Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cash Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committees authorize $17 million for delayed capital calls and approve $10 million internal rebalancing
Summary
Marquette and Bolton told the committees delayed IFM and Brookfield capital calls left the plans underweight in infrastructure; the board approved $8.5 million for IFM and $8.5 million for Brookfield from money market accounts and an internal $10 million share sale between Non‑Uniformed and Uniformed plans to rebalance cash.
Marquette Associates told the joint committees that infrastructure allocations were near policy but that delayed capital calls—most notably from IFM—had left the master trust underweight in infrastructure and overweight in cash. To cover the delayed capital calls, Marquette recommended using $8.5 million from money market accounts to fund the IFM call and an additional $8.5 million to fund the Brookfield call, with both amounts divided pro‑rata between the Uniformed and Non‑Uniformed plans according to the most recent Wilmington Trust allocation. The committee approved the recommendation on a unanimous motion by Emily C. Fiftal, seconded by Melanie Thom.
Because funding both capital calls would exhaust most of the Non‑Uniformed Plan’s remaining cash, Marquette and Bolton recommended an internal rebalancing: the Non‑Uniformed Plan would sell $10 million in Master Trust shares to the Uniformed Plan, and the Uniformed Plan would supply $10 million in cash. Bolton and Marquette described the transaction as a standard internal cash‑management mechanism that preserves total trust assets; Wilmington Trust will adjust plan allocation percentages following the transaction. The committee unanimously approved the internal rebalancing on a motion by Tyler Muntz, seconded by Emily C. Fiftal.
Committee members asked whether these internal transactions could distort allocation targets over time. Marquette, Bolton and Wilmington Trust said adjustments to plan percentages following the sale would maintain the intended allocation structure and that the transaction had precedent in prior internal rebalancing activity.
