California pensions | Pension360

CalPERS To Ditch Hedge Funds Entirely

CalPERS has been reviewing its hedge fund strategy for months, and that review initially led to a 40 percent pullback from hedge funds.

But now the California pension fund has announced plans to cut the cord from hedge funds entirely, pulling out $4 billion from 30 hedge funds. From Reuters:

Calpers, the largest U.S. pension system, said on Monday it has scrapped its hedge fund program and will pull about $4 billion in its investments from 30 such funds.

The $300 billion California Public Employees’ Retirement System said it would exit the program, known internally at Calpers as the Absolute Return Strategies (ARS) program, to reduce “complexity and costs.”

“Hedge funds are certainly a viable strategy for some, but at the end of the day, when judged against their complexity, cost, and the lack of ability to scale … the ARS program doesn’t merit a continued role,” Ted Eliopoulos, Calpers interim chief investment officer, said in a statement.

Calpers said it will spend the next year exiting 24 hedge funds and six hedge fund-of-funds, “in a manner that best serves the interests of the portfolio”.

The decision to exit the hedge fund program culminates a search, Calpers says, that began after the 2008 financial crisis to ensure it was “less susceptible to future large drawdowns.”

Calpers has signaled waning enthusiasm for the asset class for some time. It started a review of its hedge fund program this year and has said for months it would cuts its allocation to hedge funds.

CalPERS overall portfolio returned 18.4 percent last year. But it’s hedge fund portfolio earned only 7.1 percent, while racking up $135 million in fees and expenses.

Audit Estimates Legal “Pension Spiking” by CalPERS Members Could Cost State $800 Million

The California Controller released an audit on Tuesday that found a particular brand of “pension spiking”, although perfectly legal, could cost California $800 million over the next 20 years. From California Healthline:

Dozens of public agencies that contract with CalPERS have engaged in a legal form of pension spiking, putting the state on the hook for nearly $800 million over the next 20 years, according to an audit released Tuesday by the State Controller’s Office, AP/KPCC’s “KPCC News” reports (“KPCC News,” AP/KPCC, 9/9).

The legal practice involves employers withdrawing commitments to cover employees’ pension costs in their final year of work and instead adding the value of the payment to the employee’s salary. The practice was legal under a 1993 law but has since been prohibited for new employees.

The audit found that 97 agencies that contract with CalPERS have amendments allowing them to engage in the practice.

The amendments increased CalPERS members’ compensation by $39.1 million in pensionable pay annually, which could result in as much as $796 million in such compensation over two decades.

The audit found that CalPERS doesn’t have the resources to audit the 3,000 agencies with which it contracts. CalPERS said it has hired more staff recently to combat that issue, but it’s not enough. From California Healthline:

The pension fund also has insufficient resources for auditing all of the 3,100 public agencies with which it contracts. For example, the audit found that a local government contracting with CalPERS would only be audited by the pension fund every 66 years. Since the audit was performed, CalPERS has hired more staff, but the agency is still only capable of performing audits on a contracting entity once every 33 years, according to the controller’s office.

In a release, Controller John Chiang (D) said the prevalence of such issues “invites abuse” and that the pension fund “must be more vigorous in protecting taxpayers from this form of public theft.”

View the Controller’s entire audit here.

Photo credit: Lending Memo

Fitch Upholds ‘A’ Rating for California General Obligation Bonds

When CalPERS moved last week to implement 99 new types of pensionable compensation, Fitch publicly mused whether the action was a “step backward” from the state’s recent pension reforms.

But the rest of California’s economy, combined with provisions in the most recent budget which increase state funding to CalPERS and CalSTRS, was enough for Fitch to uphold its ‘A’ rating on the state’s GO bonds.

From a Fitch release:

Pension funded ratios have declined and there is a history of inadequate contributions to the teacher system; however, the state has instituted some benefit reforms and the fiscal 2015 enacted budget provides the first installment of a long-term plan to increase funding of the teacher pension system.

Full actuarial contributions to the public employees’ system are legally required, but not for the teachers’ system, leading to persistent underfunding of the latter. The state addressed teachers system funding with legislation enacted in June 2014 that will increase statutorily required contributions to the system from the state, school districts, and teachers beginning in the current fiscal year. The legislation gradually increases funding requirements, with the first installment funded in the fiscal 2015 budget, and expects that it will be fully funded by 2046.

Fitch notes that it doesn’t believe California’s two main pension funds, CalPERS and CalSTRS, are necessarily as healthy as their current funding ratios indicate. Still, a diverse economy and the hope of “improved fiscal management” were among the factors that led Fitch to avoid downgrading the state’s debt.

