Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-09-19 Finance Committee Agenda PacketFinance Committee 1 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Tuesday, September 19, 2017 Regular Meeting Community Meeting Room 7:00 PM Agenda posted according to PAMC Section 2.04.070. Supporting materials are available in the Council Chambers on the Thursday 10 days preceding the meeting. PUBLIC COMMENT Members of the public may speak to agendized items. If you wish to address the Committee on any issue that is on this agenda, please complete a speaker request card located on the table at the entrance to the Council Chambers/Community Meeting Room, and deliver it to the Clerk prior to discussion of the item. You are not required to give your name on the speaker card in order to speak to the Committee, but it is very helpful. Call to Order Oral Communications Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. Action Items 1. Utilities Advisory Commission Recommendation That the City Council Approve Policy Objectives for the 2017 Wastewater Collection Utility Cost of Service Analysis 2. Discuss and Recommend the City Council Adopt an Ordinance Amending the Fiscal Year 2018 Municipal Fee Schedule to Reflect Development Services Cost of Services Study and a Reserve Fund Policy 3. Review and Discuss CalPERS Pension Annual Valuation Reports as of June 30, 2016 Including Assumptions, Financial Disclosures and Next Steps Future Meetings and Agendas Adjournment AMERICANS WITH DISABILITY ACT (ADA) Persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids or services in using City facilities, services or programs or who would like information on the City’s compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, may contact (650) 329-2550 (Voice) 24 hours in advance. 2 September 19, 2017 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Finance Committee Items Tentatively Scheduled Meeting Date Line No. Item Title Referral Date 10/17/201 7 1 Paid Parking Study Recommendations (Planning) 2 Review and Recommend Strategies to Address the City’s Unfunded Pension Liability (ASD) 11/7/2017 3 Human Relations Commission Recommendations for Fical Year 2018-19 Human Services Resource Allocation Process Funding - Additional Allocation (Community Services) 11/21/201 7 4 Transportation Impact Fees (Planning) 5 Hydroelectric Variability Management Strategy (Utilities) 12/5/2017 6 Presentation of FY2017 CAFR (ASD) 7 Long Range Financial Forecast (ASD) City of Palo Alto (ID # 8385) Finance Committee Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 9/19/2017 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Wastewater COSA Design Guidelines Title: Utilities Advisory Commission Recommendation that the City Council Approve Policy Objectives for the 2017 Wastewater Collection Utility Cost of Service Analysis From: City Manager Lead Department: Utilities Recommendation Staff and the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) request that the Finance Committee recommend that the City Council approve the Policy Objectives for the 2017 Wastewater Collection Utility Cost of Service Analysis (Attachment A) Executive Summary Wastewater Collection rates were last adjusted when a 9% rate increase went into effect on July 1, 2016.1 The last cost of service analysis (COSA) for this utility was completed in 2011. Staff intends to complete a Wastewater Collection COSA in FY 2018 in advance of a projected rate adjustment on July 1, 2018. The primary goal of the COSA will be to review the allocation of costs to customer classes and the Wastewater Collection rate design to ensure customers are charged according to the cost to serve them. This report discusses the existing rate design, gives an overview of the issues to be addressed in the COSA, and presents the proposed COSA policy objectives to guide staff and the consultant in completing the Wastewater Collection COSA. The UAC reviewed these guidelines at its meeting on August 2, 2017 meeting, and unanimously recommended approval of the guidelines. Background A COSA is used to equitably and reasonably allocate a utility’s costs across the customer groups served. A COSA includes a Rate Study, which sets the retail rates for specific customer classes. COSAs support the development of fair and reasonable rates and serve as a complement to the annual financial planning and budgeting processes. Through the financial planning and 1 Staff Report 6690 http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/51813 City of Palo Alto Page 2 budgeting process the City determines its objectives for a utility (e.g. maintenance objectives, customer service objectives, infrastructure replacement plans), estimates what it will cost to achieve those objectives, implements cost control measures or process efficiency measures where feasible, and proposes adjustments to its annual budget and utility rates. The COSA takes this annual operating budget and determines how much of the cost should be allocated to each customer class, establishing pricing structures to ensure the cost of serving each customer matches the price they pay for the service. Note that this annual operating budget includes both wastewater collection costs and Palo Alto wastewater customers’ share of the cost of operating the Regional Water Quality Control Plant (RWQCP). The determination of Palo Alto’s share of RWQCP wastewater treatment costs is made using a formula established under the contracts among the agencies participating in funding of the RWQCP, and is simply an input to the COSA process rather than a subject of the COSA. The FY 2018 Wastewater Collection Utility Financial Plan2 projects the need for a 7% rate increase on July 1, 2018. The current rates are based on a COSA performed by Utility Financial Solutions (UFS) in 2011.3 COSAs are typically updated every three to seven years, or when there are significant changes in the utility’s costs, customer base, or other factors. As California is exiting a multi-year drought, and customer water usage is starting to stabilize at lower levels than before the drought, it is a good time to evaluate whether customer sewer outflows have changed as well. In addition, Wastewater Collection Utility expenses have changed in recent years. Whether or not these changes have resulted in the need to adjust allocations of costs between customers is unknown, but will be evaluated as a part of the COSA analysis. Discussion The following sections provide a review of the current rate structure, a discussion of rate design issues affecting the utility, and the proposed set of policy objectives to guide the COSA. Summary of Existing Rate Structure CPAU has three sewer rate schedules: one for residents (S-1), one for commercial customers (S-2), and a special schedule for restaurants (S-6), which discharge higher than average amounts of grease and oil and, therefore, have a greater impact on the sewer system. Residential customers (S-1) are billed a monthly service charge, while most commercial customers (S-2) are billed based on their winter month water usage (January through March). This closely approximates non-irrigation water consumption, which is a good proxy for actual sewer use, since nearly all non-irrigation water is discharged to the sewer. Restaurant customers (S-6) are billed based on monthly water usage.4 CPAU also maintains a rate schedule for those industrial dischargers (S-7) whose discharge requires monitoring for specific 2 Staff Report 7855 http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/56659 3 Staff Report 1399 http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/26410 4 Note that unlike other commercial customers, restaurant water use is not based on winter water consumption. This is because water use in restaurants is primarily process related (cooking, restrooms), meaning that month to month variation typically represents variations in business water needs, which impacts the sewer, rather than irrigation, which does not. City of Palo Alto Page 3 pollutants, but there are currently no customers required to be on this rate schedule. Table 1, below, summarizes the current rates for all customer classes. Table 1: Current Wastewater Collection Rates Current (as of 7/1/2016) Monthly Service and Minimum Charges ($/month) S-1 (Residential) Service charge $34.83 S-2 (Commercial) and S-6 (Restaurant) Minimum $34.83 Quantity Rates: based on water usage S-2 (Commercial) $/CCF 6.71 S-6 (Restaurant) $/CCF 10.38 S-7 (Industrial) $/CCF 3.08 COSA Policy Objectives In the past, the UAC and Council have expressed concern about having limited ability to make changes to proposed rate structures once a COSA is completed. Therefore, staff has committed to having policy discussions with the UAC and Council prior to embarking on a COSA. For this COSA, staff has a limited set of policy objectives (Attachment A) to guide the development of the next Wastewater Collection COSA. The proposed objectives are: Objective 1. Rates must be based on the cost to serve customers. This is the overriding principle for the cost of service analysis (COSA); all other rate design considerations are subsidiary to this basic premise. Objective 2. Examine the feasibility of a separate flat rate for multi-family dwelling units. Objective 3. Evaluate the impact of proposed rate designs on low income customers and mitigate if feasible. Objective 1: Rates must be based on the cost of service The goal of a COSA is to identify the costs associated with serving each customer class and the rates required to recover those costs. The California Constitution requires property-related fees such as municipal wastewater collection rates to be based on the utility’s cost to serve its customers, or else they are considered a tax subject to 2/3 voter approval. Thus, the COSA is an important tool to design and support utility rates that are based on the cost of service. As a result, this guideline must be the primary and overriding one for the COSA. Objective 2: Consider potential updates to existing rate schedules Staff recommends evaluating the possibility of differentiating rates by dwelling type (single family homes vs multi-family dwellings, such as apartments) for the residential customer class. Customers in apartments, townhomes, etc. have occasionally inquired as to whether a lower City of Palo Alto Page 4 rate could be created for smaller dwellings, as they theoretically have less discharge to the sewer than a larger home. The COSA will also examine separate multi-family dwelling wastewater collection rates. While some neighboring agencies offer this type of rate structure, it can present challenges since most multi-family dwellings are master-metered, complicating assessment of individual water use (and therefore sewer discharge). Recent surveys of the number of units served by master- meters may allow for meaningful analysis to take place. Any potential for differentiating the rate must be weighed against increased billing system complexity, as well as additional monitoring and tracking considerations. Objective 3: Evaluate the impacts of proposed rate designs on low income customers and mitigate, if feasible Tied with the review of residential customer rates, staff intends to evaluate the impact of any recommended rate design changes on low-income consumers and may recommend mitigation of those impacts if necessary. Low-income customers may have lower water usage than other customers, on average, and are more likely to live in apartments, so rate structure changes that take these characteristics into account may reduce the sewer rate impact on the City’s low- income population. Commission Review and Recommendation The UAC reviewed this proposal at its August 2, 2017 meeting. Staff presented the basic objectives of the COSA, and requested any comments or concerns that the UAC may have. Commissioners had general questions regarding how current residential flat rates relate to water consumption. Staff noted that residential rates are based on class averages and estimations of ouflow based on water usage rather than individual customer use. Commissioners also asked whether house size, number of fixtures, or occupancy impact wastewater outflow, and how irrigation was factored into the analysis. Staff noted that these factors indirectly affect water use and therefore would be considered in the COSA analysis, and that irrigation is separated from indoor usage by analyzing customer class average winter usage, when irrigation systems are typically turned off. The UAC voted to recommend that the Council approve the proposed Wastewater Collection COSA guidelines. The vote was unanimous (5-0, Commissioners Segal and Ballantine absent). The draft excerpted minutes from the UAC’s August 2, 2017 meeting are provided as Attachment B. Next Steps After receiving the Finance Committee’s recommendation, staff will take the COSA policy objectives to the City Council for consideration. The COSA is expected to be completed by the City of Palo Alto Page 5 spring of 2018 so that updated rates can be adopted as part of the FY 2019 budget process to be effective on July 1, 2018. Resource Impact The work associated with this project will be absorbed using existing staff and contract budgets. The new rates adopted as a result will be designed to generate adequate sales revenue to fund the Wastewater Collection utility’s operations in FY 2019. As discussed in the FY 2018 Wastewater Collection Utility Financial Plan (Staff Report 7855), preliminary projections show that the utility may need roughly 7% more sales revenue in FY 2019 than is generated by current rates. Expenses are projected to exceed revenues, with reserves being used to moderate customer impacts as rates are brought to parity over several years. Costs in general are projected to increase due to inflation. For more detail on these projections see the adopted FY 2018 Wastewater Collection Utility Financial Plan. Policy Implications The process of adopting these policy objectives provides the UAC and Council an opportunity to provide policy guidance to staff before work begins on the COSA. Environmental Review Adoption of the Policy Objectives for the 2018 Wastewater Collection Cost of Service Analysis does not meet the definition of a project, under Public Resources Code Section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5), because it is an administrative governmental activity which will not cause a direct or indirect physical change in the environment, thus no environmental review is required. Attachments:  Attachment A: Proposed Policy Objectives for the 2018 Wastewater Collection Cost of Service Analysis  Attachment B: Draft Excerpted UAC Minutes of August 2, 2017 ATTACHMENT A Policy Objectives for the Wastewater Collection Utility Cost of Service Analysis Objective 1. Rates must be based on the cost to serve customers. This is the overriding principle for the cost of service analysis (COSA); all other rate design considerations are subsidiary to this basic premise. Objective 2. Examine the feasibility of a separate flat rate for multi-family dwelling units. Objective 3. Evaluate the impact of proposed rate designs on low income customers and mitigate if feasible. EXCERPTED DRAFT MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 2, 2017 UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETING ITEM 3: ACTION: Staff Recommendation that the Utilities Advisory Commission Recommend that the City Council Approve Policy Objectives for the 2017 Wastewater Collection Utility Cost of Service Analysis Senior Resource Planner Eric Keniston presented three general objectives for the proposed Wastewater Collection Cost of Service (COSA) study, and asked if the commissioners had any additions, comments or concerns they wanted addressed in the study. Commissioner Johnston supported the staff recommendation. Commissioner Trumbull asked staff to clarify how sewer rates were charged. Keniston noted that residential customers were charged a flat rate, based on class averages, while non- residential customers were charged a rate based on water consumption. As not all residential units charged for wastewater are billed directly for water, such as in apartments, tying sewer bills to water usage has not been feasible in the past. This could be evaluated for the future. Chair Danaher asked staff to confirm that one goal of the study was to determine if here could be different class averages for different types of customers. Keniston affirmed this. Commissioner Schwartz asked if a larger house with more plumbing fixtures may have a different rate than a smaller home, and whether the difference between rates would be large or small. Keniston replied that low water usage months would be the proxy for outflow, and allocations would be evaluated based on that. Commissioner Schwartz stated she was a proponent of having allocations to smaller homes be smaller than to larger homes. Councilmember Filseth asked whether landscaping and irrigation were included in wastewater calculations. Keniston mentioned that these were factored out when performing calculations. Abendschein stated that census figures show that multi-family residences have fewer people on average, and thus lower indoor consumption. ACTION: Commissioner Danaher made a motion to recommend that the Utilities Advisory Commission recommend that the Council approve the Policy Objectives for the 2017 Wastewater Collection Utility Cost of Service Analysis. Commissioner Trumbull seconded the Motion. The motion carried unanimously (5 - 0) with Vice Chair Ballantine and Commissioner Segal absent. ATTACHMENT B City of Palo Alto (ID # 8437) Finance Committee Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 9/19/2017 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Development Services Cost of Services Study Phase Two and Reserve Fund Policy Title: Discuss and Recommend the City Council Adopt an Ordinance Amending the Fiscal Year 2018 Municipal Fee Schedule to Reflect Development Services Cost of Services Study and a Reserve Fund Policy From: City Manager Lead Department: Development Services Department Recommendation Staff recommends that the Finance Committee recommend that the City Council adopt an ordinance (Attachment A) to adopt a reserve policy for the Development Services Department (Attachment B) and amend the Fiscal Year 2018 Municipal Fee Schedule to adjust the Development Services Municipal Fees (Attachment C), based on the completion of Phase Two of a Cost of Services Study. Executive Summary The Development Services Department (DSD) has completed Phase Two of a Cost of Services Study which analyzed construction project fees that are determined by the value of the project, otherwise known as valuation based fees. In addition to updating fees based on this study, DSD is recommending the implementation of a reserve policy to ensure operational continuity and provide City Council with alternative funding options during unpredictable financial periods. Background In 2015, the DSD retained the services of Capital Accounting Partners (CAP) to complete a cost of services study in two phases. This was the first cost of services study for development fees to come after the DSD was created in 2012 as an outcome of the City Manager’s “Development Center Blueprint” project. The goal of the project was to restructure and adopt a more holistic approach to integrated development review, permitting services, and staff coordination in order to improve organizational efficiencies and minimize unnecessary costs and delays to property owners and developers. DSD is made up of key representatives from various different departments including the Planning and Community Environment, Public Works, Utilities, and Fire Departments. DSD works closely with these departments to ensure efficient, predictable, and transparent compliance with all development related construction regulations. DSD is responsible for post entitlement activities on private property. It does not oversee or have authority over the entitlement phase of development or construction occurring within the City’s right of way such as streets or sidewalks. DSD does support construction of City facilities; however, these projects also pay fees for DSD services similar to city facilities paying for utilities. City of Palo Alto Page 2 A new cost of services study was prudent for several reasons. First, DSD is a relatively young City department with a new management structure. Second, DSD is using more technology solutions to provide services than the City previously had. Third, changes to the uniform building codes and the City’s local amendments (e.g. green building and electrical codes) have added new and complex functions to the DSD in recent years. Finally, in 2015, the City Council adopted a policy of full cost recovery for DSD services. CAP determined the cost of doing business for non-valuation based fees in Phase One and is now presenting the results of the valuation based fees and a reserve in Phase Two. Phase One was presented to the Finance Committee on November 15, 2016, where members discussed and recommended that the City Council adopt an ordinance amending the Development Services Department’s Municipal Fee Schedule. Committee members expressed concerns about the increase in fees as related to low income citizens, requested information about comparing the new fees to existing fees for a standard project and questioned if the some of the proposed fees were higher than the product or fixture, therefore leading to citizens to not request a permit. Committee members also briefly discussed the concept of a reserve policy but were reminded that the topic of reserve would return as part of the Phase Two. The Committee approved the staff recommendation with a 4-0 vote and advanced the recommendation to City Council. On December 12, 2016, the City Council held a public hearing to adopt the ordinance amending the Fiscal Year 2017 Municipal Fee Schedule to reflect the DSD cost of services study and the Fiscal Year 2017 annual adjustment. At this meeting, staff addressed the Committee’s concerns about support for fixed or low income citizens. Additionally, staff provided a standard service cost comparison using old fees versus new fees. Council members discussed the notion of the new fees being higher than the product or fixture, therefore leading to citizens to not request a permit. Council discussion also led to questions about the definitions of “project” vs. “maintenance” as well as about the impact of special event fees. With an 8-0 vote, Council adopted the ordinance to update the Fiscal Year 2017 Municipal Fee Schedule to adjust DSD municipal fees, based on the cost of services study and adjusted the annual inflator applied to municipal fees from Fiscal Year 2016 to Fiscal Year 2017, with the exception of fees that could impact community events. Council directed staff to return to the Finance Committee with a definition of a “project” versus “maintenance” and an analysis about the community (special event) fees. On June 19, 2017, staff advanced an informational report to City Council clarifying the definitions of “project” and “maintenance” based on the California Building Code. Additionally, staff informed City Council that the special event fees will not be adjusted and will be reviewed within the context of the Special Event Application process led by the Police Department. The staff reports from aforementioned meetings are attached. Discussion City Council’s action in 2016 implemented Phase One of the cost of services study. In this phase non- valuation based or “flat” fees were adopted and implemented in March 2017. The Phase One study conducted by CAP for non-valuation fees utilized an activity-based costing model to calculate the full cost of providing specific services. This methodology identified activities in DSD and assigned the cost of each activity with the resources to all services according to the consumption by each. The model assigned a direct and indirect cost to each fee and as a result, the fees were calculated at full cost recovery. This is in line with City Council’s May 18, 2015 adoption of the User Fee Recovery Level Policy. City of Palo Alto Page 3 Phase Two of the study targets the valuation based fees as well as recommends implementing a reserve fund for the DSD. Phase Two of Fee Study In February 2017, CAP began the Phase Two of the cost services study. The study recommends a more objective fee model based of the International Code Council (ICC) methodology of calculating fees as opposed to the current model, which allows the applicant discretion to provide the given valuation of a project. As noted in the attached report, “construction values can vary even though the cost to the City in providing plan check and inspection services may not. A traditional example is two custom built homes. They each have the same floor plan, the same number of bathrooms, kitchens, outlets, etc. One home is built by a builder of high end homes with the best fixtures available. The other home is built by a retired relative of the home owner, built with second tier materials and fixtures from the local big box store. Even though the two homes will require similar plan review and inspection services the two valuations will be wildly different and thus generate different fees to the City. Using the ICC table eliminates these differences and establishes a consistent valuation and therefore a consistent fee for similar projects.” The ICC calculates fees based on construction, occupancy type, and square footage provides more equity and consistency. The Phase Two study reviewed and updated the fee schedule; calculated the total cost of fee generating services; calculated the cost of plan check and inspection services from valuation based fees; reviewed valuation data to calculate the valuation multiplier; analyzed cost recovery levels; developed a cost model based on the current organizational structure; reviewed the results with staff; and provided recommendations or methodologies on how to adjust fees annually. DSD provided a year of budget expenditure data and nine months of project activity data to CAP to be used for analysis. Using that data along with the ICC table, CAP calculated the valuation based fees at full cost recovery. In addition, CAP did the calculation of fees that assumes a reserve as part of the department’s costs, equivalent to approximately three months of DSD’s operating expenses and built over a five year period. To further understand the methodology for calculating fees please refer to the attached ICC Building Valuation Data (Attachment D). Furthermore, in applying the new methodology to valuation based fees CAP conducted an analysis of existing non-valuation fees. This analysis led CAP to recommend new non-valuation fees which provides a more streamline service delivery. These fees are listed in Attachment C. Due to the creation of these fees and the reallocation of department overhead across the new fees, all non-valuation fees have been realigned. Additionally, similar to Phase One, Public Works related fees used the Questica Calculator methodology through the Office of Management and Budget and therefore no changes are being recommended to those rates at this time. Staff may bring forward additional fee changes during the Fiscal Year 2019 budget process. Moreover, staff is not recommending a change to the Business Registry Fee. Staff will return to City Council before December 31, 2017 with an update to the Business Registry program which may include fee changes. Finally with the recommended creation of a reserve, adjustments were made to all non-valuation fees to assist in recovering costs associated with the five year phase in of the reserve. Reserve Fund During the November 15, 2016 Finance Committee meeting, the idea of reserve for DSD was discussed. Committee members questioned the need given that DSD is within the General Fund and that the City of Palo Alto Page 4 General Fund maintains a reserve. Additionally, Committee members asked about the specific uses of a DSD reserve. When DSD was developed, the longer term goal was to transition the operations both centrally for a one-stop shop for customers, but also financially so that all activities would be supported by the revenues generated. This would potentially result in establishing a special revenue or enterprise fund. This type of fully cost recoverable operation would normally have a reserve as it would need to independently manage financials in both positive and negative cycles such as an economic downturn. Attached is the recommended DSD Reserve Fund Policy (Attachment B). The policy provides a target of 25 percent or three month operating reserve which is established by a five (5) percent fee increase over a five year period. This will create a balance of $3 to $4 million reserve. Reserves are the cornerstone of financial prudence and safety. In determining the need for a reserve, DSD conducted a risk assessment and benchmark research. The results of the risk assessment indicated that due to revenue volatility, a 25 percent reserve would provide operational continuity, financial flexibility, and leverage. For example a reserve would allow active continuous improvement programs to be completed or phased down in an organized fashion. Furthermore it will allow DSD to maintain highly skilled staff to ensure that key projects stay on schedule which correlates to earlier economic recovery. With respect to the benchmark research, the results indicated that 100% of government agencies surveyed have a reserve with one third having a dedicated development services reserve. Finally, a noteworthy element of DSD is the fact the department has a responsibility to provide services once an applicant submits a plan. Given the value of real estate in Palo Alto and the investment citizens and businesses make in their properties, management strongly believes in a dedicated DSD reserve. The reserve will ensure DSD continued service delivery during tough times. More importantly the reserve will further stabilize the General Fund to ensure City services and City Council priorities are managed in an even more orderly manner. Resource Impact The actions recommended in this report would increase the estimated revenue generated by the DSD valuation and non-valuation fees. Given the changing economic environment and the unknown potential impacts of the increases on activity levels (estimated to be minor), no adjustment to the budget is assumed. Revenue collections will be monitored and factored into the annual development of the budget as data is available and adjustments are found to be necessary. Environmental Review Adoption of an ordinance amending Development Services Municipal Fees is not a project for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and therefore no environmental review is necessary. Attachments:  Attachment A - Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto to Update the Fiscal Year 2018 Municipal Fee Schedule to Adjust Development Services Department Fees  Attachment B - Reserve Fund Policy  Attachment C - Municipal Fee Schedule  Attachment D - International Code Council Building Valuation Data Table  Attachment E - Capital Accounting Partners - Fee Study City of Palo Alto Page 5  Attachment F - 6-19-17 Staff Report  Attachment G - 12-12-16 Staff Report  Attachment H - 11-15-16 Staff Report Not Yet Approved  1    Ordinance No. ____  Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto to Update the Fiscal Year 2018  Municipal Fee Schedule to Adjust Development Services Department Fees     The City Council of the City of Palo Alto does hereby ORDAIN as follows:    SECTION 1. Findings and declarations.    A. In 2016, the Development Services Department completed Phase I of a fee study to  update certain non‐valuation‐based fees for services, reserving an update of valuation‐based  fees for Phase II of the fee study.    B. In 2017, the Development Services Department completed Phase II of the fee study,  which recommended adjustments to the Department’s valuation‐based fees, the adoption of  an operating reserve, and associated changes.    C. On September 19, 2017, the Finance Committee reviewed the fee study and  recommended adoption of an ordinance updating Development Services Department fees in  accordance with the study’s recommendations, adjusted by the annual salary and benefits  adjustment of 5.5 percent.      SECTION 2. The Council of the City of Palo Alto adopts the Development Services  Department Reserve Fund Policy, as set forth in Exhibit “1” and incorporated herein by  reference.    SECTION 3. The Council of the City of Palo Alto adopts the changes to the Municipal  Fee Schedule as set forth in Exhibit "2" and incorporated herein by reference.  When effective,  such fees shall supersede any prior inconsistent fees charged by the Development Services  Department.    SECTION 4.  The amount of the new or increased fees and charges is no more than  necessary to cover the reasonable costs of the governmental activity, and the manner in which  those costs are allocated to a payer bears a fair and reasonable relationship to the payer's  burden on, or benefits received from, the governmental activity.     SECTION 5.   Fees in the Municipal Fee Schedule are for government services provided  directly to the payor that are not provided to those not charged. The amount of this fee does  not exceed the reasonable costs to the City of providing the services. Consequently, pursuant to  Art. XIII C, Section l(e)(2), such fees are not a tax.    SECTION 6.   Effective Date. The fee increases proposed for FY 2017 described in  Exhibit A shall become effective no sooner than sixty (60) days from the date of adoption of this  ordinance.   2                          SECTION 7. CEQA. The adoption of user fees is exempt from environmental review  under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).  (See CEQA Guidelines Section 15273.)      INTRODUCED:     PASSED:     AYES:     NOES:    ABSENT:     ABSTENTIONS:    ATTEST:           ____________________________    ____________________________  City Clerk       Mayor    APPROVED AS TO FORM:    APPROVED:    ____________________________    ____________________________  Deputy City Attorney     City Manager            ____________________________  Director of Development Services            ____________________________          Director of Administrative Services  Page 1 of 2    Development Services Department  Reserve Fund Policy    Section 1. Purpose  The purpose of the Development Services Department Reserve Fund (DSDRF) is to build and  maintain an adequate level of unrestricted funds available to cover any unforeseen shortfalls  that arise outside of the regular budget planning process, as well as one‐time, nonrecurring  expenses that will build long‐term capacity The fund may not be used to create or hire new full  time benefited positions. The department intends for the operating reserve to be used and  replenished within a reasonable period of time. This policy will be implemented in conjunction  with the other financial policies of the City and is intended to support the goals and strategies  contained in those related policies and in strategic and operational plans.     Section 2. Definitions and Goals  The DSDRF is a designated fund set aside by action of the City Council. The target of the DSDRF  is equal to three (3) months of average recurring operating costs; with a range of 23 (minimum)  to 27 (maximum) percent with a target of 25 percent of average recurring operating cost.     The DSDRF is dynamic and will be reviewed and adjusted in response to internal and external  changes. In addition to calculating the actual reserve at the fiscal year‐end, the reserve fund  minimum, target and maximum can be adjusted by the Council as necessary each year during  the annual budget development process. These reserves will be reported to the Finance  Committee and City Council.  Section 3. Funding of Reserves  The DSDRF will be funded by a five (5) percent increase to all Development Services  Department fees as listed in the City’s Municipal Fee Schedule beginning in Fiscal Year 2018,  upon City Council approval, through Fiscal Year 2022. The City Council may, from time to time,  direct that a specific source of revenue be set aside for the DSDRF.   Section 4. Accounting for Reserves  The DSDRF will be recorded in the City’s accounting system and financial statements titled as  the Development Services Department Reserve Fund. The DSDRF will be maintained in  accordance with the City’s investment policy.    Section 5. Authority to Use the DSDRF  Authority to use the DSDRF will remain with the City Council. The City Manager will submit a  request to use the DSDRF to the City Council. The Director of Development Services  Department will prepare the report identifying the need for access to the DSDRF and confirm  that the use is consistent with the purpose of the reserves as described in this policy.  Determination of need requires analysis of the sufficiency of the current level of reserve funds,  the availability of any other sources of funds before using reserves, and evaluation of the time  period for which the funds will be required and replenished.         Page 2 of 2    Section 6. Fee or Rate Stabilization   DSDRF may be added to the Development Services Department revenue projections by action  of the City Council and held to manage the trajectory of future year rate increases.    Section 7. Reappropriation of DSDRF  At the end of each fiscal year the DSDRF will be reappropriated to the following fiscal year in  accordance with Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 2.28.090.     Section 8. Relationship to Other Policies  The City Manager maintains City Council approved policies, which may contain provisions that  affect the creation, sufficiency, and management of the DSDRF. It will be the responsibility of  the City Manager and Director of Administrative Services Officer to notify the Director of  Development Services if changes to city‐wide policies impact the DSDRF. These policies may be  City Council approved policies such as the Investment Policy or administrative policies within  the confines of the Municipal Code.    Section 9. Reporting, Monitoring and Review of Policy  The Director of Development Services is responsible for ensuring that the DSDRF is maintained  and used only as described in this policy. Upon approval of the use of DSDRF, the Director of  Development Services and the Director of Administrative Services will maintain records of the  use of funds and plan for replenishment. Staff will provide reports to the City Council within the  annual budget process, or sooner if warranted by internal or external events.                 Municipal Fee Schedule Proposed Fee Business Registry Fee $50.00 Technology Surcharge Note: This surcharge will be added to all fees in Development Services. 1.8% per fee A. $1.00 ‐ $1,000.00 Delete B. $1,000.01 ‐ $2,000.00 Delete C. $2,000.01 ‐ $25,000.00 Delete D. $25,000.01 ‐ $50,000.00 Delete E. $50,000.01 ‐ $100,000.00 Delete F. $100,000.01 ‐ $500,000.00 Delete G. $500,000.01 ‐ $1,000,000.00 Delete H. $1,000,000.01 and Up Delete Building Permit Fee Restructured to be 1.44% of Construction  Valuation based on the ICC Table I. Building Demolition Permit $498.00 J. Commercial Interior Non‐Structural Demolition Permit $179.00 Commercial and Multi‐Family Projects greater than or equal to $25,000.00 in  Valuation $305.00 See Above Current Fee $412.00 per permit $1,895.94 for the first $100,000.00 plus $10.63 for each additional $1,000.00 or  fraction thereof, to and including $500,000.00 $6147.94 for the first $500,000.00 plus $9.03 for each additional $1,000.00 or  fraction thereof, to and including $1,000,000.00 $10,662.94 for the first $1,000,000.00 plus $7.12 for each additional $1,000.00 or  fraction thereof If valuation exceeds $5,000,000.00, an alternative fee arrangement may be  established by the Chief Building Official to achieve full cost recovery. $431.00 (does not include C&D fees) per permit $196.00 (does not include C&D fees) per permit Construction & Demolition Building Permit Fees $73.00 Base Fee $73.00 for the first $1,000.00 plus $5.80 for each additional $100.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $2,000.00 $131.00 for the first $2,000.00 plus $26.53 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction  thereof, to and including $25,000.00 $741.19 for the first $25,000.00 plus $19.69 for each additional $1,000.00 or  fraction thereof, to and including $50,000.00 $1,233.44 for the first $50,000.00 plus $13.25 for each additional $1,000.00 or  fraction thereof, to and including $100,000.00 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Business Registry $50.00 per business Miscellaneous 1.8% of each transaction Building Municipal Fee Schedule Single Family and Two Family Projects greater than $25,000.00 and less than $75,000.00 in Valuations1 $163.00 Single Family and Two Family Projects greater than $75,000.00 in Valuation1 $210.00 A. Base Fee $115.00 B. New or Remodeled Square Footage Delete Air Conditioners $70.00 Busway, Power Duct, or Floor Duct Per Foot $58.00 Conditional Utility Agreement $236.00 Each Additional Meter $153.00 Fixtures, Switches, and Outlets $58.00 Lighting, Power and/or Control Panel Board, Switchboard Cabinet or Panel $70.00 Motor $58.00 Motor Generator $441.00 Range, Electric Clothes Dryer, or Water Heater $58.00 Service Conductor/Switch ‐ Greater than 800 amp $209.00 Service Conductor/Switch ‐ Less than 200 amp Delete Service Conductor/Switch ‐ Less than 800 amp $367.00 Special Circuit (Not Listed Herein)$58.00 Temporary Power Pole $58.00 Temporary Wiring for Construction $58.00 Commercial (Level 1 and 2)$357.00 plus $67.00 for each additional  station Commercial (Level 3 and 4)$426.00 plus $83 for each additional  station Residential (Level 1 and 2)$154.00 Residential (Level 3)$235.00 Commercial System (less than 10 kW)$557.00 Commercial System (10kW ‐ 49kW)$557.00 Commercial System (greater than 49kW)$748.00 Residential Systems (greater than 10kW)$357.00 $976.00 each $340.00 each $518.00 plus $102.00 for each additional station each $188.00 per station $264.00 per station Electrical Permits ‐ Photovoltaic Systems $600.00 each $901.00 each $181.00 each $75.00 each $75.00 each $75.00 each Electrical Permits ‐ Electrical Vehicle Charging Stations $427.00 plus $83.00 for each additional station $75.00 each $75.00 each $75.00 each $75.00 each $272.00 each $136.00 each $0.02 per square foot per square foot $91.00 per unit $75.00 each $265.00 each $75.00 each $75.00 each DEVELOPMENT SERVICES $172.00 per permit $252.00 per permit Electrical Permits $92.00 per permit Municipal Fee Schedule Residential Systems (less than 10kW)$165.00 Address Change $505.00 single; $244.00 each additional  All Other Publications $16.00 Construction/Maintenance Vehicles $80.00 Electric Service and Safety Inspection $197.00 Extension of Building Permit or Building Permit Application $79.00 Inspections and Investigations ‐ Outside Normal Business Hours Note: Inspections and investigations outside normal business hours (2‐ hour minimum). $369.00 per 1.5x OT Hour; $492.00 per  2.0x OT hour Inspections and Investigations ‐ Unclassified Note: Inspections and investigations for which no fee is specifically indicated (2‐hour  minimum). $246.00 Reactivation of Expired Building Permit ‐ All Others $222.00 Reactivation of Expired Building Permit ‐ Final Inspection Only $256.00 Reactivation of Expired Building Permit Application $156.00 Real Property Research Fee (1‐hour minimum)$229.00 Records Retention $6.00 per plan sheet Reinspection Fee ‐ Multi‐Family Residential and Non‐ Residential $137.00 Reinspection Fee ‐ Single Family Residential $76.00 each secondary inspection type;  $141.00 each primary inspection type per  Request for Release of Building Plans $77.00 Residential Inspection Guidelines Note: Available free online No Change Alterations and additions for single and multifamily > 1,000 sq ft $728.00 Alterations and additions for single family and multifamily < 1,000 sq ft and  increases conditioned space $441.00 If the project is over $100,000 Energy Star is required after 12 months of  occupancy $144.00$140.00 per review $247.00 each secondary inspection type; $315.00 each primary inspection type per  inspection $85.00 each $37.00 each Green Building $708.00 per review $429.00 per review 50% of original Building Permit Fee not to exceed the full cost to perform  remaining inspections as determined by the Chief Building Official $283.00 or 50% of original Building Permit Fee, whichever is less $211.00 per permit plus Plan Check Fees as applicable per permit $271.00 per hour $6.00 per plan sheet $315.00 each $18.00 each $81.00 per space per week. This includes FY 18 adjustment rate of 6%. $169.00 per hour $95.00 per application $408.00 per 1.5x OT Hour; $544.00 per 2.0x OT hour $254.00 per hour $91.00 each General & Miscellaneous Fees $399.00 single address; $192.00 each additional address DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Municipal Fee Schedule Landscape Inspection $190.00 Landscape Plan Review ‐ Non‐Residential & Multi‐Family $1,939.00 Landscape Plan Review ‐ Single Family Residential $1,193.00 Multi Family New Construction of 1‐3 (attached) units $949.00 Multi Family New Construction of 4 or More $1,523.00 New Commercial >50,000 SF $1,810.00 New Commercial 1,000 ‐ 25,000 SF $1,236.00 New Commercial 25,001 ‐ 50,000 SF $1,523.00 New Single Family $949.00 Tenant improvements, renovations or alterations > $200,000 in valuation (and  not triggered by a Calgreen Tier) $662.00 Tenant improvements, renovations or alterations > 5,000 SF Note: includes  replacement or alteration of at least two of the following: HVAC systems, building  envelope, hot water system, or lighting system and project greater than $200,000 $662.00 A. Base Fee $115.00 B. New or Remodeled Square Footage Delete Air Handlers up to and including 10,000 cfm $47.00 Boilers, Compressors and Absorption Systems: For the installation or  reloacation of each boiler or compressor up to 30 hp or each absorption  system up to and including 1,000,000 Btu/h $93.00 Boilers, Compressors, and Absorption Systems: For the installation or  relocation of each boiler or compressor exceeding 30 hp, or each absorption  system exceeding 1,000,000 Btu/h $93.00 Furnace, Flue and Associated Ducts $93.00 Miscellaneous Note: For each appliance or piece of equipment regulated by this code, but not classed  in other appliance categories, or for which no other fee is listed. $47.00 Process Piping System $46.00 Process Piping System ‐ Hazardous $47.00 Swimming Pool Heater $56.00 Ventilation and Exhaust $47.00$60.00 each Plan Review Fees $182.00 each $182.00 each $60.00 each $60.00 per permit $145.00 per permit $72.00 per permit $644.00 per review Mechanical Permits $92.00 per permit $0.02 per square foot $60.00 each $122.00 each $1761.00 per review $1202.00 per review DEVELOPMENT SERVICES $1481.00 per review $923.00 per review $644.00 per review $185.00 per inspection $1886.00 per review $1161.00 per review $923.00 per review $1481.00 per review Municipal Fee Schedule Additional Plan Review Note: Required by changes, additions, or revisions to plans including Alternative Means  and Methods (2‐hour minimum). For Elective (3rd party) and over‐the‐counter reviews  (half hour minimum). $191.00 Building Plan Check 75% Certified Access Specialist (CASp) Review/Consultation $367.00 Elective Plan Check 35% Fire and Life Safety Plan Check 54% Public Works Plan Check 44% Zoning Plan Check 35% A. Base Fee $115.00 B. New or Remodeled Square Footage Delete Atomospheric‐type vaccum Breakers $115.00 Backflow protective device other than atomospheric‐type $167.00 Gas Piping System $167.00 Industrial Waste Pretreatment Interceptor Note: Including trap and vent, except kitchen‐type grease interceptors functioning as  fixture traps $167.00 Medical Gas Piping System $167.00 Plumbing Fixtures Note: For each plumbing fixture on one trap or a set of fixtures on one trap (including  water, drainage piping, and backflow protection). $116.00 Plumbing Fixtures: For each building sewer $112.00 Rain Water Systems Delete Solar Hot Water System Note: Does not include Plan Check fee. $167.00 Storm Drain System $167.00 Swimming Pool $56.00 Water Heater, Vent or Other $84.00 Water Piping Note: Installation, alteration or repair of water piping, water treatment equipment or  both $84.00 Clotheswasher System $70.00 Complex System $167.00 Simple System $70.00 SB 1473 Fee $109.00 each $109.00 each Plumbing Permits ‐ Graywater Systems $91.00 each $217.00 plus plan review at cost $91.00 plus plan review at cost $91.00 each $145.00 each $91.00 each $217.00 each $217.00 each $72.00 each DEVELOPMENT SERVICES $109.00 each $217.00 each $217.00 each $217.00 each $217.00 each 45% of Building Permit fee 12% of Building Permit fee 30% of Building Permit fee Plumbing Permits $92.00 per permit per permit $0.02 per square foot $225.00 per hour 80% of Building Permit fee Actual cost of CASp Consultant plus 15% per hour. Restructured to a flat fee.  35% of Building Plan Check fee Municipal Fee Schedule A. $1.00 ‐ $25,000.00 Permit Valuation No change B. $25,001.00 ‐ $50,000.00 Permit Valuation No change C. $50,001.00 ‐ $75,000.00 Permit Valuation No change D. $75,001.00 ‐ $100,000.00 Permit Valuation No change E. Each $25,000.00 Increment or Fraction Thereof Above $100,000.00 No change F. Minimum No change Commercial No change Residential No change Certificate of Use and Occupancy $1,095.00 Certificate of Use and Occupancy ‐ Replacement $228.00 SB 1186 Mandated Fee Note: Does not include fees collected by the Fire Department. No change Temporary Occupancy Permit ‐ Multi‐Family Residential, Non‐Residential, and  Other Commercial $826.00 Temporary Occupancy Permit ‐ Single Family Residential and Commercial  Tenant Improvement less than 10,000 sq. ft. $606.00 Additional Non‐Residential Long‐Term (More than 5 days) Monthly No Change Dumpster, Container No Change Non‐Residential ‐ Single Day No Change Non‐Residential Long‐Term (More than 5 days)No Change Non‐Residential Short‐Term (Less than 5 days)No Change A. 101 ‐ 1,000 cubic yards No Change B. 1,001 ‐ 10,000 cubic yards No Change Public Works Engineering $197.00 for the first 100 cubic yards, plus $197.00 for each additional 100 cubic  yards or fraction thereof $1970.00 for the first 1,000 cubic yards plus $186.00 for each additional 1,000  cubic yards or fraction thereof Encroachment Permit $746.00 per month $310.00 each $1,249.00 each $2,039.00 each $1,466.00 each $123.00 each DEVELOPMENT SERVICES $1.00 each $673.00 each $498.00 each $1.00 minimum Strong Motion Instrument Program $28.00 per $100,000.00 permit valuation ($0.50 minimum) $13.00 per $100,000.00 permit valuation ($0.50 minimum) Use & Occupancy Permits $287.00 each $1.00 per valuation increment $2.00 per valuation increment $3.00 per valuation increment $4.00 per valuation increment Add $1.00 per valuation increment Municipal Fee Schedule C. 10,001 or more cubic yards No Change Tree Inspection for Private Development No Change Construction in Public Right‐of‐Way ($1.00 ‐ $5,999) Note: Including public or private subdivision streets No Change Construction in Public Right‐of‐Way ($6,000 ‐ $25,999) Note: Including public or private subdivision streets No Change Construction in Public Right‐of‐Way ($26,000 ‐ $100,999) Note: Including public or private subdivision streets No Change Construction in Public Right‐of‐Way ($101,000 +) Note: Including public or private subdivision streets No Change Storm Drain Plan Check Fee No Change Temporary Discharge to Storm Drain from Construction Site Dewatering No Change Additional Temporary Discharge to Storm Drain from Construction Site  Dewatering No Change Wet Season Construction Site Stormwater Inspection   Note: MRP requirement  for sites >1 acre and/or high priority (hillside, near creek, prior violation) No Change Emergency Response Fee ‐ Hazmat (PAMC 17.24.050)$350.00 Installation or Closure Without Approved Plans and/or Permits No Change Emergency Planning Guide No Change Long‐term Offsite Document Storage No Change Microfilm Copy/Print No Change Photographs No Change Fire $30.00 first print; $0.55 each additional print Hazardous Materials Classification Permits Up to $1,212.00 for each incident up to 100% cost recovery $275.00 ‐ $813.00 average fee range Documents $253.00 each $0.25 per page $3.25 per blueprint page; $0.30 per specification/ calculation page $4,093 per request to discharge $313.00 per week for the duration of dewatering activities DEVELOPMENT SERVICES $287.00 per month, charge monthly October through April Compliance Fees Permit Fees $712.00 per occurrence $712.00 + 8.8% of value greater than $6,000.00 $2472.00 + 10.8% of value greater than $26,000.00 10,572.00 + 9% of value greater than $100,000.00 $743.00 per project $3830.00 for the first 10,000 cubic yards plus $711.00 for each additional 10,000  cubic yard or fraction thereof Inspection Fees $139.00 per inspection Municipal Fee Schedule Compressed Gas $351.00 Corrosives $351.00 Cryogenic Fluid $351.00 Flammable and Combustible Liquids $351.00 Flammable Gas $351.00 Flammable Solids $351.00 Health Hazard (Liquids & Solids)$351.00 Liquefied Petroleum Gases $351.00 Organic Coatings $351.00 Organic Peroxides $351.00 Other Hazardous Materials ‐ Unclassified Note: Inspections and investigations for which no fee is specifically indicated (1‐hour  maximum) $351.00 Ovens ‐ Industrial Baking or Drying $351.00 Oxidizers (Liquids & Solids)$351.00 Oxidizing Gas $351.00 Pyrophoric Gas $351.00 Pyrophoric Materials (Liquids & Solids)$351.00 Pyrotechnical Special Effects Material $351.00 Radioactive Materials $351.00 Refrigeration Equipment $351.00 Spraying/Dipping $351.00 Tire Recapping/Tire Storage $1,397.00 Toxic, Highly Toxic, Moderately Toxic, Health Hazard Gas Note: Includes pesticides, fumigants, and etiologic agents. $351.00 Toxic, Highly Toxic, Moderately Toxic, Health Hazard Materials $351.00 Unstable Reactive Gas $351.00 Unstable Reactive Materials (Liquids & Solids)$351.00 Water Reactive Materials (Liquids & Solids)$351.00 Additional Approvals for Hazardous Materials Storage Permit Note: Additional  approval for permit to construct, temporary closure, permanent closure, otherwise  modify a hazardous materials storage facility. See CEQA for additional fees. $761.00 per occurrence plus $498.00 per  hour for time above two hours per  occurrence Business Plan (HMBP)$498.00 Late Fee for Hazardous Materials Storage Permit No Change $848.00 per occurrence plus $554.00 per hour for time above two hours per  occurrence $554.00 per location annually 25% of total Hazardous Material permit fee $391.00 annually $391.00 annually $391.00 annually $391.00 annually $391.00 annually Hazardous Materials Storage Permits $391.00 annually DEVELOPMENT SERVICES $391.00 annually $391.00 annually $391.00 annually $1,561.00 annually $391.00 annually $391.00 annually $391.00 annually $391.00 annually $391.00 annually $391.00 annually $391.00 annually $391.00 annually $391.00 annually $391.00 annually $391.00 annually $391.00 annually $391.00 annually $391.00 annually $391.00 annually $391.00 annually Municipal Fee Schedule Level I Facility Note: Minimal storage as defined by having no hazardous materials over CFC permit  amounts as specified in CFC section 105. $351.00 Level II Facility Note: Quantities exceeding CFC permit threshold, but less than 50 gal., 500lbs or 200 cu.  ft. Category also includes dry cleaning, fixed medical gas, auto or aircraft repair, and  service stations. $703.00 Level III Facility Note: Quantities exceed 50 gal. 500lbs, or 200 cu. ft. and not categorized as Level II. $1,406.00 Petroleum Aboveground Storage Tank Note: Includes 2 hrs inspection time. $703.00 Provisional (6 Month)$703.00 Additional Inspection or Reinspection Fee $699.00 for up to 2 hours reinspection plus  $349.00 per hour (during business hours)  After Hours Inspection Fee Note: Fee for before or after normal business hours; weekends and holidays included.  Fee is to be paid in advance of inspection. $524.00 As‐Built Plan Check and Additional Work $699.00 Care Facility Inspection Including Fire Clearance $349.00 for facilities with 7‐25 clients;  $699.00 for facilities with more than 25  Christmas Tree Lot/Pumpkin Patch $349.00 High Rise Building ‐ Certificate of Compliance Note: Certificate of compliance inspection for each high rise building which is required  by state law to be inspected and certified annually as meeting minimum compliance  with applicable state of California fire and life safety standards for existing high rise  b ildi (CFC11143) $1456.00 annually for up to 4 hours;  $349.00 for each additional hour Outside Cooking Booths $524.00 Standby Fire Watch Note: Per person. $349.00 Use and Occupancy Fire Inspection $349.00 Additional Hours Over Plan Review/Inspection $249.00 Alternate Means and Methods Application Note: 2 hr maximum. $746.00 Appeals to Decisions $349.00 Consultation Fee $349.00 Hydrant Flow Fee $349.00$391.00 per occurrence Life Safety & Fire Protection $148.00 per inspection Investigations & Consultations $308.00 per hour $735.00 per application $391.00 per hour $391.00 per hour $390.00 for facilities with 7‐25 clients; $780.00 for facilities with more than 25  clients per inspection $391.00 each DEVELOPMENT SERVICES $1626.00 annually for up to 4 hours; $391.00 for each additional hour $210.00 each $391.00 per hour $782.00 annually $782.00 plus other hazardous materials classification permit fees if applicable.  Includes 2 hrs inspection time. Inspection Fees $781.00 for up to 2 hours reinspection plus $390.00 per hour (during business  hours) per inspection $585.00 per hour; 4 hour minimum $780.00 per review $391.00 annually per location. Includes 1 hr inspection time. $782.00 annually per location plus other hazardous materials classification permit  if applicable. Includes 2 hrs inspection time. $1565.00 annually per location plus other hazardous materials classification permit  if applicable. Includes 4 hrs inspection time. Municipal Fee Schedule Hydrant Installation/Modification ‐ Private $175.00 Automatic Fire Sprinkler Installation/Modification Note: Includes hydrostatic test $1543.00 for 1‐19 Sprinkler Heads;  $1,724.00 plus $3.00 per head for 20 or  Express Fire Protection Plan Check Fee No Change Fire Alarm System Installation and Modification $948.00 plus $21.00 a device or contract  point Fire and Life Safety Plan Check ‐ Commercial Note: Includes one inspection and reinspection. $0.54 Fire Prevention Inspection of Private Schools $699.00 Fire Protection and Fire Access Plan Review for New Single Family Dwellings  or Additions $773.00 Multifamily dwellings, hotels & motels 51‐100 units $699.00 Multifamily dwellings, hotels & motels greater than 100 units $1,048.00 Multifamily dwellings, hotels, motels 4‐50 Units $349.00 Other Automatic Fire Extinguishing System Note: Includes hood and duct, FM 200, Inergen, and C02. If a system has a release  panel, Fire Alarm fees apply as well. $948.00 Site Disaster Planning $349.00 Standpipe System ‐ Wet, Dry, or Combination $699.00 Temporary Certificate of Occupancy $757.00 Underground Fire Service Line Note: Includes 4 hrs of inspection and 1 hr of plan check $1,647.00 Verification of Fire Protection System Maintenance and Certification $64.00 Aerosol Products $437.00 Bowling Alley and Pin Refinishing Involving the use of Flammable Liquids $1,019.00 Candles and Open Flames in Assembly Areas $349.00 Carnivals and Fairs $1,456.00 Cellulose Nitrate Storage/Nitrate Film $102.00 Hot Work (Welding) Operations No Change Liquid or Gas‐Fueled Powered Equipment/Generator $349.00 Malls ‐ Covered $699.00 Occupant Load Increase ‐ Temporary Public Assembly $349.00 Open Burning $349.00 $113.00 annually $391.00 each $391.00 each $782.00 annually $391.00 each $391.00 each DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Specific Hazard Permits $488.00 annually $1,138.00 each $391.00 annually $189.00 each $1,090.00 per occurrence $390.00 per hour $780.00 per riser $377.00 per occurrence $1,870.00 per occurrence $88.00 annually The Fire and Life Safety Plan Review Fee is 45% of the Building Plan Check Fee and  is collected by the Building Division at the time an application of a Building Permit  is submitted. $780.00 annually $894.00 each $780.00 annually $1,170.00 annually $391.00 annually $195.00 per device $780.00 for 1‐19 Sprinkler Heads; $1,724.00 plus $4.80 per head for 20 or more  Sprinkler Heads $173.00 per occurrence $1090.00 plus $23.00 a device or contract point Municipal Fee Schedule Open Flame/Flame Producing Devices $349.00 Operate a Tank Vehicle to Transport Flammable/Combustible Liquids $495.00 Parade Float $351.00 Place of Assembly $703.00 Place of Public Assembly ‐ Temporary $349.00 Tent or Air Supported Structure Note: Tent or air‐supported structure having an area in excess of 200 sq. ft. or canopies  in excess of 400 sq. ft. Fee includes a public assembly permit of $125.00 for all tents. $734.00 Commercial & Residential windows, skylights and doors, New and alteration  (structural) (per 5) $279.00 Commercial & Residential windows, skylights and doors, New and alteration  (structural) (per 10) $140.00 Residential Reroof $279.00 Residential Reroof (overlay)$70.00 Commercial and multifamily reroof (first 5000 sf)$279.00 commercial and multifamily reroof (each additional 2500 sf)$70.00 Kitchen (non structural) per each $210.00 Bathroom (non structural) per each $279.00 Commercial & Residential Siding replacement or repair $140.00 commercial & Residential Stucco replacement or repair $210.00 Commercial doors, new and alteration (structural) per 5 doors $210.00 Commercial doors, new and alteration (structural) per 10 doors $140.00 Residential dry rot repair and replacement $70.00 Deck, new or repair up to 1000 sf $210.00 Deck, new or repair each additional 1000 SF $70.00 Sign permit $116.00 Residential and commercial window awnings (group of 5)$70.00 Cell Tower Equip $210.00 Building  New Fees $391.00 each $553.00 per vehicle $122.00 per hour $782.00 per occurrence $391.00 each $307.00 each Municipal Fee Schedule Utilities Handling Fee $116.00 Progress and partial inspections $56.00 Green Building ‐ Special Inspector applications and qualifications (internal  review) $395.00 Green Building ‐ Special Inspector applications and qualifications (renewal  update) $197.00 Special Inspections ‐ materials testing lab certification (up to 4 hours)$1,579.00 Miscellananeous Building ‐ base fee $115.00 Retaining Walls ‐ first 100 LF $93.00 Retaining Walls ‐ each additional  100 LF $46.00 Fees not listed above will either be based on an applicable hourly rate or at  the given valuation TCO fee for Vendors/Stock Occupancy (requires at least one additional  inspection $1,125.00 Emergency Responder Radio Coverage (testing) fee $492.00 Fire New Fee Certifications Building Valuation Data – AUGUST 2017 The International Code Council is pleased to provide the following Building Valuation Data (BVD) for its members. The BVD will be updated at six-month intervals, with the next update in February 2018. ICC strongly recommends that all jurisdictions and other interested parties actively evaluate and assess the impact of this BVD table before utilizing it in their current code enforcement related activities. The BVD table provides the “average” construction costs per square foot, which can be used in determining permit fees for a jurisdiction. Permit fee schedules are addressed in Section 109.2 of the 2015 International Building Code (IBC) whereas Section 109.3 addresses building permit valuations. The permit fees can be established by using the BVD table and a Permit Fee Multiplier, which is based on the total construction value within the jurisdiction for the past year. The Square Foot Construction Cost table presents factors that reflect relative value of one construction classification/occupancy group to another so that more expensive construction is assessed greater permit fees than less expensive construction. ICC has developed this data to aid jurisdictions in determining permit fees. It is important to note that while this BVD table does determine an estimated value of a building (i.e., Gross Area x Square Foot Construction Cost), this data is only intended to assist jurisdictions in determining their permit fees. This data table is not intended to be used as an estimating guide because the data only reflects average costs and is not representative of specific construction. This degree of precision is sufficient for the intended purpose, which is to help establish permit fees so as to fund code compliance activities. This BVD table provides jurisdictions with a simplified way to determine the estimated value of a building that does not rely on the permit applicant to determine the cost of construction. Therefore, the bidding process for a particular job and other associated factors do not affect the value of a building for determining the permit fee. Whether a specific project is bid at a cost above or below the computed value of construction does not affect the permit fee because the cost of related code enforcement activities is not directly affected by the bid process and results. Building Valuation The following building valuation data represents average valuations for most buildings. In conjunction with IBC Section 109.3, this data is offered as an aid for the building official to determine if the permit valuation is underestimated. Again it should be noted that, when using this data, these are “average” costs based on typical construction methods for each occupancy group and type of construction. The average costs include foundation work, structural and nonstructural building components, electrical, plumbing, mechanical and interior finish material. The data is a national average and does not take into account any regional cost differences. As such, the use of Regional Cost Modifiers is subject to the authority having jurisdiction. Permit Fee Multiplier Determine the Permit Fee Multiplier: 1. Based on historical records, determine the total annual construction value which has occurred within the jurisdiction for the past year. 2. Determine the percentage (%) of the building department budget expected to be provided by building permit revenue. 