Curtis Lee: The City Can and Should Take Control of Jacksonville Police and Fire Pension Fund (PFPF)

[Patricia M. McBride]

 Curtis Lee is a retired attorney, and a member of Concerned Taxpayers of Duval County, who has been involved in working with pension funds for literally years and our city pension for many years as well.   He has written articles and researched and documented the following which was sent to our city council for action.  Thus far, no action has been taken even though changes in the management of PFPF are not only called for but would be in the best interests of the residents of Duval County.  I have made a small alteration and removed his personal address and phone number but would be happy to have him contact you should you wish to speak with him.

 

By hand delivery 12/8/11                                                                   

 

Dec. 7, 2011, evening

City Council members

117 West Duval St. Jacksonville FL 32202

 

Dear Council Members:

Re: (1) all 3 City pension plans performed poorly in fiscal 2011 and over last 5 fiscal years; (2) The city can and should take control of Jacksonville Police & Fire Pension Fund (PFPF)

 

I. Poor  performance of City pension plans

 

I have obtained performance evaluation reports prepared by Summit Strategies, which is the consultant for all 3 City defined benefit pension plans.  These reports provide data concerning the fiscal2011 and longer-term performance records of the 3 City-sponsored pension plans: the General Employees' Pension Plan (GEPP), the Corrections Officers' Pension Plan (COPP), and the Police & Fire Pension Fund (PFPF).  The Summit reports show that the 3 plans still lag most relevant investment indices, net, thanks in large part to excessive operating (investment and

other) costs.   Also, all plans continue to far underperform their actuarial assumed rates of return.

 

Here are some highlights.

 

(1) The GEPP and COPP, which are managed jointly, earned 1.20% gross of fees and costs in fiscal2011, which equates to about 0.70% net of fees and costs.   Over the last 5 fiscal years, they earned 1.91%/year gross of fees and costs, which equates to about 1.40%/year net.   Indexing all of their assets would have yielded higher net returns, especially in fiscal 2011.

 

(2) The PFPF earned 0.54% gross of fees and costs in fiscal2011, which equates to a loss of about 0.25% net of fees and costs.   (The PFPF has significantly higher fees and costs as a percentage of its assets.)    Over the last 5 fiscal years, the PFPF earned 1.87%/year gross of fees and costs, which equates to about 1.10%/year net.          Indexing all of the PFPF's assets would have yielded higher net returns, especially in fiscal 2011.

 

I have often advocated to the plans' trustees and others that the 3 plans should index most core equity and bond assets, which has been commonplace in corporate America for decades,

with these objectives: reduce costs and certain risks, and boost returns.  I estimated that the COPP

and GEPP jointly could readily save about $3 million/year, and that the PFPF could also readily save about $3 million/year.  Yet my urgings have been mostly ignored, because the trustees are stubborn (not interested?), or don't care about high costs even if they resuh in lower returns and some increased risks - maybe they figure that the City will pay all costs forever, and so, why not try for home runs, which are very hard for even large investors to obtain. (We should know by now, in the context of banks etc, that blank checks, and "heads I win tails you lose" structures, lead to excessive risk-taking.) I have written about indexing before; contact me for details.

 

What is the solution?   The City Council and Administration should urge the trustees of all plans to save about $6 million per year by means of the substantial use of indexing.  The City has hammers such as budget cuts.   There is no reason that taxpayers should suffer more waste.