Fitch explains:

System-wide funded ratios on a reported basis for the state’s two main pension systems, covering public employees and teachers, have eroded due to investment losses. Based on their June 30, 2013 financial reports, the public employees’ plan reported an 83.1% system-wide funded ratio, and the teachers’ plan reported a 67% system-wide funded ratio.

Using Fitch’s more conservative 7% discount rate assumption, funded ratios for the two systems fall to 78.8% for public employees and 63.5% for teachers. On a combined basis, net tax-supported debt and pension liabilities attributable to the state at 8.3% are above the state median of 6.1%, ranking the state 31st.

The state adopted a broad package of pension reforms in 2012 that affect most state and local systems, including through benefit reductions for new workers and higher contributions for employees. While changes are expected to generate only modest near-term annual savings for the state and for local governments whose pension plans are subject to the reforms, annual savings are expected to grow considerably over time.

Fitch considers California’s GO bond outlook to be “stable”.

Photo credit: “GoldenGateBridge-001″ by Rich Niewiroski Jr. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 via Wikimedia Commons

Will Villa Park Cut Ties With CalPERS?

The California city Villa Park could vote today to remove itself from the California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS).

The decision comes in the face of mounting pension costs and calls for increased transparency in local budgets, which would shine more light on California cities’ unfunded pension liabilities.

First reported by the Voice of OC:

The Villa Park City Council could vote Tuesday to end its contract with the California Public Employees’ Retirement System or CalPERS, the world’s sixth largest pension provider, in an effort to reduce increasing pension costs.

The CalPERS move follows an Orange County Grand Jury report that called for greater budget transparency in Orange County cities.

The report indicates Orange County cities’ unfunded pension liabilities have been increasing on an annual basis since 2007.

There have been increased calls for budget transparency in recent years as cities and towns in the CalPERS system have shouldered more liabilities. A recent report called for all cities to put their budgets online and include CalPERS cost projections in all budgets going forward.

Villa Park has millions in unfunded pension liabilities. From Voice of OC:

For its pension costs, Villa Park, a north OC bedroom community of about 5,000, has a shortfall of about $3.5 million, leaving 17.5 percent of its employee pension costs unfunded, according to the grand jury report.

Gov. Jerry Brown enacted sweeping pension reforms in 2012 aimed at reducing pension payments for most public employees hired after 2013.

But because many public workers were hired before 2013, they are grandfathered into the old system, and reforms likely won’t make a dent for another decade, the grand jury report states.

Villa Park could vote on leaving CalPERS as early as 6:30 pm (Pacific Time) Tuesday. The city wouldn’t be the first to leave CalPERS; Canyon Lake, a city of 11,000, left the system in 2013 due to increasing employee contributions.

CalPERS Weighs Withdrawal From Commodities

California is often on the cutting edge of trends that eventually reverberate throughout the rest of the country. The same is true of CalPERS, the pension fund that was among the first to invest in real estate, hedge funds and private equity.

So when CalPERS announces a dramatic change in investment strategy, other funds drop what they’re doing and listen. Funds are certainly listening lately, as CalPERS is considering a handful of moves that would shift its asset allocation significantly.

Among them: the fund is considering taking all of its money out of commodities. From the Wall Street Journal:

One of the more-dramatic moves under consideration is a complete pullback from tradable indexes tied to energy, food, metals and other commodities, according to people familiar with the discussions. Calpers began making such investments in 2007 as a way of diversifying its portfolio and it currently has $2.4 billion in such derivatives, or less than 1% of total holdings.

[…]

The discussions are taking place between the fund’s interim Chief Investment Officer Ted Eliopoulos and Calpers’s other top investment executives. The Calpers board hasn’t yet been informed about any possible changes and no final decisions have been made, the people said.

The move, however jarring, wouldn’t be out of step with other recent investment decisions by CalPERS. The fund has shown a willingness to exit large investments it considers risky. From Wall Street Daily:

CalPERS’ potential retreat from riskier investments is evidence that it’s trying to simplify its portfolio and guard against losses during the next market downturn.

In a sense, CalPERS is turning to a bit of a “risk off” mode in this time of uncertainty.

Ultimately, with the realization that we’re in the midst of the Fed’s continued tapering, talk of interest rates hikes, and geopolitical unrest from the Middle East to the Ukraine, it may be time to dial down risk and play it safe.

In fact, this move is reflective of last fall, when CalPERS hinted at a shift away from complex investments, warning that the fund “will take risk only where we have a strong belief we will be rewarded for it.” This decision came after it had approved a new set of investment goals that reduced future exposure to equities and private equity, while increasing allocations to bonds and real estate.

A similar move by CalPERS also took place at the end of 2012, when the fund chopped commodities investments by more than half – prompting reports that it was shifting from commodities to inflation-linked bonds.

And in both incidences, the commodities markets experienced corrections.

CalPERS is weighing several other ideas, including whether forgo individual stocks in favor of securities that track broader industries.