3. Example The building department operates on a $300,000 budget, and it expects to cover 75 percent of that from building permit fees. The total annual construction value which occurred within the jurisdiction in the previous year is $30,000,000. Permit Fee The permit fee is determined using the building gross area, the Square Foot Construction Cost and the Permit Fee Multiplier. Permit Fee = Gross Area x Square Foot Construction Cost X Permit Fee Multiplier Example Type of Construction: IIB Area: 1st story = 8,000 sq. ft. 2nd story = 8,000 sq. ft. Height: 2 stories Permit Fee Multiplier = 0.0075 Use Group: B 1. Gross area: Business = 2 stories x 8,000 sq. ft. = 16,000 sq. ft. 2. Square Foot Construction Cost: B/IIB = $165.19/sq. ft. 3. Permit Fee: Business = 16,000 sq. ft. x $165.19/sq. ft x 0.0075 = $19,823 Bldg. Dept. Budget x (%) Total Annual Construction Value Permit Fee Multiplier = $300,000 x 75% $30,000,000 Permit Fee Multiplier = = 0.0075 Important Points • The BVD is not intended to apply to alterations or repairs to existing buildings. Because the scope of alterations or repairs to an existing building varies so greatly, the Square Foot Construction Costs table does not reflect accurate values for that purpose. However, the Square Foot Construction Costs table can be used to determine the cost of an addition that is basically a stand-alone building which happens to be attached to an existing building. In the case of such additions, the only alterations to the existing building would involve the attachment of the addition to the existing building and the openings between the addition and the existing building. • For purposes of establishing the Permit Fee Multiplier, the estimated total annual construction value for a given time period (1 year) is the sum of each building’s value (Gross Area x Square Foot Construction Cost) for that time period (e.g., 1 year). • The Square Foot Construction Cost does not include the price of the land on which the building is built. The Square Foot Construction Cost takes into account everything from foundation work to the roof structure and coverings but does not include the price of the land. The cost of the land does not affect the cost of related code enforcement activities and is not included in the Square Foot Construction Cost. Square Foot Construction Costs a, b, c Group (2015 International Building Code) IA IB IIA IIB IIIA IIIB IV VA VB A-1 Assembly, theaters, with stage 233.95 225.89 220.42 211.39 198.92 193.15 204.70 181.63 174.97 A-1 Assembly, theaters, without stage 214.40 206.35 200.88 191.84 179.53 173.76 185.16 162.23 155.58 A-2 Assembly, nightclubs 182.86 177.56 173.06 166.05 156.54 152.22 160.22 141.73 136.94 A-2 Assembly, restaurants, bars, banquet halls 181.86 176.56 171.06 165.05 154.54 151.22 159.22 139.73 135.94 A-3 Assembly, churches 216.47 208.41 202.95 193.91 181.79 176.02 187.23 164.50 157.85 A-3 Assembly, general, community halls, libraries, museums 180.57 172.51 166.04 158.00 144.89 140.11 151.32 127.59 121.94 A-4 Assembly, arenas 213.40 205.35 198.88 190.84 177.53 172.76 184.16 160.23 154.58 B Business 186.69 179.79 173.86 165.19 150.70 145.02 158.70 132.31 126.48 E Educational 197.52 190.73 185.77 177.32 165.32 156.97 171.23 144.39 140.26 F-1 Factory and industrial, moderate hazard 111.86 106.71 100.58 96.68 86.77 82.81 92.61 72.75 68.09 F-2 Factory and industrial, low hazard 110.86 105.71 100.58 95.68 86.77 81.81 91.61 72.75 67.09 H-1 High Hazard, explosives 104.68 99.53 94.40 89.50 80.80 75.84 85.43 66.78 N.P. H234 High Hazard 104.68 99.53 94.40 89.50 80.80 75.84 85.43 66.78 61.12 H-5 HPM 186.69 179.79 173.86 165.19 150.70 145.02 158.70 132.31 126.48 I-1 Institutional, supervised environment 187.63 181.26 176.01 168.60 155.33 151.11 168.69 139.15 134.82 I-2 Institutional, hospitals 314.17 307.27 301.34 292.67 277.18 N.P. 286.18 258.79 N.P. I-2 Institutional, nursing homes 217.67 210.77 204.84 196.17 182.68 N.P. 189.68 164.29 N.P. I-3 Institutional, restrained 212.42 205.52 199.59 190.92 177.93 171.25 184.43 159.54 151.71 I-4 Institutional, day care facilities 187.63 181.26 176.01 168.60 155.33 151.11 168.69 139.15 134.82 M Mercantile 136.25 130.95 125.45 119.44 109.43 106.11 113.60 94.63 90.83 R-1 Residential, hotels 189.35 182.99 177.74 170.33 156.80 152.58 170.42 140.62 136.29 R-2 Residential, multiple family 158.84 152.48 147.23 139.81 127.05 122.83 139.91 110.87 106.54 R-3 Residential, one- and two-family d 148.17 144.14 140.42 136.90 131.89 128.41 134.60 123.40 116.15 R-4 Residential, care/assisted living facilities 187.63 181.26 176.01 168.60 155.33 151.11 168.69 139.15 134.82 S-1 Storage, moderate hazard 103.68 98.53 92.40 88.50 78.80 74.84 84.43 64.78 60.12 S-2 Storage, low hazard 102.68 97.53 92.40 87.50 78.80 73.84 83.43 64.78 59.12 U Utility, miscellaneous 80.38 75.90 71.16 67.61 60.99 57.00 64.60 48.23 45.92 a. Private Garages use Utility, miscellaneous b. For shell only buildings deduct 20 percent c. N.P. = not permitted d. Unfinished basements (Group R-3) = $21.00 per sq. ft. Capital Accounting Partners Page 1 Development Services Fee Study Restructuring Valuation Based Building Fees September 2017 CITY OF PALO ALTO Development Services Department CAPITAL ACCOUNTING PARTNERS, LLC Daniel B Edds, MBA, PMP 3570 Buena Vista Dr. Sacramento, Ca 95864 916.670.0001 2 Contents Development Services Department ........................................................................................................................... 3 Introduction and Scope ................................................................................................................................... 3 Restructuring Valuation Model ................................................................................................................ 3 Summary of Costing Methodologies ............................................................................................................... 4 Assuring Quality Results .................................................................................................................................. 7 Quantitative ............................................................................................................................................. 7 Qualitative ................................................................................................................................................ 7 Summary of Results ................................................................................................................................................ 9 General Observations of Building Valuations .................................................................................................. 9 Calculating the Cost of Valuation Based Fees ........................................................................................10 Summary of Results by Division or Work Unit ...............................................................................................11 Observations and Recommendations .....................................................................................................................12 Monitoring Revenues .............................................................................................................................12 Adjusting the Fee Schedule ....................................................................................................................12 Building Reserves ...................................................................................................................................12 3 Development Services Department The City’s Development Services Department is comprised of four divisions or functions: 1. Building; 2. Fire prevention; 3. Planning; and 4. Public works. Together, they form a valuable resource for home owners, businesses, contractors, developers, and citizens to build safe buildings that comply with the code requirements of the City. The long-term objective of the Department is to become an enterprise fund. Financially, this means that fees for its various services must be sufficient to recover the cost of the Department. Introduction and Scope This is phase two of a two phase project. The first phase reset the fee schedule to align with the California Building Code. In addition, we calculated the full cost of each flat fee as opposed to building fees that are calculated as a function of construction value. Phase two calculated the building fees that are a function of construction value. With additional changes in the fee schedule and the Department budget, all fees are impacted. Restructuring Valuation Model To date, the City has been calculating building fees as a function of provided or given construction value. This is a traditional model used by many jurisdictions nationally as well as in the State of California. However, construction values can vary even though the cost to the City in providing plan check and inspection services may not. A traditional example is two custom built homes. They each have the same floor plan, the same number of bathrooms, kitchens, outlets, etc. One home is built by a respected builder of high end homes with the best fixtures available. The other home is built by a retired relative of the home owner, built with second tier materials and fixtures from the local big box store. Even though the two homes will require similar plan review and inspection services the two valuations will be wildly different and thus generate different fees to the City. Another example is a remodel. In one remodel the home owner is contracting with a respected builder. In another the home owner is doing the work himself. Both remodeling projects are identically the same but the given valuation of construction will be very different. Using the ICC table eliminates these differences and establishes a consistent valuation and therefore a consistent fee for similar projects. The International Code Council (ICC) publishes an independent and standard set of valuations based on construction, occupancy type, and size. In effort to move away from using provided or given construction value as the method of calculating new construction building fees, the Department determined that using values from the ICC table was more equitable and would create fees that were more consistent. Therefore, a primary objective of this study was to restructure valuation based building fees from provided or given construction value to value as established by the ICC table. Changing valuations does not change revenues as a simple multiplier is calculated to generate a level of revenue that is consistent with City requirements. 4 This involved significant review of project data. For the last 12 months, the City has been collecting valuation data based on the ICC table. This was a requirement to the project. Therefore, the scope of this study included the following: • Review and update the fee schedule; • Calculate the total cost of fee generating services; • Calculate the cost of plan check and inspection services from valuation based fees; • Review valuation data to calculate the valuation multiplier; • Analyze cost recovery levels; • Develop a cost model based on the current organizational structure; • Review the results with staff; and • Provide recommendations or methodologies on how to adjust fees annually. Summary of Costing Methodologies Driver Based Costing Models Developing driver based costing models is a detailed and robust method of calculating the cost of a specific service. It is based on the principles of activity based costing so it seeks to understand cost at an operational level. This means it relies on understanding the time staff invests in core business processes to provide fee and non-fee services. This provides the ability to understand staff time and cost as each staff position participates in providing fee services. 5 Project Steps and Process Virtually all of our cost of service studies uses some form of a driver based costing model. The following is provided to give the reader an overall summary of the steps in created these models. Step 1: Collect Data – This first step involves discussions with staff to identify those positions within the department that provide and support direct services. It also involves collecting departmental budget and expenditure data, identifying the salary and benefits for each position, and identifying non-personnel expenditures, as well as any departmental and City wide overhead. Specifically, the steps involve the following: • Identifying staff positions – This includes identifying both position titles and names. • Calculating the number of productive hours – For each position, vacation time, sick leave, paid holidays, professional development (training), routine staff meetings, and daily work breaks are deducted from the standard 2,080 annual hours. The result is a range of hours available for each position on an annual basis. This range is typically 1,500 to 1,600 hours. Factors that influence this range are length of service with the jurisdiction and local policies for holiday and personal leave time. However, based on previous work with the City where the calculated number of productive hours was almost exactly 1600 hours, and at the request of the Office of Management and Finance, we set all positions at 1600 productive hours. • Identifying and allocating non-personnel costs – Costs for materials and supplies are allocated to the salary and benefits for each position. • Assigning any other expenses that are budgeted in other areas – There are often expenses that should be included with the total cost of services. Examples of such costs might include amortized capital expenses for vehicles and technology. • Identifying core business processes or activities – This step also involves discussions with staff to understand, at an operational level, the work of the operating unit. Core business processes used to provide services are identified and then defined by the tasks that are involved. Processes are also organized by direct and indirect categories: • Direct processes and activities – Those processes that directly contribute to the processing of an application or permit are first identified. Examples of a direct activity are permit intake, plan review, and building inspection. • Indirect processes and activities – Those processes that support, but do not directly apply to the processing of a specific application or permit. An example of an indirect activity is customer service or staff training to maintain certifications. Step 2: Building cost structures – This second step involves significant interaction with staff and the development of time estimates for both direct and indirect processes in each department. Specifically, this step is at the core of the analysis. There are four processes that comprise this step: • Gathering time estimates for direct processes – By interviewing staff in individual and group meetings, an estimate of time was assigned to each service by the process that is indicated. For the most part, the processes included three primary steps: • Permit intake; • Plan review; and 6 • Construction inspections. In this analysis, staff time is estimated and assigned to each step. The sum of all the process steps is the total time that is required to provide that specific service. • Assigning indirect and annual process time – An annual time estimate is gathered from staff for those indirect or support processes in which they are involved. These may include activities such as program administration, customer service, and department administration. These costs are allocated to all services proportionately to all services provided by the department. • Calculating fully loaded hourly rates and the cost of service – Once the total time for each direct and indirect service is estimated, the cost of service is calculated by using the fully loaded hourly rates for each staff member or position that is involved with the service. The fully loaded hourly rate for each employee is based on the employee's salary and benefit costs plus a share of non- personnel and City overhead costs divided by the employee's available work hours (i.e. 2,080 hours minus all leave hours). Thus, the direct and indirect cost by activity also includes departmental and Citywide overhead as well as non-labor costs. The source of City indirect costs and non-personnel costs is from the annual budget or cost allocation that has been established by the City. • Gathering activity or volume data – A critical element in the analysis is the number of times a given service is provided on an annual basis. This is critical data for three reasons: • It allows a calculated projection of current revenue based on current prices. This is compared with actual revenue to see if there is a close match as the data should match. 7 • It allows for a calculated projection of revenue at full cost. This is compared to actual expenditures to see if there is a close match as the data should match. • It allows for a calculation of total hours consumed. Hours consumed must closely match actual hours available. If any of the three calculations do not approximate actual numbers, then time estimates and/or volume data need to be re-evaluated. These are critical quality checks for costing accuracy. Step 3: Calculating the full cost of services – This third step calculates the full cost of service for each direct service in the department. In the previous step, the cost of service was calculated for each direct and indirect service. In this step, the cost layers are brought together to establish the full cost of service for a specific direct service, program, or activity. As previously mentioned the cost of each direct service is calculated. To determine the full cost of service, the cost of indirect services is allocated to each direct service. The indirect services costs are allocated to each direct service based on each direct services proportion of labor spent processing each permit and application. By summing the direct and allocated indirect costs and multiplying that by the activity data, a total cost of service is calculated for both an individual service and the operating unit as a whole. Step 4: Setting fees Based on any new, existing, or revised cost recovery policies, the recommended fees can be established. The recommended fees will be established based on City staff recommendations and Council discussion in the future. The fee analyses in this report are based on full cost recovery. Assuring Quality Results In our analysis we utilize both quantitative and qualitative tests for quality. Quantitative Our process incorporates substantial input from both individuals and groups. Our belief is that we get the best data from group interviews. For example, in determining how much time is required for any specific type of building inspection, we want to hear the perspective of an inspector, the supervisor, and the counter tech or project manager. Each will have a perspective. Each will contribute value to the estimate. When all perspectives agree, we have a good sense of confidence in our results. Qualitative We also utilize four qualitative measure of quality data. When each of these measures match and there are no major disagreements with the qualitative assessment, we have significant confidence in our results. These qualitative measures are: Quantitative Analysis Targeted Margin of Error 1) Budgeted expenses entering the cost models must equal total expenses accounted for in the costing model. 0% 2) Projected revenue from fees must closely match actual revenue from fees. + or – 5%-10% 8 3) Available staff time must be fully accounted for in the costing models. 0% 4) Total revenues from fees and contributions from the general fund or other sources must match total expenses. 0% 9 Valuations Total Job Cost (current valuation)394,166,970$ Total Valuation (Calculated from ICC Table)276,628,520$ Summary of Results Department Revenue Projection and Reserve Fund Calculations Based on our modeling we project a shortfall of revenue of $1,102,130 for fiscal year 2017-2018. Obviously, this will not build reserves to protect the Department from future economic cycles. Revenue at Full Cost of Services Projection of Revenues at Current Fees Annual Surplus (subsidy) $ 14,077,204 $ 12,975,074 ($1,102,130) Based on discussions with staff a determination was made that the Department should target a 3-month operating expense to be held in reserve and to build this up over 5 years. This adds an additional $652,317 of revenue to meet both current operating expenses and building a reserve fund. Given Construction Value Vs. International Code Council (ICC) As stated earlier, (Introduction and Scope) the building plan check and inspection fees are based on a multiplier of project valuation. A major objective of the study was to calculate building permit and plan check fees based on an independent and objective assessment of value. This contrasts with the current method of calculating plan check and inspection fees based on given or construction value. The International Code Council (ICC) provides a valuation table for each of the major building projects and construction types. The formula is simple: total square footage X ICC multiplier = total valuation. For example, a 5,000 SF custom home is going to carry a value based on the ICC table of $563,250. This contrasts with construction value which can vary with construction materials, furnishings, quality and experience of the contractor and regional market forces. However, the cost to provide plan check and inspection services by the City do not change relative to these same market forces. Observations of Building Valuations Assessing the annual building valuation as defined by the ICC was a critical part of the project. The only way to calculate an accurate multiplier is to know total project valuation. To do this, Plan Reviewers tracked a second set of project data as part of their normal fee calculations. These additional data included: 1. Building occupancy type such as Assembly – theaters; Assembly – churches; Business; Mercantile, Residential homes; Storage facilities, etc. 2. Construction type; and 3. Construct size (square footage). These data gave us the ability to project forward a total annual valuation number based on the ICC table and thus determine a multiplier. We did not use an entire year of data as it was not available at the time of the analysis. However, the sample size was 9 months and over 900 data records, which should be sufficient sample size to determine annual valuation as defined by the ICC. The comparative results follow: 10 Fees Generate as a Percentage of the Permit Fee Total Valuations Target Revenue Required Sum Permit Values Required % Multplier Current Fee Total Plan Check Cost (from cost model, assumes reserves)276,628,520$ 2,988,332$ 3,996,139$ 74.8%Varies Fire and Life Safety Plan Check (from cost model) *218,809,753$ 1,718,935$ 3,160,896$ 54%45% Public Works Plan Check (from cost model) *56,853,663$ 363,442$ 821,300$ 44.3%12%Zoning Plan Check (from cost model) *166,115,084$ 833,314$ 2,399,676$ 34.7%30%* Assumes build up of reserves Comprehensive Plan Update (base: per $1,000 of valuation)300,000$ 276,629$ 1.08$ 0.55$ As the reader can see, valuation based on a given job cost creates total valuations that are very different than using the ICC table. However, because both use a multiplier to calculate a fee, the critical number is not valuation but the multiplier. Calculating the Cost of Valuation Based Fees Calculating the correct multiplier is relatively simple. By knowing the annual valuation and by knowing the annual cost of inspection services we can calculate the correct multiplier. The following graphic illustrates: The multiplier of 1.45% is what creates the permit fee for inspection services or the permit cost. Therefore, when applied to the valuation of an individual project, a project with a $100,000 valuation creates a permit fee of $1,440. The building plan check fee is a function of the permit fee = 74.8%. Thus, the total permit and building plan check fee is $1,440 + (74.8% x $1,440) = $2,517. Four other fees are driven off the valuation and permit fee. These include: 1. Zoning plan check fee, (as a percentage of the building permit); 2. Fire and life safety plan check fee, (as a percentage of the building permit); 3. Public Works plan check fee, (as a percentage of the building permit); and 4. Comprehensive plan update fee, (as a cost per $1000 of valuation). The results follow: While the multipliers are increasing, it should be noted that valuations are, on average, going down. Therefore, it is difficult to say if the actual fee charged is going to change by a significant amount. Total Valuations Target Revenue Required Valuation (Permit) Multiplier Total Permit Cost (from cost model, assumes reserves) 276,628,520$ 3,996,139$ 1.44% 11 Fee Type Projected Fee Revenues at Full Cost (w/ reserves) Projected Revenues at Current Prices Difference (Potential New Revenue) Valuation Bldg Permit & Plan Check $ 6,984,471 $ 6,577,408 $ 407,062 Fire and Life Safety Plan Check $ 1,718,935 $ 1,057,088 $ 661,847 Public Works Plan Check $ 363,442 $ 193,838 $ 169,604 Zoning Plan Check $ 833,314 $ 983,696 ($150,382) Total Valuation $ 9,900,162 $ 8,812,030 $ 1,088,132 Non-Valuation Building Total 1,742,844$ 1,511,676$ $231,169 Construction & Demolition 162,203$ 167,487$ ($5,284) Mechanical 139,767$ 134,147$ $5,620 Plumbing 217,548$ 202,000$ $15,548 Electrical 421,572$ 367,170$ $54,402 Green Building 510,868$ 496,988$ $13,880 Use and Occupancy 290,886$ 143,884$ $147,002 Fire Prevention Total 1,704,096$ 1,850,605$ ($146,509) Public Works Total 645,585$ 569,596$ $75,989 Building Admin and Reinspection Fees 217,950$ 231,167$ ($13,217) Miscellaneous Building Fees 518,884$ 0$ $518,884 Total Resources Consumed $ 14,729,521 $ 12,975,074 $ 1,754,447 Summary of Results by Division or Work Unit The following graphic outlines various levels of recovery for each of the major work units within the Development Services Department. Project Revenues Based on Current Activity Levels 12 Observations and Recommendations Monitoring Revenues The fee schedule and the model of calculating fees is changing significantly. Therefore, we would strongly urge careful monitoring of revenues. The calculations of value require Project Coordinators to identify and input new data into the permitting system. In addition, for some projects, given value is the only way of calculating value. Therefore, care should be taken that revenues neither significantly exceed cost nor under recover costs. Our recommendation is that Development Services leadership and managers carefully monitor Project Coordinators during the early phases of adoption. In our view managers should be onsite and available for questions and assistance to support Project Coordinators. Adjusting the Fee Schedule Given the changes in structure we would recommend regular reviews to compare actual vs projected revenues and a report to Council if revenues are significantly out of scope with projections. This may require adjustments to fees during the fiscal year. In addition, we also recommend that fees be adjusted annually. For flat fees we recommend using a simple CPI type increase that is attached to the City’s labor cost. For example, if the labor cost for the City goes up by 2% then adjust each fee by 2%. This is the simplest and most common method of adjusting fees. It is our observation that the regulatory requirements change enough within three to five years that a comprehensive review of costs is then warranted. We understand that the City’s policy is to adjust fees annually based on changes to salaries and benefits. We would affirm this practice and find that those cities that do this, maintain better cost recovery levels over the long term. For the valuation based fees we would recommend adjusting the ICC multiplier each time the ICC table is adjusted or at a minimum, annually. This valuation table is adjusted by the ICC at regular intervals and we would highly recommend that these valuations be monitored and maintained. Building Reserves We regularly recommend 6-12 months of operating expenses as a reserve. Based on discussions with Department leadership and the Office of Finance and Management a decision was made to target 3 months of operating expenses as a reserve. This has been built into the fee models as part of the department's expenses. Based on our modeling, this should add $652,317 to the department's expenses in the first year. However, we would fully expect this to be even higher due to seasonal fluctuations in activity and larger projects requiring services across multiple years. 13 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES FEE TABLE The following table details the individual unit costs of each fee in the Department and provides annual revenue impacts for each fee and all fees collectively. Palo Alto Building Dept Building Valuation and Flat Fees Service # If Any Fee Name Unit/Notes Actual Work Volume Direct Cost Indirect Costs Other external costs Total Cost Assigned / Annual Revenues Current Fee / Revenue Unit Surcharge or (Subsidy) Unit Cost Summary BUILDING FEES 1,165 Business Registry Fee per business -$ 50.00$ $50 -$ Building New Construction (Valuation Based Fees, Annual Revenues and Expenses)-$ Total Building Permit Costs/Revenue 1 2,200,076$ $1,631,970 $3,832,046 3,572,026.00$ ($260,020) Building Plan Review Fees 80% of Bldg Permit Fee 1 1,645,228$ $1,220,395 $2,865,623 2,997,912.25$ $132,289 Elective Plan Check 35% of current Bldg Plan Check -$ 7,470.00$ $7,470 Fire and Life Safety Plan Check 45% of Bldg Permit Fee 1 1,161,234$ $471,091 $1,632,324 1,057,087.57$ ($575,237) Public Works Plan Check 12% of Bldg Permit Fee 1 228,484$ $32,402 85,515.00$ $346,401 193,838.00$ ($152,563) Zoning Plan Check 30% of Bldg Permit Fee 1 685,066$ $97,152 $782,219 983,696.33$ $201,478 Residential Swimming Pools (includes strucural, mechanical, electrical)New 153$ $114 $267 ($267) Commercial and Multi Family Swimming Pools (includes strucural, mechanical, electrical)New 230$ $171 $401 ($401) -$ 1,217 I. Building Demolition Permit 177 274$ $203 $478 431.00$ ($47) 1,218 J. Commercial Interior Non-Structural Demolition Permit 39 98$ $73 $171 196.00$ $25 -$ -$ 1,207 Additional Plan Review per hour 117 105$ $78 $183 224.00$ $41 1,202 -$ -$ 1,208 Certified Access Specialist (CASp) Review/Consultation Hourly 202$ $150 $352 276.00$ ($76) 1,203 -$ -$ 1,204 Address change - single address 278$ $206 $485 399.00$ ($86) 1,206 Address change - each additional address 135$ $100 $234 192.00$ ($42) -$ -$ -$ -$ Construction & Demolition -$ 1,198 Commercial and Multi-Family Projects greater than or equal to $25,000.00 in Valuation per permit 89 168$ $124 $292 412.00$ $120 1,200 Single Family and Two Family Projects greater than $25,000.00 and less than $75,000.00 in Valuations per permit 18 90$ $66 $156 172.00$ $16 1,199 Single Family and Two Family Projects greater than $75,000.00 in Valuation per permit 71 116$ $86 $201 252.00$ $51 -$ Va l u a t i o n B a s e d F e e s ( A n n u a l Re v e n u e s a n d C o s t s ) -$ Capital Accounting Partners Page 1 of 24 BldCostCalcs Palo Alto Building Dept Building Valuation and Flat Fees Service # If Any Fee Name Unit/Notes Actual Work Volume Direct Cost Indirect Costs Other external costs Total Cost Assigned / Annual Revenues Current Fee / Revenue Unit Surcharge or (Subsidy) Unit Cost Summary BUILDING FEES ELECTRICAL PERMITS 1,228 Air Conditioners per unit 39 38$ $28 $67 91.00$ $24 1,230 -$ 1,226 Base Fee per permit 1,696 63$ $47 $111 92.00$ ($19) 1,240 Busway, Power Duct install, repair or replace per permit 20 32$ $24 $56 75.00$ $19 1,229 per permit -$ 1,249 Additional meter (groups of 5)per permit 2 84$ $63 $147 75.00$ ($72) 1,234 Fixtures, Switches, and Outlets (groups of 20 per permit 1,633 32$ $24 $56 75.00$ $19 1,241 Lighting, Power and/or Control Panel Board, Switchboard Cabinet or Panel per permit 43 38$ $28 $67 75.00$ $8 1,236 Motors per permit 13 32$ $24 $56 75.00$ $19 1,235 -$ 1,227 1,237 Range, Electric Clothes Dryer, or Water Heater per permit 2 32$ $24 $56 75.00$ $19 Installation of a generator New 40 243$ $180 $423 -$ ($423) 1,248 Service Conductor/Switch - Greater than 800 ampre per permit 2 115$ $85 $200 272.00$ $72 1,246 -$ 1,247 Service Conductor/Switch - Less than 800 ampre per permit 139 202$ $150 $352 181.00$ ($171) 1,238 Special Circuit (Not Listed Herein)per permit 26 32$ $24 $56 75.00$ $19 1,250 Temporary Power Pole per permit 149 32$ $24 $56 75.00$ $19 1,251 Temporary Wiring for Construction per permit 32$ $24 $56 75.00$ $19 -$ -$ Electrical Permits - Electrical Vehicle Charging Stations -$ -$ 1,232 Commercial (Level 1 and 2)17 196$ $146 $342 427.00$ $85 1,233 Commercial (Level 1 and 2) - each additional station 79 37$ $27 $64 83.00$ $19 1,233 Commercial (Level 3 and 4)1 235$ $174 $409 518.00$ $109 1,234 Commercial (Level 3 and 4) - each additional station 46$ $34 $79 102.00$ $23 1,231 Residential (level 1 & 2)per station 57 85$ $63 $147 188.00$ $41 Residential (level 3)129$ $96 $225 264.00$ $39 Electrical Permits - Photovoltaic Systems -$ -$ Residential System (less than 10 kw)127 91$ $68 $159 91.00$ ($68) 1,242 Residential System (greater than 10 kw)each 196$ $146 $342 340.00$ ($2) 1,243 Commercial System (less than 10 kW)each 307$ $227 $534 600.00$ $66 1,244 Commercial System (10kW - 49kW)each 3 307$ $227 $534 901.00$ $367 1,245 Commercial System (greater than 49kW)each 1 412$ $305 $717 976.00$ $259 MECHANICAL PERMITS Swimming Pool Heater 23 31$ $23 $53 72.00$ $19 1,254 Admin base fee 1,021 63$ $47 $111 92.00$ ($19) 1a -$ -$ Capital Accounting Partners Page 2 of 24 BldCostCalcs Palo Alto Building Dept Building Valuation and Flat Fees Service # If Any Fee Name Unit/Notes Actual Work Volume Direct Cost Indirect Costs Other external costs Total Cost Assigned / Annual Revenues Current Fee / Revenue Unit Surcharge or (Subsidy) Unit Cost Summary BUILDING FEES 1b Furnace, Flue and Associated Ducts 98 51$ $38 $89 182.00$ $93 1c -$ 1d -$ 2 -$ 3 -$ Boilers, Compressors, and Absorption Systems:-$ 4a Up to and including 30 HP, absorption system up to and including 100,000 Btu/h 51$ $38 $89 122.00$ $33 4b For the installation or relocation of each boiler or compressor exceeding 30 hp, or each absorption system exceeding 1,000,000 Btu/h 86 51$ $38 $89 182.00$ $93 4c -$ 4d -$ 4e -$ 5 Air handlers up to and including 10,000 cf per cfm…26$ $19 $45 60.00$ $15 -$ 7a Ventilation and exhaust 78 26$ $19 $45 60.00$ $15 7b -$ 7c -$ Miscellaneous -$ -$ 9 Each appliance or piece of equipment regulated by this code, but not classed in other appliance categories for which no other fee is listed in this table 26$ $19 $45 60.00$ $15 -$ -$ 10a 4 -$ 97.66$ $98 10b -$ 54.11$ $54 Process Piping System 26$ $19 $45 60.00$ $15 11a Process Piping System - Hazardous 26$ $19 $45 145.00$ $100 11b -$ 54.11$ $54 11c -$ 130.12$ $130 11d -$ 130.12$ $130 PLUMBING PERMITS - GRAY WATER SYSTEMS 1,266 Admin base fee 1,310 63$ $47 $111 92.00$ ($19) 1 Plumbing fixture on one trap or set of fixtures (set of 5)82 64$ $47 $111 91.00$ ($20) 2 For each building sewer 135 62$ $46 $107 145.00$ $38 3 -$ -$ 4 -$ 6 For each water heater, vent, or both 56 46$ $34 $80 109.00$ $29 7 Gas Piping System 142 92$ $68 $160 217.00$ $57 8 Gas Piping System Repair 46$ $34 $80 48.70$ ($31) Capital Accounting Partners Page 3 of 24 BldCostCalcs Palo Alto Building Dept Building Valuation and Flat Fees Service # If Any Fee Name Unit/Notes Actual Work Volume Direct Cost Indirect Costs Other external costs Total Cost Assigned / Annual Revenues Current Fee / Revenue Unit Surcharge or (Subsidy) Unit Cost Summary BUILDING FEES 9 Interceptor, including trap and vent 92$ $68 $160 217.00$ $57 10 Installation, alteration or repair of water piping, water treatment equip or both 1 46$ $34 $80 109.00$ $29 11 -$ 12 -$ 13A Atmospheric-type vacuum breakers 46$ $34 $80 109.00$ $29 13B -$ 14 Backflow protective device other than atmospheric-type (any size)78 92$ $68 $160 217.00$ $57 Plumbing Permits - Graywater Systems -$ -$ 1,271 Clothes washer System 38$ $28 $67 91.00$ $24 1,273 Complex System 1 92$ $68 $160 217.00$ $57 1,272 Simple System 3 38$ $28 $67 91.00$ $24 16 -$ 17 -$ 18 Medical Gas Piping Systems 92$ $68 $160 217.00$ $57 -$ -$ -$ -$ Solar hot water system 92.060$ 68.288$ 160.35$ 217.00$ $57 1,190 Storm drain system 92$ $68 $160 217.00$ $57 1,191 Swimming pool 31$ $23 $53 72.00$ $19 Use & occupancy Permits 1,187 Certificate of Use and Occupancy each 155 603$ $447 $1,050 287.00$ ($763) 1,188 Certificate of Use and Occupancy - Replacement each 125$ $93 $218 123.00$ ($95) 1,189 -$ -$ 1,186 Temporary Occupancy Permit - Multi-Family Residential, Non- Residential, and Other Commercial each 33 455$ $337 $792 673.00$ ($119) 1,185 Temporary Occupancy Permit - Single Family Residential and Commercial Tenant Improvement less than 10,000 sq. ft.each 155 334$ $247 $581 498.00$ ($83) -$ FIRE FEES Hazardous Materials Classification Permits -$ -$ 1,367 Compressed Gas annually 28 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 1,363 Corrosives annually 54 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 1,364 Cryogenic Fluid annually 42 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 1,365 Flammable and Combustible Liquids annually 172 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 1,368 Flammable Gas annually 28 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 1,366 Flammable Solids annually 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 1,373 Health Hazard (Liquids & Solids)annually 33 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 1,381 Liquefied Petroleum Gases annually 10 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 Capital Accounting Partners Page 4 of 24 BldCostCalcs Palo Alto Building Dept Building Valuation and Flat Fees Service # If Any Fee Name Unit/Notes Actual Work Volume Direct Cost Indirect Costs Other external costs Total Cost Assigned / Annual Revenues Current Fee / Revenue Unit Surcharge or (Subsidy) Unit Cost Summary BUILDING FEES 1,354 Organic Coatings annually 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 1,374 Organic Peroxides annually 1 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 1,355 Ovens - Industrial Baking or Drying annually 4 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 1,375 Oxidizers (Liquids & Solids)annually 16 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 1,369 Oxidizing Gas annually 34 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 1,356 Parade Float per hour 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 1,357 Place of Public Assembly per occurrence 475$ $193 $667 391.00$ ($276) 1,370 Pyrophoric Gas annually 1 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 1,376 Pyrophoric Materials (Liquids & Solids)annually 4 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 1,358 Pyrotechnical Special Effects Material annually 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 1,377 Radioactive Materials annually 28 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 1,359 Refrigeration Equipment annually 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 1,360 Spraying/Dipping annually 17 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 1,361 Tent or air-supported structure having an area in excess of 200 square feet; or canopies in excess of 400 square feet (includes a public assembly permit of $125.00 for all tents)each 496$ $201 $697 307.00$ ($390) 1,362 Tire Recapping/Tire Storage annually 944$ $383 $1,327 1,561.00$ $234 1,371 Toxic, Highly Toxic, Moderately Toxic, Health Hazard Gas annually 11 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 1,378 Toxic, Highly Toxic, Moderately Toxic, Health Hazard Materials annually 38 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 1,372 Unstable Reactive Gas annually 1 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 1,379 Unstable Reactive Materials (Liquids & Solids)annually 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 1,380 Water Reactive Materials (Liquids & Solids)annually 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 Other Hazardous Materials - Unclassified 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 Hazardouis Materials County Reimbursement -$ -$ Hazardous Materials Storage Permits -$ -$ 1,311 Additional Approvals for Hazardous Materials Storage Permit (first 2 hours)514$ $209 $723 848.00$ $125 1,312 Additional Approvals for Hazardous Materials Storage Permit (per hour for time above 2 hours)336$ $136 $473 554.00$ $81 1,308 Business Plan (HMBP)annually 234 336$ $136 $473 554.00$ $81 1,312 Late Fee for Hazardous Materials Storage Permit -$ -$ 1,305 Level I Facility 81 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 1,306 Level II Facility 119 475$ $193 $667 782.00$ $115 1,307 Level III Facility 191 949$ $385 $1,335 1,565.00$ $230 1,309 Petroleum Aboveground Storage Tank annually 26 475$ $193 $667 782.00$ $115 Capital Accounting Partners Page 5 of 24 BldCostCalcs Palo Alto Building Dept Building Valuation and Flat Fees Service # If Any Fee Name Unit/Notes Actual Work Volume Direct Cost Indirect Costs Other external costs Total Cost Assigned / Annual Revenues Current Fee / Revenue Unit Surcharge or (Subsidy) Unit Cost Summary BUILDING FEES 1,310 Provisional (6 Month)475$ $193 $667 782.00$ $115 -$ -$ -$ -$ Fire Inspection Fees -$ -$ 1,313 Additional Resinspection Fee (up to 2 hours during normal business hours)150 472$ $191 $664 781.00$ $117 1,313 Additional Resinspection Fee (each additional hour)236$ $96 $332 390.00$ $58 1,314 After Hours Inspection Fee 354$ $144 $498 585.00$ $87 1,316 Care Facility annually -$ -$ 1,317 Care Facility Inspection Including Fire Clearance (7-14 clients)472$ $191 $664 390.00$ ($274) Care Facility Inspection Including Fire Clearance (more than 14 236$ $96 $332 780.00$ $448 1,315 Christmas Tree Lot/Pumpkin Patch each 236$ $96 $332 391.00$ $59 1,321 High Rise Building - Certificate of Compliance (annually up to 4 984$ $399 $1,382 1,626.00$ $244 1,322 High Rise Building - Certificate of Compliance (each additional hour))236$ $96 $332 391.00$ $59 1,318 Outside Cooking Booths each 354$ $144 $498 210.00$ ($288) 1,320 Standby Fire Watch or After Hours at Fire or Incident Scene per hour 236$ $96 $332 391.00$ $59 1,319 Use and Occupancy Fire Inspection per inspection 155 236$ $96 $332 148.00$ ($184) As-Built Plan Check and Additional Work each 75 472$ $191 $664 780.00$ $116 -$ -$ Investigations & Consultations -$ -$ 1,325 Additional Hours Over Plan Review/Inspection each 168$ $68 $237 308.00$ $71 1,323 Alternate Means and Methods Application per application 75 504$ $205 $709 735.00$ $26 1,324 Appeals to Decisions per hour 236$ $96 $332 391.00$ $59 1,322 Consultation Fee per hour 475 236$ $96 $332 391.00$ $59 1,328 -$ -$ 1,327 Hydrant Flow Fee per occurrence 75 236$ $96 $332 391.00$ $59 1,326 Site Disaster Planning per hour 236$ $96 $332 391.00$ $59 -$ -$ -$ -$ Life Safety & Fire Protection 1294A Automatic Fire Sprinkler Installation/Modification 1- 19 heads 1,043$ $423 $1,465 780.00$ ($685) 1,295 Automatic Fire Sprinkler Installation/Modification (plus per head)2$ $1 $3.32 4.80$ $1 Capital Accounting Partners Page 6 of 24 BldCostCalcs Palo Alto Building Dept Building Valuation and Flat Fees Service # If Any Fee Name Unit/Notes Actual Work Volume Direct Cost Indirect Costs Other external costs Total Cost Assigned / Annual Revenues Current Fee / Revenue Unit Surcharge or (Subsidy) Unit Cost Summary BUILDING FEES 1,301 Express Fire Protection Plan Check Fee 50% of usual fee -$ 173.00$ $173 1,296 Fire Alarm System Installation and Modification 641$ $260 $900 1,090.00$ $190 1,297 Fire Alarm System Installation and Modification (plus a device or contact point)14$ $6 $19.91 22.00$ $2 1,303 Fire Protection and Fire Access Plan Review for New Single Family Dwellings or Additions each 523$ $212 $735 894.00$ $159 1,298 Hydrant Installation/Modification - Private 118$ $48 $166 195.00$ $29 1,295 Other Automatic Fire Extinguishing System 641$ $260 $900 1,090.00$ $190 1,297 Standpipe System - Wet, Dry, or Combination 25 472$ $191 $664 780.00$ $116 1,300 Temporary Certificate of Occupancy per occurrence 511$ $207 $719 377.00$ ($342) 1,299 Underground Fire Service Line per 200LF of pipe (inspection, reinspection - 150 1,113$ $451 $1,564 1,870.00$ $306 1,304 Verification of Fire Protection System Maintenance and Certification annually 43$ $18 $61 88.00$ $27 Food truck permits 118$ $48 $166 210.00$ $44 Multifamily dwellings, hotels & motels -$ -$ 4-50 units 236$ $96 $332 391.00$ $59 51-100 units 472$ $191 $664 780.00$ Greater than 100 units 708$ $287 $995 1,170.00$ $175 Fire Prevention Inspection of Private Schools 472$ $191 $664 780.00$ $116 1294B Automatic Fire Sprinkler Installation/Modification 19+472$ $191 $664 1,724.00$ $1,060 Specific Hazard Permits -$ -$ 1,329 Aerosol Products annually 295$ $120 $415 488.00$ $73 1,330 -$ -$ 1,331 -$ -$ 1,332 Bowling Alley and Pin Refinishing Involving the use of Flammable each 688$ $279 $968 1,138.00$ $170 1,333 Candles and Open Flames in Assembly Areas annually 236$ $96 $332 391.00$ $59 1,334 Carnivals and Fairs each 984$ $399 $1,382 189.00$ ($1,193) 1,335 Cellulose Nitrate Storage/Nitrate Film annually 69$ $28 $97 113.00$ $16 1,337 -$ -$ 1,336 -$ -$ 1,338 -$ 1,339 -$ -$ 1,340 -$ -$ 1,341 Delete -$ 1,342 High-piled Combustible Storage Delete -$ -$ 1,343 Hot Work (Welding) Operations Delete -$ 391.00$ $391 1,349 Liquid or Gas-Fueled Powered Equipment each 236$ $96 $332 391.00$ $59 1,344 each -$ -$ Capital Accounting Partners Page 7 of 24 BldCostCalcs Palo Alto Building Dept Building Valuation and Flat Fees Service # If Any Fee Name Unit/Notes Actual Work Volume Direct Cost Indirect Costs Other external costs Total Cost Assigned / Annual Revenues Current Fee / Revenue Unit Surcharge or (Subsidy) Unit Cost Summary BUILDING FEES 1,350 annually -$ -$ 1,345 Malls - Covered annually 472$ $191 $664 782.00$ $118 1,351 Occupant Load Increase - Temporary Public Assembly each 236$ $96 $332 391.00$ $59 1,352 Open Burning each 236$ $96 $332 391.00$ $59 1,348 Open Flame/Flame Producing Devices each 236$ $96 $332 391.00$ $59 1,353 Operate a Tank Vehicle to Transport Flammable/Combustible Liquids annually 334$ $136 $470 553.00$ $83 1,347 Place of Public Assembly - Temporary each 236$ $96 $332 391.00$ $59 1,346 Temporary Kiosks -$ -$ Place of Assembly 236$ $96 782.00$ $782 Fire Miscellaneous Fees -$ -$ TCO fee for Vendors/Stock occupancy (Requires at least one additional inspection)250 760$ $308 $1,069 1,212.00$ $143 1,288 Emergency Response Fee - Hazmat (PAMC 17.24.050)Per hour 236$ $96 $332 369.00$ $37 1,289 Installation or Closure Without Approved Plans and/or Permits Fine -$ 275.00$ $275 Fire plans revision 76 -$ -$ Building Admin and Reinspection Fees 1,176 All Other Publications each -$ 16 $16 18.00$ $2 1,201 -$ -$ 1,172 Electric Service and Safety Inspection per hour 162$ $23 $185 169.00$ ($16) 1,181 Extension of Building Permit or Building Permit Application per application 31 65$ $9 $74 95.00$ $21 1,174 Inspections and Investigations - Outside Normal Business Hours (1.5xOThour)1 303$ $43 $346 408.00$ $62 1,175 Inspections and Investigations - Outside Normal Business Hours (2.0xOThour)52 404$ $57 $462 544.00$ $82 1,173 Inspections and Investigations - Unclassified per hour 202$ $29 $231 254.00$ $23 1,184 Reactivation of Expired Building Permit - All Others (50% Bldg permit fee)19 182$ $26 $208 -$ ($208) 1,183 Reactivation of Expired Building Permit - Final Inspection Only 16 211$ $30 $240 283.00$ $43 1,182 Reactivation of Expired Building Permit Application 16 128$ $18 $147 211.00$ $64 1,178 Real Property Research Fee (1-hour minimum)per hour 189$ $27 $215 271.00$ $56 1,177 Records Retention per plan sheet 20,234 5$ $1 $6 6.00$ $0 1,180 Reinspection Fee - Multi-Family Residential and Non-Residential each 2 113$ $16 $129 315.00$ $186 1,179 Reinspection Fee - Single Family Residential (each secondary inspection type)14 62$ $9 71$ 247.00$ $176 1,180 Reinspection Fee - Single Family Residential (each primary inspection type)116$ $16 132$ 315.00$ $183 Capital Accounting Partners Page 8 of 24 BldCostCalcs Palo Alto Building Dept Building Valuation and Flat Fees Service # If Any Fee Name Unit/Notes Actual Work Volume Direct Cost Indirect Costs Other external costs Total Cost Assigned / Annual Revenues Current Fee / Revenue Unit Surcharge or (Subsidy) Unit Cost Summary BUILDING FEES 1,171 Request for Release of Building Plans each 63$ $9 $72 85.00$ $13 1,175 Inspection Guidelines each -$ 37.00$ $37 Conditional Utility Agreement 187 194$ $27 $221 265.00$ $44 Emergency Responder Radio Coverage (testing) fee.25 405$ $57 $462 663.00$ $201 PUBLIC WORKS 1,166 Protected Tree Removal 56 459$ $65 $524 280.00$ ($244) 1,283 Grading: A. 101 - 1,000 cubic yards (first 101 CY)30 105$ $15 $120 197.00$ $77 1,284 Grading: A. 101 - 1,000 cubic yards (plus each additional 100 CY or fraction thereof)105$ $15 $120 197.00$ $77 1,284 Grading: B. 1,001 - 10,000 cubic yards (first 1000 CY)30 1,048$ $149 $1,196 1,970.00$ $774 1,285 Grading: B. 1,001 - 10,000 cubic yards (each additional CY or fraction thereof)105$ $15 $120 186.00$ $66 1,285 Grading: C. 10,001 or more cubic yards (first 10,000 CY)5 1,452$ $206 $1,658 3,838.00$ $2,180 1,286 Grading: C. 10,001 or more cubic yards (each additional 10,000 CY or fraction thereof)105$ $15 $120 711.00$ $591 248 Tree Inspection for Private Development per inspection 55 237$ $34 $270 139.00$ ($131) 1,287 -$ 1,288 Wet Season Construction Site Storm Water Inspection Per month 20 182$ $26 $208 ($208) 1,286 -$ 1,171 Dumpster, Container 40 156$ $22 $178 310.00$ $132 Bldg Non-residential single day Current 55 656$ $93 $749 1,249.00$ $500 Bldg Non-residential long-term (more than 5 days)25 761$ $108 $869 2,039.00$ $1,170 Bldg Non-residential long-term (less than 5 days)25 420$ $60 $480 1,466.00$ $986 Bldg Residential (encroachments)4 536$ $76 $612 501.00$ ($111) Bldg VTA Bus Shelter installation/relocation Hourly -$ 352.00$ $352 GREEN BUILDING FEES Bldg Alterations and additions for single and multifamily < 1,000 sq ft and increases conditioned space Residential 99 162$ $267 $429 429.00$ ($0) Bldg Alterations and additions for single and multifamily > 1,000 sq ft Residential 166 267$ $441 $708 708.00$ ($0) Bldg Multi Family New Construction of 1-3 (attached) Units 4 348$ $575 $923 923.00$ $0 Bldg Multi Family New Construction of 4 or more units Residential 559$ $923 $1,481 1,481.00$ ($0) Bldg New Single family and duplex Residential 7 348$ $575 $923 923.00$ $0 Bldg Tenant improvements, renovations, or alterations > 5,000 sq ft that includes replacement or alteration of at least two of the following: HVAC system, building envelope, hot water system, or lighting system and project value greater than $200,000.Non-Residential 34 243$ $401 $644 644.00$ $0 Capital Accounting Partners Page 9 of 24 BldCostCalcs Palo Alto Building Dept Building Valuation and Flat Fees Service # If Any Fee Name Unit/Notes Actual Work Volume Direct Cost Indirect Costs Other external costs Total Cost Assigned / Annual Revenues Current Fee / Revenue Unit Surcharge or (Subsidy) Unit Cost Summary BUILDING FEES Bldg C. Tenant improvements, renovations or alterations > $200,000 in valuation (and not triggered by a Calgreen Tier) Non-Residential 42 243$ $401 $644 644.00$ $0 Bldg If the project is over $100,000 Energy Star is required after 12 months of occupancy Non-Residential 53$ $87 $140 140.00$ $0 Bldg New commercial 1000 - 25,000 SF Non-Residential 21 453$ $749 $1,202 1,202.00$ ($0) Bldg New commercial 25,001-50,000 SF Non-Residential 559$ $923 $1,481 1,481.00$ ($0) Bldg New commercial >50,000 SF Non-Residential 664$ $1,097 $1,761 1,761.00$ $0 Bldg Landscape Review - plan review: Non-residential Non-Residential 60 706$ $1,180 $1,886 1,886.00$ ($0) Bldg Landscape Review - inspection Non-Residential 60 69$ $115 $185 185.00$ $0 Bldg Landscape Review - plan review SFR 80 434$ $726 $1,161 1,161.00$ $0 Bldg Landscape Review - inspection SFR 80 69$ $115 $185 185.00$ $0 Bldg Landscape Review - plan review Multifamily 10 706$ $1,180 $1,886 1,886.00$ ($0) Bldg Landscape Review - inspection Multifamily 10 69$ $115 $185 185.00$ $0 Bldg -$ -$ ADDITIONAL PUBLIC WORKS FEES Bldg Fence (encroachment permit)1 1,121$ $159 $1,280 191.00$ ($1,089) Bldg A. Constriction in public rght of way($1-$5,999)Base 130 364$ $52 $416 712.00$ $296 Bldg B. Constriction in public rght of way($6,000-$25,999)Base 50 364$ $52 $416 712.00$ $296 Bldg B. Constriction in public rght of way($6,000-$25,999) Plus 3.9% >$6,000 of value 50 491$ $70 5.85%($0) Bldg C. Constriction in public rght of way($26,000-$100,999)Base 36 1,221$ $173 $1,394 2,472.00$ $1,078 Bldg C. Constriction in public rght of way($26,000-$100,999) Plus 4.4% of value >$26,000 of value 36 1,830$ $260 4.5%($0) Bldg D. Constriction in public rght of way(>$101,000)Base 7 3,948$ $560 $4,508 10,572.00$ $6,064 Bldg D. Constriction in public rght of way(>$101,000) Plus 3.