addresses the 2 billion underfunding in the San Francisco employees Retirement System Pension Fund by forming a High Level Task force a panel of experts and Community Grou
Our clerk will do it. Go ahead. What the Stanford Institute compared was the calpers return to hypothetical low risk portfolio pursued over the same 25 year time period, a negligible the new york times, in 2012 found that Pension Funds investing in more alternative investments, not only have the highest risk levels, but contrary to expectations had poor returns than those that remained in traditional low risk investments. They further found that funds that did well with low risk Investment Policies nevertheless tended to switch to high risk model. And the reason for that is the Upjohn Institute in 2011 report titled an analysis of risktaking behavior for public Pension Plans of over 100 funds found pressure on Fund Managers to change from their conservative investment policy to assume more risk, even if a fund made a higher return with a low risk portfolio. Economists referred to this trend as the herd mentality. The jury can verify to the board of supervisors that studies do exist are
Finding one, San Francisco Employee Pension fund is current underfunded by more than 2 billion. I would agree, i think suggests that. Madam clerk, are you following us as we did through in finding one we disagree with. Finding 2, the retirement board did not complete a failure absences subsequent to the funding loss in 200809. I mean theres kind of two ways you could go here. If you buy into the grand jurys concept of what a failure analysis is, sure you could agree with that. But having served on the board, analysis of what happened. Did it meet your definition of failure analysis . Maybe not because you seem to be caught into one specific definition of what a failure analysis is but i believe the board did a very there are row job of analyzing how the portfolio went down so i would disagree with this finding. Supervisor chiu i could go either way on that one. Again, i think supervisor elsbernd has laid out the perspectives that there was a lot of analysis but not exactly as the civil
Youre using the funded status today to point out what you investment process, but then you go back in time, and you look at the investment style that you think is appropriate, but you did not do the other comparison to show what the funded status was of the citys retirement system in those years . no audio . Supervisor elsbernd ill trustee driscoll or trustee myberg erwho has the history tell us what our fund status was when we had this kind of investment style. But go ahead, continue. You want me to tell you no you . Supervisor elsbernd well let them get to it when they make their presentationed. The jury found prior to 1984 they invested in a more in a easygoing, lowrisk. After 1984, the fund started to follow the yale model, investing in more alternative riskier investments, causing the fund to become more volatile, the return to become more volatile, while showing no significant increase in returns over the longterm. And has been underfunded for the last three years. Thus facing mo
Up efforts to stop the spread which dr. Fauci echoed this morning saying without real action this uptick will quickly turn to a surge. If its referred to at percent positive. Its a clear indication that you are getting an uptick in cases which inevitably, as weve seen in the southern states, leads to surges, and then you get hospitalizations and then you get deaths. What dr. Birx is saying is now is the time to accelerate the preventive measures. She was warning the states and the cities to be careful because this is a predictor of trouble ahead. Yeah. This warning as the country marks a second day in a row with nearly 1,400 people dying from the virus and the total number of deaths in this country is now creeping closer and closer to a tagering 200,000 people. Lets focus in on california as dr. Birx and fauci are in. Officials are saying young people are driving the spike in cases there, and in response Los Angeles Health department is banning parties, banning gatherings and threateni