 

Further, the PFPF budget especially deserves cutting for other reasons: (A) Excessive compensation paid to PFPF officials, complicated by PFPF boobytraps such as 6 figure leave and vacation accruals for Mr. Keane and Cohee, and multiyear employment agreements that could cost 7 figures.  These improprieties have been concealed and/or described falsely.  (B) Other waste (e.g., high and foolish legal costs, associated with a judicial ruling that the PFPF twice violated the law).  (C) The PFPF's recent false budgetary submission.  On 6/30111, the PFPF sought a 12% increase in its annual operating budget (to $9.1 million) because increased PFPF assets supposedly inexorably led to higher investment management fees, which was a false premise - the PFPF had a net negative return in fiscal 2011. Did the PFPF so inform you, and ask that its requested budget increase therefore be undone?   (D) The misconduct ofPFPF officials in other respects.             E.g., Peter D. Steiman, still a PFPF trustee (I checked www. coj. net this morning), has engaged in substantial illegal conduct over the years, and some of his violations of the law will, in fact, be addressed soon- e.g., at the State Ethics Commission (I

have been informed, in writing, that the Commission will make a determination respecting probable cause respecting certain of Mr. Sleiman's violations of the law, at its meeting scheduled for 2/3/12). It should be obvious to you by now that the PFPF is a scandal-ridden entity, and yet, still, has not been auditedmuch less forensically audited, by the City, in over 10 years.

(Note- this audit deficiency might change soon- I await a response from  Kevin Hyde re the possibility

that this office will conduct a forensic audit of the PFPF, and as he reads this letter, I hope that he realizes that he owes me a response to my 11114/11/etter on this issue.)

 

Plus, these facts further support the notion that City pension policy must be wholly reformed.   Nothing should be off the table.   Further suggestions come to mind-(1) transition from a defmed benefit to a defmed contribution approach, and (2) take control of the PFPF, which FL law now permits the City to do, once necessary local law changes are made. See II below.

 

[Note- everything I report above re:  poor returns, has been slightly ameliorated by  strong stock market returns after 9/30/11.    E.g., the Standard & Poor's 500 stock market index returned 10.9%  in Oct.

2011, negative 0.2% in Nov. 2011, and about 1%  so far in Dec.    My belief, based upon as yet incomplete data, is that the 3 pension plans have had positive but notably  lesser returns since 9/30/1; they continue to hobble those returns with their high costs.   Still, this recent spate of better news cannot make up for 5

years of very bad news.  Besides, market history tells us that the good news may be ephemeral.]

 

ll. The City can and should take control of the PFPF.

 

Current local law (section 22.02(a) of the City Charter) provides that the PFPF be structured as follows -1 trustee chosen by policemen (currently, Bobby Deal), 1 trustee chosen by firemen (currently, Richard Tuten ill), 2 trustees chosen by the municipality (in our case, City Council)-these are Barbara Jaffe and Peter Steiman, and 1 trustee chosen by the ftrst 4-Nat Glover.   This fifth, theoretically tie- breaking, trustee is chosen by the first 4 PFPF trustees, and his or her name is then submitted to the City Council, which formally appoints such trustee as a ministerial act.                     All of these 5 trustees have served as such for at least 5 years, with Mrs. Jaffe and Mr. Steiman each serving for more than 2 decades.             Further, John Keane has administered the PFPF for more than 2 decades.   The PFPF clearly lacks new blood.

 

In early 2011, certain relevant legislation was approved by the FL Legislature, and signed into law by the Governor on 6/23/11, effective 7/1/11.   The legislation started as Senate Bill (SB)

2011 - 1128, and was amended, and ultimately adopted by both houses of the FL Legislature, as Ch. 2011-216.  FL law respecting many public pension issues (including the structure of police and fire pension plans) was thus modified.       See Exhibit 1 for FL law as it now exists, regarding, inter alia, the structure of the boards of trustees of police and fire pension plans.   Markings are mine.   (Because of the large number of changes made to FL public pension law, I will not show how other parts of such FL law were modified, nor will I provide copies of ch. 2011 - 216 and its legislative history -there are over 100 pages of documents in toto relating to these matters.  Also, such documents are available online.)

 

The broad theme behind the 2011 amendments (ch. 2011- 216) was simple- principally, to provide several vehicles for reducing future increases in public pension costs.   I have reviewed everything I can find of relevance, and believe that this new law can be very helpful to the City.

