Pension Newsroom | Pension360

New Jersey Fund Rakes In Nearly 16 Percent Returns For Year

Amidst all the pension-related turmoil in New Jersey, a piece of bright(er) news: the state’s pension fund raked in double-digit returns for fiscal year 2013-14, which ended June 30. The fund returned more than double the actuarially assumed rate of return, although the S&P 500 returned about 25 percent over the same period.

From Bloomberg:

New Jersey’s pension fund return is expected to exceed 16 percent for fiscal 2014 on gains that include an unanticipated $6.1 billion, according to the state Treasury Department.

Data as of June 30, which exclude some investments reported on a delayed basis, showed returns of 15.9 percent, treasury officials said in a statement. The fund’s total value was $80.6 billion, up from $66.9 billion four years earlier. The state investment division will report the performance to its oversight council at a meeting tomorrow.

Interestingly, unions are now presenting the argument that the strong returns only further demonstrate the need for the state to make its full contributions into the system. From NorthJersey.com:

The impressive returns, however, highlight an argument from unions that New Jersey may have missed out on even bigger gains in recent years because state contributions into the pension fund have been reduced or cut altogether, including the payment Governor Christie slashed at the end of June. Christie said he cut that payment — from a planned $1.57 billion, to $697 million — to prevent tax hikes or funding cuts to schools, hospitals and other crucial services amid a $1 billion budget shortfall.

New Jersey’s actuarially assumed rate of return stands at 7.9 percent.

Kentucky Ends Contract With Non-Profit Looking to Get Out of State Pension System

Last month, a judge ruled that Kentucky-based non-profit Seven Counties Services could legally remove itself from the state’s pension system. But lawmakers aren’t happy with the pension obligations—allegedly to the tune of $90 million—that the organization is leaving behind.

Seven Counties, a group that provides fostering and other family services, filed for bankruptcy in 2013, and as part of the proceedings they were hoping to get out of Kentucky’s pension system to avoid increasing contributions. The judge allowed the maneuver.

But now, angry lawmakers seem to not want the organization in the state at all. They chose not to renew Seven Counties’ contract with the state. From the Courier-Journal:

Prompted by angry legislators, state officials agreed Friday to jettison a $3.7 million contract with Seven Counties Services as the agency continues efforts to exit Kentucky’s underfunded pension system.

The contract provided family preservation services in the Louisville area, using in-home counselors to help families in crisis with the aim of keeping children at home or reuniting them with parents.

It will remain effective through Oct. 31 as families and children are transitioned, and officials “will move with all due haste” to execute a contract with a new provider, according to a letter from the Cabinet for Health and Family Services.

Seven Counties has provided the services for decades, and warned that cancelling the contract would harm at-risk children and around 300 families that participate in the program.

But last week, the Government Contract Review Committee rejected a proposal to renew the deal for two more years after lawmakers cited concerns over Seven Counties’ high-profile bankruptcy case.

Lawmakers are concerned that if the Seven Counties ruling stands, other state agencies will rush to get out of the state’s pension system. That would mean less contributions coming into the system.

From WFPL:

The state would have to cover $2.5 billion in unpaid pension obligations, Kentucky Retirement Systems executive director Bill Thielen said.

“The actuaries have determined it would increase the contribution rate over a 20 year period, it would ratchet up a little bit each year over 20 years about 6.5 percent, which would amount to about $2.4 billion of additional moneys over the 20 year period that would have to be picked up by the remaining employers in the system,” Thielen said.

In that vein, the contract non-renewal sets a precedent for other groups looking to follow in Seven Counties’ footsteps: if you leave the pension system, you leave the state too.

The Cities Scaling Back Pension Benefits Are The Same Ones Upgrading Their Sports Stadiums

Cash-strapped cities around the country have two things in common: one, they are slashing pension costs by scaling back benefits. Two, they are spending tens of millions of dollars on building and subsidizing sports stadiums. David Sirota has more on this interesting juxtaposition:

In Chicago, Mayor Rahm Emanuel recently passed a $55 million cut to municipal workers’ pensions. At the same time, he has promoted a plan to spend $55 million of taxpayer money on a hotel project that is part of a larger stadium redevelopment plan for Depaul University.

