ACTION ITEM EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
|
|
- Wilfrid Kory Baker
- 8 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 F9 Office of the President TO MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ON FINANCE: For Meeting of ACTION ITEM UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RETIREMENT PLAN PROPOSAL TO MODIFY THE EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION RATE FOR THE LAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIONAL LABORATORY SEGMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In light of the significantly higher funded ratio of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) Segment of the UC Retirement Plan (UCRP) in relation to the Campus and Medical Centers Segment, and in order to reduce certain contract risks associated with the University s Management and Operating Contract with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and ensure that LBNL remains competitive with its sister laboratories throughout the United States, LBNL requests that the methodology for determining its UCRP employer contribution rate be modified so that it is commensurate with the LBNL Segment s funded status (96 percent as of July 1, 2014 on an actuarial value of assets basis). Currently, the LBNL employer contribution rate is set at the same level as the Campus and Medical Centers Segment rate, which is 79 percent funded as of July 1, 2014 on an actuarial value of assets basis. The proposed LBNL employer contribution methodology is consistent with the Regents policy to achieve full funding, and it is anticipated that it will maintain the trajectory for the LBNL Segment to attain 100 percent funding earlier than the Campus and Medical Centers Segment. The proposal will have no impact on the funded status of the Campus and Medical Centers (C/MC) Segment and minimal impact on the funded status of URCP as a whole, because the LBNL Segment represents only about three percent of the total UCRP Actuarial Accrued Liability ($2 billion vs. $60 billion). If the proposed modification is approved, the Management and Operating Contract will be modified to reflect the new methodology and associated contract risk reduction. RECOMMENDATION The President of the University recommends that the Committee on Finance recommend to the Regents that: A. During a five-year transition period beginning October 1, 2015, the employer contribution rate to the University of California Retirement Plan for the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) Segment be set at a rate proportionate to the funded ratios of the LBNL Segment and the Campus and Medical Centers (C/MC)
2 COMMITTEE ON FINANCE -2- F9 Segment, determined on an actuarial value of assets basis as of the previous valuation date (July 1, 2014 for the proposed October 1, 2015 rate) as shown in the table below. B. The proposed employer LBNL contribution rate be made effective as of October 1, 2015, subject to mutually agreed-upon appropriate modification of the Management and Operating Contract to implement the new rate that will be negotiated under existing authority of the UC Office of the National Laboratories. LBNL Funded Ratio > C/MC Funded Ratio CC/MMMM FFFFFFFFFFFF RRRRRRRRRR LBNL Indexed Rate = CC/MMMM RRRRRRRR LLLLLLLL FFFFFFFFFFFF RRRRRRRRRR Under current conditions, LBNL rate would equal 11.5% LBNL Funded Ratio C/MC Funded Ratio C/MC Rate Current C/MC rate = 14% BACKGROUND While the LBNL Segment is similar to the C/MC Segment in that each has active as well as nonactive members, the two segments are accounted for and evaluated separately. 1 There is only one pension fund for investment and benefit payment purposes. Pension payouts, however, are tracked and charged against each segment s assets for accounting purposes. For UCRP funding purposes, no other UC location with active members (campus or medical center) is tracked as a distinct segment. Under the current Regents policy on UCRP funding and the Management and Operating Contract with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to manage LBNL (DOE Contract), the DOE contributes to UCRP at the same employer contribution rate set by the Regents for the C/MC Segment, which is either the total funding policy rate less member contributions or the flat rate determined from time to time by the Regents, which is currently 14 percent of payroll. Since contributions to UCRP were resumed in 2010, DOE has paid this employer contribution regardless of the actual funded ratio of the LBNL Segment. As of July 1, 2014, the LBNL Segment had a funded ratio of 96 percent (on an AVA basis) and 104 percent (on an MVA basis). 2 By comparison, the C/MC Segment had funded ratios of 79 percent and 86 percent, respectively. UC s Consulting Actuary for UCRP, Segal Consulting (Segal), estimates LBNL s employer contribution rate could be reduced to the proposed contribution rate effective October 1, 2015, and the LBNL Segment would still maintain a trajectory to reach full funding status (on an AVA basis) in the next several years. 3 Since 1991, when UCRP assets were initially allocated to the DOE laboratories based on actuarial accrued liability (AAL) for DOE contract accounting purposes, the active member 1 There are four separate and distinct segments that comprise UCRP as a whole: the C/MC Segment, the LBNL Segment and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Los Alamos National Laboratory (referred to as Retained Segments ). 2 AVA, Actuarial Value of Assets, represents the value of assets computed by smoothing: market gains and losses over a five-year period. MVA, Market Value of Assets, represents the market value of the assets as of a specific date. 3 Based on Segal s proposed actuarial assumptions which include a 7.25 percent market value return per year and 3 percent annual inflation (See the chart on page 5).
