CASH FLOW/ASSET ALLOCATION REVIEW

Since January 1, 1998 the majority of grant payments, operating expenses and alternative investment capital calls have been funded from the equity portfolio. As indicated on page 111-3 the equity portfolio reductions total over $24,000,000 through May, 1998. Even with these reductions, the equity portfolio allocation is 78.72% at April 30, 1998 compared to the target allocation of 75%, (page 111-4).

Rebalancing of the equity portfolio will continue in 1998. The key question is whether the present rebalancing approach should continue or should action be taken to make an immediate rebalancing adjustment of the equity portfolio to the 75% target allocation?

To facilitate discussion the following "Proforma Life Boat Drills" were prepared for the period 5/1/98 to 12/31/98:

Estimated Proforma

Total Portfolio

At 12/31/98

1.	Break-even equity portfolio returns (Page 111-5)	$600,836,000

2.	25% negative return for the equity portfolio

(Page 111-6)	$478,246,000

3.	25% negative return for the equity portfolio

but equity portfolio is rebalanced at 5/1/98

(Page 111-7)	$485,192,000

Estimated funding needs for the remainder of 1998 include the following:

Grant Payments	$21,171,000

Alternative

Investment Capital

Calls (NET)	6,200,000

Operating Expenses	4,702,000

Stadium Financing

Commitment	3,190,000	(Item IV)

Loan Repayment	48,000

$35,311,000

In addition, the balance of the Stadium Financing Commitment totaling $16,810,000 will be due in the first half of 1999 (See Item IV).

Alternative actions include:

1.	Continue as is and rebalance equity portfolio for the remainder of 1998 based on funding needs.

2.	Immediately reduce portfolio to 75% target allocation. Based on April 30, 1998 amounts, this would require approximately a $23,000,000 reduction in the equity portfolio.

We recommend option 1 above because of the following reasons:

1.	Interest rate, inflation and GDP growth appear under control with no short term sustained corrections anticipated.

2.	Mutual fund cash inflow continues at a robust level.

3.	There is greater risk to be "out of the market" rather than "in the market" at the present time.