% >$101,000 of value 7 5,751$ $816 3.8%($0) Bldg -$ Bldg Improvement plan review Deposit -$ 1,171.00$ $1,171 Bldg -$ Bldg Temporary Discharge to Storm Drain from Construction Site 15 2,189$ $310 $2,499 ($2,499) Bldg Temporary Discharge to Storm Drain (per week of discharge); this is additional to other fee Current 150 151$ $112 $262 ($262) Capital Accounting Partners Page 10 of 24 BldCostCalcs Palo Alto Building Dept Building Valuation and Flat Fees Service # If Any Fee Name Unit/Notes Actual Work Volume Direct Cost Indirect Costs Other external costs Total Cost Assigned / Annual Revenues Current Fee / Revenue Unit Surcharge or (Subsidy) Unit Cost Summary BUILDING FEES Bldg Current -$ Bldg Current -$ Miscellaneous Building Fees 1 Commercial & Residential windows, skylights and doors, New and alteration (structural) (per 5)131 $153.43 $114 $267 ($267) 2 Commercial & Residential windows, skylights and doors, New and alteration (non-structural) (per 10)$76.72 $57 $134 ($134) 3 Residential Reroof 29 $153.43 $114 $267 ($267) 4 Residential Reroof (overlay)$38.36 $28 $67 ($67) 5 6 Commercial and multifamily reroof (first 5000 SF)15 $153.43 $114 $267 ($267) 7 Commercial and multifamily reroof (each additional 2500 SF)$38.36 $28 $67 ($67) 8 Kitchen (nonstructural) (per each)245 $115.07 $85 $200 ($200) 9 Bathroom (nonstructural) per each 267 $153.43 $114 $267 ($267) 10 Commercial & Residential Siding replacement or repair 33 $76.72 $57 $134 ($134) 11 Commercial & Residential Stucco replacement or repair 14 $115.07 $85 $200 ($200) 12 13 Technology Surcharge (revenue requirement)250,000 1.8%1.81% 14 15 Commercial doors, new and alteration (structural) (per 5 doors)$115.07 $85 $200 ($200) 16 Commercial door replacement (nonstructural) (per 10)$76.72 $57 $134 ($134) 17 Residential dry rot repair and replacement 11 $115.07 $85 $200 ($200) 18 $38.36 $28 $67 ($67) 19 Deck, new or repair up to 1000 SF 24 $115.07 $85 $200 ($200) 20 Deck, new or repair each additional 1000 SF $38.36 $28 $67 ($67) 21 Sign permit $63.93 $47 $111 ($111) 22 Work without a permit Twice Permit and Plan Review Fees 23 Residential and commercial window awnings (groups of 5)1 $38.36 $28 $67 ($67) 24 Cell Tower Equip New 14 $115.07 $85 $200 ($200) 25 Utilities handling fee $63.46 $47 $111 ($111) 26 Progress and partial inspections $30.69 $23 $53 ($53) 27 Consultation (per hour) 28 29 Certifications: Capital Accounting Partners Page 11 of 24 BldCostCalcs Palo Alto Building Dept Building Valuation and Flat Fees Service # If Any Fee Name Unit/Notes Actual Work Volume Direct Cost Indirect Costs Other external costs Total Cost Assigned / Annual Revenues Current Fee / Revenue Unit Surcharge or (Subsidy) Unit Cost Summary BUILDING FEES 30 Green Building - Special inspector applications and qualifications (initial review)$217.39 $161 $379 ($379) 31 Green Building - Special inspector applications and qualifications (renewal/update)$108.70 $81 $189 ($189) 32 Special Inspections - materials testing lab certification (up to 4 hours)$869.57 $645 $1,515 ($1,515) 33 Special Inspections - materials testing lab certification (each additional hour)$217.39 $161 $379 ($379) 34 Miscellaneous Building - base fee 665 $63.46 $47 $111 ($111) 35 Retaining Walls - first 100 LF $51.14 $38 $89 ($89) 36 Retaining Walls - each additional 100 LF $25.57 $19 $45 ($45) 37 Fees not listed above will either be based on an applicable hourly rate or at the given valuation Capital Accounting Partners Page 12 of 24 BldCostCalcs Palo Alto Building Dept Building Valuation and Flat Fees Service # If Any Fee Name BUILDING FEES 1,165 Business Registry Fee Building New Construction (Valuation Based Fees, Annual Revenues and Expenses) Total Building Permit Costs/Revenue Building Plan Review Fees Elective Plan Check Fire and Life Safety Plan Check Public Works Plan Check Zoning Plan Check Residential Swimming Pools (includes strucural, mechanical, electrical) Commercial and Multi Family Swimming Pools (includes strucural, mechanical, electrical) 1,217 I. Building Demolition Permit 1,218 J. Commercial Interior Non-Structural Demolition Permit 1,207 Additional Plan Review 1,202 1,208 Certified Access Specialist (CASp) Review/Consultation 1,203 1,204 Address change - single address 1,206 Address change - each additional address Construction & Demolition 1,198 Commercial and Multi-Family Projects greater than or equal to $25,000.00 in Valuation 1,200 Single Family and Two Family Projects greater than $25,000.00 and less than $75,000.00 in Valuations 1,199 Single Family and Two Family Projects greater than $75,000.00 in Valuation Va l u a t i o n B a s e d F e e s ( A n n u a l Re v e n u e s a n d C o s t s ) Annual Revenue With Reserves Revenue at Full Cost of Services Projection of Revenues at Current Fees Annual Surplus (subsidy) R e q u i 3 Months Reserve, 5 Year Build Full Cost / Unit With Reserves ANNUAL REVENUE ANALYSIS INCLUDING RESERVES Reserve RequirementsAnnual Revenue Impact BUILDING FEES $ 652,317 1,165Business Registry Feeper business -$ 50.00$ $50 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Total Building Permit Costs/Revenue12,200,076$ $1,631,970 $3,832,046 3,572,026.00$ ($260,020)3,832,046$ $3,572,026 ($260,020)$164,093 $3,996,139 $3,996,139 Building Plan Review Fees11,645,228$ $1,220,395 $2,865,623 2,997,912.25$ $132,289 2,865,623$ $2,997,912 $132,289 $122,709 $2,988,332 $2,988,332 Elective Plan Check -$ 7,470.00$ $7,470 -$ 7,470.00$ $7,470 Fire and Life Safety Plan Check11,161,234$ $471,091 $1,632,324 1,057,087.57$ ($575,237)1,632,324$ $1,057,088 ($575,237)$86,611 $1,718,935 $1,718,935 Public Works Plan Check1228,484$ $32,402 85,515.00$ $346,401 193,838.00$ ($152,563)346,401$ $193,838 ($152,563)$17,041 $363,442 $363,442 Zoning Plan Check1685,066$ $97,152 $782,219 983,696.33$ $201,478 782,219$ $983,696 $201,478 $51,096 $833,314 $833,314 New153$ $114 $267 ($267)-$ $11 $279 New230$ $171 $401 ($401)-$ $17 $418 -$ -$ 1,217I. Building Demolition Permit177274$ $203 $478 431.00$ ($47)84,528$ $76,287 ($8,241)$20 $498 $88,147 1,218J. Commercial Interior Non-Structural Demolition Permit39 98$ $73 $171 196.00$ $25 6,676$ $7,644 $968 $7 $179 $6,962 -$ -$ -$ 1,207Additional Plan Reviewper hour117 105$ $78 $183 224.00$ $41 21,460$ $26,208 $4,748 $8 $191 $22,379 1,202 -$ -$ -$ 1,208Certified Access Specialist (CASp) Review/ConsultationHourly202$ $150 $352 276.00$ ($76)-$ $15 $367 1,203 -$ -$ -$ 1,204Address change - single address 278$ $206 $485 399.00$ ($86)-$ $21 $505 1,206Address change - each additional address 135$ $100 $234 192.00$ ($42)-$ $10 $244 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Construction & Demolition-$ -$ 1,198per permit89168$ $124 $292 412.00$ $120 25,861$ $36,462 $10,601 $13 $305 $26,968 1,200per permit18 90$ $66 $156 172.00$ $16 2,760$ $3,044 $284 $7 $163 $2,879 1,199per permit71116$ $86 $201 252.00$ $51 14,258$ $17,842 $3,584 $9 $210 $14,868 -$ -$ -$ Capital Accounting Partners Page 13 of 24 BldCostCalcs Palo Alto Building Dept Building Valuation and Flat Fees Service # If Any Fee Name BUILDING FEES ELECTRICAL PERMITS 1,228 Air Conditioners 1,230 1,226 Base Fee 1,240 Busway, Power Duct install, repair or replace 1,229 1,249 Additional meter (groups of 5) 1,234 Fixtures, Switches, and Outlets (groups of 20 1,241 Lighting, Power and/or Control Panel Board, Switchboard Cabinet or Panel 1,236 Motors 1,235 1,227 1,237 Range, Electric Clothes Dryer, or Water Heater Installation of a generator 1,248 Service Conductor/Switch - Greater than 800 ampre 1,246 1,247 Service Conductor/Switch - Less than 800 ampre 1,238 Special Circuit (Not Listed Herein) 1,250 Temporary Power Pole 1,251 Temporary Wiring for Construction Electrical Permits - Electrical Vehicle Charging Stations 1,232 Commercial (Level 1 and 2) 1,233 Commercial (Level 1 and 2) - each additional station 1,233 Commercial (Level 3 and 4) 1,234 Commercial (Level 3 and 4) - each additional station 1,231 Residential (level 1 & 2) Residential (level 3) Electrical Permits - Photovoltaic Systems Residential System (less than 10 kw) 1,242 Residential System (greater than 10 kw) 1,243 Commercial System (less than 10 kW) 1,244 Commercial System (10kW - 49kW) 1,245 Commercial System (greater than 49kW) MECHANICAL PERMITS Swimming Pool Heater 1,254 Admin base fee 1a Annual Revenue With Reserves Revenue at Full Cost of Services Projection of Revenues at Current Fees Annual Surplus (subsidy) R e q u i 3 Months Reserve, 5 Year Build Full Cost / Unit With Reserves ANNUAL REVENUE ANALYSIS INCLUDING RESERVES Reserve RequirementsAnnual Revenue Impact BUILDING FEES $ 652,317 2,606$ $3,549 $943 $3 $70 $2,717 -$ 187,479$ $156,032 ($31,447)$5 $115 $195,507 1,114$ $1,500 $386 $2 $58 $1,161 -$ 294$ $150 ($144)$6 $153 $306 90,919$ $122,475 $31,556 $2 $58 $94,813 2,873$ $3,225 $352 $3 $70 $2,996 724$ $975 $251 $2 $58 $755 -$ -$ 111$ $150 $39 $2 $58 $116 16,908$ ($16,908)$18 $441 $17,632 401$ $544 $143 $9 $209 $418 -$ 48,962$ $25,159 ($23,803)$15 $367 $51,059 1,448$ $1,950 $502 $2 $58 $1,510 8,296$ $11,175 $2,879 $2 $58 $8,651 -$ $2 $58 -$ -$ 5,813$ $7,259 $1,446 $15 $357 $6,062 5,054$ $6,557 $1,503 $3 $67 $5,270 409$ $518 $109 $18 $426 $426 -$ $3 $83 8,401$ $10,716 $2,315 $6 $154 $8,761 -$ $10 $235 -$ 20,132$ $11,557 ($8,575)$7 $165 $20,994 -$ $15 $357 -$ $23 $557 1,602$ $2,703 $1,101 $23 $557 $1,670 717$ $976 $259 $31 $748 $748 1,229$ $1,656 $427 $2 $56 $1,282 112,863$ $93,932 ($18,931)$5 $115 $117,696 -$ -$ Capital Accounting Partners Page 14 of 24 BldCostCalcs Palo Alto Building Dept Building Valuation and Flat Fees Service # If Any Fee Name BUILDING FEES 1b Furnace, Flue and Associated Ducts 1c 1d 2 3 Boilers, Compressors, and Absorption Systems: 4a Up to and including 30 HP, absorption system up to and including 100,000 Btu/h 4b For the installation or relocation of each boiler or compressor exceeding 30 hp, or each absorption system exceeding 1,000,000 Btu/h 4c 4d 4e 5 Air handlers up to and including 10,000 cf per cfm… 7a Ventilation and exhaust 7b 7c Miscellaneous 9 Each appliance or piece of equipment regulated by this code, but not classed in other appliance categories for which no other fee is listed in this table 10a 10b Process Piping System 11a Process Piping System - Hazardous 11b 11c 11d PLUMBING PERMITS - GRAY WATER SYSTEMS 1,266 Admin base fee 1 Plumbing fixture on one trap or set of fixtures (set of 5) 2 For each building sewer 3 4 6 For each water heater, vent, or both 7 Gas Piping System 8 Gas Piping System Repair Annual Revenue With Reserves Revenue at Full Cost of Services Projection of Revenues at Current Fees Annual Surplus (subsidy) R e q u i 3 Months Reserve, 5 Year Build Full Cost / Unit With Reserves ANNUAL REVENUE ANALYSIS INCLUDING RESERVES Reserve RequirementsAnnual Revenue Impact BUILDING FEES $ 652,317 8,756$ $17,836 $9,080 $4 $93 $9,131 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ $4 $93 7,684$ $15,652 $7,968 $4 $93 $8,013 -$ -$ -$ -$ $2 $47 -$ 3,495$ $4,680 $1,185 $2 $47 $3,645 -$ -$ -$ -$ $2 $47 -$ -$ $391 $391 -$ -$ $2 $46 -$ $2 $47 -$ -$ -$ 144,810$ $120,520 ($24,290)$5 $115 $151,010 9,131$ $7,462 ($1,669)$5 $116 $9,522 14,467$ $19,575 $5,108 $5 $112 $15,087 -$ -$ 4,490$ $6,104 $1,614 $3 $84 $4,682 22,769$ $30,814 $8,045 $7 $167 $23,744 -$ $3 $84 Capital Accounting Partners Page 15 of 24 BldCostCalcs Palo Alto Building Dept Building Valuation and Flat Fees Service # If Any Fee Name BUILDING FEES 9 Interceptor, including trap and vent 10 Installation, alteration or repair of water piping, water treatment equip or both 11 12 13A Atmospheric-type vacuum breakers 13B 14 Backflow protective device other than atmospheric-type (any size) Plumbing Permits - Graywater Systems 1,271 Clothes washer System 1,273 Complex System 1,272 Simple System 16 17 18 Medical Gas Piping Systems Solar hot water system 1,190 Storm drain system 1,191 Swimming pool Use & occupancy Permits 1,187 Certificate of Use and Occupancy 1,188 Certificate of Use and Occupancy - Replacement 1,189 1,186 Temporary Occupancy Permit - Multi-Family Residential, Non- Residential, and Other Commercial 1,185 Temporary Occupancy Permit - Single Family Residential and Commercial Tenant Improvement less than 10,000 sq. ft. FIRE FEES Hazardous Materials Classification Permits 1,367 Compressed Gas 1,363 Corrosives 1,364 Cryogenic Fluid 1,365 Flammable and Combustible Liquids 1,368 Flammable Gas 1,366 Flammable Solids 1,373 Health Hazard (Liquids & Solids) 1,381 Liquefied Petroleum Gases Annual Revenue With Reserves Revenue at Full Cost of Services Projection of Revenues at Current Fees Annual Surplus (subsidy) R e q u i 3 Months Reserve, 5 Year Build Full Cost / Unit With Reserves ANNUAL REVENUE ANALYSIS INCLUDING RESERVES Reserve RequirementsAnnual Revenue Impact BUILDING FEES $ 652,317 -$ $7 $167 80$ $109 $29 $3 $84 $84 -$ -$ -$ $3 $84 -$ 12,507$ $16,926 $4,419 $7 $167 $13,043 -$ -$ $3 $70 160$ $217 $57 $7 $167 $167 200$ $273 $73 $3 $70 $209 -$ -$ -$ $7 $167 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Solar hot water system92.060$ 68.288$ 160.35$ 217.00$ $57 -$ $7 $167 1,190Storm drain system 92$ $68 $160 217.00$ $57 -$ $7 $167 1,191Swimming pool 31$ $23 $53 72.00$ $19 -$ $2 $56 Use & occupancy Permits 1,187Certificate of Use and Occupancyeach155603$ $447 $1,050 287.00$ ($763)162,714$ $44,485 ($118,229)$45 $1,095 $169,682 1,188Certificate of Use and Occupancy - Replacementeach125$ $93 $218 123.00$ ($95)-$ $9 $228 1,189 -$ -$ -$ 1,186each33 455$ $337 $792 673.00$ ($119)26,152$ $22,209 ($3,943)$34 $826 $27,272 1,185each155 334$ $247 $581 498.00$ ($83)90,075$ $77,190 ($12,885)$25 $606 $93,933 -$ -$ FIRE FEES Hazardous Materials Classification Permits -$ -$ -$ 1,367Compressed Gasannually28 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 9,343$ $10,948 $1,605 $18 $351 $9,839 1,363Corrosivesannually54 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 18,018$ $21,114 $3,096 $18 $351 $18,974 1,364Cryogenic Fluidannually42 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 14,014$ $16,422 $2,408 $18 $351 $14,758 1,365Flammable and Combustible Liquidsannually172 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 57,392$ $67,252 $9,860 $18 $351 $60,437 1,368Flammable Gasannually28 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 9,343$ $10,948 $1,605 $18 $351 $9,839 1,366Flammable Solidsannually 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 -$ $18 $351 1,373Health Hazard (Liquids & Solids)annually33 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 11,011$ $12,903 $1,892 $18 $351 $11,595 1,381Liquefied Petroleum Gasesannually10 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 3,337$ $3,910 $573 $18 $351 $3,514 Capital Accounting Partners Page 16 of 24 BldCostCalcs Palo Alto Building Dept Building Valuation and Flat Fees Service # If Any Fee Name BUILDING FEES 1,354 Organic Coatings 1,374 Organic Peroxides 1,355 Ovens - Industrial Baking or Drying 1,375 Oxidizers (Liquids & Solids) 1,369 Oxidizing Gas 1,356 Parade Float 1,357 Place of Public Assembly 1,370 Pyrophoric Gas 1,376 Pyrophoric Materials (Liquids & Solids) 1,358 Pyrotechnical Special Effects Material 1,377 Radioactive Materials 1,359 Refrigeration Equipment 1,360 Spraying/Dipping 1,361 Tent or air-supported structure having an area in excess of 200 square feet; or canopies in excess of 400 square feet (includes a public assembly permit of $125.00 for all tents) 1,362 Tire Recapping/Tire Storage 1,371 Toxic, Highly Toxic, Moderately Toxic, Health Hazard Gas 1,378 Toxic, Highly Toxic, Moderately Toxic, Health Hazard Materials 1,372 Unstable Reactive Gas 1,379 Unstable Reactive Materials (Liquids & Solids) 1,380 Water Reactive Materials (Liquids & Solids) Other Hazardous Materials - Unclassified Hazardouis Materials County Reimbursement Hazardous Materials Storage Permits 1,311 Additional Approvals for Hazardous Materials Storage Permit (first 2 hours) 1,312 Additional Approvals for Hazardous Materials Storage Permit (per hour for time above 2 hours) 1,308 Business Plan (HMBP) 1,312 Late Fee for Hazardous Materials Storage Permit 1,305 Level I Facility 1,306 Level II Facility 1,307 Level III Facility 1,309 Petroleum Aboveground Storage Tank Annual Revenue With Reserves Revenue at Full Cost of Services Projection of Revenues at Current Fees Annual Surplus (subsidy) R e q u i 3 Months Reserve, 5 Year Build Full Cost / Unit With Reserves ANNUAL REVENUE ANALYSIS INCLUDING RESERVES Reserve RequirementsAnnual Revenue Impact BUILDING FEES $ 652,317 1,354Organic Coatingsannually 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 -$ $18 $351 1,374Organic Peroxidesannually1 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 334$ $391 $57 $18 $351 $351 1,355Ovens - Industrial Baking or Dryingannually4 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 1,335$ $1,564 $229 $18 $351 $1,406 1,375Oxidizers (Liquids & Solids)annually16 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 5,339$ $6,256 $917 $18 $351 $5,622 1,369Oxidizing Gasannually34237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 11,345$ $13,294 $1,949 $18 $351 $11,947 1,356Parade Floatper hour 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 -$ $18 $351 1,357Place of Public Assembly per occurrence 475$ $193 $667 391.00$ ($276)-$ $35 $703 1,370Pyrophoric Gasannually1237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 334$ $391 $57 $18 $351 $351 1,376Pyrophoric Materials (Liquids & Solids)annually4 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 1,335$ $1,564 $229 $18 $351 $1,406 -$ $18 $351 9,343$ $10,948 $1,605 $18 $351 $9,839 -$ $18 $351 5,672$ $6,647 $975 $18 $351 $5,973 -$ $37 $734 -$ $70 $1,397 1,371Toxic, Highly Toxic, Moderately Toxic, Health Hazard Gasannually11237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 3,670$ $4,301 $631 $18 $351 $3,865 12,680$ $14,858 $2,178 $18 $351 $13,352 334$ $391 $57 $18 $351 $351 -$ $18 $351 -$ $18 $351 -$ $18 $351 -$ -$ -$ $38 $761 -$ $25 $498 110,639$ $129,636 $18,997 $25 $498 $116,509 -$ 1,305Level I Facility81 237$ $96 $334 391.00$ $57 27,028$ $31,671 $4,643 $18 $351 $28,462 79,414$ $93,058 $13,644 $35 $703 $83,628 254,926$ $298,915 $43,989 $71 $1,406 $268,452 17,351$ $20,332 $2,981 $35 $703 $18,272 Capital Accounting Partners Page 17 of 24 BldCostCalcs Palo Alto Building Dept Building Valuation and Flat Fees Service # If Any Fee Name BUILDING FEES 1,310 Provisional (6 Month) Fire Inspection Fees 1,313 Additional Resinspection Fee (up to 2 hours during normal business hours) 1,313 Additional Resinspection Fee (each additional hour) 1,314 After Hours Inspection Fee 1,316 Care Facility 1,317 Care Facility Inspection Including Fire Clearance (7-14 clients) Care Facility Inspection Including Fire Clearance (more than 14 1,315 Christmas Tree Lot/Pumpkin Patch 1,321 High Rise Building - Certificate of Compliance (annually up to 4 1,322 High Rise Building - Certificate of Compliance (each additional hour)) 1,318 Outside Cooking Booths 1,320 Standby Fire Watch or After Hours at Fire or Incident Scene 1,319 Use and Occupancy Fire Inspection As-Built Plan Check and Additional Work Investigations & Consultations 1,325 Additional Hours Over Plan Review/Inspection 1,323 Alternate Means and Methods Application 1,324 Appeals to Decisions 1,322 Consultation Fee 1,328 1,327 Hydrant Flow Fee 1,326 Site Disaster Planning Life Safety & Fire Protection 1294A Automatic Fire Sprinkler Installation/Modification 1- 19 heads 1,295 Automatic Fire Sprinkler Installation/Modification (plus per head) Annual Revenue With Reserves Revenue at Full Cost of Services Projection of Revenues at Current Fees Annual Surplus (subsidy) R e q u i 3 Months Reserve, 5 Year Build Full Cost / Unit With Reserves ANNUAL REVENUE ANALYSIS INCLUDING RESERVES Reserve RequirementsAnnual Revenue Impact BUILDING FEES $ 652,317 -$ $35 $703 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 99,531$ $117,150 $17,619 $35 $699 $104,812 -$ $18 $349 -$ $26 $524 -$ -$ $35 $699 -$ $18 $349 -$ $18 $349 -$ $73 $1,456 -$ $18 $349 -$ $26 $524 -$ $18 $349 51,424$ $22,940 ($28,484)$18 $349 $54,153 49,766$ $58,500 $8,734 $35 $699 $52,406 -$ -$ -$ $13 $249 53,160$ $55,860 $2,700 $38 $746 $55,980 -$ $18 $349 157,591$ $185,725 $28,134 $18 $349 $165,953 -$ 24,883$ $29,716 $4,833 $18 $349 $26,203 -$ $18 $349 -$ -$ -$ $78 $1,543 -$ $0 $3 Capital Accounting Partners Page 18 of 24 BldCostCalcs Palo Alto Building Dept Building Valuation and Flat Fees Service # If Any Fee Name BUILDING FEES 1,301 Express Fire Protection Plan Check Fee 1,296 Fire Alarm System Installation and Modification 1,297 Fire Alarm System Installation and Modification (plus a device or contact point) 1,303 Fire Protection and Fire Access Plan Review for New Single Family Dwellings or Additions 1,298 Hydrant Installation/Modification - Private 1,295 Other Automatic Fire Extinguishing System 1,297 Standpipe System - Wet, Dry, or Combination 1,300 Temporary Certificate of Occupancy 1,299 Underground Fire Service Line 1,304 Verification of Fire Protection System Maintenance and Certification Food truck permits Multifamily dwellings, hotels & motels 4-50 units 51-100 units Greater than 100 units Fire Prevention Inspection of Private Schools 1294B Automatic Fire Sprinkler Installation/Modification 19+ Specific Hazard Permits 1,329 Aerosol Products 1,330 1,331 1,332 Bowling Alley and Pin Refinishing Involving the use of Flammable 1,333 Candles and Open Flames in Assembly Areas 1,334 Carnivals and Fairs 1,335 Cellulose Nitrate Storage/Nitrate Film 1,337 1,336 1,338 1,339 1,340 1,341 1,342 High-piled Combustible Storage 1,343 Hot Work (Welding) Operations 1,349 Liquid or Gas-Fueled Powered Equipment 1,344 Annual Revenue With Reserves Revenue at Full Cost of Services Projection of Revenues at Current Fees Annual Surplus (subsidy) R e q u i 3 Months Reserve, 5 Year Build Full Cost / Unit With Reserves ANNUAL REVENUE ANALYSIS INCLUDING RESERVES Reserve RequirementsAnnual Revenue Impact BUILDING FEES $ 652,317 -$ -$ $48 $948 -$ $1 $21 -$ $39 $773 -$ $9 $175 -$ $48 $948 16,589$ $19,500 $2,911 $35 $699 $17,469 -$ $38 $757 234,590$ $280,500 $45,910 $83 $1,647 $247,038 -$ $3 $64 -$ $9 $175 -$ -$ $18 $349 -$ $35 $699 -$ $53 $1,048 -$ $35 $699 -$ $35 $699 -$ -$ $22 $437 -$ -$ -$ $51 $1,019 -$ $18 $349 -$ $73 $1,456 -$ $5 $102 -$ -$ 1,338 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ $18 $349 -$ Capital Accounting Partners Page 19 of 24 BldCostCalcs Palo Alto Building Dept Building Valuation and Flat Fees Service # If Any Fee Name BUILDING FEES 1,350 1,345 Malls - Covered 1,351 Occupant Load Increase - Temporary Public Assembly 1,352 Open Burning 1,348 Open Flame/Flame Producing Devices 1,353 Operate a Tank Vehicle to Transport Flammable/Combustible Liquids 1,347 Place of Public Assembly - Temporary 1,346 Temporary Kiosks Place of Assembly Fire Miscellaneous Fees TCO fee for Vendors/Stock occupancy (Requires at least one additional inspection) 1,288 Emergency Response Fee - Hazmat (PAMC 17.24.050) 1,289 Installation or Closure Without Approved Plans and/or Permits Fire plans revision Building Admin and Reinspection Fees 1,176 All Other Publications 1,201 1,172 Electric Service and Safety Inspection 1,181 Extension of Building Permit or Building Permit Application 1,174 Inspections and Investigations - Outside Normal Business Hours (1.5xOThour) 1,175 Inspections and Investigations - Outside Normal Business Hours (2.0xOThour) 1,173 Inspections and Investigations - Unclassified 1,184 Reactivation of Expired Building Permit - All Others (50% Bldg permit fee) 1,183 Reactivation of Expired Building Permit - Final Inspection Only 1,182 Reactivation of Expired Building Permit Application 1,178 Real Property Research Fee (1-hour minimum) 1,177 Records Retention 1,180 Reinspection Fee - Multi-Family Residential and Non-Residential 1,179 Reinspection Fee - Single Family Residential (each secondary inspection type) 1,180 Reinspection Fee - Single Family Residential (each primary inspection type) Annual Revenue With Reserves Revenue at Full Cost of Services Projection of Revenues at Current Fees Annual Surplus (subsidy) R e q u i 3 Months Reserve, 5 Year Build Full Cost / Unit With Reserves ANNUAL REVENUE ANALYSIS INCLUDING RESERVES Reserve RequirementsAnnual Revenue Impact BUILDING FEES $ 652,317 -$ -$ $35 $699 -$ $18 $349 -$ $18 $349 -$ $18 $349 -$ $25 $495 -$ $18 $349 -$ -$ $18 $18 -$ 267,165$ $303,000 $35,835 $57 $1,125 $281,340 -$ $18 $349 -$ -$ -$ $16 -$ 1,172Electric Service and Safety Inspectionper hour 162$ $23 $185 169.00$ ($16)-$ $12 $197 2,293$ $2,945 $652 $5 $79 $2,442 346$ $408 $62 $23 $369 $369 24,015$ $28,288 $4,273 $30 $492 $25,584 -$ $15 $246 3,958$ ($3,958)$14 $222 $4,216 3,846$ $4,528 $682 $16 $256 $4,097 2,344$ $3,376 $1,032 $10 $156 $2,497 -$ $14 $229 113,606$ $121,404 $7,798 $0 $6 $121,027 257$ $630 $373 $8 $137 $274 997$ $3,458 $2,461 $5 $76 $1,062 -$ $9 $141 Capital Accounting Partners Page 20 of 24 BldCostCalcs Palo Alto Building Dept Building Valuation and Flat Fees Service # If Any Fee Name BUILDING FEES 1,171 Request for Release of Building Plans 1,175 Inspection Guidelines Conditional Utility Agreement Emergency Responder Radio Coverage (testing) fee. PUBLIC WORKS 1,166 Protected Tree Removal 1,283 Grading: A. 101 - 1,000 cubic yards (first 101 CY) 1,284 Grading: A. 101 - 1,000 cubic yards (plus each additional 100 CY or fraction thereof) 1,284 Grading: B. 1,001 - 10,000 cubic yards (first 1000 CY) 1,285 Grading: B. 1,001 - 10,000 cubic yards (each additional CY or fraction thereof) 1,285 Grading: C. 10,001 or more cubic yards (first 10,000 CY) 1,286 Grading: C. 10,001 or more cubic yards (each additional 10,000 CY or fraction thereof) 248 Tree Inspection for Private Development 1,287 1,288 Wet Season Construction Site Storm Water Inspection 1,286 1,171 Dumpster, Container Bldg Non-residential single day Bldg Non-residential long-term (more than 5 days) Bldg Non-residential long-term (less than 5 days) Bldg Residential (encroachments) Bldg VTA Bus Shelter installation/relocation GREEN BUILDING FEES Bldg Alterations and additions for single and multifamily < 1,000 sq ft and increases conditioned space Bldg Alterations and additions for single and multifamily > 1,000 sq ft Bldg Multi Family New Construction of 1-3 (attached) Units Bldg Multi Family New Construction of 4 or more units Bldg New Single family and duplex Bldg Tenant improvements, renovations, or alterations > 5,000 sq ft that includes replacement or alteration of at least two of the following: HVAC system, building envelope, hot water system, or lighting system and project value greater than $200,000. Annual Revenue With Reserves Revenue at Full Cost of Services Projection of Revenues at Current Fees Annual Surplus (subsidy) R e q u i 3 Months Reserve, 5 Year Build Full Cost / Unit With Reserves ANNUAL REVENUE ANALYSIS INCLUDING RESERVES Reserve RequirementsAnnual Revenue Impact BUILDING FEES $ 652,317 -$ $5 $77 -$ 41,377$ $49,555 $8,178 $14 $236 $44,080 11,547$ $16,575 $5,028 $30 $492 $12,301 29,331$ $15,680 ($13,651)$34 $558 $31,247 3,588$ $5,910 $2,322 $8 $127 $3,823 -$ $8 $127 35,882$ $59,100 $23,218 $78 $1,274 $38,226 -$ $8 $127 8,289$ $19,190 $10,901 $108 $1,766 $8,831 -$ $8 $127 14,863$ $7,645 ($7,218)$18 $288 $15,833 -$ 4,161$ ($4,161)$14 $222 $4,433 -$ 7,138$ $12,400 $5,262 $12 $190 $7,604 41,175$ $68,695 $27,520 $49 $798 $43,865 21,720$ $50,975 $29,255 $57 $926 $23,139 11,997$ $36,650 $24,653 $31 $511 $12,780 2,447$ $2,004 ($443)$40 $652 $2,606 -$ 42,474$ $42,471 ($3)$12 $441 $43,668 117,574$ $117,528 ($46)$20 $728 $120,881 3,691$ $3,692 $1 $26 $949 $3,795 -$ $42 $1,523 6,460$ $6,461 $1 $26 $949 $6,641 21,880$ $21,896 $16 $18 $662 $22,496 Capital Accounting Partners Page 21 of 24 BldCostCalcs Palo Alto Building Dept Building Valuation and Flat Fees Service # If Any Fee Name BUILDING FEES Bldg C. Tenant improvements, renovations or alterations > $200,000 in valuation (and not triggered by a Calgreen Tier) Bldg If the project is over $100,000 Energy Star is required after 12 months of occupancy Bldg New commercial 1000 - 25,000 SF Bldg New commercial 25,001-50,000 SF Bldg New commercial >50,000 SF Bldg Landscape Review - plan review: Non-residential Bldg Landscape Review - inspection Bldg Landscape Review - plan review Bldg Landscape Review - inspection Bldg Landscape Review - plan review Bldg Landscape Review - inspection Bldg ADDITIONAL PUBLIC WORKS FEES Bldg Fence (encroachment permit) Bldg A. Constriction in public rght of way($1-$5,999) Bldg B. Constriction in public rght of way($6,000-$25,999) Bldg B. Constriction in public rght of way($6,000-$25,999) Bldg C. Constriction in public rght of way($26,000-$100,999) Bldg C. Constriction in public rght of way($26,000-$100,999) Bldg D. Constriction in public rght of way(>$101,000) Bldg D. Constriction in public rght of way(>$101,000) Bldg Bldg Improvement plan review Bldg Bldg Temporary Discharge to Storm Drain from Construction Site Bldg Temporary Discharge to Storm Drain (per week of discharge); this is additional to other fee Annual Revenue With Reserves Revenue at Full Cost of Services Projection of Revenues at Current Fees Annual Surplus (subsidy) R e q u i 3 Months Reserve, 5 Year Build Full Cost / Unit With Reserves ANNUAL REVENUE ANALYSIS INCLUDING RESERVES Reserve RequirementsAnnual Revenue Impact BUILDING FEES $ 652,317 27,029$ $27,048 $19 $18 $662 $27,789 -$ $4 $144 25,243$ $25,242 ($1)$34 $1,236 $25,953 -$ $42 $1,523 -$ $50 $1,810 113,185$ $113,160 ($25)$53 $1,939 $116,344 11,070$ $11,100 $30 $5 $190 $11,379 92,870$ $92,880 $10 $32 $1,193 $95,462 14,761$ $14,800 $39 $5 $190 $15,173 18,864$ $18,860 ($4)$53 $1,939 $19,391 1,845$ $1,850 $5 $5 $190 $1,897 -$ 1,280$ $191 ($1,089)$84 $1,363 $1,363 54,069$ $92,560 $38,491 $27 $443 $57,601 20,796$ $35,600 $14,804 $27 $443 $22,154 46,800$ ($46,800)$37 6.14%$49,140 50,173$ $88,992 $38,819 $91 $1,485 $53,451 81,000$ ($81,000)$136 4.725%$85,050 31,557$ $74,004 $42,447 $294 $4,803 $33,619 66,500$ ($66,500)$429 3.99%$69,856 -$ -$ -$ 37,490$ ($37,490)$163 $2,663 $39,939 39,341$ ($39,341)$11 $274 $41,026 Capital Accounting Partners Page 22 of 24 BldCostCalcs Palo Alto Building Dept Building Valuation and Flat Fees Service # If Any Fee Name BUILDING FEES Bldg Bldg Miscellaneous Building Fees 1 Commercial & Residential windows, skylights and doors, New and alteration (structural) (per 5) 2 Commercial & Residential windows, skylights and doors, New and alteration (non-structural) (per 10) 3 Residential Reroof 4 Residential Reroof (overlay) 5 6 Commercial and multifamily reroof (first 5000 SF) 7 Commercial and multifamily reroof (each additional 2500 SF) 8 Kitchen (nonstructural) (per each) 9 Bathroom (nonstructural) per each 10 Commercial & Residential Siding replacement or repair 11 Commercial & Residential Stucco replacement or repair 12 13 Technology Surcharge (revenue requirement) 14 15 Commercial doors, new and alteration (structural) (per 5 doors) 16 Commercial door replacement (nonstructural) (per 10) 17 Residential dry rot repair and replacement 18 19 Deck, new or repair up to 1000 SF 20 Deck, new or repair each additional 1000 SF 21 Sign permit 22 Work without a permit 23 Residential and commercial window awnings (groups of 5) 24 Cell Tower Equip 25 Utilities handling fee 26 Progress and partial inspections 27 Consultation (per hour) 28 29 Certifications: Annual Revenue With Reserves Revenue at Full Cost of Services Projection of Revenues at Current Fees Annual Surplus (subsidy) R e q u i 3 Months Reserve, 5 Year Build Full Cost / Unit With Reserves ANNUAL REVENUE ANALYSIS INCLUDING RESERVES Reserve RequirementsAnnual Revenue Impact BUILDING FEES $ 652,317 -$ -$ 35,009$ ($35,009)$11 $279 $36,508 -$ $6 $139 7,750$ ($7,750)$11 $279 $8,082 -$ $3 $70 -$ 4,009$ ($4,009)$11 $279 $4,180 -$ $3 $70 49,106$ ($49,106)$9 $209 $51,209 71,355$ ($71,355)$11 $279 $74,410 4,410$ ($4,410)$6 $139 $4,598 2,806$ ($2,806)$9 $209 $2,926 -$ 250,000$ $0 ($250,000)$0 250,000$ -$ -$ $9 $209 -$ $6 $139 2,205$ ($2,205)$9 $209 $2,299 -$ $3 $70 4,810$ ($4,810)$9 $209 $5,016 -$ $3 $70 -$ $5 $116 -$ 67$ ($67)$3 $70 $70 2,806$ ($2,806)$9 $209 $2,926 -$ $5 $115 -$ $2 $56 -$ -$ -$ Capital Accounting Partners Page 23 of 24 BldCostCalcs Palo Alto Building Dept Building Valuation and Flat Fees Service # If Any Fee Name BUILDING FEES 30 Green Building - Special inspector applications and qualifications (initial review) 31 Green Building - Special inspector applications and qualifications (renewal/update) 32 Special Inspections - materials testing lab certification (up to 4 hours) 33 Special Inspections - materials testing lab certification (each additional hour) 34 Miscellaneous Building - base fee 35 Retaining Walls - first 100 LF 36 Retaining Walls - each additional 100 LF 37 Fees not listed above will either be based on an applicable hourly rate or at the given valuation Annual Revenue With Reserves Revenue at Full Cost of Services Projection of Revenues at Current Fees Annual Surplus (subsidy) R e q u i 3 Months Reserve, 5 Year Build Full Cost / Unit With Reserves ANNUAL REVENUE ANALYSIS INCLUDING RESERVES Reserve RequirementsAnnual Revenue Impact BUILDING FEES $ 652,317 -$ $16 $395 -$ $8 $197 -$ $65 $1,579 -$ $16 $395 73,510$ ($73,510)$5 $115 $76,658 -$ $4 $93 -$ $2 $46 -$ Annual Revenue Impact Revenue at Full Cost of Services Projection of Revenues at Current Fees Annual Surplus (subsidy)With Reserves 14,077,204$ 12,975,074$ ($1,102,130)$14,729,521 Capital Accounting Partners Page 24 of 24 BldCostCalcs City of Palo Alto (ID # 8175) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Informational Report Meeting Date: 6/19/2017 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Clarification to FY2017 Muni Fee Schedule for Development Services Title: Clarification to FY2017 Municipal Fee Schedule for Development Services From: City Manager Lead Department: Development Services Department Recommendation This is an informational item; no Council action is required. Executive Summary This is an Informational Report clarifying the definitions of “Project” and “Maintenance” items in building construction. This report responds to a request from the December 12, 2016 Council hearing for the Adoption of an Ordinance Amending the FY 2017 Municipal Fee Schedule to Reflect Development Services Cost of Services Study and FY 2017 Annual Adjustment. During that same meeting, Council also directed that proposed changes to Special Event fees be removed from the fee schedule prior to the second reading. After reviewing the Fee Schedule proposal and the Council’s comments, the Development Services Department and Fire Marshal have chosen not to re-introduce the “Special Event” fee in question in the proposed FY 2017 fee schedule. The Fire Marshal will continue to work with the Special Events Committee (headed by the Palo Alto Police Department) to ensure the public safety at large events, but has no control over the fees charged by the other departments involved. Background and Discussion “Projects” and “Maintenance” Definitions The California Building Code (CBC) requires building permits when any owner or owner’s agent intends to construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move demolish or change the occupancy of a building or structure or to install, enlarge, alter, repair, remove, convert or replace any City of Palo Alto Page 2 electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing system. A permit is to be obtained from the Development Services department to ensure that the work performed is in compliance with the code. Within the CBC, there are exceptions to when a permit is required. For building permits, the following exceptions apply to structures: 1. One-story detached accessory structures used as storage sheds and playhouses and similar uses with a floor area not greater than 120 square feet, s.f. 2. Fences not over 7-feet high. 3. Retaining walls that are not over 4-feet in height measured from the bottom of the footing to the top of the wall. 4. Sidewalks and driveways not more than 30 inches above the adjacent grade and not over any basement or story below. 5. Painting, papering, tiling, carpeting, cabinets, counter tops and similar finish work. 6. Swings and other playground equipment accessory to detached one and two family dwellings. 7. Non-fixed and movable fixtures, cases, racks, counters and partitions not over 5 feet and 9 inches in height. For Electrical Residential Permits: 1. Minor repairs and maintenance, including the replacement of lamps or the connection of approved portable electrical equipment. For Gas & Mechanical Residential Permits: 1. Portable heating appliance 2. Replacement of any minor part that does not alter the equipment to make is unsafe. 3. Portable ventilation equipment 4. Portable cooling unit 5. Steam, hot or chilled water piping within any heating or cooling equipment For Plumbing Residential Permits: 1. The stopping of leaks in drains, water, waste or vent piping. 2. The clearing of stoppages or repairing leaks in pipes, valves or fixtures and the removal and reinstallation of water closets (toilets). New building construction, additions to existing buildings, remodeling kitchens and bathrooms are the most common residential projects that apply for building permits. These projects often combine the aspects of multiple construction disciplines, such as structural engineering, architectural life safety, mechanical, electrical and plumbing design and construction. Even small projects of kitchen and bathroom remodels can encompass multiple construction trades in its design and construction. City of Palo Alto Page 3 Some components, such as faucet and toilet replacements, repairing of plumbing piping and mechanical duct leaks are often performed on an individual basis. Unless performed as part of a larger project, this type of work is considered a maintenance item, which may be exempt from permit requirements. Even though some of the maintenance items do not require building permits, the work is required to comply with the applicable code and state regulations. Council had a question about the need for a permit to replace a single fixture in a bathroom or kitchen. Single fixture replacements fall in the category of maintenance and do not trigger the need for a building permit. Upon review of the building sub-permits (e.g., Plumbing, Mechanical and Electrical stand-alone permits) that were issued in 2016, there were no records of a single fixture permit, e.g., water-closet, faucet, receptacle outlet, etc., found to be issued. However, when work combines multiple construction trades, e.g. bathroom “like for like” remodels, and work that combines construction trades with minor structural alterations, e.g., kitchen remodel that relocates a bearing wall, or adds a window to an exterior wall, then the proposed work will be considered a project that does require a building permit, which includes plan review and field inspections. Fire Marshal’s Review of Special Events Staff has revisited their permitting process in response to the council’s question about the extent to which permits are needed for special events. It was council’s desire to reduce hurdles and unnecessary obstacles in the permitting of special events. While the previously proposed “Special Event” fee was removed, the Fire Department is bound by the California Fire code to permit and evaluate all tents and membrane structures having an area in excess of 400 square feet (CFC Sec. 3103.2). In response to council’s direction, staff has simplified the approval process and will simply continue using the existing tent permit fee structure from the 2016 fee schedule. Staff feels they can work with applicants to properly inspect these tents within the existing fee structure. Attachments:  City Council Action Minutes_12.12.16 City of Palo Alto (ID # 7525) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 12/12/2016 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Development Services Cost of Services Study Title: PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending the FY 2017 Municipal Fee Schedule to Reflect Development Services Cost of Services Study and FY 2017 Annual Adjustment From: City Manager Lead Department: Development Services Department Recommendation Staff and the Finance Committee recommend that the City Council adopt an ordinance (Attachment A) to update the Fiscal Year 2017 Municipal Fee Schedule to adjust Development Services Municipal Fees, based on the completion of a Cost of Services Study (Attachment B) and adjusted by the annual inflator applied to Municipal Fees from Fiscal Year 2016 to Fiscal Year 2017. At the Finance Committee meeting of November 15, 2016, the Development Services Municipal Fee amendments were approved 4-0 without any recommended changes. Executive Summary The Development Services Department (DSD) initiated a Cost of Services Study in 2015 to evaluate development related service fees incurred by applicants seeking a construction related permit. These fees had not been reevaluated for many years, and the resulting recommendations -- if approved -- would increase fee revenues and lower General Fund subsidies consistent with the Cost Recovery Policy adopted by the City Council in May 2015. The proposed changes would amend the fee schedule to reflect current International Code Council (ICC) unit fee schedule structures and the City’s Green Building and Energy Ordinances by eliminating some fees, proposing new fees, consolidating or expanding others, and adjusting certain fees to a single flat-fee per permit. The City Council has the discretion to determine the level of cost recovery for each of these fees. However, under State law, fees cannot be set above the cost of service. The consultant report is discussed in detail below, and the proposed ordinance adopting fee changes (Attachment A) and the full text of the consultant report (Attachment B) are attached. City of Palo Alto Page 2 This study was completed based on FY 2016 data, therefore an annual inflation value of 5.5%, as recommended by the Office of Management and Budget for all Citywide fees in Fiscal Year 2017, has been included in the fees detailed in Attachment A as part of the final ordinance action for City Council consideration. Background In July 2010, the City Manager launched the comprehensive “Development Center Blueprint” (Blueprint) project to restructure and adopt more holistic approaches to integrated development review, permitting services, and staff coordination in order to improve organizational efficiencies and minimize unnecessary costs and delays to customers. Since the inception of the Blueprint, DSD has implemented new technologies, acquired additional space, upgraded the existing space, and consolidated into a central department, that consists of Building (formerly within the Planning department), Planning, Public Works, and Fire Prevention divisions. Development Services is now a “one-stop” shop, located in a leased space across from City Hall. Design development projects now have a single point of contact that facilitates the customers’ experience throughout the permitting and construction process. As part of the Fiscal Year 2014 Adopted Budget, and in efforts to better align the budget with the current operational structure, the City Council created the Development Services Department. Development Services embodies all development-related activities, including staff allocations, resources, and associated service fees across multiple departments. The operating budget currently relies on development review fees, permitting fees, and a subsidy from the General Fund. Though the fees have been adjusted annually for inflation factors, it has been at least five years since the fee schedule and structure were last subject to a full evaluation. The Development Services Department is made up of key representatives from four different departments including the Building, Planning, Public Works, and Fire divisions. These representatives are physically stationed at the Development Center (285 Hamilton Avenue) or elsewhere in the City, and provide development-related services to applicants seeking a construction-related permit. In the current budget structure, representatives are allocated proportionally to Development Services based on their time involved in the review process. Approximately 80 employees are fully or fractionally budgeted to the department, resulting in a total of 40 FTE. For example, Development Services has watershed protection representatives in the Public Works department and transportation planners in the Planning department City of Palo Alto Page 3 that review building permits. In addition to personnel costs, Development Services has specific overhead and indirect charges such as the rent, administrative functions, and city support services like Administrative Services, City Attorney, and Human Resources that must also be accounted for. As a department that operates based on fee revenues, the incoming fees must offset all expenses which include personnel, overhead, and indirect charges. On May 18, 2015 the City Council adopted the User Fee Recovery Level Policy (CMR 5735) that suggests levels of cost recovery (high, medium, and low) based upon policy considerations. As referenced in the table below, activities in which participants receive most or all of the benefit from the service provided (i.e. issuance of building permits), or which are regulatory in nature, fall within the “high” cost recovery level group. The City retained the services of Capital Accounting Partners (CAP) to complete a cost of services study to identify the total cost of providing services for which the City charges fees, Phase I of which is included as Attachment D. CAP has prepared hundreds of cost allocation plans for cities, counties and special districts throughout California, Texas, Washington and more. Some of their clients include San Diego, Glendale, Los Gatos, Santa Barbara, Burbank and Sacramento. Dan Edds is a project manager with CAP and has more than 15 years of experience consulting within the public sector. His operational improvement work has involved problem solving and process improvement opportunities for core business processes. CAP uses an activity-based costing model to calculate the cost of a specific service (detailed further in Attachment B), which identifies activities in an organization and assigns the cost of each activity with resources to all services according to the consumption by each. The model assigns direct and indirect costs to each fee, and therefore, calculates the cost of each fee at full cost recovery. As discussed below, Phase I of the study includes recommendations for the Department’s flat fees only. Discussion Fees and Fee Structure: Development Services fees are structured in two ways: flat or project valuation-based. Based on estimated FY 2016 revenues, approximately 75%, or $8.6 million, of departmental revenue is derived from project valuation-based fees. Major project valuation-based fees include the Building Permit and Plan Check fees. Industry practice correlates the valuation of a job to its complexity, in the aggregate, and building permit and plan check fees are then calculated based on a percentage of a project’s valuation. In contrast, flat rate fees are based on time and materials and activity levels. These fees comprise the remaining Development Services revenue. The following represents the projected breakdown of FY 2016 revenues evaluated as part of the fee study, at current fee levels: FY 2016 Development Services Projected Revenue City of Palo Alto Page 4 Fee Study Project Steps and Process: CAP was tasked to prepare a detailed cost analysis of its Development Services user fees with the objective of ensuring that the Development Services Department is fully accounting for all costs and recovering adequate revenues to cover expenses. Based on the current organizational structure, CAP developed a costing model to analyze the total cost of fee generating services and recommend adjustments necessary to reach full recovery. As the study progressed, it was determined that additional data points were necessary to recommend adjustments for valuation-based fee activities. Therefore, the report includes only a high-level assessment of aggregated building permit and plan check activities. Staff is currently in the process of implementing new data collection fields in the permit system and is expanding the existing study to include a survey of other comparable City valuation tables and alternative permit fee structures for what are currently valuation-based fees. The study conducted by CAP for all Non-Valuation-based fees, or “flat rate” fees, utilized an activity-based costing model to calculate the full cost of providing specific services. This methodology identifies activities in an organization and assigns the cost of each activity with resources to all services according to the consumption by each. The model assigns direct and indirect costs to each fee, where all proposed fees have been calculated at full recovery. A summary of how CAP builds cost structures follows: 1. Direct Costs Through meetings with staff, CAP identified all direct staff time spent on fee-related activities or services, where direct time is indicative of workers who are directly involved with activities of a specific fee or service. Average salaries and the City Standard productive rate of 1,600 hours/year were used for these calculations. Additionally, CAP identified other operational costs that are directly attributed to certain services, such as the Department’s use of on-call consultants for inspections in the Building and Fire divisions. 2. Indirect Costs (citywide administration) City of Palo Alto Page 5 These costs include processes that support, but do not directly apply to any specific activity or fee, such as the Citywide and Departmental Overhead. The Citywide overhead costs are allocated to departments based on the City’s Cost Allocation Plan. These represent expenses of supporting departments including the offices of the City Manager, City Attorney, City Auditor, City Clerk, Administrative Services, Human Resources, Information Technology, and Facilities Maintenance. 3. Overhead (departmental administration) Department Overhead is represented in two aspects: 1) Development Services as a whole; and 2) Divisional Overhead. Development Services overhead includes the salaries of the Director, the Director’s Administrative Assistant, and the Senior Management Analyst, as well as rent, and other supplies commonly used by all divisions of the department (Building, Planning, Public Works, and Fire Prevention). These are not assigned to any particular service, but are allocated to all fees since these professionals support all the activities of the department as a whole. The Divisional Overhead represents costs associated with managers, supervisors, and support staff and common purpose operational costs of the Public Works, Planning, and Fire Departments. For example, direct staff is allocated as a percentage of an FTE to Development Services based upon activity levels for Public Works, while divisional overhead which reflects the Public Works administrative costs such as budget, contract, and executive leadership costs are calculated as a rate that is applied to the salaries allocated to Development services and executed through a year-end adjustment. The rate assumes that the same level of administrative support provided to the Public Works Department is provided to the Public Works division within Development Services. These are not assigned to any particular service, but are allocated to all fees in the respective division. 4. Reserve A reserve fund provides a mechanism to finance future unanticipated events and other identified or planned needs of the department. For purposes of the calculation, the reserve amount is allocated to all fees, similar to Overhead. As part of the study, the consultant recommended that the City set a specific reserve policy, and included an illustrative calculation based on the common practice of building 6-12 months of operating expenses over a three year period. This is equivalent to a $2.3 million reserve within the annual cost structure of the department, and the study’s results show the full cost of fees with and without a reserve. However, due to the significant changes recommended to move closer towards cost recovery, and the anticipated future adjustments valuation-based fees, staff does not recommend the establishment of a reserve at this time. As such, the proposed fees presented in Attachment A do not include any assumption for reserve costs. Projections: The study indicates a total projected General Fund subsidy in FY 2016 of $1,787,985, excluding impacts of one-time activities, such as deferred revenue for large projects and expense savings. Once adjusted for one-time revenues, the net general fund subsidy in FY 2016 is approximately City of Palo Alto Page 6 $294,000. Drivers of Cost Recovery Variances: Staff believes the following to be key drivers for cost recovery variances within the Public Works, Planning, and Fire Prevention divisions: 1. Length of time since last comprehensive Fee Study. While fees have been adjusted annually for inflation factors, it has been at least five years since the fee schedule and structure were last subject to a full evaluation. 2. Fee levels in Planning, Public Works, and Fire have historically been set below full cost recovery. 3. As part of the creation of Development Services, the cost structure for Planning, Public Works, and Fire divisions has significantly changed. For example, divisions are now responsible for overhead allocations such as rent, Development Services managerial staff, and other commonly used operating expenses (e.g. scanning services, office supplies, etc.). Findings & Recommendations: Modifications to flat fees, representing approximately 25% or $2.7 million of departmental revenues, are representative of current resources, activities, and activity levels, as well as changes to California Building and Fire Codes, and/or state mandates. Recommended modifications to fees included re-naming fees, altering tiered fees and triggers, removing, and creating new fees. The proposed fees, including a description of changes where applicable, are included in Attachment A. Fire Prevention The largest impact of the Fee Study is anticipated in the Fire Prevention Division. Fire Prevention fees have historically been set below cost recovery, or were provided at no cost, and a complete fee study or evaluation has not been completed in at least five years. Further, as part of creating Development Services, all Fire Prevention staff and associated costs were moved to Development Services offices resulting in the need for additional space. Moving Fire Prevention entirely out of the Fire Department and into Development Services means that this division is now subject to a different cost structure that includes overhead allocations such as rent, Development Services managerial staff, and other commonly used operating expenses (e.g. scanning services, office supplies, etc.). All fees in Fire Prevention were calculated according to the consultant’s activity-based model, where fees have been proposed at full cost based on current activities, activity levels, and proposed resources. These proposed fees are included in the fee study and are proposed to be increased as recommended by CAP. City of Palo Alto Page 7 Public Works Public Works, like Planning, has a host of fees. However, many of their fees can be applied to both development and non-development-related work. The differentiating factor is that development-related work is entirely the result of private development. For example, a commercial developer has to apply for a street work permit to work in the right-of-way. That is entirely due to the impacts associated with their project. That work is driven by private interests and it has been the direction from Council to ensure that those fees are set at full cost recovery. Those fees are collected by and reside in Development Services as do the subsequent direct, indirect and overhead Public Works costs associated with providing those services. For purposes of this study, private development work is separate and distinct from non- development related work. Therefore, those services and fees are provided by Public Works as a whole, and the fees are set by Public Works as a whole through the Public Works departmental municipal fee schedule. Public Works, with direction from the City Council, decides how close to full cost recovery they should set those fees. The CAP study did include analysis of the Public Works Department, however, subsequent to the kick-off of the consultant study, updated analysis on staff allocations, time estimates, and fee volumes were obtained and staff was unable to incorporate this more current data into the consultant’s final results. Therefore, Public Works municipal fee proposals included as part of the development of the Adopted Fiscal Year 2017 Municipal Fee Schedule are reflective of a full cost recovery model, however, were not reflective of the specific methodologies and assumptions used in the CAP study. The FY 2017 Adopted Fees utilized the Questica Calculator launched by the Office of Management and Budget as opposed to those fees recommended in the CAP study. The Adopted amendments to Public Works’ fees in the Development Services Department represent significant recommended increases from the 2016 fees, and are expected to bring the Public Works fees much closer to cost recovery. As part of the FY 2018 budget process, the Office of Management and Budget, Development Services and Public Works will review these fees and ensure they are at full cost recovery and/or bring forward recommended adjustments to the fees and appropriate based on FY 2017 actual activity levels and estimated FY 2018 costs. Building Non-valuation fees were updated to reflect current ICC unit fee schedule structures, per California State code. Similar to Fire Prevention, a complete fee study or evaluation has not been completed in the last five years, and all fees are proposed at full cost according to the consultant’s activity based model and current activities, activity levels, and resources. The most significant changes recommended within the Building division are a result of restructuring Mechanical, Plumbing, and Electric Permit fees. These fees are charged in conjunction with the Building Permit and generally charge a Base Fee (representing administrative costs to process) and new or remodeled supplemental fee (based on square footage and representative of inspection costs). As a result of the study, current processing and inspection times have both decreased. At full cost, the base fee is proposed to decrease to $82, from $92, and the square footage fee to decrease to $0.02, from $0.11 per square foot. City of Palo Alto Page 8 Mechanical, Plumbing, and Electric fees can also be charged as stand-alone permits. These fees are structured as a Base fee (representing administrative costs to process) plus a supplemental permit fee (representing inspection costs). The base fee is proposed to decrease to $82 from $92 as stated above, where the unit of measure for the supplemental permit is proposed to change from “each” to “per permit”. The current unit of measure is reflective of time estimates for each incremental measure of an activity, such as the inspection of each individual light fixture or switch at $0.50/each. Determining the incremental unit of time is incredibly difficult, hard to justify, and is no longer a method promoted by ICC. As such, Development Services has revised these fees on a per permit basis, using time estimates of an average project (5,000 sq. ft.). In the case of the light fixture, the permit would be issued at a total cost of $82 for the Base Fee, representing administrative processing costs, plus $68 for the inspection of any number of light fixtures. Green Building Development Services continues to expand and develop the Green Building program in efforts to follow the City Council’s lead and maintain a leadership role in environmental sustainability. Fees were updated and new fees implemented to comply with State mandates, such as a Landscape review and permit management, as well as the current Green Building and Energy Ordinance. The cost structure of these fees includes consulting services associated with the integration and management of sustainable building practices and policies, Landscape review and permit management, as well as staff training, quality control, reporting, and informational outreach to the community. Use & Occupancy Use & Occupancy fees were included in the study; however, staff does not propose to adjust these fees at this time. These fees will be studied separately with the integration of the Business Registry fee where staff anticipates that drivers to calculate cost, such as activities and resources, will change as the program is developed. Next Steps: Development Services strives to operate as a revenue-supported department within the General Fund with the ultimate goal of being an enterprise fund. The ultimate goal of Development Services is to reach full cost recovery in all divisions and the adoption of the Fees outlined in Attachment A represents the next step towards this goal of full cost recovery. The department will continue to track revenues and expenditures at a divisional level through Fiscal Year 2017 in order to analyze their cost-recovery performance and will work collaboratively with the Office of Management and Budget, and the City Attorney’s Office to identify and define a reserve policy that is appropriate and specific to the Development Services. Staff anticipates returning to City Council with iterative recommendations, including adjustments to valuation-based fees and the inclusion of reserve costs, through subsequent budget processes. City of Palo Alto Page 9 Resource Impact The actions recommended in this report would increase the estimated revenue generated by the Development Service Department flat fee activities. Given the changing economic environment and the unknown potential impacts of the increases on activity levels (estimated to be minor), no adjustment to the budget is assumed. Revenue collections will be monitored and factored into the annual development of the budget as data is availabe and adjustments are found to be necessary. Environmental Review Adoption of an ordinance amending Development Services Municipal Fees is not a project for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and therefore no environmental review is necessary. Attachments:  Attachment A: Municipal Fee Proposals (PDF)  Attachment B: CAP Cost of Services Study (PDF)  Attachment C: 11-15-16_FCM-Excerpt-Item-3 (PDF) City of Palo Alto (ID # 7347) Finance Committee Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 11/15/2016 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Development Services Cost of Services Study Title: Development Services Cost of Services Study Including Fiscal Year 2017 Fee Proposals From: City Manager Lead Department: Development Services Department Recommendation Staff recommends that the Finance Committee recommend that the City Council adopt an ordinance amending to Development Services Municipal Fees as described in Attachment A, based on the completion of a Cost of Services Study (Attachment B) and adjusted by the annual inflator applied to Municipal Fees from Fiscal Year 2016 to Fiscal Year 2017. Executive Summary The Development Services Department (DSD) undertook a Cost of Services Study in 2015 to evaluate development related service fees incurred by applicants seeking a construction related permit. These fees had not been reevaluated for many years, and the resulting recommendations -- if approved -- would increase fee revenues and lower General Fund subsidies consistent with the Cost Recovery Policy adopted by the City Council in May 2015. The proposed changes would amend the fee schedule to reflect current International Code Council (ICC) unit fee schedule structures and the City’s Green Building and Energy Ordinances by eliminating some fees, proposing new fees, consolidating or expanding others, and adjusting certain fees to a single flat-fee per permit. The City Council has the discretion to determine the level of cost recovery for each of these fees. However, under State law, fees cannot be set above the cost of service. The consultant report is discussed in detail below, and the recommended fee changes (Attachment A) and the full text of the consultant report (Attachment B) are attached. This study was completed based on Fy2016 data, therefore an annual inflation value of 5.5%, as recommended by the Office of Management and Budget for all Citywide fees in Fiscal Year 2017, is not included in the fees detailed in Attachment A but staff does recommend that this increase be applied to all Development Services related fees in order to capture their cost in FY 2017 and included as part of the final ordinance action for City Council consideration. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Background In July 2010, the City Manager launched the comprehensive “Development Center Blueprint” (Blueprint) project to restructure and adopt more holistic approaches to integrated development review, permitting services, and staff coordination in order to improve organizational efficiencies and minimize unnecessary costs and delays to customers. Since the inception of the Blueprint, DSD has implemented new technologies, acquired additional space, upgraded the existing space, and consolidated into a central department, that consists of Building (formerly within the Planning department), Planning, Public Works, and Fire Prevention divisions. Development Services is now a “one-stop” shop, located in a leased space across from City Hall. Design development projects now have a single point of contact that facilitates the customers’ experience throughout the permitting and construction process. As part of the Fiscal Year 2014 Adopted Budget, and in efforts to better align the budget with the current operational structure, the City Council created the Development Services Department. Development Services embodies all development-related activities, including staff allocations, resources, and associated service fees across multiple departments. The operating budget currently relies on development review fees, permitting fees, and a subsidy from the General Fund. Though the fees have been adjusted annually for inflation factors, it has been at least five years since the fee schedule and structure were last subject to a full evaluation. The Development Services Department is made up of key representatives from four different departments including the Building, Planning, Public Works, and Fire divisions. These representatives are physically stationed at the Development Center (285 Hamilton Avenue) or elsewhere in the City, and provide development-related services to applicants seeking a construction-related permit. In the current budget structure, representatives are allocated proportionally to Development Services based on their time involved in the review process. Approximately 80 employees are fully or fractionally budgeted to the department, resulting in a total of 40 FTE. For example, Development Services has watershed protection representatives in the Public Works department and transportation planners in the Planning department that review building permits. In addition to personnel costs, Development Services has specific overhead and indirect charges such as the rent, administrative functions, and city support services like Administrative Services, City Attorney, and Human Resources that must also be accounted for. As a department that operates based on fee revenues, the incoming fees must offset all expenses which include City of Palo Alto Page 3 personnel, overhead, and indirect charges. On May 18, 2015 the City Council adopted the User Fee Recovery Level Policy (CMR 5735) that suggests levels of cost recovery (high, medium, and low) based upon policy considerations. As referenced in the table below, activities in which participants receive most or all of the benefit from the service provided (i.e. issuance of building permits), or which are regulatory in nature, fall within the “high” cost recovery level group. The City retained the services of Capital Accounting Partners (CAP) to complete a cost of services study to identify the total cost of providing services for which the City charges fees, Phase I of which is included as Attachment D. CAP has prepared hundreds of cost allocation plans for cities, counties and special districts throughout California, Texas, Washington and more. Some of their clients include San Diego, Glendale, Los Gatos, Santa Barbara, Burbank and Sacramento. Dan Edds is a project manager with CAP and has more than 15 years of experience consulting within the public sector. His operational improvement work has involved problem solving and process improvement opportunities for core business processes. CAP uses an activity-based costing model to calculate the cost of a specific service (detailed further in Attachment D), which identifies activities in an organization and assigns the cost of each activity with resources to all services according to the consumption by each. The model assigns direct and indirect costs to each fee, and therefore, calculates the cost of each fee at full cost recovery. As discussed below, Phase I of the study includes recommendations for the Department’s flat fees only. Discussion Fees and Fee Structure: Development Services fees are structured in two ways: flat or project valuation-based. Based on estimated FY 2016 revenues, approximately 75%, or $8.6 million, of departmental revenue is derived from project valuation-based fees. Major project valuation-based fees include the Building Permit and Plan Check fees. Industry practice correlates the valuation of a job to its complexity, in the aggregate, and as such fees are calculated based on a percentage of a projects valuation. Currently, the department uses the construction value for labor and materials of the permitted work as the basis for determining the total Building Permit fee. An additional Plan Check fee is assessed on top of the Building Permit, which is based on a percentage of the total Permit fee. The Plan Check fee is intended to recover costs associated with the Building, Fire & Life Safety, Zoning, and Public Works review of applicant plan submittals. In contrast, flat rate fees are fees costed based on time and materials and activity levels. These fees comprise the remaining Development Services revenue. The following represents the projected breakdown of FY 2016 revenues evaluated as part of the fee study, at current fee levels: City of Palo Alto Page 4 FY 2016 Development Services Projected Revenue Fee Study Project Steps and Process: CAP was tasked to prepare a detailed cost analysis of its Development Services user fees with the objective of ensuring that the Development Services Department is fully accounting for all costs and recovering adequate revenues to cover expenses. Based on the current organizational structure, CAP developed a costing model to analyze the total cost of fee generating services and recommend adjustments necessary to reach full recovery. As the study progressed, it was determined that additional data points were necessary to recommend adjustments for valuation-based fee activities. Therefore, the report includes only a high-level assessment of aggregated building permit and plan check activities. Staff is currently in the process of implementing new data collection fields in the permit system and is expanding the existing study to include a survey of other comparable City valuation tables and alternative permit fee structures for what are currently valuation-based fees. The study conducted by CAP for all Non-Valuation-based fees, or “flat rate” fees as referenced earlier in this report, utilized an activity-based costing model to calculate the full cost of providing specific services. This methodology identifies activities in an organization and assigns the cost of each activity with resources to all services according to the consumption by each. The model assigns direct and indirect costs to each fee, where all proposed fees have been calculated at full recovery. A summary of how CAP builds cost structures follows: 1. Direct Costs Through meetings with staff, CAP identified all direct staff time spent on fee-related activities or services, where direct time is indicative of workers who are directly involved with activities of a specific fee or service. Average salaries and the City Standard productive rate of 1,600 hours/year were used for these calculations. Additionally, CAP identified other operational costs that are directly attributed to certain services, such as the Department’s use of on-call consultants for inspections in the Building and Fire divisions. City of Palo Alto Page 5 2. Indirect Costs (citywide administration) These costs include processes that support, but do not directly apply to any specific activity or fee, such as the Citywide and Departmental Overhead. The Citywide overhead costs are allocated to departments based on the City’s Cost Allocation Plan. These represent expenses of supporting departments including the offices of the City Manager, City Attorney, City Auditor, City Clerk, Administrative Services, Human Resources, Information Technology, and Facilities Maintenance. 