Ted Ballantine | Pension360

Video: Fixing the Kentucky Retirement Systems

Watch the above video for an in-depth discussion on the problems and politics surrounding the Kentucky Retirement Systems and potential solutions to the funding woes that plague the system, in particular the “non-hazardous” portion of the system.

The interviewee is Jim Carroll, who runs the Facebook group Kentucky Government Retirees and has taken an active role in raising awareness among citizens and pushing lawmakers for change.

As Carroll points out in the video: “There aren’t any good answers to this [funding shortfall].”

There are, however, options to improve the system’s health – although none are particularly pleasant.

The KERS non-hazardous plan is among the unhealthiest in the country. The system is only 23 percent funded and is one market downturn away from complete insolvency.

Rhode Island, Raimondo Defend Hedge Fund Position After CalPERS Pullout

Rhode Island’s pension fund invests nearly $2 billion in hedge funds, or 14 percent of its overall portfolio.

In light of CalPERS high-profile pullback from hedge funds, The Providence Journal asked Gina Raimondo, Rhode Island’s Treasurer, for her thoughts on CalPERS’ decision and the fate of hedge funds in Rhode Island’s portfolio:

State Treasurer Gina Raimondo sees no immediate reason to pull Rhode Island’s pension money out of hedge funds, just because the largest public pension fund in the U.S. – the California Public Employees Retirement System – has announced plans to do so over the next year.

[…]

Asked Tuesday if Rhode Island would take its cue from Calpers, Raimondo chief of staff Andrew Roos said: “We will continue to learn from best practices around the country and will look closely at the CalPERS decision.’’

But he said: “Rhode Island’s pension fund is less than 3% the size of Calpers and has very different funding and cash-flow needs. Given our fund’s different characteristics, we will continue to pursue strategies that pursue the best outcomes for Rhode Island pension participants.’’

Roos acknowledged that the state’s hedge-fund-heavy strategy brings loads of fees. He also admitted that the hedge funds have under-performed in 2013 compared to the rest of the pension fund’s portfolio. But he stood by the investments. He told the Providence Journal:

“Every action the State Investment Commission has taken during this administration has been to promote retirement security and ensure funds will be available to pay pension checks to our retirees,’’ he said.

“After the financial collapse of 2008-2009 when the fund lost over $2 billion dollars, the SIC reviewed its policies and unanimously adopted a plan to reduce volatility while continuing to pursue strong long-term returns … As a part of the strategy to reduce volatility while maintaining strong long-term returns, the SIC improved the pension fund’s diversification, which included making allocations to hedge funds….’’

“This strategy is working,’’ Roos said. “Over the last three years we have reduced the volatility of this portfolio by 50% and achieved strong returns (1 year: 15.12%; 3 year: 9.05% as of June 30, 2014) … [But] like every other investment the state makes, the SIC and staff are constantly evaluating and making adjustments to the hedge fund allocation to ensure it is performing as intended.’’

Rhode Island’s pension fund paid $70 million in investment fees in the 2012-13 fiscal year. Meanwhile, the state’s hedge fund investments returned around 8.8 percent in 2013-14, while the pension fund’s overall portfolio returned 15 percent over the same period.

Maryland Fund Looking For New CIO

The Maryland State Retirement and Pension System is looking to hire an executive search firm to hire the fund’s next chief investment officer.

The fund has put the Request for Proposal on their website. The document can also be found at the bottom of this post. According to Pensions & Investments, the proposals are due by September 22 at 2 pm Eastern Time.

The fund’s previous CIO, Melissa Moye, left the fund recently to work for the US Treasury Department. Pensions & Investments reported at the time:

[Moye] is leaving at the end of August to become a senior policy adviser with the U.S. Treasury Department’s office of state and local finance. Deputy CIO Robert Burd will serve as acting CIO. The board has not begun the search process yet, spokesman Michael Golden said.

At the Treasury Department, Ms. Moye will focus on public sector pensions for the office, which was created in May to coordinate efforts to oversee developments in state and local financial markets, including public pension fund liabilities. Maryland pension board chairwoman and state Treasurer Nancy Kopp said in a statement that while the board will miss Ms. Moye’s leadership, “we are thrilled with the opportunity Dr. Moye will have to apply her wealth of knowledge and experience at the national policy level.”

Ms. Moye became CIO in September 2011 after serving as acting CIO since October 2010. Before that, she was deputy treasurer for financial policy and a trustee of the state pension system. Mr. Burd started with the retirement agency in 2001 as an assistant director of externally managed investments and was named managing director of private markets in 2008.