3 COMMITTEE ON FINANCE -3- F9 population at the campuses and medical centers has grown significantly faster than the LBNL population. Differences in demographic experience combined with LBNL s exclusion from some University-sponsored programs (such as one of the Capital Accumulation Provision (CAP) allocations and Voluntary Early Retirement Incentive Programs (VERIPs) that were offered to members at campuses and medical centers) resulted in the higher funded ratio for the LBNL Segment relative to the C/MC Segment. DOE SCRUTINY AND LBNL COST COMPETITIVENESS UC manages LBNL under the DOE Contract, which requires that expenditure of all federal funds must be reasonable and allocable to approved activities at the Laboratory. DOE s scrutiny of fringe benefits expenses has grown significantly over the past several years. LBNL s high costs are increasingly disparate in DOE s most recent study of complex-wide contractor benefit programs (see chart below). The DOE Inspector General is now auditing certain fringe benefits across the DOE labs, which may result in pressure to reduce these costs and expose the University and the Laboratory to the risk of untimely and highly unpredictable contract direction from DOE regarding the University s systemwide benefit programs, and specifically UCRP. Modifying the LBNL Segment contribution rate to a rate commensurate with its higher funded ratio will significantly mitigate this contract risk. Retirement Plan Cost (per Participant) for DOE Labs and Contractors Source: DOE Contractor Benefits Metric Study, January 2014
4 COMMITTEE ON FINANCE -4- F9 Figure 1. Plot comparing Defined Benefit (DB) retirement plan costs in Dollars Per Participant Per Year (PPPY) for all DOE National Laboratories, plants and sites. LBNL, highlighted by the red arrow, is the bar labeled SC-Berkeley. External benchmark shown as yellow line, DOE weighted average as green line. The proposed modification would give the Laboratory the ability to increase its competitiveness with other multi-purpose DOE Office of Science National Laboratories by reducing LBNL s overhead expenses by an estimated $7 million in the first 12-month period. Without the proposed change, LBNL is at risk of losing funding from DOE and other sponsors if it fails to address its competitive position by proactively implementing changes to reduce the growth in its cost of doing research. PROPOSED MODIFICATION TO EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION RATE FOR LBNL SEGMENT LBNL UCRP Segment Employer Contribution Rate Time Period LBNL Funded Ratio > C/MC Funded Ratio LBNL Funded Ratio C/MC Funded Ratio CC/MMMM FFFFFFFFFFFF RRRRRRRRRR LBNL Indexed Rate = CC/MMMM RRRRRRRR LLLLLLLL FFFFFFFFFFFF RRRRRRRRRR C/MC Rate Current Rates (as of July 1, 2014): C/MC Contribution Rate = 14% AVA Funded Ratios: C/MC = 79%, LBNL = 96% C/MC Ratio / LBNL Ratio = 79% / 96% = 82.3% 10/1/2015 6/30/ % (= 14% * 82.3%) N/A 7/1/2016 6/30/2017 TBD based on formula above as of July 1, 2015 C/MC Rate (Est. 14%) 7/1/2017 6/30/2018 TBD based on formula above as of July 1, 2016 C/MC Rate (Est. 14%) 7/1/2018 6/30/2019 TBD based on formula above as of July 1, 2017 C/MC Rate (Est. 14%) 7/1/2019 6/30/2020 TBD based on formula above as of July 1, 2018 C/MC Rate (Est. 14%) LBNL proposes that effective October 1, 2015, its UCRP employer contribution rate begin to transition from the C/MC Segment rate to ultimately achieve the LBNL Segment funding policy contribution rate (LBNL Segment ARC rate). The LBNL Segment ARC rate is the rate resulting from applying the Regents Policy for UCRP Funding solely to LBNL Segment liabilities and normal cost, less member contributions as of the previous valuation date. During an initial five-year transition period, provided the AVA funded ratio of the LBNL Segment as of the previous July 1 exceeds the corresponding ratio of the C/MC Segment, the LBNL Segment employer contribution rate would be indexed to the C/MC employer contribution rate in direct proportion to the C/MC Segment funded ratio divided by the LBNL Segment funded ratio. In any year during the five-year transition period in which the LBNL Segment funded ratio does not exceed the C/MC Segment funded ratio, the LBNL Segment employer contribution rate would revert to the C/MC rate (see table above). After the initial transition period and assuming the LBNL Segment funded status progresses as Segal has projected, LBNL is expected to propose that the LBNL contribution rate would transition to the
5 COMMITTEE ON FINANCE -5- F9 LBNL Segment ARC rate, irrespective of the relationship of the LBNL Segment funded ratio to the funded ratio of the C/MC Segment. Based on the July 1, 2014 funded ratios of the two segments and the C/MC Segment contribution rate for UCRP Plan Year , LBNL s contribution rate would equal 11.5 percent through the end of the Plan Year; the contribution rate would be recomputed and be effective for each of the subsequent four Plan Years. As shown in the chart below, Segal projects that the proposed LBNL contributions would enable the LBNL Segment to maintain a trajectory to full funding in alignment with the UCRP policy on funding, while not generating the large surplus that would be expected if the current methodology and employer contribution rate were maintained. This projection includes the impact of proposed assumption changes from the UCRP actuarial experience study. For illustration purposes, the projection assumes that the LBNL contribution rate becomes the LBNL Segment ARC rate after the initial transition period. 135% University of California Retirement Plan Funded Ratio Based on Proposed Contribution Rate Schedule for LBNL Segment Using Proposed Assumptions from UCRP Experience Study Funded Ratio (Actuarial Value Basis) 130% 125% 120% 115% 110% 105% 100% 95% 90% Uses estimate of actual market value return of 4.5% for 2014/15 and 7.25% per year beginning July 1, 2015 LBNL active member population headcount assumed to increase 0.7% per year July 1, 2014 UAAL = $89 Million No UAAL Plan Year Beginning July 1, Current - Campus/Medical Center Employer Contribution Rates (14% Maximum) Ratio of Campus/Medical Center to LBNL Funded Ratio multiplied by 14% for 5 years, and then LBNL ARC Figure 2. Projected UCRP funded ratio based on proposed contribution rate schedule for LBNL. LBNL will continue to fund existing or future liabilities. There is no change proposed to LBNL member contribution rates and the provision in the current UCRP Funding Policy that requires the employer rate to be at least as much as the member rate. LBNL s proposal will have no impact on the funded status of the C/MC Segment. Prior to the end of the initial five-year
6 COMMITTEE ON FINANCE -6- F9 transition period, LBNL and the UC Office of National Laboratories will evaluate relevant conditions (e.g., the LBNL Segment s funded status and LBNL s competitive position) and submit a proposal for Regental approval for an LBNL employer contribution rate going forward based on the guiding principles contained in this item. PROPOSAL IMPACT The proposed change in the LBNL Segment employer contribution rate will have an immediate and significant positive impact for the University in relation to the DOE Contract, but will have no impact on the retirement benefits afforded to LBNL s employees. The funded status of the C/MC Segment will continue to be determined under the current UCRP Funding Policy terms. There should be minimal impact to the entire URCP funded status because the LBNL Segment represents about three percent of the total UCRP AAL ($2 billion vs. $60 billion). The proposed change also assures that LBNL remains firmly within the University benefits program, adheres to the Regents UCRP funding principles, and funds the LBNL Segment in a financially responsible manner. Key To Acronyms AAL ARC AVA CAP C/MC DB DOE LBNL MVA PPPY UAAL UCRP VERIP Actuarial Accrued Liability Annual Required Contribution Actuarial Value of Assets Capital Accumulation Provision Campus and Medical Centers Defined Benefit Department of Energy Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Market Value of Assets Per Participant, Per Year Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability University of California Retirement Plan Voluntary Early Retirement Incentive Program Attachment: Frequently Asked Questions Proposal to Modify the UCRP Employer Contribution Rate for the LBNL Segment of UCRP
