HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-10-21 Finance Committee Summary MinutesFINANCE COMMITTEE
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 1 of 12
Regular Meeting
October 21, 2025
The Finance Committee of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Community Meeting
Room and by virtual teleconference at 5:30 P.M.
Present In-Person: Reckdahl, Lythcott-Haims, Burt (Chair)
Present Remotely: None
Absent: None
Call to Order
Chair Burt called the meeting to order. The clerk called the roll.
Public Comment
There were no requests to speak.
Agenda Items
1. Review Risk Management and Insurance Program, Including Funding Status of the General
Liability Fund and Recommend the City Council Approve Amendments in the FY 2026
General Liability Fund Budget; CEQA Status - Not a Project
Assistant Director David Ramberg said this topic was a referral from Council to dive deeper into
programs and bring awareness to the recent steep increase in insurance costs. Assistant
Director Ramberg gave a brief overview of the City’s Risk Management Program, the insurance
premium outlook, and the strategic response. The City ran a comprehensive risk management
program to protect City employees, property, and public funds. The City funded the General
Liability Insurance Fund at an 85 percent confidence level, the top recommended range, but
faced higher-than-average risks being a full-service City. The City had been a member of the
ACCEL risk pool since 1986. The collective approach provided broader protection and long-term
savings compared to purchasing insurance independently. Alliant had been the administrator of
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 2 of 12
Finance Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 10/21/2025
the ACCEL pool for 25 years. ACCEL was a mid-sized JPA that covered over $1.7B of California
City payroll.
Senior Management Analyst Kelly Poggetti explained that, for FY2026, the City obtained a total
of $65M of layered liability coverage, which was the highest limit available. A chart showed the
layered structure. The first layer was self-insurance of $1M. The second layer was sharing $9M
through the ACCEL risk pool. The third layer was commercial excess insurance of $55M. The City
maintained a broad range of insurance coverages designed to protect City operations from
exposures typically faced by public entities. A chart showed the various coverage types and
amounts, including $1.25B for property insurance and $2M in cyber liability. The City insured
the first $1M in damage for earthquake insurance rather than purchasing a separate
commercial policy.
There were 5 components regarding how insurance coverage translated into annual premiums:
payroll, claims history, claims rate, reserve levels, and market conditions. Claims history and
claims rates had been favorable to the City. The low frequency/low severity claims, with some
years having zero claims, showed strong safety practices and effective risk management. The
City’s claims rate was low at 0.80-0.86, which was 15 to 20 percent better than the national
standard and earned the City a discount on premiums. The 3 main components that affected
premiums for FY2026 were payroll, market conditions, and reserve levels. There was a 20
percent payroll increase from FY2025-FY2026 due to efforts to fill vacancies. Factors that
impacted the market conditions were a hard insurance market, diminished insurer capacity,
and major lawsuit verdicts. Since 2017, the City’s reserve level had remained at 85 percent. The
ACCEL board raised reserve levels given recent claims among members, which helped the pool
maintain financial stability but increased costs.
Council Member Reckdahl clarified that 15 percent of the time, the claims will exceed what the
City had reserved.
Assistant City Manager Kiely Nose confirmed the City was funding 85 percent of the City’s
liability or risk.
Senior Management Analyst Poggetti noted that all components resulted in an estimated 30
percent increase in excess liability premiums for FY2026.
A slide showed the proposed funding adjustments to offset the General Liability Insurance Fund
variance of $1.5M. Assistant Director Ramberg proposed reallocating about $600,000 within
the fund and drawing upon the fund balance of approximately $900,000, which would result in
an ending fund balance of $1.2M.
Council Member Reckdahl asked what it meant to reallocate the balance.
Assistant Director Ramberg explained that within the fund, there were other areas budgeted
for. There was the ability to draw upon some of the other budget areas where there were one-
time savings.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 3 of 12
Finance Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 10/21/2025
A slide showed a graph of the projected Excess Liability Insurance costs, which were projected
to reach over $9M by FY2028. Increases of about 20 percent will be built into the long-range
financial forecast over the next few fiscal years to accommodate the increases. Staff
recommended the finance committee review the report and recommend the City Council
amend Fiscal Year 2026 Budget Appropriation for the General Liability Fund within the Mid-Year
Report.
Public Comment: None.
Council Member Reckdahl asked how the 85 percent confidence was calculated and how to
calculate the right number using that percentage. Council Member Reckdahl asked if the rates
were driven by payroll only or other things such as number of buildings, square footage,
population, etc.