CalPERS also made headlines last month when it announced it would cut its hedge fund allocation by 40 percent.

Photo by Terence Wright via Flickr CC License

Fitch Weighs In On New CalPERS Compensation Rules

This week, CalPERS approved 99 types of additional income that workers can include in their pension calculations.

The change will increase the pensions of many workers in the CalPERS system, and the fund has already drawn flak from California Governor Jerry Brown.

Now, the credit rating agency Fitch is in on the game, too. Fitch says the changes will increase pension liabilities and present additional costs to the state. From Fitch:

The expanded definition of pensionable compensation exposes public employers to higher pension liabilities and contribution expenses, and appears to be a step backward from recent reforms. The Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA) narrowed the definition of pensionable compensation for public employees in an effort to address “pension spiking,” the inflation of base pay for purposes of pension benefit calculations. This decision expands the definition of pensionable compensation, in apparent conflict with PEPRA, and will increase pension costs for public employers if implemented.

The magnitude of impact from this decision is not yet clear, but it raises more questions about the sustainability of California’s pension reform efforts, which continue to face legal and institutional challenges. Particularly worrisome to Fitch is the absence of detailed information on the analysis of its projected costs. The decision has been sharply criticized by Gov. Jerry Brown, who cited its conflicts with recent state legislation intended to reduce pension costs. City-led pension reform efforts in San Diego and San Jose remain mired in litigation while this CalPERS decision appears to open up a new front for challenging reform efforts.

Gov. Brown was actually open to most of the 99 “special pay items”. But he adamantly opposed the measures that contradicted the reform law Brown passed in 2012.

“Today Calpers got it wrong,” Brown said in a statement on Wednesday. “This vote undermines the pension reforms enacted just two years ago. I’ve asked my staff to determine what actions can be taken to protect the integrity of the Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act.”

CalPERS Board Member Facing Stiffer Penalty After Latest Failure To File Campaign Documents

What do the years 2002, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2012 and 2013 all have in common?

Those are the years that Priya Mathur, Vice President of the CalPERS board, failed to submit campaign finance documents or conflict of interest statements in a timely manner.

She was fined three times by the Fair Political Practices Commission over that period for those violations. Now, another fine is coming for her latest transgressions. From the LA Times:

At issue in the recent enforcement action was the failure to file four semiannual campaign financial statements for 2012 and 2013 in a timely manner.

In a recent email, she described the missed reports as an oversight. “I had inadvertently failed to file the proper forms in 2012 to close my campaign committee,” she said.

The proposed fine of $1,000 was announced Aug. 11 after she and FPPC attorneys reached an agreement to settle the charges. In turn, Mathur and her board reelection committee pledged not to contest the punishment.

But the panel reversed course on the $1000 dollar fine and decided they should quadruple it—raising it to $4000. The Sacramento Bee reports:

Mathur, the pension fund’s vice president, had agreed to a $1,000 fine with the staff of the state Fair Political Practices Commission. But the commissioners refused to accept the fine Thursday, arguing that Mathur should get a higher penalty because she had been fined several times before by the FPPC.

Gary Winuk, the agency’s chief of enforcement, said commissioners sent the case back to the FPPC’s staff and suggested the fine be increased to $4,000.

“Given her history … they felt it warranted a higher penalty,” he said. He said the matter could be brought back to the commission next month.

At this point, Mathur and the ethics panel probably know each other on a first name bases. But repeated disciplinary actions haven’t changed Mathur’s behavior. From the Sac Bee:

The FPPC has already fined Mathur a total of $13,000 for earlier transgressions, including late filing of campaign documents and her conflict-of-interest statements. The most recent fine came in 2010, prompting the CalPERS board to punish her by removing her as chair of the health benefits committee and suspending her from traveling on pension fund business.

In the latest case, Mathur was late filing four campaign finance statements in connection with her re-election bid. Mathur told The Sacramento Bee last week that the late filing was the result of a paperwork mix-up.

The FPPC staff, in its report to the commissioners, said it took “numerous requests” from investigators to get Mathur to finally file the documents. That conduct played a role in the commissioners’ desire for a stronger penalty, Winuk said.

The board’s election takes place next week. The election is conducted by mail.

Photo by Blake O’Brien via Flickr CC License

Which Pension Fund Is Best At Investing In Private Equity? The Results Are In

Reuters PE Hub recently surveyed 160 public pension funds across the country in an attempt to pinpoint the fund with the highest-performing private equity portfolio.

The results of the survey were released this month, and the fund with the best performance from private equity was the San Diego City Employees Retirement System (SDCERS). From KUSI News:

SDCERS’ private equity portfolio consists of 45 different funds, with commitments of $580 million. The survey noted 47 percent of SDCERS’ funds performed in the top 25 percent of all funds surveyed. The private equity program invests in all types of assets and strategies globally, including buyouts, special situations and venture capital funds.