7 Attachment 1 Proposal to Modify the UCRP Employer Contribution Rate for the LBNL Segment of UCRP Frequently Asked Questions General Information about Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory ( Berkeley Lab, the Lab or LBNL ) 1. What is Berkeley Lab? Berkeley Lab, founded in 1931, is a member of the national laboratory system supported by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) through the DOE Office of Science, conducting only non-classified research in the public interest. The Lab is a Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC) managed for DOE by the University of California (UC). Berkeley Lab brings together staff scientists, engineers, UC faculty, graduate students, postdoctoral researchers, and operations professionals to pursue highly coordinated team science at great scale, enabling the nation to pursue a vital science-based approach to issues of energy and environment. 2. What is Berkeley Lab s mission and role in the US innovation ecosystem? From its five National User Facilities to its interdisciplinary research teams, Berkeley Lab conducts the ground-breaking fundamental science that offers transformational solutions to the world s most urgent energy and environmental challenges, while creating new advanced tools for scientific discovery. Berkeley Lab is the most open, sharing, and connected of the 17 DOE National Laboratories. With more than 10,000 visiting university and industry researchers each year, Berkeley Lab is the destination for one third of all scientists who access DOE User Facilities each year to expand the frontiers of human knowledge. 3. What makes Berkeley Lab unique among DOE National Laboratories? Berkeley Lab home to 13 Nobel prizes is distinguished from its peers in the national laboratory network because of its close partnership with UC Berkeley and the UC system more broadly. Additionally, LBNL is the originator of team science, which drives the breadth and originality of its research, and fuels its creativity, risk-taking and sense of social responsibility. 4. What roles do UC and DOE have in the management and operations of Berkeley Lab? DOE awarded UC the Management and Operations (M&O) contract to operate Berkeley Lab on DOE s behalf. The M&O contract includes numerous provisions related to management of Lab costs, including employee benefit costs. For Lab costs to be reimbursed by DOE under the M&O contract, costs must be reasonable and allocable to approved activities at the Lab. Questions on Berkeley Lab s Proposal to Modify UCRP Employer Contribution 5. Does LBNL s proposal impact pension funds available for Campuses and Medical Centers? No. LBNL and the campus/medical centers are two distinct segments of UCRP. LBNL s proposal has no impact on the Campus and Medical Centers Segment. 6. How are LBNL s UCRP assets treated with respect to accounting, investment, and pension payouts relative to the Campus and Medical Center Segment? The two segments are accounted for and evaluated separately (per the DOE reporting need and the requirement that federal and state funds not be comingled). Pension payouts are also tracked and paid separately from each segment's assets. LBNL retirees are paid from the LBNL Segment and campus/medical center retirees are paid from the Campus and Medical Centers Segment. If an employee moves between segments, assets equivalent to the liability also move between segments. The only aspect for which LBNL and campus/medical center UCRP funds are managed together is investment of funds.
8 2 7. What methodology is used to determine LBNL s UCRP segment is nearing full funding? And is that methodology consistently applied to the Campus and Medical Centers Segment? "Full funding" is defined as having a "funded ratio" as of the valuation date equal to 100 percent or more. Specifically, Funded Ratio = Assets / Actuarial Accrued Liability (AAL). By definition, this formula incorporates any legacy unfunded liability for each distinct segment. In the annual actuarial valuation conducted by the Regents consulting actuary, Segal Consulting (Segal), each July 1 st, a funded ratio is calculated consistently for each UCRP segment based on the assets allocated to that segment (tracked by UCOP) and the AAL for UCRP members assigned to that segment (calculated by Segal). For the LBNL Segment, those members include: 1) current LBNL employees, 2) inactive vested members who separated from service while an LBNL employee, and 3) retirees and eligible survivors who retired as an LBNL employee or inactive vested member. As of July 1, 2014 the LBNL Segment had a funded ratio of 96 percent on an actuarial value of assets (AVA) basis and, in fact, had a funded ratio of 104 percent on a market value of assets (MVA) basis. Therefore, the segment was already fully-funded on an MVA basis and at 96 percent AVA, was nearing full funding on an AVA basis. 8. What is the funded ratio of UCRP as a whole (including the Campus/Medical Centers, LBNL and the LLNL and LANL retained segments) and of the LBNL Segment as of 7/1/2014? UCRP as a Whole: 80 percent AVA, 87 percent MVA 1 LBNL Segment: 96 percent AVA, 104 percent MVA 9. How significant is LBNL s segment relative to UCRP as a whole as of 7/1/2014? LBNL s AAL is $2.0 billion out of $60.4 billion for UCRP as a whole, or 3.3 percent. 10. How did the LBNL Segment get a higher funded ratio than the Campus and Medical Centers Segment? The active population of UC s campuses and medical centers grew by 58 percent after 1991, the year when separate accounting for the DOE labs started and all segments initially had similar funded ratios. The active population of LBNL only grew by 10 percent since that time. This was also when UCRP was in a surplus position and the normal costs of the increased amounts of new members at the campus/medical centers locations reduced the surplus faster than at LBNL. Also, some programs (e.g., VERIP and CAP) were offered to campus/medical center employees but not LBNL employees, reducing the Campus and Medical Centers Segment funded ratio, while leaving that of LBNL unaffected. 11. What are current employer and employee contribution rates for UCRP and LBNL? For both LBNL and the Campus/Medical Centers: Pre July 2013 hires: Employer: 14 percent, Employee: approximately 8 percent Post June 2013 hires: Employer 14 percent, Employee: approximately 7 percent 12. What is LBNL s proposal with regard to segment funding? LBNL proposes that effective October 1, 2015 and for the next five years, provided the corresponding funded ratio of the LBNL Segment exceeds that of the Campus and Medical Centers Segment, the LBNL Segment UCRP employer contribution rate would be indexed to the UCRP Campus/Medical Center contribution rate in direct proportion to the Campus/Medical Center funded ratio divided by the LBNL Segment funded ratio. 2 For any year in which the LBNL Segment funded ratio does not exceed that of the Campus and Medical Centers Segment, the LBNL Segment UCRP employer contribution rate would revert 1 The Campus and Medical Centers Segment funded ratios are within one percent or less of the funded ratios for UCRP as a whole. 2 For 10/1/2015 6/30/2016, the LBNL Segment employer contribution rate to UCRP would be 11.5 percent.