 

Thanks to the 2011 amendments, the City can now amend local law (City Charter

22.02(a); if there is anything else that needs amending- I defer to OGC) to provide that the City Council appoints 3 of the 5 PFPF trustees, rather than 2.   I.e., the City can now appoint the "5th trustee" (the slot now filled by Mr. Glover), rather than simply appoint (as a ministerial act) the 5th trustee who was chosen by the other 4 PFPF trustees (Mr. Deal, Mr. Tuten, Mr. Sleiman, and Ms. Jaffe.)    Exhibit 1 as marked shows the 2 parts ofFL law that were added to this effect.

 

The massive documentation associated with the 2011 amendments further confmns my assertion.                                                                                                     (See "More Detailed Commentary... " beginning on page 4 for details.)   Further, I have OGC verbal confmnation in support of my conclusion.   One might rightly say that that is not a legal opinion, and that I am a retired attorney, not an active FL attorney.   Further, you all know that I am an advoc  te for certain positions, and thus, confrrmation of my assertions is appropriate.   However, do not forget that this matter is of major importance- (1) millions of$ per year are wasted, (2) The PFPF has about $1 billion in assets, (3) PFPF performance has not been good, and (4) the PFPF is scandal-ridden, insular and dodgy in many ways.                  The issues I discuss in this letter are very important, and therefore I ask at least one City Council Member to:

 •    Request a legal opinion from OGC

•              Sponsor legislation to modify local law and thereby  permit the City to appoint 3 of the 5 members of the PFPF.  Ask OGC to draft it.   (Ifl drafted it, someone would still demand that OGC redraft all of it.)

•    Then, after all necessary legal changes have been made, remove Mr. Glover, Mr.Sleiman and Ms.Jaffe as PFPF trustees, as the City would then have the right to do, and appoint 3 new trustees who would take control ofthe PFPF, replace John Keane, and then finally reform that scandal-plagued entity. (These 3 trustees might well be happy to be replaced.  E.g., Mr. Sleiman is holding over pending appointment of a successor, and Mr. Glover has many other duties.)

 

The objectives should be to (1) save$ millions per year in PFPF costs, which will be a savings to taxpayers, (2) fire Mr. Keane for his poor performance, self-aggrandizement, deception, and, in general, misconduct and bias.  (Further, if Mr. Keane is fired for cause, as is richly deserved, the City can escape the 7 figure golden parachutes that Mr. Keane and the PFPF trustees have wrongly put in place, despite the PFPF's abysmal financial status); and (3) operate the PFPF so that it no longer is a tool of Fraternal Order of Police and Jacksonville Association of  Firefighters' interests.  These objectives cannot be achieved without changing local law as  above.

 

One might wonder -could not the PFPF reform itself?           The answer is obvious - it hasn't for decades, or in recent years, despite years of advocacy and pressure on my part, despite years of poor performance, despite years of waste and violations of the law (see Judge Daniel's opinion dated 6/24/11), and despite years of no change in key personnel.   (One would think that judicial rebuke might have had an effect on the trustees - but no -they just waste more taxpayer money on appealing.) Ms. Jaffe, Mr. Sleiman, Mr. Glover, Mr. Keane, Mr. Cohee and the police and firefighter trustees have run the PFPF for many years, and have presided over all these bad results.   They own the mess they have made.        Plus, I have attended PFPF meetings these last 2 years- a115 trustees have acted unanimously and as a solid bloc in favor of the status quo­ which includes FOP and IAFF control of(or substantial influence over) the PFPF, enormous waste and poor performance.  Thus, there is no hope for internal reform at the PFPF, and you must act aggressively to force reform.

 

Not only is what I suggest right and necessary in these tough economic times, but it is fair- the City has been and will be contributing 80% or more of the costs of the PFPF.    The City should have- it deserves - commensurate control of the PFPF.

