CalPERS Commits $100 Million to San Francisco Bay Apartment Developments

businessman holding small model house in his hands

CalPERS has committed $100 million to the AGI Resmark Housing Fund, which invests in three apartment development sites in the San Francisco Bay area.

More details from IPE Real Estate:

CalPERS, which declined to comment, has now allocated a total of $300m into its emerging manager program for real estate, having previously backed Sack Properties and Rubicon Point Partners in the office and data centre sectors.

[…]

With leverage at 70%, total investment could be as much as $330m.

Development properties are unlikely to be sold to other institutional owners, as was the case with Avant Housing.

Holding apartment developments and transferring them to another CalPERS account once the properties become core is a more likely option, IP Real Estate understands.

AGI Capital and the Resmark Company are serving as the respective emerging and mentoring managers for the fund.

CalPERS has previously worked with AGI in its Avant Housing venture with TMG Partners, to which it made a $100m allocation.

Resmark, which has since replaced TMG, expects three development sites to be placed into the new relationship with AGI.

An existing, 259-unit project, previously under the control of TMG and Avant Housing, has been moved to the new venture.

Ground-breaking is scheduled in the next 30 days, with the project due for completion in 19 months.

CalPERS is in the midst of a plan to increase real estate investments by 27 percent over the next few years.

Video: Insights From Switzerland’s Pension System

The above talk was given by Monika Buetler (Universitaet St. Gallen) at the 2014 Pension Research Council Conference; Buetler spoke about her research into Switzerland’s three pillar pension system.

From the video description:

This paper takes Switzerland’s much praised three pillar system to illustrate some of the challenges pension system reforms face in an ageing society. It shows that policy makers are confronted by both individuals with behavioral anomalies and by others strategically exploiting the system. The trade-off between incentives and providing adequate retirement income limits policy options, especially if reforms do not want to impose too many restrictions on individual choice and avoid excessive burdens for the young generation. Reforms can also be seriously challenged by political constraints, in particular institutions of direct democracy.

Canada Pension Plan Returned 3.4 Percent in Second Quarter

Canada blank mapThe Canada Pension Plan Investment Board (CPPIB) has crunched its numbers for the second quarter, which ended Sep. 30.

CPPIB investments returned 3.4 percent over the period; that’s an improvement over the 1.6 percent return experienced by plan investments in the first quarter.

The CPPIB returned 16.5 percent in fiscal year 2013-14.

More on the return figures from the Globe and Mail:

CPPIB said its assets grew by $7.6-billion in the fiscal second quarter ended Sept. 30, with assets increasing to $234.4-billion from $226.8-billion in the previous quarter.

Growth consisted of $7.5-billion in net investment income and $0.1-billion from new contributions.

The modest return is in stark contrast to much higher returns posted last year, as growth in global markets slows.

“During the quarter, our investment portfolio reflected mixed performance from the global public equity markets, balanced by solid returns from our fixed income assets and positive contributions from our private investments,” CPPIB president and chief executive officer Mark Wiseman said.

“We continue to realize the benefits of a globally diversified, resilient portfolio that is designed to deliver superior returns over the long term.”

Canada’s largest pension fund manager said on Thursday that the Chief Actuary of Canada has projected that the fund will attain a 4-per-cent rate of return after inflation on a long-term basis.

CPPIB has a five-year rate of return of 8.2 per cent and a 10-year return rate of 5.6 per cent, above the actuary’s assumptions.

The CPPIB’s allocates 33 percent of its assets to public equities, 32.5 percent to fixed income, 10.8 percent to real estate, 5.4 percent to infrastructure and 18.3 percent to private equity.

Pennsylvania Teachers’ Pension Puts $2 Billion of Private Equity Stakes Up For Sale

SALE signs

The Pennsylvania Public School Employees’ Retirement System (PSERS) is attempting to sell a significant portion of its stakes in various private equity funds.

