I think I will go ahead and call to order the Lexington Fayette Urban County Government Police and Fire Retirement Fund Board. And this is November 13th, 2024. And we'll start out right from the beginning. I see Jim O'Connor with us. And the first item is our quarterly report. Welcome. Thank you and good morning all. Let me get my stuff situated here. So we've got technology this morning. This is at least new to me. So bear with me if the slides aren't advancing as needed. But good morning, everyone. Nice to see you all. It was just one short month ago that we were here. It's just going to be me this morning. John has another obligation to attend to. So with that, I'm going to walk through the executive summary, which we have pulled up on the board here. And I'm going to start on page 2. Good start, Jim. Great. So Steve's going to drive this morning. Can you please turn to page 2, Steve? So why don't we just start with a quick high level recap of the third quarter capital market results, just to set the stage before we get into the performance of the total fund. So equity and bond markets were up pretty sharply in the third quarter. The S&P 500, which is really a broad U.S. large cap index, was up about 5.9%. The small cap index, as measured by the Russell 2000, was up a bit more than that, 9.3%. So small caps outperformed large caps. And looking out more broadly, globally, in the non-U.S. markets, the non-U.S. equity markets were up about 7.8%, so ahead of U.S. markets. And then emerging markets were up even higher than that, up about 8.7%. Pretty strong quarter for bonds as well. So the Bloomberg aggregate index was up about 5% as we had a cut in interest rates this quarter. Interest rates, by and large, remain pretty volatile, again, as the market sort of assesses how the Fed will continue forward with their easing policies. Inflation came in at about 2.4% year over year, so down slightly from last quarter, which was up about 2.5% year over year. So inflation seems to be at least slightly coming down. We know that prices that we pay for all of our goods and services remain elevated. But as inflation is kind of coming down or at least coming under control, that's kind of supporting the prospects for a further rate cut. And then the economy, at least as measured by GDP, came in at a pretty strong figure at about 2.8%. Consumer spending continues to drive much of that GDP growth. So overall, a pretty positive market this quarter, and you'll see that through the results of the total fund. On page three here, we have what we call the Calend Periodic Table of Investment Returns. So this is really just a mosaic of the returns of the various asset classes. So we're looking at annual, so calendar year returns of the major asset classes. And you can see, at least in 2023 and year to date, the best performing asset classes, U.S. large cap equity. We've talked quite a bit about the Magnificent Seven the last several quarters. They are driving a big portion of those results, at least to date. But I think what's important to note here is there's never one leader over a long period of time, so diversification across all asset classes is paramount to remain a diversified portfolio and drive investment results across a number of different asset classes. So I'm going to skip ahead to page five and just give a couple highlights of the major asset classes. So I won't go into these slides in detail, but what you can see here is the quarterly results in the top right corner of the different indices. Again, the takeaway here is kind of a slow start for U.S. equity in the third quarter in July, but ended on a really strong note. A lot of that had to do with the Fed's decision to cut rates during the quarter. At the bottom there, those are all the sectors within the S&P 500, and you can see pretty much every single one of them is in the green with the exception of energy. So again, a pretty strong market across various sectors and different indices. One thing to note is value securities outperform growth. So we've talked about that value growth style within the portfolio, and growth has had a pretty good advantage over value, but that seems to be turning a bit here, at least in the short term. On page six, this is just a look at the major non-U.S. equity indices. I think the ones to focus on are the IFA at the top, 7.3%. Two of your non-U.S. managers are benchmarked to that. So globally speaking, I mentioned the Fed. You see markets really across the globe rose as central banks began or continue their easing with monetary policy and cutting of rates. Non-U.S. markets outperform U.S. markets. So the technology sector I mentioned, the Mag 7, a lot of those names make up a big portion of the U.S. market. They did face a little bit of pressure and had some headwinds this quarter. So we saw the non-U.S. markets, which doesn't have as much concentration, do better than the U.S. counterparts. Emerging markets had a really strong quarter, up about 8.7%, and a lot of that was driven by China. You can see kind of off the charts returns there at about 24% in the quarter. And then growth versus value. Similar in the U.S., we saw value outperform growth as well in non-U.S. markets. Turning to page 7, we have some highlights on U.S. fixed income. As I mentioned, the Bloomberg aggregate index was up about 5.2%. The Fed did lower rates by about 50 basis points during the quarter, which spurred really the rally in the fixed income markets. And then before this was published, or actually right around when it was published, we saw another rate cut of 25 basis points at the November 6 meeting. So there's one more meeting left for the Fed in their calendar. Based off of some of the data that we're observing, I'm not a Fed bank governor, but things point to potentially some more rate cuts at least, or at least remaining stable to end the calendar year from their perspective. In terms of the drivers of performance in the U.S. fixed income market, we saw Treasuries do well. We also saw some of what we call the spread sector. So investment grade credit and high yield do even better. Again they are usually pretty correlated to the U.S. equity markets, which did quite well. So again, we saw really strong performance across really most of the fixed income market. So that was just a brief overview. I know I went pretty quick. I'll pause here if there are any questions about the market. Are there questions, members? No? All right. Thank you. Turning to page 8, give you a snapshot of