 

Is there anyone in the business world foolish enough to pay for 80% of the costs of something, and not have control over it?   He who pays the piper should call the tune.

 

I have already informed certain OGC and other City officials of the implications of the 2011 legislation discussed herein, and again note that I have received oral confirmation from OGC that what I advocate can succeed, if all necessary steps are taken.   Beyond that, I do not know if OGC is really interested- Ms. Laquidara to date has not responded to my many past money-saving suggestions.   I believe that City Council and the Mayor must pressure OGC on this matter, even though one would think that financial issues should dictate its high priority.  It will take months to get this done, but the millions that can be saved, etc., make it worth the while.

 

Now that all members of City Council, the Mayor, key personnel of the Mayor's office and OGC have hereby been formally informed that they can reform and take control of the PFPF, I believe that it is incumbent on all City officials to act, for reasons set forth herein.

 

Thank you, and please contact me soon with any questions.

  

Enc: Exhibit 1 ·excerpts from relevant FL statutes, marked for relevant 2011 changes

Cc: Mayor Brown, K. Sherman, C. Hand, R. Belton, K. Hyde, C. Laquidara, D. Chatmon, J. Horkan

Sincerely,

{ h'5 [J '-

 

More Detailed Commentary re: attached excerpts from current FL law, legislative intent, statutory construction, other legal issues re ch. 2011 - 216

 

The enclosed excerpts from current FL statutes are marked where relevant - see Exh. 1 - but let me explain how I came to the conclusions I have come to, after reading the enclosures, and after reading other documents too bulky and numerous to append hereto.

 

(1)  Take a look at Exh. 1, and the bracketed parts of the 2nd and 5th pages.   Florida Statutes

("FS")  175.061(b) and 185.05 (b) apply because the PFPF, which was established in

1937, is a "local law plan".  I know this for many reasons:

 

•    The FL Division of Retirement has so described it.

•    The legislative history behind ch. 2011 -216 and SB 2011-1128 several times states that there are only 6 "chapter plans" in FL, and that all of those are "school board early retirement programs".       In contrast, as of9/30/10, legislative history notes that there were 483 local government, or local law, defmed benefit pension plans sponsored by FL municipalities.

•    Counsel for the City concurs that the PFPF as a "local law plan".   See the 17 page opinion of counsel provided by Lewis, Longman & Walker P.A. to Rick Mullaney on 7/8/09, and in particular, see pg. 3.

 

(2)  One might complain that the new law could have been more clearly written.   Yet, because 2011 -216 adds new and specific language designed to achieve particular objectives (see (3) below), it "controls" over older language, and ambiguities must be resolved in favor of giving precedence to the words and intents of the new law.

 

(3)  Legislative history behind 2011 - 216 clearly shows the legislative intent to permit a municipality to change how it appoints the 3 municipality trustees of police and fire pension fund boards of trustees, as long as the firemen and the police get to choose 1 trustee each-i.e., as long as their membership percentages (20% each) are not reduced.

 

Consequently, I am highly confident that I what I suggest can be done, and that the City Council can ultimately appoint 3 of the 5 trustees of the PFPF, as long as the necessary changes to local law are first enacted.   I welcome the OGC's  independent analysis of my research and conclusions, and am happy to assist OGC if it contacts me.

 

If anyone wants me to walk him or her through my analysis, and if anyone wants guidance in fmding and obtaining helpful documents in connection therewith, please contact me.