The RFP:

[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 RFP-Executive Search Services on Scribd” href=”http://www.scribd.com/doc/240077647/RFP-Executive-Search-Services” style=”text-decoration: underline;” >RFP-Executive Search Services</a></p><iframe class=”scribd_iframe_embed” src=”//www.scribd.com/embeds/240077647/content?start_page=1&view_mode=scroll&show_recommendations=true” data-auto-height=”false” data-aspect-ratio=”undefined” scrolling=”no” id=”doc_10198″ width=”100%” height=”600″ frameborder=”0″></iframe>”]

Video: CalSTRS CIO On Sticking With Hedge Funds

In the above video, we get to hear the Chief Investment Officer of CalSTRS, Christopher Ailman, weigh in on CalPERS’ decision to divest from hedge funds. The gist: CalPERS did what was right for them, but CalSTRS is sticking with hedge funds.

“CalPERS’ decision does not change our mind or our opinion,” Ailman said during the interview.

CalSTRS made its first hedge fund seed investment earlier this year when it committed $200 million to Legion Partners Asset Management LLC. Bloomberg reported back in May:

CalSTRS, based in Sacramento, California, pledged $200 million to Legion in February and took a 30 percent minority stake, investment officer Philip Larrieu, who oversees the pension’s allocations to activist managers, said in an interview last week at the SkyBridge Alternatives Conference in Las Vegas.
The pension system, which has about $4.6 billion with activist managers including Trian Fund Management LP and Relational Investors LLC, is weighing additional investments in the strategy, especially in managers such as Legion that invest in small- and mid-cap companies. Activist investors take stakes in companies and then push for changes aimed at increasing value.

[…]

The pension system will consider additional seed investments for the ability to take minority stakes in funds and early allocations for concessions on fees, according to Larrieu. CalSTRS’ other activists include Blue Harbor Group LP, New Mountain Capital LLC, Starboard Value LP, Cartica Capital LLC and Knight Vinke. CalSTRS commits a minimum of about $100 million to each fund and prefers to be the sole investor in a pool, also known as a fund-of-one structure, Larrieu said.

Detroit Retiree Committee Explains Decision to Support Pension Cuts

When Detroit initially announced its plans to cut back worker pensions earlier this year, the Detroit Retiree Committee took a hard line: the cuts were unconstitutional and the Committee wouldn’t support them.

But the Committee eventually backed down, and retirees easily approved the pension cuts at the ballot box.

What caused the Committee to reverse course? Today, during testimony at Detroit’s bankruptcy trial, we got a glimpse of the behind-the-scenes decision-making that led to the change in sentiment. From the Detroit Free Press:

“Part of the test of whether Detroit’s plan would be successful was whether Detroit could be able to revitalize itself,” [Committee member Ron] Bloom said. “Anything we put forward, we had to feel in good faith was consistent with Detroit being able to revitalize itself.

“The city was dysfunctional. We didn’t like what they had to say often, but we felt their commitment to revitalization was sincere.”

[…]

The Retiree Committee agreed to endorse the plan ahead of a July vote by retirees. Retirees and workers voted in support of the plan.

Early on, the committee “had a pretty vigorous disagreement with how we thought the case should go,” Bloom said, adding that the retirees were never treated like favored insiders among the city’s creditors.

But as realities of the case set in, and it became clear pension cuts could be worse if retirees rejected the plan, the committee decided to back the plan.

“We believe that we received enough,” Bloom testified.

The restructuring plan, eventually endorsed by the Committee and approved by retirees, eliminated COLA increases and cut pensions by 4.5 percent.

Photo Credit: Mikerussell – Own work. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

New York Common Fund’s Hedge Fund Target Is “Under Review”

New York’s Common Retirement Fund says it is “reviewing” its hedge fund investments, including the allocation targets for such investments as set in its investment policy.

The Common Fund makes investments for the New York State and Local Retirement System (NYSLRS) as well as other systems. Pension360 previously covered the fund’s investment policy, which allows for higher allocations towards hedge funds.

Now, the Common Fund is reviewing those allocations. From Business Insider:

“We are currently reviewing our asset allocations with the goal of maximizing our risk-adjusted return on investments,” a spokesman for state Comptroller Tom DiNapoli told Business Insider on Tuesday.

[DiNapoli] stressed that only a small amount of their investments are tied up in hedge funds, however — only about 3.2% or $5.6 billion for the DiNapoli’s fund, for example.

“The target allocation, which is currently under review, was set at 4% in 2009,” DiNapoli’s office added. If he decides to maintain that target, he would actually have to move more money into hedge funds.

[…]

Scott Evans, the chief investment officer of New York City’s retirement system, said the Big Apple’s pension fund has no plans to divest from its investments in hedge funds. He pointed to the relatively small size of the city’s hedge fund investment in his explanation for why he had no plans to eliminate it.