Senior Vice President Conor Boughey explained that the City provided loss data to the actuary
who reviewed it, compared it to industry data, came up with loss projections, and then
provided guidance between what was expected to occur and confidence levels above that. A
city would typically hope to achieve an 80 percent confidence level funding, meaning 8 out of
10 years the City would be over-funded. The overfunding can offset 2 years of a budget
shortfall. If funding was over 80 percent, there would be a positive fund balance. Rates the City
will charge based on payroll were provided for different confidence levels. Payroll was used as a
measure of growth. Payroll and employee concentration were used to analyze and review for
excess liability and work comp. Total insured values was used to analyze and review for
property.
Council Member Lythcott-Haims asked if the City was being taxed due to having more
employees even though there were fewer claims.
Senior Vice President Boughey explained the City was in a high payroll area but low claims were
expected for the region, which resulted in a greater deposit into an account that became loss
sensitive due to the retrospectively rated pricing formula. The City’s pricing was a deposit that
was a hold to see what claims will develop. The final price will be seen 4 years later. There will
be a 35 percent discount off the upfront price if there are no claims. In other cities where
employees were paid less but there were greater claims, the go-in premium was be less but
that city will be assessed for more cost. Typically for Palo Alto, there will be a high deposit and a
refund available.
Chair Burt asked if the rate was based on the Ex-Mod and if the Ex-Mod will go up due to having
large claims over last couple years. Chair Burt wondered if there was a pattern in the root cause
for the increase in claims and if the causes, payout amounts, or number of claims have
changed. Chair Burt queried if tort reform was in the legislative priorities and wanted to add it if
not. Chair Burt asked if the League of Cities was involved. Chair Burt wondered why more cities
were not part of the same pool, what those cities do, and why. Chair Burt referenced slide 8
and asked if claims history impacted cost only through the Ex-Mod.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 4 of 12
Finance Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 10/21/2025
Senior Vice President Boughey explained that the premium was the payroll multiplied by the
Ex-Mod multiplied by rate. The Ex-Mod will not increase because everyone was having large
claims. The rate of large losses in California had increased for everyone over the last 4 years.
The most common areas of a claim in excess of $1M were dangerous conditions of public
property, auto liability, and law enforcement liability. Bodily injury to third parties occurred in
those claims. Medical cost inflation, cost of living, cost of lifetime care plan, etc., had increased
and the plaintiff’s counsel had been aggressive against public entities. Senior Vice President
Boughey had a presentation to councils about the need for tort reform, however there was no
municipal body with the necessary budget to take on the plaintiff’s bar in Sacramento. Senior
Vice President Boughey believed the League of Cities was starting to discuss tort reform. When
ACCEL was founded, all members took a $1M deductible. All 13 cities in ACCEL had risk
managers. To be part of the group, a city was required to have a comprehensive risk
management program and take a high retention. Other pools such as Plan JPIA or Bay Cities
catered to small cities with a lower deductible. There was a large state-wide pool called PRISM,
which was a very large, diverse group.
Senior Vice President Boughey confirmed that claims history impacted the cost and explained
there was a formula in which the claim amount will be split by members of the pool but
whoever had the claim will take on the largest portion. If a member of ACCEL had multiple
unexpected claims, that member may no longer have a positive balance available to withdraw
from and the pool may require money back, which was called the retrospective rating
calculation. This year, the City received an invoice for the first time.
Assistant City Clerk Christine Prior said tort reform was not in the guidelines but will be
included. It will go to the Policy & Services Committee in November and to Council for approval
in January.
Assistant City Manager Nose clarified that tort reform will be brought up to the Policy and
Services Committee as something to consider.
Council Member Reckdahl asked how big the tail could be regarding the 85 percent confidence
level. Council Member Reckdahl wondered what will happen if the City spent more than
expected in any given year. Slide 6 was brought up. Council Member Reckdahl asked if the pool
or excess insurance layer was more efficient and if the pool will increase beyond the $10M.
Council Member Reckdahl queried if the $1M retention should be changed and if there was
anything the City could do to reduce the chance of having large claims.
