To be our last question. Hi. Hows the reseptember economic struggles impacted how states align with federal support and ability of the federal government toates align with fe support and ability of the federal government to give support . So here is the bottom line. There is a lot of downward pressure economically at all levels of government. And so, states and their political subdivisions, we have seen an increase in request for federal assistance, both inside and outside of the disaster declarations, to help offset the impact on budgets. Ill give you a great example. When it snows, there is a need to do removal of snow and ice from the roads. One would expect that most states and local governments would plan and budget for that. As a policy matter we generally dont provide assistance for road treatment unless there is a record or near record know fall. That policy is meeting resistance because record or near record snow falls, governments are struggling to meet their snow removal bud
Investment policy. And one of the reports found that we researched found that the Stanford Institute for grand jury report that you can stick on the projector. 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 retu
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