the asset allocation of the fund at the end of September. And so that's comparing the actual asset allocation to the target allocation. And you can see by and large, the actual weights do track the target weights pretty closely. The fund at the end of the quarter was a little bit overweight domestic equity and underweight non-U.S. equity fixed income and real estate and real assets. I'd say that variance for domestic equity to date has actually come in a little bit tighter. So again, we're using, you know, when payrolls I'm sorry, when payroll is needed on a monthly or quarterly basis, we work with staff to kind of pull from the asset classes that are most overweight. So we'll continue to rebalance and bring those variance tighter to the long-term target. On page 9, this just gives you a look at the cash flows that occurred during the quarter. And so working kind of right to left in the bottom right corner, you can see the total market value at the beginning of the quarter for the fund was about $945 million. I talked about the investment returns were positive across really all asset classes this quarter. So really strong results up about $57 million. And then that net new investment column that just tracks kind of cash flows in and out of the plan on a net basis was out was down about $5 million, which is really in line with what we see on a quarter-to-quarter basis. Most of the, you know, proceeds to pay to meet payroll needs came from domestic equity and real estate. So at the end of the quarter, the total fund assets were at $997 million. Which was an increase of about $52 million from last quarter. On page 10 of the summary, this gives a look at the performance of the total fund at the bottom over various short-term and long-term periods and how that's stacked up relative relative to the total fund benchmark. So this quarter, for the third quarter, the total fund was up 6.11%, which outperformed its benchmark, which was up about 6.02%. On an absolute basis, domestic non-U.S. equity, U.S. equity and domestic fixed income were both up 6, 8, and 4% respectively. Real estate was in the positive, up about 8.2% this quarter. So that was breaking the streak of several quarters of real estate finishing with a negative return. So that was a nice change of pace for them. Real assets were up about 7% and, you know, cash yielding a modest but pretty strong 1.3% this quarter. So overall, that brings the total fund return up just over 6%. So we'll get to some of the highlights within each asset class in just a moment. On page 11, we have the performance of those same numbers that I just referenced, but also comparing how those numbers stack up relative to a peer group. So we're using the Callen Public Fund Peer Group. So a number of large defined benefit plans, just like yourselves, reside in this database. And you can see over the last quarter, the fund was up relative to its benchmark and ranked in the 8th percentile of peers. So really strong performance against benchmark and peers. So you think about that, ranking in the 8th percentile, you've outperformed 92% of the peers this quarter. Longer term, results are pretty strong as well over the trailing one year up relative to the benchmark and ranking in the 28th percentile of peers. The trailing three years, ending September 30th, the fund was down on a relative basis and ranked in the 78th percentile. And that really had a big, the calendar year 2022 had a big impact on the trailing three-year returns. But we've got some really long-term performance and history to show here over the 5, 10 and even the 25 years, the fund is outperforming its benchmark and ranking well ahead of its peers. So happy to report that. On page 12, I mentioned the calendar year performance. Pretty strong batting average here. The total fund outperformed its benchmark eight of the last nine calendar years. The one exception was in 2022, the fund underperformed its benchmark in peers. On page 13, we have the performance of the underlying managers. I would say, you know, this quarter, you know, we kind of focus on the quarterly highlights and that's important too. But over the long-term performance, again, that's what we're looking for is outperformance over the long-term. The batting average remains pretty strong for each individual manager. So, for example, you employ 11 active managers. So those, you know, managers are trying to actively outperform their benchmark. And we could see over the last five and 10-year periods that eight of 11 active managers outperformed their benchmark. So, again, that's driving a lot of the strong long-term results that we saw on the prior pages. This quarter, it was a little bit of a mixed bag. I would say highlights from the contributors were in U.S. equity was Neuberger Berman had really strong stock selection across a number of sectors. So outperforming its benchmark. Two of the more growth-oriented strategies, Capital Group Emerging Markets Growth and Bailey Gifford also had really strong results. I'd say that's good to see given, you know, kind of the economic backdrop that we had with the Fed cutting rates, you know, typically we would see them do pretty well in a quarter like that when growth takes off a bit. From a detractor perspective, U.S. equity was a challenging spot for active management. Dodge and Cox and Jennison underperformed this quarter. But happy to report that Dodge and Cox remains ahead of its benchmark over the long term. And Jennison, which, you know, trails over the last three years, has remained in line with its benchmark over the last five and ten-year periods, which has been a really challenging spot for active large-cap growth. And then from the last detractor perspective, Acadian, which is having a strong year-to-date and trailing year, did lag a bit this quarter. So, again, mixed bags. We wish that every manager could outperform every quarter, but it certainly doesn't work that way. But, again, over the long term, we've seen some really good results from your roster of managers. I'll pause there, see if there are any questions on performance of the fund or the managers before I just give a couple brief updates. We do have some questions. Thank you, sir, for coming out. I appreciate it. I do have a question about the domestic equity and cash as it relates to payroll. I think we transferred, I think, $2.2 million out of the domestic equity, and I'm going to butcher the name, the Nuremberg Berman Fund. I'm just curious, kind of the thought process behind