Laserfiche WebLink
<br />CITY OF UNIVERSITY CITY COUNCIL <br />STUDY SESSION <br />NOVEMBER 8, 2010 <br /> <br /> <br />The Council Study Session held on the fifth floor of the City Hall, on Monday, November 8, <br />2010. Mayor Welsch called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. In addition to Mayor <br />Welsch, the following members of the Council were present: <br /> <br /> Mr. Arthur Sharpe, Jr. <br /> Mr. Michael Glickert <br /> Mr. Steven Kraft <br /> Mr. Terry Crow <br />Mr. Byron Price and Ms. Lynn Ricci were excused. <br /> <br />Also present were City Manager Lehman Walker, Deputy City Manager Janet Watson and <br />members of the Board of Trustees of the Police and Firemen’s’ retirement fund and the <br />Non Uniform Retirement Fund Board. <br /> <br />The study session was for updating the Council on proposed changes with both Pension <br />plans. <br /> <br />Mayor Welsch first asked if there were any questions or changes to the agenda for this <br />evening. Mayor Welsch asked to remove to postpone till the next Council meeting, <br />Resolution 2010 – 21 Council’s Pledge under New Business. She also asked to remove to <br />postpone till the next Council meeting, the State of the School District presentation by <br />Superintendent Joylynn Wilson due to a scheduling conflict with Ms. Wilson. She will <br />present the School District’s update at the December 13, 2010, Council meeting. <br /> <br />Ms. Watson stated the Federal government has devised a cycle for renewal of <br />qualifications for pension plans. In reviewing this cycle, the Pension Board decided to hire <br />a consultant to help them revise the pension plans in order to submit to the IRS and <br />receive a determination letter from them. The Board chose Tom Mug of Gallop, Johnson <br />and Neuman to assist with the updates. The Pension Board has recommended the <br />changes be passed that are in the ordinance before the Council this evening. <br /> <br />Mr. Mug explained that he was engaged to review the pension plans of the City for <br />compliance with the Internal Revenue Code and State Statutes. He determined that there <br />were a number of required provisions under the Internal Revenue Code that were not <br />included in the plan. Among the provisions not in the plan were provisions relating to <br />required minimum distributions. Pension plans are required to start distribution no later <br />than when a person is age 70½ and to distribute over a period of time. Plans are also <br />required to state actuarial assumptions. Under 415 of the pension code, there are certain <br />limits on the amount of compensation that can be taken into account in determining <br />contribution and benefits and these also were not included in the plans. His <br />recommendation to the Board was to amend the plan to add these required provisions into <br />the plans. When doing this Mr. Mug said he restated the plans in their entirety, creating an <br />order to make plans easier to administer, assuring everybody would know where relative <br />provisions were in the plans and creating some similarities between the two plans. There <br />were no substantive provisions changed, no benefits modified or changed. Mr. Mug said <br />that after approving the plans, they would be submitted to the Internal Revenue Service <br /> <br />