3. Overhead (departmental administration) Department Overhead is represented in two aspects: 1) Development Services as a whole; and 2) Divisional Overhead. Development Services overhead includes the salaries of the Director, the Director’s Administrative Assistant, and the Senior Management Analyst, as well as rent, and other supplies commonly used by all divisions of the department (Building, Planning, Public Works, and Fire Prevention). These are not assigned to any particular service, but are allocated to all fees since these professionals support all the activities of the department as a whole. The Divisional Overhead represents costs associated with managers, supervisors, and support staff and common purpose operational costs of the Public Works, Planning, and Fire Departments. For example, direct staff is allocated as a percentage of an FTE to Development Services based upon activity levels for Public Works, while divisional overhead which reflects the Public Works administrative costs such as budget, contract, and executive leadership costs are calculated as a rate that is applied to the salaries allocated to Development services and executed through a year-end adjustment. The rate assumes that the same level of administrative support provided to the Public Works Department is provided to the Public Works division within Development Services. These are not assigned to any particular service, but are allocated to all fees in the respective division. 4. Reserve A reserve fund provides a mechanism to finance future unanticipated events and other identified or planned needs of the department. For purposes of the calculation, the reserve amount is allocated to all fees, similar to Overhead. As part of the study, the consultant recommended that the City set a specific reserve policy, however included an optional common practice to build 6-12 months of operating expenses over a three year period. The original consultant study incorporates a $2.3 million reserve within the cost structure of the department, where results show the full cost of fees with and without a reserve. However, due to the recommended significant changes to move closer towards cost recovery, and the delay necessary to adjust valuation-based fees, staff does not recommend the establishment of a reserve at this time. As such, the proposed fees presented in Attachment A do not include any assumption for reserve costs. Projections: The study indicates a total projected General Fund subsidy in FY 2016 of $1,787,985, excluding City of Palo Alto Page 6 impacts of one-time activities, such as deferred revenue for large projects and expense savings. Once adjusted for one-time revenues, the net general fund subsidy in FY 2016 is approximately $294,000. Drivers of Cost Recovery Variances: Staff believes the following to be key drivers for cost recovery variances within the Public Works, Planning, and Fire Prevention divisions: 1. Length of time since last comprehensive Fee Study. While fees have been adjusted annually for inflation factors, it has been at least five years since the fee schedule and structure were last subject to a full evaluation. 2. Fee levels in Planning, Public Works, and Fire have historically been set below full cost recovery. 3. As part of the creation of Development Services, the cost structure for Planning, Public Works, and Fire divisions has significantly changed. For example, divisions are now responsible for overhead allocations such as rent, Development Services managerial staff, and other commonly used operating expenses (e.g. scanning services, office supplies, etc.). Findings & Recommendations: Modifications to flat fees, representing approximately 25% or $2.7 million of departmental revenues, are representative of current resources, activities, and activity levels, as well as changes to California Building and Fire Codes, and/or state mandates. Recommended modifications to fees included re-naming fees, altering tiered fees and triggers, removing, and creating new fees. The proposed fees, including a description of changes where applicable, are included as Attachment A (excluding the recommended 5.5% increase to align with FY 2017 costs). Fire Prevention The largest impact of the Fee Study is anticipated in the Fire Prevention Division. Fire Prevention fees have historically been set below cost recovery, or were provided at no cost, and a complete fee study or evaluation has not been completed in at least five years. Further, as part of creating Development Services, all Fire Prevention staff and associated costs were moved to Development Services offices resulting in the need for additional space. Moving Fire Prevention entirely out of the Fire Department and into Development Services means that this division is now subject to a different cost structure that includes overhead allocations such as rent, Development Services managerial staff, and other commonly used operating expenses (e.g. scanning services, office supplies, etc.). All fees in Fire Prevention were calculated according to the consultant’s activity-based model, where fees have been proposed at full cost based on current activities, activity levels, and City of Palo Alto Page 7 proposed resources. These proposed fees are included in the fee study and are proposed to be increased as recommended by CAP. Public Works Public Works, like Planning, has a host of fees. However, many of their fees can be applied to both development and non-development-related work. The differentiating factor is that development-related work is entirely the result of private development. For example, a commercial developer has to apply for a street work permit to work in the right-of-way. That is entirely due to the impacts associated with their project. That work is driven by private interests and it has been the direction from Council to ensure that those fees are set at full cost recovery. Those fees are collected by and reside in Development Services as do the subsequent direct, indirect and overhead Public Works costs associated with providing those services. For purposes of this study, private development work is separate and distinct from non- development related work. Therefore, those services and fees are provided by Public Works as a whole, and the fees are set by Public Works as a whole through the Public Works departmental municipal fee schedule. Public Works, with direction from the City Council, decides how close to full cost recovery they should set those fees. The CAP study did include analysis of the Public Works Department, however, subsequent to the kick-off of the consultant study, updated analysis on staff allocations, time estimates, and fee volumes were obtained and staff was unable to incorporate this more current data into the consultant’s final results. Therefore, Public Works municipal fee proposals included as part of the development of the Adopted Fiscal Year 2017 Municipal Fee Schedule are reflective of a full cost recovery model, however, were not reflective of the specific methodologies and assumptions used in the CAP study. The FY 2017 Adopted Fees utilized the Questica Calculator launched by the Office of Management and Budget as opposed to those fees recommended in the CAP study. The Adopted amendments to Public Works’ fees in the Development Services Department represent significant recommended increases from the 2016 fees, and are expected to bring the Public Works fees much closer to cost recovery. As part of the FY 2018 budget process, the Office of Management and Budget, Development Services and Public Works will review these fees and ensure they are at full cost recovery and/or bring forward recommended adjustments to the fees and appropriate based on FY 2017 actual activity levels and estimated FY 2018 costs. Building Non-valuation fees were updated to reflect current ICC unit fee schedule structures, per California State code. Similar to Fire Prevention, a complete fee study or evaluation has not been completed in the last five years, and all fees are proposed at full cost according to the consultant’s activity based model and current activities, activity levels, and resources. The most significant changes recommended within the Building division are a result of restructuring Mechanical, Plumbing, and Electric Permit fees. These fees are charged in conjunction with the Building Permit and generally charge a Base Fee (representing administrative costs to process) and new or remodeled supplemental fee (based on square City of Palo Alto Page 8 footage and representative of inspection costs). As a result of the study, current processing and inspection times have both decreased. At full cost, the base fee is proposed to decrease to $82, from $92, and the square footage fee to decrease to $0.02, from $0.11 per square foot. Mechanical, Plumbing, and Electric fees can also be charged as stand-alone permits. These fees are structured as a Base fee (representing administrative costs to process) plus a supplemental permit fee (representing inspection costs). The base fee is proposed to decrease to $82 from $92 as stated above, where the unit of measure for the supplemental permit is proposed to change from “each” to “per permit”. The current unit of measure is reflective of time estimates for each incremental measure of an activity, such as the inspection of each individual light fixture or switch at $0.50/each. Determining the incremental unit of time is incredibly difficult, hard to justify, and is no longer a method promoted by ICC. As such, Development Services has revised these fees on a per permit basis, using time estimates of an average project (5,000 sq. ft.). In the case of the light fixture, the permit would be issued at a total cost of $82 for the Base Fee, representing administrative processing costs, plus $68 for the inspection of any number of light fixtures. Green Building Development Services continues to expand and develop the Green Building program in efforts to follow the City Council’s lead and maintain a leadership role in environmental sustainability. Fees were updated and new fees implemented to comply with State mandates, such as a Landscape review and permit management, as well as the current Green Building and Energy Ordinance. The cost structure of these fees includes consulting services associated with the integration and management of sustainable building practices and policies, Landscape review and permit management, as well as staff training, quality control, reporting, and informational outreach to the community. Use & Occupancy Use & Occupancy fees were included in the study; however, staff does not propose to adjust these fees at this time. These fees will be studied separately with the integration of the Business Registry fee where staff anticipates that drivers to calculate cost, such as activities and resources, will change as the program is developed. Next Steps: Development Services strives to operate as a revenue-supported department within the General Fund with the ultimate goal of being an enterprise fund. The ultimate goal of Development Services is to reach full cost recovery in all divisions and the adoption of the Fees outlined in Attachment A represents the next step towards this goal of full cost recovery. The department will continue to track revenues and expenditures at a divisional level through Fiscal Year 2017 in order to analyze their cost-recovery performance and will work collaboratively with the Office of Management and Budget, and the City Attorney’s Office to identify and define a reserve policy that is appropriate and specific to the Development City of Palo Alto Page 9 Services. Staff anticipates returning to City Council with iterative recommendations, including adjustments to valuation-based fees and the inclusion of reserve costs, through subsequent budget processes. Resource Impact The actions recommended in this report would increase the estimated revenue generated by the Development Service Department flat fee activities. Given the changing economic environment and the unknown potential impacts of the increases on activity levels (estimated to be minor), no adjustment to the budget is assumed. Revenue collections will be monitored and factored into the annual development of the budget as data is availabe and adjustments are found to be necessary. Environmental Review Adoption of an ordinance amending Development Services Municipal Fees is not a project for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and therefore no environmental review is necessary. Attachments: Attachment A_Municipal Fee Proposals (PDF) Attachment B_CAP Cost of Services Study (PDF) City of Palo Alto (ID # 8509) Finance Committee Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 9/19/2017 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Review and Discuss CalPERS Pension Annual Valuation Reports Title: Review and Discuss CalPERS Pension Annual Valuation Reports as of June 30, 2016 Including Assumptions, Financial Disclosures and Next Steps From: City Manager Lead Department: Administrative Services RECOMMENDATION Staff Recommends the Finance Committee: 1. Review and discuss the June 30, 2016 CalPERs Valuation Reports for the Miscellaneous and Safety Pension Plans; and 2. Provide feedback and direction for the next scheduled discussion (October 2017) regarding the City’s options related to pension funding. BACKGROUND The City of Palo Alto offers its employees and retirees a defined pension benefit plan which is managed and administered by the California Pensions Retirement System (CalPERS) a State of California Pension Trust program. Annually staff provides the CalPERS actuarial reports detailing the latest status of the City of Palo Alto Pension trust plans for employees and retirees. These actuarial reports are used to calculate the annual required contribution to the trust for the pension obligations. In addition, updates on the rate of return, funding status, and changes to the trust based on various impacts are detailed in the report. The City of Palo Alto provides a defined pension benefit to its employees through the State of California Pension Retirement System (CalPERS), which manages and administers the program. The CalPERS program maintains two trust accounts: 1) a plan for safety employees (sworn fire and police personnel); and 2) a plan for miscellaneous employees (all other non-safety personnel employed by the City such as field personnel, administrative support, and managers). These annual reports provide updated actuarial information for both pension plans as of June 30, 2016. City of Palo Alto Page 2 As a refresher on the CalPERS benefits, there are three tiers of benefits within the two plans described above and it takes City employees five (5) years of service to vest in the pension program. Table 1 below outlines the current pension plans and the different benefits levels by tier. Attachment A outlines in further detail the participation levels in each of these tiers by pension plan and employee group as of March 2017. Table 1: City of Palo Alto Pension Benefit Plans and Tiers Miscellaneous Safety: Fire Safety: Police Tier 1 2.7%/service year worked; eligibility starting at the age of 55 (2.7% @ 55) 3.0%/service year worked; eligibility starting at the age of 50 (3.0% @ 50) 3.0%/service year worked; eligibility starting at the age of 50 (3.0% @ 50) Tier 2 Effective July 16, 2010 – 2.0%/service year worked, eligibility starting at age 60 (2.0% @ 60) Effective June 7, 2012 – 3.0%/service year worked, eligibility starting at age 55 (3.0% @ 55) Effective December 6, 2012 – 3.0%/service year worked, eligibility starting at age 55 (3.0% @ 55) Tier 3 “PEPRA”* Effective January 1, 2013: 2.0%/service year worked; eligibility starting at age 62 (2.0% at 62) Effective January 1, 2013: 2.7%/service year worked; eligibility starting at age 57 (2.7% at 57) Effective January 1, 2013: 2.7%/service year worked; eligibility starting at age 57 (2.7% at 57) * Under PEPRA, the benefit calculation is maxed at a salary of $142,530 for both Miscellaneous and Safety benefit plans, therefore it is calculated based on service years but cannot exceed $142,530. Also, the final salary calculation is based on the average of highest three years. In addition, as part of the adoption of the City’s FY 2018 Budget, the City Council referred to the Finance Committee the task of identifying funding options to further address the City’s unfunded pension. Specifically, the City Council directed staff to: Return to the Finance Committee beginning August to review the citywide implications of: 1) Structural revenue and expense growth ensuring expense growth remains at or below that of revenues; and 2) Unfunded pension liability. Some specific areas to address include: 1. Look first at current public safety growth rate of 10 to 12 percent in relation to citywide growth rate of 6 percent. Include a review of staffing levels and alternative models. 2. Review of the financial reporting of the unfunded pension liability This is the first in a series of meetings staff anticipates scheduling over the coming fiscal year in order to begin to address this referral from the City Council. City of Palo Alto Page 3 DISCUSSION CalPERS prepares an annual actuarial analysis to determine the City’s pension liability and annual required contribution for the two trusts – update on the funding status, results of assumptions such as rate of return (ROR), the new fiscal year Annual Required Contribution (ARC) and projected future ARC as a percentage of payroll. The actuarial analysis is based on current employees’ accrued benefit, and former employees that are vested but have yet to retire as well as retired employees as of June 30, 2016. The CalPERS actuarial analysis is completed two years in arrears by practice. On December 21, 2016, the CalPERS Board of Administration lowered the discount rate (or rate of return) from 7.5 percent to 7.0 percent using a three-year phase-in beginning in FY 2019. The reports were prepared prior to CalPERS staff finalizing the ROR as of June 30, 2017, which CalPERS estimated to be 11.2 percent. Overall, this ROR of 11.2 percent is a significant improvement over the prior year’s rate of return of only 0.61 percent. Exceeding the assumed rate of return of 7.375 percent is a positive short-term result and is estimated to bring CalPERS overall funding status up by approximately 3 percent. The use of the actual 11.2 percent ROR instead of the assumed rate of return of 7.375 percent will decrease the unfunded pension liability in both trusts compared to the levels reported in these valuations, however, this will be offset by the lowering of the ROR to 7.0 percent in future years, which will result in an increase of the unfunded pension liability for both trusts. CalPERS Projected Contribution levels As of 2017, CalPERS has designated two components to the annual billing of the employer portion of pension contributions, 1) the Normal Cost, and 2) the Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL). - Normal Cost: This reflects a rate of contribution for the plan of retirement benefits provided to current employees based on the current set of assumptions. - Employer Amortization of Unfunded Accrued Liability: This is an annual payment calculated by CalPERS to pay down an agency’s unfunded accrued pension liability. Assuming every assumption in the actuarial valuation stayed perfectly in place, an organization would eliminate its unfunded pension liability if it made these payments annually for 30 years. The liability grows when the assumptions goals, such as rate of return, are not met. This ARC for FY 2019 is $26.8 million for the Miscellaneous Plan and $12.9 million for the Safety Plan. These payments reflect the blended or combined cost of both the “Normal Cost” and the “Unfunded Accrued Liability” and are within the staff estimated payment based on CalPERS projections provided earlier this calendar year. Future ARCs are estimated to grow from 32.6 percent to 44.1 percent of payroll by FY 2025 for miscellaneous and from 55.6 percent to 76.2 percent of payroll for safety. This is based on a 7.375 percent ROR for FY 2019, 7.25 percent for FY 2020, and 7.00 percent for future years starting in FY 2021. City of Palo Alto Page 4 The tables below, Table 2 through Table 4, summarize the projected percentage of payroll required for each plan to fund the ARC as well as the individual components that make up this rate. - Table 2: Reflects the estimated percentage of payroll that is necessary for the City of Palo Alto as an employer to fund both the Normal Cost and the annual payment of the Unfunded Accrued Liability. It should be noted that the majority of employee groups have agreed to pick-up between 1% and 3% of this employer contribution rate. - Table 3: Reflects the projected percentage of payroll for the Normal Cost employer contribution. This rate increases as the phase in of the change in ROR is realized. - Table 4: Reflects the estimated annual contribution to pay down the Unfunded Accrued Liability. This cost also increases as the phase-in of the change in ROR is realized. Staff anticipates providing additional implications of the increasing cost of providing current service levels on the City of Palo Alto in future discussions. TABLE 2: CalPERS Projected Employer Contribution Rates (blended both UAL and Normal Cost)* FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 FY 2023 FY 2024 FY 2025 Miscellaneous 28.89% 30.20% 32.56% 35.9% 38.8% 40.9% 42.6% 43.5% 44.1% Safety 45.43% 49.69% 55.63% 61.6% 66.3% 70.3% 73.5% 75.2% 76.2% * In the most recent negotiations between the City and the represented labor units, the parties agreed to Memoranda of Agreement (MOAs) that include provisions for employees to accept a greater share of pension costs to assist in curtailing the City’s growing pension expense. For all Miscellaneous Plan employees, a 1% employee pick-up of the employer contribution (excluding UMPAPA) and for all Safety employees a 3% employee pick-up of the employer contribution are anticipated to be executed. TABLE 3: CalPERS Projected Normal Cost Employer Rate* FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 FY 2023 FY 2024 FY 2025 Miscellaneous 10.33% 10.04% 10.22% 10.7% 11.7% 11.7% 11.7% 11.7% 11.7% Safety 18.98% 18.90% 19.40% 20.2% 21.9% 21.9% 21.9% 21.9% 21.9% * In addition to the employer contributions, employees contribute the employee share of pension costs based on the plan and benefit tier. Miscellaneous employees in Tier 1 contribute 8 percent, Tier 2 contribute 7 percent and Tier 3 are 50 percent of the Normal Cost. Safety employees in Tiers 1 and 2 contribute 9 percent and Tier 3 contribute 50 percent of the Normal Cost percent. TABLE 4: CalPERS Projected Annual Employer Amortization of Unfunded Accrued Liability ($’s in 000’s) FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022 FY 2023 FY 2024 FY 2025 Miscellaneous 13,748 15,765 18,393 21,368 23,620 26,268 28,624 30,328 31,816 Safety 6,149 7,128 8,421 9,894 10,943 12,295 13,495 14,345 15,080 TOTAL $19,897 $22,893 $26,814 $31,262 $34,563 $38,563 $42,119 $44,673 $46,896 % Change from Prior Yr 15.1% 17.1% 16.6% 10.6% 11.6% 9.2% 6.1% 5.0% City of Palo Alto Page 5 CalPERS Projected Unfunded Accrued Pension Liability Included in the annual valuation report is a status of both plans “Funded Status.” Overall, CalPERS is funded at 68 percentage. This is higher than the City’s funded status of 63.6 percent for Safety, and 64.2 percent for miscellaneous. The Table 5 below outlines the City’s Funded Status for both the Miscellaneous and Safety Plans with an assumed ROR of 7.375 as of June 30, 2017. The unfunded pension liability increased from $338.4 million as of June 30, 2015 to $404.7 million as of June 30, 2016 an increase of $66.2 million or 19.6%. Again the actual ROR was 11.2 percent and if this was used in the reports it would have lowered the unfunded liability number that was provided. TABLE 5: CalPERS Projected Unfunded Accrued Liability for the City of Palo Alto As of June 30, 2014 As of June 30, 2015 As of June 30, 2016 Miscellaneous 191,411,633 219,668,121 261,680,231 Miscellaneous Funded Ratio 71.3% 68.5% 64.2% Safety 103,333,634 118,764,933 143,025,193 Safety Funded Ratio 71.9% 68.6% 63.6% TOTAL UNFUNDED PENSION LIABILITY $249,745,267 $338,433,054 $404,705,424 % Change from Prior Yr 14.8% 19.6% CalPERS recognizes the varying assumptions that may impact a plans unfunded accrued liability and therefore a pension plan’s funding status, especially the implications of the discount rate assumption. Therefore, in addition to the actuarial assumptions used to develop this annual evaluation, CalPERS includes an Analysis of Discount Rate Sensitivity Section in their reports in order to provide some level of sensitivity analysis of the pension plans. This analysis can be found on page 22 of each respective plan report. The following analysis provided by CalPERS looks at the June 30, 2016 unfunded accrued liability alternative discount rates. At 6.0 percent ROR, the plans are estimated to have a total unfunded accrued liability of $609 million. This represents an approximate 54 percent funding level of each plan. This analysis gives an indication of the potential plan impacts if the Public Employees Retirement Fund were to realize investment returns of 3.0% to 8.0% over the long-term. This type of analysis provides a sense of the long-term risk of the employer contribution rates. TABLE 6: CalPERS Alternative Scenarios Sensitivity Analysis (as of June 30, 2016) 3% Discount Rate 6% Discount Rate 7% Discount Rate 8% Discount Rate Miscellaneous $681,675,340 $394,930,155 $294,639,684 $211,566,099 Miscellaneous Funded Ratio 40.7% 54.3% 61.4% 68.9% Safety $388,794,232 $214,495,451 $160,646,230 $116,295,910 Safety Funded Ratio 39.1% 53.8% 60.9% 68.2% TOTAL UNFUNDED PENSION LIABILITY $1.1 billion $609 million $455 million $328 million City of Palo Alto Page 6 Conclusion The City of Palo Alto has already proactively anticipated this increased need for funding and worked on two strategies successfully to mitigate these growing funding needs. First, in the most recent negotiations between the City and the represented labor units, the parties agreed to Memoranda of Agreement (MOAs) that include provisions for employees to accept a greater share of pension costs to assist in curtailing the City’s growing pension expense. For all Miscellaneous Plan employees, a 1% employee pick-up of the employer contribution (excluding UMPAPA) and for all Safety employees a 3% employee pick-up of the employer contribution are anticipated to be executed. Second, the City Council has established an irrevocable 115 Pension Trust Fund with funding of approximately $3.1 million contributed through FY 2018 from all funds. This represents approximately 10% of the ARC. Staff anticipates a continuation of this discussion in October 2017 including bringing back potential funding options, methods of mitigating the implications in these reports, and timelines for policy decisions in the context of the FY 2019 Budget development. It is through this continued discussion staff anticipates further policy direction to be developed and ultimately include in the annual budget process including the Long Range Financial Forecast. RESOURCE IMPACT SECTION Implications will be determined based on policy direction in subsequent conversations. The FY 2019 projects discussed in the Adopted of the FY 2018 Budget are consistent with these values. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT This report is not a project for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act. Environmental review is not required. Attachments:  Attachment A: Pension Tiers Table March 2017  Attachment B: CalPERS Safety Valuation June 30, 2016  Attachment C: CalPERS Misc. Valuation June 30, 2016 Mar 2017 Mar 2016 Mar 2017 Mar 2016 Tier 14 6 Tier 16770 Tier 22 2 Tier 267 Tier 34 3 Tier 31110 Sub‐total 10           11              Sub‐total 84 87 Tier 1 102         106            Tier 155 Tier 248           49              Tier 200 Tier 345           35              Tier 300 Sub‐total 195         190            Sub‐total 55 Tier 1 321         352            Tier 144 Tier 266           64              Tier 200 Tier 3 170         125            Tier 300 Sub‐total 557         541            Sub‐total 44 Tier 143           45              Tier 15059* Tier 2 ‐          ‐             Tier 234 Tier 32 2 Tier 32410 Sub‐total 45           47              Sub‐total 77 73 Tier 176 Tier 211 Tier 300 Sub‐total 87 Tier 101 Tier 200 Tier 300 Sub‐total 01 Total Tier 1 470 509 Total Tier 1 133 145 Tier 2 116 115 Tier 21012 Tier 3 221 165 Tier 33520 Grand Total Misc Plans 807 789 Grand Total Safety Plans 178 177 %Tier 1 58% 65%%Tier 1 75% 82% Tier 2 14% 15%Tier 26%7% Tier 3 27% 21%Tier 3 20% 11% Tier 1 2.7% @ 55 Tier 13% @ 50 Tier 22% @ 60 Tier 23% @ 55 Tier 32% @ 62 Tier 3 2.7% @ 57 *Excludes police trainees (4/2) Police Management  Association Police Management Fire Management PAPOA Service Employees  International Union Utilities Management Miscellaneous Plans Safety Plans Fire Chiefs Association Employee Group IAFFCity Council and Council  Appointed Officers Employee Group Management and  Professional # of Employees # of Employees Attachment A: City of Palo Alto Pension Plan Benefit Levels Enrollment by Plan and Employee Group California Public Employees’ Retirement System Actuarial Office P.O. Box 942701 Sacramento, CA 94229-2701 TTY: (916) 795-3240 (888) 225-7377 phone • (916) 795-2744 fax www.calpers.ca.gov July 2017 SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO (CalPERS ID: 6373437857) Annual Valuation Report as of June 30, 2016 Dear Employer, As an attachment to this letter, you will find a copy of the June 30, 2016 actuarial valuation report of your pension plan. Your 2016 actuarial valuation report contains important actuarial information about your pension plan at CalPERS. Your CalPERS staff actuary, whose signature appears in the “Actuarial Certification” section on page 1, is available to discuss the report with you after August 31, 2017. Required Contributions The exhibit below displays the minimum required employer contributions and the Employee PEPRA Rate for Fiscal Year 2018-19 along with estimates of the required contributions for Fiscal Years 2019-20 and 2020-21. Member contributions other than cost sharing (whether paid by the employer or the employee) are in addition to the results shown below. The required employer contributions in this report do not reflect any cost sharing arrangement you may have with your employees. Fiscal Year Employer Normal Cost Rate Employer Amortization of Unfunded Accrued Liability Employee PEPRA Rate 2018-19 19.397% $8,421,191 10.75% Projected Results 2019-20 20.2% $9,894,000 TBD 2020-21 21.9% $10,943,000 TBD The actual investment return for Fiscal Year 2016-17 was not known at the time this report was prepared. The projections above assume the investment return for that year would be 7.375 percent. If the actual investment return for Fiscal year 2016-17 differs from 7.375 percent, the actual contribution requirements for the projected years will differ from those shown above. Moreover, the projected results for Fiscal Years 2019-20 and 2020-21 also assume that there are no future plan changes, no further changes in assumptions other than those recently approved, and no liability gains or losses. Such changes can have a significant impact on required contributions. Since they cannot be predicted in advance, the projected employer results shown above are estimates. The actual required employer contributions for Fiscal year 2019-20 will be provided in next year’s report. For additional details regarding the assumptions and methods used for these projections please refer to the “Projected Employer Contributions” in the “Highlights and Executive Summary” section. The required contributions shown above include a Normal Cost component expressed as a percentage of payroll and a payment toward Unfunded Accrued Liability expressed as a dollar amount. Actual contributions for Fiscal Year 2018-19 and all future years will be collected on that basis. For illustrative total contribution requirements expressed as percentages of payroll, please see pages 4 and 5 of the report. The “Risk Analysis” section of the valuation report on page 21 also contains estimated employer contributions in future years under a variety of investment return scenarios. SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO (CalPERS ID: 6373437857) Annual Valuation Report as of June 30, 2016 Page 2 Changes since the Prior Year’s Valuation On December 21, 2016, the CalPERS Board of Administration lowered the discount rate from 7.50 percent to 7.00 percent using a three year phase-in beginning with the June 30, 2016 actuarial valuations. The minimum employer contributions for Fiscal Year 2018-19 determined in this valuation were calculated using a discount rate of 7.375 percent. The projected employer contributions on Page 5 are calculated assuming that the discount rate will be lowered to 7.25 percent next year and to 7.00 percent the following year as adopted by the Board. Beginning with Fiscal Year 2017-18 CalPERS began collecting employer contributions toward the plan’s unfunded liability as dollar amounts instead of the prior method of a contribution rate. This change addresses potential funding issues that could arise from a declining payroll or reduction in the number of active members in the plan. Funding the unfunded liability as a percentage of payroll could lead to the underfunding of the plans. Due to stakeholder feedback regarding internal needs for total contributions expressed as a percentage of payroll, the reports have been modified to include such results in the contribution projection on page 5. These results are provided for information purposes only. Contributions toward the unfunded liability will continue to be collected as dollar amounts. The CalPERS Board of Administration adopted a Risk Mitigation Policy which is designed to reduce funding risk over time. This Policy has been temporarily suspended during the period over which the discount rate is being lowered. More details on the Risk Mitigation Policy can be found on our website. Besides the above noted changes, there may also be changes specific to the plan such as contract amendments and funding changes. Further descriptions of general changes are included in the “Highlights and Executive Summary” section and in Appendix A, “Actuarial Methods and Assumptions.” The effects of the changes on the required contributions are included in the “Reconciliation of Required Employer Contributions” section. We understand that you might have a number of questions about these results. While we are very interested in discussing these results with your agency, in the interest of allowing us to give every public agency their results, we ask that you wait until after August 31 to contact us with actuarial questions. If you have other questions, you may call the Customer Contact Center at (888)-CalPERS or (888-225-7377). Sincerely, SCOTT TERANDO Chief Actuary ACTUARIAL VALUATION as of June 30, 2016 for the SAFETY PLAN of the CITY OF PALO ALTO (CalPERS ID: 6373437857) (Rate Plan ID: 5080) REQUIRED CONTRIBUTIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR July 1, 2018 – June 30, 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACTUARIAL CERTIFICATION 1 HIGHLIGHTS AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction 3 Purpose of the Report 3 Required Contributions 4 Plan’s Funded Status 5 Projected Employer Contributions 5 Cost 6 Changes Since the Prior Year’s Valuation 7 Subsequent Events 7 ASSETS Reconciliation of the Market Value of Assets 9 Asset Allocation 10 CalPERS History of Investment Returns 11 LIABILITIES AND CONTRIBUTIONS Development of Accrued and Unfunded Liabilities 13 (Gain) / Loss Analysis 06/30/15 - 06/30/16 14 Schedule of Amortization Bases 15 30-Year Amortization Schedule and Alternatives 16 Reconciliation of Required Employer Contributions 18 Employer Contribution History 19 Funding History 19 RISK ANALYSIS Analysis of Future Investment Return Scenarios 21 Analysis of Discount Rate Sensitivity 22 Volatility Ratios 23 Hypothetical Termination Liability 24 PLAN’S MAJOR BENEFIT PROVISIONS Plan’s Major Benefit Options 26 APPENDIX A – ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS Actuarial Data A-1 Actuarial Methods A-1 Actuarial Assumptions A-3 Miscellaneous A-21 APPENDIX B – PRINCIPAL PLAN PROVISIONS B-1 APPENDIX C – PARTICIPANT DATA Summary of Valuation Data C-1 Active Members C-2 Transferred and Terminated Members C-3 Retired Members and Beneficiaries C-4 APPENDIX D – DEVELOPMENT OF PEPRA MEMBER CONTRIBUTION RATE D-1 APPENDIX E – GLOSSARY OF ACTUARIAL TERMS E-1 (CY) FIN PROCESS CONTROL ID: 496858 (PY) FIN PROCESS CONTROL ID: 480105 REPORT ID: 104049 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 1 ACTUARIAL CERTIFICATION To the best of our knowledge, this report is complete and accurate and contains sufficient information to disclose, fully and fairly, the funded condition of the SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO. This valuation is based on the member and financial data as of June 30, 2016 provided by the various CalPERS databases and the benefits under this plan with CalPERS as of the date this report was produced. It is our opinion that the valuation has been performed in accordance with generally accepted actuarial principles, in accordance with standards of practice prescribed by the Actuarial Standards Board, and that the assumptions and methods are internally consistent and reasonable for this plan, as prescribed by the CalPERS Board of Administration according to provisions set forth in the California Public Employees’ Retirement Law. The undersigned is an actuary for CalPERS, a member of the American Academy of Actuaries and the Society of Actuaries and meets the Qualification Standards of the American Academy of Actuaries to render the actuarial opinions contained herein. DAVID CLEMENT, ASA, MAAA, EA Senior Pension Actuary, CalPERS HIGHLIGHTS AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY  INTRODUCTION  PURPOSE OF THE REPORT  REQUIRED CONTRIBUTIONS  PLAN’S FUNDED STATUS  PROJECTED EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTIONS  COST  CHANGES SINCE THE PRIOR YEAR’S VALUATION  SUBSEQUENT EVENTS CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 3 Introduction This report presents the results of the June 30, 2016 actuarial valuation of the SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO of the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS). This actuarial valuation sets the required employer contributions for Fiscal Year 2018-19. Purpose of the Report The actuarial valuation was prepared by the CalPERS Actuarial Office using data as of June 30, 2016. The purpose of the report is to:  Set forth the assets and accrued liabilities of this plan as of June 30, 2016;  Determine the required employer contributions for the fiscal year July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019;  Provide actuarial information as of June 30, 2016 to the CalPERS Board of Administration and other interested parties. The pension funding information presented in this report should not be used in financial reports subject to Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 68 for an Agent Employer Defined Benefit Pension Plan. A separate accounting valuation report for such purposes is available from CalPERS and details for ordering are available on our website. The measurements shown in this actuarial valuation may not be applicable for other purposes. The employer should contact their actuary before disseminating any portion of this report for any reason that is not explicitly described above. Future actuarial measurements may differ significantly from the current measurements presented in this report due to such factors as the following: plan experience differing from that anticipated by the economic or demographic assumptions; changes in economic or demographic assumptions; changes in actuarial policies; and changes in plan provisions or applicable law. California Actuarial Advisory Panel Recommendations This report includes all the basic disclosure elements as described in the Model Disclosure Elements for Actuarial Valuation Reports recommended in 2011 by the California Actuarial Advisory Panel (CAAP), with the exception of including the original base amounts of the various components of the unfunded liability in the Schedule of Amortization Bases shown on page 15. Additionally, this report includes the following “Enhanced Risk Disclosures” also recommended by the CAAP in the Model Disclosure Elements document:  A “Deterministic Stress Test,” projecting future results under different investment income scenarios  A “Sensitivity Analysis,” showing the impact on current valuation results using alternative discount rates of 6.0 percent, 7.0 percent and 8.0 percent. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 4 Required Contributions Fiscal Year Required Employer Contribution 2018-19 Employer Normal Cost Rate 19.397% Plus Either 1) Monthly Employer Dollar UAL Payment $ 701,766 Or 2) Annual UAL Prepayment Option $ 8,126,844 Required PEPRA Member Contribution Rate 10.75% The total minimum required employer contribution is the sum of the Plan’s Employer Normal Cost Rate (expressed as a percentage of payroll) plus the Employer Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) Contribution Amount (billed monthly in dollars). Only the UAL portion of the employer contribution can be prepaid (which must be received in full no later than July 31). Plan Normal Cost contributions will be made as part of the payroll reporting process. If there is contractual cost sharing or other change, this amount will change. §20572 of the Public Employees’ Retirement Law assesses interest at an annual rate of 10 percent if a contracting agency fails to remit the required contributions when due. For additional detail regarding the determination of the required contribution for PEPRA members, see Appendix D. Required member contributions for Classic members can be found in Appendix B. Fiscal Year Fiscal Year 2017-18 2018-19 Normal Cost Contribution as a Percentage of Payroll Total Normal Cost 28.029% 28.571% Employee Contribution1 9.129% 9.174% Employer Normal Cost 18.900% 19.397% Projected Annual Payroll for Contribution Year $ 23,150,815 $ 23,240,148 Estimated Employer Contributions Based On Projected Payroll Total Normal Cost $ 6,488,942 $ 6,639,943 Employee Contribution1 2,113,438 2,132,051 Employer Normal Cost 4,375,504 4,507,892 Unfunded Liability Contribution 7,127,885 8,421,191 % of Projected Payroll (illustrative only) 30.789% 36.236% Estimated Total Employer Contribution $ 11,503,389 $ 12,929,083 % of Projected Payroll (illustrative only) 49.689% 55.633% 1 For classic members, this is the percentage specified in the Public Employees Retirement Law, net of any reduction from the use of a modified formula or other factors. For PEPRA members, the member contribution rate is based on 50 percent of the normal cost. A development of PEPRA member contribution rates can be found in Appendix D. Employee cost sharing is not shown in this report. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 5 Plan’s Funded Status This measure of funded status is an assessment of the need for future employer contributions based on the selected actuarial cost method used to fund the plan. The UAL is the present value of future employer contributions for service that has already been earned and is in addition to future normal cost contributions for active members. For a measure of funded status that is appropriate for assessing the sufficiency of plan assets to cover estimated termination liabilities, please see “Hypothetical Termination Liability” in the “Risk Analysis” section. Projected Employer Contributions The table below shows the required and projected employer contributions (before cost sharing) for the next six fiscal years. Projected results reflect the adopted changes to the discount rate described in Appendix A, “Actuarial Methods and Assumptions.” The projections also assume that all actuarial assumptions will be realized and that no further changes to assumptions, contributions, benefits, or funding will occur during the projection period. The projected normal cost percentages in the projections below do not reflect that the normal cost will decline over time as new employees are hired into PEPRA or other lower cost benefit tiers. Required Contribution Projected Future Employer Contributions (Assumes 7.375% Return for Fiscal Year 2016-17) Fiscal Year 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 Normal Cost % 19.397% 20.2% 21.9% 21.9% 21.9% 21.9% 21.9% UAL Payment 8,421,191 9,894,000 10,943,000 12,295,000 13,495,000 14,345,000 15,080,000 Total as a % of Payroll* 55.6% 61.6% 66.3% 70.3% 73.5% 75.2% 76.2% Projected Payroll 23,240,148 23,937,353 24,655,474 25,395,138 26,156,992 26,941,702 27,749,953 *Illustrative only and based on the projected payroll shown. Changes in the UAL due to actuarial gains or losses as well as changes in actuarial assumptions or methods are amortized using a 5-year ramp up. For more information, please see “Amortization of the Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability” under “Actuarial Methods” in Appendix A. This method phases in the impact of unanticipated changes in UAL over a 5-year period and attempts to minimize employer cost volatility from year to year. As a result of this methodology, dramatic changes in the required employer contributions in any one year are less likely. However, required contributions can change gradually and significantly over the next five years. In years where there is a large increase in UAL the relatively small amortization payments during the ramp up period could result in a funded ratio that is projected to decrease initially while the contribution impact of the increase in the UAL is phased in. Due to the adopted changes in the discount rate for the next two valuations in combination with the 5-year phase-in ramp, the increases in the required contributions are expected to continue for seven years from Fiscal Year 2018-19 through Fiscal Year 2024-25. For projected contributions under alternate investment return scenarios, please see the “Analysis of Future Investment Return Scenarios” in the “Risk Analysis” section. June 30, 2015 June 30, 2016 1. Present Value of Projected Benefits $ 433,980,861 $ 448,048,891 2. Entry Age Normal Accrued Liability 377,934,524 392,911,774 3. Market Value of Assets (MVA) $ 259,169,591 $ 249,886,581 4. Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) [(2) – (3)] $ 118,764,933 $ 143,025,193 5. Funded Ratio [(3) / (2)] 68.6% 63.6% CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 6 Cost Actuarial Cost Estimates in General What is the cost of the pension plan? Contributions to fund the pension plan are comprised of two components:  The Normal Cost, expressed as a percentage of total active payroll.  The Amortization of the Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL), expressed as a dollar amount. For fiscal years prior to FY 2017-18, the Amortizations of UAL component was expressed as percentage of total active payroll. Starting with FY 2017-18, the Amortization of UAL component will be expressed as a dollar amount and will be invoiced on a monthly basis. There will be an option to prepay this amount during July of each fiscal year. The Normal Cost component will continue to be expressed as a percentage of active payroll with employer and employee contributions payable as part of the regular payroll reporting process. The determination of both components requires complex actuarial calculations. The calculations are based on a set of actuarial assumptions which can be divided into two categories:  Demographic assumptions (which includes mortality rates, retirement rates, employment termination rates, disability rates)  Economic assumptions (which includes future investment earnings, inflation, salary growth rates) These assumptions reflect CalPERS best estimate of the future experience of the plan and are long term in nature. We recognize that all the assumptions will not be realized in any given year. For example, the investment earnings at CalPERS have averaged 7.0 percent over the 20 years ending June 30, 2016, yet individual fiscal year returns have ranged from -24 percent to +21.7 percent. In addition, CalPERS reviews all the actuarial assumptions on an ongoing basis by conducting in depth experience studies every four years. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 7 Changes since the Prior Year’s Valuation Benefits The standard actuarial practice at CalPERS is to recognize mandated legislative benefit changes in the first annual valuation following the effective date of the legislation. Voluntary benefit changes by plan amendment are generally included in the first valuation that is prepared after the amendment becomes effective, even if the valuation date is prior to the effective date of the amendment. This valuation generally reflects plan changes by amendments effective before the date of the report. Please refer to the “Plan’s Major Benefit Options” and Appendix B for a summary of the plan provisions used in this valuation. The effect of any mandated benefit changes or plan amendments on the unfunded liability is shown in the “(Gain)/Loss Analysis” and the effect on the employer contribution is shown in the “Reconciliation of Required Employer Contributions.” It should be noted that no change in liability or contribution is shown for any plan changes which were already included in the prior year’s valuation. Actuarial Methods and Assumptions On December 21, 2016, the CalPERS Board of Administration lowered the discount rate from 7.50 percent to 7.00 percent using a three year phase-in beginning with the June 30, 2016 actuarial valuations. The minimum employer contributions for Fiscal Year 2018-19 determined in this valuation were calculated using a discount rate of 7.375 percent. The projected employer contributions on Page 5 are calculated assuming that the discount rate will be lowered to 7.25 percent next year and 7.00 percent the following year as adopted by the Board. The decision to reduce the discount rate was primarily based on reduced capital market assumptions provided by external investment consultants and CalPERS investment staff. The specific decision adopted by the Board reflected recommendations from CalPERS staff and additional input from employer and employee stakeholder groups. Based on the investment allocation adopted by the Board and capital market assumptions, the reduced discount rate assumption provides a more realistic assumption for the long term investment return of the fund. Notwithstanding the Board’s decision to phase into a 7.0 percent discount rate, subsequent analysis of the expected investment return of CalPERS assets or changes to the investment allocation may result in a change to this three year discount rate schedule. A comprehensive analysis of all actuarial assumptions and methods including the discount rate will be conducted in 2017. Subsequent Events The contribution requirements determined in this actuarial valuation report are based on demographic and financial information as of June 30, 2016. Changes in the value of assets subsequent to that date are not reflected. Declines in asset values will increase the required contribution, while investment returns above the assumed rate of return will decrease the actuarial cost of the plan. This actuarial valuation report reflects statutory changes, regulatory changes and CalPERS Board actions through January 2017. Any subsequent changes or actions are not reflected. ASSETS  RECONCILIATION OF THE MARKET VALUE OF ASSETS  ASSET ALLOCATION  CALPERS HISTORY OF INVESTMENT RETURNS CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 9 Reconciliation of the Market Value of Assets 1. Market Value of Assets as of 6/30/15 including Receivables $ 259,169,591 2. Change in Receivables for Service Buybacks (93,759) 3. Employer Contributions 9,403,268 4. Employee Contributions 2,014,877 5. Benefit Payments to Retirees and Beneficiaries (21,629,407) 6. Refunds (39,964) 7. Lump Sum Payments 0 8. Transfers and Miscellaneous Adjustments 136,139 9. Net Investment Return 925,836 10. Market Value of Assets as of 6/30/16 including Receivables $ 249,886,581 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 10 Asset Allocation CalPERS adheres to an Asset Allocation Strategy which establishes asset class allocation policy targets and ranges, and manages those asset class allocations within their policy ranges. CalPERS Investment Belief No. 6 recognizes that strategic asset allocation is the dominant determinant of portfolio risk and return. On February 19, 2014, the CalPERS Board of Administration adopted changes to the current asset allocation as shown in the Policy Target Allocation below expressed as a percentage of total assets. The asset allocation and market value of assets shown below reflect the values of the Public Employees’ Retirement Fund (PERF) in its entirety as of June 30, 2016. The assets for CITY OF PALO ALTO SAFETY PLAN are part of the PERF and are invested accordingly. (A) Asset Class (B) Market Value ($ Billion) (C) Policy Target Allocation Public Equity 153.1 51.0% Private Equity 26.4 10.0% Global Fixed Income 59.9 20.0% Liquidity 4.5 1.0% Real Assets 31.8 12.0% Inflation Sensitive Assets 17.8 6.0% Other 1.6 0.0% Total Fund $295.1 100.0% Global Equity 51.9% Private Equity 9.0% Global Fixed Income 20.3% Liquidity 1.5% Real Assets 10.8% Inflation 6.0% Other 0.5% Asset Allocation at 6/30/2016 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 11 CalPERS History of Investment Returns The following is a chart with the 20-year historical annual returns of the Public Employees Retirement Fund for each fiscal year ending on June 30. Beginning in 2002, the figures are reported as gross of fees. The table below shows historical geometric mean annual returns of the Public Employees Retirement Fund for various time periods ending on June 30, 2016, (figures are reported as gross of fees). The geometric mean rate of return is the average rate per period compounded over multiple periods. It should be recognized that in any given year the rate of return is volatile. The portfolio has an expected volatility of 11.8 percent per year based on the most recent Asset Liability Modelling study. The volatility is a measure of the risk of the portfolio expressed in the standard deviation of the fund’s total return distribution, expressed as a percentage. Consequently, when looking at investment returns, it is more instructive to look at returns over longer time horizons. History of CalPERS Geometric Mean Rates of Return and Volatilities 1 year 5 year 10 year 20 year 30 year Geometric Return 0.6% 6.6% 5.0% 7.0% 8.2% Volatility – 8.1% 14.0% 11.8% 10.1% -25.0% -20.0% -15.0% -10.0% -5.0% 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 20 . 1 % 19 . 5 % 12 . 5 % 10 . 5 % -7. 2 % -6. 1 % 3. 7 % 16 . 6 % 12 . 3 % 11 . 8 % 19 . 1 % -5. 1 % -24 . 0 % 13 . 3 % 21 . 7 % 0. 2 % 13 . 2 % 17 . 7 % 2. 4 % 0. 6 % LIABILITIES AND CONTRIBUTIONS  DEVELOPMENT OF ACCRUED AND UNFUNDED LIABILITIES  (GAIN) / LOSS ANALYSIS 06/30/15 - 06/30/16  SCHEDULE OF AMORTIZATION BASES  30-YEAR AMORTIZATION SCHEDULES AND ALTERNATIVES  RECONCILIATION OF REQUIRED EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTIONS  EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION HISTORY  FUNDING HISTORY CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 13 Development of Accrued and Unfunded Liabilities June 30, 2015 June 30, 2016 1. Present Value of Projected Benefits a) Active Members $ 145,227,338 151,548,026 b) Transferred Members 7,219,815 7,805,314 c) Terminated Members 2,371,428 2,453,933 d) Members and Beneficiaries Receiving Payments 279,162,280 286,241,618 e) Total $ 433,980,861 448,048,891 2. Present Value of Future Employer Normal Costs $ 37,166,396 36,656,902 3. Present Value of Future Employee Contributions $ 18,879,941 18,480,215 4. Entry Age Normal Accrued Liability a) Active Members [(1a) - (2) - (3)] $ 89,181,001 96,410,909 b) Transferred Members (1b) 7,219,815 7,805,314 c) Terminated Members (1c) 2,371,428 2,453,933 d) Members and Beneficiaries Receiving Payments (1d) 279,162,280 286,241,618 e) Total $ 377,934,524 392,911,774 5. Market Value of Assets (MVA) $ 259,169,591 249,886,581 6. Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) [(4e) - (5)] $ 118,764,933 143,025,193 7. Funded Ratio [(5) / (4e)] 68.6% 63.6% CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 14 (Gain)/Loss Analysis 6/30/15 – 6/30/16 To calculate the cost requirements of the plan, assumptions are made about future events that affect the amount and timing of benefits to be paid and assets to be accumulated. Each year, actual experience is compared to the expected experience based on the actuarial assumptions. This results in actuarial gains or losses, as shown below. 1. Total (Gain)/Loss for the Year a) Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) as of 6/30/15 $ 118,764,933 b) Expected Payment on the UAL during 2015-16 5,004,190 c) Interest through 6/30/16 [.075 x (1a) - ((1.075)½ - 1) x (1b)] 8,723,105 d) Expected UAL before all other changes [(1a) - (1b) + (1c)] 122,483,848 e) Change due to plan changes 0 f) Change due to assumption change 5,599,395 g) Expected UAL after all other changes [(1d) + (1e) + (1f)] 128,083,243 h) Actual UAL as of 6/30/16 143,025,193 i) Total (Gain)/Loss for 2015-16 [(1h) - (1g)] $ 14,941,950 2. Contribution (Gain)/Loss for the Year a) Expected Contribution (Employer and Employee) $ 11,142,461 b) Interest on Expected Contributions 410,288 c) Actual Contributions 11,418,145 d) Interest on Actual Contributions 420,440 e) Expected Contributions with Interest [(2a) + (2b)] 11,552,749 f) Actual Contributions with Interest [(2c) + (2d)] 11,838,585 g) Contribution (Gain)/Loss [(2e) - (2f)] $ (285,836) 3. Asset (Gain)/Loss for the Year a) Market Value of Assets as of 6/30/15 $ 259,169,591 b) Prior Fiscal Year Receivables (739,213) c) Current Fiscal Year Receivables 645,454 d) Contributions Received 11,418,145 e) Benefits and Refunds Paid (21,669,371) f) Transfers and Miscellaneous Adjustments 136,139 g) Expected Int. [.075 x (3a + 3b) + ((1.075)½ - 1) x ((3d) + (3e) + (3f))] 19,009,820 h) Expected Assets as of 6/30/16 [(3a) + (3b) + (3c) + (3d) + (3e) + (3f) + (3g)] 267,970,565 i) Market Value of Assets as of 6/30/16 249,886,581 j) Asset (Gain)/Loss [(3h) - (3i)] $ 18,083,984 4. Liability (Gain)/Loss for the Year a) Total (Gain)/Loss (1i) $ 14,941,950 b) Contribution (Gain)/Loss (2g) (285,836) c) Asset (Gain)/Loss (3j) 18,083,984 d) Liability (Gain)/Loss [(4a) - (4b) - (4c)] $ (2,856,198) CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 15 Schedule of Amortization Bases There is a two-year lag between the valuation date and the start of the contribution fiscal year.  The assets, liabilities, and funded status of the plan are measured as of the valuation date: June 30, 2016.  