that, and since we do have seemingly excess cash because of our real estate liquidation, why did we sell off of a stock that seems to be doing pretty well when we have the cash kind of in our cash fund already? I'm just kind of curious to your thoughts to that. Yeah. So, a couple things there. The fund has a long-term strategic target, so that is something that's evaluated every two to three years when we do our asset liability study. So again, that's designed to meet your future obligations. So as markets do take off and do strong or they do poorly, those actual market values are going to have a little bit of variance against the long-term target. So what we're trying to do is to keep the return and risk posture in line with the long-term target. Those asset classes that do get overweight, we want to make sure that we are keeping them in line with their long-term target and that it doesn't get too out of whack. That's a good question, though, and a good point. There is cash sitting in the cash account, and while it's earning more than it did five or ten years ago, the question is why would you pull from a good manager? I think part and parcel of that is really to keep in line with the long-term targets and keep the fund from a governance perspective in line with the policy statement. Then also I think the cash component, which we'll maybe get to in a little bit, that's going to be part of the funding mechanism for the new real estate manager because the redemptions that were coming in from J.P. Morgan were sitting in the cash account. But that's really a short-term thing and not a long-term strategic target to cash. To follow up, I think perhaps I'm putting the cart before the horse with that a little bit. We need to keep that cash around so that we can reinvest it. Is that kind of the thought process? Because we're liquidating our assets in real estate, are we keeping that in our cash account, I guess for lack of a better word, so that we can put it back with whoever we choose, presumably today? Correct. So as redemptions were coming in during the search process, they were, I'm going to say the word park, they were being put in the cash account. Because the redemption, we didn't have a good sense of what those cash flows would look like coming from J.P. Morgan. So as we've identified a manager going forward, the thought is as those redemptions come in from J.P. Morgan is to use those to fund the new manager and then those that were sitting in the cash account would then also be part of that funding mechanism. So it's coming from a couple different areas. Hopefully that answers your question. Thank you. It does. Any other questions? Yes, Tommy. Tim, looking at these managers, everyone has ups and downs. Basically, when we have a long-term relationship with a manager, I don't have super expectations, but I'd like to at least have them beating half of their peers. And I don't have the big book, and I think it was Bolly Gifford. We've had a relationship with them for like 14 years, 16 years, and yet they are ranked, if I'm not mistaken, like 80th or 90th in their peer. Isn't that concerning? Yes, I'm just pulling up the book here. So Bailey Gifford is one of the non-U.S. managers, right? And what we've seen here is they tend to be a pretty volatile manager. So there's going to be periods of time when they do well relative to their benchmark, and there's going to be periods of time when they don't look so good relative to their benchmarks. This is a period of time that we're in where they don't look relatively strong. And agreed, the peer rankings aren't where we would like them to be. So we kind of evaluate it a couple different ways. We look at it from performance against a benchmark and peer group. They aren't doing particularly well right now. I'm not going to sugarcoat it. But we're also looking at it from a total composite perspective. So again, how they're being paired with the other managers within your non-U.S. portfolio and trying to get them to be a complementary manager relative to the other managers that you hired. And when value does particularly well, growth may not do as well. So again, we're trying to balance that out. But to your point, they are a concentrated manager, so they're not going to hold several securities. They're going to hold anywhere from 70 to 75 securities. They do not turn the portfolio over very often, so they're not making huge buy and sell changes and strategy changes. They're long-term holders. So investors will have to stomach periods of time when their philosophy and their holdings aren't doing well. And we're in that period right now. We're not thrilled with the results, but there's nothing really broken about their process. There's nothing broken about the firm. It's just a very challenging period that they're in right now. We can come back and do a deeper dive and analysis on this strategy, but do have confidence that our research team is covering this very closely. We have other clients that are invested in this strategy and other Bailey Gifford strategies that aren't doing particularly well. I think if we were to look out at some alternative non-U.S. managers that have a growth orientation, I think you would see maybe similar results. I'm not going to say they're going to be exactly the same, the same performance pattern, but it certainly has been a challenging time and happy to take a deeper dive with our research group and come back with some more concrete examples of why we think this is a good long-term performer for the fund. Well, I would appreciate that, but I mean, you know, it's just that, you know, we're I think, what is it, over 2% or so that we've lost, you know, for the 14, 15, and what do they have, 65 million or so? Is that what they have? They have, yes, 74 million at the end of September. Okay, so that's quite a bit of a chunk of change there. It is. You know, and that's concerning for me. I mean, you know, if it was my personal portfolio, I'd be really looking at it. May I add something real quick? I would like to note that they are the only fund manager that reaches out to us, to the internal team on a regular basis, and they have continued to offer to come and speak to the board, either through you guys or through us, to kind of talk about their strategy. They are aware that we have several new board members to kind of educate on their particular style, if you will, because it is different from the others. They have a very unique perspective, and not that I'm defending