9 to (i.e., be equal to) the Campus and Medical Centers Segment rate. Prior to the end of the initial fiveyear transition period, LBNL and the UC Office of National Laboratories will evaluate relevant conditions (e.g., the LBNL Segment funded status and competitive position) and submit a new proposal for future LBNL Segment employer contribution rates Does LBNL s proposal set a precedent for other campuses? No. The proposal should not set a precedent because the LBNL Segment is distinctly separate from the Campus and Medical Centers Segment. This is required by virtue of the contract with DOE since the LBNL Segment is considered federal funds. For UCRP purposes, no other UC location (campus or medical center) is tracked as a distinct segment. 14. Do the funds committed by the State of California to fund UCRP (i.e., the $436 million) apply to the LBNL segment? No. State funds do not apply to the LBNL Segment - they can only be applied to the UAAL of the Campus and Medical Centers Segment. 15. What would be the funding impact of the proposal to LBNL s segment and to the Campus and Medical Centers Segment? There would be no funding impact to the Campus and Medical Centers Segment. The designed impact of the proposal on the LBNL Segment is that it would still reach a 100 percent funded ratio within a few years, while preventing a large surplus from accumulating. 16. What is UC policy on employer vs. employee contribution? The Regents determine the split between employer and employee contribution rates. Employer contribution rates cannot be lower than employee contribution rates in any year. 17. If the LBNL employer contribution rate is reduced, what does LBNL propose for the LBNL employee contribution rate? LBNL is not proposing any changes to the employee contribution rate.
University of Regents propose Increase in Funding and Planning
The Regents of the University of California COMMITTEE ON FINANCE September 17, 2015 The Committee on Finance met on the above date at the Student Center, Irvine Campus. Members present: In attendance:
More informationACTION ITEM EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
C16 Office of the President TO MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ON COMPENSATION: For Meeting of May16, 2007 ACTION ITEM AMENDMENT OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RETIREMENT PLAN TO FACILITATE THE CLOSE-OUT OF
More informationTable of Contents. Background and Certification Page 2 Introduction Page 3. Amortization Method Page 4
Racine County School Office Accounting and Sample Funding Report of Liabilities for Participants Post Employment Benefits as of January 1, 2011 Thru End of the Year December 31, 2011 January 2012 This
More informationReport on the Actuarial Valuation of the Group Life Insurance Program
Report on the Actuarial Valuation of the Group Life Insurance Program Prepared as of June 30, 2014 Cavanaugh Macdonald C O N S U L T I N G, L L C The experience and dedication you deserve December 19,
More informationReport on the Actuarial Valuation of the Health Insurance Credit Program
Report on the Actuarial Valuation of the Health Insurance Credit Program Prepared as of June 30, 2013 Cavanaugh Macdonald C O N S U L T I N G, L L C The experience and dedication you deserve December 19,
More informationAN EXPLANATORY GLOSSARY OF POST EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS AND DESIGN OPTIONS FOR DISCUSSION WITHIN THE ACADEMIC SENATE. Daniel L. Simmons * April 16, 2010
AN EXPLANATORY GLOSSARY OF POST EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS AND DESIGN OPTIONS FOR DISCUSSION WITHIN THE ACADEMIC SENATE * April 16, 2010 This paper, in the form of an explanatory glossary, attempts to address
More informationA Critique of Response to A Dissenting
A Critique of Response to A Dissenting Statement by Staff and Academic Senate Members of the Work Groups of The President s Task Force on Post-Employment Benefits (9-25-10) Robert M. Anderson 1 All seven
More informationWarwick Public School System
Warwick Public School System Actuarial Valuation Post Employment Benefits Other Than Pensions as of July 1, 2011 under Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 45 (GASB 45) (Estimated Disclosures
More informationIntroduction. Valuation Policy. Employee Contributions. Employer Contributions. Actuarial Cost Method
95 At LACERA we're committed to customer service. It drives everything we do, from taking members' calls, responding to correspondence, leading workshops, and counseling individuals in one-on-one sessions
More informationReport of the Actuary on the Annual Valuation of the Retirement System for Employees of the City of Cincinnati. Pension Report
Report of the Actuary on the Annual Valuation of the Retirement System for Employees of the City of Cincinnati Pension Report Prepared as of December 31, 2011 and Approved by the Board of Trustees on May
More informationPolicy Brief June 2010
Policy Brief June 2010 Pension Tension: Understanding Arizona s Public Employee Retirement Plans The Arizona Chamber Foundation (501(c)3) is a non-partisan, objective educational and research foundation.
More informationFY10 Illinois Pension Reform Proposals SURS Implications Fact Sheet 5/22/09
FY10 Illinois Pension Reform Proposals SURS Implications Fact Sheet 5/22/09 Pension reform measures covering all of the State employee retirement systems were initially proposed in the Governor s Fiscal
More informationAnalysis of PERS Cost Allocation, Benefit Modification, and System Financing Concepts February 14, 2013
Analysis of Cost Allocation, Benefit Modification, and System Financing Concepts February 14, 2013 Version 1.2 Important Notes Regarding This Report This report is produced to support the Board in its
More informationKansas Legislator Briefing Book 2012
Kansas Legislator Briefing Book 2012 Retirement V-4 Long-Term Funding of KPERS Other Retirement reports available V-1 Kansas Public Employees Retirement System V-2 Kansas Defined Contribution Retirement
More informationDEPT: EMPLOYEE FRINGE BENEFITS UNIT NO. 1950 FUND: General - 0001. Approximate Tax Levy Cost, Employee & Retiree Fringe Benefits: $138,193,986
BUDGET SUMMARY 2012 Actual 2013 Budget 2014 Budget 2013/2014 Change Health Benefit Expenditures $ 113,308,978 $ 118,502,180 $ 118,676,177 $ 173,997 Pension Related Expenditures 64,388,961 66,724,779 65,198,296
More informationGASB STATEMENT NO. 68 REPORT FOR THE SHERIFFS RETIREMENT FUND OF GEORGIA
GASB STATEMENT NO. 68 REPORT FOR THE SHERIFFS RETIREMENT FUND OF GEORGIA PREPARED AS OF JUNE 30, 2014 Cavanaugh Macdonald C O N S U L T I N G, L L C The experience and dedication you deserve May 7, 2015
More informationAttention: Michelle Schulz, Finance Director. The date of the valuation was December 31, 2014. The purpose of the actuarial valuation is to:
March 2, 2015 The Board of Trustees Retiree Health Care Trust Fund, Michigan 48326-2753 Attention: Michelle Schulz, Finance Director This report contains the results of an actuarial valuation of the liabilities
More informationGENERAL FUND AND PUBLIC SAFETY FUND PROJECTION
2015 Charter Township of West Bloomfield Finance Department GENERAL FUND AND PUBLIC SAFETY FUND PROJECTION Fiscal Years Ended December 31, 2015 through 2024 Contents Finance Director s Report 3 Historical
More informationState of Indiana Interim GASB 45 Actuarial Valuation Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2013
State of Indiana Interim GASB 45 Actuarial Valuation Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2013 Prepared by: Nyhart 8415 Allison Pointe Blvd., Suite 300 Indianapolis, IN 46250 Ph: (317) 845-3500 www.nyhart.com November
More informationRetirements and Beneficiaries Added to and Removed from Rolls
FIREMEN S ANNUITY AND BENEFIT FUND OF CHICAGO ACTUARIAL VALUATION REPORT FOR THE YEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2012 May 16, 2013 Retirement Board of the Firemen s Annuity and Benefit Fund of Chicago 20 South
More informationCavanaugh Macdonald. The experience and dedication you deserve
Cavanaugh Macdonald C O N S U L T I N G, L L C The experience and dedication you deserve Mr. David L. Senn Executive Director Teachers Retirement System State of Montana 1500 Sixth Avenue Helena, MT 59620-0139
More informationPENSION PLAN OPTIONS. July 1, 2014 CITY OF MEMPHIS. Copyright 2014 by The Segal Group, Inc. All rights reserved.