The pension fund is looking to sell off $2 billion of such investments, a total that amounts to about 22 percent of its private equity holdings.

PSERS is putting the stakes up for sale to cash in on high prices.

From Bloomberg:

Pennsylvania Public School Employees’ Retirement System is offering about $2 billion of private-equity fund stakes for sale after prices for such investments reached the highest levels since the 2008 financial crisis

The $53.3 billion system, known as Psers, hired Dallas-based investment bank Cogent Partners to manage the sale process, said three people with knowledge of the matter, who asked not to be identified because the information is private. The amount for sale is less than a quarter of the plan’s $8.7 billion private-equity holdings as of June 30.

“We are considering a secondary sale since we are overweight in our long-term allocation to private equity and have been since coming out of the financial crisis,” said Evelyn Tatkovski Williams, a spokeswoman at the plan.

The pension system’s level of private-market investments was near its 21 percent target as of June 30, according to data on the Psers website. Private markets includes private equity, private debt and venture capital.

Bill Murphy, a managing director at Cogent in New York, declined to comment on the sale process.

The pension plan reported a net investment return of 3.3 percent for private markets during the quarter ended June 30 and 14 percent for the latest fiscal year.

PSERS manages $53.3 billion in assets and is 63.8 percent funded.

 

Photo by  Simon Greig via Flickr CC License

CalSTRS Stepped Up “Green” Bond-Buying By 300 Percent In 2014

windmill farm

CalSTRS released its Green Initiative Task Force report on Wednesday. The report highlights the pension fund’s “environmental-themed investments” and risk-management efforts related to climate change.

The report reveals that it increased its purchases of “green bonds” by 300 percent in 2014. Investopedia defines a “green bond”:

These bonds are created to encourage sustainability and the development of brownfield sites. The tax-exempt status makes purchasing a green bond a more attractive investment when compared to a comparable taxable bond. To qualify for green bond status the development must take the form of any of the following:

1) At least 75% of the building is registered for LEED certification;

2) The development project will receive at least $5 million from the municipality or State; and

3) The building is at least one million square feet in size, or 20 acres in size.

From a CalSTRS press release:

California State Teachers’ Retirement System’s (CalSTRS) eighth annual Green Initiative Task Force report shows an almost 300 percent increase in green bond purchases within the Fixed Income portfolio. This year, the Teachers’ Retirement Board identified sustainable investing as a key, strategic priority, which is reflected in the report and other initiatives.

The growth in green bonds aligns with a commitment that CalSTRS Chief Executive Officer Jack Ehnes made during his participation in the 2014 Climate Summit where he announced that CalSTRS will more than double the fund’s clean energy and technology investments of $1.4 billion to $3.7 billion over the next five years. The move is in response to United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s call for bold action to build resilience to the impacts of climate change.

“Targeting the clean energy and technology sector provides a good investment opportunity while positioning CalSTRS for a low-carbon future,” noted Ehnes. “But more importantly, we hope our actions will help catalyze incentives for comprehensive climate change policies that ultimately lead up to a global agreement in Paris in 2015.”

CalSTRS sees a growing number of investment opportunities in low-carbon solutions, especially as renewable technology costs come down and regional clean energy policies take hold.
“Our growth of green-related investments is a good example of successful engagement on environmental and climate risk issues,” said CalSTRS Chief Investment Officer Christopher J. Ailman. “Looking forward, we hope to bring more attention to the role large institutional investor’s play in financing green bonds, clean energy and climate change initiatives.”

The entire Green Initiative Task Force report can be read here.

 

Photo by penagate via Flickr CC

Survey: 81 Percent of Pension Funds Looking to Bring More Investment Management In-House

wall street

CalSTRS recently announced its plans to eventually manage 60 percent of its assets internally. According to a recent survey, a majority of pension funds are beginning to think the same way.

A survey by State Street released this week found that 81 percent of pension funds are planning to bring more investment management duties in-house in the near future.