their returns at all, but they were one of the first ones that I heard about when I first came on the board and we were seeing the 10 and 15 and just dramatic returns that were the only ones that were performing when I first came on the board, when we were having downturns in a number of the other funds. And they're definitely aware that they are not performing currently and have been in constant communication as far as trying to come and be present, which the first time was fine. We're not going to be able to meet with them every time, you know, internally, but if there are any board members that would like to talk to them, I think they would like to talk to us. So if that is something you would like either to happen through Calen or to happen in communication with the finance group, they would like to come and talk to us. So if that's something you're interested in, I think they would like to do that. Would the board like to hear from them at a meeting? It sounds like they'd like to come talk with us if you have concerns. Sure. I mean, you know, but, you know, yeah, I would like, you know, definitely would like to hear, but, you know, it's just as a board member, you know, we want to look at numbers, you know, and the more money we make, the less the city contribution is. Correct? I agree. Okay. Well, let's, Jim, can you arrange that for us to hear from them at our next meeting or if they can't come to our next one, follow on? Sure. Absolutely. We can arrange that. And just to be clear. Oh, they're in Scotland. Their headquarters is in Scotland, but they have representatives based here. I think they're primarily in New York. So that's no problem. That would be great. Don't let that be a deterrent. There's a movement of foot to take the board there. We could do an off-site, yeah. All right. Thank you very much for that. So, sorry, just to be clear, at the next meeting, at the February meeting when we're going to be here or your next meeting, do you want them to be with us? Yes. So in February. Okay. Yes. We can arrange that. Yes. Some arrangements. Great. And I would like for your people to take a look at it also. Yes. We will. Okay. Anything else pressing? If not, we'll go right on. Okay. Okay. Just a couple quick organizational updates that I think it's important to share with the board on a few of your managers. So on page 17, and again, these three updates, so I don't want to bury the lead, we don't have any action items coming out of these. This is just more of a wanting to keep the board abreast of what's going on at some of the organizations that you employ. So Acadian announced that their CEO, Kelly Young, will be taking the role of president and CEO of BrightSphere Investment Group. So BrightSphere will be rebranded as Acadian Asset Management. So BrightSphere, for a number of years, was a conglomerate that held several investment firms, while the only firm that they hold now is Acadian. So this is really just more streamlining the organization and reporting channels. So we think this makes a lot of sense and gets rid of sort of layers of confusing structure. And again, just more streamlined and we have no issue there. I think there was a point in time where we thought maybe BrightSphere would offload and sell Acadian like they did their other asset managers that they own, but I think with this change, it provides a little bit more certainty going forward. Speaking of Bailey Gifford, they recently announced that Andrew Telfer, their CEO and one of their three managing partners, this is on page 18, is retiring in March of 2025. So he has been with the firm for 33 years, 13 as a managing partner, has held several roles within Bailey Gifford. He started his career in 1999. We think this is a well telegraphed change with Tim Campbell becoming the new managing partner, the third managing partner, along with Amy and Malcolm. So again, this is telegraphed. We have confidence in Tim and we don't think that this is an actionable event. And speaking of onsite, we actually had a research professional from Callen there onsite and visited with some managers when he was over in Europe. And his takeaway is he's, again, confident in Campbell's ability to fill in for Andrew and has plenty of time to come up to speed with March 31, 2025, quite a ways away, I guess. I guess it's actually not too far away. Time goes fast. And then the last update is with Capital Group. So this is the Emerging Markets Growth Manager. I'm on page 19. Just wanted to give an update. Effective September 1, Samir Parekh was disclosed as a portfolio manager for the Emerging Markets Growth Fund. Of course, this is a manager that you have exposure to. He is joining the four-person team that you see there. He is a well-seasoned industry expert. He's been in the business for 23 years and 17 years at Capital Group. Again, our research team has met with Samir and, again, confident in his skill set to kind of bolster the portfolio team. I actually have a follow-up call with him later next week. So I'll have the opportunity to meet with him and talk about the move and how that's going within the team and kind of what he sees for the portfolio going forward. Again, not an actual event, just something we wanted to make you aware of. So with that, I will stop my prepared remarks and take any final questions. All right. Thank you very much. Is there any other questions? All right. Thank you so much. We appreciate your report. Thank you. Our next item is really good news. Chad's going to bring us, as you saw. Welcome. Good morning. You should have in your packet the various financial reports as well as the letter of transmittal, bank statement, and fund reconciliation activity. The value as of yesterday morning was $1,779,955.01. That's great. Over the last several weeks, we have gone over and gone back around a billion dollars. I'm going to throw a little monkey wrench in. As of this morning, it was down to $996 million. Oh, wait a minute. I know. We only count yesterday, Chad. I was disappointed as well. Depending on how the market does, this is what it does, up and down. Yeah, we have hit it several times in the last several weeks, and this is without taking any funds out. This is just market value. Anyway. That's really great. I withdraw my nomination for Employee of the Month. That is wonderful news, and so I'll ask for a motion to accept the transfer letter, and this is your bailiwick. A motion to accept the report and approve the transfer letter and look for another