political contributions

Audit: Massachusetts Gov. Didn’t Violate Pay-to-Play Rules With Donation That Preceded Pension Investment

In 2011, Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker donated $10,000 to the New Jersey Republican State Committee.

Less than a year later, New Jersey committed $25 million in pension money to General Catalyst Partners for management – the firm where Baker was an executive.

The transaction raised the red flags of a pay-to-play violation.

But an audit released yesterday cleared Baker of any wrongdoing.

From the Associated Press:

A New Jersey treasury audit has found Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker did not break pay-to-play rules when he donated to Republicans here in 2011.

[…]

New Jerseys regulations bar the state from investing with a firm whose managers made political contributions within a two-year window. The audit says while Baker was an investment professional, he did not provide the kinds of services the policy prohibits.

[…]

The audit also suggests Baker and General Catalyst forcefully resisted the possibility of any wrongdoing. For example the firm wrote to the auditor in May 2014 that “Mr. Baker has never been an executive officer, owner or other control person of GC and has never solicited investors when GC raised funds.”

Baker himself hired the law firm Covington & Burling, which expressed a similar view, the audit said.

While the report recommends the state should consider strengthening its due-diligence procedures, the audit said the State Investment Council, the body that sets investment policy, reported it met those standards.

The audit was released and presented at the Thursday meeting of the State Investment Council.

Photo by Truthout.org via Flickr CC License

How Pension Trustees Can Ensure Compliance With SEC Pay-to-Play Rules

Raymond M. Sarola, an attorney and former trustee of New York City’s pension systems, has penned a column explaining how trustees can ensure they don’t violate the SEC’s pay-to-play rules, and how they can handle a violation if one does occurs.

The column, published in Pensions & Investments, begins with an overview of the rule in question:

The rule — Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 206(4)-5…prohibits investment advisers from receiving compensation for advisory services to a government entity for two years after the advisory firm or any covered employee makes a political contribution to a public official or candidate who is or would be in a position to influence the award of investment advisory business by public retirement funds. The rule allows covered employees to make contributions up to $350 per official or candidate per election in which they can vote, or $150 for other elections. Contributions by investment firms in any amount would trigger a violation of the rule.

Sarola then lays out options for how trustees can ensure compliance, and what steps to take if a violation has occurred:

Public retirement plan executives should become familiar with the options available if a violation of the SEC rule occurs.

The rule provides for advisory firms that violated the rule to give the public plan sufficient time to redeem or transfer its assets on an uncompensated basis. This provision is particularly important with alternative investment vehicles that invest in illiquid assets and typically restrict the ability of limited partners to redeem committed capital.

Public retirement plans should develop and implement written policies that confirm compliance with this rule by investment advisers. These policies may include a requirement that advisers make a certification of compliance before an initial investment is made, with an ongoing obligation to recertify throughout the life of the investment.

Public plans might also wish to include in their policies a ban on future investment transactions with investment managers who fail to comply with the procedural or substantive requirements of the rule. And public plans should consider including in investment advisory contracts or side letters provisions that address remedial actions if a violation of the rule occurs. For instance, a contract might specify that if a violation occurs, the adviser will continue to provide services under the contract without compensation for up to two years while the pension fund seeks efficient means to transfer its assets. Other remedial measures might require the investment manager to repay the amount paid or promised to a placement agent involved in winning the business.

The full column can be read here.

Firms Managing Illinois Pension Money May Have Skirted Pay-to-Play Rules By Donating To Rauner Campaign

Over the course of his campaign, Illinois governor-elect Bruce Rauner accepted contributions from executives from firms that manage portions of the state’s pension money, according to a new report from David Sirota.

Those contributions may violate SEC pay-to-play rules, under which investment firms can’t make donations to politicians that have any influence—direct or indirect—over the hiring of firms to handle pension investments.

As Illinois governor, Rauner will have that influence – the governor has the power to appoint trustees to the state’s pension boards.

More from David Sirota on the donations:

During his gubernatorial campaign, Rauner raised millions of dollars from executives in the financial sector — and, despite the pay-to-play rule, some of the money came from executives at firms affiliated with funds that receive state pension investments. That includes:

– $1,000 from Mesirow Financial senior managing director Mark Kmety and $2,000 from Mesirow Financial managing director David Wanger. ISBI’s 2013 annual report lists Mesirow Financial as a hedge fund-of-fund manager for the pension system, and lists $271 million in holdings in Mesirow investment vehicles. In an emailed statement, a Mesirow spokeswoman told IBTimes that a separate branch of Mesirow works with the Illinois pension system and that therefore “we do not believe these contributions violate the pay to play laws.” Neither Rauner donor from Mesirow Financial “has any relationship with and/or receives any compensation from any state entity, nor do they pursue state business,” she wrote.