The required employer contributions determined by the valuation are for the fiscal year beginning two years after the valuation date: Fiscal Year 2018-19. This two-year lag is necessary due to the amount of time needed to extract and test the membership and financial data, and the need to provide public agencies with their required employer contribution well in advance of the start of the fiscal year. The Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) is used to determine the employer contribution and therefore must be rolled forward two years from the valuation date to the first day of the fiscal year for which the contribution is being determined. The UAL is rolled forward each year by subtracting the expected payment on the UAL for the fiscal year and adjusting for interest. The expected payment on the UAL for a fiscal year is equal to the Expected Employer Contribution for the fiscal year minus the Expected Normal Cost for the year. The Employer Contribution for the first fiscal year is determined by the actuarial valuation two years ago and the contribution for the second year is from the actuarial valuation one year ago. The Normal Cost Rate for each of the two fiscal years is assumed to be the same as the rate determined by the current valuation. All expected dollar amounts are determined by multiplying the rate by the expected payroll for the applicable fiscal year, based on payroll as of the valuation date. Reason for Base Date Established Amorti-zation Period Balance 6/30/16 Expected Payment 2016-17 Balance 6/30/17 Expected Payment 2017-18 Balance 6/30/18 Scheduled Payment for 2018-19 FRESH START 06/30/04 18 $(928,572) $(70,112) $(924,403) $(72,216) $(917,746) $(73,518) BENEFIT CHANGE 06/30/05 8 $141,689 $17,674 $133,824 $18,204 $124,831 $18,618 ASSUMPTION CHANGE 06/30/09 13 $7,356,998 $674,413 $7,200,737 $694,645 $7,011,987 $708,757 SPECIAL (GAIN)/LOSS 06/30/09 23 $8,903,104 $588,446 $8,949,949 $606,099 $8,981,956 $615,760 SPECIAL (GAIN)/LOSS 06/30/10 24 $4,238,306 $274,129 $4,266,823 $282,353 $4,288,922 $286,741 ASSUMPTION CHANGE 06/30/11 15 $6,174,876 $518,759 $6,092,725 $534,322 $5,988,389 $544,679 SPECIAL (GAIN)/LOSS 06/30/11 25 $2,401,190 $152,183 $2,420,583 $156,749 $2,436,675 $159,124 PAYMENT (GAIN)/LOSS 06/30/12 26 $1,549,288 $96,335 $1,563,724 $99,225 $1,576,230 $100,690 (GAIN)/LOSS 06/30/12 26 $44,343,046 $2,757,260 $44,756,220 $2,839,977 $45,114,153 $2,881,919 (GAIN)/LOSS 06/30/13 27 $41,497,881 $1,133,854 $43,383,429 $1,751,805 $44,767,703 $2,370,921 ASSUMPTION CHANGE 06/30/14 18 $19,725,680 $375,729 $20,791,111 $774,001 $21,522,421 $1,182,639 (GAIN)/LOSS 06/30/14 28 $(26,317,755) $(370,160) $(27,875,123) $(762,530) $(29,140,765) $(1,160,282) (GAIN)/LOSS 06/30/15 29 $13,398,115 $(183,242) $14,576,105 $205,251 $15,438,408 $416,097 ASSUMPTION CHANGE 06/30/16 20 $5,599,395 $(172,182) $6,190,769 $(177,347) $6,831,109 $128,758 (GAIN)/LOSS 06/30/16 30 $14,941,952 $(97,946) $16,145,414 $0 $17,336,138 $240,288 TOTAL $143,025,193 $5,695,140 $147,671,888 $6,950,538 $151,360,411 $8,421,191 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 20 Page 16 30-Year Amortization Schedule and Alternatives The amortization schedule on the previous page shows the minimum contributions required according to CalPERS amortization policy. There has been considerable interest from many agencies in paying off these unfunded accrued liabilities sooner and the possible savings in doing so. As a result, we have provided alternate amortization schedules to help analyze the current amortization schedule and illustrate the advantages of accelerating unfunded liability payments. Shown on the following page are future year amortization payments based on 1) the current amortization schedule reflecting the individual bases and remaining periods shown on the previous page, and 2) alternate “fresh start” amortization schedules using two sample periods that would both result in interest savings relative to the current amortization schedule. Note that the payments under each alternate scenario increase by 3 percent per year. The schedules do not reflect the impact of adopted discount rate changes that will become effective beyond June 30, 2016. Therefore, future amortization payments displayed in the Current Amortization Schedule on the following page will not match projected amortization payments shown in connection with Projected Employer Contributions provided elsewhere in this report. The Current Amortization Schedule typically contains individual bases that are both positive and negative. Positive bases result from plan changes, assumption changes or plan experience that result in increases to unfunded liability. Negative bases result from plan changes, assumption changes or plan experience that result in decreases to unfunded liability. The combination of positive and negative bases within an amortization schedule can result in unusual or problematic circumstances in future years such as:  A positive total unfunded liability with a negative total payment,  A negative total unfunded liability with a positive total payment, or  Total payments that completely amortize the unfunded liability over a very short period of time In any year where one of the above scenarios occurs, the actuary will consider corrective action such as replacing the existing unfunded liability bases with a single “fresh start” base and amortizing it over a reasonable period. The Current Amortization Schedule on the following page may appear to show that, based on the current amortization bases, one of the above scenarios will occur at some point in the future. It is impossible to know today whether such a scenario will in fact arise since there will be additional bases added to the amortization schedule in each future year. Should such a scenario arise in any future year, the actuary will take appropriate action based on guidelines in the CalPERS amortization policy. For purposes of this display, total payments include any negative payments. Therefore, the amount of estimated savings may be understated to the extent that negative payments appear in the current schedule. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 17 30-Year Amortization Schedule and Alternatives * This schedule does not reflect the impact of adopted discount rate changes that will become effective beyond June 30, 2016. For Projected Employer Contributions, please see Page 5. Alternate Schedules Current Amortization Schedule* 20 Year Amortization 15 Year Amortization Date Balance Payment Balance Payment Balance Payment 6/30/2018 151,360,410 8,421,191 151,360,410 11,314,568 151,360,410 13,767,113 6/30/2019 153,797,041 9,886,419 150,798,869 11,654,005 148,257,495 14,180,126 6/30/2020 154,895,077 10,803,156 149,844,184 12,003,625 144,497,768 14,605,530 6/30/2021 155,124,154 11,757,856 148,456,807 12,363,734 140,019,949 15,043,696 6/30/2022 154,380,847 12,525,958 146,593,960 12,734,646 134,757,856 15,495,007 6/30/2023 152,786,799 12,901,734 144,209,381 13,116,685 128,640,026 15,959,857 6/30/2024 150,685,803 13,288,788 141,253,064 13,510,186 121,589,319 16,438,653 6/30/2025 148,028,785 13,687,451 137,670,965 13,915,491 113,522,486 16,931,812 6/30/2026 144,762,708 14,074,490 133,404,701 14,332,956 104,349,702 17,439,767 6/30/2027 140,854,703 14,496,722 128,391,215 14,762,945 93,974,073 17,962,960 6/30/2028 136,220,958 14,931,625 122,562,422 15,205,833 82,291,099 18,501,848 6/30/2029 130,794,820 15,379,572 115,844,827 15,662,008 69,188,099 19,056,904 6/30/2030 124,504,332 15,840,963 108,159,111 16,131,868 54,543,594 19,628,611 6/30/2031 117,271,818 15,275,357 99,419,696 16,615,824 38,226,643 20,217,469 6/30/2032 110,091,996 15,137,335 89,534,264 17,114,299 20,096,130 20,823,993 6/30/2033 102,525,688 14,128,693 78,403,253 17,627,728 6/30/2034 95,446,537 13,713,340 65,919,305 18,156,560 6/30/2035 88,275,692 13,260,351 51,966,680 18,701,256 6/30/2036 81,045,396 12,892,998 36,420,623 19,262,294 6/30/2037 73,662,521 13,054,009 19,146,687 19,840,163 6/30/2038 65,568,318 13,213,079 6/30/2039 56,712,335 13,609,471 6/30/2040 46,792,475 14,017,755 6/30/2041 35,717,955 12,053,231 6/30/2042 25,862,365 11,413,248 6/30/2043 15,943,089 10,555,614 6/30/2044 6,180,964 3,028,946 6/30/2045 3,498,158 1,666,411 6/30/2046 2,029,381 1,575,523 6/30/2047 546,462 566,254 Totals 347,157,540 304,026,674 256,053,346 Interest Paid 195,797,130 152,666,264 104,692,936 Estimated Savings 43,130,866 91,104,194 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 18 Reconciliation of Required Employer Contributions Normal Cost (% of Payroll) 1. For Period 7/1/17 – 6/30/18 a) Employer Normal Cost 18.900% b) Employee Contribution 9.129% c) Total Normal Cost 28.029% 2. Changes since the prior year annual valuation a) Effect of changes in demographics results (0.244%) b) Effect of plan changes 0.000% c) Effect of changes in assumptions 0.786% d) Net effect of the changes above [sum of (a) through (c)] 0.542% 3. For Period 7/1/18 – 6/30/19 a) Employer Normal Cost 19.397% b) Employee Contribution 9.174% c) Total Normal Cost 28.571% Employer Normal Cost Change [(3a) – (1a)] 0.497% Employee Contribution Change [(3b) – (1b)] 0.045% Unfunded Liability Contribution ($) 1. For Period 7/1/17 – 6/30/18 7,127,885 2. Changes since the prior year annual valuation a) Effect of (gain)/loss during prior year1 240,288 b) Effect of plan changes 0 c) Effect of changes in assumptions2 128,758 d) Changes to prior year amortization payments3 924,260 e) Effect of changes due to Fresh Start 0 f) Effect of elimination of amortization base 0 g) Net effect of the changes above [sum of (a) through (f)] 1,293,306 3. For Period 7/1/18 – 6/30/19 [(1)+(2g)] 8,421,191 1 The unfunded liability contribution for the (gain)/loss during the year prior to the valuation date is 20 percent of the “full” annual requirement due to the 5-year ramp. Increases to this amount that occur during the ramp period will be included in line d) in future years. 2 The unfunded liability contribution for the change in assumptions is 20 percent of the “full” annual requirement due to the 5-year ramp. Increases to this amount that occur during the ramp period will be included in line d) in future years. 3 Includes changes due to 5-year ramp, payroll growth assumption, and re-amortization under new discount rate. The amounts shown for the period 7/1/17 – 6/30/18 may be different if a prepayment of unfunded actuarial liability is made or a plan change became effective after the prior year’s actuarial valuation was performed. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 19 Employer Contribution History The table below provides a recent history of the required employer contributions for the plan, as determined by the annual actuarial valuation. It does not account for prepayments or benefit changes made during a fiscal year. Required By Valuation Fiscal Year Employer Normal Cost Unfunded Rate Unfunded Liability Payment ($) 2013 - 14 18.658% 14.786% N/A 2014 - 15 18.874% 20.654% N/A 2015 - 16 18.627% 23.305% N/A 2016 - 17 18.977% 26.449% N/A 2017 - 18 18.900% N/A 7,127,885 2018 - 19 19.397% N/A 8,421,191 Funding History The table below shows the recent history of the actuarial accrued liability, the market value of assets, the funded ratio and the annual covered payroll. Valuation Date Accrued Liability Market Value of Assets (MVA) Unfunded Liability Funded Ratio Annual Covered Payroll 06/30/11 $ 313,183,690 $ 225,015,089 $ 88,168,601 71.8% $ 22,774,462 06/30/12 327,608,300 215,605,457 112,002,843 65.8% 20,919,846 06/30/13 338,666,499 233,417,363 105,249,136 68.9% 21,258,082 06/30/14 367,478,634 264,145,000 103,333,634 71.9% 21,274,021 06/30/15 377,934,524 259,169,591 118,764,933 68.6% 21,186,275 06/30/16 392,911,774 249,886,581 143,025,193 63.6% 21,268,028 RISK ANALYSIS  ANALYSIS OF FUTURE INVESTMENT RETURN SCENARIOS  ANALYSIS OF DISCOUNT RATE SENSITIVITY  VOLATILITY RATIOS  HYPOTHETICAL TERMINATION LIABILITY CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 21 Analysis of Future Investment Return Scenarios Analysis was performed to determine the effects of various future investment returns on required employer contributions. The projections below provide a range of results based on five investment return scenarios assumed to occur during the next four fiscal years (2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20). The projections also assume that all other actuarial assumptions will be realized and that no further changes to assumptions, contributions, benefits, or funding will occur. Each of the five investment return scenarios assumes a return of 7.375 percent for fiscal year 2016-17. For fiscal years 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20 each scenario assumes an alternate fixed annual return. The fixed return assumptions for the five scenarios are -3.0 percent, 3.0 percent, 7.0 percent (7.25 percent for 2017-18), 11.0 percent and 17.0 percent. The alternate investment returns were chosen based on stochastic analysis of possible future investment returns over the four year period ending June 30, 2020. Using the expected returns and volatility of the asset classes in which the funds are invested, we produced ten thousand stochastic outcomes for this period. We then selected annual returns that approximate the 5th, 25th, 50th, 75th, and 95th percentiles for these outcomes. For example, of all of the 4-year outcomes generated in the stochastic analysis, approximately 25 percent of them had an average annual return of 3.0 percent or less. Required contributions outside of this range are also possible. In particular, while it is unlikely that investment returns will average less than -3.0 percent or greater than 17.0 percent over this four year period, the possibility of a single investment return less than -3.0 percent or greater than 17.0 percent in any given year is much greater. Assumed Annual Return From 2017-18 through 2019-20 Projected Employer Contributions 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23 (3.0%) Normal Cost 20.2% 21.9% 21.9% 21.9% UAL Contribution $9,894,000 $11,335,000 $13,461,000 $15,815,000 3.0% Normal Cost 20.2% 21.9% 21.9% 21.9% UAL Contribution $9,894,000 $11,106,000 $12,782,000 $14,478,000 Assumed Discount Rate Normal Cost 20.2% 21.9% 21.9% 21.9% UAL Contribution $9,894,000 $10,943,000 $12,295,000 $13,495,000 11.0% Normal Cost 20.2% 21.9% 22.3% 22.7% UAL Contribution $9,894,000 $10,799,000 $11,820,000 $12,533,000 17.0% Normal Cost 20.2% 21.9% 23.1% 24.4% UAL Contribution $9,894,000 $10,569,000 $11,062,000 $11,004,000 Given the temporary suspension of the Risk Mitigation Policy during the period over which the discount rate assumption is being phased down to 7.0 percent, the projections above were performed without reflection of any possible impact of this Policy for Fiscal Years 2019-20 and 2020-21. The projected normal cost percentages do not reflect that the normal cost will decline over time as new employees are hired into PEPRA or other lower cost benefit tiers. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 22 Analysis of Discount Rate Sensitivity Shown below are various valuation results as of June 30, 2016 assuming alternate discount rates. Results are shown using the current discount rate of 7.375 percent as well as alternate discount rates of 6.0 percent, 7.0 percent, and 8.0 percent. The alternate rate of 7.0 percent was selected since the Board has adopted this rate as the final discount rate at the end of the three year phase-in of the reduction in this assumption. The rates of 6.0 percent and 8.0 percent were selected since they illustrate the impact of a 1 percent increase or decrease to the 7.0 percent assumption. This analysis shows the potential plan impacts if the PERF were to realize investment returns of 6.0 percent, 7.0 percent, or 8.0 percent over the long- term. This type of analysis gives the reader a sense of the long-term risk to required contributions. For a measure of funded status that is appropriate for assessing the sufficiency of plan assets to cover estimated termination liabilities, please see “Hypothetical Termination Liability” in the “Risk Analysis” section. Sensitivity Analysis As of June 30, 2016 Plan’s Normal Cost Accrued Liability Unfunded Accrued Liability Funded Status 7.375% (current discount rate) 28.571% $392,911,774 $143,025,193 63.6% 6.0% 39.221% $464,382,032 $214,495,451 53.8% 7.0% 31.093% $410,532,811 $160,646,230 60.9% 8.0% 24.890% $366,182,491 $116,295,910 68.2% CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 23 Volatility Ratios The actuarial calculations supplied in this communication are based on a number of assumptions about long-term demographic and economic behavior. Unless these assumptions (terminations, deaths, disabilities, retirements, salary growth, and investment return) are exactly realized each year, there will be differences on a year-to-year basis. The year-to-year differences between actual experience and the assumptions are called actuarial gains and losses and serve to lower or raise required employer contributions from one year to the next. Therefore, employer contributions will inevitably fluctuate, especially due to the ups and downs of investment returns. Asset Volatility Ratio (AVR) Plans that have higher asset-to-payroll ratios experience more volatile employer contributions (as a percentage of payroll) due to investment return. For example, a plan with an asset-to-payroll ratio of 8 may experience twice the contribution volatility due to investment return volatility than a plan with an asset-to- payroll ratio of 4. Shown below is the asset volatility ratio, a measure of the plan’s current volatility. It should be noted that this ratio is a measure of the current situation. It increases over time but generally tends to stabilize as the plan matures. Liability Volatility Ratio (LVR) Plans that have higher liability-to-payroll ratios experience more volatile employer contributions (as a percentage of payroll) due to investment return and changes in liability. For example, a plan with a liability- to-payroll ratio of 8 is expected to have twice the contribution volatility of a plan with a liability-to-payroll ratio of 4. The liability volatility ratio is also included in the table below. It should be noted that this ratio indicates a longer-term potential for contribution volatility. The asset volatility ratio, described above, will tend to move closer to the liability volatility ratio as the plan matures. Since the liability volatility ratio is a long-term measure, it is shown below at the current discount rate (7.375 percent) as well as the discount rate the Board has adopted to determine the contribution requirement in the June 30, 2018 actuarial valuation (7.00 percent). Contribution Volatility As of June 30, 2016 1. Market Value of Assets without Receivables $ 249,241,127 2. Payroll 21,268,028 3. Asset Volatility Ratio (AVR) [(1) / ( 2)] 11.7 4. Accrued Liability (7.375% discount rate) $ 392,911,774 5. Liability Volatility Ratio (LVR) [(4) / (2)] 18.5 6. Accrued Liability (7.00% discount rate) 410,532,811 7. Projected Liability Volatility Ratio [(6) / (2)] 19.3 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 24 Hypothetical Termination Liability The hypothetical termination liability is an estimate of the financial position of the plan had the contract with CalPERS been terminated as of June 30, 2016. The plan liability on a termination basis is calculated differently compared to the plan’s ongoing funding liability. For this hypothetical termination liability calculation, both compensation and service are frozen as of the valuation date and no future pay increases or service accruals are assumed. This measure of funded status is not appropriate for assessing the need for future employer contributions in the case of an ongoing plan, that is, for an employer that continues to provide CalPERS retirement benefits to active employees. A more conservative investment policy and asset allocation strategy was adopted by the CalPERS Board for the Terminated Agency Pool. The Terminated Agency Pool has limited funding sources since no future employer contributions will be made. Therefore, expected benefit payments are secured by risk-free assets and benefit security for members is increased while limiting the funding risk. However, this asset allocation has a lower expected rate of return than the PERF and consequently, a lower discount rate assumption. The lower discount rate for the Terminated Agency Pool results in higher liabilities for terminated plans. The effective termination discount rate will depend on actual market rates of return for risk-free securities on the date of termination. As market discount rates are variable the table below shows a range for the hypothetical termination liability based on the lowest and highest interest rates observed during an approximate 2-year period centered around the valuation date. Market Value of Assets (MVA) Hypothetical Termination Liability1,2 @ 1.75% Funded Status Unfunded Termination Liability @ 1.75% Hypothetical Termination Liability1,2 @ 3.00% Funded Status Unfunded Termination Liability @ 3.00% $249,886,581 $737,420,442 33.9% $487,533,861 $638,680,813 39.1% $388,794,232 1 The hypothetical liabilities calculated above include a 7 percent mortality contingency load in accordance with Board policy. Other actuarial assumptions can be found in Appendix A. 2 The current discount rate assumption used for termination valuations is a weighted average of the 10-year and 30-year U.S. Treasury yields where the weights are based on matching asset and liability durations as of the termination date. The discount rates used in the table are based on 20-year Treasury bonds, rounded to the nearest quarter percentage point, which is a good proxy for most plans. The 20-year Treasury yield was 1.75 percent on June 30, 2016, and was 2.75 percent on January 31, 2017. In order to terminate the plan, you must first contact our Retirement Services Contract Unit to initiate a Resolution of Intent to Terminate. The completed Resolution will allow the plan actuary to give you a preliminary termination valuation with a more up-to-date estimate of the plan liabilities. CalPERS advises you to consult with the plan actuary before beginning this process. PLAN’S MAJOR BENEFIT PROVISIONS CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Plan’s Major Benefit Options Shown below is a summary of the major optional benefits for which your agency has contracted for this plan. A description of principal standard and optional plan provisions is in Appendix B of this report. Contract Package Active Police Active Fire Active Fire Active Police Active Fire Active Police Active Fire Benefit Provision Benefit Formula 3.0% @ 50 3.0% @ 50 3.0% @ 50 2.7% @ 57 3.0% @ 55 3.0% @ 55 2.7% @ 57 Social Security Coverage No No No No No No No Full/Modified Full Full Full Full Full Full Full Employee Contribution Rate 9.00% 9.00% 9.00% 10.75% 9.00% 9.00% 10.75% Final Average Compensation Period One Year One Year One Year Three Year Three Year Three Year Three Year Sick Leave Credit No No No No No No No Non-Industrial Disability Standard Standard Standard Standard Standard Standard Standard Industrial Disability Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Pre-Retirement Death Benefits Optional Settlement 2W No Yes Yes No Yes No Yes 1959 Survivor Benefit Level Level 1 Level 1 Level 1 Level 1 Level 1 Level 1 Level 1 Special Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Alternate (firefighters) No No No No No No No Post-Retirement Death Benefits Lump Sum $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 Survivor Allowance (PRSA) No No No No No No No COLA 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% Page 26 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Plan’s Major Benefit Options Shown below is a summary of the major optional benefits for which your agency has contracted. A description of principal standard and optional plan provisions is in the following section of this Appendix. Contract Package Receiving Fire Receiving Police Benefit Provision Benefit Formula Social Security Coverage Full/Modified Employee Contribution Rate Final Average Compensation Period Sick Leave Credit Non-Industrial Disability Industrial Disability Pre-Retirement Death Benefits Optional Settlement 2W 1959 Survivor Benefit Level Special Alternate (firefighters) Post-Retirement Death Benefits Lump Sum $500 $500 Survivor Allowance (PRSA) No No COLA 2% 2% Page 27 APPENDICES  APPENDIX A – ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS  APPENDIX B – PRINCIPAL PLAN PROVISIONS  APPENDIX C – PARTICIPANT DATA  APPENDIX D – DEVELOPMENT OF PEPRA MEMBER CONTRIBUTION RATES  APPENDIX E – GLOSSARY OF ACTUARIAL TERMS APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS  ACTUARIAL DATA  ACTUARIAL METHODS  ACTUARIAL ASSUMPTIONS  MISCELLANEOUS CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-1 Actuarial Data As stated in the Actuarial Certification, the data which serves as the basis of this valuation has been obtained from the various CalPERS databases. We have reviewed the valuation data and believe that it is reasonable and appropriate in aggregate. We are unaware of any potential data issues that would have a material effect on the results of this valuation, except that data does not always contain the latest salary information for former members now in reciprocal systems and does not recognize the potential for unusually large salary deviation in certain cases such as elected officials. Therefore, salary information in these cases may not be accurate. These situations are relatively infrequent, however, and when they do occur, they generally do not have a material impact on the required employer contributions. Actuarial Methods Actuarial Cost Method The actuarial cost method used is the Entry Age Normal Cost Method. Under this method, projected benefits are determined for all members and the associated liabilities are spread in a manner that produces level annual cost as a percentage of pay in each year from the member’s entry age to their assumed retirement age on the valuation date. The cost allocated to the current fiscal year is called the normal cost. The actuarial accrued liability for active members is then calculated as the portion of the total cost of the plan allocated to prior years. The actuarial accrued liability for members currently receiving benefits and for members entitled to deferred benefits is equal to the present value of the benefits expected to be paid. No normal costs are applicable for these participants. Amortization of Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability The excess of the total actuarial accrued liability over the market value of plan assets is called the unfunded actuarial accrued liability (UAL). Funding requirements are determined by adding the normal cost and an amortization payment toward the unfunded liability. The unfunded liability is amortized as a “level percent of pay”. Commencing with the June 30, 2013 valuation, all new gains or losses are amortized over a fixed 30-year period with a 5-year ramp up at the beginning and a 5-year ramp down at the end of the amortization period. All changes in liability due to plan amendments (other than golden handshakes) are amortized over a 20-year period with no ramp. Changes in actuarial assumptions or changes in actuarial methodology are amortized over a 20-year period with a 5-year ramp up at the beginning and a 5-year ramp down at the end of the amortization period. Changes in unfunded accrued liability due to a Golden Handshake will be amortized over a period of five years. The 5-year ramp up means that the payments in the first four years of the amortization period are 20 percent, 40 percent, 60 percent and 80 percent of the “full” payment which begins in year five. The 5-year ramp down means that the reverse is true in the final four years of the amortization period. Exceptions for Inconsistencies: An exception to the amortization rules above is used whenever their application results in inconsistencies. In these cases, a “fresh start” approach is used. This means that the current unfunded actuarial liability is projected and amortized over a set number of years. For example, a fresh start is needed in the following situations: 1) When a positive payment would be required on a negative unfunded actuarial liability (or conversely a negative payment on a positive unfunded actuarial liability); or 2) When there are excess assets, rather than an unfunded liability. In this situation, a 30-year fresh start is used. It should be noted that the actuary may determine that a fresh start is necessary under other circumstances. In all cases of a fresh start, the period is set by the actuary at what is deemed appropriate; however, the period will not be greater than 30 years. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-2 Exceptions for Inactive Plans: The following exceptions apply to plans classified as Inactive. These plans have no active members and no expectation to have active members in the future.  Amortization of the unfunded liability is on a “level dollar” basis rather than a “level percent of pay” basis. For amortization layers which utilize a ramp up and ramp down, the “ultimate” payment is constant.  Actuarial judgment will be used to shorten amortization periods for Inactive plans with existing periods that are deemed too long given the duration of the liability. The specific demographics of the plan will be used to determine if shorter periods may be more appropriate. Asset Valuation Method It is the policy of the CalPERS Board of Administration to use professionally accepted amortization methods to eliminate a surplus or an unfunded accrued liability in a manner that maintains benefit security for the members of the System while minimizing substantial variations in required employer contributions. On April 17, 2013, the CalPERS Board of Administration approved a recommendation to change the CalPERS amortization and rate smoothing policies. Beginning with the June 30, 2013 valuations that set the employer contribution for Fiscal Year 2015-16, CalPERS employs a policy that amortizes all gains and losses over a fixed 30-year period. The increase or decrease in the rate is then spread directly over a 5-year period. This method is referred to as “direct rate smoothing.” CalPERS no longer uses an actuarial value of assets and only uses the market value of assets. The direct rate smoothing method is equivalent to a method using a 5 year asset smoothing period with no actuarial value of asset corridor and a 25-year amortization period for gains and losses. PEPRA Normal Cost Rate Methodology Per Government Code Section 7522.30(b) the “normal cost rate” shall mean the annual actuarially determined normal cost for the plan of retirement benefits provided to the new member and shall be established based on actuarial assumptions used to determine the liabilities and costs as part of the annual actuarial valuation. The plan of retirement benefits shall include any elements that would impact the actuarial determination of the normal cost, including, but not limited to, the retirement formula, eligibility and vesting criteria, ancillary benefit provisions, and any automatic cost-of-living adjustments as determined by the public retirement system. Each non-pooled plan is considered to be stable with a sufficiently large demographic of actives. It is preferable to determine normal cost using a large active population ongoing so that this rate remains relatively stable. The total PEPRA normal cost will be calculated using all active members within a non- pooled plan until the number of members covered under the PEPRA formula meets either: 1. 50 percent of the active population, or 2. 25 percent of the active population and 100 or more PEPRA members Once either of the conditions above are met for a non-pooled plan, the total PEPRA normal cost will be based on the active PEPRA population in the plan. Accordingly, the total normal cost will be funded equally between employer and employee based on the demographics of the employees of that employer. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-3 Actuarial Assumptions In 2014, CalPERS completed a 2-year asset liability management study incorporating actuarial assumptions and strategic asset allocation. On February 19, 2014, the CalPERS Board of Administration adopted relatively modest changes to the asset allocation that reduced the expected volatility of returns. The adopted asset allocation was expected to have a long-term blended return that continued to support a discount rate assumption of 7.5 percent at that time. The Board also approved several changes to the demographic assumptions that more closely aligned with actual experience. The most significant of these is mortality improvement to acknowledge the greater life expectancies we are seeing in our membership and expected continued improvements. These new actuarial assumptions were first used in the June 30, 2014 valuation to set the Fiscal Year 2016-17 contribution for public agency employers. On December 21, 2016, the CalPERS Board of Administration lowered the discount rate from 7.50 percent to 7.00 percent using a three year phase-in beginning with the June 30, 2016 actuarial valuations. The minimum employer contributions for Fiscal Year 2018-19 determined in this valuation were calculated using a discount rate of 7.375 percent. The projected employer contributions on Page 5 are calculated assuming that the discount rate will be lowered to 7.25 percent next year and 7.00 percent the following year as adopted by the Board. The decision to reduce the discount rate was primarily based on reduced capital market assumptions provided by external investment consultants and CalPERS investment staff. The specific decision adopted by the Board reflected recommendations from CalPERS staff and additional input from employer and employee stakeholder groups. Based on the investment allocation adopted by the Board and capital market assumptions, the reduced discount rate schedule provides a more realistic assumption for the long term investment return of the fund. Notwithstanding the Board’s decision to phase into a 7.0 percent discount rate, subsequent analysis of the expected investment return of CalPERS assets or changes to the investment allocation may result in a change to this three year discount rate schedule. A comprehensive analysis of all actuarial assumptions and methods including the discount rate will be conducted in 2017. For more details and additional rationale for the selection of the actuarial assumptions, please refer to the CalPERS Experience Study and Review of Actuarial Assumptions report from January 2014 that can be found on the CalPERS website under: “Forms and Publications”. Click on “View All” and search for Experience Study. All actuarial assumptions (except the discount rates used for the hypothetical termination liability) represent an estimate of future experience rather than observations of the estimates inherent in market data. Economic Assumptions Discount Rate The prescribed discount rate assumption adopted by the Board on December 21, 2016 is 7.375 percent compounded annually (net of investment and administrative expenses) as of 6/30/2016. The Board also prescribed that the assumed discount rate will reduce to 7.25 percent compounded annually (net of expenses) as of 6/30/2017, and 7.0 percent compounded annually (net of expenses) as of 6/30/2018. These further changes to the discount rate assumption are not reflected in the determination of required contributions determined in this report for Fiscal Year 2018-19. Termination Liability Discount Rate The current discount rate assumption used for termination valuations is a weighted average of the 10-year and 30-year U.S. Treasury yields where the weights are based on matching asset and liability durations as of the termination date. The hypothetical termination liabilities in this report are calculated using an observed range of market interest rates. This range is based on the lowest and highest 20-year Treasury bond observed during an approximate 2-year period centered around the valuation date. The 20-year Treasury bond has a similar duration to most plan liabilities and serves as a good proxy for the termination discount rate. The 20-year Treasury yield was 1.75 percent on June 30, 2016. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-4 Salary Growth Annual increases vary by category, entry age, and duration of service. A sample of assumed increases are shown below. Public Agency Miscellaneous Duration of Service (Entry Age 20) (Entry Age 30) (Entry Age 40) 0 0.1220 0.1160 0.1020 1 0.0990 0.0940 0.0830 2 0.0860 0.0810 0.0710 3 0.0770 0.0720 0.0630 4 0.0700 0.0650 0.0570 5 0.0640 0.0600 0.0520 10 0.0460 0.0430 0.0390 15 0.0420 0.0400 0.0360 20 0.0390 0.0380 0.0340 25 0.0370 0.0360 0.0330 30 0.0350 0.0340 0.0320 Public Agency Fire Duration of Service (Entry Age 20) (Entry Age 30) (Entry Age 40) 0 0.2000 0.1980 0.1680 1 0.1490 0.1460 0.1250 2 0.1200 0.1160 0.0990 3 0.0980 0.0940 0.0810 4 0.0820 0.0780 0.0670 5 0.0690 0.0640 0.0550 10 0.0470 0.0460 0.0420 15 0.0440 0.0420 0.0390 20 0.0420 0.0390 0.0360 25 0.0400 0.0370 0.0340 30 0.0380 0.0360 0.0340 Public Agency Police Duration of Service (Entry Age 20) (Entry Age 30) (Entry Age 40) 0 0.1500 0.1470 0.1310 1 0.1160 0.1120 0.1010 2 0.0950 0.0920 0.0830 3 0.0810 0.0780 0.0700 4 0.0700 0.0670 0.0600 5 0.0610 0.0580 0.0520 10 0.0450 0.0430 0.0370 15 0.0450 0.0430 0.0370 20 0.0450 0.0430 0.0370 25 0.0450 0.0430 0.0370 30 0.0450 0.0430 0.0370 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-5 Salary Growth (continued) Public Agency County Peace Officers Duration of Service (Entry Age 20) (Entry Age 30) (Entry Age 40) 0 0.1770 0.1670 0.1500 1 0.1340 0.1260 0.1140 2 0.1080 0.1030 0.0940 3 0.0900 0.0860 0.0790 4 0.0760 0.0730 0.0670 5 0.0650 0.0620 0.0580 10 0.0470 0.0450 0.0410 15 0.0460 0.0450 0.0390 20 0.0460 0.0450 0.0380 25 0.0460 0.0450 0.0380 30 0.0460 0.0440 0.0380 Schools Duration of Service (Entry Age 20) (Entry Age 30) (Entry Age 40) 0 0.0900 0.0880 0.0820 1 0.0780 0.0750 0.0700 2 0.0700 0.0680 0.0630 3 0.0650 0.0630 0.0580 4 0.0610 0.0590 0.0540 5 0.0580 0.0560 0.0510 10 0.0460 0.0450 0.0410 15 0.0420 0.0410 0.0380 20 0.0390 0.0380 0.0350 25 0.0370 0.0350 0.0330 30 0.0350 0.0330 0.0310  The Miscellaneous salary scale is used for Local Prosecutors.  The Police salary scale is used for Other Safety, Local Sheriff, and School Police. Overall Payroll Growth 3.00 percent compounded annually (used in projecting the payroll over which the unfunded liability is amortized). This assumption is used for all plans with active members. Inflation 2.75 percent compounded annually. Non-valued Potential Additional Liabilities The potential liability loss for a cost-of-living increase exceeding the 2.75 percent inflation assumption, and any potential liability loss from future member service purchases are not reflected in the valuation. Miscellaneous Loading Factors Credit for Unused Sick Leave Total years of service is increased by 1 percent for those plans that have accepted the provision providing Credit for Unused Sick Leave. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-6 Conversion of Employer Paid Member Contributions (EPMC) Total years of service is increased by the Employee Contribution Rate for those plans with the provision providing for the Conversion of Employer Paid Member Contributions (EPMC) during the final compensation period. Norris Decision (Best Factors) Employees hired prior to July 1, 1982 have projected benefit amounts increased in order to reflect the use of “Best Factors” in the calculation of optional benefit forms. This is due to a 1983 Supreme Court decision, known as the Norris decision, which required males and females to be treated equally in the determination of benefit amounts. Consequently, anyone already employed at that time is given the best possible conversion factor when optional benefits are determined. No loading is necessary for employees hired after July 1, 1982. Termination Liability The termination liabilities include a 7 percent contingency load. This load is for unforeseen improvements in mortality. Demographic Assumptions Pre-Retirement Mortality Non-industrial death rates vary by age and gender. Industrial death rates vary by age. See sample rates in table below. The non-industrial death rates are used for all plans. The industrial death rates are used for safety plans (except for Local Prosecutor safety members where the corresponding miscellaneous plan does not have the Industrial Death Benefit). Non-Industrial Death Industrial Death (Not Job-Related) (Job-Related) Age Male Female Male and Female 20 0.00031 0.00020 0.00003 25 0.00040 0.00023 0.00007 30 0.00049 0.00025 0.00010 35 0.00057 0.00035 0.00012 40 0.00075 0.00050 0.00013 45 0.00106 0.00071 0.00014 50 0.00155 0.00100 0.00015 55 0.00228 0.00138 0.00016 60 0.00308 0.00182 0.00017 65 0.00400 0.00257 0.00018 70 0.00524 0.00367 0.00019 75 0.00713 0.00526 0.00020 80 0.00990 0.00814 0.00021 Miscellaneous plans usually have industrial death rates set to zero unless the agency has specifically contracted for industrial death benefits. If so, each non-industrial death rate shown above will be split into two components; 99 percent will become the non-industrial death rate and 1 percent will become the industrial death rate. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-7 Post-Retirement Mortality Rates vary by age, type of retirement, and gender. See sample rates in table below. These rates are used for all plans. Healthy Recipients Non-Industrially Disabled Industrially Disabled (Not Job-Related) (Job-Related) Age Male Female Male Female Male Female 50 0.00501 0.00466 0.01680 0.01158 0.00501 0.00466 55 0.00599 0.00416 0.01973 0.01149 0.00599 0.00416 60 0.00710 0.00436 0.02289 0.01235 0.00754 0.00518 65 0.00829 0.00588 0.02451 0.01607 0.01122 0.00838 70 0.01305 0.00993 0.02875 0.02211 0.01635 0.01395 75 0.02205 0.01722 0.03990 0.03037 0.02834 0.02319 80 0.03899 0.02902 0.06083 0.04725 0.04899 0.03910 85 0.06969 0.05243 0.09731 0.07762 0.07679 0.06251 90 0.12974 0.09887 0.14804 0.12890 0.12974 0.09887 95 0.22444 0.18489 0.22444 0.21746 0.22444 0.18489 100 0.32536 0.30017 0.32536 0.30017 0.32536 0.30017 105 0.58527 0.56093 0.58527 0.56093 0.58527 0.56093 110 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 The post-retirement mortality rates above include 20 years of projected on-going mortality improvement using Scale BB published by the Society of Actuaries. Marital Status For active members, a percentage who are married upon retirement is assumed according to member category as shown in the following table. Member Category Percent Married Miscellaneous Member 85% Local Police 90% Local Fire 90% Other Local Safety 90% School Police 90% Age of Spouse It is assumed that female spouses are 3 years younger than male spouses. This assumption is used for all plans. Terminated Members It is assumed that terminated members refund immediately if non-vested. Terminated members who are vested are assumed to follow the same service retirement pattern as active members but with a load to reflect the expected higher rates of retirement, especially at lower ages. The following table shows the load factors that are applied to the service retirement assumption for active members to obtain the service retirement pattern for separated vested members: Age Load Factor Miscellaneous Load Factor Safety 50 190% 310% 51 110% 190% 52 110% 105% 53 through 54 100% 105% 55 100% 140% 56 and above 100% (no change) 100% (no change) Termination with Refund Rates vary by entry age and service for miscellaneous plans. Rates vary by service for safety plans. See sample rates in tables below. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-8 Public Agency Miscellaneous Duration of Service Entry Age 20 Entry Age 25 Entry Age 30 Entry Age 35 Entry Age 40 Entry Age 45 0 0.1742 0.1674 0.1606 0.1537 0.1468 0.1400 1 0.1545 0.1477 0.1409 0.1339 0.1271 0.1203 2 0.1348 0.1280 0.1212 0.1142 0.1074 0.1006 3 0.1151 0.1083 0.1015 0.0945 0.0877 0.0809 4 0.0954 0.0886 0.0818 0.0748 0.0680 0.0612 5 0.0212 0.0193 0.0174 0.0155 0.0136 0.0116 10 0.0138 0.0121 0.0104 0.0088 0.0071 0.0055 15 0.0060 0.0051 0.0042 0.0032 0.0023 0.0014 20 0.0037 0.0029 0.0021 0.0013 0.0005 0.0001 25 0.0017 0.0011 0.0005 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 30 0.0005 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 35 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 Public Agency Safety Duration of Service Fire Police County Peace Officer 0 0.0710 0.1013 0.0997 1 0.0554 0.0636 0.0782 2 0.0398 0.0271 0.0566 3 0.0242 0.0258 0.0437 4 0.0218 0.0245 0.0414 5 0.0029 0.0086 0.0145 10 0.0009 0.0053 0.0089 15 0.0006 0.0027 0.0045 20 0.0005 0.0017 0.0020 25 0.0003 0.0012 0.0009 30 0.0003 0.0009 0.0006 35 0.0003 0.0009 0.0006 The police termination and refund rates are also used for Public Agency Local Prosecutors, Other Safety, Local Sheriff, and School Police. Schools Duration of Service Entry Age 20 Entry Age 25 Entry Age 30 Entry Age 35 Entry Age 40 Entry Age 45 0 0.1730 0.1627 0.1525 0.1422 0.1319 0.1217 1 0.1585 0.1482 0.1379 0.1277 0.1174 0.1071 2 0.1440 0.1336 0.1234 0.1131 0.1028 0.0926 3 0.1295 0.1192 0.1089 0.0987 0.0884 0.0781 4 0.1149 0.1046 0.0944 0.0841 0.0738 0.0636 5 0.0278 0.0249 0.0221 0.0192 0.0164 0.0135 10 0.0172 0.0147 0.0122 0.0098 0.0074 0.0049 15 0.0115 0.0094 0.0074 0.0053 0.0032 0.0011 20 0.0073 0.0055 0.0038 0.0020 0.0002 0.0002 25 0.0037 0.0023 0.0010 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 30 0.0015 0.0003 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 35 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-9 Termination with Vested Benefits Rates vary by entry age and service for miscellaneous plans. Rates vary by service for safety plans. See sample rates in tables below. Public Agency Miscellaneous Duration of Service Entry Age 20 Entry Age 25 Entry Age 30 Entry Age 35 Entry Age 40 5 0.0656 0.0597 0.0537 0.0477 0.0418 10 0.0530 0.0466 0.0403 0.0339 0.0000 15 0.0443 0.0373 0.0305 0.0000 0.0000 20 0.0333 0.0261 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 25 0.0212 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 30 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 35 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Public Agency Safety Duration of Service Fire Police County Peace Officer 5 0.0162 0.0163 0.0265 10 0.0061 0.0126 0.0204 15 0.0058 0.0082 0.0130 20 0.0053 0.0065 0.0074 25 0.0047 0.0058 0.0043 30 0.0045 0.0056 0.0030 35 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000  When a member is eligible to retire, the termination with vested benefits probability is set to zero.  After termination with vested benefits, a miscellaneous member is assumed to retire at age 59 and a safety member at age 54.  The Police termination with vested benefits rates are also used for Public Agency Local Prosecutors, Other Safety, Local Sheriff, and School Police. Schools Duration of Service Entry Age 20 Entry Age 25 Entry Age 30 Entry Age 35 Entry Age 40 5 0.0816 0.0733 0.0649 0.0566 0.0482 10 0.0629 0.0540 0.0450 0.0359 0.0000 15 0.0537 0.0440 0.0344 0.0000 0.0000 20 0.0420 0.0317 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 25 0.0291 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 30 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 35 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-10 Non-Industrial (Not Job-Related) Disability Rates vary by age and gender for miscellaneous plans. Rates vary by age and category for safety plans. Miscellaneous Fire Police County Peace Officer Schools Age Male Female Male and Female Male and Female Male and Female Male Female 20 0.0002 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0003 0.0003 25 0.0002 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 30 0.0002 0.0002 0.0001 0.0002 0.0001 0.0001 0.0002 35 0.0005 0.0008 0.0001 0.0003 0.0004 0.0005 0.0004 40 0.0012 0.0016 0.0001 0.0004 0.0007 0.0015 0.0010 45 0.0019 0.0022 0.0002 0.0005 0.0013 0.0030 0.0019 50 0.0021 0.0023 0.0005 0.0008 0.0018 0.0039 0.0024 55 0.0022 0.0018 0.0010 0.0013 0.0010 0.0036 0.0021 60 0.0022 0.0014 0.0015 0.0020 0.0006 0.0031 0.0014  The miscellaneous non-industrial disability rates are used for Local Prosecutors.  The police non-industrial disability rates are also used for Other Safety, Local Sheriff, and School Police. Industrial (Job-Related) Disability Rates vary by age and category. Age Fire Police County Peace Officer 20 0.0001 0.0000 0.0004 25 0.0003 0.0017 0.0013 30 0.0007 0.0048 0.0025 35 0.0016 0.0079 0.0037 40 0.0030 0.0110 0.0051 45 0.0053 0.0141 0.0067 50 0.0277 0.0185 0.0092 55 0.0409 0.0479 0.0151 60 0.0583 0.0602 0.0174  The police industrial disability rates are also used for Local Sheriff and Other Safety.  Fifty percent of the police industrial disability rates are used for School Police.  One percent of the police industrial disability rates are used for Local Prosecutors.  Normally, rates are zero for miscellaneous plans unless the agency has specifically contracted for industrial disability benefits. If so, each miscellaneous non-industrial disability rate will be split into two components: 50 percent will become the non-industrial disability rate and 50 percent will become the industrial disability rate. Service Retirement Retirement rates vary by age, service, and formula, except for the safety ½ @ 55 and 2% @ 55 formulas, where retirement rates vary by age only. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-11 Service Retirement Public Agency Miscellaneous 1.5% @ 65 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.008 0.011 0.013 0.015 0.017 0.019 51 0.007 0.010 0.012 0.013 0.015 0.017 52 0.010 0.014 0.017 0.019 0.021 0.024 53 0.008 0.012 0.015 0.017 0.019 0.022 54 0.012 0.016 0.019 0.022 0.025 0.028 55 0.018 0.025 0.031 0.035 0.038 0.043 56 0.015 0.021 0.025 0.029 0.032 0.036 57 0.020 0.028 0.033 0.038 0.043 0.048 58 0.024 0.033 0.040 0.046 0.052 0.058 59 0.028 0.039 0.048 0.054 0.060 0.067 60 0.049 0.069 0.083 0.094 0.105 0.118 61 0.062 0.087 0.106 0.120 0.133 0.150 62 0.104 0.146 0.177 0.200 0.223 0.251 63 0.099 0.139 0.169 0.191 0.213 0.239 64 0.097 0.136 0.165 0.186 0.209 0.233 65 0.140 0.197 0.240 0.271 0.302 0.339 66 0.092 0.130 0.157 0.177 0.198 0.222 67 0.129 0.181 0.220 0.249 0.277 0.311 68 0.092 0.129 0.156 0.177 0.197 0.221 69 0.092 0.130 0.158 0.178 0.199 0.224 70 0.103 0.144 0.175 0.198 0.221 0.248 Public Agency Miscellaneous 2% @ 60 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.010 0.013 0.015 0.018 0.019 0.021 51 0.009 0.011 0.014 0.016 0.017 0.019 52 0.011 0.014 0.017 0.020 0.022 0.024 53 0.010 0.012 0.015 0.017 0.020 0.021 54 0.015 0.019 0.023 0.025 0.029 0.031 55 0.022 0.029 0.035 0.040 0.045 0.049 56 0.018 0.024 0.028 0.033 0.036 0.040 57 0.024 0.032 0.038 0.043 0.049 0.053 58 0.027 0.036 0.043 0.049 0.055 0.061 59 0.033 0.044 0.054 0.061 0.068 0.076 60 0.056 0.077 0.092 0.105 0.117 0.130 61 0.071 0.097 0.118 0.134 0.149 0.166 62 0.117 0.164 0.198 0.224 0.250 0.280 63 0.122 0.171 0.207 0.234 0.261 0.292 64 0.114 0.159 0.193 0.218 0.244 0.271 65 0.150 0.209 0.255 0.287 0.321 0.358 66 0.114 0.158 0.192 0.217 0.243 0.270 67 0.141 0.196 0.238 0.270 0.301 0.337 68 0.103 0.143 0.174 0.196 0.219 0.245 69 0.109 0.153 0.185 0.209 0.234 0.261 70 0.117 0.162 0.197 0.222 0.248 0.277 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-12 Service Retirement Public Agency Miscellaneous 2% @ 55 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.014 0.018 0.021 0.025 0.027 0.031 51 0.012 0.014 0.017 0.020 0.021 0.025 52 0.013 0.017 0.019 0.023 0.025 0.028 53 0.015 0.020 0.023 0.027 0.030 0.034 54 0.026 0.033 0.038 0.045 0.051 0.059 55 0.048 0.061 0.074 0.088 0.100 0.117 56 0.042 0.053 0.063 0.075 0.085 0.100 57 0.044 0.056 0.067 0.081 0.091 0.107 58 0.049 0.062 0.074 0.089 0.100 0.118 59 0.057 0.072 0.086 0.103 0.118 0.138 60 0.067 0.086 0.103 0.123 0.139 0.164 61 0.081 0.103 0.124 0.148 0.168 0.199 62 0.116 0.147 0.178 0.214 0.243 0.288 63 0.114 0.144 0.174 0.208 0.237 0.281 64 0.108 0.138 0.166 0.199 0.227 0.268 65 0.155 0.197 0.238 0.285 0.325 0.386 66 0.132 0.168 0.203 0.243 0.276 0.328 67 0.122 0.155 0.189 0.225 0.256 0.304 68 0.111 0.141 0.170 0.204 0.232 0.274 69 0.114 0.144 0.174 0.209 0.238 0.282 70 0.130 0.165 0.200 0.240 0.272 0.323 Public Agency Miscellaneous 2.5% @ 55 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.004 0.009 0.019 0.029 0.049 0.094 51 0.004 0.009 0.019 0.029 0.049 0.094 52 0.004 0.009 0.020 0.030 0.050 0.095 53 0.008 0.014 0.025 0.036 0.058 0.104 54 0.024 0.034 0.050 0.066 0.091 0.142 55 0.066 0.088 0.115 0.142 0.179 0.241 56 0.042 0.057 0.078 0.098 0.128 0.184 57 0.041 0.057 0.077 0.097 0.128 0.183 58 0.045 0.061 0.083 0.104 0.136 0.192 59 0.055 0.074 0.098 0.123 0.157 0.216 60 0.066 0.088 0.115 0.142 0.179 0.241 61 0.072 0.095 0.124 0.153 0.191 0.255 62 0.099 0.130 0.166 0.202 0.248 0.319 63 0.092 0.121 0.155 0.189 0.233 0.302 64 0.091 0.119 0.153 0.187 0.231 0.299 65 0.122 0.160 0.202 0.245 0.297 0.374 66 0.138 0.179 0.226 0.272 0.329 0.411 67 0.114 0.149 0.189 0.229 0.279 0.354 68 0.100 0.131 0.168 0.204 0.250 0.322 69 0.114 0.149 0.189 0.229 0.279 0.354 70 0.127 0.165 0.209 0.253 0.306 0.385 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-13 Service Retirement Public Agency Miscellaneous 2.7% @ 55 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.004 0.009 0.014 0.035 0.055 0.095 51 0.002 0.006 0.011 0.030 0.050 0.090 52 0.006 0.012 0.017 0.038 0.059 0.099 53 0.010 0.017 0.024 0.046 0.068 0.110 54 0.032 0.044 0.057 0.085 0.113 0.160 55 0.076 0.101 0.125 0.165 0.205 0.265 56 0.055 0.074 0.093 0.127 0.160 0.214 57 0.050 0.068 0.086 0.118 0.151 0.204 58 0.055 0.074 0.093 0.127 0.161 0.215 59 0.061 0.082 0.102 0.138 0.174 0.229 60 0.069 0.093 0.116 0.154 0.192 0.250 61 0.086 0.113 0.141 0.183 0.225 0.288 62 0.105 0.138 0.171 0.218 0.266 0.334 63 0.103 0.135 0.167 0.215 0.262 0.329 64 0.109 0.143 0.177 0.226 0.275 0.344 65 0.134 0.174 0.215 0.270 0.326 0.401 66 0.147 0.191 0.235 0.294 0.354 0.433 67 0.121 0.158 0.196 0.248 0.300 0.372 68 0.113 0.147 0.182 0.232 0.282 0.352 69 0.117 0.153 0.189 0.240 0.291 0.362 70 0.141 0.183 0.226 0.283 0.341 0.418 Public Agency Miscellaneous 3% @ 60 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.012 0.018 0.024 0.039 0.040 0.091 51 0.009 0.014 0.019 0.034 0.034 0.084 52 0.014 0.020 0.026 0.043 0.044 0.096 53 0.016 0.023 0.031 0.048 0.050 0.102 54 0.026 0.036 0.045 0.065 0.070 0.125 55 0.043 0.057 0.072 0.096 0.105 0.165 56 0.042 0.056 0.070 0.094 0.103 0.162 57 0.049 0.065 0.082 0.108 0.119 0.180 58 0.057 0.076 0.094 0.122 0.136 0.199 59 0.076 0.100 0.123 0.157 0.175 0.244 60 0.114 0.148 0.182 0.226 0.255 0.334 61 0.095 0.123 0.152 0.190 0.214 0.288 62 0.133 0.172 0.211 0.260 0.294 0.378 63 0.129 0.166 0.204 0.252 0.285 0.368 64 0.143 0.185 0.226 0.278 0.315 0.401 65 0.202 0.260 0.318 0.386 0.439 0.542 66 0.177 0.228 0.279 0.340 0.386 0.482 67 0.151 0.194 0.238 0.292 0.331 0.420 68 0.139 0.179 0.220 0.270 0.306 0.391 69 0.190 0.245 0.299 0.364 0.414 0.513 70 0.140 0.182 0.223 0.274 0.310 0.396 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-14 Service Retirement Public Agency Miscellaneous 2% @ 62 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 51 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 52 0.010 0.013 0.016 0.019 0.022 0.024 53 0.013 0.017 0.020 0.024 0.027 0.031 54 0.021 0.027 0.033 0.039 0.045 0.050 55 0.044 0.056 0.068 0.080 0.092 0.104 56 0.030 0.039 0.047 0.055 0.063 0.072 57 0.036 0.046 0.056 0.066 0.076 0.086 58 0.046 0.059 0.072 0.085 0.097 0.110 59 0.058 0.074 0.089 0.105 0.121 0.137 60 0.062 0.078 0.095 0.112 0.129 0.146 61 0.062 0.079 0.096 0.113 0.129 0.146 62 0.097 0.123 0.150 0.176 0.202 0.229 63 0.089 0.113 0.137 0.162 0.186 0.210 64 0.094 0.120 0.145 0.171 0.197 0.222 65 0.129 0.164 0.199 0.234 0.269 0.304 66 0.105 0.133 0.162 0.190 0.219 0.247 67 0.105 0.133 0.162 0.190 0.219 0.247 68 0.105 0.133 0.162 0.190 0.219 0.247 69 0.105 0.133 0.162 0.190 0.219 0.247 70 0.125 0.160 0.194 0.228 0.262 0.296 Service Retirement Public Agency Fire ½ @ 55 and 2% @ 55 Age Rate Age Rate 50 0.0159 56 0.1108 51 0.0000 57 0.0000 52 0.0344 58 0.0950 53 0.0199 59 0.0441 54 0.0413 60 1.00000 55 0.0751 Public Agency Police ½ @ 55 and 2% @ 55 Age Rate Age Rate 50 0.0255 56 0.0692 51 0.0000 57 0.0511 52 0.0164 58 0.0724 53 0.0272 59 0.0704 54 0.0095 60 1.0000 55 0.1667 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-15 Service Retirement Public Agency Police 2% @ 50 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.017 0.089 51 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.017 0.087 52 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.042 0.132 53 0.044 0.044 0.044 0.044 0.090 0.217 54 0.065 0.065 0.065 0.065 0.126 0.283 55 0.086 0.086 0.086 0.086 0.166 0.354 56 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.130 0.289 57 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.129 0.288 58 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.129 0.288 59 0.139 0.139 0.139 0.139 0.176 0.312 60 0.123 0.123 0.123 0.123 0.153 0.278 61 0.110 0.110 0.110 0.110 0.138 0.256 62 0.130 0.130 0.130 0.130 0.162 0.291 63 0.130 0.130 0.130 0.130 0.162 0.291 64 0.130 0.130 0.130 0.130 0.162 0.291 65 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000  These rates also apply to Local Prosecutors, Local Sheriff, School Police, and Other Safety. Service Retirement Public Agency Fire 2% @ 50 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.013 0.020 51 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.020 0.029 52 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.028 0.042 53 0.052 0.052 0.052 0.052 0.079 0.119 54 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.103 0.154 55 0.089 0.089 0.089 0.089 0.136 0.204 56 0.083 0.083 0.083 0.083 0.127 0.190 57 0.082 0.082 0.082 0.082 0.126 0.189 58 0.088 0.088 0.088 0.088 0.136 0.204 59 0.074 0.074 0.074 0.074 0.113 0.170 60 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.154 0.230 61 0.072 0.072 0.072 0.072 0.110 0.165 62 0.099 0.099 0.099 0.099 0.152 0.228 63 0.114 0.114 0.114 0.114 0.175 0.262 64 0.114 0.114 0.114 0.114 0.175 0.262 65 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-16 Service Retirement Public Agency Police 3% @ 55 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.015 0.086 51 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.034 0.114 52 0.026 0.026 0.026 0.026 0.060 0.154 53 0.038 0.038 0.038 0.038 0.083 0.188 54 0.071 0.071 0.071 0.071 0.151 0.292 55 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.131 0.261 56 0.072 0.072 0.072 0.072 0.153 0.295 57 0.065 0.065 0.065 0.065 0.140 0.273 58 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.142 0.277 59 0.118 0.118 0.118 0.118 0.247 0.437 60 0.065 0.065 0.065 0.065 0.138 0.272 61 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.178 0.332 62 0.108 0.108 0.108 0.108 0.226 0.405 63 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.178 0.332 64 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.178 0.332 65 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000  These rates also apply to Local Prosecutors, Local Sheriff, School Police, and Other Safety. Service Retirement Public Agency Fire 3% @ 55 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.006 0.016 0.069 51 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.006 0.018 0.071 52 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.021 0.040 0.098 53 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.049 0.085 0.149 54 0.057 0.057 0.057 0.087 0.144 0.217 55 0.073 0.073 0.073 0.109 0.179 0.259 56 0.064 0.064 0.064 0.097 0.161 0.238 57 0.063 0.063 0.063 0.095 0.157 0.233 58 0.065 0.065 0.065 0.099 0.163 0.241 59 0.088 0.088 0.088 0.131 0.213 0.299 60 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.155 0.251 0.344 61 0.118 0.118 0.118 0.175 0.282 0.380 62 0.087 0.087 0.087 0.128 0.210 0.295 63 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.100 0.165 0.243 64 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.100 0.165 0.243 65 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-17 Service Retirement Public Agency Police 3% @ 50 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.099 0.240 0.314 51 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.072 0.198 0.260 52 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.071 0.198 0.259 53 0.039 0.039 0.039 0.080 0.212 0.277 54 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.092 0.229 0.300 55 0.052 0.052 0.052 0.105 0.248 0.323 56 0.042 0.042 0.042 0.087 0.221 0.289 57 0.043 0.043 0.043 0.088 0.223 0.292 58 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.109 0.255 0.333 59 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.108 0.253 0.330 60 0.060 0.060 0.060 0.121 0.272 0.355 61 0.048 0.048 0.048 0.098 0.238 0.311 62 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.122 0.274 0.357 63 0.057 0.057 0.057 0.115 0.263 0.343 64 0.069 0.069 0.069 0.137 0.296 0.385 65 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000  These rates also apply to Local Prosecutors, Local Sheriff, School Police, and Other Safety. Service Retirement Public Agency Fire 3% @ 50 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.040 0.130 0.192 51 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.023 0.107 0.164 52 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.043 0.136 0.198 53 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.043 0.135 0.198 54 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.048 0.143 0.207 55 0.043 0.043 0.043 0.070 0.174 0.244 56 0.053 0.053 0.053 0.085 0.196 0.269 57 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.086 0.197 0.271 58 0.052 0.052 0.052 0.084 0.193 0.268 59 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.116 0.239 0.321 60 0.065 0.065 0.065 0.102 0.219 0.298 61 0.076 0.076 0.076 0.117 0.241 0.324 62 0.068 0.068 0.068 0.106 0.224 0.304 63 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.049 0.143 0.208 64 0.094 0.094 0.094 0.143 0.277 0.366 65 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-18 Service Retirement Public Agency Police 2% @ 57 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.020 0.036 51 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.016 0.028 52 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.034 0.060 53 0.037 0.037 0.037 0.037 0.067 0.119 54 0.049 0.049 0.049 0.049 0.089 0.159 55 0.063 0.063 0.063 0.063 0.115 0.205 56 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.082 0.146 57 0.064 0.064 0.064 0.064 0.117 0.209 58 0.047 0.047 0.047 0.047 0.086 0.154 59 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.130 0.191 60 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.129 0.188 61 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.129 0.188 62 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.129 0.188 63 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.129 0.188 64 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.129 0.188 65 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000  These rates also apply to Local Prosecutors, Local Sheriff, School Police, and Other Safety. Service Retirement Public Agency Fire 2% @ 57 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.008 0.012 51 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.009 0.013 52 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.019 0.028 53 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.050 0.075 54 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.069 0.103 55 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.094 0.140 56 0.055 0.055 0.055 0.055 0.084 0.126 57 0.081 0.081 0.081 0.081 0.125 0.187 58 0.059 0.059 0.059 0.059 0.091 0.137 59 0.055 0.055 0.055 0.055 0.084 0.126 60 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.131 0.196 61 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.131 0.196 62 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.131 0.196 63 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.131 0.196 64 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.131 0.196 65 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-19 Service Retirement Public Agency Police 2.5% @ 57 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.025 0.045 51 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.021 0.038 52 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.046 0.081 53 0.047 0.047 0.047 0.047 0.086 0.154 54 0.063 0.063 0.063 0.063 0.115 0.205 55 0.076 0.076 0.076 0.076 0.140 0.249 56 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.099 0.177 57 0.071 0.071 0.071 0.071 0.130 0.232 58 0.057 0.057 0.057 0.057 0.103 0.184 59 0.126 0.126 0.126 0.126 0.156 0.229 60 0.126 0.126 0.126 0.126 0.155 0.226 61 0.126 0.126 0.126 0.126 0.155 0.226 62 0.126 0.126 0.126 0.126 0.155 0.226 63 0.126 0.126 0.126 0.126 0.155 0.226 64 0.126 0.126 0.126 0.126 0.155 0.226 65 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000  These rates also apply to Local Prosecutors, Local Sheriff, School Police, and Other Safety. Service Retirement Public Agency Fire 2.5% @ 57 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.010 0.015 51 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.012 0.018 52 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.025 0.038 53 0.042 0.042 0.042 0.042 0.064 0.096 54 0.057 0.057 0.057 0.057 0.088 0.132 55 0.074 0.074 0.074 0.074 0.114 0.170 56 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.102 0.153 57 0.090 0.090 0.090 0.090 0.139 0.208 58 0.071 0.071 0.071 0.071 0.110 0.164 59 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.101 0.151 60 0.102 0.102 0.102 0.102 0.157 0.235 61 0.102 0.102 0.102 0.102 0.157 0.236 62 0.102 0.102 0.102 0.102 0.157 0.236 63 0.102 0.102 0.102 0.102 0.157 0.236 64 0.102 0.102 0.102 0.102 0.157 0.236 65 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-20 Service Retirement Public Agency Police 2.7% @ 57 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.0138 0.0138 0.0138 0.0138 0.0253 0.0451 51 0.0123 0.0123 0.0123 0.0123 0.0226 0.0402 52 0.0249 0.0249 0.0249 0.0249 0.0456 0.0812 53 0.0497 0.0497 0.0497 0.0497 0.0909 0.1621 54 0.0662 0.0662 0.0662 0.0662 0.1211 0.2160 55 0.0854 0.0854 0.0854 0.0854 0.1563 0.2785 56 0.0606 0.0606 0.0606 0.0606 0.1108 0.1975 57 0.0711 0.0711 0.0711 0.0711 0.1300 0.2318 58 0.0628 0.0628 0.0628 0.0628 0.1149 0.2049 59 0.1396 0.1396 0.1396 0.1396 0.1735 0.2544 60 0.1396 0.1396 0.1396 0.1396 0.1719 0.2506 61 0.1396 0.1396 0.1396 0.1396 0.1719 0.2506 62 0.1396 0.1396 0.1396 0.1396 0.1719 0.2506 63 0.1396 0.1396 0.1396 0.1396 0.1719 0.2506 64 0.1396 0.1396 0.1396 0.1396 0.1719 0.2506 65 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000  These rates also apply to Local Prosecutors, Local Sheriff, School Police, and Other Safety. Service Retirement Public Agency Fire 2.7% @ 57 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.0065 0.0065 0.0065 0.0065 0.0101 0.0151 51 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0125 0.0187 52 0.0164 0.0164 0.0164 0.0164 0.0254 0.0380 53 0.0442 0.0442 0.0442 0.0442 0.0680 0.1018 54 0.0606 0.0606 0.0606 0.0606 0.0934 0.1397 55 0.0825 0.0825 0.0825 0.0825 0.1269 0.1900 56 0.0740 0.0740 0.0740 0.0740 0.1140 0.1706 57 0.0901 0.0901 0.0901 0.0901 0.1387 0.2077 58 0.0790 0.0790 0.0790 0.0790 0.1217 0.1821 59 0.0729 0.0729 0.0729 0.0729 0.1123 0.1681 60 0.1135 0.1135 0.1135 0.1135 0.1747 0.2615 61 0.1136 0.1136 0.1136 0.1136 0.1749 0.2618 62 0.1136 0.1136 0.1136 0.1136 0.1749 0.2618 63 0.1136 0.1136 0.1136 0.1136 0.1749 0.2618 64 0.1136 0.1136 0.1136 0.1136 0.1749 0.2618 65 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-21 Service Retirement Schools 2% @ 55 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.005 0.009 0.013 0.015 0.016 0.018 51 0.005 0.010 0.014 0.017 0.019 0.021 52 0.006 0.012 0.017 0.020 0.022 0.025 53 0.007 0.014 0.019 0.023 0.026 0.029 54 0.012 0.024 0.033 0.039 0.044 0.049 55 0.024 0.048 0.067 0.079 0.088 0.099 56 0.020 0.039 0.055 0.065 0.072 0.081 57 0.021 0.042 0.059 0.070 0.078 0.087 58 0.025 0.050 0.070 0.083 0.092 0.103 59 0.029 0.057 0.080 0.095 0.105 0.118 60 0.037 0.073 0.102 0.121 0.134 0.150 61 0.046 0.090 0.126 0.149 0.166 0.186 62 0.076 0.151 0.212 0.250 0.278 0.311 63 0.069 0.136 0.191 0.225 0.251 0.281 64 0.067 0.133 0.185 0.219 0.244 0.273 65 0.091 0.180 0.251 0.297 0.331 0.370 66 0.072 0.143 0.200 0.237 0.264 0.295 67 0.067 0.132 0.185 0.218 0.243 0.272 68 0.060 0.118 0.165 0.195 0.217 0.243 69 0.067 0.133 0.187 0.220 0.246 0.275 70 0.066 0.131 0.183 0.216 0.241 0.270 Miscellaneous Internal Revenue Code Section 415 The limitations on benefits imposed by Internal Revenue Code Section 415 are taken into account in this valuation. Each year the impact of any changes in this limitation since the prior valuation is included and amortized as part of the actuarial gain or loss base. This results in lower contributions for those employers contributing to the Replacement Benefit Fund and protects CalPERS from prefunding expected benefits in excess of limits imposed by federal tax law. Internal Revenue Code Section 401(a)(17) The limitations on compensation imposed by Internal Revenue Code Section 401(a)(17) are taken into account in this valuation. Each year, the impact of any changes in the compensation limitation since the prior valuation is included and amortized as part of the actuarial gain or loss base. The compensation limit for classic members for the 2016 calendar year is $265,000. APPENDIX B PRINCIPAL PLAN PROVISIONS CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX B SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PRINCIPAL PLAN PROVISIONS B-1 The following is a description of the principal plan provisions used in calculating costs and liabilities. We have indicated whether a plan provision is standard or optional. Standard benefits are applicable to all members while optional benefits vary among employers. Optional benefits that apply to a single period of time, such as Golden Handshakes, have not been included. Many of the statements in this summary are general in nature, and are intended to provide an easily understood summary of the Public Employees’ Retirement Law. The law itself governs in all situations. Service Retirement Eligibility A classic CalPERS member or PEPRA Safety member becomes eligible for Service Retirement upon attainment of age 50 with at least 5 years of credited service (total service across all CalPERS employers, and with certain other retirement systems with which CalPERS has reciprocity agreements). For employees hired into a plan with the 1.5 percent at 65 formula, eligibility for service retirement is age 55 with at least 5 years of service. PEPRA miscellaneous members become eligible for service retirement upon attainment of age 52 with at least 5 years of service. Benefit The service retirement benefit is a monthly allowance equal to the product of the benefit factor, years of service, and final compensation.  