billion next month. Yeah. We'll wait for next month. Is there a... Thank you, Commissioner. Any discussion or questions for Chad? Yes. Yes. You touched on this last month, Chad. We've received, what, over $7 million from the real estate, JP Morton, right? Yes. Where's that money? If you look at the manager's mix, look at the top line, cash fund. The cash fund, okay. $7,475,000. Okay. I missed it. Yeah. That's where it is, and you'll see that again. We'll have another... Well, it depends on how soon we do a transfer to the new real estate fund, because once that's established, we will move a majority of that money, all but a couple hundred thousand, over to that. Correct. We'll be funding for that. Okay. But it just depends on how soon that happens. I know the next redemption will be in January from JP Morgan, and I'm not... The time is usually around the 8th or the 9th of the month when they do a redemption, so I'm not sure what the date is of the January meeting, but as soon as they do the redemption and we get that money, and I move it straight over. So it'll either be there or we'll move it straight to the new real estate fund. Good. Any other questions? All right. All those in favor of the motion, please say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? All right. That passes. Thank you very much. And we have minutes for October. I'll entertain a motion to approve. Thank you. Is there a second? Second. Okay. Any questions, corrections, additions? Mayor, there was a minor correction, typographical, that I noted, and I've spoke to Susan about it, and she's going to correct it. Okay. I missed it. I accidentally listed Brad Hawkins as attending as opposed to Greg Marlin. We want to make sure that Officer Marlin gets his credit. We will make those changes. Anything else for corrections? All right. All those in favor of approving, say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? All right. That motion passes. And now I'll ask Susan to run us through the new business. Yes, Mayor. New business item number one is ghost time purchases for James Cooper, Richard Rader, John Robinson, and Jason Walton. I need a motion to approve. Is there a motion? Motion to approve. Thank you. Is there a second? Second. Okay. Thank you. Any questions? All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Is anyone opposed? All right. That motion passes. Item number two is widow's annuities for Lou Ann Osborne, Helen Stevens, and Ada Williamson. I need a motion to approve. So moved. Second. Thank you. Any questions? All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Is anyone opposed? All right. That motion passes. Item number three is real estate manager search update. Tommy Peckett will address the board. Yes. Per the meeting last month, it was sent back to the committee, and after a brief discussion, it was unanimously accepted by the committee to hire LaSalle Property Fund. So I will redo my motion that failed at the last meeting, that we hire LaSalle Property Fund. Is there a second? Second. Commissioner? Did I hear you? Yes. And Rock. Okay. Any questions? All right. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Is anyone opposed? All right. That motion passes. Thank you. Item number four is internal audit suggestions and solutions. Commissioner Hensley will address this. Yes. Commissioner? As one of the internal audit reviews that the Department of Finance has undergone this year, we have a recommendation from internal audit that is for consideration by this board, as well as the City Employees Pension Fund, that we have a periodic review of the master death files for the Social Security Administration for all of our retirees. This came about in a, they call it a ghost employee review, that we look for erroneous payments that are being made by the government for any payments that go out of the government. This would be for beneficiaries, either retirees or their beneficiaries, spouses, et cetera, that may have passed or that we have lost contact with. And as we make payments via direct deposit these days, that can happen for quite some time before a bank account is closed or there is some notification that we receive. And so the internal audit review found that there could be a period of time for which we are making payment before we are notified, either by the bank being closed or somebody just lets us know, and that we should periodically review the master death files from the Social Security Administration to make sure that we're not doing that. Lo and behold, those records are not available to us as a municipal government, but there was an alternative after talking to Social Security that was provided to us. It's called NTIS. It's a major data storage alternative, I guess. And it has a subscription that we can obtain for a year. A year's license is about $3,500. And we can go in and check our records against about 210 different contributors of data to this data warehouse to make sure that we are not sending payments out into the world and not paying someone erroneously, basically. So I'm bringing this forward as a recommendation from internal audit. We actually have a situation where we have a city employee pension fund member that had been paid for a number of months, had shared a joint account with a family member. The family member was continuing to utilize those funds and didn't quite realize that they were continuing to utilize those funds and is now on a payment agreement with us. So it does happen. I think it was a good recommendation. And so I think that probably with having over 1,500 retirees at this point and growing, it is a point of exposure for the fund. I think it was a good recommendation. I think that that's something that we would and should consider. And so since this is the decision-making body for this board, we are bringing it forward as a recommendation to you. And I'm open to any questions you may have. Commissioner, will you also talk about what we did in the city employee pension fund regarding this? We had our meeting for the city employee pension fund last week. They passed the ability to pay up to one-third of the cost. Again, we're thinking it's going to be around $3,500. That's an annual membership. That's Trey's question, apparently. They only have 25 retirees. We obviously have quite a few more, but they voted to approve up to one-third of the cost of that membership annually. Whether or not we think that that is something that they should bear or not, that can be a discussion for this