PENSION PLAN OPTIONS CITY OF MEMPHIS July 1, 2014 Copyright 2014 by The Segal Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Table of Contents I. Retirement Plans Overview II. Plan Redesign Approach III. Current Plan
More informationGEORGIA STATE EMPLOYEES POST-EMPLOYMENT HEALTH BENEFIT FUND & GEORGIA SCHOOL PERSONNEL POST-EMPLOYMENT
GEORGIA STATE EMPLOYEES POST-EMPLOYMENT HEALTH BENEFIT FUND & GEORGIA SCHOOL PERSONNEL POST-EMPLOYMENT HEALTH BENEFIT FUND REPORT OF THE ACTUARY ON THE RETIREE MEDICAL VALUATIONS PREPARED AS OF JUNE 30,
More informationCavanaugh Macdonald. The experience and dedication you deserve
Cavanaugh Macdonald C O N S U L T I N G, L L C The experience and dedication you deserve December 7, 2015 Mr. Gary L. Harbin Executive Secretary Teachers' Retirement System of the State of Kentucky 479
More informationANTRIM COUNTY TRANSPORTATION BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS DECEMBER 31, 2005
ANTRIM COUNTY TRANSPORTATION BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS DECEMBER 31, 2005 ANTRIM COUNTY TRANSPORTATION TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Independent Auditor's Report 1 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Statement of Net Assets
More informationRHODE ISLAND STATE EMPLOYEES AND ELECTING TEACHERS OPEB
RHODE ISLAND STATE EMPLOYEES AND ELECTING TEACHERS OPEB ACTUARIAL VALUATION REPORT JUNE 30, 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page Number -- Cover Letter A B C D E F G EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1-5 Executive Summary
More informationDollars and Sense: a Report on Retirement Funding June 1, 2006
Summary County of Mendocino Post Office Box 629 Grand Jury Ukiah, CA 95482 (707) 463-4320 Dollars and Sense: a Report on Retirement Funding June 1, 2006 The 2005-2006 Mendocino County Grand Jury conducted
More informationCavanaugh Macdonald. The experience and dedication you deserve
Cavanaugh Macdonald C O N S U L T I N G, L L C The experience and dedication you deserve April 16, 2015 Mr. James A. Potvin Executive Director Employees Retirement System of Georgia Two Northside 75, Suite
More informationDEPT: EMPLOYEE FRINGE BENEFITS UNIT NO. 1950 FUND: General - 0001
BUDGET SUMMARY 2010 Actual 2011 Budget 2012 Budget 2011/2012 Change Health Benefit Expenditures $ 132,619,138 $ 138,642,087 $ 120,566,786 $ (18,075,301) Pension Related Expenditures 67,972,949 66,872,988
More informationUC Retirement Benefits. Guide to Your. A Complete RETIREMENT PLANS: SUMMARY PLAN DESCRIPTIONS
RETIREMENT PLANS: SUMMARY PLAN DESCRIPTIONS 2012 A Complete Guide to Your UC Retirement Benefits Listed below are telephone numbers and website and correspondence addresses for some of the resources UC
More informationState Notes TOPICS OF LEGISLATIVE INTEREST Summer 2010
Retirement Incentive and Pension Reform of the Michigan Public School Employees' Retirement System By Kathryn Summers, Chief Analyst Introduction On May 19, 2010, Governor Granholm signed into law Senate
More informationMACOMB COUNTY, MICHIGAN Notes to Basic Financial Statements December 31, 2014
Notes to Basic Financial Statements Note 8 Employees Retirement System Plan Description and Provision The County sponsors the Macomb County Employees Retirement System (the System ), a single employer
More informationTHE STATE OF VIRGINIA
SUMMARY February 2013 THE STATE OF VIRGINIA The plans: Virginia has two large state-administered pension systems, four smaller state-administered plans for various state and municipal workers and many
More informationSUMMARY February 2013 The plans: The impact of the crisis: The impact of pension plan reforms: Total state costs:
SUMMARY February 2013 THE STATE OF GEORGIA The plans: Georgia has three large state-administered pension systems, six smaller state-administered systems, and many locally-administered systems. The state
More informationHuman Resources and Benefits Update. HR/B Updates
Human Resources and Benefits Update Randolph R. Scott, SPHR Executive Director Policy & Program Design Human Resources & Benefits HR/B Updates Total Remuneration (Compensation) Compensation 2007 Health
More informationsummary plan descriptions
summary plan descriptions University of California Retirement Plan (for safety members) Defined Contribution Plan Tax-Deferred 403(b) Plan 457(b) Deferred Compensation Plan april 2007 Addresses, Information
More informationPENSION COMMUNICATION RESOURCES
PENSION COMMUNICATION RESOURCES Contents Two Sets of Pension Measures Separating Accounting and Funding for Pensions Has the ARC Disappeared? Two Sets of Numbers Financial Statement Impact of New Standards
More informationCOMPLIANCE AUDIT. Donora Borough Police Pension Plan Washington County, Pennsylvania For the Period January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2013
COMPLIANCE AUDIT Donora Borough Police Pension Plan Washington County, Pennsylvania For the Period January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2013 August 2014 The Honorable Mayor and Borough Council Donora Borough
More informationTHE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
SUMMARY February 2013 THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT The plans: Connecticut has two large state-administered pension systems, four smaller state-administered systems, and many locally-administered systems. The
More informationCity of Newton Retiree Benefits A Primer
City of Newton Retiree Benefits A Primer Ruthanne Fuller with Gail Deegan Dan Fahey Ellen Grody Tony Logalbo Rob Mashal Howard Merkowitz Mal Salter Becky Searles Terry Yoffie April 22, 2014 Updated October
More informationThe Universities Academic Pension Plan