In Miami, Bloomberg News reports that the city “approved a $19 million subsidy for the professional basketball arena” and then six weeks later “began considering a plan to cut as many as 700 (librarian) positions, including a fifth of the library staff and more than 300 police.”

In Arizona, the Phoenix Business Journal reports that regional governments in that state have spent $1.5 billion “on sports stadiums, arenas and pro teams” since the mid-1990s. At the same time, legislators are considering proposals to cut public pension benefits, while voters in Phoenix may face a pension-cutting ballot initiative in November.

In Jacksonville, Florida, officials have not fully funded the pension system leading to a recent credit downgrade by Moody’s. At the same time, city officials just approved a $63 million plan to upgrade EverBank Field.

In New Jersey, Gov. Chris Christie is trying to block a planned $2.4 billion payment to the pension system, at the same time his administration has spent a record $4 billion on economic development subsidies and tax breaks to corporations. That includes an $82 million subsidy for the construction of a practice facility for the Philadelphia 76ers

In Louisville, Kentucky, up to $265 million in state and local tax revenues were used to finance the construction of the KFC Yum! Center, which opened in 2010. Only a few years later, Kentucky legislators enacted major cuts to the state’s pension system.

Is there an economic basis for these decisions? Sports stadiums are typically considered an economic boon for the long-term business they bring to certain areas, not to mention the jobs created during construction. But a few studies negate the notion that stadiums are economically sound investments for cities. More from David Sirota:

The officials promoting these twin policies argue that boosting stadium development effectively promotes broad economic growth. But many calculations rely on controversial and dubious assumptions that have been widely challenged.

A landmark 1997 Brookings Institution study by sports economist Andrew Zimbalist concluded that “a new sports facility has an extremely small (perhaps even negative) effect on overall economic activity and employment” and that few facilities “have earned anything approaching a reasonable return on investment” for taxpayers.

That finding was confirmed by University of Maryland and University of Alberta researchers, whose 2008 review of major academic research found that “sports subsidies cannot be justified on the grounds of local economic development.” In addition, a 2012 Bloomberg News analysis found that taxpayers have lost $4 billion on such subsidies since the mid-1980s.

At the same time, cuts to pension contributions are rarely described by public officials as negative for local economic growth, though economic data suggests otherwise. An analysis by the Washington, D.C.-based National Institute on Retirement Security notes that spending resulting from pension payments had “a total economic impact of more than $941.2 billion” and “supported more than 6.1 million American jobs” in 2012.

The timing is particularly bad in Detroit; the day voters approved a measure to cut their pensions was incidentally the same day the Detroit Red Wings unveiled their plan for a new, taxpayer-funded stadium.

Detroit Deal Leaves Pension Protection in Legal Limbo

Municipal bankruptcies are increasingly becoming a reality in the United States, and it’s changing what we know about how—and to what extent—state laws protect pension benefits.

Detroit made big waves this week when its citizens voted to cut their own pensions. But if they had not approved the ballot measure, the city would have tried to cut their benefits by even greater margins. The fact that this took place in a state with stringent legal protections for pension benefits is making observers elsewhere wonder if a new precedent has been set. From NPR:

Pension benefits already earned have always been sacrosanct, protected by federal law and, often, state constitutions. Retirees could rest easy, knowing their money couldn’t be touched.

The in Detroit by retired city workers to cut their own benefits by 4.5 percent calls all that into question.

“Detroit has raised it as a possibility,” says Daniel DiSalvo, a political scientist at City College of New York who studies public sector labor issues. “I don’t think that most people, maybe with the exception of some unions, think pensions are inviolable.”

With several other cases pending, it’s not at all clear whether federal bankruptcy law trumps traditional pension protections. Pensions continue to have strong legal protection, and there’s not going to be any great rush among states and cities to test whether cutting benefits for current retirees is something that will necessarily fly with the courts.

