Fort Walton Beach Council agenda — 04-08-08 regular agenda — reading text

16 Council not to interfere in appointments or removals; violation a misdemeanor; forfeiture of office Discussion ensued on the recourse available to Council regarding any situation with an employee. The City Manager explained that Council would go to her to discuss any individual employee or concerns she may need to act upon. It was requested that the City Attorney provide an interpretation on the meaning that Council shall not give " orders" to any subordinate of the city, and provide clarification on forfeiture of office and removal process. Section 16 was identified for discussion at the final workshop. Section 17 Duties of manager There were no changes for Section 17. Section 18 Manager' s and officer' s right to participate in council meetings Discussion ensued on participation in council meetings and confusion over the meaning of "other officers of the city as may be designated by vote of the council ". During discussion it was expressed that the Boards and Committees fall under that category; that the Boards work directly for Council; and that the practice has been that Council will listen to anyone who wants to speak, or to anyone on staff delegated by the City Manager to present information. There were no changes for Section 18 Section 19 Administrative departments There were no changes for Section 19. Section 20 Departments to be supervised by a director Discussion was held on the verbiage that there shall be a Director of each Department, and whether or not a Manager can be a department head. Section 20 was identified for discussion at the final workshop. City Attorney arrived at 6: 17 p.m.  63 Council Workshop 3 - 18 -08 POSITION OF FINANCE DIRECTOR The City Manager noted Council was provided information on a survey on the reporting and hiring authority for the position of Finance Director in the Florida Public Personnel Association. She noted Finance Procedures is scheduled for discussion at the next workshop. PUBLIC INPUT The Mayor opened the floor for public input. Kabe Woods, 240 Brooks Street, referenced Section 16, the fourth sentence that begins with Except for the purpose of inquiry" and suggested the entire sentence be reviewed instead ofjust the word " orders" because the entire sentence qualifies what is in the sentence. PENSION WORKSHOP MEETING 25th The Mayor reminded Council of the workshop scheduled for next Tuesday, March to discuss the General, Police and Fire Pension Plans. The City Manager mentioned the Police and Fire Pension Attorney Lee Dehner; the Police and Fire Actuary, Brad Heinrichs with Foster and Foster; and the General Plan Attorney Jim Linn, will all be present at the workshop to answer any questions. STRAGEGIC MEETING The City Manager reported two members of Council cannot meet with Dr. Marlowe on April 18th so she will coordinate a couple of dates with Dr. Marlowe to schedule another strategic meeting in May. REFERENDUM QUESTION The question was asked of the City Attorney whether a referendum would be needed to clarify wording in the Charter on an Acting City Manager. The City Attorney pointed out the information provided on Municipal Law that affects anything they can put into the Code and that the first two pages discuss what is required for a referendum. She explained a referendum is not necessarily required for redefinition of boundaries, for the abolishment of Municipal Departments, and for amendment of language that has been judicially construed. She said the answer to the question as to an Acting City Manager would require referendum. ADJOURNMENT Being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 6: 30 p.m. MAYOR: ATTEST: CITY CLERK kw ddm  65 MINUTES OF THE COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING GENERAL, POLICE AND FIRE PENSION PLANS OF THE CITY OF FORT WALTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 25, 2008 INTRODUCTION A Council Workshop Meeting of the City Council of Fort Walton Beach, Florida, was held on Tuesday, March 25, 2008, at 5: 30 p. m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall with the following members present: 1 Mayor Mike Anderson Councilmen: Mike Holmes, Virgil Miller, Dennis Reeves, Bill Garvie, Dr. Wayne Pullen, Jim Hartwell, and Mike Minich, Mayor Pro Tern Also Present: Joyce Shanahan, City Manager; Helen Spencer, City Clerk; Finance Director Position vacant); Toni Craig, City Attorney; Department Directors PURPOSE OF MEETING Review of General Employees', Police Officers' and Firefighters' Pension Plans. Mr. Jim Linn from Lewis, Longman & Walker, legal counsel for General Employees' Plan, Mr. Lee Dehner, from Christianson & Dehner, legal counsel for Police and Fire Plans, and a representative from Foster & Foster, actuary for Police and Fire Plans, will be in attendance. CALL TO ORDER The Mayor called the meeting to order. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Mayor led in the Pledge of Allegiance. GENERAL, POLICE, FIRE PENSION PLANS The Mayor introduced Lee Dehner, Christianson & Dehner; Brad Heinrichs, Foster & Foster, Actuarial Consulting; Jim Linn, and Glenn Thomas, Lewis Longman & Walker. Lee Dehner of Christianson & Dehner, legal counsel for the Police and Fire Plans, discussed the distinctions between the Police Officers' Pension Board and the Firefighters' Pension Board with the General Employees Fund. He noted the Police Officers' and Firefighters' Pension Boards do have the same fiduciary responsibility as the General Employees Pension Fund but, unlike the General Fund where there is a Pension -Board of Advisors, they are the Board of Trustees and they are charged with the final authority of administering the Firefighters' and Police Officers' Pension Plan. He mentioned another significant difference between the Police, Fire and General Employees Plans relates to funding of the Plans. He noted the funding of all three Plans occur through member contributions, as well as City contributions as the City is responsible under Florida Statutes 112 to fund the Plans to actuarial soundness by the amount determined by the Actuary for each of the Plans. He mentioned there is a funding source enjoyed by the Police Officers' and the Firefighters' Pension Plans that is not enjoyed by. the General Employees Plan. He explained in the 1930' s the Legislature determined that because of the nature of the work performed by the firefighters and police officers that they should be provided an opportunity to retire at an earlier age and be provided with funding to enable them to do that, which resulted in the Insurance Premium Tax Rebate Program. Me Council Workshop 3 -25 -08 PENSION PLANS cont. Mr. Dehner explained in the case of the firefighters, every resident of the City pays a 1. 85% premium tax on property insurance policy; and in the case of the police officers a 85% tax on casualty insurance is paid. He said if each of those Plan complies with minimum requirements per Florida Statutes, Chapter 175 for Firefighters and Chapter 185 for Police Officers, then they are eligible to receive those monies back as a funding source to the retirement plans. Brad Heinrichs, Foster and Foster, Actuary for the Police Officers' and Firefighters' Plans, advised his main role is to ensure the Plans are funded to actuarial soundness. He 1St explained in order to do that they collect census data every October and perform an actuarial evaluation to help develop a contribution amount that for the fiscal year that will be sufficient, if made as a level percentage of payroll, to pay for the each retirees benefit for as long as they live so that, theoretically, if something were to happen to the City and it no longer existed, there would still be enough money in the trust to take care of the retirees. He said it is important to understand, their job is to try to fund those programs as a level percentage of payroll so that if everything works the way they anticipate, the cost will be stable and predictable. He mentioned looking at this year vs. last year, the total required contribution for the Firefighters' Fund was 23. 9% of payroll and went down by .4% of payroll; and for the Police Officers' it was constant at 25.7% of payroll. He said that is telling them that the Pension Boards are doing a very good job of making actual assumptions and in helping fund the programs. He said the Plans are well funded and in both cases if they were to shut down the programs today and give every member a lump 1St, sum value of what they have accrued as of October they would have enough money in each fund to fully accomplish that task, those Plans are fully funded on an accrued basis. He also said that both funds, in terms of a contribution requirement to the City with 14. 6% of payroll for the fiscal year ending 2009 for Police and 10.2% of payroll for the Fire, that relative to neighbor and other peers in the State it is a relatively light amount in terms of the requirement. Jim Linn, Lewis, Longman & Walker, pointed out the matrix that gives a summary overview of the benefit structure of all three Plans. He noted the Plans are very similar in most respects in terms of the benefits being provided to the employees with the major difference between the Police, Fire, and General Plans being the normal retirement date. He explained by Statute they the Police can retire at age 55 and Fire can retire at age 52 with 25 years of service, but with General it is at age 62. He pointed out Mr. Tierney's most recent valuation for the General Fund shows the City's contributions for the General Plan have been relatively stable for the past two years and looking ahead to next year Mr. Tierney has projected a slight decrease in the contribution requirement of the City in terms of percent of payroll, with about 15. 8% for this year going down to 14.8% next year. Mr. Miller advised his reason for requesting this meeting was to obtain a better understanding of the working of the pension plans. He expressed concern that after so many years there is no requirement to pay into the fund and that people are allowed to work without paying into the pension fund, and expressed concern that the retirees may be receiving a larger COLA than given the present employees, which he personally did not think was fair. He mentioned the upcoming budget cycle where Council will be looking at efficiencies and tightening of belts, and thought Council may need