From BenefitsPro:

81 percent of funds are exploring bringing more management responsibilities in-house over the next three years.

Cost concerns are driving the trend, as 29 percent of funds said it is becoming more difficult to justify the fees paid to outside managers.

“Pension funds’ desire to deliver strong investment returns to their participants coupled with improved oversight and governance is leading to a need for more in-house accountability for asset and risk management,” said Martin Sullivan, head of asset owner sector solutions for North America.

The State Street data doesn’t suggest that outside management will become obsolete, but rather that pension funds are becoming more judicious about how they select and manage outside relationships.

The largest funds have the capacity to handle multi-asset management in-house, but they are in the minority, Sullivan noted.

“The majority of pension funds will need to make a choice about where to be a specialist and when a sub-contractor is needed,” he said.

The survey examined responses from 134 defined benefit and defined contribution funds around the globe.

The survey also found funds are willing to take on more risk:

While pensions funds re-examine their relationships with outside managers, 77 percent are also reporting a need to increase their risk appetite to boost lackluster returns.

That means a greater push into alternatives, as equities and fixed-income “may look pricey.”

“Pension funds are finding that a small allocation to alternatives is not sufficient to generate the required growth. This is forcing many of them to place bigger bets on alternatives,” according to the report.

The full report, called “Pension Funds DIY: A Hands-On Future for Asset Owners,” can be found here.

Pension Funds Push G20 Leaders to Regulate and Reform With Long-Term Investing in Mind

G20 2014 logo

Pension funds and other investors participating in the Fiduciary Investors Symposium at Harvard University have written a letter to Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott encouraging him and other G20 leaders to implement regulations and reforms that encourage long-term investing.

[The letter can be read at the bottom of this post.]

Australia is hosting the 2014 G20 summit.

From the letter:

There was a request to alert you to this support from the industry and to request action from G20 leaders on the following:

1. That we acknowledge the OECD’s definition of long-term capital in terms of being patient, engaged and productive.

2. That investor voices can play an important role in the discussion of those factors that are fundamental to the development of a sustainable financial system that delivers benefits to the economy, our societies and the planet, now and into the future.

3. That asset owners, including pension funds, sovereign funds and endowments have an interest to ensure that, in order to provide strong financial returns, and effective stewardship of assets as well as value creation, all the stakeholders in funds management need to be well informed about and active in pursuing a long term investment horizon. This requires a commitment to stronger direct engagement with companies and changes in reporting cycles and greater transparency.

4. That regulation can be enabling of long-term investment and we want to ensure that regulation does not inhibit long-term investment. We therefore encourage a deeper level of engagement between asset owners and investment managers with policy makers that relate to the evolving global financial, economic and social processes as they become more integrated and more complex and help design a regulatory framework that helps and does not hinder long-term investment.

Read the entire letter here, or below.

 

[iframe src=”<p  style=” margin: 12px auto 6px auto; font-family: Helvetica,Arial,Sans-serif; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 14px; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; -x-system-font: none; display: block;”>   <a title=”View G20 Letter on Scribd” href=”https://www.scribd.com/doc/246380236/G20-Letter”  style=”text-decoration: underline;” >G20 Letter</a></p><iframe class=”scribd_iframe_embed” src=”https://www.scribd.com/embeds/246380236/content?start_page=1&view_mode=scroll&show_recommendations=true” data-auto-height=”false” data-aspect-ratio=”undefined” scrolling=”no” id=”doc_81507″ width=”100%” height=”600″ frameborder=”0″></iframe>”]

 

Photo by G20.org

New Chicago Treasurer Makes Pension Funding His Priority

chicago

Chicago Treasurer Stephanie Neely is stepping down at the end of November.

Her replacement, Kurt Summers, said his priority will be fixing the city’s pension systems. From the Chicago Sun-Times:

The full City Council is expected to ratify the appointment of Kurt Summers at Wednesday’s meeting, but the incoming treasurer is not waiting for the vote before rolling up his sleeves and getting to work.