But the vote in Detroit does suggest that at least some pensioners might have to give up more than they ever expected.

And it won’t be too long until the possibility of more pension cuts are raised elsewhere in Michigan. Flint is considering filing for bankruptcy, as well. From Money News:

Flint, the birthplace of General Motors that once had 200,000 residents, has also endured a spectacular drop in population and factory jobs and a corresponding rise in property abandonment, much like its insolvent big brother an hour’s drive south.

If a judge rules against Flint’s effort to cut its retiree health care benefits, the city is expected to join about a dozen cities or counties that have sought help from the courts since the start of the recession.

“If we don’t get any relief in the courts … we are headed over the same cliff as Detroit,” said Darnell Earley, the emergency manager appointed by Gov. Rick Snyder to manage Flint’s finances. “We can’t even sustain the budget we have if we have to put more money into health care” for city workers.

And, if Flint follows a similar path to Detroit after declaring bankruptcy, it could mean pension benefits are the first thing on the chopping block.

This will all become a bit clearer when Detroit bankruptcy judge Steven Rhodes makes his ruling on the city’s restructuring plan. That won’t come until sometime in September.

Longer Life Expectancy Will Lead to Spike in Liabilities In Near Future

Hundreds of pension funds across the country are struggling to rein in their liabilities, but their funding situations may soon be considered even worse. That’s because an actuarial tweak that takes into account greater life expectancy will increase the liabilities on the books of many plans. From Pensions & Investments:

The measured value of liabilities for most defined benefit plans will increase between 3% and 8% with the adoption of new mortality tables, said a report from Wilshire Consulting.

The tables, released by the Society of Actuaries in exposure draft form in February, reflect an increase in the life expectancy of Americans, resulting in increased pension plan liability values and liability durations.

For women ages 25 to 85, the liability increase ranges from 5.5% to 10.5%. For males in that age group, the increase ranges from 2.5% to 17.4%.

The tables most DB plans now use to measure pension liabilities were published by the Society of Actuaries in 2000.

Some pension plans will be affected more than others, as P&I explains:

The impact of the updated tables on a particular plan will depend on the makeup of its participants, said Jeff Leonard, managing director at Wilshire Associates Inc. and head of the actuarial services group of Wilshire Consulting, based in Pittsburgh.

Some public and corporate plans are large enough to use custom mortality table and likely will stick with them, Mr. Leonard said.

For U.S. plans that rely on the industry tables, however, the mortality assumption changes are “another nail in the coffin” and might encourage some sponsoring entities to move away from DB plans altogether, Mr. Leonard said.

These changes haven’t come out of nowhere, and they won’t go into effect right away; according to Wilshire, the new tables likely won’t affect funding ratios until 2016.

Photo by Alexander Baxevanis via Flickr CC License

Puerto Rico’s Pension Obligations May Lead to US-Style Bankruptcy

Puerto Rico may not have statehood status, but it’s picking up some of the United States’ habits. Lately, that means weighing bankruptcy. And, like the United States, ballooning pension obligations are a major reason Puerto Rico is wearing the proverbial fiscal handcuffs.

From Reuters:

Momentum is building toward a deal that would make painful losses inevitable for investors holding about $20 billion in bonds issued by Puerto Rico’s highway, water and electricity authorities even as some big U.S. mutual funds launch a legal battle to squelch a new law that authorizes a restructuring.

The Puerto Rican government and most of its creditors have hired U.S.-based bankruptcy experts to advise them through the Caribbean island’s efforts to solve its debt problem, and the resolution figures to look a lot like a U.S.-style bankruptcy.

The crisis came to a head late last month when Governor Alejandro Garcia Padilla pushed through the Public Corporations Debt Enforcement and Recovery Act to create a bankruptcy-like process for restructuring the debt of commonwealth-run corporations.