group. But they did think that that was important. Obviously, they've had an event most recently of their very small membership. So they definitely felt like that was an important thing that they should proceed. Well, before I make a motion, I thought I'd answer any questions, if that's how you'd like to proceed. Or we could do it during discussion of a motion. Or that would be fine, however you'd like to proceed. Why don't you go ahead and make a motion, and then we'll have discussion. So I would like to make a motion to approve an expense up to $3,000 for, I'm going to call it retiree research, in the dues and subscriptions line for this NTIS research subscription annually. Up to 3,000. Up to 3,000. The proportionate share, because we have over 1,500 retirees, the proportionate share is 98%, which would be $3,430 of the subscription amount. I think 3,500 is a decent split. And I think it doesn't, I think the city employee pension fund would be fine with $500, I think that that's fair. But we can have that discussion. Okay, is there a second? Second. Commissioner? Okay, now let's have discussion. Did you have a question, Trey? Okay. You've explained that now, and it's more clear on who's paying for what, so I think I'm okay with that. Is this a one year thing, and then we'll revisit this some years down the road? Or is this something you would like to do annually? How do we need to, what's the frequency at which we need to do this? The recommendation from internal audit would be to do it annually. I think since this is the first year, we would have to amend our budget to do it this year, and then we would include it in our budget every year thereafter. The 3,000, the proportionate share. Okay, other questions? Brock? I'm not suggesting this, but if this is a subscription, technically, it sounds like we could do this once a month. I haven't seen it yet, so I didn't want to commit to reviewing it more frequently than his recommendation, which is once a year. If it is incredibly arduous and time consuming, I did not want to make the commitment that we're going to commit Susan and Tonya's time. But I was curious about. Yeah. Okay, next. If it is not incredibly cumbersome, I think it is definitely something that we can do more frequently. It only benefits us to check it fairly regularly if it's not incredibly hard and challenging and time consuming. I find it unusual that we can't- Access this fund. Get, have Social Security help us. But besides that, and I'm guessing you've explored this, other pension systems are much larger than we are. Kentucky Teachers, CERS, KERS, do we know what they do? So when I talked, I had a wonderful conversation with our district manager for the Social Security office, he's in Frankfurt, and he was fantastic. They only authorize the master death files to state agencies. That's about as far down as they go. But they were very complimentary of this next option. He said, we use all kinds of data, and this is probably our second best option. The labor cabinet, a lot of other folks also use this. So he was very helpful in saying, you can go through the process, you can apply, but we just don't grant them. Unless you're doing Medicare, Medicaid, unless you're really doing things where you're operating on a federal or a state level. This is just not available to you. But this is a really good second option. So he really was very, very helpful in providing us a solution. And I really think that it's a much larger step than what we're taking right now, which is to check Anthem and to access the sources that we have available to us at the moment. Other questions? Yes. I appreciate the time and effort you've put into this, obviously, so thank you. I do have a question about if the city employees fund is piggybacking off of us, in a sense, with this subscription. Do we have that ability to do the same thing with a state system who does have access to the master death files? Or does that complicate things logistically that would be unbeneficial? I think that we could explore some kind of information sharing agreement with the state. I don't know what that would look like or who I would even approach for that, but I think it's worth exploring it. I think it's worth exploring it. I don't know. It's a good question. And to kind of piggyback off of that, do we know if we don't already have a subscription to a service that does something similar? And what I mean by that is, from an investigative perspective, we do have a subscription to, I believe, at least two that I know about that do check death records. Now, I don't know about logistically what that would mean or how often they're actually updated. But perhaps, is it worth making sure we don't already pay for something that would do the same thing? Sure. And I don't know if anybody here knows specifically the details of what that would, I don't think we have an answer to that today. I'm just trying to think outside the box if we, excuse me, already pay for a subscription. That seems to do something similar, perhaps we should make sure to determine it doesn't already do what we're looking to do. And I don't know the specifics at all. If the police already have something that checks that, I would want to allow access to. Well, but I think that I want to be clear though, this would check only our record, our people. I mean, I think, is that correct? Because I think what you're alluding to is that we may already have subscriptions to, I'm sorry. Can I speak to that real quick? You're talking about the service that's provided specifically in that agreement is for law enforcement purposes only. Okay. So I don't think that we could use the contract currently established with the police department because of that misnomer to protect the access to the information there. So I don't think that's a route to go right now. Good idea, but I don't think so. Maybe Chief Weathers, could you, I think that's the case, is it not? Okay, all right. Thanks. Excellent point. Thank you. Okay. Good question. Yeah. Other questions? Thoughts? Yes, sir. Yes, Commissioner. May I have one other question? When, if we do this and we find an issue of some type, would that be reported back to the board in some manner? Would that be something for occasion to not only see the effectiveness, but also to kind of give us an update of the funds that this $3,000 is actually saving us? Absolutely. So the payment agreement that we've had to enter into with the individual for the other fund is in excess of $10,000. So