Columbus, Georgia

Georgia's First Consolidated Government

Post Office Box 1340
Columbus, Georgia, 31902-1340
(706) 653-4013
fax (706) 653-4016

Council Members

MINUTES OF THE

BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING OF THE

COLUMBUS GEORGIA EMPLOYEES' PENSION PLAN



March 7, 2007





A meeting of the Board of Trustees for the Columbus Georgia Employees? Pension

Plan was held March 7, 2007 at 2:00 P.M. in the Mayor?s Conference Room.





PRESIDING: Mayor Jim Wetherington, Chairman





PRESENT: Isaiah Hugley, City Manager; Pamela J. Hodge, Finance Director,

Morton Harris Trustee; Omagene Holland, Trustee; Mary Strozier-Weaver, Trustee;

Col. R. George Plummer, Trustee; Chief Robert Futrell, Trustee; Richard Swift

and Henry Swift, (Smith Barney); Tom Barron, Human Resources Director; Reather

Hollowell, Human Resources; Denise Baxter, Revenue Division (Investment Officer)





ABSENT: Alan Rothschild, Trustee; Joe Smith, Vice-Chairman; Harvey

Milner, Trustee





GUESTS: James J. Donofrio, FSA and Ben Law, Project Manager (Buck

Consultants, Actuaries)









Mayor Jim Wetherington called the meeting to order. Ms. Julia Rasch, Recording

Secretary, recorded the attendance.





MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING:



The minutes from the February 7, 2007 meeting was presented for approval. A

motion was made and seconded to accept the minutes as submitted. The vote was

unanimous.





INVESTMENT UPDATE: Interim Report (Mr. Richard Swift)



Mr. Swift began with the interim report covering the period since the last

pension meeting on 02/07/07. Beginning with the S&P 500, there was a

substantial drop in the market place, 1446 to 1395. Normally, this amount of

volatility is not seen in a month?s time but there were a lot of factors that

contributed to this, which was outlined in the memo sent out to each of you.

Just to mention a few, in China, the overseas markets were down about 8.5%.

Freddie Mac tightened their rates on some of their customers, which brought

about a fear that a real estate weakness may re-emerge. Plus the computer

glitch, when the capacity of activity became so large the computers could not

compensate and caused a huge drop in the market place in just a few seconds.

When that happened a lot of investors anticipated real panic selling and

trading more, causing more of a domino effect.



On the Ten Year Treasury Bond, the yield dropped from 4.80% to 4.52% during

this period of time and that indicates a stronger bond market. Officially when

the stock market is weaker, bonds generally do rally some, rates will drop and

bond prices will go up.



The fixed managers, Synovus, Tattersal and Madison went from $76,651 million to

$77,804 million, slightly up about 1.50%. Unfortunately that?s where the good

news ends because the equity managers had a really tough time during this

period because of the sell-off.



The growth managers, Santa Barbara, Rittenhouse and Trusco went from $35,860

million to $34,783 million, down -3.00% compared to their benchmark, the

Russell Growth at -3.52%, better than the benchmark although an absolute tough

period.



Deutsche Asset and Spears, in the value space, went from $44,500 million to

$42,804 million. Their combined value was down -3.81% vs. the Russell Value

-3.63%, which is more or less in line with the market place.



Knott and Madison, the Core Managers, their combined values went from $29,781

million to $28,847 million, down -3.14% vs. the S&P 500 at -3.59%.



Lazard also had a tough period of time. The overseas market was little bit

more volatile than the U.S. market place. They went from $16,748 million to

$15,802 million, down -5.65% and the ACWI was down 3.05%. This is surprising

from Lazard, generally in a down market they will hold up better than the

market place. Contact has been made with them, currently, about their

performance during the market sell-off.



All in all the combined fixed was up 1.50%, the combined equity was down -3.67%

and the total city account down -1.72% but holding to the $200,040 million mark.



Mr. Hugley stated that he was stuck on the previous report and the drop in the

performance of the managers. Mr. Swift explained that for the equity market to

fall 461 points in one day and then to fall again the next day and for this

portfolio to be down only -1.72% is absolutely fantastic.



There was a few minutes discussion between Mr. Henry Swift, Mr. Hugley, and

Mayor Wetherington about the sell-off in the market and how the fund sustained

itself.



Mr. Richard Swift reminded the board that the interim report is for only 30

days and that, truthfully it is too short a period of time to start judging

managers or the market place. This report is given each month so that the

board can see how the fund is performing compared to the index.



Next, Mr. Swift presented a report on the Fiscal Year End Returns Since 1993.