This isn’t coming out of nowhere; the writing has been on the wall recently. Just two weeks ago, Fitch downgraded a number of Puerto Rico’s bonds. From a Fitch press release via Business Wire:

Puerto Rico’s bonded debt levels and unfunded pension liabilities are very high relative to U.S. states, with a large amount of outstanding debt issued for deficit financing purposes. Pension funding will remain exceptionally low even with the significant pension reform effort undertaken by the current administration, and the April 2014 Puerto Rico Supreme Court decision finding recent reforms of the teachers’ retirement system unconstitutional presented the administration with yet another challenge. The Commonwealth has stated in the past that without reform the teachers retirement system would confront an annual cash flow deficit beginning in fiscal 2020.

Puerto Rico tried earlier this year to reform its teacher pension system, which is set to run out of money by 2020. The Island passed a law that increased retirement ages and employee contributions, while mandating that the system adopt more 401(k) qualities. But a court struck down the law in April.

Jerry Brown Sends CalPERS Board Back to School

California Gov. Jerry Brown wanted to make sure that the members of the CalPERS board knew what they are doing when making decisions regarding the fund’s nearly $300 billion investment portfolio. Now, Brown can rest assured that the members have spent some time in the classroom, studying up on the topics that are relevant to the governance of the country’s largest public pension fund. That’s because he just signed a bill requiring all board members to receive 24 hours of education on a variety of investment issues every two years.

From the Associated Press:

AB1163 by Assemblyman Marc Levine, D-San Rafael, originally was introduced as a way to meet Brown’s request to “bring financial sophistication” to the California Public Employees’ Retirement System’s 13-member board, which is dominated by public employees and labor union representatives.

Its original language required adding two board members who had financial expertise and did not have a financial interest in the pension system. It also proposed replacing the State Personnel Board representative with the state Director of Finance.

The bill was changed to give board members 24 hours of education every two years, require records of board members’ compliance with education requirements, and provide an annual report on CalPERS’ website.

The topics of the training are varied, but they include fiduciary responsibilities, ethics, pension funding, benefits administration, investment management, actuarial matters, and governance. All great things to learn about when you govern one of the largest pension funds on the planet.

You can read the entire bill here.

Photo by Eric James Sarmiento via Flickr CC License

Detroit’s Pension-Slashing Plan Passed, But Creditors Remain the City’s Biggest Obstacle

When Detroit bankruptcy judge Steven Rhodes considers whether to approve the city’s sweeping debt-cutting plan, he will take into strong consideration what the city’s voters had to say. He’ll see that Detroit’s pension holders overwhelmingly approved the ballot measure today which cut pension benefits and cost-of-living-adjustments, among other things.

But he’ll also see the discontent coming from another group receiving much less media attention: Detroit’s creditors. Those include banks, hedge funds, individual investors and average Detroit citizens who hold the city’s bonds, which have become worthless. Some of these bondholders are going to be paid back in full, but others won’t; Detroit is offering as little as 10 cents on the dollar to investors who own certain bond classes.

Needless to say, the owners of those bonds aren’t happy. And they expressed that discontent by voting “no” on the ballot measure that passed today. Still, Judge Rhodes will consider their opinions when ruling whether Detroit’s restructuring plan is legal.

There are twelve classes of bonds, and the Detroit Free Press has a fantastic breakdown of how those classes voted and their unique situations. You can read the whole thing here, but here are some of the more interesting ones:

Class 1: Water and sewer bondholders

Who owns or controls this debt? Major bond insurers, individuals and financial giants such as Black Rock

What they’re owed: $5.8 billion

The city’s offer: 100%

Back story: This debt is secured, which means it’s protected from cuts. Nonetheless, mediation talks between the city and the bondholders have tarried without a settlement. Why? Because the city is trying to replace the bonds without paying all future interest.

How they voted: 119 sub-classes of bondholders voted no, while 32 voted yes.