 

Note of caution-I have noted the need to amend relevant local law- section 22.02 (a) of the City Charter.    Section 3.01 (e) (2) of the City Charter requires that charter amendments re: matters "relating to appointive boards" shall be subject to voter referendum.         However, the PFPF is not and will not ever be a totally appointive board (in terms of appointive by the City- it is instead a hybrid board, appointed in part by the City, and in part by certain employees of the City and JSO).   www.municode.com,  which publishes the City Charter online, indicates that the legal sources of section 3.01 of the City Charter are several FL laws enacted between 1978 and 1992. Now look at the relevant underlined parts ofExh. 1- which permit municipalities to change their appointive rules "by ordinance".   Clearly, the new statutory language is permissive in its terms, and in its intent, and I cannot fmd any 2011 discussion re: voter referendum, leading to the question- do the 2011 changes to FL law "trump" or "slide by" the somewhat unclear language

of Charter section 3.01 (e) (2)?   Given that I have not had years of experience in dealing with FL

legal issues concerning the City Charter, and referendums, I believe that OGC must address and resolve these questions.

 

Now-even if a referendum is required, I suggest that this would be well worth the candle.   The many violations of the law by the PFPF and its trustees, the huge financial costs that the PFPF has imposed upon City taxpayers, and all the other scandals associated with the PFPF, should suffice to convince voters to reform the PFPF as I have indicated.   Further, if a forensic audit occurs soon, and yields further proof ofPFPF misconduct, this will increase the odds that voters will approve pension reform.   Plus, the costs of submitting this matter to voter approval pale in comparison to the waste and abuse at the PFPF, and thereby the potential savings.

 

Curtis Lee,          12/7/11,    

Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes: Online Sunshine                                                                                                                                              Page 1 of3

 

 

 

 

 

 

Select Year:                          2011                     

 

 

 

The 2011 Florida Statutes

 

 

Title  XII

MUNICIPALITIES

Chapter 175

FIREFIGHTER PENSIONS

View Entire Chapter

175.061      Board of trustees; members; terms  of office; meetings; legal entity;costs; attorney's fees.-For any municipality, special fire  control district, chapter plan, tocallaw municipality, local law special fire control district, or local law plan under this chapter:

(1)    ln·each municipality and in each special fire  control district there is hereby created a board of trustees of the firefighters' pension trust  fund, which shall be solely responsible for administering the trust fund. Effective October 1, 1986, and thereafter:

(a)    The membership of the board of trustees for a chapter plan consists of five members, two of whom, unless otherwise prohibited by law, must be legal residents of the municipality or special fire control district and must be appointed  by the governing body of the municipality or special fire control district, and two of whom must be full-time firefighters as defined ins. 175.032 who are elected by a majority of the active firefighters who are members of such plan. With respect  to any chapter plan or local law plan that, on January 1, 1997, allowed retired firefighters to vote in such elections, retirees may continue  to vote in such elections.  The fifth member shall be chosen by a majority of the previous four members as provided  herein,  and such person's name shall be submitted to the governing body of the municipality or special fire  control district. Upon receipt  of the fifth person's name, the governing body of the municipality or special fire control district shall, as a ministerial duty, appoint such person to the board of trustees. The fifth member shall have the same rights as each of the other four members, shall serve as trustee  for a period of 2 years, and may succeed himself  or herself in office. Each resident  member shall serve as trustee  for a period of 2 years, unless sooner replaced by the governing body at whose pleasure he or she serves, and may succeed himself  or herself as a trustee.

Each firefighter member shall serve as trustee  for a period of 2 years, unless he or she sooner leaves the employment  of the municipality or special fire control district as a firefighter, whereupon a successor shall be chosen in the same manner as an original appointment. Each firefighter may succeed himself  or herself in office. The terms of office  of the appointed and elected members may be amended by municipal ordinance, special act of the Legislature, or resolution  adopted by the governing body of the special fire control district to extend  the terms from 2 years to 4 years. The length of the terms of

office  shall be the same for all board members.

(b)      The membership of boards of trustees for local law plans shall be as follows:

·---

1.      If a municipality or special fire control district has a pension plan for firefighters only, the

provisions of paragraph (a) apply.

2.     If a municipality has a pension plan for firefighters and police officers, the provisions of

paragraph (a) apply, except that  one member of the board must be a firefighter and one member of the board must be a police officer as defined ins. 185.02, respectively  elected  by a majority of the active firefighters or police officers  who are members of the plan.