The Universities Academic Pension Plan Proposed Plan Changes For pensions earned after December 31, 2014 www.proposedchangesuapp.ca UAPP Proposed Changes for Service after 2014 Table of Contents Introduction
More information1.1.0 Description of Your Cost Accounting System
1.1.0 Description of Your Cost Accounting System The University of California s cost accounting system incorporates data accumulated and recorded in the financial accounting system. The financial statements
More informationRetirement Plan Participants and/or Beneficiaries. Harvard Human Resources, Benefits. Annual Funding Notice Harvard University Retirement Plan
Richard A. and Susan F. Smith Campus Center 1350 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Retirement Plan Participants and/or Beneficiaries Harvard Human Resources, Benefits Annual Funding
More informationThe Regents of the University of California. COMMITTEE ON FINANCE May 17, 2000
The Regents of the University of California COMMITTEE ON FINANCE May 17, 2000 The Committee on Finance met on the above date at Covel Commons, Los Angeles campus. Members present: In attendance: Regents
More informationHigher Education includes the California Community Colleges (CCC), the California
Higher Education Higher Education includes the California Community Colleges (CCC), the California State University (CSU), the University of California (UC), the Student Aid Commission, and several other
More informationOAKLAND COUNTY RETIREES HEALTH CARE TRUST S E P T E M B E R 3 0, 2 0 1 3
OAKLAND COUNTY RETIREES HEALTH CARE TRUST T W E N T Y - N I N T H A N N U A L A C T U A R I A L V A L U A T I O N R E P O R T S E P T E M B E R 3 0, 2 0 1 3 CONTENTS Section Page Introduction A 1-3 Executive
More informationANNUAL FUNDING NOTICE For THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PENSION PLAN FOR STAFF EMPLOYEES. Introduction
ANNUAL FUNDING NOTICE For THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PENSION PLAN FOR STAFF EMPLOYEES Introduction This notice includes important information about the funding status of your single employer pension plan
More informationCITY OF AVENTURA POLICE OFFICERS RETIREMENT PLAN FINANCIAL STATEMENTS SEPTEMBER 30, 2014, AND 2013
CITY OF AVENTURA POLICE OFFICERS RETIREMENT PLAN FINANCIAL STATEMENTS SEPTEMBER 30, 2014, AND 2013 CITY OF AVENTURA POLICE OFFICERS RETIREMENT PLAN FINANCIAL STATEMENTS SEPTEMBER 30, 2014, AND 2013 TABLE
More informationKansas Legislator Briefing Book 2015
K a n s a s L e g i s l a t i v e R e s e a r c h D e p a r t m e n t Q-1 Kansas Public Employees Retirement System Retirement Plans and History Retirement Kansas Legislator Briefing Book 2015 Q-1 Kansas
More informationArizona s Pension Challenges: The Need for an Affordable, Secure, and Sustainable Retirement Plan
NOVEMBER 2012 ARIZONA Arizona s Pension Challenges: The Need for an Affordable, Secure, and Sustainable Retirement Plan The funding level of Arizona s public employee retirement systems has declined every
More informationFUNDING NEW JERSEY PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT SYSTEMS
FUNDING NEW JERSEY PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT SYSTEMS N ew Jersey has six major Stateadministered retirement systems. Along with the required contributions of the public employees, these systems are funded
More informationThe Regents of the University of California. COMMITTEE ON FINANCE November 19, 2015
The Regents of the University of California COMMITTEE ON FINANCE November 19, 2015 The Committee on Finance met on the above date at UCSF Mission Bay Conference Center, San Francisco. Members present:
More informationThe Regents of the University of California. COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY LABORATORIES September 16, 2015
The Regents of the University of California COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY LABORATORIES September 16, 2015 The Committee on Oversight of the Department of Energy Laboratories met on
More informationUnderstanding Montana's Public Employee Retirement Plans
Understanding Montana's Public Employee Retirement Plans By Rachel Weiss, Legislative Services Division Jon Moe, Legislative Fiscal Division November 2010 Purpose This report is an introduction to Montana's
More informationSUPPLEMENT TO ANNUAL FUNDING NOTICE OF MAYO PENSION PLAN FOR PLAN YEAR BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2015 AND ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2015 ( Plan Year )
SUPPLEMENT TO ANNUAL FUNDING NOTICE OF MAYO PENSION PLAN FOR PLAN YEAR BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2015 AND ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2015 ( Plan Year ) This is a temporary supplement to your annual funding notice.
More informationEach year, millions of Californians pursue degrees and certificates or enroll in courses
Higher Education Each year, millions of Californians pursue degrees and certificates or enroll in courses to improve their knowledge and skills at the state s higher education institutions. More are connected
More informationTASK FORCE ON SUSTAINABLE FUNDING OF BALTIMORE CITY S FIRE AND POLICE PENSION SYSTEM
TASK FORCE ON SUSTAINABLE FUNDING OF BALTIMORE CITY S FIRE AND POLICE PENSION SYSTEM By THE GREATER BALTIMORE COMMITTEE The City of Baltimore is facing a serious fiscal challenge. Current contributions
More informationActuarial Speak 101 Terms and Definitions
Actuarial Speak 101 Terms and Definitions Introduction and Caveat: It is intended that all definitions and explanations are accurate. However, for purposes of understanding and clarity of key points, the
More informationADMINISTRATION & BENEFITS
OVERVIEW OF THE KENTUCKY RETIREMENT SYSTEMS ADMINISTRATION & BENEFITS Background Most Kentucky public employees are provided retirement coverage through one of six state administered retirement systems.
