pages: CityCouncil/2013-07-23.pdf, 10
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2013-07-23 | 10 | Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the In-N-Out project is conditioned on the crosswalk being addressed, but the Safeway gas and Chase Bank are not, to which the Acting Community Development Director responded in the affirmative. The Assistant City Manager stated Public Works staff began discussions with CalTrans regarding the crosswalk today. Councilmember Tam inquired whether sale of the remnant parcel is not related to the CalTrans parcel, to which the Acting Community Development manager responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Tam moved introduction of the ordinance. Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Chen: Aye; Daysog: Aye; Ezzy Ashcraft: Aye; Tam: Aye; and Mayor Gilmore: Aye. Ayes: 5. Noes: 0. * Mayor Gilmore called a recess at 8:39 and reconvened the meeting at 8:44 p.m. (13-366) Recommendation to Receive a Report and Provide Direction to Staff Regarding a Strategy to Address Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB). The Finance Director gave a Power Point presentation. Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the City would be doing what CalPERS does if a trust fund, which would be invested, is created. The Finance Director responded the City would make contributions to the trust fund, which would be like the City having 457 plan; stated the City would then tell the trustee to make the payments to retirees; the trust fund would somewhat be like PERS; the City makes the payment to PERS and PERS makes payment to the retirees. Vice Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft inquired whether the unused balance would earn interest. The Finance Director responded in the affirmative; stated the City has reviewed different pools; the two main firms are PERS and PARS; PARS has some really attractive options and allows selection of different types of pools; options range from very conservative to moderate to aggressive; the moderate approach would fit the City pretty well; a return of about 6% is the goal, as opposed to 7 to 8% on the aggressive side; 6% seems moderate but is better than what the City could earn; currently, the City's investment pool is not even earning 1% due to current market rates. In response to Mayor Gilmore's inquiry regarding investment restrictions, the Finance Director stated the City is restricted and is primarily in U.S. government or treasury Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 9 July 23, 2013 | CityCouncil/2013-07-23.pdf |