 

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Stat... 11125/2011

 

 

 

3.    A board of trustees operating a local law plan on July 1, 1999, which is combined with a plan for general employees shall hold an election of the firefighters, or firefighters  and police officers, if included, to determine whether a plan is to be established for firefighters  only, or for firefighters and police officers where included. Based on the election results, a new board shall be established as provided in subparagraph 1. or subparagraph 2., as appropriate. The municipality or fire control district shall enact an ordinance or resolution to implement the new board by October 1, 1999. The newly

established board shall take whatever action is necessary to determine the amount of assets attributable

to firefighters, or firefighters and police officers where included. Such assets include all employer, employee, and state contributions made by or on behalf of firefighters, or firefighters and police officers where included, and any investment income derived from such contributions. All such moneys shall be transferred into the newly established retirement plan, as directed by the board.

 

With respect to a board of trustees operating a local law plan qn June 30, 1986, this paragraph does not permit the reduction of the membership percentage of firefighters, or of firefighters  and police officers where a joint or mixed fund exists. t: Ewever, for the sole purpose of changing municipal represen n, a municipality may by ordinance change the municipal representation on the board of trustees o ng

- --

atoca l       ay if such change does not  reduce the membership percentage of

-----------        -------                 ----·---         ---·-.            -----...-...-     .                    ---- ------------- --·

firefighters,   or  firefighters   and  police  officers,  or  the  membersh1p percentage  of  the  municipal

 

representation.

::.

--------------

(c)    Whenever the active firefighter membership of a closed chapter plan or closed local law plan as provided in s. 175.371 falls below 10, an active firefighter  member seat may be held by either a retired member or an active firefighter  member of the plan who is elected by the active and retired members of the plan. If there are no active or retired firefighters remaining in the plan or capable of serving, the

remaining board members may elect an individual to serve in the active firefighter seat. Upon receipt of such person's name, the legislative body of the municipality or special fire control district shall, as a ministerial duty, appoint such person to the board of trustees. This paragraph applies only to those plans that are closed to new members under s. 175.371 (2), and does not apply to any other municipality or

fire control district  having a chapter or local taw plan.

(2)      The trustees shall by a majority  vote elect from their number a chair and a secretary. The secretary of the board shall keep a complete minute book of the actions, proceedings, or hearings of the board. The trustees shall not receive any compensation  as such, but may receive expenses and per diem as provided by Florida law.

(3)      The board of trustees shall meet at least quarterly each year.

(4)     Each board of trustees shall be a legal entity with, in addition to other powers and responsibilities contained herein, the power to bring and defend lawsuits of every kind, nature, and description.

(5)      In any judicial proceeding or administrative proceeding under chapter 120 brought under or

pursuant to the provisions of this chapter, the prevailing party shall be entitled  to recover the costs thereof, together with reasonable attorney's fees.

(6)      The provisions of this section may not be altered by a participating  municipality or special fire

control district  operating a chapter plan or local law plan under this chapter.

(7)    The board of trustees may, upon written  request of the retiree of the plan, or by a dependent, if authorized by the retiree or the retiree's  beneficiary, authorize the plan administrator to withhold from the monthly retirement payment funds that are necessary to pay for the benefits being received through the governmental entity from which the employee retired,  to pay the certified  bargaining agent of the

 

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.efm?App_mode=Display_Stat...11125/2011

 

 

 

governmental entity, and to make any payments for child support or alimony.  Upon the written request of the retiree of the plan, the board may also authorize  the plan administrator to withhold from the retirement payment  those funds necessary to pay for premiums for accident, health, and long-term care insurance for the retiree and the retiree's spouse and dependents. A retirement plan does not incur liability for participation in this permissive program if its actions are taken in good faith.

History.-s. 1, ch. 63-249; s. 2, ch. 81-168; 5-3,  ch_ 86-41; 5. 15, ch. 93-193; 5. 919, ch. 95-147; 5. 5, ch. 99-1; 5. 3, ch.