The benefit factor depends on the benefit formula specified in your agency’s contract. The table below shows the factors for each of the available formulas. Factors vary by the member’s age at retirement. Listed are the factors for retirement at whole year ages: Miscellaneous Plan Formulas Retirement Age 1.5% at 65 2% at 60 2% at 55 2.5% at 55 2.7% at 55 3% at 60 PEPRA 2% at 62 50 0.5000% 1.092% 1.426% 2.000% 2.000% 2.000% N/A 51 0.5667% 1.156% 1.522% 2.100% 2.140% 2.100% N/A 52 0.6334% 1.224% 1.628% 2.200% 2.280% 2.200% 1.000% 53 0.7000% 1.296% 1.742% 2.300% 2.420% 2.300% 1.100% 54 0.7667% 1.376% 1.866% 2.400% 2.560% 2.400% 1.200% 55 0.8334% 1.460% 2.000% 2.500% 2.700% 2.500% 1.300% 56 0.9000% 1.552% 2.052% 2.500% 2.700% 2.600% 1.400% 57 0.9667% 1.650% 2.104% 2.500% 2.700% 2.700% 1.500% 58 1.0334% 1.758% 2.156% 2.500% 2.700% 2.800% 1.600% 59 1.1000% 1.874% 2.210% 2.500% 2.700% 2.900% 1.700% 60 1.1667% 2.000% 2.262% 2.500% 2.700% 3.000% 1.800% 61 1.2334% 2.134% 2.314% 2.500% 2.700% 3.000% 1.900% 62 1.3000% 2.272% 2.366% 2.500% 2.700% 3.000% 2.000% 63 1.3667% 2.418% 2.418% 2.500% 2.700% 3.000% 2.100% 64 1.4334% 2.418% 2.418% 2.500% 2.700% 3.000% 2.200% 65 1.5000% 2.418% 2.418% 2.500% 2.700% 3.000% 2.300% 66 1.5000% 2.418% 2.418% 2.500% 2.700% 3.000% 2.400% 67 & up 1.5000% 2.418% 2.418% 2.500% 2.700% 3.000% 2.500% CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX B SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PRINCIPAL PLAN PROVISIONS B-2 Safety Plan Formulas Retirement Age ½ at 55 * 2% at 55 2% at 50 3% at 55 3% at 50 50 1.783% 1.426% 2.000% 2.400% 3.000% 51 1.903% 1.522% 2.140% 2.520% 3.000% 52 2.035% 1.628% 2.280% 2.640% 3.000% 53 2.178% 1.742% 2.420% 2.760% 3.000% 54 2.333% 1.866% 2.560% 2.880% 3.000% 55 & Up 2.500% 2.000% 2.700% 3.000% 3.000% * For this formula, the benefit factor also varies by entry age. The factors shown are for members with an entry age of 35 or greater. If entry age is less than 35, then the age 55 benefit factor is 50 percent divided by the difference between age 55 and entry age. The benefit factor for ages prior to age 55 is the same proportion of the age 55 benefit factor as in the above table. PEPRA Safety Plan Formulas Retirement Age 2% at 57 2.5% at 57 2.7% at 57 50 1.426% 2.000% 2.000% 51 1.508% 2.071% 2.100% 52 1.590% 2.143% 2.200% 53 1.672% 2.214% 2.300% 54 1.754% 2.286% 2.400% 55 1.836% 2.357% 2.500% 56 1.918% 2.429% 2.600% 57 & Up 2.000% 2.500% 2.700%  The years of service is the amount credited by CalPERS to a member while he or she is employed in this group (or for other periods that are recognized under the employer’s contract with CalPERS). For a member who has earned service with multiple CalPERS employers, the benefit from each employer is calculated separately according to each employer’s contract, and then added together for the total allowance. An agency may contract for an optional benefit where any unused sick leave accumulated at the time of retirement will be converted to credited service at a rate of 0.004 years of service for each day of sick leave.  The final compensation is the monthly average of the member’s highest 36 or 12 consecutive months’ full-time equivalent monthly pay (no matter which CalPERS employer paid this compensation). The standard benefit is 36 months. Employers had the option of providing a final compensation equal to the highest 12 consecutive months for classic plans only. Final compensation must be defined by the highest 36 consecutive months’ pay under the 1.5% at 65 formula. PEPRA members have a cap on the annual salary that can be used to calculate final compensation for all new members based on the Social Security contribution and benefit base. For employees that participate in Social Security this cap is $118,775 for 2016 and for those employees that do not participate in Social Security the cap for 2016 is $142,530. Adjustments to the caps are permitted annually based on changes to the CPI for all urban consumers.  Employees must be covered by Social Security with the 1.5% at 65 formula. Social Security is optional for all other benefit formulas. For employees covered by Social Security, the modified formula is the standard benefit. Under this type of formula, the final compensation is offset by $133.33 (or by one third if the final compensation is less than $400). Employers may contract for the full benefit with Social Security that will eliminate the offset applicable to the final compensation. For employees not covered by Social Security, the full benefit is paid with CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX B SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PRINCIPAL PLAN PROVISIONS B-3 no offsets. Auxiliary organizations of the CSUC system may elect reduced contribution rates, in which case the offset is $317 if members are not covered by Social Security or $513 if members are covered by Social Security.  The miscellaneous and PEPRA safety service retirement benefit is not capped. The classic Safety service retirement benefit is capped at 90 percent of final compensation. Vested Deferred Retirement Eligibility for Deferred Status A CalPERS member becomes eligible for a deferred vested retirement benefit when he or she leaves employment, keeps his or her contribution account balance on deposit with CalPERS, and has earned at least 5 years of credited service (total service across all CalPERS employers, and with certain other retirement systems with which CalPERS has reciprocity agreements). Eligibility to Start Receiving Benefits The CalPERS classic members and PEPRA safety members become eligible to receive the deferred retirement benefit upon satisfying the eligibility requirements for deferred status and upon attainment of age 50 (55 for employees hired into a 1.5% @ 65 plan). PEPRA miscellaneous members become eligible to receive the deferred retirement benefit upon satisfying the eligibility requirements for deferred status and upon attainment of age 52. Benefit The vested deferred retirement benefit is the same as the service retirement benefit, where the benefit factor is based on the member’s age at allowance commencement. For members who have earned service with multiple CalPERS employers, the benefit from each employer is calculated separately according to each employer’s contract, and then added together for the total allowance. Non-Industrial (Non-Job Related) Disability Retirement Eligibility A CalPERS member is eligible for Non-Industrial Disability Retirement if he or she becomes disabled and has at least 5 years of credited service (total service across all CalPERS employers, and with certain other retirement systems with which CalPERS has reciprocity agreements). There is no special age requirement. Disabled means the member is unable to perform his or her job because of an illness or injury, which is expected to be permanent or to last indefinitely. The illness or injury does not have to be job related. A CalPERS member must be actively employed by any CalPERS employer at the time of disability in order to be eligible for this benefit. Standard Benefit The standard Non-Industrial Disability Retirement benefit is a monthly allowance equal to 1.8 percent of final compensation, multiplied by service, which is determined as follows:  Service is CalPERS credited service, for members with less than 10 years of service or greater than 18.518 years of service; or  Service is CalPERS credited service plus the additional number of years that the member would have worked until age 60, for members with at least 10 years but not more than 18.518 years of service. The maximum benefit in this case is 33 1/3 percent of final compensation. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX B SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PRINCIPAL PLAN PROVISIONS B-4 Improved Benefit Employers have the option of providing the improved Non-Industrial Disability Retirement benefit. This benefit provides a monthly allowance equal to 30 percent of final compensation for the first 5 years of service, plus 1 percent for each additional year of service to a maximum of 50 percent of final compensation. Members who are eligible for a larger service retirement benefit may choose to receive that benefit in lieu of a disability benefit. Members eligible to retire, and who have attained the normal retirement age determined by their service retirement benefit formula, will receive the same dollar amount for disability retirement as that payable for service retirement. For members who have earned service with multiple CalPERS employers, the benefit attributed to each employer is the total disability allowance multiplied by the ratio of service with a particular employer to the total CalPERS service. Industrial (Job Related) Disability Retirement All safety members have this benefit. For miscellaneous members, employers have the option of providing this benefit. An employer may choose to provide the increased benefit option or the improved benefit option. Eligibility An employee is eligible for Industrial Disability Retirement if he or she becomes disabled while working, where disabled means the member is unable to perform the duties of the job because of a work-related illness or injury, which is expected to be permanent or to last indefinitely. A CalPERS member who has left active employment within this group is not eligible for this benefit, except to the extent described below. Standard Benefit The standard Industrial Disability Retirement benefit is a monthly allowance equal to 50 percent of final compensation. Increased Benefit (75 percent of Final Compensation) The increased Industrial Disability Retirement benefit is a monthly allowance equal to 75 percent final compensation for total disability. Improved Benefit (50 percent to 90 percent of Final Compensation) The improved Industrial Disability Retirement benefit is a monthly allowance equal to the Workman’s Compensation Appeals Board permanent disability rate percentage (if 50 percent or greater, with a maximum of 90 percent) times the final compensation. For a CalPERS member not actively employed in this group who became disabled while employed by some other CalPERS employer, the benefit is a return of accumulated member contributions with respect to employment in this group. With the standard or increased benefit, a member may also choose to receive the annuitization of the accumulated member contributions. If a member is eligible for service retirement and if the service retirement benefit is more than the industrial disability retirement benefit, the member may choose to receive the larger benefit. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX B SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PRINCIPAL PLAN PROVISIONS B-5 Post-Retirement Death Benefit Standard Lump Sum Payment Upon the death of a retiree, a one-time lump sum payment of $500 will be made to the retiree’s designated survivor(s), or to the retiree’s estate. Improved Lump Sum Payment Employers have the option of providing an improved lump sum death benefit of $600, $2,000, $3,000, $4,000 or $5,000. Form of Payment for Retirement Allowance Standard Form of Payment Generally, the retirement allowance is paid to the retiree in the form of an annuity for as long as he or she is alive. The retiree may choose to provide for a portion of his or her allowance to be paid to any designated beneficiary after the retiree’s death. CalPERS provides for a variety of such benefit options, which the retiree pays for by taking a reduction in his or her retirement allowance. Such reduction takes into account the amount to be provided to the beneficiary and the probable duration of payments (based on the ages of the member and beneficiary) made subsequent to the member’s death. Improved Form of Payment (Post-Retirement Survivor Allowance) Employers have the option to contract for the post-retirement survivor allowance. For retirement allowances with respect to service subject to the modified formula, 25 percent of the retirement allowance will automatically be continued to certain statutory beneficiaries upon the death of the retiree, without a reduction in the retiree’s allowance. For retirement allowances with respect to service subject to the full or supplemental formula, 50 percent of the retirement allowance will automatically be continued to certain statutory beneficiaries upon the death of the retiree, without a reduction in the retiree’s allowance. This additional benefit is referred to as post-retirement survivor allowance (PRSA) or simply as survivor continuance. In other words, 25 percent or 50 percent of the allowance, the continuance portion, is paid to the retiree for as long as he or she is alive, and that same amount is continued to the retiree’s spouse (or if no eligible spouse, to unmarried child(ren) until they attain age 18; or, if no eligible child(ren), to a qualifying dependent parent) for the rest of his or her lifetime. This benefit will not be discontinued in the event the spouse remarries. The remaining 75 percent or 50 percent of the retirement allowance, which may be referred to as the option portion of the benefit, is paid to the retiree as an annuity for as long as he or she is alive. Or, the retiree may choose to provide for some of this option portion to be paid to any designated beneficiary after the retiree’s death. Benefit options applicable to the option portion are the same as those offered with the standard form. The reduction is calculated in the same manner but is applied only to the option portion. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX B SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PRINCIPAL PLAN PROVISIONS B-6 Pre-Retirement Death Benefits Basic Death Benefit This is a standard benefit. Eligibility An employee’s beneficiary (or estate) may receive the basic death benefit if the member dies while actively employed. A CalPERS member must be actively employed with the CalPERS employer providing this benefit to be eligible for this benefit. A member’s survivor who is eligible for any other pre-retirement death benefit may choose to receive that death benefit instead of this basic death benefit. Benefit The basic death benefit is a lump sum in the amount of the member’s accumulated contributions, where interest is currently credited at 7.5 percent per year, plus a lump sum in the amount of one month's salary for each completed year of current service, up to a maximum of six months' salary. For purposes of this benefit, one month's salary is defined as the member's average monthly full-time rate of compensation during the 12 months preceding death. 1957 Survivor Benefit This is a standard benefit. Eligibility An employee’s eligible survivor(s) may receive the 1957 Survivor benefit if the member dies while actively employed, has attained at least age 50 for classic and safety PEPRA members and age 52 for miscellaneous PEPRA members, and has at least 5 years of credited service (total service across all CalPERS employers and with certain other retirement systems with which CalPERS has reciprocity agreements). A CalPERS member must be actively employed with the CalPERS employer providing this benefit to be eligible for this benefit. An eligible survivor means the surviving spouse to whom the member was married at least one year before death or, if there is no eligible spouse, to the member's unmarried child(ren) under age 18. A member’s survivor who is eligible for any other pre-retirement death benefit may choose to receive that death benefit instead of this 1957 Survivor benefit. Benefit The 1957 Survivor benefit is a monthly allowance equal to one-half of the unmodified service retirement benefit that the member would have been entitled to receive if the member had retired on the date of his or her death. If the benefit is payable to the spouse, the benefit is discontinued upon the death of the spouse. If the benefit is payable to dependent child(ren), the benefit will be discontinued upon death or attainment of age 18, unless the child(ren) is disabled. The total amount paid will be at least equal to the basic death benefit. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX B SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PRINCIPAL PLAN PROVISIONS B-7 Optional Settlement 2W Death Benefit This is an optional benefit. Eligibility An employee’s eligible survivor may receive the Optional Settlement 2W Death benefit if the member dies while actively employed, has attained at least age 50 for classic and safety PEPRA members and age 52 for miscellaneous PEPRA members, and has at least 5 years of credited service (total service across all CalPERS employers and with certain other retirement systems with which CalPERS has reciprocity agreements). A CalPERS member who is no longer actively employed with any CalPERS employer is not eligible for this benefit. An eligible survivor means the surviving spouse to whom the member was married at least one year before death. A member’s survivor who is eligible for any other pre-retirement death benefit may choose to receive that death benefit instead of this Optional Settlement 2W Death benefit. Benefit The Optional Settlement 2W Death benefit is a monthly allowance equal to the service retirement benefit that the member would have received had the member retired on the date of his or her death and elected Optional Settlement 2W. (A retiree who elects Optional Settlement 2W receives an allowance that has been reduced so that it will continue to be paid after his or her death to a surviving beneficiary.) The allowance is payable as long as the surviving spouse lives, at which time it is continued to any unmarried child(ren) under age 18, if applicable. The total amount paid will be at least equal to the basic death benefit. Special Death Benefit This is a standard benefit for safety members. An employer may elect to provide this benefit for miscellaneous members. Eligibility An employee’s eligible survivor(s) may receive the special death benefit if the member dies while actively employed and the death is job-related. A CalPERS member who is no longer actively employed with any CalPERS employer is not eligible for this benefit. An eligible survivor means the surviving spouse to whom the member was married prior to the onset of the injury or illness that resulted in death. If there is no eligible spouse, an eligible survivor means the member's unmarried child(ren) under age 22. An eligible survivor who chooses to receive this benefit will not receive any other death benefit. Benefit The special death benefit is a monthly allowance equal to 50 percent of final compensation, and will be increased whenever the compensation paid to active employees is increased but ceasing to increase when the member would have attained age 50. The allowance is payable to the surviving spouse until death at which time the allowance is continued to any unmarried child(ren) under age 22. There is a guarantee that the total amount paid will at least equal the basic death benefit. If the member’s death is the result of an accident or injury caused by external violence or physical force incurred in the performance of the member’s duty, and there are eligible surviving child(ren) (eligible means unmarried child(ren) under age 22) in addition to an eligible spouse, then an additional monthly allowance is paid equal to the following:  if 1 eligible child: 12.5 percent of final compensation  if 2 eligible children: 20.0 percent of final compensation  if 3 or more eligible children: 25.0 percent of final compensation CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX B SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PRINCIPAL PLAN PROVISIONS B-8 Alternate Death Benefit for Local Fire Members This is an optional benefit available only to local fire members. Eligibility An employee’s eligible survivor(s) may receive the alternate death benefit in lieu of the basic death benefit or the 1957 Survivor benefit if the member dies while actively employed and has at least 20 years of total CalPERS service. A CalPERS member who is no longer actively employed with any CalPERS employer is not eligible for this benefit. An eligible survivor means the surviving spouse to whom the member was married prior to the onset of the injury or illness that resulted in death. If there is no eligible spouse, an eligible survivor means the member's unmarried child(ren) under age 18. Benefit The Alternate Death benefit is a monthly allowance equal to the service retirement benefit that the member would have received had the member retired on the date of his or her death and elected Optional Settlement 2W. (A retiree who elects Optional Settlement 2W receives an allowance that has been reduced so that it will continue to be paid after his or her death to a surviving beneficiary.) If the member has not yet attained age 50, the benefit is equal to that which would be payable if the member had retired at age 50, based on service credited at the time of death. The allowance is payable as long as the surviving spouse lives, at which time it is continued to any unmarried child(ren) under age 18, if applicable. The total amount paid will be at least equal to the basic death benefit. Cost-of-Living Adjustments (COLA) Standard Benefit Retirement and survivor allowances are adjusted each year in May for cost of living, beginning the second calendar year after the year of retirement. The standard cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) is 2 percent. Annual adjustments are calculated by first determining the lesser of 1) 2 percent compounded from the end of the year of retirement or 2) actual rate of inflation. The resulting increase is divided by the total increase provided in prior years. For any particular year, the COLA adjustment may be less than 2 percent (when the rate of inflation is low), may be greater than the rate of inflation (when the rate of inflation is low after several years of high inflation) or may even be greater than 2 percent (when inflation is high after several years of low inflation). Improved Benefit Employers have the option of providing a COLA of 3 percent, 4 percent, or 5 percent, determined in the same manner as described above for the standard 2 percent COLA. An improved COLA is not available with the 1.5% at 65 formula. Purchasing Power Protection Allowance (PPPA) Retirement and survivor allowances are protected against inflation by PPPA. PPPA benefits are cost-of-living adjustments that are intended to maintain an individual’s allowance at 80 percent of the initial allowance at retirement adjusted for inflation since retirement. The PPPA benefit will be coordinated with other cost-of-living adjustments provided under the plan. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX B SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PRINCIPAL PLAN PROVISIONS B-9 Employee Contributions Each employee contributes toward his or her retirement based upon the retirement formula. The standard employee contribution is as described below.  The percent contributed below the monthly compensation breakpoint is 0 percent.  The monthly compensation breakpoint is $0 for full and supplemental formula members and $133.33 for employees covered by the modified formula.  The percent contributed above the monthly compensation breakpoint depends upon the benefit formula, as shown in the table below. Benefit Formula Percent Contributed above the Breakpoint Miscellaneous, 1.5% at 65 2% Miscellaneous, 2% at 60 7% Miscellaneous, 2% at 55 7% Miscellaneous, 2.5% at 55 8% Miscellaneous, 2.7% at 55 8% Miscellaneous, 3% at 60 8% Miscellaneous, 2% at 62 50% of the Total Normal Cost Miscellaneous, 1.5% at 65 50% of the Total Normal Cost Safety, 1/2 at 55 Varies by entry age Safety, 2% at 55 7% Safety, 2% at 50 9% Safety, 3% at 55 9% Safety, 3% at 50 9% Safety, 2% at 57 50% of the Total Normal Cost Safety, 2.5% at 57 50% of the Total Normal Cost Safety, 2.7% at 57 50% of the Total Normal Cost The employer may choose to “pick-up” these contributions for classic members (Employer Paid Member Contributions or EPMC). EPMC is prohibited for new PEPRA members. An employer may also include Employee Cost Sharing in the contract, where employees agree to share the cost of the employer contribution. These contributions are paid in addition to the member contribution. Auxiliary organizations of the CSUC system may elect reduced contribution rates, in which case the offset is $317 and the contribution rate is 6 percent if members are not covered by Social Security. If members are covered by Social Security, the offset is $513 and the contribution rate is 5 percent. Refund of Employee Contributions If the member’s service with the employer ends, and if the member does not satisfy the eligibility conditions for any of the retirement benefits above, the member may elect to receive a refund of his or her employee contributions, which are credited with 6 percent interest compounded annually. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX B SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PRINCIPAL PLAN PROVISIONS B-10 1959 Survivor Benefit This is a pre-retirement death benefit available only to members not covered by Social Security. Any agency joining CalPERS subsequent to 1993 is required to provide this benefit if the members are not covered by Social Security. The benefit is optional for agencies joining CalPERS prior to 1994. Levels 1, 2 and 3 are now closed. Any new agency or any agency wishing to add this benefit or increase the current level may only choose the 4th or Indexed Level. This benefit is not included in the results presented in this valuation. More information on this benefit is available on the CalPERS website at www.calpers.ca.gov. APPENDIX C PARTICIPANT DATA  SUMMARY OF VALUATION DATA  ACTIVE MEMBERS  TRANSFERRED AND TERMINATED MEMBERS  RETIRED MEMBERS AND BENEFICIARIES CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX C SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PARTICIPANT DATA C-1 Summary of Valuation Data June 30, 2015 June 30, 2016 1. Active Members a) Counts 179 174 b) Average Attained Age 40.91 41.61 c) Average Entry Age to Rate Plan 29.21 29.31 d) Average Years of Service 11.70 12.30 e) Average Annual Covered Pay $ 118,359 $ 122,230 f) Annual Covered Payroll 21,186,275 21,268,028 g) Projected Annual Payroll for Contribution Year 23,150,815 23,240,148 h) Present Value of Future Payroll 205,334,914 199,470,322 2. Transferred Members a) Counts 59 63 b) Average Attained Age 43.87 42.96 c) Average Years of Service 3.22 3.34 d) Average Annual Covered Pay $ 109,275 $ 114,053 3. Terminated Members a) Counts 39 38 b) Average Attained Age 42.63 43.22 c) Average Years of Service 3.54 3.61 d) Average Annual Covered Pay $ 89,331 $ 87,206 4. Retired Members and Beneficiaries a) Counts 414 417 b) Average Attained Age 67.81 68.24 c) Average Annual Benefits $ 51,863 $ 52,760 5. Active to Retired Ratio [(1a) / (4a)] 0.43 0.42 Counts of members included in the valuation are counts of the records processed by the valuation. Multiple records may exist for those who have service in more than one valuation group. This does not result in double counting of liabilities. Average Annual Benefits represents benefit amounts payable by this plan only. Some members may have service with another agency and would therefore have a larger total benefit than would be included as part of the average shown here. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX C SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PARTICIPANT DATA C-2 Active Members Counts of members included in the valuation are counts of the records processed by the valuation. Multiple records may exist for those who have service in more than one valuation group. This does not result in double counting of liabilities. Distribution of Active Members by Age and Service Years of Service at Valuation Date Attained Age 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-25 25+ Total 15-24 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 25-29 13 3 0 0 0 0 16 30-34 15 9 4 0 0 0 28 35-39 7 13 9 2 0 0 31 40-44 6 4 7 18 2 0 37 45-49 1 1 7 9 6 3 27 50-54 1 1 5 6 7 8 28 55-59 0 1 0 1 0 2 4 60-64 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 65 and over 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 All Ages 44 32 32 36 15 15 174 Distribution of Average Annual Salaries by Age and Service Years of Service at Valuation Date Attained Age 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-25 25+ Average 15-24 $85,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $85,500 25-29 96,376 109,816 0 0 0 0 98,896 30-34 102,167 117,615 116,867 0 0 0 109,233 35-39 114,032 119,919 128,323 154,720 0 0 123,275 40-44 111,805 115,909 137,179 134,200 135,680 0 129,235 45-49 118,622 127,278 113,807 118,795 128,696 167,814 125,456 50-54 218,930 124,923 110,502 120,124 137,058 133,545 130,174 55-59 0 121,321 0 147,465 0 194,438 164,415 60-64 0 0 0 0 0 122,334 122,334 65 and over 0 0 0 0 0 126,294 126,294 All Ages $106,307 $118,253 $122,868 $129,511 $133,529 $147,287 $122,230 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX C SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PARTICIPANT DATA C-3 Transferred and Terminated Members Distribution of Transfers to Other CalPERS Plans by Age, Service, and average Salary Years of Service at Valuation Date Attained Age 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-25 25+ Total Average Salary 15-24 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 $103,645 25-29 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 120,404 30-34 5 1 0 0 0 0 6 109,662 35-39 14 2 0 0 0 0 16 100,832 40-44 9 2 0 0 0 0 11 108,583 45-49 9 6 2 0 0 0 17 124,976 50-54 7 0 1 0 0 0 8 120,946 55-59 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 126,592 60-64 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 150,271 65 and over 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 All Ages 46 14 3 0 0 0 63 114,053 Distribution of Terminated Participants with Funds on Deposit by Age, Service, and average Salary Years of Service at Valuation Date Attained Age 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-25 25+ Total Average Salary 15-24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 25-29 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 91,679 30-34 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 88,888 35-39 10 3 1 0 0 0 14 93,175 40-44 0 3 0 0 0 0 3 107,289 45-49 6 2 1 0 0 0 9 85,994 50-54 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 54,434 55-59 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 86,896 60-64 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 106,475 65 and over 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 All Ages 25 11 2 0 0 0 38 87,206 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX C SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PARTICIPANT DATA C-4 Retired Members and Beneficiaries Distribution of Retirees and Beneficiaries by Age and Retirement Type* Attained Age Service Retirement Non- Industrial Disability Industrial Disability Non- Industrial Death Industrial Death Death After Retirement Total Under 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30-34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35-39 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 40-44 0 0 7 0 0 0 7 45-49 0 1 5 0 0 0 6 50-54 25 0 15 0 1 0 41 55-59 38 1 20 0 2 0 61 60-64 30 1 19 0 0 4 54 65-69 33 1 20 0 0 4 58 70-74 31 0 17 0 0 9 57 75-79 33 2 25 0 0 5 65 80-84 16 0 12 0 0 7 35 85 and Over 17 0 7 0 0 7 31 All Ages 223 6 149 0 3 36 417 Distribution of Average Annual Disbursements to Retirees and Beneficiaries by Age and Retirement Type* Attained Age Service Retirement Non- Industrial Disability Industrial Disability Non- Industrial Death Industrial Death Death After Retirement Average Under 30 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 30-34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35-39 0 0 54,436 0 0 0 54,436 40-44 0 0 59,398 0 0 0 59,398 45-49 0 83 42,136 0 0 0 35,127 50-54 79,097 0 71,792 0 52,644 0 75,779 55-59 84,777 32,929 70,873 0 36,504 0 77,786 60-64 58,918 2,048 52,903 0 0 44,160 54,655 65-69 72,548 17,352 46,687 0 0 35,800 60,144 70-74 46,376 0 30,498 0 0 38,584 40,410 75-79 48,114 11,533 34,877 0 0 29,016 40,428 80-84 42,630 0 31,537 0 0 24,496 35,200 85 and Over 28,738 0 24,075 0 0 21,909 26,143 All Ages $60,792 $12,580 $47,691 $0 $41,884 $31,584 $52,760 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX C SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PARTICIPANT DATA C-5 Retired Members and Beneficiaries (continued) Distribution of Retirees and Beneficiaries by Years Retired and Retirement Type* Years Retired Service Retirement Non- Industrial Disability Industrial Disability Non- Industrial Death Industrial Death Death After Retirement Total Under 5 Yrs 49 1 17 0 0 7 74 5-9 41 1 22 0 0 5 69 10-14 48 0 16 0 1 9 74 15-19 22 1 19 0 1 9 52 20-24 29 0 13 0 0 1 43 25-29 18 1 19 0 0 4 42 30 and Over 16 2 43 0 1 1 63 All Years 223 6 149 0 3 36 417 Distribution of Average Annual Disbursements to Retirees and Beneficiaries by Years Retired and Retirement Type* Years Retired Service Retirement Non- Industrial Disability Industrial Disability Non- Industrial Death Industrial Death Death After Retirement Average Under 5 Yrs $77,313 $2,048 $77,780 $0 $0 $21,308 $71,106 5-9 75,538 83 77,762 0 0 35,334 72,240 10-14 64,157 0 63,687 0 52,644 43,771 61,420 15-19 40,377 32,929 44,117 0 46,601 30,307 39,977 20-24 50,346 0 41,507 0 0 25,841 47,104 25-29 40,215 17,352 34,169 0 0 29,306 35,897 30 and Over 32,469 11,533 23,881 0 26,406 1,417 25,354 All Years $60,792 $12,580 $47,691 $0 $41,884 $31,584 $52,760 * Counts of members do not include alternate payees receiving benefits while the member is still working. Therefore, the total counts may not match information on page 25 of the report. Multiple records may exist for those who have service in more than one coverage group. This does not result in double counting of liabilities. APPENDIX D DEVELOPMENT OF PEPRA MEMBER CONTRIBUTION RATES CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX D SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PARTICIPANT DATA D-1 Development of PEPRA Members Contribution Rates The table below shows the determination of the Member contribution rates based on 50 percent of the Total Normal Cost for each respective plan on June 30, 2016. Assembly Bill (AB) 340 created PEPRA that implemented new benefit formulas and a final compensation period as well as new contribution requirements for new employees. In accordance with Section Code 7522.30(b), “new members … shall have an initial contribution rate of at least 50 percent of the normal cost rate.” The normal cost for the plan is dependent on the benefit levels, actuarial assumptions and demographics of the plan particularly the entry age into the plan. Should the total normal cost of the plan change by one percent or more from the base total normal cost established for the plan, the new member rate shall be 50 percent of the new normal cost rounded to the nearest quarter percent. Basis for Current Rate Rates Effective July 1, 2018 Rate Plan Identifier Plan Total Normal Cost Member Rate Total Normal Cost Change Change Needed Member Rate 25006 Safety Fire PEPRA 21.276% 10.750% 21.856% 0.580% No 10.750% 25007 Safety Police PEPRA 21.276% 10.750% 21.856% 0.580% No 10.750% For a description of the methods used to determine the Total Normal Cost for this purpose, please see the “PEPRA Normal Cost Rate Methodology” section in Appendix A. APPENDIX E GLOSSARY OF ACTUARIAL TERMS CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX E SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO GLOSSARY OF ACTUARIAL TERMS E-1 Glossary of Actuarial Terms Accrued Liability (also called Actuarial Accrued Liability or Entry Age Normal Accrued Liability) The total dollars needed as of the valuation date to fund all benefits earned in the past for current members. Actuarial Assumptions Assumptions made about certain events that will affect pension costs. Assumptions generally can be broken down into two categories: demographic and economic. Demographic assumptions include such things as mortality, disability and retirement rates. Economic assumptions include discount rate, salary growth and inflation. Actuarial Methods Procedures employed by actuaries to achieve certain funding goals of a pension plan. Actuarial methods include funding method, setting the length of time to fund the Accrued Liability and determining the Value of Assets. Actuarial Valuation The determination, as of a valuation date of the Normal Cost, Accrued liability, and related actuarial present values for a pension plan. These valuations are performed annually or when an employer is contemplating a change to their plan provisions. Amortization Bases Separate payment schedules for different portions of the Unfunded Liability. The total Unfunded Liability of a Risk Pool or non-pooled plan can be segregated by "cause,” creating “bases” and each such base will be separately amortized and paid for over a specific period of time. However, all bases are amortized using investment and payroll assumptions from the current valuation. This can be likened to a home having a first mortgage of 24 years remaining payments and a second mortgage that has 10 years remaining payments. Each base or each mortgage note has its own terms (payment period, principal, etc.) Generally, in an actuarial valuation, the separate bases consist of changes in unfunded liability due to contract amendments, actuarial assumption changes, actuarial methodology changes, and/or gains and losses. Payment periods are determined by Board policy and vary based on the cause of the change. Amortization Period The number of years required to pay off an Amortization Base. Classic Member (under PEPRA) A classic member is a member who joined CalPERS prior to January, 1, 2013 and who is not defined as a new member under PEPRA. (See definition of new member below) Discount Rate Assumption The actuarial assumption that was called “investment return” in earlier CalPERS reports or “actuarial interest rate” in Section 20014 of the California Public Employees’ Retirement Law (PERL). Entry Age The earliest age at which a plan member begins to accrue benefits under a defined benefit pension plan. In most cases, this is the age of the member on their date of hire. Entry Age Normal Cost Method An actuarial cost method designed to fund a member's total plan benefit over the course of his or her career. This method is designed to yield a rate expressed as a level percentage of payroll. (The assumed retirement age less the entry age is the amount of time required to fund a member’s total benefit. Generally, the older a member on the date of hire, the greater the entry age normal cost. This is mainly because there is less time to earn investment income to fund the future benefits.) CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX E SAFETY PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO GLOSSARY OF ACTUARIAL TERMS E-2 Fresh Start A Fresh Start is when multiple amortization bases are collapsed to one base and amortized together over a new funding period. Funded Status A measure of how well funded, or how "on track" a plan or risk pool is with respect to assets versus accrued liabilities. A ratio greater than 100 percent means the plan or risk pool has more assets than liabilities and a ratio less than 100 percent means liabilities are greater than assets. GASB 68 Statement No. 68 of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board. The accounting standard governing a state or local governmental employer’s accounting and financial reporting for pensions. GASB 68 replaces GASB 27 effective the first fiscal year beginning after June 15, 2014. New Member (under PEPRA) A new member includes an individual who becomes a member of a public retirement system for the first time on or after January 1, 2013, and who was not a member of another public retirement system prior to that date, and who is not subject to reciprocity with another public retirement system. Normal Cost The annual cost of service accrual for the upcoming fiscal year for active employees. The normal cost should be viewed as the long term contribution rate. Pension Actuary A business professional that is authorized by the Society of Actuaries, and the American Academy of Actuaries to perform the calculations necessary to properly fund a pension plan. PEPRA The California Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2013 Prepayment Contribution A payment made by the employer to reduce or eliminate the year’s required employer contribution. Present Value of Benefits (PVB) The total dollars needed as of the valuation date to fund all benefits earned in the past or expected to be earned in the future for current members. Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) When a plan or pool’s Value of Assets is less than its Accrued Liability, the difference is the plan or pool’s Unfunded Accrued Liability (or unfunded liability). If the unfunded liability is positive, the plan or pool will have to pay contributions exceeding the Normal Cost. California Public Employees’ Retirement System Actuarial Office P.O. Box 942701 Sacramento, CA 94229-2701 TTY: (916) 795-3240 (888) 225-7377 phone • (916) 795-2744 fax www.calpers.ca.gov July 2017 MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO (CalPERS ID: 6373437857) Annual Valuation Report as of June 30, 2016 Dear Employer, As an attachment to this letter, you will find a copy of the June 30, 2016 actuarial valuation report of your pension plan. Your 2016 actuarial valuation report contains important actuarial information about your pension plan at CalPERS. Your CalPERS staff actuary, whose signature appears in the “Actuarial Certification” section on page 1, is available to discuss the report with you after August 31, 2017. Required Contributions The exhibit below displays the minimum required employer contributions and the Employee PEPRA Rate for Fiscal Year 2018-19 along with estimates of the required contributions for Fiscal Years 2019-20 and 2020-21. Member contributions other than cost sharing (whether paid by the employer or the employee) are in addition to the results shown below. The required employer contributions in this report do not reflect any cost sharing arrangement you may have with your employees. Fiscal Year Employer Normal Cost Rate Employer Amortization of Unfunded Accrued Liability Employee PEPRA Rate 2018-19 10.217% $18,392,618 6.25% Projected Results 2019-20 10.7% $21,368,000 TBD 2020-21 11.7% $23,620,000 TBD The actual investment return for Fiscal Year 2016-17 was not known at the time this report was prepared. The projections above assume the investment return for that year would be 7.375 percent. If the actual investment return for Fiscal year 2016-17 differs from 7.375 percent, the actual contribution requirements for the projected years will differ from those shown above. Moreover, the projected results for Fiscal Years 2019-20 and 2020-21 also assume that there are no future plan changes, no further changes in assumptions other than those recently approved, and no liability gains or losses. Such changes can have a significant impact on required contributions. Since they cannot be predicted in advance, the projected employer results shown above are estimates. The actual required employer contributions for Fiscal year 2019-20 will be provided in next year’s report. For additional details regarding the assumptions and methods used for these projections please refer to the “Projected Employer Contributions” in the “Highlights and Executive Summary” section. The required contributions shown above include a Normal Cost component expressed as a percentage of payroll and a payment toward Unfunded Accrued Liability expressed as a dollar amount. Actual contributions for Fiscal Year 2018-19 and all future years will be collected on that basis. For illustrative total contribution requirements expressed as percentages of payroll, please see pages 4 and 5 of the report. The “Risk Analysis” section of the valuation report on page 21 also contains estimated employer contributions in future years under a variety of investment return scenarios. MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO (CalPERS ID: 6373437857) Annual Valuation Report as of June 30, 2016 Page 2 Changes since the Prior Year’s Valuation On December 21, 2016, the CalPERS Board of Administration lowered the discount rate from 7.50 percent to 7.00 percent using a three year phase-in beginning with the June 30, 2016 actuarial valuations. The minimum employer contributions for Fiscal Year 2018-19 determined in this valuation were calculated using a discount rate of 7.375 percent. The projected employer contributions on Page 5 are calculated assuming that the discount rate will be lowered to 7.25 percent next year and to 7.00 percent the following year as adopted by the Board. Beginning with Fiscal Year 2017-18 CalPERS began collecting employer contributions toward the plan’s unfunded liability as dollar amounts instead of the prior method of a contribution rate. This change addresses potential funding issues that could arise from a declining payroll or reduction in the number of active members in the plan. Funding the unfunded liability as a percentage of payroll could lead to the underfunding of the plans. Due to stakeholder feedback regarding internal needs for total contributions expressed as a percentage of payroll, the reports have been modified to include such results in the contribution projection on page 5. These results are provided for information purposes only. Contributions toward the unfunded liability will continue to be collected as dollar amounts. The CalPERS Board of Administration adopted a Risk Mitigation Policy which is designed to reduce funding risk over time. This Policy has been temporarily suspended during the period over which the discount rate is being lowered. More details on the Risk Mitigation Policy can be found on our website. Besides the above noted changes, there may also be changes specific to the plan such as contract amendments and funding changes. Further descriptions of general changes are included in the “Highlights and Executive Summary” section and in Appendix A, “Actuarial Methods and Assumptions.” The effects of the changes on the required contributions are included in the “Reconciliation of Required Employer Contributions” section. We understand that you might have a number of questions about these results. While we are very interested in discussing these results with your agency, in the interest of allowing us to give every public agency their results, we ask that you wait until after August 31 to contact us with actuarial questions. If you have other questions, you may call the Customer Contact Center at (888)-CalPERS or (888-225-7377). Sincerely, SCOTT TERANDO Chief Actuary ACTUARIAL VALUATION as of June 30, 2016 for the MISCELLANEOUS PLAN of the CITY OF PALO ALTO (CalPERS ID: 6373437857) (Rate Plan ID: 8) REQUIRED CONTRIBUTIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR July 1, 2018 – June 30, 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACTUARIAL CERTIFICATION 1 HIGHLIGHTS AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction 3 Purpose of the Report 3 Required Contributions 4 Plan’s Funded Status 5 Projected Employer Contributions 5 Cost 6 Changes Since the Prior Year’s Valuation 7 Subsequent Events 7 ASSETS Reconciliation of the Market Value of Assets 9 Asset Allocation 10 CalPERS History of Investment Returns 11 LIABILITIES AND CONTRIBUTIONS Development of Accrued and Unfunded Liabilities 13 (Gain) / Loss Analysis 06/30/15 - 06/30/16 14 Schedule of Amortization Bases 15 30-Year Amortization Schedule and Alternatives 16 Reconciliation of Required Employer Contributions 18 Employer Contribution History 19 Funding History 19 RISK ANALYSIS Analysis of Future Investment Return Scenarios 21 Analysis of Discount Rate Sensitivity 22 Volatility Ratios 23 Hypothetical Termination Liability 24 PLAN’S MAJOR BENEFIT PROVISIONS Plan’s Major Benefit Options 26 APPENDIX A – ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS Actuarial Data A-1 Actuarial Methods A-1 Actuarial Assumptions A-3 Miscellaneous A-21 APPENDIX B – PRINCIPAL PLAN PROVISIONS B-1 APPENDIX C – PARTICIPANT DATA Summary of Valuation Data C-1 Active Members C-2 Transferred and Terminated Members C-3 Retired Members and Beneficiaries C-4 APPENDIX D – DEVELOPMENT OF PEPRA MEMBER CONTRIBUTION RATE D-1 APPENDIX E – GLOSSARY OF ACTUARIAL TERMS E-1 (CY) FIN PROCESS CONTROL ID: 494678 (PY) FIN PROCESS CONTROL ID: 480029 REPORT ID: 103789 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 1 ACTUARIAL CERTIFICATION To the best of our knowledge, this report is complete and accurate and contains sufficient information to disclose, fully and fairly, the funded condition of the MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO. This valuation is based on the member and financial data as of June 30, 2016 provided by the various CalPERS databases and the benefits under this plan with CalPERS as of the date this report was produced. It is our opinion that the valuation has been performed in accordance with generally accepted actuarial principles, in accordance with standards of practice prescribed by the Actuarial Standards Board, and that the assumptions and methods are internally consistent and reasonable for this plan, as prescribed by the CalPERS Board of Administration according to provisions set forth in the California Public Employees’ Retirement Law. The undersigned is an actuary for CalPERS, a member of the American Academy of Actuaries and the Society of Actuaries and meets the Qualification Standards of the American Academy of Actuaries to render the actuarial opinions contained herein. DAVID CLEMENT, ASA, MAAA, EA Senior Pension Actuary, CalPERS HIGHLIGHTS AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY  INTRODUCTION  PURPOSE OF THE REPORT  REQUIRED CONTRIBUTIONS  PLAN’S FUNDED STATUS  PROJECTED EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTIONS  COST  CHANGES SINCE THE PRIOR YEAR’S VALUATION  SUBSEQUENT EVENTS CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 3 Introduction This report presents the results of the June 30, 2016 actuarial valuation of the MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO of the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS). This actuarial valuation sets the required employer contributions for Fiscal Year 2018-19. Purpose of the Report The actuarial valuation was prepared by the CalPERS Actuarial Office using data as of June 30, 2016. The purpose of the report is to:  Set forth the assets and accrued liabilities of this plan as of June 30, 2016;  Determine the required employer contributions for the fiscal year July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019;  Provide actuarial information as of June 30, 2016 to the CalPERS Board of Administration and other interested parties. The pension funding information presented in this report should not be used in financial reports subject to Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 68 for an Agent Employer Defined Benefit Pension Plan. A separate accounting valuation report for such purposes is available from CalPERS and details for ordering are available on our website. The measurements shown in this actuarial valuation may not be applicable for other purposes. The employer should contact their actuary before disseminating any portion of this report for any reason that is not explicitly described above. Future actuarial measurements may differ significantly from the current measurements presented in this report due to such factors as the following: plan experience differing from that anticipated by the economic or demographic assumptions; changes in economic or demographic assumptions; changes in actuarial policies; and changes in plan provisions or applicable law. California Actuarial Advisory Panel Recommendations This report includes all the basic disclosure elements as described in the Model Disclosure Elements for Actuarial Valuation Reports recommended in 2011 by the California Actuarial Advisory Panel (CAAP), with the exception of including the original base amounts of the various components of the unfunded liability in the Schedule of Amortization Bases shown on page 15. Additionally, this report includes the following “Enhanced Risk Disclosures” also recommended by the CAAP in the Model Disclosure Elements document:  A “Deterministic Stress Test,” projecting future results under different investment income scenarios  A “Sensitivity Analysis,” showing the impact on current valuation results using alternative discount rates of 6.0 percent, 7.0 percent and 8.0 percent. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 4 Required Contributions Fiscal Year Required Employer Contribution 2018-19 Employer Normal Cost Rate 10.217% Plus Either 1) Monthly Employer Dollar UAL Payment $ 1,532,718 Or 2) Annual UAL Prepayment Option $ 17,749,739 Required PEPRA Member Contribution Rate 6.25% The total minimum required employer contribution is the sum of the Plan’s Employer Normal Cost Rate (expressed as a percentage of payroll) plus the Employer Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) Contribution Amount (billed monthly in dollars). Only the UAL portion of the employer contribution can be prepaid (which must be received in full no later than July 31). Plan Normal Cost contributions will be made as part of the payroll reporting process. If there is contractual cost sharing or other change, this amount will change. §20572 of the Public Employees’ Retirement Law assesses interest at an annual rate of 10 percent if a contracting agency fails to remit the required contributions when due. For additional detail regarding the determination of the required contribution for PEPRA members, see Appendix D. Required member contributions for Classic members can be found in Appendix B. Fiscal Year Fiscal Year 2017-18 2018-19 Normal Cost Contribution as a Percentage of Payroll Total Normal Cost 17.623% 17.697% Employee Contribution1 7.584% 7.480% Employer Normal Cost 10.039% 10.217% Projected Annual Payroll for Contribution Year $ 78,211,742 $ 82,332,567 Estimated Employer Contributions Based On Projected Payroll Total Normal Cost $ 13,783,255 $ 14,570,395 Employee Contribution1 5,931,579 6,158,476 Employer Normal Cost 7,851,676 8,411,919 Unfunded Liability Contribution 15,765,273 18,392,618 % of Projected Payroll (illustrative only) 20.157% 22.339% Estimated Total Employer Contribution $ 23,616,949 $ 26,804,537 % of Projected Payroll (illustrative only) 30.196% 32.556% 1 For classic members, this is the percentage specified in the Public Employees Retirement Law, net of any reduction from the use of a modified formula or other factors. For PEPRA members, the member contribution rate is based on 50 percent of the normal cost. A development of PEPRA member contribution rates can be found in Appendix D. Employee cost sharing is not shown in this report. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 5 Plan’s Funded Status This measure of funded status is an assessment of the need for future employer contributions based on the selected actuarial cost method used to fund the plan. The UAL is the present value of future employer contributions for service that has already been earned and is in addition to future normal cost contributions for active members. For a measure of funded status that is appropriate for assessing the sufficiency of plan assets to cover estimated termination liabilities, please see “Hypothetical Termination Liability” in the “Risk Analysis” section. Projected Employer Contributions The table below shows the required and projected employer contributions (before cost sharing) for the next six fiscal years. Projected results reflect the adopted changes to the discount rate described in Appendix A, “Actuarial Methods and Assumptions.” The projections also assume that all actuarial assumptions will be realized and that no further changes to assumptions, contributions, benefits, or funding will occur during the projection period. The projected normal cost percentages in the projections below do not reflect that the normal cost will decline over time as new employees are hired into PEPRA or other lower cost benefit tiers. Required Contribution Projected Future Employer Contributions (Assumes 7.375% Return for Fiscal Year 2016-17) Fiscal Year 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 Normal Cost % 10.217% 10.7% 11.7% 11.7% 11.7% 11.7% 11.7% UAL Payment 18,392,618 21,368,000 23,620,000 26,268,000 28,624,000 30,328,000 31,816,000 Total as a % of Payroll* 32.6% 35.9% 38.8% 40.9% 42.6% 43.5% 44.1% Projected Payroll 82,332,567 84,802,544 87,346,620 89,967,019 92,666,029 95,446,010 98,309,391 *Illustrative only and based on the projected payroll shown. Changes in the UAL due to actuarial gains or losses as well as changes in actuarial assumptions or methods are amortized using a 5-year ramp up. For more information, please see “Amortization of the Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability” under “Actuarial Methods” in Appendix A. This method phases in the impact of unanticipated changes in UAL over a 5-year period and attempts to minimize employer cost volatility from year to year. As a result of this methodology, dramatic changes in the required employer contributions in any one year are less likely. However, required contributions can change gradually and significantly over the next five years. In years where there is a large increase in UAL the relatively small amortization payments during the ramp up period could result in a funded ratio that is projected to decrease initially while the contribution impact of the increase in the UAL is phased in. Due to the adopted changes in the discount rate for the next two valuations in combination with the 5-year phase-in ramp, the increases in the required contributions are expected to continue for seven years from Fiscal Year 2018-19 through Fiscal Year 2024-25. For projected contributions under alternate investment return scenarios, please see the “Analysis of Future Investment Return Scenarios” in the “Risk Analysis” section. June 30, 2015 June 30, 2016 1. Present Value of Projected Benefits $ 788,241,494 $ 827,688,407 2. Entry Age Normal Accrued Liability 696,699,220 730,382,476 3. Market Value of Assets (MVA) $ 477,031,099 $ 468,702,245 4. Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) [(2) – (3)] $ 219,668,121 $ 261,680,231 5. Funded Ratio [(3) / (2)] 68.5% 64.2% CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 6 Cost Actuarial Cost Estimates in General What is the cost of the pension plan? Contributions to fund the pension plan are comprised of two components:  The Normal Cost, expressed as a percentage of total active payroll.  The Amortization of the Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL), expressed as a dollar amount. For fiscal years prior to FY 2017-18, the Amortizations of UAL component was expressed as percentage of total active payroll. Starting with FY 2017-18, the Amortization of UAL component will be expressed as a dollar amount and will be invoiced on a monthly basis. There will be an option to prepay this amount during July of each fiscal year. The Normal Cost component will continue to be expressed as a percentage of active payroll with employer and employee contributions payable as part of the regular payroll reporting process. The determination of both components requires complex actuarial calculations. The calculations are based on a set of actuarial assumptions which can be divided into two categories:  Demographic assumptions (which includes mortality rates, retirement rates, employment termination rates, disability rates)  Economic assumptions (which includes future investment earnings, inflation, salary growth rates) These assumptions reflect CalPERS best estimate of the future experience of the plan and are long term in nature. We recognize that all the assumptions will not be realized in any given year. For example, the investment earnings at CalPERS have averaged 7.0 percent over the 20 years ending June 30, 2016, yet individual fiscal year returns have ranged from -24 percent to +21.7 percent. In addition, CalPERS reviews all the actuarial assumptions on an ongoing basis by conducting in depth experience studies every four years. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 7 Changes since the Prior Year’s Valuation Benefits The standard actuarial practice at CalPERS is to recognize mandated legislative benefit changes in the first annual valuation following the effective date of the legislation. Voluntary benefit changes by plan amendment are generally included in the first valuation that is prepared after the amendment becomes effective, even if the valuation date is prior to the effective date of the amendment. This valuation generally reflects plan changes by amendments effective before the date of the report. Please refer to the “Plan’s Major Benefit Options” and Appendix B for a summary of the plan provisions used in this valuation. The effect of any mandated benefit changes or plan amendments on the unfunded liability is shown in the “(Gain)/Loss Analysis” and the effect on the employer contribution is shown in the “Reconciliation of Required Employer Contributions.” It should be noted that no change in liability or contribution is shown for any plan changes which were already included in the prior year’s valuation. Actuarial Methods and Assumptions On December 21, 2016, the CalPERS Board of Administration lowered the discount rate from 7.50 percent to 7.00 percent using a three year phase-in beginning with the June 30, 2016 actuarial valuations. The minimum employer contributions for Fiscal Year 2018-19 determined in this valuation were calculated using a discount rate of 7.375 percent. The projected employer contributions on Page 5 are calculated assuming that the discount rate will be lowered to 7.25 percent next year and 7.00 percent the following year as adopted by the Board. The decision to reduce the discount rate was primarily based on reduced capital market assumptions provided by external investment consultants and CalPERS investment staff. The specific decision adopted by the Board reflected recommendations from CalPERS staff and additional input from employer and employee stakeholder groups. Based on the investment allocation adopted by the Board and capital market assumptions, the reduced discount rate assumption provides a more realistic assumption for the long term investment return of the fund. Notwithstanding the Board’s decision to phase into a 7.0 percent discount rate, subsequent analysis of the expected investment return of CalPERS assets or changes to the investment allocation may result in a change to this three year discount rate schedule. A comprehensive analysis of all actuarial assumptions and methods including the discount rate will be conducted in 2017. Subsequent Events The contribution requirements determined in this actuarial valuation report are based on demographic and financial information as of June 30, 2016. Changes in the value of assets subsequent to that date are not reflected. Declines in asset values will increase the required contribution, while investment returns above the assumed rate of return will decrease the actuarial cost of the plan. This actuarial valuation report reflects statutory changes, regulatory changes and CalPERS Board actions through January 2017. Any subsequent changes or actions are not reflected. ASSETS  RECONCILIATION OF THE MARKET VALUE OF ASSETS  ASSET ALLOCATION  CALPERS HISTORY OF INVESTMENT RETURNS CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 9 Reconciliation of the Market Value of Assets 1. Market Value of Assets as of 6/30/15 including Receivables $ 477,031,099 2. Change in Receivables for Service Buybacks (370,242) 3. Employer Contributions 18,839,524 4. Employee Contributions 5,608,002 5. Benefit Payments to Retirees and Beneficiaries (34,250,971) 6. Refunds (574,027) 7. Lump Sum Payments 0 8. Transfers and Miscellaneous Adjustments 572,097 9. Net Investment Return 1,846,763 10. Market Value of Assets as of 6/30/16 including Receivables $ 468,702,245 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 10 Asset Allocation CalPERS adheres to an Asset Allocation Strategy which establishes asset class allocation policy targets and ranges, and manages those asset class allocations within their policy ranges. CalPERS Investment Belief No. 6 recognizes that strategic asset allocation is the dominant determinant of portfolio risk and return. On February 19, 2014, the CalPERS Board of Administration adopted changes to the current asset allocation as shown in the Policy Target Allocation below expressed as a percentage of total assets. The asset allocation and market value of assets shown below reflect the values of the Public Employees’ Retirement Fund (PERF) in its entirety as of June 30, 2016. The assets for CITY OF PALO ALTO MISCELLANEOUS PLAN are part of the PERF and are invested accordingly. (A) Asset Class (B) Market Value ($ Billion) (C) Policy Target Allocation Public Equity 153.1 51.0% Private Equity 26.4 10.0% Global Fixed Income 59.9 20.0% Liquidity 4.5 1.0% Real Assets 31.8 12.0% Inflation Sensitive Assets 17.8 6.0% Other 1.6 0.0% Total Fund $295.1 100.0% Global Equity 51.9% Private Equity 9.0% Global Fixed Income 20.3% Liquidity 1.5% Real Assets 10.8% Inflation 6.0% Other 0.5% Asset Allocation at 6/30/2016 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 11 CalPERS History of Investment Returns The following is a chart with the 20-year historical annual returns of the Public Employees Retirement Fund for each fiscal year ending on June 30. Beginning in 2002, the figures are reported as gross of fees. The table below shows historical geometric mean annual returns of the Public Employees Retirement Fund for various time periods ending on June 30, 2016, (figures are reported as gross of fees). The geometric mean rate of return is the average rate per period compounded over multiple periods. It should be recognized that in any given year the rate of return is volatile. The portfolio has an expected volatility of 11.8 percent per year based on the most recent Asset Liability Modelling study. The volatility is a measure of the risk of the portfolio expressed in the standard deviation of the fund’s total return distribution, expressed as a percentage. Consequently, when looking at investment returns, it is more instructive to look at returns over longer time horizons. History of CalPERS Geometric Mean Rates of Return and Volatilities 1 year 5 year 10 year 20 year 30 year Geometric Return 0.6% 6.6% 5.0% 7.0% 8.2% Volatility – 8.1% 14.0% 11.8% 10.1% -25.0% -20.0% -15.0% -10.0% -5.0% 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 20 . 1 % 19 . 5 % 12 . 5 % 10 . 5 % -7. 2 % -6. 1 % 3. 7 % 16 . 6 % 12 . 3 % 11 . 8 % 19 . 1 % -5. 1 % -24 . 0 % 13 . 3 % 21 . 7 % 0. 2 % 13 . 2 % 17 . 7 % 2. 4 % 0. 6 % LIABILITIES AND CONTRIBUTIONS  DEVELOPMENT OF ACCRUED AND UNFUNDED LIABILITIES  (GAIN) / LOSS ANALYSIS 06/30/15 - 06/30/16  SCHEDULE OF AMORTIZATION BASES  30-YEAR AMORTIZATION SCHEDULES AND ALTERNATIVES  RECONCILIATION OF REQUIRED EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTIONS  EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION HISTORY  FUNDING HISTORY CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 13 Development of Accrued and Unfunded Liabilities June 30, 2015 June 30, 2016 1. Present Value of Projected Benefits a) Active Members $ 342,215,197 362,450,800 b) Transferred Members 31,772,074 33,583,165 c) Terminated Members 12,787,802 13,595,787 d) Members and Beneficiaries Receiving Payments 401,466,421 418,058,655 e) Total $ 788,241,494 827,688,407 2. Present Value of Future Employer Normal Costs $ 50,436,220 54,419,083 3. Present Value of Future Employee Contributions $ 41,106,054 42,886,848 4. Entry Age Normal Accrued Liability a) Active Members [(1a) - (2) - (3)] $ 250,672,923 265,144,869 b) Transferred Members (1b) 31,772,074 33,583,165 c) Terminated Members (1c) 12,787,802 13,595,787 d) Members and Beneficiaries Receiving Payments (1d) 401,466,421 418,058,655 e) Total $ 696,699,220 730,382,476 5. Market Value of Assets (MVA) $ 477,031,099 468,702,245 6. Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) [(4e) - (5)] $ 219,668,121 261,680,231 7. Funded Ratio [(5) / (4e)] 68.5% 64.2% CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 14 (Gain)/Loss Analysis 6/30/15 – 6/30/16 To calculate the cost requirements of the plan, assumptions are made about future events that affect the amount and timing of benefits to be paid and assets to be accumulated. Each year, actual experience is compared to the expected experience based on the actuarial assumptions. This results in actuarial gains or losses, as shown below. 1. Total (Gain)/Loss for the Year a) Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) as of 6/30/15 $ 219,668,121 b) Expected Payment on the UAL during 2015-16 13,171,185 c) Interest through 6/30/16 [.075 x (1a) - ((1.075)½ - 1) x (1b)] 15,990,119 d) Expected UAL before all other changes [(1a) - (1b) + (1c)] 222,487,055 e) Change due to plan changes 0 f) Change due to assumption change 10,486,467 g) Expected UAL after all other changes [(1d) + (1e) + (1f)] 232,973,522 h) Actual UAL as of 6/30/16 261,680,231 i) Total (Gain)/Loss for 2015-16 [(1h) - (1g)] $ 28,706,709 2. Contribution (Gain)/Loss for the Year a) Expected Contribution (Employer and Employee) $ 26,007,671 b) Interest on Expected Contributions 957,656 c) Actual Contributions 24,447,526 d) Interest on Actual Contributions 900,208 e) Expected Contributions with Interest [(2a) + (2b)] 26,965,327 f) Actual Contributions with Interest [(2c) + (2d)] 25,347,734 g) Contribution (Gain)/Loss [(2e) - (2f)] $ 1,617,593 3. Asset (Gain)/Loss for the Year a) Market Value of Assets as of 6/30/15 $ 477,031,099 b) Prior Fiscal Year Receivables (2,539,961) c) Current Fiscal Year Receivables 2,169,719 d) Contributions Received 24,447,526 e) Benefits and Refunds Paid (34,824,998) f) Transfers and Miscellaneous Adjustments 572,097 g) Expected Int. [.075 x (3a + 3b) + ((1.075)½ - 1) x ((3d) + (3e) + (3f))] 35,225,781 h) Expected Assets as of 6/30/16 [(3a) + (3b) + (3c) + (3d) + (3e) + (3f) + (3g)] 502,081,263 i) Market Value of Assets as of 6/30/16 468,702,245 j) Asset (Gain)/Loss [(3h) - (3i)] $ 33,379,018 4. Liability (Gain)/Loss for the Year a) Total (Gain)/Loss (1i) $ 28,706,709 b) Contribution (Gain)/Loss (2g) 1,617,593 c) Asset (Gain)/Loss (3j) 33,379,018 d) Liability (Gain)/Loss [(4a) - (4b) - (4c)] $ (6,289,902) CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 15 Schedule of Amortization Bases There is a two-year lag between the valuation date and the start of the contribution fiscal year.  The assets, liabilities, and funded status of the plan are measured as of the valuation date: June 30, 2016.  The required employer contributions determined by the valuation are for the fiscal year beginning two years after the valuation date: Fiscal Year 2018-19. This two-year lag is necessary due to the amount of time needed to extract and test the membership and financial data, and the need to provide public agencies with their required employer contribution well in advance of the start of the fiscal year. The Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) is used to determine the employer contribution and therefore must be rolled forward two years from the valuation date to the first day of the fiscal year for which the contribution is being determined. The UAL is rolled forward each year by subtracting the expected payment on the UAL for the fiscal year and adjusting for interest. The expected payment on the UAL for a fiscal year is equal to the Expected Employer Contribution for the fiscal year minus the Expected Normal Cost for the year. The Employer Contribution for the first fiscal year is determined by the actuarial valuation two years ago and the contribution for the second year is from the actuarial valuation one year ago. The Normal Cost Rate for each of the two fiscal years is assumed to be the same as the rate determined by the current valuation. All expected dollar amounts are determined by multiplying the rate by the expected payroll for the applicable fiscal year, based on payroll as of the valuation date. Reason for Base Date Established Amorti-zation Period Balance 6/30/16 Expected Payment 2016-17 Balance 6/30/17 Expected Payment 2017-18 Balance 6/30/18 Scheduled Payment for 2018-19 ASSUMPTION CHANGE 06/30/03 7 $15,478,726 $2,102,994 $14,441,120 $2,166,084 $13,261,614 $2,216,388 METHOD CHANGE 06/30/04 8 $(1,186,612) $(148,017) $(1,120,747) $(152,458) $(1,045,422) $(155,924) BENEFIT CHANGE 06/30/05 8 $26,288,910 $3,279,266 $24,829,679 $3,377,643 $23,160,890 $3,454,433 ASSUMPTION CHANGE 06/30/09 13 $25,621,903 $2,348,748 $25,077,701 $2,419,210 $24,420,350 $2,468,358 SPECIAL (GAIN)/LOSS 06/30/09 23 $16,653,731 $1,100,719 $16,741,358 $1,133,741 $16,801,229 $1,151,812 SPECIAL (GAIN)/LOSS 06/30/10 24 $1,374,845 $88,923 $1,384,096 $91,591 $1,391,265 $93,015 ASSUMPTION CHANGE 06/30/11 15 $12,031,321 $1,010,766 $11,871,256 $1,041,089 $11,667,965 $1,061,270 SPECIAL (GAIN)/LOSS 06/30/11 25 $(57,801) $(3,663) $(58,268) $(3,773) $(58,656) $(3,830) PAYMENT (GAIN)/LOSS 06/30/12 26 $3,021,937 $187,905 $3,050,094 $193,542 $3,074,487 $196,400 (GAIN)/LOSS 06/30/12 26 $25,475,473 $1,584,070 $25,712,846 $1,631,592 $25,918,481 $1,655,688 (GAIN)/LOSS 06/30/13 27 $74,807,078 $2,043,968 $78,206,101 $3,157,930 $80,701,494 $4,273,993 ASSUMPTION CHANGE 06/30/14 18 $41,242,604 $785,576 $43,470,217 $1,618,287 $44,999,246 $2,472,670 (GAIN)/LOSS 06/30/14 28 $(45,020,639) $(633,217) $(47,684,760) $(1,304,427) $(49,849,838) $(1,984,845) (GAIN)/LOSS 06/30/15 29 $26,755,579 $639,126 $28,066,528 $395,222 $29,726,898 $801,201 ASSUMPTION CHANGE 06/30/16 20 $10,486,467 $(364,750) $11,637,805 $(375,692) $12,885,392 $242,873 (GAIN)/LOSS 06/30/16 30 $28,706,709 $624,231 $30,176,989 $0 $32,402,542 $449,116 TOTAL $261,680,231 $14,646,645 $265,802,015 $15,389,581 $269,457,937 $18,392,618 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 20 Page 16 30-Year Amortization Schedule and Alternatives The amortization schedule on the previous page shows the minimum contributions required according to CalPERS amortization policy. There has been considerable interest from many agencies in paying off these unfunded accrued liabilities sooner and the possible savings in doing so. As a result, we have provided alternate amortization schedules to help analyze the current amortization schedule and illustrate the advantages of accelerating unfunded liability payments. Shown on the following page are future year amortization payments based on 1) the current amortization schedule reflecting the individual bases and remaining periods shown on the previous page, and 2) alternate “fresh start” amortization schedules using two sample periods that would both result in interest savings relative to the current amortization schedule. Note that the payments under each alternate scenario increase by 3 percent per year. The schedules do not reflect the impact of adopted discount rate changes that will become effective beyond June 30, 2016. Therefore, future amortization payments displayed in the Current Amortization Schedule on the following page will not match projected amortization payments shown in connection with Projected Employer Contributions provided elsewhere in this report. The Current Amortization Schedule typically contains individual bases that are both positive and negative. Positive bases result from plan changes, assumption changes or plan experience that result in increases to unfunded liability. Negative bases result from plan changes, assumption changes or plan experience that result in decreases to unfunded liability. The combination of positive and negative bases within an amortization schedule can result in unusual or problematic circumstances in future years such as:  A positive total unfunded liability with a negative total payment,  A negative total unfunded liability with a positive total payment, or  Total payments that completely amortize the unfunded liability over a very short period of time In any year where one of the above scenarios occurs, the actuary will consider corrective action such as replacing the existing unfunded liability bases with a single “fresh start” base and amortizing it over a reasonable period. The Current Amortization Schedule on the following page may appear to show that, based on the current amortization bases, one of the above scenarios will occur at some point in the future. It is impossible to know today whether such a scenario will in fact arise since there will be additional bases added to the amortization schedule in each future year. Should such a scenario arise in any future year, the actuary will take appropriate action based on guidelines in the CalPERS amortization policy. For purposes of this display, total payments include any negative payments. Therefore, the amount of estimated savings may be understated to the extent that negative payments appear in the current schedule. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 17 30-Year Amortization Schedule and Alternatives * This schedule does not reflect the impact of adopted discount rate changes that will become effective beyond June 30, 2016. For Projected Employer Contributions, please see Page 5. Alternate Schedules Current Amortization Schedule* 20 Year Amortization 15 Year Amortization Date Balance Payment Balance Payment Balance Payment 6/30/2018 269,457,937 18,392,618 269,457,937 20,142,652 269,457,937 24,508,772 6/30/2019 270,271,679 21,337,802 268,458,259 20,746,932 263,934,002 25,244,035 6/30/2020 268,093,576 23,309,575 266,758,689 21,369,340 257,240,783 26,001,357 6/30/2021 263,711,651 25,202,766 264,288,825 22,010,420 249,269,189 26,781,397 6/30/2022 257,044,797 26,737,689 260,972,509 22,670,732 239,901,397 27,584,839 6/30/2023 248,295,747 27,539,817 256,727,386 23,350,854 229,010,188 28,412,384 6/30/2024 238,070,276 28,366,013 251,464,429 24,051,380 216,458,234 29,264,756 6/30/2025 226,234,553 26,491,113 245,087,432 24,772,921 202,097,330 30,142,699 6/30/2026 215,468,753 23,107,399 237,492,456 25,516,109 185,767,569 31,046,980 6/30/2027 207,415,244 23,800,618 228,567,245 26,281,592 167,296,454 31,978,389 6/30/2028 198,049,463 24,514,638 218,190,592 27,070,040 146,497,951 32,937,741 6/30/2029 187,253,077 25,250,078 206,231,656 27,882,141 123,171,459 33,925,873 6/30/2030 174,898,379 26,007,577 192,549,233 28,718,606 97,100,717 34,943,649 6/30/2031 160,847,587 23,162,939 176,990,972 29,580,164 68,052,619 35,991,958 6/30/2032 148,708,219 22,611,118 159,392,526 30,467,569 35,775,945 37,071,717 6/30/2033 136,245,376 20,351,915 139,576,649 31,381,596 6/30/2034 125,204,431 19,250,096 117,352,218 32,323,044 6/30/2035 114,490,941 18,063,849 92,513,190 33,292,735 6/30/2036 104,216,544 16,789,107 64,837,470 34,291,517 6/30/2037 94,505,323 16,866,899 34,085,709 35,320,262 6/30/2038 83,997,289 16,934,251 6/30/2039 72,644,495 17,442,280 6/30/2040 59,928,003 17,965,550 6/30/2041 45,731,446 14,122,542 6/30/2042 34,470,094 13,530,028 6/30/2043 22,992,191 12,253,254 6/30/2044 11,990,809 5,916,684 6/30/2045 6,744,151 3,302,911 6/30/2046 3,818,993 2,971,635 6/30/2047 1,021,378 1,058,372 Totals 562,651,133 541,240,606 455,836,546 Interest Paid 293,193,196 271,782,669 186,378,609 Estimated Savings 21,410,527 106,814,587 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 18 Reconciliation of Required Employer Contributions Normal Cost (% of Payroll) 1. For Period 7/1/17 – 6/30/18 a) Employer Normal Cost 10.039% b) Employee Contribution 7.584% c) Total Normal Cost 17.623% 2. Changes since the prior year annual valuation a) Effect of changes in demographics results (0.396%) b) Effect of plan changes 0.000% c) Effect of changes in assumptions 0.470% d) Net effect of the changes above [sum of (a) through (c)] 0.074% 3. For Period 7/1/18 – 6/30/19 a) Employer Normal Cost 10.217% b) Employee Contribution 7.480% c) Total Normal Cost 17.697% Employer Normal Cost Change [(3a) – (1a)] 0.178% Employee Contribution Change [(3b) – (1b)] (0.104%) Unfunded Liability Contribution ($) 1. For Period 7/1/17 – 6/30/18 15,765,273 2. Changes since the prior year annual valuation a) Effect of (gain)/loss during prior year1 449,116 b) Effect of plan changes 0 c) Effect of changes in assumptions2 242,873 d) Changes to prior year amortization payments3 1,935,356 e) Effect of changes due to Fresh Start 0 f) Effect of elimination of amortization base 0 g) Net effect of the changes above [sum of (a) through (f)] 2,627,345 3. For Period 7/1/18 – 6/30/19 [(1)+(2g)] 18,392,618 1 The unfunded liability contribution for the (gain)/loss during the year prior to the valuation date is 20 percent of the “full” annual requirement due to the 5-year ramp. Increases to this amount that occur during the ramp period will be included in line d) in future years. 2 The unfunded liability contribution for the change in assumptions is 20 percent of the “full” annual requirement due to the 5-year ramp. Increases to this amount that occur during the ramp period will be included in line d) in future years. 3 Includes changes due to 5-year ramp, payroll growth assumption, and re-amortization under new discount rate. The amounts shown for the period 7/1/17 – 6/30/18 may be different if a prepayment of unfunded actuarial liability is made or a plan change became effective after the prior year’s actuarial valuation was performed. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 19 Employer Contribution History The table below provides a recent history of the required employer contributions for the plan, as determined by the annual actuarial valuation. It does not account for prepayments or benefit changes made during a fiscal year. Required By Valuation Fiscal Year Employer Normal Cost Unfunded Rate Unfunded Liability Payment ($) 2013 - 14 10.360% 14.240% N/A 2014 - 15 10.283% 15.839% N/A 2015 - 16 10.358% 17.336% N/A 2016 - 17 10.334% 18.556% N/A 2017 - 18 10.039% N/A 15,765,273 2018 - 19 10.217% N/A 18,392,618 Funding History The table below shows the recent history of the actuarial accrued liability, the market value of assets, the funded ratio and the annual covered payroll. Valuation Date Accrued Liability Market Value of Assets (MVA) Unfunded Liability Funded Ratio Annual Covered Payroll 06/30/11 $ 552,715,631 $ 384,056,704 $ 168,658,927 69.5% $ 60,297,783 06/30/12 576,182,013 373,592,926 202,589,087 64.8% 62,910,810 06/30/13 602,540,178 412,227,784 190,312,394 68.4% 64,439,680 06/30/14 666,978,627 475,566,994 191,411,633 71.3% 67,802,942 06/30/15 696,699,220 477,031,099 219,668,121 68.5% 71,574,823 06/30/16 730,382,476 468,702,245 261,680,231 64.2% 75,345,962 RISK ANALYSIS  ANALYSIS OF FUTURE INVESTMENT RETURN SCENARIOS  ANALYSIS OF DISCOUNT RATE SENSITIVITY  VOLATILITY RATIOS  HYPOTHETICAL TERMINATION LIABILITY CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 21 Analysis of Future Investment Return Scenarios Analysis was performed to determine the effects of various future investment returns on required employer contributions. The projections below provide a range of results based on five investment return scenarios assumed to occur during the next four fiscal years (2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20). The projections also assume that all other actuarial assumptions will be realized and that no further changes to assumptions, contributions, benefits, or funding will occur. Each of the five investment return scenarios assumes a return of 7.375 percent for fiscal year 2016-17. For fiscal years 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20 each scenario assumes an alternate fixed annual return. The fixed return assumptions for the five scenarios are -3.0 percent, 3.0 percent, 7.0 percent (7.25 percent for 2017-18), 11.0 percent and 17.0 percent. The alternate investment returns were chosen based on stochastic analysis of possible future investment returns over the four year period ending June 30, 2020. Using the expected returns and volatility of the asset classes in which the funds are invested, we produced ten thousand stochastic outcomes for this period. We then selected annual returns that approximate the 5th, 25th, 50th, 75th, and 95th percentiles for these outcomes. For example, of all of the 4-year outcomes generated in the stochastic analysis, approximately 25 percent of them had an average annual return of 3.0 percent or less. Required contributions outside of this range are also possible. In particular, while it is unlikely that investment returns will average less than -3.0 percent or greater than 17.0 percent over this four year period, the possibility of a single investment return less than -3.0 percent or greater than 17.0 percent in any given year is much greater. Assumed Annual Return From 2017-18 through 2019-20 Projected Employer Contributions 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23 (3.0%) Normal Cost 10.7% 11.7% 11.7% 11.7% UAL Contribution $21,368,000 $24,382,000 $28,551,000 $33,202,000 3.0% Normal Cost 10.7% 11.7% 11.7% 11.7% UAL Contribution $21,368,000 $23,936,000 $27,222,000 $30,563,000 Assumed Discount Rate Normal Cost 10.7% 11.7% 11.7% 11.7% UAL Contribution $21,368,000 $23,620,000 $26,268,000 $28,624,000 11.0% Normal Cost 10.7% 11.7% 12.0% 12.2% UAL Contribution $21,368,000 $23,341,000 $25,347,000 $26,740,000 17.0% Normal Cost 10.7% 11.7% 12.5% 13.2% UAL Contribution $21,368,000 $22,895,000 $23,879,000 $23,757,000 Given the temporary suspension of the Risk Mitigation Policy during the period over which the discount rate assumption is being phased down to 7.0 percent, the projections above were performed without reflection of any possible impact of this Policy for Fiscal Years 2019-20 and 2020-21. The projected normal cost percentages do not reflect that the normal cost will decline over time as new employees are hired into PEPRA or other lower cost benefit tiers. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 22 Analysis of Discount Rate Sensitivity Shown below are various valuation results as of June 30, 2016 assuming alternate discount rates. Results are shown using the current discount rate of 7.375 percent as well as alternate discount rates of 6.0 percent, 7.0 percent, and 8.0 percent. The alternate rate of 7.0 percent was selected since the Board has adopted this rate as the final discount rate at the end of the three year phase-in of the reduction in this assumption. The rates of 6.0 percent and 8.0 percent were selected since they illustrate the impact of a 1 percent increase or decrease to the 7.0 percent assumption. This analysis shows the potential plan impacts if the PERF were to realize investment returns of 6.0 percent, 7.0 percent, or 8.0 percent over the long- term. This type of analysis gives the reader a sense of the long-term risk to required contributions. For a measure of funded status that is appropriate for assessing the sufficiency of plan assets to cover estimated termination liabilities, please see “Hypothetical Termination Liability” in the “Risk Analysis” section. Sensitivity Analysis As of June 30, 2016 Plan’s Normal Cost Accrued Liability Unfunded Accrued Liability Funded Status 7.375% (current discount rate) 17.697% $730,382,476 $261,680,231 64.2% 6.0% 24.098% $863,632,400 $394,930,155 54.3% 7.0% 19.208% $763,341,929 $294,639,684 61.4% 8.0% 15.497% $680,268,344 $211,566,099 68.9% CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 23 Volatility Ratios The actuarial calculations supplied in this communication are based on a number of assumptions about long-term demographic and economic behavior. Unless these assumptions (terminations, deaths, disabilities, retirements, salary growth, and investment return) are exactly realized each year, there will be differences on a year-to-year basis. The year-to-year differences between actual experience and the assumptions are called actuarial gains and losses and serve to lower or raise required employer contributions from one year to the next. Therefore, employer contributions will inevitably fluctuate, especially due to the ups and downs of investment returns. Asset Volatility Ratio (AVR) Plans that have higher asset-to-payroll ratios experience more volatile employer contributions (as a percentage of payroll) due to investment return. For example, a plan with an asset-to-payroll ratio of 8 may experience twice the contribution volatility due to investment return volatility than a plan with an asset-to- payroll ratio of 4. Shown below is the asset volatility ratio, a measure of the plan’s current volatility. It should be noted that this ratio is a measure of the current situation. It increases over time but generally tends to stabilize as the plan matures. Liability Volatility Ratio (LVR) Plans that have higher liability-to-payroll ratios experience more volatile employer contributions (as a percentage of payroll) due to investment return and changes in liability. For example, a plan with a liability- to-payroll ratio of 8 is expected to have twice the contribution volatility of a plan with a liability-to-payroll ratio of 4. The liability volatility ratio is also included in the table below. It should be noted that this ratio indicates a longer-term potential for contribution volatility. The asset volatility ratio, described above, will tend to move closer to the liability volatility ratio as the plan matures. Since the liability volatility ratio is a long-term measure, it is shown below at the current discount rate (7.375 percent) as well as the discount rate the Board has adopted to determine the contribution requirement in the June 30, 2018 actuarial valuation (7.00 percent). Contribution Volatility As of June 30, 2016 1. Market Value of Assets without Receivables $ 466,532,526 2. Payroll 75,345,962 3. Asset Volatility Ratio (AVR) [(1) / ( 2)] 6.2 4. Accrued Liability (7.375% discount rate) $ 730,382,476 5. Liability Volatility Ratio (LVR) [(4) / (2)] 9.7 6. Accrued Liability (7.00% discount rate) 763,341,929 7. Projected Liability Volatility Ratio [(6) / (2)] 10.1 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION - June 30, 2016 MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Page 24 Hypothetical Termination Liability The hypothetical termination liability is an estimate of the financial position of the plan had the contract with CalPERS been terminated as of June 30, 2016. The plan liability on a termination basis is calculated differently compared to the plan’s ongoing funding liability. For this hypothetical termination liability calculation, both compensation and service are frozen as of the valuation date and no future pay increases or service accruals are assumed. This measure of funded status is not appropriate for assessing the need for future employer contributions in the case of an ongoing plan, that is, for an employer that continues to provide CalPERS retirement benefits to active employees. A more conservative investment policy and asset allocation strategy was adopted by the CalPERS Board for the Terminated Agency Pool. The Terminated Agency Pool has limited funding sources since no future employer contributions will be made. Therefore, expected benefit payments are secured by risk-free assets and benefit security for members is increased while limiting the funding risk. However, this asset allocation has a lower expected rate of return than the PERF and consequently, a lower discount rate assumption. The lower discount rate for the Terminated Agency Pool results in higher liabilities for terminated plans. The effective termination discount rate will depend on actual market rates of return for risk-free securities on the date of termination. As market discount rates are variable the table below shows a range for the hypothetical termination liability based on the lowest and highest interest rates observed during an approximate 2-year period centered around the valuation date. Market Value of Assets (MVA) Hypothetical Termination Liability1,2 @ 1.75% Funded Status Unfunded Termination Liability @ 1.75% Hypothetical Termination Liability1,2 @ 3.00% Funded Status Unfunded Termination Liability @ 3.00% $468,702,245 $1,331,814,237 35.2% $863,111,992 $1,150,377,585 40.7% $681,675,340 1 The hypothetical liabilities calculated above include a 7 percent mortality contingency load in accordance with Board policy. Other actuarial assumptions can be found in Appendix A. 2 The current discount rate assumption used for termination valuations is a weighted average of the 10-year and 30-year U.S. Treasury yields where the weights are based on matching asset and liability durations as of the termination date. The discount rates used in the table are based on 20-year Treasury bonds, rounded to the nearest quarter percentage point, which is a good proxy for most plans. The 20-year Treasury yield was 1.75 percent on June 30, 2016, and was 2.75 percent on January 31, 2017. In order to terminate the plan, you must first contact our Retirement Services Contract Unit to initiate a Resolution of Intent to Terminate. The completed Resolution will allow the plan actuary to give you a preliminary termination valuation with a more up-to-date estimate of the plan liabilities. CalPERS advises you to consult with the plan actuary before beginning this process. PLAN’S MAJOR BENEFIT PROVISIONS CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CalPERS ID: 6373437857 Plan’s Major Benefit Options Shown below is a summary of the major optional benefits for which your agency has contracted for this plan. A description of principal standard and optional plan provisions is in Appendix B of this report. Contract Package Active Misc Active Misc Active Misc Inactive Misc Receiving Misc Benefit Provision Benefit Formula 2.7% @ 55 2.0% @ 60 2.0% @ 62 2.0% @ 55 Social Security Coverage No No No No Full/Modified Full Full Full Full Employee Contribution Rate 8.00% 7.00% 6.25% Final Average Compensation Period One Year One Year Three Year One Year Sick Leave Credit No No No No Non-Industrial Disability Standard Standard Standard Standard Industrial Disability No No No No Pre-Retirement Death Benefits Optional Settlement 2W No No No No 1959 Survivor Benefit Level Level 1 Level 1 Level 1 Level 1 Special No No No No Alternate (firefighters) No No No No Post-Retirement Death Benefits Lump Sum $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 Survivor Allowance (PRSA) No No No No No COLA 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% Page 26 APPENDICES  APPENDIX A – ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS  APPENDIX B – PRINCIPAL PLAN PROVISIONS  APPENDIX C – PARTICIPANT DATA  APPENDIX D – DEVELOPMENT OF PEPRA MEMBER CONTRIBUTION RATES  APPENDIX E – GLOSSARY OF ACTUARIAL TERMS APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS  ACTUARIAL DATA  ACTUARIAL METHODS  ACTUARIAL ASSUMPTIONS  MISCELLANEOUS CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-1 Actuarial Data As stated in the Actuarial Certification, the data which serves as the basis of this valuation has been obtained from the various CalPERS databases. We have reviewed the valuation data and believe that it is reasonable and appropriate in aggregate. We are unaware of any potential data issues that would have a material effect on the results of this valuation, except that data does not always contain the latest salary information for former members now in reciprocal systems and does not recognize the potential for unusually large salary deviation in certain cases such as elected officials. Therefore, salary information in these cases may not be accurate. These situations are relatively infrequent, however, and when they do occur, they generally do not have a material impact on the required employer contributions. Actuarial Methods Actuarial Cost Method The actuarial cost method used is the Entry Age Normal Cost Method. Under this method, projected benefits are determined for all members and the associated liabilities are spread in a manner that produces level annual cost as a percentage of pay in each year from the member’s entry age to their assumed retirement age on the valuation date. The cost allocated to the current fiscal year is called the normal cost. The actuarial accrued liability for active members is then calculated as the portion of the total cost of the plan allocated to prior years. The actuarial accrued liability for members currently receiving benefits and for members entitled to deferred benefits is equal to the present value of the benefits expected to be paid. No normal costs are applicable for these participants. Amortization of Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability The excess of the total actuarial accrued liability over the market value of plan assets is called the unfunded actuarial accrued liability (UAL). Funding requirements are determined by adding the normal cost and an amortization payment toward the unfunded liability. The unfunded liability is amortized as a “level percent of pay”. Commencing with the June 30, 2013 valuation, all new gains or losses are amortized over a fixed 30-year period with a 5-year ramp up at the beginning and a 5-year ramp down at the end of the amortization period. All changes in liability due to plan amendments (other than golden handshakes) are amortized over a 20-year period with no ramp. Changes in actuarial assumptions or changes in actuarial methodology are amortized over a 20-year period with a 5-year ramp up at the beginning and a 5-year ramp down at the end of the amortization period. Changes in unfunded accrued liability due to a Golden Handshake will be amortized over a period of five years. The 5-year ramp up means that the payments in the first four years of the amortization period are 20 percent, 40 percent, 60 percent and 80 percent of the “full” payment which begins in year five. The 5-year ramp down means that the reverse is true in the final four years of the amortization period. Exceptions for Inconsistencies: An exception to the amortization rules above is used whenever their application results in inconsistencies. In these cases, a “fresh start” approach is used. This means that the current unfunded actuarial liability is projected and amortized over a set number of years. For example, a fresh start is needed in the following situations: 1) When a positive payment would be required on a negative unfunded actuarial liability (or conversely a negative payment on a positive unfunded actuarial liability); or 2) When there are excess assets, rather than an unfunded liability. In this situation, a 30-year fresh start is used. It should be noted that the actuary may determine that a fresh start is necessary under other circumstances. In all cases of a fresh start, the period is set by the actuary at what is deemed appropriate; however, the period will not be greater than 30 years. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-2 Exceptions for Inactive Plans: The following exceptions apply to plans classified as Inactive. These plans have no active members and no expectation to have active members in the future.  Amortization of the unfunded liability is on a “level dollar” basis rather than a “level percent of pay” basis. For amortization layers which utilize a ramp up and ramp down, the “ultimate” payment is constant.  Actuarial judgment will be used to shorten amortization periods for Inactive plans with existing periods that are deemed too long given the duration of the liability. The specific demographics of the plan will be used to determine if shorter periods may be more appropriate. Asset Valuation Method It is the policy of the CalPERS Board of Administration to use professionally accepted amortization methods to eliminate a surplus or an unfunded accrued liability in a manner that maintains benefit security for the members of the System while minimizing substantial variations in required employer contributions. On April 17, 2013, the CalPERS Board of Administration approved a recommendation to change the CalPERS amortization and rate smoothing policies. Beginning with the June 30, 2013 valuations that set the employer contribution for Fiscal Year 2015-16, CalPERS employs a policy that amortizes all gains and losses over a fixed 30-year period. The increase or decrease in the rate is then spread directly over a 5-year period. This method is referred to as “direct rate smoothing.” CalPERS no longer uses an actuarial value of assets and only uses the market value of assets. The direct rate smoothing method is equivalent to a method using a 5 year asset smoothing period with no actuarial value of asset corridor and a 25-year amortization period for gains and losses. PEPRA Normal Cost Rate Methodology Per Government Code Section 7522.30(b) the “normal cost rate” shall mean the annual actuarially determined normal cost for the plan of retirement benefits provided to the new member and shall be established based on actuarial assumptions used to determine the liabilities and costs as part of the annual actuarial valuation. The plan of retirement benefits shall include any elements that would impact the actuarial determination of the normal cost, including, but not limited to, the retirement formula, eligibility and vesting criteria, ancillary benefit provisions, and any automatic cost-of-living adjustments as determined by the public retirement system. Each non-pooled plan is considered to be stable with a sufficiently large demographic of actives. It is preferable to determine normal cost using a large active population ongoing so that this rate remains relatively stable. The total PEPRA normal cost will be calculated using all active members within a non- pooled plan until the number of members covered under the PEPRA formula meets either: 1. 50 percent of the active population, or 2. 25 percent of the active population and 100 or more PEPRA members Once either of the conditions above are met for a non-pooled plan, the total PEPRA normal cost will be based on the active PEPRA population in the plan. Accordingly, the total normal cost will be funded equally between employer and employee based on the demographics of the employees of that employer. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-3 Actuarial Assumptions In 2014, CalPERS completed a 2-year asset liability management study incorporating actuarial assumptions and strategic asset allocation. On February 19, 2014, the CalPERS Board of Administration adopted relatively modest changes to the asset allocation that reduced the expected volatility of returns. The adopted asset allocation was expected to have a long-term blended return that continued to support a discount rate assumption of 7.5 percent at that time. The Board also approved several changes to the demographic assumptions that more closely aligned with actual experience. The most significant of these is mortality improvement to acknowledge the greater life expectancies we are seeing in our membership and expected continued improvements. These new actuarial assumptions were first used in the June 30, 2014 valuation to set the Fiscal Year 2016-17 contribution for public agency employers. On December 21, 2016, the CalPERS Board of Administration lowered the discount rate from 7.50 percent to 7.00 percent using a three year phase-in beginning with the June 30, 2016 actuarial valuations. The minimum employer contributions for Fiscal Year 2018-19 determined in this valuation were calculated using a discount rate of 7.375 percent. The projected employer contributions on Page 5 are calculated assuming that the discount rate will be lowered to 7.25 percent next year and 7.00 percent the following year as adopted by the Board. The decision to reduce the discount rate was primarily based on reduced capital market assumptions provided by external investment consultants and CalPERS investment staff. The specific decision adopted by the Board reflected recommendations from CalPERS staff and additional input from employer and employee stakeholder groups. Based on the investment allocation adopted by the Board and capital market assumptions, the reduced discount rate schedule provides a more realistic assumption for the long term investment return of the fund. Notwithstanding the Board’s decision to phase into a 7.0 percent discount rate, subsequent analysis of the expected investment return of CalPERS assets or changes to the investment allocation may result in a change to this three year discount rate schedule. A comprehensive analysis of all actuarial assumptions and methods including the discount rate will be conducted in 2017. For more details and additional rationale for the selection of the actuarial assumptions, please refer to the CalPERS Experience Study and Review of Actuarial Assumptions report from January 2014 that can be found on the CalPERS website under: “Forms and Publications”. Click on “View All” and search for Experience Study. All actuarial assumptions (except the discount rates used for the hypothetical termination liability) represent an estimate of future experience rather than observations of the estimates inherent in market data. Economic Assumptions Discount Rate The prescribed discount rate assumption adopted by the Board on December 21, 2016 is 7.375 percent compounded annually (net of investment and administrative expenses) as of 6/30/2016. The Board also prescribed that the assumed discount rate will reduce to 7.25 percent compounded annually (net of expenses) as of 6/30/2017, and 7.0 percent compounded annually (net of expenses) as of 6/30/2018. These further changes to the discount rate assumption are not reflected in the determination of required contributions determined in this report for Fiscal Year 2018-19. Termination Liability Discount Rate The current discount rate assumption used for termination valuations is a weighted average of the 10-year and 30-year U.S. Treasury yields where the weights are based on matching asset and liability durations as of the termination date. The hypothetical termination liabilities in this report are calculated using an observed range of market interest rates. This range is based on the lowest and highest 20-year Treasury bond observed during an approximate 2-year period centered around the valuation date. The 20-year Treasury bond has a similar duration to most plan liabilities and serves as a good proxy for the termination discount rate. The 20-year Treasury yield was 1.75 percent on June 30, 2016. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-4 Salary Growth Annual increases vary by category, entry age, and duration of service. A sample of assumed increases are shown below. Public Agency Miscellaneous Duration of Service (Entry Age 20) (Entry Age 30) (Entry Age 40) 0 0.1220 0.1160 0.1020 1 0.0990 0.0940 0.0830 2 0.0860 0.0810 0.0710 3 0.0770 0.0720 0.0630 4 0.0700 0.0650 0.0570 5 0.0640 0.0600 0.0520 10 0.0460 0.0430 0.0390 15 0.0420 0.0400 0.0360 20 0.0390 0.0380 0.0340 25 0.0370 0.0360 0.0330 30 0.0350 0.0340 0.0320 Public Agency Fire Duration of Service (Entry Age 20) (Entry Age 30) (Entry Age 40) 0 0.2000 0.1980 0.1680 1 0.1490 0.1460 0.1250 2 0.1200 0.1160 0.0990 3 0.0980 0.0940 0.0810 4 0.0820 0.0780 0.0670 5 0.0690 0.0640 0.0550 10 0.0470 0.0460 0.0420 15 0.0440 0.0420 0.0390 20 0.0420 0.0390 0.0360 25 0.0400 0.0370 0.0340 30 0.0380 0.0360 0.0340 Public Agency Police Duration of Service (Entry Age 20) (Entry Age 30) (Entry Age 40) 0 0.1500 0.1470 0.1310 1 0.1160 0.1120 0.1010 2 0.0950 0.0920 0.0830 3 0.0810 0.0780 0.0700 4 0.0700 0.0670 0.0600 5 0.0610 0.0580 0.0520 10 0.0450 0.0430 0.0370 15 0.0450 0.0430 0.0370 20 0.0450 0.0430 0.0370 25 0.0450 0.0430 0.0370 30 0.0450 0.0430 0.0370 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-5 Salary Growth (continued) Public Agency County Peace Officers Duration of Service (Entry Age 20) (Entry Age 30) (Entry Age 40) 0 0.1770 0.1670 0.1500 1 0.1340 0.1260 0.1140 2 0.1080 0.1030 0.0940 3 0.0900 0.0860 0.0790 4 0.0760 0.0730 0.0670 5 0.0650 0.0620 0.0580 10 0.0470 0.0450 0.0410 15 0.0460 0.0450 0.0390 20 0.0460 0.0450 0.0380 25 0.0460 0.0450 0.0380 30 0.0460 0.0440 0.0380 Schools Duration of Service (Entry Age 20) (Entry Age 30) (Entry Age 40) 0 0.0900 0.0880 0.0820 1 0.0780 0.0750 0.0700 2 0.0700 0.0680 0.0630 3 0.0650 0.0630 0.0580 4 0.0610 0.0590 0.0540 5 0.0580 0.0560 0.0510 10 0.0460 0.0450 0.0410 15 0.0420 0.0410 0.0380 20 0.0390 0.0380 0.0350 25 0.0370 0.0350 0.0330 30 0.0350 0.0330 0.0310  The Miscellaneous salary scale is used for Local Prosecutors.  The Police salary scale is used for Other Safety, Local Sheriff, and School Police. Overall Payroll Growth 3.00 percent compounded annually (used in projecting the payroll over which the unfunded liability is amortized). This assumption is used for all plans with active members. Inflation 2.75 percent compounded annually. Non-valued Potential Additional Liabilities The potential liability loss for a cost-of-living increase exceeding the 2.75 percent inflation assumption, and any potential liability loss from future member service purchases are not reflected in the valuation. Miscellaneous Loading Factors Credit for Unused Sick Leave Total years of service is increased by 1 percent for those plans that have accepted the provision providing Credit for Unused Sick Leave. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-6 Conversion of Employer Paid Member Contributions (EPMC) Total years of service is increased by the Employee Contribution Rate for those plans with the provision providing for the Conversion of Employer Paid Member Contributions (EPMC) during the final compensation period. Norris Decision (Best Factors) Employees hired prior to July 1, 1982 have projected benefit amounts increased in order to reflect the use of “Best Factors” in the calculation of optional benefit forms. This is due to a 1983 Supreme Court decision, known as the Norris decision, which required males and females to be treated equally in the determination of benefit amounts. Consequently, anyone already employed at that time is given the best possible conversion factor when optional benefits are determined. No loading is necessary for employees hired after July 1, 1982. Termination Liability The termination liabilities include a 7 percent contingency load. This load is for unforeseen improvements in mortality. Demographic Assumptions Pre-Retirement Mortality Non-industrial death rates vary by age and gender. Industrial death rates vary by age. See sample rates in table below. The non-industrial death rates are used for all plans. The industrial death rates are used for safety plans (except for Local Prosecutor safety members where the corresponding miscellaneous plan does not have the Industrial Death Benefit). Non-Industrial Death Industrial Death (Not Job-Related) (Job-Related) Age Male Female Male and Female 20 0.00031 0.00020 0.00003 25 0.00040 0.00023 0.00007 30 0.00049 0.00025 0.00010 35 0.00057 0.00035 0.00012 40 0.00075 0.00050 0.00013 45 0.00106 0.00071 0.00014 50 0.00155 0.00100 0.00015 55 0.00228 0.00138 0.00016 60 0.00308 0.00182 0.00017 65 0.00400 0.00257 0.00018 70 0.00524 0.00367 0.00019 75 0.00713 0.00526 0.00020 80 0.00990 0.00814 0.00021 Miscellaneous plans usually have industrial death rates set to zero unless the agency has specifically contracted for industrial death benefits. If so, each non-industrial death rate shown above will be split into two components; 99 percent will become the non-industrial death rate and 1 percent will become the industrial death rate. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-7 Post-Retirement Mortality Rates vary by age, type of retirement, and gender. See sample rates in table below. These rates are used for all plans. Healthy Recipients Non-Industrially Disabled Industrially Disabled (Not Job-Related) (Job-Related) Age Male Female Male Female Male Female 50 0.00501 0.00466 0.01680 0.01158 0.00501 0.00466 55 0.00599 0.00416 0.01973 0.01149 0.00599 0.00416 60 0.00710 0.00436 0.02289 0.01235 0.00754 0.00518 65 0.00829 0.00588 0.02451 0.01607 0.01122 0.00838 70 0.01305 0.00993 0.02875 0.02211 0.01635 0.01395 75 0.02205 0.01722 0.03990 0.03037 0.02834 0.02319 80 0.03899 0.02902 0.06083 0.04725 0.04899 0.03910 85 0.06969 0.05243 0.09731 0.07762 0.07679 0.06251 90 0.12974 0.09887 0.14804 0.12890 0.12974 0.09887 95 0.22444 0.18489 0.22444 0.21746 0.22444 0.18489 100 0.32536 0.30017 0.32536 0.30017 0.32536 0.30017 105 0.58527 0.56093 0.58527 0.56093 0.58527 0.56093 110 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 The post-retirement mortality rates above include 20 years of projected on-going mortality improvement using Scale BB published by the Society of Actuaries. Marital Status For active members, a percentage who are married upon retirement is assumed according to member category as shown in the following table. Member Category Percent Married Miscellaneous Member 85% Local Police 90% Local Fire 90% Other Local Safety 90% School Police 90% Age of Spouse It is assumed that female spouses are 3 years younger than male spouses. This assumption is used for all plans. Terminated Members It is assumed that terminated members refund immediately if non-vested. Terminated members who are vested are assumed to follow the same service retirement pattern as active members but with a load to reflect the expected higher rates of retirement, especially at lower ages. The following table shows the load factors that are applied to the service retirement assumption for active members to obtain the service retirement pattern for separated vested members: Age Load Factor Miscellaneous Load Factor Safety 50 190% 310% 51 110% 190% 52 110% 105% 53 through 54 100% 105% 55 100% 140% 56 and above 100% (no change) 100% (no change) Termination with Refund Rates vary by entry age and service for miscellaneous plans. Rates vary by service for safety plans. See sample rates in tables below. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-8 Public Agency Miscellaneous Duration of Service Entry Age 20 Entry Age 25 Entry Age 30 Entry Age 35 Entry Age 40 Entry Age 45 0 0.1742 0.1674 0.1606 0.1537 0.1468 0.1400 1 0.1545 0.1477 0.1409 0.1339 0.1271 0.1203 2 0.1348 0.1280 0.1212 0.1142 0.1074 0.1006 3 0.1151 0.1083 0.1015 0.0945 0.0877 0.0809 4 0.0954 0.0886 0.0818 0.0748 0.0680 0.0612 5 0.0212 0.0193 0.0174 0.0155 0.0136 0.0116 10 0.0138 0.0121 0.0104 0.0088 0.0071 0.0055 15 0.0060 0.0051 0.0042 0.0032 0.0023 0.0014 20 0.0037 0.0029 0.0021 0.0013 0.0005 0.0001 25 0.0017 0.0011 0.0005 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 30 0.0005 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 35 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 Public Agency Safety Duration of Service Fire Police County Peace Officer 0 0.0710 0.1013 0.0997 1 0.0554 0.0636 0.0782 2 0.0398 0.0271 0.0566 3 0.0242 0.0258 0.0437 4 0.0218 0.0245 0.0414 5 0.0029 0.0086 0.0145 10 0.0009 0.0053 0.0089 15 0.0006 0.0027 0.0045 20 0.0005 0.0017 0.0020 25 0.0003 0.0012 0.0009 30 0.0003 0.0009 0.0006 35 0.0003 0.0009 0.0006 The police termination and refund rates are also used for Public Agency Local Prosecutors, Other Safety, Local Sheriff, and School Police. Schools Duration of Service Entry Age 20 Entry Age 25 Entry Age 30 Entry Age 35 Entry Age 40 Entry Age 45 0 0.1730 0.1627 0.1525 0.1422 0.1319 0.1217 1 0.1585 0.1482 0.1379 0.1277 0.1174 0.1071 2 0.1440 0.1336 0.1234 0.1131 0.1028 0.0926 3 0.1295 0.1192 0.1089 0.0987 0.0884 0.0781 4 0.1149 0.1046 0.0944 0.0841 0.0738 0.0636 5 0.0278 0.0249 0.0221 0.0192 0.0164 0.0135 10 0.0172 0.0147 0.0122 0.0098 0.0074 0.0049 15 0.0115 0.0094 0.0074 0.0053 0.0032 0.0011 20 0.0073 0.0055 0.0038 0.0020 0.0002 0.0002 25 0.0037 0.0023 0.0010 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 30 0.0015 0.0003 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 35 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-9 Termination with Vested Benefits Rates vary by entry age and service for miscellaneous plans. Rates vary by service for safety plans. See sample rates in tables below. Public Agency Miscellaneous Duration of Service Entry Age 20 Entry Age 25 Entry Age 30 Entry Age 35 Entry Age 40 5 0.0656 0.0597 0.0537 0.0477 0.0418 10 0.0530 0.0466 0.0403 0.0339 0.0000 15 0.0443 0.0373 0.0305 0.0000 0.0000 20 0.0333 0.0261 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 25 0.0212 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 30 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 35 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Public Agency Safety Duration of Service Fire Police County Peace Officer 5 0.0162 0.0163 0.0265 10 0.0061 0.0126 0.0204 15 0.0058 0.0082 0.0130 20 0.0053 0.0065 0.0074 25 0.0047 0.0058 0.0043 30 0.0045 0.0056 0.0030 35 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000  When a member is eligible to retire, the termination with vested benefits probability is set to zero.  After termination with vested benefits, a miscellaneous member is assumed to retire at age 59 and a safety member at age 54.  The Police termination with vested benefits rates are also used for Public Agency Local Prosecutors, Other Safety, Local Sheriff, and School Police. Schools Duration of Service Entry Age 20 Entry Age 25 Entry Age 30 Entry Age 35 Entry Age 40 5 0.0816 0.0733 0.0649 0.0566 0.0482 10 0.0629 0.0540 0.0450 0.0359 0.0000 15 0.0537 0.0440 0.0344 0.0000 0.0000 20 0.0420 0.0317 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 25 0.0291 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 30 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 35 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-10 Non-Industrial (Not Job-Related) Disability Rates vary by age and gender for miscellaneous plans. Rates vary by age and category for safety plans. Miscellaneous Fire Police County Peace Officer Schools Age Male Female Male and Female Male and Female Male and Female Male Female 20 0.0002 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0003 0.0003 25 0.0002 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 30 0.0002 0.0002 0.0001 0.0002 0.0001 0.0001 0.0002 35 0.0005 0.0008 0.0001 0.0003 0.0004 0.0005 0.0004 40 0.0012 0.0016 0.0001 0.0004 0.0007 0.0015 0.0010 45 0.0019 0.0022 0.0002 0.0005 0.0013 0.0030 0.0019 50 0.0021 0.0023 0.0005 0.0008 0.0018 0.0039 0.0024 55 0.0022 0.0018 0.0010 0.0013 0.0010 0.0036 0.0021 60 0.0022 0.0014 0.0015 0.0020 0.0006 0.0031 0.0014  The miscellaneous non-industrial disability rates are used for Local Prosecutors.  The police non-industrial disability rates are also used for Other Safety, Local Sheriff, and School Police. Industrial (Job-Related) Disability Rates vary by age and category. Age Fire Police County Peace Officer 20 0.0001 0.0000 0.0004 25 0.0003 0.0017 0.0013 30 0.0007 0.0048 0.0025 35 0.0016 0.0079 0.0037 40 0.0030 0.0110 0.0051 45 0.0053 0.0141 0.0067 50 0.0277 0.0185 0.0092 55 0.0409 0.0479 0.0151 60 0.0583 0.0602 0.0174  The police industrial disability rates are also used for Local Sheriff and Other Safety.  