Classes 2-4, 6: Secured general obligation bonds, other secured claims, U.S. Housing and Urban Development loans, parking bonds

Who owns or controls this debt? A variety of investors (Classes 2-3, 6); Uncle Sam (Class 4)

What they’re owed: $494 million (Classes 2-3); $90 million (Class 4); $8 million (Class 6)

The city’s offer: 100%

Back story: This debt has rock-solid legal standing and the city can’t get out of it.

How they voted: These creditors don’t vote because they are receiving full payment.

Class 7: Limited-tax general obligation bonds

Who owns or controls this debt? Ambac Assurance and Black Rock control most of it, with Syncora holding a smaller amount.

What they’re owed: $164 million

The city’s offer: 34%

Back story: Black Rock and Ambac agreed to a tentative settlement, but all of the terms have not been released.

How they voted: Bondholders representing 99.8% of the claims and the votes rejected the plan — likely because the settlement has not been finalized.

Class 8: Unlimited-tax general obligation bonds

Who owns or controls this debt? The lion’s share is controlled by bond insurers Assured, Ambac and National Public Finance Guarantee.

What they’re owed: $388 million

The city’s offer: 74%

Back story: The bond insurers agreed to a deal to allow the city to divert 26% of their debt to low-income retirees who face pension cuts. But this deal will face legal challenges during the trial.

How they voted: 87% of bondholders representing 97% of the debt voted “yes” to approve the deal.

Class 9: Pension obligation certificates of participation (COPs)

Who owns or controls this debt? Syncora and FGIC insured the debt, which is mostly owned by European banks and five major hedge funds that recently acquired about half of it

What they’re owed: $1.473 billion

The city’s offer: 0% to 10%

Back story: The fiercest fight in the bankruptcy is here. Syncora and FGIC argue they are being unfairly treated and have pushed for the City of Detroit to consider selling Detroit Institute of Arts treasures to pay their debts. The hedge funds have also objected to the city’s proposal.

How they voted: It was an emphatic “no,” with not a single “yes” vote.

Class 10: Police and Fire Retirement System pensions

Who owns or controls this debt? Police and fire retirees and active uniform employees who are vested in their pensions

What they’re owed: $1.25 billion in unfunded future pension promises

The city’s offer: 100% payment of their monthly pension checks and a reduction in annual cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) increases from 2.25% to 1%.

Back story: The U.S. government-appointed Official Committee of Retirees, a major retiree association and the pension board representing the police and fire retirees reached a deal with the city to recommend a “yes” vote. With a “yes” vote by Classes 10 and 11, the city would agree to transfer the DIA to an independent charitable trust in exchange for foundation, state and DIA donations directed toward pensions.

How they voted: 82% of police and fire pensioners representing 82% of the debt voted “yes” to support the deal.

Class 14: Other unsecured claims

Who owns or controls this debt? A variety of creditors, including people who sued the city and won settlements, as well as city vendors that had contracts canceled

What they’re owed: An estimated $150 million

The city’s offer: 10% to 13%

Where they stand: This group of creditors is not well coordinated, but it includes a major Macomb County water claim expected to vote no.

How they voted: This class voted no by a 53-47% margin in number and by a 61-39% margin in total claims.

There are two ways this could play out:

1) Detroit reaches a settlement with creditors, likely paying them around 10 cents on the dollar for many of their bonds.

And, if a settlement can’t be reached:

2) Judge Rhodes will determine whether to force the creditors to accept cuts.

The trial starts next month, but likely won’t be finished until September.

Detroit Voters Pass Pension Cuts By A Landslide

The long-awaited news has finally come: Detroit’s pension holders have approved a ballot measure that cuts their pension benefits as part of the city’s bankruptcy plan. There was much speculation about whether the measure would pass. In the end, though, it wasn’t even close. The Wall Street Journal had the final tally:

The official count, filed late Monday night, showed 82% of those eligible for a police or fire pension who voted supported the plan. Roughly 73% of other retirees and employees with pension benefits who voted favored the plan. Voting lasted through early July.
The voting margins from pension holders were seen as an endorsement for the city’s plan to confront an estimated $18 billion in long-term obligations.
“The voting shows strong support for the City’s plan to adjust its debts and for the investment necessary to provide essential services and put Detroit on secure financial footing,” Detroit Emergency Manager Kevyn Orr said.
Despite the critical nature of the vote, a sizable chunk of those eligible sat out. About 59% of police and firefighter pension holders and 42% of other pension holders cast ballots, according to the city’s legal filing.