“Hedge funds are an alternative asset class that can help improve the balance between risk and return. They are optional,” Evans said in a statement. “Two of our five systems have opted to pass on those allocations. The other three have allocated 4-5% of assets to hedge funds. We have no current plans to recommend changes to this program.”

A spokesman for the fund later clarified to Business Insider that the review was routine and scheduled, and not connected to CalPERS’ decision to end its hedge fund program.

Photo by: Christopher Chan via Flickr CC License

Advisors, Fund Managers React To CalPERS’ Hedge Fund Pullout

We’ve heard what CalPERS officials had to say about the decision to cut ties with hedge funds. But how are advisors and fund managers within the industry reacting to the news?

A few anonymous hedge fund advisors have claimed that CalPERS’ problem wasn’t hedge funds as an asset class—the problem was that the pension fund was bad at picking which hedge funds to invest in. From Business Insider:

“I think CalPERS is not a particularly good hedge fund investor,” one prominent hedge fund manager told Business Insider. He cited the pension fund’s lackluster annualized rate of return of 4.8% over the last ten years. “I would redeem too.”

He continued: “I think it’s not hedge funds as an asset class. It’s the ones they invest in.”

Another prominent hedge fund manager echoed that same sentiment.

“They got what they paid for since they only invested in managers who would cut fees. So the best funds wouldn’t do that, so they had a mediocre portfolio.”

Another investment officer gave a more measured response to the New York Times:

“I think the industry is changing. There is less tolerance for underperformance in an environment when you have a relative huge outperformance with more liquid opportunities like an S.&P.-500 index fund,” said Elizabeth R. Hilpman, chief investment officer at Barlow Partners.

“There is a lot of disappointment that hedge funds have not been able to capture more of the market results,” she added.

Several advisors gave some interesting opinions to Wealth Management, too:

“All taxable investors should take notice of this decision, because if Calpers doesn’t think the asset class is adding value for them, how does any taxable investor believe the asset class can add value in their portfolio—especially those in the top couple tax brackets?” said Scott Freund, president of Family Office Research.

[…]

“We already ignore the [hedge fund] genre because they are the Groucho Marx club of investing: The only ones that will let us in are the ones in which we don’t want to be invested,” said Stephen Barnes, investment manager and chief compliance officer of Barnes Investment Advisory. “Fees are too high. Truly a ‘heads I win, tails I don’t lose’ proposition for the hedge fund manager.”

Some advisors defended hedge funds in light of CalPERS’ decision. From Wealth Management:

Ryan Graves, wealth advisor with FirstPoint Financial, said alternatives play an important role in mitigating the risks associated with traditional asset classes.

“The time for a ‘true’ hedge fund (and not the levered up investment vehicles that many morphed into pre-2008) is when valuations are high, not after the correction has already occurred,” Graves said. “Just wait for a pullback in next 12-24 months and see how they try to explain away dumping an absolute return strategy.”

“To a contrarian this might mean it is time to consider investing in hedge funds,” said Kris Maksimovich, president of Global Wealth Advisors. “The decision could push hedge funds, especially the more expensive variety, to reconsider their pricing.”

There are plenty more quotes in the linked articles.

Photo credit: Lending Memo

San Francisco Fund Delays Hedge Fund Investments Again

The San Francisco City & County Employees’ Retirement System (SFCCERS) decided earlier this summer to invest 15 percent of its assets in hedge funds. But the fund has never invested in hedge funds before – and some board members aren’t on board with the plan in its current form.

So, for the second time in three months, the board delayed a vote on the hedge fund investments. From FinAlternatives:

The $20.6 billion public pension delayed a vote on a planned $3 billion hedge-fund allocation for the second time last week, Pensions & Investments reports. The board first put off a vote in June.

The planned alternative investments allocation has become a source of contention at the San Francisco fund. Board member Herb Meiberger has vocally opposed it, going so far as to seek—and win—the support of Berkshire Hathaway chief Warren Buffett, who urged the pension to use index funds rather than hedge funds.

Meiberger remains the only board member in certain opposition. But the other board members appeared open to joining him, as well as to supporting Chief Investment Officer William Coaker, who has championed the plan. Coaker presented a detailed report to the board on Wednesday, but his fellow members demanded still more information before voting to table the matter for another 90 days.

The key issue for board members seems to be the specific allocation of the money. Board members wanted to know, specifically, what hedge funds were to be invested in. But that information wasn’t available.

The board will vote again in early December.

Photo by Kevin Cole via Flickr CC License

New York Retirement System Is Prepared To Increase Its Allocation to Hedge Funds, Alternatives

CalPERS is running away from hedge funds, but, as Pension360 has covered in the past, most pension funds aren’t following. In fact, some are running in the opposite direction.