More informationPension Sustainability Consensus Proposal Presentation to Task Force
Pension Sustainability Consensus Proposal Presentation to Task Force January 18, 2013 Public Financial Management, Inc. Two Logan Square 18 th & Arch Streets, Suite 1600 Philadelphia, PA 19103-2770 (215)
More informationGASB 45 for School Attorneys
GASB 45 for School Attorneys Reprinted with permission from Inquiry & Analysis, June, 2006. Copyright 2006 National School Boards Association. All rights reserved. By Martin Tokunaga, CPA, MBA, Program
More informationConnecticut State Employee Collective Bargaining and Retirement Benefits
Background Connecticut State Employee Collective Bargaining and Retirement Benefits State employees through their bargaining units have had the authority under state law to collectively bargain on wages,
More informationSUMMARY February 2013 The plans: The impact of the crisis: The impact of pension plan reforms: Total state costs:
SUMMARY February 2013 THE STATE OF OHIO The plans: Ohio has four large state-administered pension systems, two smaller state-administered systems, and some locally-administered systems. The state also
More informationAppendix A - Charter of the Academic and Student Affairs Committee
ATTACHMENT 2 Appendix A - Charter of the Academic and Student Affairs Committee A. Purpose. The Academic and Student Affairs Committee shall be well informed about, provide strategic direction and oversight,
More informationThe Contributory Pension Plan of the Ontario Northland Transportation Commission. Ontario Registration Number 0355164
The Contributory Pension Plan of the Ontario Northland Transportation Commission Ontario Registration Number 0355164 Public Sector Pension Plan Solvency Relief Application The Contributory Pension Plan
More informationThe Cost of Doing Nothing: Maine s Pension Payments are Crowding-Out Other Spending. By J. Scott Moody
Path to Prosperity Published by The Maine Heritage Policy Center The Cost of Doing Nothing: Maine s Pension s are Crowding-Out Other Spending By J. Scott Moody February 3, 2011 Maine s annual public pension
More informationThe Impact of Pension Reform Proposals on Claims Against the Pension Insurance Program, Losses to Participants, and Contributions
The Impact of Pension Reform Proposals on Claims Against the Pension Insurance Program, Losses to Participants, and Contributions Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation October 26, 2005 Contents Introduction
More informationANNUAL FUNDING NOTICE For The Johns Hopkins University Support Staff Pension Plan. Introduction
Human Resources Benefits Service Center Johns Hopkins at Eastern 1101 E. 33 rd Street, Suite D100 Baltimore, MD 21218-2696 410-516-2000 / Fax 443-997-5820 ANNUAL FUNDING NOTICE For The Johns Hopkins University
More information96.30% 82.88% 93.20% 81.98% 97.73% 85.79% $252,254 $1,357,845 $490,361 $1,477,463 $167,281 $1,193,625 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 INFORMATION TABLE
SUPPLEMENT TO ANNUAL FUNDING NOTICE OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY RETIREMENT PLAN FOR SUPPORTING STAFF ( PLAN ) FOR PLAN YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 2014 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2015 This is a temporary supplement to
More informationPUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF THE STATE OF NEVADA ANALYSIS AND COMPARISON OF DEFINED BENEFIT AND DEFINED CONTRIBUTION RETIREMENT PLANS
Benefits, Compensation and HR Consulting PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF THE STATE OF NEVADA ANALYSIS AND COMPARISON OF DEFINED BENEFIT AND DEFINED CONTRIBUTION RETIREMENT PLANS Copyright 2010 THE
More informationEach year, millions of Californians pursue degrees and certificates or enroll in courses
Higher Education Each year, millions of Californians pursue degrees and certificates or enroll in courses to improve their knowledge and skills at the state s higher education institutions. More are connected
More informationBenefits Handbook Date September 1, 2015. Marsh & McLennan Companies Retirement Plan
Date September 1, 2015 Marsh & McLennan Companies Retirement Plan Marsh & McLennan Companies Marsh & McLennan Companies Retirement Plan The (also referred to as the Plan ) is the central part of the Company
More informationACTION ITEM EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
F7 Office of the President TO MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ON FINANCE: 1 For Meeting of ACTION ITEM PARTICIPATION IN A SEPARATE 501(C)(3) ENTITY, TRANSFER OF THE CENTER FOR EXECUTIVE EDUCATION AT THE HAAS
More informationWest Virginia Department of Public Safety Death, Disability and Retirement Fund (Plan A)
West Virginia Department of Public Safety Death, Disability and Retirement Fund (Plan A) Actuarial Valuation As of July 1, 2013 Prepared by: for the West Virginia Consolidated Public Retirement Board January
More informationRegional Transportation Authority Pension Plan (A Pension Trust Fund of the Regional Transportation Authority)
(A Pension Trust Fund of the Regional Transportation Authority) Financial Report Year Ended December 31, 2014 Table of Contents Page Independent Auditor s Report 1-2 Management s Discussion and Analysis
More informationGASB s New Pension Standards
Table of Contents BACKGROUND & OVERVIEW... 3 ACCOUNTING OVERVIEW... 3 SCOPE... 4 KEY PROVISIONS... 4 OVERVIEW... 4 TYPES OF BENEFIT PLANS & BENEFIT PLAN ARRANGEMENTS... 5 ACCOUNTING CHANGES... 6 CHANGES
More informationGlossary for Use with the Comprehensive Benefit Funding Plan
Caring For Those Who Serve 1901 Chestnut Avenue Glenview, Illinois 60025-1604 1-800-851-2201 www.gbophb.org Glossary for Use with the Comprehensive Benefit Funding Plan Accumulated Post-Retirement Benefit
More informationCONTENTS. University of California Regents Policy 7706 Reemployment of UC Retired Employees Into Senior Management Group and Staff Positions
Reemployment of UC Retired Employees Into Senior Management Group and Staff Positions Approved September 18, 2008 Amended February 9, 2009 and September 18, 2013 Responsible Officer: Vice President Human
More informationUnderstanding the Basics of Actuarial Methods
Pension Review Board Understanding the Basics of Actuarial Methods April 2013 Research Paper No. 13-001 Pension Review Board Paul A. Braden, Chair J. Robert Massengale, Vice Chair Andrew W. Cable Leslie