Need a recap of what exactly the “yes” vote means? Here’s an explanation from Click On Detroit:

General retirees would get a 4.5 percent pension cut and lose annual inflation adjustments. Retired police officers and firefighters would lose a portion of their annual cost-of-living raise.
Ballot approval of the pension changes triggers an extraordinary $816 million bailout from the state of Michigan, foundations and the Detroit Institute of Arts. The money would prevent the sale of city-owned art and avoid deeper pension cuts. The judge, however, still must agree.

That last line is key: the city’s bankruptcy judge still has to OK the plan. But it was always assumed that if voters passed it, the judge would too.

To read the official declaration released by the bankruptcy court, click here.

Pennsylvania Recieves Third Consecutive Credit Downgrade, and Its Pension System Is The Culprit

Just a few weeks ago, Pension360 covered the story of Pennsylvania’s pension tussle; in short, the state’s governor wanted lawmakers to address pension reform before they left on their vacations. Well, lawmakers are now on vacation and pension reform is gathering dust. The state’s credit rating is now paying the price.

From Reuters:

Moody’s Investors Service downgraded its rating on Pennsylvania debt to Aa3 from Aa2 on Monday, the third consecutive year that a new state budget has prompted a credit cut.
Moody’s cited underperforming revenues and the continued use of one-time measures in its latest downgrade. After wrestling with lawmakers over public pensions and cutting millions of dollars through line-item vetoes, Pennsylvania Governor Tom Corbett didn’t sign the 2015 budget until more than a week after the start of the new fiscal year on July 1.
The state has about $50 billion of unfunded long-term pension liabilities. About 63 cents of every new dollar of state revenue goes to pay pension costs, Corbett, a Republican, has said.
In order to close a deficit of about $1.5 billion without raising taxes, the state’s Republican-run legislature passed a spending plan that included one-time transfers of money from dedicated funds, such as one that helps volunteer fire companies purchase equipment.
Growing pension liabilities, coupled with modest economic growth, will limit Pennsylvania’s ability to regain structural balance in the near term, Moody’s said.

But the state can’t say it wasn’t warned; in fact, Moody’s, Fitch and S&P all warned Pennsylvania that they would be forced to downgrade its credit rating if the state produced an inadequate budget. A big part of what defined “adequacy”, in the eyes of the agencies, was doing something about the state’s dangerously unhealthy pension system.

Moody’s noted two key trends in its warning, released back in late April:

* High combined debt position driven by growing unfunded pension liabilities, and a history of significantly underfunding pension contributions that will be reversed slowly over the next four years
* Rapidly growing pension contributions will absorb much of the commonwealth’s financial flexibility over the next four years challenging its ability to return to structural balance or make meaningful contributions to the depleted budget stabilization fund

Moody’s, in its latest report, left the door open for upgrading the state’s rating. On the other hand, it also left the door open to downgrade it further. From Watchdog.org:

The rating could improve, Moody’s said, if the state reduced its long-term liabilities, including its unfunded pension liability. The rating could also rise if Pennsylvania replenished its reserves and revenues came in above projections, Moody’s indicated.
In turn, the rating could drop more if revenues come in worse than expected, if long-term liabilities grow and if further declines pressure liquidity, Moody’s said.
Moody’s gave Pennsylvania a stable outlook, saying that while Pennsylvania’s economy will grow more slowly than the United States on average, it has stabilized. Moody’s also cited a “recent history of improved governance, reflected in timely budget adoption and proactive financial management.”

Pennsylvania now has the third-worst credit rating among all 50 states. Illinois and New Jersey are the only states that carry lower ratings.

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