He stated that with the actuaries being here they felt it would be prudent to

keep perspective on what has happened in the market place. First, was a graph

showing a ten year history of the market place with the three indexes, the

Russell 2000, the small cap index, the Russell Mid-Cap Index which is the

mid-cap stock or medium size companies, the S&P 500 which is primarily the

large cap companies, the larger companies that are followed from an index

perspective. What the graph showed is that for the first five years the S&P

500, the large-cap stocks, showed the best performance in the market place. In

contrast, the last five years showed that the Russell mid-cap stocks held the

lead in performance with the Russell 2000, small-cap stocks also holding a

steady incline in performance and the S&P 500 showing a steady drop in

performance. Therefore, the mid-caps and small-caps over the past five years

have taken over the leadership in the market place. The point is that the last

five years have been pretty tough on large-cap stocks and this chart kind of

outlines what has been leading the market place and it?s been in an area that

the fund really has not participated in.



City of Columbus Annual Returns Gross of Fees ? This chart basically shows the

year since the restructuring in 1993 to 2006 and the June 30th returns for each

year. The first six years or so the returns were ahead of the actuarial

assumption but the last six years has been a tough market place. Not having

securities that are risky and speculative like mid-cap and small-cap that has

been leading the market place and it being a tough market for large-cap stock,

for the last five or six years the returns have missed the actuarial assumption

more times than beat it. But, the long-term picture, going all the way back to

1993, the average is 8.33%; the actuarial assumption is 7.0%. This is

pre-manager fee, it includes Smith Barney?s fee but does not include the

manager fee. The average manager?s fee is about 50 basis points and if that is

backed out the average is at 7.9%, well above the actuarial assumption.



Referring to a chart entitled TOTAL FUND, it was reiterated that over the past

few years the returns on a short-term basis have been tough but, looking at the

long-term picture, the returns have been well above what was needed to make the

plan work with the actuarial assumption.



The Sub-Committee Report-The investment sub-committee met with the focus of

discussing two things. First, was the replacement of the large-cap value

manager Deutsche Asset, formerly under the management of Tom Sassi. Mr.

Sassi, basically, was asked to retire by Deutsche and they have a new product

that they are moving their assets to called the Deutsche Relative Value

product. A manager search was done and was narrowed down to three candidates

to interview, one was TCW, another was CAMBIAR(sp) and after reviewing the

report from the replacing managers from Deutsche, looking at their numbers,

their history, their consistency, the committee felt like they were a good

candidate and as good as the other two that had been selected and therefore,

invited them to be interviewed as well. At the end of the three interviews with

TCW, CAMBIAR and the new DEUTSCHE, the sub-committee felt most comfortable with

the new Deutsche. There were several reasons for that, number one, their

numbers were excellent, number two, their numbers were very consistent, much

more than the other managers that they looked at and number three, they are

very different from the manager currently in the value space, Spears, Grisanti

& Brown. They?re much more driven by what?s in the index than Spears, Grisanti

who is very different from the index. The new Deutsche is very similar to the

index but they?ve been beating the index and their returns are in the top

quintile all across the board, so, very good, consistent numbers, a

quantitative model that?s computer driven and different from the current

manager, and different from what has been hired in the past and the committee

felt like it was a good opportunity.







Ms. Hodge commented that she felt Mr. Swift had explained it well; one of the

things the sub-committee looked at was their method and their presentation.

Also the figures that were provided for their returns over the last five years

were ahead of the other two candidates and that?s why the sub-committee

selected to continue with Deutsche. The motion was made, seconded and the vote

was ratified to accept the new Deutsche Asset Manager.



The second item discussed by the sub-committee is the asset allocation.

Referring another spreadsheet, he began to explain. At the current time, the

old Deutsche Asset Management has $26 million dollars, $9 million dollars will

be taken from them and the new Deutsche manager will start with $17 million

dollars. Of the $9 million dollars taken from Deutsche Asset, $1 million of

that will go to Spears, the other value manager. Two million will go to

Large-Cap Core, two million in international and four million into the fixed

income portfolio. The first column shows the current percentage held in each

asset class, large-cap value (21%), large-cap core (15%), and large-cap growth

(18%). The intention with this asset allocation shift is to balance these

asset classes as closely as possible; large-cap value (17%), large-cap core

(16%), and large-cap growth (18%). By this action there is no over-exposure in

any one particular asset class and their performance is more diversified. Also

with this move a one percent increase will be added to the international

position and the bonds will go from 62% to 60%, that?s why money is be added

money to the fixed income space. There were two objectives with moving the

monies around, one was to balance the asset allocation and the other was to

balance out the managers with the asset classes. Therefore, if they have a bad

quarter, they won?t hurt the plan and if they have a good quarter, they won?t

affect the plan quite as much. A motion was made and seconded to accept the

rebalancing of the asset plan and was ratified by the vote of the board.





PRESENTATION(S): Buck Consultants, Actuaries



Mr. Richard Swift introduced Mr. James J. Donofrio and Mr. Ben Law from Buck

Consultants (Actuaries). Buck Consultants were awarded the contract to replace

William M. Mercer as the actuary for the Pension Plan.