Senior Vice President Boughey said the tail was very long for worker’s compensation. For
liability, all claims were typically received within 2 years; if they were large, they typically
resolved within 5 to 6 years. For property, claims were typically resolved within 18 months to 2
years. Senior Vice President Boughey explained that actuaries looked at the City’s loss history,
the worst and best years, etc., and came up with probabilities. Senior Vice President Boughey
stated it was unlikely the City would go over 85 percent and if so, the City could borrow from
the accrued fund balance. The City would either be able to keep a positive balance at 85
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 5 of 12
Finance Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 10/21/2025
percent or will need to increase the confidence level if the balance was declining. ACCEL was at
funding at a 90 percent confidence level. Senior Vice President Boughey reiterated that if the
City did not have claims, the pool premium would be returned. Senior Vice President Boughey
explained how ACCEL invested funds and that any investment income received would be
returned to the member who drove the income. ACCEL was starting to prepare the pool to
increase to $15M, then to $20M, and then to $25M. Senior Vice President Boughey noted there
was no reason to request increases in retentions among members, however if the City were
presented a quote with a higher retention, it would be attractive. Senior Vice President
Boughey suggested the City focus on de-escalation training for law enforcement to protect
against large claims. Senior Vice President Boughey encouraged design immunity due to the
City’s dangerous conditions claims.
Chief Assistant City Attorney Caio Arellano explained that design immunity was a key strategy
that agencies used to limit dangerous condition liability. Chief Assistant City Attorney Arellano
opined Palo Alto was doing well in terms of design immunity and record keeping.
Chair Burt asked if there had been a systematic analysis done regarding what the significant
claims were, what the trends were, and ways to anticipate additional sources of risk. Chair Burt
felt the challenge was to create a culture that looks for and proactively responds to risks before
the risks have been actualized. Chair Burt wanted to look at the City’s claims under $1M as well
and be informed by other agencies’ experiences. Chair Burt wondered if the culture of “do not
make work for fellow workers” had changed.
Council Member Lythcott-Haims asked if the plaintiff’s bar was incentivized to settle claims as
high as possible given the City was within the ACCEL pool. Council Member Lythcott-Haims felt
the City was advertising the capacity to pay.
Chief Assistant City Attorney Arellano was not aware of any systematic analysis. The 2 large
claims tendered to ACCEL over the last 2 years involved catastrophic personal injuries and were
the first of that nature and severity that the City had seen in a long time.
Senior Vice President Boughey suggested the City ensure all police officers were trained on the
vehicle pursuit policy annually. Senior Vice President Boughey stated there were case examples
where the settlement went over the policy limit and cited the billion-dollar settlements in the
Los Angeles Unified School District. Cities were required to declare policy limits.
Assistant City Manager Nose explained that staff had been tracking claims and looking at
experience with ACCEL and was working to instill a culture of safety.
Council Member Reckdahl asked what the process was for integrating lessons learned in other
cities and how that information would get to individual employees.
Senior Vice President Boughey noted the City had a litigation manager through ACCEL that
worked with the City Attorney to give guidance. ACCEL was a supportive party to the City.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 6 of 12
Finance Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 10/21/2025
Director Sandra Blanch explained that the information about claims in other cities in which Palo
Alto had a similar risk would be brought to the relevant City department.
Chief Assistant City Attorney Arellano noted there was a dedicated attorney who managed the
litigation portfolio, monitored the stable of outside counsel retained for tort defense, and
monitored the development in municipal tort litigation. Chief Assistant City Attorney Arellano
explained the battleground for claims was in the existing statutory immunities. Developments
in the law were monitored closely and when there were takeaways, it was brought to the
clients’ attention, in which related policies were asked about and actionable steps were given
to avoid potential exposure.
Council Member Lythcott-Haims opined the cyber liability limit was inadequate. Council
Member Lythcott-Haims asked what a parametric earthquake policy was.
Senior Vice President Boughey recommended the City buy more cyber liability coverage and
was willing to provide benchmarking data. Senior Vice President Boughey felt the City was
exposed on earthquakes and recommended purchasing a policy or having an internal CAT fund.
A parametric earthquake policy offered a quick payout based on pre-agreed upon terms.
Director Blanch explained that a parametric earthquake policy was a new line of insurance that
ACCEL had been looking at in the last year. The cost of insurance was high but was being
discussed.
Chair Burt asked if the earthquake policy would be through ACCEL. Chair Burt questioned if
there was a City position comparable to a Chief Safety Officer. Chair Burt referenced slide 11
and queried how the variance amount was known for FY2026. Chair Burt clarified that an
adjustment would need to be made annually around this time of year. Chair Burt noted the
estimated ending fund balance was less than the year’s funding adjustment and wanted to
ensure the fund balance was adequate. Chair Burt cited graph 1 on slide 12 in the staff report.