“The success of SDCERS’ private equity program can be attributed to the thoughtful way in which the program was constructed, and the quality of the dialogue between staff and consultants,” SDCERS CEO Mark Hovey said. “I am proud of our investments team and the Board of Administration, who work tirelessly to secure a retirement future for more than 200,000 members through an effective investment strategy focused on delivering long-term results.”

SDCERS shouldn’t be confused with the San Diego County Employees Retirement Association, which gained notoriety this week when the Wall Street Journal reported on the fund’s heavy reliance on alternative investments.

SDCERS was 68.6 percent funded as of 2013.

California Governor Calls Out CalPERS On Pension Tweak

Today CalPERS approved 99 types of “special pay”, or additional income that can be included in calculating a worker’s pension.

California Governor Jerry Brown was receptive to most of the “special pay” items—except for one. But it was enough to compel him to send a letter to CalPERS urging the board not to approve the pending changes.

At issue is a section of the CalPERS proposal that allows pension benefits to be increased based on temporary pay increases and ad hoc payments.

That contradicts a section of Jerry Brown’s 2012 reform law which states that pension benefits can only be based on “normal monthly pay”, and not “short-term” pay increases. From Reuters:

Although Calpers approved 99 types of extra pay that can be factored in to a worker’s income when calculating their pension, Brown only objected to one of those: allowing temporary upgrade pay to be counted as permanent, pensionable income.

Brown, a Democrat, sent a letter to Calpers last week asking them not to allow temporary upgrade pay to count toward pensions.

On Wednesday, the Calpers board rejected Brown’s opposition and voted to pass all 99 pay provisions, including that temporary pay hikes can be factored into a final pension.

“Today Calpers got it wrong,” Brown said in a statement. “This vote undermines the pension reforms enacted just two years ago. I’ve asked my staff to determine what actions can be taken to protect the integrity of the Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act.”

Read the full letter below, courtesy of the Sacramento Bee:

[A quick PSA, in case you don’t live in California: Edmund is the legal first name of Gov. Jerry Brown.]

CalPERS Responds To Criticism Of Plan To Boost Pensions

CalPERS is holding a hearing today seeking public comment on a set of potential rules that would open the door for many workers to increase their pensions.

The rules would introduce 98 new forms of “pensionable compensation”, or income that is counted when calculating a worker’s ultimate pension benefit.

But many interested parties didn’t wait until the hearing to voice their opinions. California Gov. Jerry Brown was among the first to voice his displeasure at the potential rules, as they contradict certain sections of the reform law he passed in 2012.

“This disregards the rule that pensions will be based on normal monthly pay and not on short-term, ad hoc pay increases,” Brown wrote in a letter to the CalPERS board. “I urge the board to vote against these regulations and instead request a new draft that excludes temporary pay upgrades from employee pension calculations.”

Other big players weighed in as well. Jon Ortiz writes:

Public pension-change advocates, including Democratic San Jose Mayor Chuck Reed, say the proposal is another sign that the union-dominated CalPERS board “is doing what they can to resist reforms. … They’re in favor of anything that expands benefits.”

Elk Grove City Manager Laura Gill said including temporary upgrade pay “really does invite spiking” and threatens to erode savings from pension changes the Sacramento suburb has enacted the past couple of years, such as city employees paying their share of pension costs.

If such practices became standard, “it would put us backward from all the work we’ve done to have a sustainable and sound pension system,” Gill said.

Unions responded as well, but they were receptive to CalPERS’ plan. From the Sacramento Bee:

Mike Durant, president of the union-backed Peace Officers Research Association of California, dismissed those kinds of concerns. If a city or the state needs pension relief, he said, “they can bargain it.”

Instead, he said, government employers expect CalPERS to save them from themselves.

“They want to put it on the backs of someone else to make those decisions rather than making it themselves,” he said.

You can bet CalPERS is listening to all this. And the pension fund responded to the criticisms in a statement sent out to numerous newspapers, including the Daily Bulletin:

CalPERS has approached this issue with full transparency and sought stakeholder input along the way, including employee and employer feedback. The purpose of the public hearing is to seek even greater input on what compensation should and should not be counted toward pensions.

While reasonable people may disagree about what aspects of a public servant’s compensation should count toward a pension, an editorial should stick to the facts and not try to inflame readers with inaccurate terms like pension spiking. Pay for a service is still compensation at the end of the day. Our staff made a recommendation based on a good-faith interpretation of the law. If changes need to be made, we welcome the public’s input.

CalPERS is holding a hearing today to gather the public’s comments on the proposed rules. Once the hearing is wrapped up, the full CalPERS board will vote on the rules, likely on Wednesday.

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