2002-66; 5. 7, ch. 2004-21; 5. 4, ch. 2009-97; 5. 5, ch. 2011-216.

 

 

Copyright © 1995-2011  The Florida Legislature • Privacy Statement • Contact Us

  http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.efm?App_mode=Display_Stat... 11/25/2011

  The 2011 Florida Statutes

Select Year:   2011

 

 

Title  XII

MUNICIPALITIES

Chapter 185

MUNICIPAL POLICE PENSIONS

View Entire Chapter

 

185.05        Board of trustees; members; terms of office; meetings; legal entity; costs; attorney's fees.-For  any municipality, chapter plan, local law municipality, or locc;tllaw plan under this chapter:

(1)   In each municipality described in s. 185.03 there is hereby created a board of trustees of the municipal police officers' retirement  trust fund, which shall be solely responsible for administering the trust fund. Effective October 1, 1986, and thereafter:

(a)   The membership of the board of trustees for chapter plans consists of five members, two of

whom, unless otherwise prohibited by law, must be legal residents of the municipality and must be appointed by the legislative body of the municipality, and two of whom must be police officers as

defined ins. 185.02 who are elected by a majority of the active police officers who are members of such

plan. With respect to any chapter plan or local law plan that, on January 1, 1997, allowed retired police officers to vote in such elections, retirees may continue to vote in such elections. The fifth  member shall be chosen by a majority  of the previous four members, and such person's name shall be submitted to the legislative body of the municipality. Upon receipt of the fifth  person's name, the legislative body shall, as a ministerial duty, appoint such person to the board of trustees. The fifth  member shall have

the same rights as each of the other four members appointed or elected, shall serve as trustee for a period of 2 years, and may succeed himself or herself in office. Each resident member shall serve as trustee for a period  of 2 years, unless sooner replaced by the legislative body at whose pleasure the member serves, and may succeed himself or herself as a trustee. Each police officer member shall serve as trustee for a period of 2 years, unless he or she sooner leaves the employment of the municipality as a police officer,  whereupon a successor shall be chosen in the same manner as an original appointment. Each police officer may succeed himself or herself in office. The terms of office of the appointed and elected members of the board of trustees may be amended by municipal ordinance or special act of the Legislature to extend the terms from 2 years to 4 years. The length of the terms of office shall be the same for all board members.

(b)   The membership of boards of trustees for      sis as follows:

1.    If a municipality has a pension plan for police officers only, the provisions of paragraph (a) shall apply.

2.    If a municipality has a pension plan for police officers and firefighters, the provisions of

paragraph (a) apply, except that one member of the board shall be a police officer and one member shall be a firefighter as defined in s. 175.032, respectively, elected by a majority  of the active firefighters and police officers who are members of the plan.

3.    Any board of trustees operating a local law plan on July 1, 1999, which is combined with a plan for general employees shall hold an election of the police officers, or police officers and firefighters if included, to determine  whether a plan is to be established for police officers only, or for police officers

 http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.efm?App_mode=Display_Stat...11/20/2011

and firefighters where included. Based on the election results, a new board shall be established as provided in subparagraph 1. or subparagraph 2., as appropriate. The municipality shall enact an ordinance to implement the new board by October 1, 1999. The newly established board shalltake whatever action is necessary to determine the amount of assets which is attributable  to police officers, or police officers and firefighters where included. Such assets shall include all employer, employee, and state contributions made by or on behalf of police officers, or police officers and firefighters where included, and any investment income derived from such contributions. All such moneys shall be transferred into the newly established retirement plan, as directed by the board.