Chair Burt asked what the most recent long-term financial forecast had projected for costs in
FY2027 and FY2028. Chair Burt wondered if the projected costs for FY2027 and FY2028 were
ready to be incorporated into the long-range forecast and clarified it will affect the forecast but
there was uncertainty as to how much. Chair Burt asked when the next long-range financial
forecast would be given. Chair Burt wondered if there were circumstances in which the City
could experience an increased liability due to throttled e-bikes and reckless behavior by private
citizens.
Senior Vice President Boughey said an earthquake policy could go through ACCEL and JPAs
almost always offered a better price if the City was willing to share the risk with other
municipalities. Cyber liability would be purchased by the City. That policy was not frequently
discussed publicly. Senior Vice President Boughey said California was a difficult state for the City
to defend itself in, noted joint and several liability, and cited the City of Carlsbad’s recent state
of emergency declaration over e-bikes.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 7 of 12
Finance Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 10/21/2025
Director Blanch noted there was a safety officer for Utilities. Fire and Police had training officers
that reviewed exposures, calls, improvements, etc. The rest of the City relied on supervisors to
report risks or new exposures and conduct inspections on a case-by-case basis.
Director Lauren Lai said that slide 11 referred to FY2025-FY2026 and the starting fund balance
was as of June 30, 2025. The premium was finalized in June by the pool board but did not make
it on time for the budget adoption, so the premium affected the current fiscal year.
Adjustments had typically been insignificant and absorbed within the budget. Director Lai said
this was the first year in a while where the adjustment had been of this magnitude. There will
be a significant jump in the long-range financial forecast. The City will work with ACCEL
regarding the reliability of the forecasted projections. The City needed to find ways to offset the
expenses and determine if the projected increases will be the near-term reality. There was not
the level of growth required in the long-range expenditures to fund the projected increases.
The next long-range financial forecast will be in December.
Assistant City Manager Nose said the fund was an internal service fund. All the other city funds
paid into that based on an actuarial study that identified the pro rata share. The City had
control over the sources coming in and could make adjustments as necessary.
Assistant Director Ramberg said in the current long-range financial forecast, a 5 percent
increase was projected for each year through FY2028.
Chair Burt moved to attach 5 recommendations for Council to endorse. Chair Burt
acknowledged the products of the systematic review could be confidential. Due to the increase
in risk level, Chair Burt wanted the City to hold itself to a higher standard. Chair Burt assumed if
Council endorsed the motion, the matters would return to the Finance Committee. Chair Burt
stated there were reforms in 2021 regarding law enforcement training and the policies were
implemented well.
Council Member Lythcott-Haims wanted input from staff on the scope of the proposed actions
and encouraged the City to raise the bar.
Director Lai stated that if the Committee agreed to the proposal regarding the fiscal impact, it
would be part of the mid-year adjustment. Director Lai said the risk team could evaluate
additional coverages, balance the additional cost, and bring that back as part of the budget
development. Director Lai was concerned about having public, in-depth conversations
regarding risk, claims, programs, and gaps. Director Lai suggested that point 5 come as part of
the budget development.
Assistant City Manager Nose emphasized that the requests would impact capacities and noted
there were other fiscal priorities and constraints.
Chief Assistant City Attorney Arellano said the City Attorney’s office was willing to look into
claims patterns.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 8 of 12
Finance Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 10/21/2025
Council Member Reckdahl thought extra safety positions could save money in the long run.
MOTION: Chair Burt moved, seconded by Council Member Lythcott-Haims, to recommend the
City Council amend Fiscal Year 2026 Budget Appropriation for the General Liability Fund within
the Mid-Year Report with the following referrals to staff:
1. Evaluate increased liability insurance for cybersecurity and earthquake
2. Add tort reform to proposed 2026 legislative guidelines
3. Request that staff conduct systematic claims analysis and mitigation strategy
4. Request staff update the City Council on risk management and safety policies
5. Evaluate adequacy of senior safety positions throughout the organization
MOTION PASSED: 3-0
2. Investment Advisory Services Overview
Assistant Director Christine Paras stated that Council approved the transition of investment
management to a specialized firm in the 2026 adopted budget. The contract with Chandler
Asset Management was approved by Council in June. The Committee wanted more information
and discussion on what the transition to a specialized firm would look like.
Council Member Lythcott-Haims noted this transition was big and the Finance Committee was
not consulted beforehand.
Senior Relationship Manager Neil Murthy gave a brief background of the firm, which provided
customized investment programs tailored to a client’s investment policies within the confines
of California code. The firm was a fiduciary to the City and must put City interests first when
making decisions on the investment portfolio. There were $42.4B assets under management as
of June 30, 2025, 88 percent of which were public agencies. The firm worked with over 165
public agencies within California and managed funds for ACCEL.