Case in point: the New York State and Local Retirement System (NYSLRS). The fund hasn’t made any decisions yet, but it is open to the possibility of expanding its allocation in hedge funds and other complex investments. From Public Sector Inc:

A bill passed by the New York State Senate and Assembly at the end of their session in June would expand, to 30 percent from 25 percent, the share of pension fund investments that can be allocated in “baskets” of assets not otherwise specifically permitted by law. These include hedge funds and private equity funds, which involve more complex financial risks and are more difficult to value and monitor than traditional stocks and bonds. The change has been supported in the past by Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli, NYSLRS’ sole trustee, although the lobbying effort for the bill this year appears to have been spearheaded by the New York City pension funds.

The bigger-basket pension bill hasn’t yet been sent to Governor Andrew Cuomo for his signature. If his approval or veto message contains so much as a single sentence’s worth of substantive explanation, it will exceed the sum total of all public comment devoted to the subject by state lawmakers this year. (The issue has also gone virtually unnoticed by State Capitol news media.)

In fiscal 2007, when DiNapoli became comptroller, NYSLRS paid out $162 million of investment management fees, including $27 million for alternative investments. By fiscal 2013, the latest year for which data are available, investment fees had risen to $454 million, including $163 million in the “absolute return” category alone, which includes hedge funds.

The NYSLRS has ramped up its allocation towards alternative investments in recent years. It the fund’s official investment policy is any indication, it is planning on devoting an even higher percentage of its assets towards such investments. From Public Sector Inc:

Total NYSLRS assets in the alternative category came to 11.8 percent last year, including 3.2 percent invested in absolute return strategies. However, according to its annual report, the fund’s long-term goal is to increase its alternative allocation to 21 percent, including 10 percent in private equity and 4 percent in absolute return assets including hedge funds, plus 4 percent in the newer category of “opportunistic” investments and 3 percent in “real assets” including commodities, infrastructure and timberland meant to create “inflation hedging strategies,” the annual report said.

The pension funds also announced recently a partnership with Goldman Sachs. Sachs will receive $2 billion to manage.

Pennsylvania Lawmaker Speaks Out Against “Irresponsible” Reform Efforts

Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett spent most of his summer traveling the state and touting the need for pension reform. The legislators are now back from their breaks, but pension reform bills continue to gather dust.

Republicans have been vocal about Democrat lawmakers’ unwillingness to work with the reform bills currently on the table. Now, one Democratic lawmaker has clarified why her party refuses to engage with the Republicans. Rep. Michelle F. Brownlee (D) writes in the Patriot News:

Republican leaders have already acknowledged the real pension problem is debt, not benefit costs. The solution to pension debt is the same as the solution to credit card debt: Pay the bills. Yet the Corbett/Republican pension proposal focuses on cutting benefits for future workers.

Act 120 of 2010 already cut new worker benefits starting in 2011 by nearly 50 percent, saving Pennsylvania $34 billion. Further cuts will sacrifice the retirement security of tens of thousands of future teachers, nurses, first responders, counselors and other public workers. The strain on safety net programs would stress future state budgets. Why do that when the Corbett plan offered by the Republicans, by their own admission, will do nothing to pay down the pension debt any faster?

If “reformers” truly believe we need to pay down the unfunded liability more quickly than Act 120 does, then they need to offer additional revenue so the state and school districts can do that.

It’s irresponsible, and a huge disservice to Pennsylvania, for those who do or should know better to continue misstating the pension problem and misleading the public about the solution.

She was responding to an editorial lambasting both parties, written last week by Dwight D. Weidman, vice-chairman of the Franklin County Republican party. He wrote in the Patriot News:

A very wise Pennsylvania politician recently opined, “In Pennsylvania, the unions buy Democrats, and rent Republicans”.

No doubt what the author of this statement was thinking about when he made it was the fact that close to twenty Republican legislators have steadfastly opposed any attempt to help enact urgently-needed reform to Pennsylvania’s public employee pension system, because of their ties to public sector unions.

To be sure, not a single Democrat legislator is willing to step up and save the state from certain bankruptcy, but that shouldn’t really matter, since the Republicans control both the Senate and the House and could fix our pension debt crisis, but won’t, and that is disturbing.

[…]

If lawmakers fail to act, this issue will, in time turn Pennsylvania into a large-scale version of Detroit, with both businesses and population fleeing ever more burdensome taxes that will be needed to fund the growing pension obligations.

Weidman criticized the 16 Republican assemblymen who “won’t get on board” with pension reform efforts. Many of those lawmakers receive campaign support from various unions.

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