More informationJUNE 30, 2013 POST RETIREMENT BENEFITS ANALYSIS OF THE TOWN OF SMITHFIELD
JUNE 30, 2013 POST RETIREMENT BENEFITS ANALYSIS OF THE TOWN OF SMITHFIELD September 2013 2013 Smithfield OPEB report - Sept TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Item Page SECTION I OVERVIEW... 1 SECTION II REQUIRED
More informationHigher Education in California: Institutional Costs
Higher Education in California: Institutional Costs Hans Johnson, Kevin Cook, Patrick Murphy, and Margaret Weston NOVEMBER 2014 SUMMARY Over the past 20 years, in-state tuition at both the University of
More informationEUROPEAN UNION ACCOUNTING RULE 12 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS
EUROPEAN UNION ACCOUNTING RULE 12 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS Page 2 of 18 I N D E X 1. Introduction... 3 2. Objective... 3 3. Scope... 4 4. Definitions... 5 5. Short-term employee benefits... 7 5.1 Recognition
More informationDecember 13, 2006. Retiree Medical Discussion for Faculty & Administration
December 13, 2006 Vassar College Retiree Medical Discussion for Faculty & Administration Retiree Medical Discussion Agenda The Situation Today Profile of Current Costs What If We Do Nothing What Can We
More informationPensions & Post-Retirement Benefits
FIN 551: Fundamental Analysis 1 Pensions & Post-Retirement Benefits The Issues Separate set of pension books Defined contribution vs. defined benefit plans» Problem exists with defined benefit plans Annual
More informationOther Postemployment Benefits: A Plain-Language Summary of GASB Statements No. 43 and No. 45
Governmental Accounting Standards Board Other Postemployment Benefits: A Plain-Language Summary of GASB Statements No. 43 and No. 45 Please note: This document, prepared by the GASB staff, has not been
More informationTermination of Employment Benefits. Fact Sheet: Termination of Employment Benefits
Termination of Employment Benefits Fact Sheet: Termination of Employment Benefits KEY DEADLINES AS SOON AS YOU KNOW YOU WANT TO RETIRE (IF YOU ARE ELIGIBLE AND WANT TO CONTINUE MEDICAL, DENTAL, VISION
More informationA Guide to the Pension Options
A Guide to the Pension Options James A. Chalfant and Helen L. Henry 1 Explanatory note: the purpose of this document is to go beyond the requests for tables showing simple, hypothetical results for new
More informationCAL STATE L.A. UNIVERSITY AUXILIARY SERVICES, INC. (a Component Unit of California State University, Los Angeles)
CAL STATE L.A. UNIVERSITY AUXILIARY SERVICES, INC. (a Component Unit of California State University, Los Angeles) Independent Auditor's Report, Financial Statements and Supplementary Schedules For the
More informationCounty of Santa Barbara Office of the Auditor-Controller County Retirement Costs: White Paper by Robert W. Geis, CPA (Through June, 30, 2006)
County of Santa Barbara Office of the Auditor-Controller County Retirement Costs: White Paper by Robert W. Geis, CPA (Through June, 30, 2006) The County Retirement plan and underlying systems can be difficult
More informationAdjusting. Public Pension Benefits in Colorado A Fiduciary Process
Adjusting Public Pension Benefits in Colorado A Fiduciary Process By Gregory W. Smith From late 2007 into 2009, the United States and countries around the world experienced the worst financial collapse
More informationThe Texas Municipal Retirement System
The Texas Municipal Retirement System (TMRS) Understanding Benefits, Funding, and Economic Impact TMRS provides valuable benefits that help cities attract and retain quality employees. It is important
More informationFundamentals of Current Pension Funding and Accounting For Private Sector Pension Plans
Fundamentals of Current Pension Funding and Accounting For Private Sector Pension Plans An Analysis by the Pension Committee of the American Academy of Actuaries July 2004 The American Academy of Actuaries
More informationAMENDED REHABILITATION PLAN OF THE GRAPHIC COMMUNICATIONS CONFERENCE OF THE INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS NATIONAL PENSION FUND
GCC/IBT-NPF AMENDED REHABILITATION PLAN OF THE GRAPHIC COMMUNICATIONS CONFERENCE OF THE INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS NATIONAL PENSION FUND I. INTRODUCTION On August 17, 2006, the Pension Protection
More informationRetirement Benefits Decision Guide
Retirement Benefits Decision Guide For rehired, newly eligible and former CalPERS-covered employees RETIREMENT Chapter Title BENEFITS DECISION GUIDE REHIRED, NEWLY ELIGIBLE AND FORMER CALPERS-COVERED EMPLOYEES
More informationSurvey of Public Employee Retirement Systems in Missouri
Thomas A. Schweich Missouri State Auditor STATEWIDE Survey of Public Employee Retirement Systems in Missouri September 2014 http://auditor.mo.gov Report No. 2014-092 Thomas A. Schweich Missouri State Auditor
More informationUnderstanding Indiana s Largest Pension System
INDIANA PUBLIC RETIREMENT SYSTEM Understanding Indiana s Largest Pension System March 27, 2015 Funds Overview The Indiana Public Retirement System (INPRS) includes the two largest public retirement plans
More informationINSIGHT. Comparing Public Pension Accounting and Funding Measures. In This Issue. October 2013. Funding Measures. By Paul Zorn 1
October 2013 Visit the GRS website at: www.gabrielroeder.com In This Issue The GASB s changes to pension accounting standards for state and local governments disconnect the accounting measures from the
More informationHow many members are there? As of June 30, 2010. Active Members: Vested: 66,078 Non-Vested: 28,332 Total Active Members: 94,410
For More information, contact: Chief Executive Office Office of Public Affairs (213) 974-1363 pio@ceo.lacounty.gov Los Angeles County is already a model example of pension reform Key points Pension reform
More informationLocal Elected Official Toolkit
Local Elected Official Toolkit Pension Funding and Retiree Health Benefits Funding March 2011 LOCAL ELECTED OFFICIAL TOOLKIT PENSION FUNDING & RETIREE HEALTH BENEFITS FUNDING a MARCH 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS
More informationSouth Dakota Retirement System. Actuarial Valuation As of June 30, 2014
South Dakota Retirement System Actuarial Valuation As of June 30, 2014 2014 Xerox Corporation and Buck Consultants, LLC. All rights reserved. Xerox and Xerox and Design are trademarks of Xerox Corporation
More information