Senior Portfolio Strategist Carlos Oblites developed the strategy for the City. There were 53
employees at the firm, which also managed 5 of the 13 cities in ACCEL.
A slide showed the breakdown of the investment team. The firm was organized into
committees. A slide showed the team that worked with the City. The initial steps to building the
investment program were to review the investment policy, analyze cash flow, develop a
portfolio strategy, and then actively manage investments. A statistical analysis was conducted
with collaboration from staff to give an overview of how the City used its money.
The cash flow analysis identified funds that were needed for immediate liquidity. It was
recommended to bifurcate the investment program between funds needed for short-term
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 9 of 12
Finance Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 10/21/2025
needs versus longer-term funds not immediately needed. It was proposed to utilize a
combination of LAIF and LGIP solutions for shorter-term cash and implement a total return
strategy for longer-term funds. It was recommended to revisit banking and custodial
arrangements to eliminate immediate transfer of payments and maturing funds and establish
bank and custodian sweeps. Senior Portfolio Strategist Oblites noted the investment advisor
will never have access to the City’s funds. A slide showed the City’s investment program as of
August 31, 2025, with a market value of $541M. The yield was 2.46 percent, which was low.
Council Member Reckdahl asked how the City got below the current yield curve. Council
Member Reckdahl queried what taxes the City paid on earned interest and if there was a credit
risk if municipal bonds yielded above treasury. Council Member Reckdahl asked why callables
were a loss.
Senior Portfolio Strategist Oblites explained the City got below the current yield curve due to
the practice of holding monies to maturity. The City’s credit quality was strong but the City
maintained an outsized exposure to municipal obligations. Small issue holdings totaled over
one-eighth of the portfolio. Senior Portfolio Strategist Oblites clarified the City was not a
taxpayer and there was credit risk with everything, including the Treasury. The yield could vary
depending on market circumstances, how much the municipal market was issuing, what the
federal reserve was doing, and/or fiscal policy. It was observed that federal agency callables
comprised nearly 60 percent of federal agency holdings. The City’s longest maturity extended
9.6 years. The large municipal exposure and small issue exposure decreased liquidity. The
proposed action was to gradually increase diversification and replace small exposures with
benchmark size issuances of $100M or greater. The federal agency callable exposure made cash
flows uncertain. The proposed action was to limit federal agency callables and let them run off
the portfolio. Callables were a loss because the City will lose money compared to the book
value.
The holdings that lasted longer than 5 years exhibited an outsized sensitivity to changes in
interest rates. The proposed action was to reduce purchases in securities longer than 5 years.
The current yield was 2.46 percent, which reflected rates available during the pandemic. The
proposed action was to implement a total return strategy with the ability to sell before maturity
while balancing the safety of the principal.
Staff had approved a strategy in which the majority of funds in the managed portfolio will range
between 1 and 5 years and average 2.5 years in duration. Staff will review and approve any
sales before maturity prior to the execution of the sale. Reinvestments will occur within City
policy and California Government Code parameters. The firm will review the City’s investment
policy and discuss with staff. Council will review and approve changes to the investment policy
during the annual investment policy review and adoption process, set to occur in spring 2026.
A slide showed the firm’s Short Term Bond composite, in which 43.8 percent of the average
portfolio was comprised of treasuries. Palo Alto held 0.82 percent in treasuries. Treasuries were
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 10 of 12
Finance Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 10/21/2025
considered safer and more liquid than federal agencies. The firm wanted to utilize asset classes
allowed by code, such as ABS and CMO.
Council Member Lythcott-Haims asked how much would be lost by putting off the investment
policy amendment until spring 2026. Council Member Lythcott-Haims wondered why the firm
did not take on the City’s Section 115 trust. Council Member Lythcott-Haims queried what the
net cost of the contract with the firm was given the internal savings and how much the move to
the firm will improve the yield.
Senior Portfolio Strategist Oblites believed the City would be better off amending the
investment policy sooner. Senior Portfolio Strategist Oblites advised focusing on the firm’s
current portfolio before revisiting the Section 115 trust.
Director Lauren Lai stated the firm had access to institutional brokers and buyers, which meant
the cost of transactions was lower than it was for the City. The firm had access to platforms and
outlets the City did not. Director Lai said City staff needed to oversee and manage the firm and
was still evaluating the staffing issue for FY2026. City staff was looking at ASD as an
organization. Director Lai said there will be more information on that in the future. Director Lai
noted the City’s portfolio was at about 2.4 percent and neighboring jurisdictions that the firm
managed were close to 4 percent.