Fifty percent of the police industrial disability rates are used for School Police.  One percent of the police industrial disability rates are used for Local Prosecutors.  Normally, rates are zero for miscellaneous plans unless the agency has specifically contracted for industrial disability benefits. If so, each miscellaneous non-industrial disability rate will be split into two components: 50 percent will become the non-industrial disability rate and 50 percent will become the industrial disability rate. Service Retirement Retirement rates vary by age, service, and formula, except for the safety ½ @ 55 and 2% @ 55 formulas, where retirement rates vary by age only. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-11 Service Retirement Public Agency Miscellaneous 1.5% @ 65 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.008 0.011 0.013 0.015 0.017 0.019 51 0.007 0.010 0.012 0.013 0.015 0.017 52 0.010 0.014 0.017 0.019 0.021 0.024 53 0.008 0.012 0.015 0.017 0.019 0.022 54 0.012 0.016 0.019 0.022 0.025 0.028 55 0.018 0.025 0.031 0.035 0.038 0.043 56 0.015 0.021 0.025 0.029 0.032 0.036 57 0.020 0.028 0.033 0.038 0.043 0.048 58 0.024 0.033 0.040 0.046 0.052 0.058 59 0.028 0.039 0.048 0.054 0.060 0.067 60 0.049 0.069 0.083 0.094 0.105 0.118 61 0.062 0.087 0.106 0.120 0.133 0.150 62 0.104 0.146 0.177 0.200 0.223 0.251 63 0.099 0.139 0.169 0.191 0.213 0.239 64 0.097 0.136 0.165 0.186 0.209 0.233 65 0.140 0.197 0.240 0.271 0.302 0.339 66 0.092 0.130 0.157 0.177 0.198 0.222 67 0.129 0.181 0.220 0.249 0.277 0.311 68 0.092 0.129 0.156 0.177 0.197 0.221 69 0.092 0.130 0.158 0.178 0.199 0.224 70 0.103 0.144 0.175 0.198 0.221 0.248 Public Agency Miscellaneous 2% @ 60 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.010 0.013 0.015 0.018 0.019 0.021 51 0.009 0.011 0.014 0.016 0.017 0.019 52 0.011 0.014 0.017 0.020 0.022 0.024 53 0.010 0.012 0.015 0.017 0.020 0.021 54 0.015 0.019 0.023 0.025 0.029 0.031 55 0.022 0.029 0.035 0.040 0.045 0.049 56 0.018 0.024 0.028 0.033 0.036 0.040 57 0.024 0.032 0.038 0.043 0.049 0.053 58 0.027 0.036 0.043 0.049 0.055 0.061 59 0.033 0.044 0.054 0.061 0.068 0.076 60 0.056 0.077 0.092 0.105 0.117 0.130 61 0.071 0.097 0.118 0.134 0.149 0.166 62 0.117 0.164 0.198 0.224 0.250 0.280 63 0.122 0.171 0.207 0.234 0.261 0.292 64 0.114 0.159 0.193 0.218 0.244 0.271 65 0.150 0.209 0.255 0.287 0.321 0.358 66 0.114 0.158 0.192 0.217 0.243 0.270 67 0.141 0.196 0.238 0.270 0.301 0.337 68 0.103 0.143 0.174 0.196 0.219 0.245 69 0.109 0.153 0.185 0.209 0.234 0.261 70 0.117 0.162 0.197 0.222 0.248 0.277 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-12 Service Retirement Public Agency Miscellaneous 2% @ 55 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.014 0.018 0.021 0.025 0.027 0.031 51 0.012 0.014 0.017 0.020 0.021 0.025 52 0.013 0.017 0.019 0.023 0.025 0.028 53 0.015 0.020 0.023 0.027 0.030 0.034 54 0.026 0.033 0.038 0.045 0.051 0.059 55 0.048 0.061 0.074 0.088 0.100 0.117 56 0.042 0.053 0.063 0.075 0.085 0.100 57 0.044 0.056 0.067 0.081 0.091 0.107 58 0.049 0.062 0.074 0.089 0.100 0.118 59 0.057 0.072 0.086 0.103 0.118 0.138 60 0.067 0.086 0.103 0.123 0.139 0.164 61 0.081 0.103 0.124 0.148 0.168 0.199 62 0.116 0.147 0.178 0.214 0.243 0.288 63 0.114 0.144 0.174 0.208 0.237 0.281 64 0.108 0.138 0.166 0.199 0.227 0.268 65 0.155 0.197 0.238 0.285 0.325 0.386 66 0.132 0.168 0.203 0.243 0.276 0.328 67 0.122 0.155 0.189 0.225 0.256 0.304 68 0.111 0.141 0.170 0.204 0.232 0.274 69 0.114 0.144 0.174 0.209 0.238 0.282 70 0.130 0.165 0.200 0.240 0.272 0.323 Public Agency Miscellaneous 2.5% @ 55 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.004 0.009 0.019 0.029 0.049 0.094 51 0.004 0.009 0.019 0.029 0.049 0.094 52 0.004 0.009 0.020 0.030 0.050 0.095 53 0.008 0.014 0.025 0.036 0.058 0.104 54 0.024 0.034 0.050 0.066 0.091 0.142 55 0.066 0.088 0.115 0.142 0.179 0.241 56 0.042 0.057 0.078 0.098 0.128 0.184 57 0.041 0.057 0.077 0.097 0.128 0.183 58 0.045 0.061 0.083 0.104 0.136 0.192 59 0.055 0.074 0.098 0.123 0.157 0.216 60 0.066 0.088 0.115 0.142 0.179 0.241 61 0.072 0.095 0.124 0.153 0.191 0.255 62 0.099 0.130 0.166 0.202 0.248 0.319 63 0.092 0.121 0.155 0.189 0.233 0.302 64 0.091 0.119 0.153 0.187 0.231 0.299 65 0.122 0.160 0.202 0.245 0.297 0.374 66 0.138 0.179 0.226 0.272 0.329 0.411 67 0.114 0.149 0.189 0.229 0.279 0.354 68 0.100 0.131 0.168 0.204 0.250 0.322 69 0.114 0.149 0.189 0.229 0.279 0.354 70 0.127 0.165 0.209 0.253 0.306 0.385 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-13 Service Retirement Public Agency Miscellaneous 2.7% @ 55 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.004 0.009 0.014 0.035 0.055 0.095 51 0.002 0.006 0.011 0.030 0.050 0.090 52 0.006 0.012 0.017 0.038 0.059 0.099 53 0.010 0.017 0.024 0.046 0.068 0.110 54 0.032 0.044 0.057 0.085 0.113 0.160 55 0.076 0.101 0.125 0.165 0.205 0.265 56 0.055 0.074 0.093 0.127 0.160 0.214 57 0.050 0.068 0.086 0.118 0.151 0.204 58 0.055 0.074 0.093 0.127 0.161 0.215 59 0.061 0.082 0.102 0.138 0.174 0.229 60 0.069 0.093 0.116 0.154 0.192 0.250 61 0.086 0.113 0.141 0.183 0.225 0.288 62 0.105 0.138 0.171 0.218 0.266 0.334 63 0.103 0.135 0.167 0.215 0.262 0.329 64 0.109 0.143 0.177 0.226 0.275 0.344 65 0.134 0.174 0.215 0.270 0.326 0.401 66 0.147 0.191 0.235 0.294 0.354 0.433 67 0.121 0.158 0.196 0.248 0.300 0.372 68 0.113 0.147 0.182 0.232 0.282 0.352 69 0.117 0.153 0.189 0.240 0.291 0.362 70 0.141 0.183 0.226 0.283 0.341 0.418 Public Agency Miscellaneous 3% @ 60 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.012 0.018 0.024 0.039 0.040 0.091 51 0.009 0.014 0.019 0.034 0.034 0.084 52 0.014 0.020 0.026 0.043 0.044 0.096 53 0.016 0.023 0.031 0.048 0.050 0.102 54 0.026 0.036 0.045 0.065 0.070 0.125 55 0.043 0.057 0.072 0.096 0.105 0.165 56 0.042 0.056 0.070 0.094 0.103 0.162 57 0.049 0.065 0.082 0.108 0.119 0.180 58 0.057 0.076 0.094 0.122 0.136 0.199 59 0.076 0.100 0.123 0.157 0.175 0.244 60 0.114 0.148 0.182 0.226 0.255 0.334 61 0.095 0.123 0.152 0.190 0.214 0.288 62 0.133 0.172 0.211 0.260 0.294 0.378 63 0.129 0.166 0.204 0.252 0.285 0.368 64 0.143 0.185 0.226 0.278 0.315 0.401 65 0.202 0.260 0.318 0.386 0.439 0.542 66 0.177 0.228 0.279 0.340 0.386 0.482 67 0.151 0.194 0.238 0.292 0.331 0.420 68 0.139 0.179 0.220 0.270 0.306 0.391 69 0.190 0.245 0.299 0.364 0.414 0.513 70 0.140 0.182 0.223 0.274 0.310 0.396 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-14 Service Retirement Public Agency Miscellaneous 2% @ 62 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 51 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 52 0.010 0.013 0.016 0.019 0.022 0.024 53 0.013 0.017 0.020 0.024 0.027 0.031 54 0.021 0.027 0.033 0.039 0.045 0.050 55 0.044 0.056 0.068 0.080 0.092 0.104 56 0.030 0.039 0.047 0.055 0.063 0.072 57 0.036 0.046 0.056 0.066 0.076 0.086 58 0.046 0.059 0.072 0.085 0.097 0.110 59 0.058 0.074 0.089 0.105 0.121 0.137 60 0.062 0.078 0.095 0.112 0.129 0.146 61 0.062 0.079 0.096 0.113 0.129 0.146 62 0.097 0.123 0.150 0.176 0.202 0.229 63 0.089 0.113 0.137 0.162 0.186 0.210 64 0.094 0.120 0.145 0.171 0.197 0.222 65 0.129 0.164 0.199 0.234 0.269 0.304 66 0.105 0.133 0.162 0.190 0.219 0.247 67 0.105 0.133 0.162 0.190 0.219 0.247 68 0.105 0.133 0.162 0.190 0.219 0.247 69 0.105 0.133 0.162 0.190 0.219 0.247 70 0.125 0.160 0.194 0.228 0.262 0.296 Service Retirement Public Agency Fire ½ @ 55 and 2% @ 55 Age Rate Age Rate 50 0.0159 56 0.1108 51 0.0000 57 0.0000 52 0.0344 58 0.0950 53 0.0199 59 0.0441 54 0.0413 60 1.00000 55 0.0751 Public Agency Police ½ @ 55 and 2% @ 55 Age Rate Age Rate 50 0.0255 56 0.0692 51 0.0000 57 0.0511 52 0.0164 58 0.0724 53 0.0272 59 0.0704 54 0.0095 60 1.0000 55 0.1667 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-15 Service Retirement Public Agency Police 2% @ 50 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.017 0.089 51 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.017 0.087 52 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.042 0.132 53 0.044 0.044 0.044 0.044 0.090 0.217 54 0.065 0.065 0.065 0.065 0.126 0.283 55 0.086 0.086 0.086 0.086 0.166 0.354 56 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.130 0.289 57 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.129 0.288 58 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.129 0.288 59 0.139 0.139 0.139 0.139 0.176 0.312 60 0.123 0.123 0.123 0.123 0.153 0.278 61 0.110 0.110 0.110 0.110 0.138 0.256 62 0.130 0.130 0.130 0.130 0.162 0.291 63 0.130 0.130 0.130 0.130 0.162 0.291 64 0.130 0.130 0.130 0.130 0.162 0.291 65 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000  These rates also apply to Local Prosecutors, Local Sheriff, School Police, and Other Safety. Service Retirement Public Agency Fire 2% @ 50 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.013 0.020 51 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.020 0.029 52 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.028 0.042 53 0.052 0.052 0.052 0.052 0.079 0.119 54 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.103 0.154 55 0.089 0.089 0.089 0.089 0.136 0.204 56 0.083 0.083 0.083 0.083 0.127 0.190 57 0.082 0.082 0.082 0.082 0.126 0.189 58 0.088 0.088 0.088 0.088 0.136 0.204 59 0.074 0.074 0.074 0.074 0.113 0.170 60 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.154 0.230 61 0.072 0.072 0.072 0.072 0.110 0.165 62 0.099 0.099 0.099 0.099 0.152 0.228 63 0.114 0.114 0.114 0.114 0.175 0.262 64 0.114 0.114 0.114 0.114 0.175 0.262 65 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-16 Service Retirement Public Agency Police 3% @ 55 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.015 0.086 51 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.034 0.114 52 0.026 0.026 0.026 0.026 0.060 0.154 53 0.038 0.038 0.038 0.038 0.083 0.188 54 0.071 0.071 0.071 0.071 0.151 0.292 55 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.131 0.261 56 0.072 0.072 0.072 0.072 0.153 0.295 57 0.065 0.065 0.065 0.065 0.140 0.273 58 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.142 0.277 59 0.118 0.118 0.118 0.118 0.247 0.437 60 0.065 0.065 0.065 0.065 0.138 0.272 61 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.178 0.332 62 0.108 0.108 0.108 0.108 0.226 0.405 63 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.178 0.332 64 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.178 0.332 65 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000  These rates also apply to Local Prosecutors, Local Sheriff, School Police, and Other Safety. Service Retirement Public Agency Fire 3% @ 55 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.006 0.016 0.069 51 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.006 0.018 0.071 52 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.021 0.040 0.098 53 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.049 0.085 0.149 54 0.057 0.057 0.057 0.087 0.144 0.217 55 0.073 0.073 0.073 0.109 0.179 0.259 56 0.064 0.064 0.064 0.097 0.161 0.238 57 0.063 0.063 0.063 0.095 0.157 0.233 58 0.065 0.065 0.065 0.099 0.163 0.241 59 0.088 0.088 0.088 0.131 0.213 0.299 60 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.155 0.251 0.344 61 0.118 0.118 0.118 0.175 0.282 0.380 62 0.087 0.087 0.087 0.128 0.210 0.295 63 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.100 0.165 0.243 64 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.100 0.165 0.243 65 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-17 Service Retirement Public Agency Police 3% @ 50 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.099 0.240 0.314 51 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.072 0.198 0.260 52 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.071 0.198 0.259 53 0.039 0.039 0.039 0.080 0.212 0.277 54 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.092 0.229 0.300 55 0.052 0.052 0.052 0.105 0.248 0.323 56 0.042 0.042 0.042 0.087 0.221 0.289 57 0.043 0.043 0.043 0.088 0.223 0.292 58 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.109 0.255 0.333 59 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.108 0.253 0.330 60 0.060 0.060 0.060 0.121 0.272 0.355 61 0.048 0.048 0.048 0.098 0.238 0.311 62 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.122 0.274 0.357 63 0.057 0.057 0.057 0.115 0.263 0.343 64 0.069 0.069 0.069 0.137 0.296 0.385 65 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000  These rates also apply to Local Prosecutors, Local Sheriff, School Police, and Other Safety. Service Retirement Public Agency Fire 3% @ 50 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.040 0.130 0.192 51 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.023 0.107 0.164 52 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.043 0.136 0.198 53 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.043 0.135 0.198 54 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.048 0.143 0.207 55 0.043 0.043 0.043 0.070 0.174 0.244 56 0.053 0.053 0.053 0.085 0.196 0.269 57 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.086 0.197 0.271 58 0.052 0.052 0.052 0.084 0.193 0.268 59 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.116 0.239 0.321 60 0.065 0.065 0.065 0.102 0.219 0.298 61 0.076 0.076 0.076 0.117 0.241 0.324 62 0.068 0.068 0.068 0.106 0.224 0.304 63 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.049 0.143 0.208 64 0.094 0.094 0.094 0.143 0.277 0.366 65 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-18 Service Retirement Public Agency Police 2% @ 57 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.020 0.036 51 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.016 0.028 52 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.034 0.060 53 0.037 0.037 0.037 0.037 0.067 0.119 54 0.049 0.049 0.049 0.049 0.089 0.159 55 0.063 0.063 0.063 0.063 0.115 0.205 56 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.082 0.146 57 0.064 0.064 0.064 0.064 0.117 0.209 58 0.047 0.047 0.047 0.047 0.086 0.154 59 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.130 0.191 60 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.129 0.188 61 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.129 0.188 62 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.129 0.188 63 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.129 0.188 64 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.129 0.188 65 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000  These rates also apply to Local Prosecutors, Local Sheriff, School Police, and Other Safety. Service Retirement Public Agency Fire 2% @ 57 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.008 0.012 51 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.009 0.013 52 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.019 0.028 53 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.050 0.075 54 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.069 0.103 55 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.094 0.140 56 0.055 0.055 0.055 0.055 0.084 0.126 57 0.081 0.081 0.081 0.081 0.125 0.187 58 0.059 0.059 0.059 0.059 0.091 0.137 59 0.055 0.055 0.055 0.055 0.084 0.126 60 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.131 0.196 61 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.131 0.196 62 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.131 0.196 63 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.131 0.196 64 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.131 0.196 65 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-19 Service Retirement Public Agency Police 2.5% @ 57 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.025 0.045 51 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.021 0.038 52 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.046 0.081 53 0.047 0.047 0.047 0.047 0.086 0.154 54 0.063 0.063 0.063 0.063 0.115 0.205 55 0.076 0.076 0.076 0.076 0.140 0.249 56 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.099 0.177 57 0.071 0.071 0.071 0.071 0.130 0.232 58 0.057 0.057 0.057 0.057 0.103 0.184 59 0.126 0.126 0.126 0.126 0.156 0.229 60 0.126 0.126 0.126 0.126 0.155 0.226 61 0.126 0.126 0.126 0.126 0.155 0.226 62 0.126 0.126 0.126 0.126 0.155 0.226 63 0.126 0.126 0.126 0.126 0.155 0.226 64 0.126 0.126 0.126 0.126 0.155 0.226 65 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000  These rates also apply to Local Prosecutors, Local Sheriff, School Police, and Other Safety. Service Retirement Public Agency Fire 2.5% @ 57 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.010 0.015 51 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.012 0.018 52 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.025 0.038 53 0.042 0.042 0.042 0.042 0.064 0.096 54 0.057 0.057 0.057 0.057 0.088 0.132 55 0.074 0.074 0.074 0.074 0.114 0.170 56 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.102 0.153 57 0.090 0.090 0.090 0.090 0.139 0.208 58 0.071 0.071 0.071 0.071 0.110 0.164 59 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.101 0.151 60 0.102 0.102 0.102 0.102 0.157 0.235 61 0.102 0.102 0.102 0.102 0.157 0.236 62 0.102 0.102 0.102 0.102 0.157 0.236 63 0.102 0.102 0.102 0.102 0.157 0.236 64 0.102 0.102 0.102 0.102 0.157 0.236 65 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-20 Service Retirement Public Agency Police 2.7% @ 57 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.0138 0.0138 0.0138 0.0138 0.0253 0.0451 51 0.0123 0.0123 0.0123 0.0123 0.0226 0.0402 52 0.0249 0.0249 0.0249 0.0249 0.0456 0.0812 53 0.0497 0.0497 0.0497 0.0497 0.0909 0.1621 54 0.0662 0.0662 0.0662 0.0662 0.1211 0.2160 55 0.0854 0.0854 0.0854 0.0854 0.1563 0.2785 56 0.0606 0.0606 0.0606 0.0606 0.1108 0.1975 57 0.0711 0.0711 0.0711 0.0711 0.1300 0.2318 58 0.0628 0.0628 0.0628 0.0628 0.1149 0.2049 59 0.1396 0.1396 0.1396 0.1396 0.1735 0.2544 60 0.1396 0.1396 0.1396 0.1396 0.1719 0.2506 61 0.1396 0.1396 0.1396 0.1396 0.1719 0.2506 62 0.1396 0.1396 0.1396 0.1396 0.1719 0.2506 63 0.1396 0.1396 0.1396 0.1396 0.1719 0.2506 64 0.1396 0.1396 0.1396 0.1396 0.1719 0.2506 65 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000  These rates also apply to Local Prosecutors, Local Sheriff, School Police, and Other Safety. Service Retirement Public Agency Fire 2.7% @ 57 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.0065 0.0065 0.0065 0.0065 0.0101 0.0151 51 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0081 0.0125 0.0187 52 0.0164 0.0164 0.0164 0.0164 0.0254 0.0380 53 0.0442 0.0442 0.0442 0.0442 0.0680 0.1018 54 0.0606 0.0606 0.0606 0.0606 0.0934 0.1397 55 0.0825 0.0825 0.0825 0.0825 0.1269 0.1900 56 0.0740 0.0740 0.0740 0.0740 0.1140 0.1706 57 0.0901 0.0901 0.0901 0.0901 0.1387 0.2077 58 0.0790 0.0790 0.0790 0.0790 0.1217 0.1821 59 0.0729 0.0729 0.0729 0.0729 0.1123 0.1681 60 0.1135 0.1135 0.1135 0.1135 0.1747 0.2615 61 0.1136 0.1136 0.1136 0.1136 0.1749 0.2618 62 0.1136 0.1136 0.1136 0.1136 0.1749 0.2618 63 0.1136 0.1136 0.1136 0.1136 0.1749 0.2618 64 0.1136 0.1136 0.1136 0.1136 0.1749 0.2618 65 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX A ACTUARIAL METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS A-21 Service Retirement Schools 2% @ 55 Duration of Service Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.005 0.009 0.013 0.015 0.016 0.018 51 0.005 0.010 0.014 0.017 0.019 0.021 52 0.006 0.012 0.017 0.020 0.022 0.025 53 0.007 0.014 0.019 0.023 0.026 0.029 54 0.012 0.024 0.033 0.039 0.044 0.049 55 0.024 0.048 0.067 0.079 0.088 0.099 56 0.020 0.039 0.055 0.065 0.072 0.081 57 0.021 0.042 0.059 0.070 0.078 0.087 58 0.025 0.050 0.070 0.083 0.092 0.103 59 0.029 0.057 0.080 0.095 0.105 0.118 60 0.037 0.073 0.102 0.121 0.134 0.150 61 0.046 0.090 0.126 0.149 0.166 0.186 62 0.076 0.151 0.212 0.250 0.278 0.311 63 0.069 0.136 0.191 0.225 0.251 0.281 64 0.067 0.133 0.185 0.219 0.244 0.273 65 0.091 0.180 0.251 0.297 0.331 0.370 66 0.072 0.143 0.200 0.237 0.264 0.295 67 0.067 0.132 0.185 0.218 0.243 0.272 68 0.060 0.118 0.165 0.195 0.217 0.243 69 0.067 0.133 0.187 0.220 0.246 0.275 70 0.066 0.131 0.183 0.216 0.241 0.270 Miscellaneous Internal Revenue Code Section 415 The limitations on benefits imposed by Internal Revenue Code Section 415 are taken into account in this valuation. Each year the impact of any changes in this limitation since the prior valuation is included and amortized as part of the actuarial gain or loss base. This results in lower contributions for those employers contributing to the Replacement Benefit Fund and protects CalPERS from prefunding expected benefits in excess of limits imposed by federal tax law. Internal Revenue Code Section 401(a)(17) The limitations on compensation imposed by Internal Revenue Code Section 401(a)(17) are taken into account in this valuation. Each year, the impact of any changes in the compensation limitation since the prior valuation is included and amortized as part of the actuarial gain or loss base. The compensation limit for classic members for the 2016 calendar year is $265,000. APPENDIX B PRINCIPAL PLAN PROVISIONS CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX B MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PRINCIPAL PLAN PROVISIONS B-1 The following is a description of the principal plan provisions used in calculating costs and liabilities. We have indicated whether a plan provision is standard or optional. Standard benefits are applicable to all members while optional benefits vary among employers. Optional benefits that apply to a single period of time, such as Golden Handshakes, have not been included. Many of the statements in this summary are general in nature, and are intended to provide an easily understood summary of the Public Employees’ Retirement Law. The law itself governs in all situations. Service Retirement Eligibility A classic CalPERS member or PEPRA Safety member becomes eligible for Service Retirement upon attainment of age 50 with at least 5 years of credited service (total service across all CalPERS employers, and with certain other retirement systems with which CalPERS has reciprocity agreements). For employees hired into a plan with the 1.5 percent at 65 formula, eligibility for service retirement is age 55 with at least 5 years of service. PEPRA miscellaneous members become eligible for service retirement upon attainment of age 52 with at least 5 years of service. Benefit The service retirement benefit is a monthly allowance equal to the product of the benefit factor, years of service, and final compensation.  The benefit factor depends on the benefit formula specified in your agency’s contract. The table below shows the factors for each of the available formulas. Factors vary by the member’s age at retirement. Listed are the factors for retirement at whole year ages: Miscellaneous Plan Formulas Retirement Age 1.5% at 65 2% at 60 2% at 55 2.5% at 55 2.7% at 55 3% at 60 PEPRA 2% at 62 50 0.5000% 1.092% 1.426% 2.000% 2.000% 2.000% N/A 51 0.5667% 1.156% 1.522% 2.100% 2.140% 2.100% N/A 52 0.6334% 1.224% 1.628% 2.200% 2.280% 2.200% 1.000% 53 0.7000% 1.296% 1.742% 2.300% 2.420% 2.300% 1.100% 54 0.7667% 1.376% 1.866% 2.400% 2.560% 2.400% 1.200% 55 0.8334% 1.460% 2.000% 2.500% 2.700% 2.500% 1.300% 56 0.9000% 1.552% 2.052% 2.500% 2.700% 2.600% 1.400% 57 0.9667% 1.650% 2.104% 2.500% 2.700% 2.700% 1.500% 58 1.0334% 1.758% 2.156% 2.500% 2.700% 2.800% 1.600% 59 1.1000% 1.874% 2.210% 2.500% 2.700% 2.900% 1.700% 60 1.1667% 2.000% 2.262% 2.500% 2.700% 3.000% 1.800% 61 1.2334% 2.134% 2.314% 2.500% 2.700% 3.000% 1.900% 62 1.3000% 2.272% 2.366% 2.500% 2.700% 3.000% 2.000% 63 1.3667% 2.418% 2.418% 2.500% 2.700% 3.000% 2.100% 64 1.4334% 2.418% 2.418% 2.500% 2.700% 3.000% 2.200% 65 1.5000% 2.418% 2.418% 2.500% 2.700% 3.000% 2.300% 66 1.5000% 2.418% 2.418% 2.500% 2.700% 3.000% 2.400% 67 & up 1.5000% 2.418% 2.418% 2.500% 2.700% 3.000% 2.500% CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX B MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PRINCIPAL PLAN PROVISIONS B-2 Safety Plan Formulas Retirement Age ½ at 55 * 2% at 55 2% at 50 3% at 55 3% at 50 50 1.783% 1.426% 2.000% 2.400% 3.000% 51 1.903% 1.522% 2.140% 2.520% 3.000% 52 2.035% 1.628% 2.280% 2.640% 3.000% 53 2.178% 1.742% 2.420% 2.760% 3.000% 54 2.333% 1.866% 2.560% 2.880% 3.000% 55 & Up 2.500% 2.000% 2.700% 3.000% 3.000% * For this formula, the benefit factor also varies by entry age. The factors shown are for members with an entry age of 35 or greater. If entry age is less than 35, then the age 55 benefit factor is 50 percent divided by the difference between age 55 and entry age. The benefit factor for ages prior to age 55 is the same proportion of the age 55 benefit factor as in the above table. PEPRA Safety Plan Formulas Retirement Age 2% at 57 2.5% at 57 2.7% at 57 50 1.426% 2.000% 2.000% 51 1.508% 2.071% 2.100% 52 1.590% 2.143% 2.200% 53 1.672% 2.214% 2.300% 54 1.754% 2.286% 2.400% 55 1.836% 2.357% 2.500% 56 1.918% 2.429% 2.600% 57 & Up 2.000% 2.500% 2.700%  The years of service is the amount credited by CalPERS to a member while he or she is employed in this group (or for other periods that are recognized under the employer’s contract with CalPERS). For a member who has earned service with multiple CalPERS employers, the benefit from each employer is calculated separately according to each employer’s contract, and then added together for the total allowance. An agency may contract for an optional benefit where any unused sick leave accumulated at the time of retirement will be converted to credited service at a rate of 0.004 years of service for each day of sick leave.  The final compensation is the monthly average of the member’s highest 36 or 12 consecutive months’ full-time equivalent monthly pay (no matter which CalPERS employer paid this compensation). The standard benefit is 36 months. Employers had the option of providing a final compensation equal to the highest 12 consecutive months for classic plans only. Final compensation must be defined by the highest 36 consecutive months’ pay under the 1.5% at 65 formula. PEPRA members have a cap on the annual salary that can be used to calculate final compensation for all new members based on the Social Security contribution and benefit base. For employees that participate in Social Security this cap is $118,775 for 2016 and for those employees that do not participate in Social Security the cap for 2016 is $142,530. Adjustments to the caps are permitted annually based on changes to the CPI for all urban consumers.  Employees must be covered by Social Security with the 1.5% at 65 formula. Social Security is optional for all other benefit formulas. For employees covered by Social Security, the modified formula is the standard benefit. Under this type of formula, the final compensation is offset by $133.33 (or by one third if the final compensation is less than $400). Employers may contract for the full benefit with Social Security that will eliminate the offset applicable to the final compensation. For employees not covered by Social Security, the full benefit is paid with CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX B MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PRINCIPAL PLAN PROVISIONS B-3 no offsets. Auxiliary organizations of the CSUC system may elect reduced contribution rates, in which case the offset is $317 if members are not covered by Social Security or $513 if members are covered by Social Security.  The miscellaneous and PEPRA safety service retirement benefit is not capped. The classic Safety service retirement benefit is capped at 90 percent of final compensation. Vested Deferred Retirement Eligibility for Deferred Status A CalPERS member becomes eligible for a deferred vested retirement benefit when he or she leaves employment, keeps his or her contribution account balance on deposit with CalPERS, and has earned at least 5 years of credited service (total service across all CalPERS employers, and with certain other retirement systems with which CalPERS has reciprocity agreements). Eligibility to Start Receiving Benefits The CalPERS classic members and PEPRA safety members become eligible to receive the deferred retirement benefit upon satisfying the eligibility requirements for deferred status and upon attainment of age 50 (55 for employees hired into a 1.5% @ 65 plan). PEPRA miscellaneous members become eligible to receive the deferred retirement benefit upon satisfying the eligibility requirements for deferred status and upon attainment of age 52. Benefit The vested deferred retirement benefit is the same as the service retirement benefit, where the benefit factor is based on the member’s age at allowance commencement. For members who have earned service with multiple CalPERS employers, the benefit from each employer is calculated separately according to each employer’s contract, and then added together for the total allowance. Non-Industrial (Non-Job Related) Disability Retirement Eligibility A CalPERS member is eligible for Non-Industrial Disability Retirement if he or she becomes disabled and has at least 5 years of credited service (total service across all CalPERS employers, and with certain other retirement systems with which CalPERS has reciprocity agreements). There is no special age requirement. Disabled means the member is unable to perform his or her job because of an illness or injury, which is expected to be permanent or to last indefinitely. The illness or injury does not have to be job related. A CalPERS member must be actively employed by any CalPERS employer at the time of disability in order to be eligible for this benefit. Standard Benefit The standard Non-Industrial Disability Retirement benefit is a monthly allowance equal to 1.8 percent of final compensation, multiplied by service, which is determined as follows:  Service is CalPERS credited service, for members with less than 10 years of service or greater than 18.518 years of service; or  Service is CalPERS credited service plus the additional number of years that the member would have worked until age 60, for members with at least 10 years but not more than 18.518 years of service. The maximum benefit in this case is 33 1/3 percent of final compensation. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX B MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PRINCIPAL PLAN PROVISIONS B-4 Improved Benefit Employers have the option of providing the improved Non-Industrial Disability Retirement benefit. This benefit provides a monthly allowance equal to 30 percent of final compensation for the first 5 years of service, plus 1 percent for each additional year of service to a maximum of 50 percent of final compensation. Members who are eligible for a larger service retirement benefit may choose to receive that benefit in lieu of a disability benefit. Members eligible to retire, and who have attained the normal retirement age determined by their service retirement benefit formula, will receive the same dollar amount for disability retirement as that payable for service retirement. For members who have earned service with multiple CalPERS employers, the benefit attributed to each employer is the total disability allowance multiplied by the ratio of service with a particular employer to the total CalPERS service. Industrial (Job Related) Disability Retirement All safety members have this benefit. For miscellaneous members, employers have the option of providing this benefit. An employer may choose to provide the increased benefit option or the improved benefit option. Eligibility An employee is eligible for Industrial Disability Retirement if he or she becomes disabled while working, where disabled means the member is unable to perform the duties of the job because of a work-related illness or injury, which is expected to be permanent or to last indefinitely. A CalPERS member who has left active employment within this group is not eligible for this benefit, except to the extent described below. Standard Benefit The standard Industrial Disability Retirement benefit is a monthly allowance equal to 50 percent of final compensation. Increased Benefit (75 percent of Final Compensation) The increased Industrial Disability Retirement benefit is a monthly allowance equal to 75 percent final compensation for total disability. Improved Benefit (50 percent to 90 percent of Final Compensation) The improved Industrial Disability Retirement benefit is a monthly allowance equal to the Workman’s Compensation Appeals Board permanent disability rate percentage (if 50 percent or greater, with a maximum of 90 percent) times the final compensation. For a CalPERS member not actively employed in this group who became disabled while employed by some other CalPERS employer, the benefit is a return of accumulated member contributions with respect to employment in this group. With the standard or increased benefit, a member may also choose to receive the annuitization of the accumulated member contributions. If a member is eligible for service retirement and if the service retirement benefit is more than the industrial disability retirement benefit, the member may choose to receive the larger benefit. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX B MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PRINCIPAL PLAN PROVISIONS B-5 Post-Retirement Death Benefit Standard Lump Sum Payment Upon the death of a retiree, a one-time lump sum payment of $500 will be made to the retiree’s designated survivor(s), or to the retiree’s estate. Improved Lump Sum Payment Employers have the option of providing an improved lump sum death benefit of $600, $2,000, $3,000, $4,000 or $5,000. Form of Payment for Retirement Allowance Standard Form of Payment Generally, the retirement allowance is paid to the retiree in the form of an annuity for as long as he or she is alive. The retiree may choose to provide for a portion of his or her allowance to be paid to any designated beneficiary after the retiree’s death. CalPERS provides for a variety of such benefit options, which the retiree pays for by taking a reduction in his or her retirement allowance. Such reduction takes into account the amount to be provided to the beneficiary and the probable duration of payments (based on the ages of the member and beneficiary) made subsequent to the member’s death. Improved Form of Payment (Post-Retirement Survivor Allowance) Employers have the option to contract for the post-retirement survivor allowance. For retirement allowances with respect to service subject to the modified formula, 25 percent of the retirement allowance will automatically be continued to certain statutory beneficiaries upon the death of the retiree, without a reduction in the retiree’s allowance. For retirement allowances with respect to service subject to the full or supplemental formula, 50 percent of the retirement allowance will automatically be continued to certain statutory beneficiaries upon the death of the retiree, without a reduction in the retiree’s allowance. This additional benefit is referred to as post-retirement survivor allowance (PRSA) or simply as survivor continuance. In other words, 25 percent or 50 percent of the allowance, the continuance portion, is paid to the retiree for as long as he or she is alive, and that same amount is continued to the retiree’s spouse (or if no eligible spouse, to unmarried child(ren) until they attain age 18; or, if no eligible child(ren), to a qualifying dependent parent) for the rest of his or her lifetime. This benefit will not be discontinued in the event the spouse remarries. The remaining 75 percent or 50 percent of the retirement allowance, which may be referred to as the option portion of the benefit, is paid to the retiree as an annuity for as long as he or she is alive. Or, the retiree may choose to provide for some of this option portion to be paid to any designated beneficiary after the retiree’s death. Benefit options applicable to the option portion are the same as those offered with the standard form. The reduction is calculated in the same manner but is applied only to the option portion. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX B MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PRINCIPAL PLAN PROVISIONS B-6 Pre-Retirement Death Benefits Basic Death Benefit This is a standard benefit. Eligibility An employee’s beneficiary (or estate) may receive the basic death benefit if the member dies while actively employed. A CalPERS member must be actively employed with the CalPERS employer providing this benefit to be eligible for this benefit. A member’s survivor who is eligible for any other pre-retirement death benefit may choose to receive that death benefit instead of this basic death benefit. Benefit The basic death benefit is a lump sum in the amount of the member’s accumulated contributions, where interest is currently credited at 7.5 percent per year, plus a lump sum in the amount of one month's salary for each completed year of current service, up to a maximum of six months' salary. For purposes of this benefit, one month's salary is defined as the member's average monthly full-time rate of compensation during the 12 months preceding death. 1957 Survivor Benefit This is a standard benefit. Eligibility An employee’s eligible survivor(s) may receive the 1957 Survivor benefit if the member dies while actively employed, has attained at least age 50 for classic and safety PEPRA members and age 52 for miscellaneous PEPRA members, and has at least 5 years of credited service (total service across all CalPERS employers and with certain other retirement systems with which CalPERS has reciprocity agreements). A CalPERS member must be actively employed with the CalPERS employer providing this benefit to be eligible for this benefit. An eligible survivor means the surviving spouse to whom the member was married at least one year before death or, if there is no eligible spouse, to the member's unmarried child(ren) under age 18. A member’s survivor who is eligible for any other pre-retirement death benefit may choose to receive that death benefit instead of this 1957 Survivor benefit. Benefit The 1957 Survivor benefit is a monthly allowance equal to one-half of the unmodified service retirement benefit that the member would have been entitled to receive if the member had retired on the date of his or her death. If the benefit is payable to the spouse, the benefit is discontinued upon the death of the spouse. If the benefit is payable to dependent child(ren), the benefit will be discontinued upon death or attainment of age 18, unless the child(ren) is disabled. The total amount paid will be at least equal to the basic death benefit. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX B MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PRINCIPAL PLAN PROVISIONS B-7 Optional Settlement 2W Death Benefit This is an optional benefit. Eligibility An employee’s eligible survivor may receive the Optional Settlement 2W Death benefit if the member dies while actively employed, has attained at least age 50 for classic and safety PEPRA members and age 52 for miscellaneous PEPRA members, and has at least 5 years of credited service (total service across all CalPERS employers and with certain other retirement systems with which CalPERS has reciprocity agreements). A CalPERS member who is no longer actively employed with any CalPERS employer is not eligible for this benefit. An eligible survivor means the surviving spouse to whom the member was married at least one year before death. A member’s survivor who is eligible for any other pre-retirement death benefit may choose to receive that death benefit instead of this Optional Settlement 2W Death benefit. Benefit The Optional Settlement 2W Death benefit is a monthly allowance equal to the service retirement benefit that the member would have received had the member retired on the date of his or her death and elected Optional Settlement 2W. (A retiree who elects Optional Settlement 2W receives an allowance that has been reduced so that it will continue to be paid after his or her death to a surviving beneficiary.) The allowance is payable as long as the surviving spouse lives, at which time it is continued to any unmarried child(ren) under age 18, if applicable. The total amount paid will be at least equal to the basic death benefit. Special Death Benefit This is a standard benefit for safety members. An employer may elect to provide this benefit for miscellaneous members. Eligibility An employee’s eligible survivor(s) may receive the special death benefit if the member dies while actively employed and the death is job-related. A CalPERS member who is no longer actively employed with any CalPERS employer is not eligible for this benefit. An eligible survivor means the surviving spouse to whom the member was married prior to the onset of the injury or illness that resulted in death. If there is no eligible spouse, an eligible survivor means the member's unmarried child(ren) under age 22. An eligible survivor who chooses to receive this benefit will not receive any other death benefit. Benefit The special death benefit is a monthly allowance equal to 50 percent of final compensation, and will be increased whenever the compensation paid to active employees is increased but ceasing to increase when the member would have attained age 50. The allowance is payable to the surviving spouse until death at which time the allowance is continued to any unmarried child(ren) under age 22. There is a guarantee that the total amount paid will at least equal the basic death benefit. If the member’s death is the result of an accident or injury caused by external violence or physical force incurred in the performance of the member’s duty, and there are eligible surviving child(ren) (eligible means unmarried child(ren) under age 22) in addition to an eligible spouse, then an additional monthly allowance is paid equal to the following:  if 1 eligible child: 12.5 percent of final compensation  if 2 eligible children: 20.0 percent of final compensation  if 3 or more eligible children: 25.0 percent of final compensation CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX B MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PRINCIPAL PLAN PROVISIONS B-8 Alternate Death Benefit for Local Fire Members This is an optional benefit available only to local fire members. Eligibility An employee’s eligible survivor(s) may receive the alternate death benefit in lieu of the basic death benefit or the 1957 Survivor benefit if the member dies while actively employed and has at least 20 years of total CalPERS service. A CalPERS member who is no longer actively employed with any CalPERS employer is not eligible for this benefit. An eligible survivor means the surviving spouse to whom the member was married prior to the onset of the injury or illness that resulted in death. If there is no eligible spouse, an eligible survivor means the member's unmarried child(ren) under age 18. Benefit The Alternate Death benefit is a monthly allowance equal to the service retirement benefit that the member would have received had the member retired on the date of his or her death and elected Optional Settlement 2W. (A retiree who elects Optional Settlement 2W receives an allowance that has been reduced so that it will continue to be paid after his or her death to a surviving beneficiary.) If the member has not yet attained age 50, the benefit is equal to that which would be payable if the member had retired at age 50, based on service credited at the time of death. The allowance is payable as long as the surviving spouse lives, at which time it is continued to any unmarried child(ren) under age 18, if applicable. The total amount paid will be at least equal to the basic death benefit. Cost-of-Living Adjustments (COLA) Standard Benefit Retirement and survivor allowances are adjusted each year in May for cost of living, beginning the second calendar year after the year of retirement. The standard cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) is 2 percent. Annual adjustments are calculated by first determining the lesser of 1) 2 percent compounded from the end of the year of retirement or 2) actual rate of inflation. The resulting increase is divided by the total increase provided in prior years. For any particular year, the COLA adjustment may be less than 2 percent (when the rate of inflation is low), may be greater than the rate of inflation (when the rate of inflation is low after several years of high inflation) or may even be greater than 2 percent (when inflation is high after several years of low inflation). Improved Benefit Employers have the option of providing a COLA of 3 percent, 4 percent, or 5 percent, determined in the same manner as described above for the standard 2 percent COLA. An improved COLA is not available with the 1.5% at 65 formula. Purchasing Power Protection Allowance (PPPA) Retirement and survivor allowances are protected against inflation by PPPA. PPPA benefits are cost-of-living adjustments that are intended to maintain an individual’s allowance at 80 percent of the initial allowance at retirement adjusted for inflation since retirement. The PPPA benefit will be coordinated with other cost-of-living adjustments provided under the plan. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX B MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PRINCIPAL PLAN PROVISIONS B-9 Employee Contributions Each employee contributes toward his or her retirement based upon the retirement formula. The standard employee contribution is as described below.  The percent contributed below the monthly compensation breakpoint is 0 percent.  The monthly compensation breakpoint is $0 for full and supplemental formula members and $133.33 for employees covered by the modified formula.  The percent contributed above the monthly compensation breakpoint depends upon the benefit formula, as shown in the table below. Benefit Formula Percent Contributed above the Breakpoint Miscellaneous, 1.5% at 65 2% Miscellaneous, 2% at 60 7% Miscellaneous, 2% at 55 7% Miscellaneous, 2.5% at 55 8% Miscellaneous, 2.7% at 55 8% Miscellaneous, 3% at 60 8% Miscellaneous, 2% at 62 50% of the Total Normal Cost Miscellaneous, 1.5% at 65 50% of the Total Normal Cost Safety, 1/2 at 55 Varies by entry age Safety, 2% at 55 7% Safety, 2% at 50 9% Safety, 3% at 55 9% Safety, 3% at 50 9% Safety, 2% at 57 50% of the Total Normal Cost Safety, 2.5% at 57 50% of the Total Normal Cost Safety, 2.7% at 57 50% of the Total Normal Cost The employer may choose to “pick-up” these contributions for classic members (Employer Paid Member Contributions or EPMC). EPMC is prohibited for new PEPRA members. An employer may also include Employee Cost Sharing in the contract, where employees agree to share the cost of the employer contribution. These contributions are paid in addition to the member contribution. Auxiliary organizations of the CSUC system may elect reduced contribution rates, in which case the offset is $317 and the contribution rate is 6 percent if members are not covered by Social Security. If members are covered by Social Security, the offset is $513 and the contribution rate is 5 percent. Refund of Employee Contributions If the member’s service with the employer ends, and if the member does not satisfy the eligibility conditions for any of the retirement benefits above, the member may elect to receive a refund of his or her employee contributions, which are credited with 6 percent interest compounded annually. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX B MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PRINCIPAL PLAN PROVISIONS B-10 1959 Survivor Benefit This is a pre-retirement death benefit available only to members not covered by Social Security. Any agency joining CalPERS subsequent to 1993 is required to provide this benefit if the members are not covered by Social Security. The benefit is optional for agencies joining CalPERS prior to 1994. Levels 1, 2 and 3 are now closed. Any new agency or any agency wishing to add this benefit or increase the current level may only choose the 4th or Indexed Level. This benefit is not included in the results presented in this valuation. More information on this benefit is available on the CalPERS website at www.calpers.ca.gov. APPENDIX C PARTICIPANT DATA  SUMMARY OF VALUATION DATA  ACTIVE MEMBERS  TRANSFERRED AND TERMINATED MEMBERS  RETIRED MEMBERS AND BENEFICIARIES CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX C MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PARTICIPANT DATA C-1 Summary of Valuation Data June 30, 2015 June 30, 2016 1. Active Members a) Counts 796 821 b) Average Attained Age 46.35 46.17 c) Average Entry Age to Rate Plan 35.01 35.05 d) Average Years of Service 11.34 11.12 e) Average Annual Covered Pay $ 89,918 $ 91,773 f) Annual Covered Payroll 71,574,823 75,345,962 g) Projected Annual Payroll for Contribution Year 78,211,742 82,332,567 h) Present Value of Future Payroll 549,799,999 583,437,155 2. Transferred Members a) Counts 347 361 b) Average Attained Age 46.34 45.98 c) Average Years of Service 3.55 3.46 d) Average Annual Covered Pay $ 111,297 $ 113,704 3. Terminated Members a) Counts 367 383 b) Average Attained Age 47.69 48.05 c) Average Years of Service 3.30 3.19 d) Average Annual Covered Pay $ 64,442 $ 66,844 4. Retired Members and Beneficiaries a) Counts 1,027 1,061 b) Average Attained Age 69.31 69.64 c) Average Annual Benefits $ 32,564 $ 32,763 5. Active to Retired Ratio [(1a) / (4a)] 0.78 0.77 Counts of members included in the valuation are counts of the records processed by the valuation. Multiple records may exist for those who have service in more than one valuation group. This does not result in double counting of liabilities. Average Annual Benefits represents benefit amounts payable by this plan only. Some members may have service with another agency and would therefore have a larger total benefit than would be included as part of the average shown here. CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX C MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PARTICIPANT DATA C-2 Active Members Counts of members included in the valuation are counts of the records processed by the valuation. Multiple records may exist for those who have service in more than one valuation group. This does not result in double counting of liabilities. Distribution of Active Members by Age and Service Years of Service at Valuation Date Attained Age 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-25 25+ Total 15-24 12 0 0 0 0 0 12 25-29 52 0 0 0 0 0 52 30-34 54 20 6 1 0 0 81 35-39 45 34 20 11 2 0 112 40-44 34 26 20 19 6 1 106 45-49 43 17 16 28 13 3 120 50-54 19 29 19 27 33 29 156 55-59 18 18 11 21 11 19 98 60-64 6 13 7 10 10 9 55 65 and over 3 4 1 9 7 5 29 All Ages 286 161 100 126 82 66 821 Distribution of Average Annual Salaries by Age and Service Years of Service at Valuation Date Attained Age 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-25 25+ Average 15-24 $57,743 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $57,743 25-29 68,174 0 0 0 0 0 68,174 30-34 77,827 83,831 83,460 99,780 0 0 79,998 35-39 80,289 86,452 91,827 91,950 82,351 0 85,402 40-44 92,188 91,278 89,991 93,318 111,222 86,060 92,772 45-49 96,084 93,981 111,666 98,326 118,659 93,855 100,777 50-54 109,651 98,853 98,331 86,561 102,240 104,917 99,821 55-59 113,847 97,497 90,220 83,301 92,928 106,744 97,921 60-64 110,080 87,411 85,736 85,225 103,248 88,967 92,407 65 and over 97,621 94,278 58,768 116,311 89,153 97,137 99,493 All Ages $85,334 $91,441 $94,434 $92,245 $102,772 $101,890 $91,773 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX C MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PARTICIPANT DATA C-3 Transferred and Terminated Members Distribution of Transfers to Other CalPERS Plans by Age, Service, and average Salary Years of Service at Valuation Date Attained Age 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-25 25+ Total Average Salary 15-24 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 $103,645 25-29 14 1 0 0 0 0 15 97,680 30-34 39 3 0 0 0 0 42 96,159 35-39 43 10 1 0 0 0 54 106,490 40-44 43 7 0 2 0 0 52 111,706 45-49 47 10 2 2 1 0 62 113,645 50-54 48 14 3 3 1 0 69 123,040 55-59 25 7 4 1 0 0 37 129,573 60-64 15 3 1 1 1 0 21 129,129 65 and over 3 4 1 0 0 0 8 104,826 All Ages 278 59 12 9 3 0 361 113,704 Distribution of Terminated Participants with Funds on Deposit by Age, Service, and average Salary Years of Service at Valuation Date Attained Age 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-25 25+ Total Average Salary 15-24 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 $53,219 25-29 14 0 0 0 0 0 14 72,132 30-34 30 5 0 0 0 0 35 71,310 35-39 46 3 2 0 0 0 51 63,875 40-44 37 7 1 0 0 0 45 66,627 45-49 43 14 1 2 1 0 61 74,762 50-54 49 15 4 2 1 0 71 68,022 55-59 32 8 5 1 0 0 46 65,351 60-64 30 6 1 0 0 0 37 60,309 65 and over 17 3 1 1 0 0 22 52,669 All Ages 299 61 15 6 2 0 383 66,844 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX C MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PARTICIPANT DATA C-4 Retired Members and Beneficiaries Distribution of Retirees and Beneficiaries by Age and Retirement Type* Attained Age Service Retirement Non- Industrial Disability Industrial Disability Non- Industrial Death Industrial Death Death After Retirement Total Under 30 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 30-34 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 35-39 0 0 1 0 0 1 2 40-44 0 1 3 0 0 0 4 45-49 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 50-54 18 8 3 0 0 2 31 55-59 100 14 1 0 0 3 118 60-64 171 7 2 0 0 9 189 65-69 196 13 2 0 0 17 228 70-74 191 7 1 0 0 14 213 75-79 97 7 1 0 0 11 116 80-84 54 3 1 0 0 15 73 85 and Over 51 3 0 0 0 28 82 All Ages 878 65 15 0 0 103 1,061 Distribution of Average Annual Disbursements to Retirees and Beneficiaries by Age and Retirement Type* Attained Age Service Retirement Non- Industrial Disability Industrial Disability Non- Industrial Death Industrial Death Death After Retirement Average Under 30 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $13,093 $13,093 30-34 0 0 0 0 0 11,571 11,571 35-39 0 0 249 0 0 11,571 5,910 40-44 0 8,919 252 0 0 0 2,419 45-49 0 10,962 0 0 0 0 10,962 50-54 22,821 15,760 519 0 0 21,898 18,781 55-59 39,769 12,987 1,613 0 0 19,713 35,759 60-64 43,184 19,227 6,833 0 0 28,913 41,233 65-69 37,757 17,063 9,278 0 0 23,978 35,300 70-74 32,812 14,768 1,922 0 0 17,440 31,064 75-79 33,718 20,452 1,811 0 0 31,435 32,426 80-84 27,675 16,738 4,260 0 0 19,678 25,262 85 and Over 23,075 18,352 0 0 0 20,838 22,138 All Ages $35,742 $16,107 $2,959 $0 $0 $22,220 $32,763 CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX C MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PARTICIPANT DATA C-5 Retired Members and Beneficiaries (continued) Distribution of Retirees and Beneficiaries by Years Retired and Retirement Type* Years Retired Service Retirement Non- Industrial Disability Industrial Disability Non- Industrial Death Industrial Death Death After Retirement Total Under 5 Yrs 184 5 4 0 0 34 227 5-9 312 10 3 0 0 25 350 10-14 170 12 2 0 0 16 200 15-19 107 11 5 0 0 11 134 20-24 59 16 1 0 0 9 85 25-29 30 7 0 0 0 7 44 30 and Over 16 4 0 0 0 1 21 All Years 878 65 15 0 0 103 1,061 Distribution of Average Annual Disbursements to Retirees and Beneficiaries by Years Retired and Retirement Type* Years Retired Service Retirement Non- Industrial Disability Industrial Disability Non- Industrial Death Industrial Death Death After Retirement Average Under 5 Yrs $32,001 $16,464 $267 $0 $0 $23,840 $29,878 5-9 48,959 10,254 6,013 0 0 26,976 45,915 10-14 30,240 18,806 6,254 0 0 17,696 28,310 15-19 29,154 19,607 2,124 0 0 24,030 26,941 20-24 17,218 19,494 2,155 0 0 12,395 16,958 25-29 21,552 9,324 0 0 0 19,847 19,335 30 and Over 18,472 10,892 0 0 0 5,784 16,424 All Years $35,742 $16,107 $2,959 $0 $0 $22,220 $32,763 * Counts of members do not include alternate payees receiving benefits while the member is still working. Therefore, the total counts may not match information on page 25 of the report. Multiple records may exist for those who have service in more than one coverage group. This does not result in double counting of liabilities. APPENDIX D DEVELOPMENT OF PEPRA MEMBER CONTRIBUTION RATES CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX D MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO PARTICIPANT DATA D-1 Development of PEPRA Members Contribution Rates The table below shows the determination of the Member contribution rates based on 50 percent of the Total Normal Cost for each respective plan on June 30, 2016. Assembly Bill (AB) 340 created PEPRA that implemented new benefit formulas and a final compensation period as well as new contribution requirements for new employees. In accordance with Section Code 7522.30(b), “new members … shall have an initial contribution rate of at least 50 percent of the normal cost rate.” The normal cost for the plan is dependent on the benefit levels, actuarial assumptions and demographics of the plan particularly the entry age into the plan. Should the total normal cost of the plan change by one percent or more from the base total normal cost established for the plan, the new member rate shall be 50 percent of the new normal cost rounded to the nearest quarter percent. Basis for Current Rate Rates Effective July 1, 2018 Rate Plan Identifier Plan Total Normal Cost Member Rate Total Normal Cost Change Change Needed Member Rate 26004 Miscellaneous PEPRA 12.500% 6.250% 12.165% (0.335%) No 6.250% For a description of the methods used to determine the Total Normal Cost for this purpose, please see the “PEPRA Normal Cost Rate Methodology” section in Appendix A. APPENDIX E GLOSSARY OF ACTUARIAL TERMS CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX E MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO GLOSSARY OF ACTUARIAL TERMS E-1 Glossary of Actuarial Terms Accrued Liability (also called Actuarial Accrued Liability or Entry Age Normal Accrued Liability) The total dollars needed as of the valuation date to fund all benefits earned in the past for current members. Actuarial Assumptions Assumptions made about certain events that will affect pension costs. Assumptions generally can be broken down into two categories: demographic and economic. Demographic assumptions include such things as mortality, disability and retirement rates. Economic assumptions include discount rate, salary growth and inflation. Actuarial Methods Procedures employed by actuaries to achieve certain funding goals of a pension plan. Actuarial methods include funding method, setting the length of time to fund the Accrued Liability and determining the Value of Assets. Actuarial Valuation The determination, as of a valuation date of the Normal Cost, Accrued liability, and related actuarial present values for a pension plan. These valuations are performed annually or when an employer is contemplating a change to their plan provisions. Amortization Bases Separate payment schedules for different portions of the Unfunded Liability. The total Unfunded Liability of a Risk Pool or non-pooled plan can be segregated by "cause,” creating “bases” and each such base will be separately amortized and paid for over a specific period of time. However, all bases are amortized using investment and payroll assumptions from the current valuation. This can be likened to a home having a first mortgage of 24 years remaining payments and a second mortgage that has 10 years remaining payments. Each base or each mortgage note has its own terms (payment period, principal, etc.) Generally, in an actuarial valuation, the separate bases consist of changes in unfunded liability due to contract amendments, actuarial assumption changes, actuarial methodology changes, and/or gains and losses. Payment periods are determined by Board policy and vary based on the cause of the change. Amortization Period The number of years required to pay off an Amortization Base. Classic Member (under PEPRA) A classic member is a member who joined CalPERS prior to January, 1, 2013 and who is not defined as a new member under PEPRA. (See definition of new member below) Discount Rate Assumption The actuarial assumption that was called “investment return” in earlier CalPERS reports or “actuarial interest rate” in Section 20014 of the California Public Employees’ Retirement Law (PERL). Entry Age The earliest age at which a plan member begins to accrue benefits under a defined benefit pension plan. In most cases, this is the age of the member on their date of hire. Entry Age Normal Cost Method An actuarial cost method designed to fund a member's total plan benefit over the course of his or her career. This method is designed to yield a rate expressed as a level percentage of payroll. (The assumed retirement age less the entry age is the amount of time required to fund a member’s total benefit. Generally, the older a member on the date of hire, the greater the entry age normal cost. This is mainly because there is less time to earn investment income to fund the future benefits.) CALPERS ACTUARIAL VALUATION – June 30, 2016 APPENDIX E MISCELLANEOUS PLAN OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO GLOSSARY OF ACTUARIAL TERMS E-2 Fresh Start A Fresh Start is when multiple amortization bases are collapsed to one base and amortized together over a new funding period. Funded Status A measure of how well funded, or how "on track" a plan or risk pool is with respect to assets versus accrued liabilities. A ratio greater than 100 percent means the plan or risk pool has more assets than liabilities and a ratio less than 100 percent means liabilities are greater than assets. GASB 68 Statement No. 68 of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board. The accounting standard governing a state or local governmental employer’s accounting and financial reporting for pensions. GASB 68 replaces GASB 27 effective the first fiscal year beginning after June 15, 2014. New Member (under PEPRA) A new member includes an individual who becomes a member of a public retirement system for the first time on or after January 1, 2013, and who was not a member of another public retirement system prior to that date, and who is not subject to reciprocity with another public retirement system. Normal Cost The annual cost of service accrual for the upcoming fiscal year for active employees. The normal cost should be viewed as the long term contribution rate. Pension Actuary A business professional that is authorized by the Society of Actuaries, and the American Academy of Actuaries to perform the calculations necessary to properly fund a pension plan. PEPRA The California Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2013 Prepayment Contribution A payment made by the employer to reduce or eliminate the year’s required employer contribution. Present Value of Benefits (PVB) The total dollars needed as of the valuation date to fund all benefits earned in the past or expected to be earned in the future for current members. Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) When a plan or pool’s Value of Assets is less than its Accrued Liability, the difference is the plan or pool’s Unfunded Accrued Liability (or unfunded liability). If the unfunded liability is positive, the plan or pool will have to pay contributions exceeding the Normal Cost.