He’s already meeting with actuaries and pouring over the books of the four city employee pension funds.

They include the Municipal Employees and Laborers funds that have already been reformed and police and fire pension funds still waiting for similar action.

In 2016, the city is required by law to make a $550 million contribution to shore up police and fire pension funds with assets to cover just 29.6 and 24 percent of their respective liabilities.

Much of that money will have to come from Chicago taxpayers.

That’s because, unlike Municipal Employees and Laborers, police officers and firefighters do not get compounded cost of living increases.

The process of making the city’s pension funds healthy, he said, includes decreasing investment fees and increasing investment returns. In other words, “investing more efficiently and less expensively.” From the Sun-Times:

As a member of the board overseeing all four city employee pension funds, Summers said he can “make a dent” in the taxpayer burden by reducing investment fees and bolstering returns.

Summers noted that the firefighters and laborers pension funds are paying dramatically higher fees to their investment managers than the Municipal Employees and police pension funds.

“One fund is paying 80 percent more in fees. Another is paying 50 percent more. Yet, there’s one client: The city of Chicago. That’s real money. For fire, the value of that is about $2.5 million-a-year on $1 billion in assets,” he said.

“These kinds of things aren’t going to solve the kinds of holes we have. But any benefit we can find to invest more efficiently and less expensively is a benefit to taxpayers and retirees.”

Summers noted that the bill that saved the Municipal and Laborers Pension funds — by increasing employee contributions by 29 percent and reducing employee benefits — assumes an “actuarial rate of return” on investments of 7.5 percent-a-year.

That makes it imperative that the funds invest in the “right type of assets,” he said.

“If there’s market shock during that time that looks anything like what happened in 2008 — or even what we saw in July — then you end that period of fixed, graduated contributions with less funding than was modeled out in the legislation and there’ll have to be greater catch-up to get to 90 percent funding,” Summers said.

“We’ll have to have portfolio and asset allocation changes to protect our rate of return because ultimately, the taxpayers and retirees are relying on us to hit that number and, if we don’t, they have a bigger bill on the other side of the graduated payments structure.”

That doesn’t necessarily mean being conservative, he said.

“It’s a common misconception to say, `If I invest in the markets or fixed-income [instruments], we’re gonna be protected, but real estate, private equity or hedge funds are risky.’ That’s plain wrong,” Summers said.

“The reality is, you have just as much, if not more exposure to risk and volatility in the market with investments in basic public securities than you do with alternative products meant to mitigate risk and limit volatility. That’s the business I was in — trying to do that for clients around the world.”

As Treasurer, Summers would be a trustee of the city’s pension funds.

NYC Comptroller Explains Boardroom Accountability Project in Open Letter

boardroom chair

New York City Comptroller Scott Stringer is pushing corporations to give their biggest investors – often pension funds – more power over corporate boardrooms.

Stringer says pension funds can use their leverage as large shareholders to rein in excessive executive compensation and make corporate boards more diverse.

From a piece written by Stringer in Wednesday’s Daily News:

In partnership with the city’s pension funds, recently launched the Boardroom Accountability Project, a national initiative designed to improve the long-term performance of American companies by giving shareowners the right to nominate directors using the corporate ballot — also known as proxy access.

Proxy access promises to transform corporate elections from rubber-stamp affairs, where one slate of candidates is listed on an official ballot determined entirely by current officeholders, to true tests of merit and independence.

Bringing accountability to the boardroom will have real benefits for the retirement security of millions of Americans, including the 700,000 municipal workers , retirees and their beneficiaries who rely on city pension funds.

A recent report by the CFA Institute, the world’s largest association of investment professionals, concluded that on a marketwide basis, bringing more democracy to the boardroom could increase U.S. market capitalization by up to $140 billion.