 

With respect to any board of trustees operating a local law plan on June 30, 1986, this paragraph does not  permit  the  reduction  of  the  membership percentage of  police  officers  or  police  officers  and firefighters. However, for the sole purpose of changing municjmll representation, a municipality may_by

ordinance ch i!& Jb.municipal representation on the board of trustes  operating a local law plan by .:-----·--- ordinance, gnjy_i.f.. l.!h change does not reduce the membership percentage of off  direfighters.membership percentage o      e mumci epresentation.

(c)    Whenever the active police officer membership of a closed chapter plan or closed locallaw plan as provided ins. 185.38 falls below 10, an active police officer member seat may be held by either a retired police officer or an active police officer member of the plan who is elected by the active and retired members of the plan. If there are no active or retired police officers remaining in the plan or capable of serving, the remaining board members may elect an individual to serve in the active police

officer member seat. Upon receipt of such person's name, the legislative body of the municipality shall, c k -zo' \-.t" e

as a ministerial duty, appoint such person to the board of trustees. This paragraph applies only to those                                                                                                                                              .eR c\c..

plans that are closed to new members under s. 185.38(2), and does not apply to any other municipality                                                                                                                                              '1 t    \'

having a chapter or local law plan.

(d)    If the chapter plan or local law plan with an active membership of 10 or more is closed to new members, the member seats may be held by either a retiree, as defined ins. 185.02, or an active police officer of the plan who has been elected by the active police officers. A closed plan means a plan that is closed to new members but continues to operate, pursuant to s. 185.38(2), for participants who elect to remain in the existing plan. This paragraph applies only to those plans that are closed to new members pursuant to s. 185.38(2) and does not apply to any other municipality that has a chapter plan or a local law plan.

(2)   The trustees shall by majority vote elect from its members a chair and a secretary. The secretary

of the board shall keep a complete minute book of the actions, proceedings, or hearings of the board. The trustees shall not receive any compensation  as such, but may receive expenses and per diem as provided by Florida law.

(3)   The board of trustees shall meet at least quarterly each year.

(4)   Each board of trustees shall be a legal entity that shall have, in addition to other powers and responsibilities contained herein, the power to bring and defend lawsuits of every kind, nature, and description.

(5)   In any judicial proceeding or administrative proceeding under chapter 120 brought under or

pursuant to the provisions of this chapter, the prevailing party shall be entitled  to recover the costs thereof, together with reasonable attorney's fees.

(6)   The board of trustees may, upon written  request by the retiree of the plan, or by a dependent, if

authorized by the retiree or the retiree's beneficiary, authorize the plan administrator to withhold from the monthly retirement  payment funds necessary to pay for the benefits being received through the

 

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Stat... 11/20/2011

governmental entity from which  the employee  retired, to pay the certified bargaining  agent of the governmental entity, and to make any payments for child support or alimony.  Upon the written request of the retiree of the  plan, the board of trustees may also authorize  the plan administrator to withhold from the retirement payment  those funds necessary to pay for premiums for accident, health,  and long­

term care insurance for the retiree and the retiree's spouse and dependents. A retirement plan does not incur liability for participation in this permissive program if its actions are taken in good faith.

(7)      The provisions of this section may not be altered  by a participating municipality operating  a chapter or local law  plan under this chapter.

History.-s. 2, ch. 28230, 1953; s. 2, ch. 59-320; s. 2, ch. 61-119; s. 4, ch. 86-42; s. 41, ch. 93-193; s. 940, ch. 95-147; s.

45, ch. 99-1; s. 6, ch.  2002-66; s. 8, ch. 2004-21; s. 10, ch. 2009-97; s. 9, ch. 2011-216.

  

Copyright © 1995-2011  The Florida Legislature • Privacy Statement • Contact Us

 

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Stat...12/20/2011      

[Patricia M. McBride]

He did a fine job and our city council members were all sent a copy.  Funny we haven't heard a word about this except from Curtis.  Both Curtis and Ted spend hours and hours determining what could be done to fix the pension problem or improve the financial situation of the city, but it appears to fall on deaf ears!

[amanda choate]

Good work.