I would certainly bring back any findings that we had to you all. We'd need to be made aware of all of those. And then any next steps that would have to happen after that from your all side would need to proceed. I mean, anecdotally, we have very few people in the city. Right. Employee pension fund, and we already have one $10,000 difference, so. And I agree with this, but the one thing I think we need to make sure everyone understands at home that happens to be watching this or hears about it is that we're not trying to take any benefits away from anyone. We're not talking about widows. We're not talking about any of those kind of situations. It's just that, for instance, in Saddle, we have a number of individuals that we'll talk about here in a little bit that have passed away. Now they have widows. We don't always keep in touch with them as much as we do with those that have actually retired from the fund. So that kind of gets lost in the mix. I don't think there's any purposeful action on anyone's part. But our responsibility is protect the fund and protect our membership by instituting this, which I appreciate you bringing this forward. I think it only makes common sense that as the guardians of that fund, we need to have something like this in place. Other comments or questions to the motion? Anything at all? Tommy? So we're just talking about deaths, correct? People that have died? Yes. Possibly any way you can go through the coroner's office or something? Well, they died. You may. As commissioners, dying is a good thought. Obviously, they were deceased all over the United States. Yes. So that would be a little difficult to do. Also, some of that is law enforcement based, too, because the coroner's office is a law enforcement entity. So now I'm not sure they want to take on the responsibility, to be honest with you. As a guardian of this pension, we are talking about $3,000 here for something that can save us tremendously. Let's, yeah, I think we don't need another avenue. I think we just spent that talking about it. Anything else? All right, all those in favor of the motion to spend up to $3,000 for this subscription, please say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? No. We have one no vote. Two no votes. All right. So, Commissioner, you'll go ahead, now that we have both pension funds on board, to- Yes, ma'am. Take care of that and let us know next meeting how that's going. Okay. Thank you. All right. We'll proceed. Item number five is disbursements for November. They're listed on your agenda. I need a motion to approve. Is there a motion? Motion to approve. Thank you. Is there a second? Second. Thank you. Any questions? All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? All right, that motion passes. Next on the agenda are disabilities. I'm going to lump the first three together. We have Eric Chumley, Division of Police, application to convert an existing service retirement to a total and permanent occupational disability. We have Otis Savickian, Division of Fire, application to convert an existing service retirement to a total and permanent occupational disability. Also Christopher Oakley, Division of Fire, application to convert an existing service retirement to a permanent occupational disability. I need a motion to send to appropriate doctors. So moved. All right, thank you. We've got a motion and second. Any questions? All right, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? All right, that motion passes. Next on the agenda is John Rieselman, Division of Police. Medical reports are completed and distributed. I need a motion, please. Do I hear a motion? Motion to approve is at the appropriate rate. Thank you, is there a second? Chief Weathers seconds. Any questions? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Is anyone opposed? All right, that motion passes. Next on the agenda is Michael O'Leary, Division of Fire. Medical reports are completed and distributed. I need a motion, please. Is there a motion? I move that we approve and set at the appropriate rate. Second. Chief Wells seconds. Any questions? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Is anyone opposed? All right, that motion passes. Thank you. Next are tributes. We have Phillip Osborne, Division of Police, passed away on October 11th, 2024. John Stevens, Division of Police, passed away on October 16th, 2024. Fred Williamson, Division of Police, passed away on October 18th, 2024. Michael and Connie Murphy, Division of Police, passed away on October 27th, 2024. All right, let's pause a moment. We have had several things here. Are there any comments or does anyone wish to say anything at this point about our folks who are going out? Yes, Tommy? Yes. Phil Osborne, when I came on, he was in patrol before he went to the liaison at the garage and all that. Great guy, worked with him for many years. Very good at driving and so forth. He was a, I believe he raced some kind of little cars or something for years. Very active in that. John Stevens, I never had the privilege of really working close to John. He was here, obviously, but we just never really closed paths a lot. Fred Williamson, obviously, he came from the old county. Over here, was my captain for quite some time. Loved sports, big into sports. Was a referee for the intramural basketball and all that for years. And then Mike Murphy, I didn't know his wife, Connie, but Michael was, I think it was my beat partner and best friend, Roger Black. He, it was Mike was his first rookie, if I'm not mistaken. And we got to ride around with this for about three months or so. And then he stayed in our sector and worked with him for a number of years before he transferred out. Mike was a great guy. He was also a very good plumber. Many people used him. And obviously, all of those individuals, we are sorry and all our condolences to the families. Thank you. Thank you very much for those comments. Anyone else? Chief Weathers. First, I want to wish Officer Rieselman good luck in his retirement and thank him for his service. As far as the tributes go, from Philip Osborne and John Stephens and Mike Murphy and Captain Williamson, three of them I had the pleasure to work with. And they influenced me greatly because of their experience when I came on. They will be missed, and my condolences and sympathies to their families. So it was a shock to hear about Mike and his wife, but they will be missed. Thank you. Thank you very much, Chief. Chief Wells. Thank you, Mayor. And on