Mr. Donofrio stated that the valuations have been completed at this point in

time, they have delayed the completion of the detailed report documenting the

results pending a decision on a possible change in the way the pension

contributions are determined and formulated for the city?s consideration. This

report is at a very high level and it differs from the kind of report that the

preceding actuary had been providing, statistically oriented, so they have a

lot of backup material. He stated that if there were any specific questions,

they?ll try to answer them today or they will get back to the board with

answers to their questions. They would appreciate feedback as to whether this

type of report meets the boards? needs or whether they should focus on the more

statistically oriented results that their predecessor had. He stated that the

agenda is shown on page one, and that he will be going through the key results

and some of the supporting information. The focus of this presentation will be

on discussing the elements and financial status of the plan, which have a

bearing on determining the contribution amount. They are developing an

alternative contribution policy for the City?s consideration.







Overview



The plans are well-structured and appear to be in compliance with



--Georgia state funding standards, and

--GASB accounting standards



Benefit liabilities are being measured on a reasonable and appropriate

basis



The plans are 78% funded (financial statement basis)



There are certain adverse trends that will need to be addressed if

they persist



We have developed an alternative contribution policy for the City?s

consideration





Mr. Hugley asked the question ?what did they consider average?? Mr. Donofrio

explained that it varies a lot depending on how often the plan sponsor reduces

benefits and how successful is the investment program. Mr. Hugley wanted to

know when they would be coming back to the board with their report on the

alternative policy and the effects of reverting back to 2% vs. the current 1.5%

for new employees. Mr. Donofrio stated that their report would be completed as

soon as they receive the feedback from Human Resources and the Finance

Department.



Ms. Hodge explained that what they?ve been asked to do is, they have proposed

two different alternatives, one is the same contribution policy that the board

as followed to date and the other is an alternative policy that they have

provided and she thought the group needed to hear.





Key Results



Total Contribution

(See Page 3 in booklet for figures)



Financial Statement Funded Status

(See Page 3 in booklet for figures)



Covered Population as of July 1, 2006



This section describes the number, average age, service and earnings for both

General Government and Public Safety. The number of pensioners and

beneficiaries, and their average monthly benefit. The number of terminated

vested and disabled members and their average monthly benefit.



These results are based on the covered population, the employee group as of the

beginning of the fiscal year, July 1, 2006. They found very little change in

comparing last year?s population to this year?s population with one exception,

the average compensation increase by 6.1% for the general employees and 6.5%

for public safety. With the new pay plan that came into effect, which is

greater than 3.24%, this creates a great influence in the increase in

contributions.



Mr. Hugley, at this time, instructed Mr. Barron that when Mr. Donofrio and Mr.

Lawh come back to present their second report , he would like to coordinate it

so that the Pension Board would be briefed on their recommendations and then

follow up with a presentation to the members of Council.



Plan Assets



This gives a breakdown as of July 1, 2006 of the plan assets of $188.6

million and the allocation of stock, fixed income, cash and short-term

investments and receivables. It also shows the market value rate of return and

the assumed interest rate for the years from June 30, 2000 through June 30,

2006.



Funded Status



In this section is described the projected, accrued and financial

statement funded ratios for both general government and public safety employees

as of July 1, 2005 and July 1, 2006.



Contribution



Determined Under Current Policy

(See Page 7 in booklet for details)



Actuarial Assumptions



--Describes the economic and demographic assumptions and shows the average

retirement age for General Government and Public Safety Personnel



Reduction in Assumed Interest Rate



--Fund performance suggests that a reduction in the assumed interest rate may

be indicated (7.0% to 6.50%)



Policy Contribution ? Current Method

(See Page 10, 11 & 12 of booklet for details)



Policy Contribution ? Alternative Method

(See Page 13, 14, 15, 16 & 17 of booklet for details)



Following the dismissal of the representatives from Buck Consultants there were

a few minutes of discussion on whether to accept their recommendation for the

alternative plan or to keep the plan as it is. It was agreed to keep the plan

as it stands until further examination by the Mayor, City Manager, Finance

Director, Human Resources Director and Henry and Richard Swift of Smith Barney.

A meeting was held following the pension board meeting and it was agreed to

maintain the current method for the policy contributions.



A copy of the evaluation reports and the other information presented to the

board is retained in the Finance Director?s Office by the Board Secretary and

is available for review upon request.





OLD BUSINESS:



a. None





NEW BUSINESS:



None





With no further business for discussion, the meeting was adjourned.



The next regular meeting is scheduled for April 11, 2007 at 2:00 p.m. in the

Mayor?s Conference Room. The guest speaker(s) will be from Santa Barbara.







_______Julia A. Rasch ____

Julia A. Rasch

Recording Secretary

Attachments


No attachments for this document.

Back to List