We have focused our initial list of 75 companies being targeted around three core issues: those with excessive CEO pay, those with little or no gender or racial diversity on their board, and many of our most carbon-intensive energy companies. They include Urban Outfitters, ExxonMobil, Abercrombie & Fitch and Netflix.

Excessive CEO pay is a problem in itself and can create perverse incentives for management to focus on short-term profits at the expense of long-term value creation. It is also often a sign of a captive board that puts the interests of management ahead of the interests of shareholders.

And while most agree that more diverse boards make better decisions, the pace of change is glacial. In 2006, women made up 11% of S&P 1500 board seats. By last year, that number had barely budged (to 15%), and also as of last year, 56% of S&P 100 companies had no women or minority-group members in their highest-paid senior executive positions.

That’s bad for business, investors and our economy, and we will use our leverage to change it.

Lastly, we know that transitioning the world’s energy production to low-carbon sources is essential if we are to stem the most extreme effects of climate change. But the CEOs of the world’s major energy companies have little incentive to make investments that may reduce earnings today to protect their companies’ long-term prosperity.

In corporate America, the buck stops with the board. As a result, the right of shareowners to nominate and elect truly independent directors that reflect a diversity of viewpoints is critical to ensuring that the interests of long-term shareowners triumph over the pressure for short-term gains that all too often drives decisions at our largest corporations.

Read the whole piece here.

Detroit’s Pension Problems Not Over Yet – As Costs Remain High, City’s Payments Remain Small

Detroit

Judge Steven Rhodes approved Detroit’s bankruptcy plan last week. But he used the moment to re-iterate that Detroit isn’t out of the water yet.

One thing in particular worries Judge Rhodes, who said his “greatest concern…arises from the risks that the city retains relating to pension funding.”

Retirees have accepted benefit cuts, but pension problems still linger. Among them: Detroit’s unwillingness to make full payments to its pension systems. From the New York Times:

Documents filed with his court show that Detroit plans to continue its past practice of making undersize pension contributions in the near term while promising to ramp them up in the future. This approach is by no means unusual; many other cities and states do it, on the advice of their actuaries. Detroit’s pension fund for general city workers, now said to be 74 percent funded, is scheduled to go into a controlled decline to just 65 percent by 2043; the police and firefighters’ fund will slide to 78 percent from 87 percent. After that, the city’s contributions are scheduled to come roaring back, bringing the plan up to 100 percent funding by 2053.

This will work, of course, as long as the city has recovered sufficiently by then. The state’s contribution to the grand bargain lasts until 2023, with the foundations and the art museum continuing to kick in until 2033. Eventually the payouts will begin to shrink some as current retirees fall off the rolls. Active workers have already shifted to a hybrid pension plan, and they will start to bear most of the new plan’s investment risk. But the city faces decades of payments for retirees under the old plan.

“The city has the potential to be saddled with an underfunded pension plan,” warned Martha E.M. Kopacz, the independent fiscal expert Judge Rhodes hired to help him determine whether Detroit’s exit strategy was feasible.

Ms. Kopacz, a senior managing director with Phoenix Management Services, did find it feasible, but expressed many reservations, especially about pensions.

“The city must be continually mindful that a root cause of the financial troubles it now experiences is the failure to properly address future pension obligations,” she said in her report. Judge Rhodes said on Friday that he agreed.

Despite benefit cuts, the city’s pension costs are still high. Since the city isn’t paying full contributions, even more pressure will be put on investment returns to cover costs. From the Times:

Even after the benefit cuts, the city’s 32,000 current and future retirees are entitled to pensions worth more than $500 million a year — more than twice the city’s annual municipal income-tax receipts in recent years. Contributions to the system will not be nearly enough to cover these payouts, so success depends on strong, consistent investment returns, averaging at least 6.75 percent a year for the next 10 years. Any shortfall will have to ultimately be covered by the taxpayers.

Judge Rhodes’ full opinion can be read here.


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /home/mhuddelson/public_html/pension360.org/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 3712