behalf of the Division of Fire, we want to offer our condolences. It's been a tough month for the Division of Police, and we're certainly thinking about our brothers and sisters who have lost part of their family. And to our retirements, obviously we want to thank you both. Firefighter O'Leary has been just a fantastic employee and a member of our community paramedicine team who is really out in our community doing great work. And you will be greatly missed, and thank you both for your service. Thank you. Is there any other comment? I will add my voice to those who've spoken. On those who've passed, I don't know how many years of service that represents, but I offer my sympathies to their families and thank the families for supporting all of these officers who've passed. And for those who are retiring, particularly the two of you who are in the audience, thank you so much for your service. We can't ever say that enough, and what it means to our community that you've given your time and dedicated yourselves to our community, so thank you very much. With that, we'll go on to our committee reports and benefits. Do you have anything else for us, Tommy? I'm sorry. We're on our committee reports now. First up is benefits and then legislative. Nothing to report, thank goodness. That's always a good thing. Good. As far as legislative, we will be, our plan is probably start that committee, probably what, are we talking about February? Whenever you get back from Florida. Whenever I get back from Florida, that's right. Okay. All right. Thank you. Trey, do you have anything for your organizational committee? No updates, ma'am. Okay. Very good. Is there anything else for the good of the whole? Yes, Commissioner. Thank you, Commissioner. Okay, Ron. Mayor, you may or may not be aware of this. There are a couple of social security provisions that affect our actives and retirees. Windfall elimination provision and government pension offset, and the long and short of those means that those of us who retire on a pension from this pension plan will only draw approximately 40% of our social security. Had we not had this pension, we would have significantly more. Anecdotally, it seems that most of the retirees draw between $100 and $200 a month in social security. There was a bill that was passed yesterday in the Federal House of Representatives, the Social Security Fairness Act, and that will wipe out those two provisions and essentially allow all of us, both active and retired, our social security would go up two and a half times. That bill has now gone over to the Senate. The rules in the Senate are different than they are in the House, but it will not be acted upon until at least December the 12th, if I recall correctly. This bill has been sponsored by the national FOP every single year, as long as I can remember, and it never went anywhere. The reason I'm bringing this up, this is the first time ever that we've ever had a vote on it and got it out of one body into the other. So there is a chance, at least, that our actives and retirees will have a significant increase in our social security. This also, this bill does not just affect us. If you were in a pension system that did not pay into social security, it affects those people too. For instance, my wife is a retired school teacher. She, I'll never draw social security. I said, well, let's just see. She gets 300 bucks a month. So anyway, this bill has some far-reaching effects and I will keep you updated. Okay. Thank you for that information. Is there any other? Commissioner? Mayor, I apologize. I have three things that I want to talk about real quick, one being somewhat negative. I wasn't sure if I was going to say it or not. But for my soul, I feel like I have to. The real estate manager search, everyone took a lot of time to think about that. We went with LaSalle. The only negative thing, and it's always disappointing to me whenever we see large organizations like that get into real estate and buy single-family homes that take it out of the market for people that need it much more than that large organization. So I think it was, Rock said it last time, sometimes you've got to hold your nose and vote what's best for the board or for the pension fund, and that one was definitely one I very much had to, as I'm sure some of my peers on the board did as well. On a more positive note, this past Monday was Veterans Day, and I just want to thank all the veterans out there, whether they're part of the public safety family or LFUCG, just everyone out there for their service to the community, and I know I bring this up as well. I want to thank their families, too, because while I'm not sure, and obviously we're talking about the mayor specifically on this, I'm not sure if there's a term for that, but you're vet adjacent, and you have to be out there and make sure that the home continues to run, children continue to be raised, bills continue to get paid, and have a good home for one of those people to come back to us. So I just want to thank the vets and the vets' families for that. And lastly, we're not going to meet again before Thanksgiving. One of the things I always say is I'm extremely thankful for our public safety team, police, fire, corrections, E911, emergency management, security here in the building. I'm very grateful for everyone in LFUCG, and I'm very grateful that we have such a wonderful city that we all get to serve on a daily basis, and I just wish everyone here and anyone that happens to be watching at home to have a very, very happy Thanksgiving. Thank you for all of that. To the veterans, a point of interest, our government, LFUCG, has 160 veterans, and we always try to honor them, especially because they're working inside our government. Anything else for the good of the whole? All right. Thank you all for your time. I'll entertain a motion to adjourn. Thank you. All those in favor, say aye. Well, there's one, at least. We are adjourned. Thank you very much. Oh, say the word. Say the word. Say the word. Say the word. Say the word. Say the word. Say the word. Say the word. Say the word. I believe I can say again. I remember the day. We walked on the beach to sunset. Then we sang. The songs we played were a promise of love that lasted beyond the grave. Oh, what a song learned from the sea taught solely to the young. Oh, what a song to cast away the rain. Oh, what a song to break the bonds of fear and instill the sound. Oh, what a song I believe I can sing again. I remember the day we met.