Assistant City Manager Kiely Nose mentioned an audit the City did about 5 years ago on
investment services. The audit found a significant key person risk because it was done in-house
by single individuals. Retaining an outside investment firm was a recommendation in the Baker
Tilly audit that Council approved.
Council Member Reckdahl asked what range of time horizons were seen in the different
pockets of money the City had. Council Member Reckdahl confirmed that shorter-term
investments within the state pool will change value. Council Member Reckdahl queried what
LAIF holds and if it was subsidized. Council Member Reckdahl wondered if the firm was worried
about an unexpected, impactful event. Council Member Reckdahl asked if the average of 43
percent in the U.S. Treasury was because of a worry about flight to safety. Council Member
Reckdahl questioned how much turnover there was in a typical year when looking at other
clients’ portfolios in a steady state. Council Member Reckdahl noted that most holdings would
be between 1 and 5 years and asked if that would be uniform or if the firm would look at the
yield curve and act accordingly. Council Member Reckdahl liked that there were more
corporates on the sector allocation. Council Member Reckdahl queried if the firm stayed away
from Freddie and Fannie due to recent talks of privatization and what agencies the firm used.
Council Member Reckdahl questioned if Freddie Ks were callable. Council Member Reckdahl
wanted clarification on asset-backed securities.
Senior Portfolio Strategist Oblites explained that the firm looked at anything that was needed
for 1 year or less and advised City staff to segregate those funds and keep them in short-term
investments, such as local agency investment funds (LAIF). LAIF were not an obligation to the
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 11 of 12
Finance Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 10/21/2025
State. LAIF held securities, treasuries, sometimes agencies, and some corporates. The expense
of LAIF to the City was small because it charged a percentage of earnings rather than assets
managed. LAIF were part of a greater program called PMIA. There was a subsidy on the yield
basis. Senior Portfolio Strategist Oblites said that while the firm could not mitigate all risk, the
portfolios were built with safety as the top goal as mandated by code. The amount in treasuries
on average for 1 to 5 year short bond portfolios was a deliberate positioning based on analysis.
It was between 33 percent and 45 percent depending on the client. The reason was because
when times were volatile, investors moved toward safety. Senior Portfolio Strategist Oblites
confirmed there was not much turnover in a typical year; Sunnyvale had 3 to 4 trades a month.
Senior Portfolio Strategist Oblites referenced page 15 and explained the term structure was
dynamic based on the anticipated yield curve. Tools like the horizon analysis model were used.
California government code allowed the City to purchase up to 30 percent of an investment
program in corporate securities. Palo Alto limited corporate securities to an AA grade or higher,
whereas 56 to 60 percent of the investment grade world was grade A. The firm believed the
privatization of Freddie and Fannie will not be a big event. The firm tended not to buy Freddie
and Fannie due to having less liquidity than a 3-year treasury for only a few additional basis
points. Federal agency issuance had diminished significantly. The firm will purchase federal
agency issuances if it was a good value for the portfolio, including Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae,
Federal Home Loan Banks, Tennessee Valley Authority, etc. The firm found value in the highest
credit quality federal agency mortgage-backed securities called Freddie Ks, but the City did not
allow those in the portfolio. Freddie Ks were CMOs and were not callable. From a legal
standpoint, the City was allowed to treat CMOs as federal agencies from a compliance
perspective in investment policy. Senior Portfolio Strategist Oblites explained asset-backed
securities and said the firm only looked at the most liquid AAA tranches.
Chair Burt asked why staff must wait until next spring to update the investment policy. Chair
Burt queried how long it will take to get to the firm’s standard rate of return.
Council Member Lythcott-Haims asked why updating the investment policy will not be talked
about at the mid-year budget adjustment.
Director Lai said the investment policy was typically an item within the June budget adoption
but staff proposed to bring it forward closer to February, which was typically mid-year.
Senior Portfolio Strategist Oblites wanted to see the portfolio fall in line within the next 9
months.
Public Comment: None.
NO ACTION TAKEN
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 12 of 12
Finance Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 10/21/2025
Future Meetings and Agendas
The November 4 meeting will have items relating to the Regional Water Quality Control Plant,
the updated CIP plan, and the fourth amendment to the Green Waste Contract. The second
November meeting will have an update on major revenues, tax items, and utility items.
Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned 8:10 P.M.