– $2,500 from Sofinnova general partner James Healy. TRS lists Sofinnova as a private equity manager. The system’s 2013 annual report says the firm manages $8.1 million of state pension money, and was paid more than $900,000 in fees that year. In June, TRS committed to invest another $50 million of state pension cash in Sofinnova. Healy did not respond to IBTimes’ interview request.

– $5,000 from Northern Trust’s Senior Vice President Brayton Alley. Illinois TRS lists Northern Trust Investments as an equity manager. The system’s 2013 annual report says Northern Trust manages $2.3 billion of state money, and made $548,000 in fees from the system that year. A spokesman for the firm told IBTimes, “We are aware of the obligations under various Illinois and federal laws and regulations” and “we are unaware of any violation to such requirements.”

– $9,600 from employees of the real estate firm CBRE. The 2013 annual reports of TRS and ISBI show a combined $184 million worth of state pension investments in CBRE investment vehicles. A representative for CBRE told IBTimes that the employees are not covered by the SEC rule because they are not involved in state pension business and not employed by the subsidiary of CBRE that does pension investment work.

– More than $90,000 in in-kind contributions from John Buck of the John Buck Company, which is listed as an investment manager for TRS. A spokesman for TRS, David Urbanek, told IBTimes that the pension system’s investment in the John Buck Company “is now in wind-down mode” and added that “the company is no longer actively managing TRS money.” A representative for the John Buck company said, “We do not manage money for TRS.”

While some of the contributions are relatively small, the SEC recently prosecuted its first pay-to-play case over donations totaling just $4,500. SEC sanctions can be strong: The rule can compel investment managers to return all fees they have collected from the pension systems after the political contributions were made.

Illinois state law also restricts contributions from state contractors to candidates for governor, though the executive director of ISBI, William Atwood, told IBTimes that the pension systems are exempt from the statute.

Specifics of the SEC rule in question, as explained by law firm Bracewell & Giuliani:

Rule 206 (4)-5, which was adopted in 2010, prohibits investment advisers from providing compensatory advisory services to a government client for a period of two years following a campaign contribution from the firm, or from defined investment advisers, to any government officials, or political candidates in a position to influence the selection or retention of advisers to manage public pension funds or other government client assets. Some de minimus contributions are permitted, topping out at $350 if the contributor is eligible to vote for the candidate, and the contribution is from the person’s personal funds.

Read Sirota’s entire report here.

By Steven Vance [CC-BY-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

State Street Being Probed by SEC, Department of Justice For Possible Misconduct While Soliciting Pension Business

An interesting piece of information was tucked away in a new State Street Corp. regulatory filing.

In an SEC filing filed Monday, State Street said it was being subpoenaed by the SEC and the Department of Justice for information related to the way the bank solicits business from public pension funds.

State Street admits in the filing that “in at least one instance” a consultant employed by the firm made political contributions while bidding for pension business.

From the filing:

We are responding to subpoenas from the Department of Justice and the SEC for information regarding our solicitation of asset servicing business of public retirement plans. We have retained counsel to conduct a review of these matters, including our use of consultants and lobbyists in our solicitation of business of public retirement plans and, in at least one instance, political contributions by one of our consultants during and after a public bidding process. While we are unable to predict the outcome of these matters, adverse outcomes could have a material adverse effect on our business and reputation.

Depending on the nature of the political contribution, the action could violate SEC pay-to-play rules.

Under the SEC’s current rules, investment advisors can’t make donations to politicians that have any influence—direct or indirect—over the hiring of investment firms.

Specifics of Rule 206 (4)-5, as explained by law firm Bracewell & Giuliani:

Rule 206 (4)-5, which was adopted in 2010, prohibits investment advisers from providing compensatory advisory services to a government client for a period of two years following a campaign contribution from the firm, or from defined investment advisers, to any government officials, or political candidates in a position to influence the selection or retention of advisers to manage public pension funds or other government client assets. Some de minimus contributions are permitted, topping out at $350 if the contributor is eligible to vote for the candidate, and the contribution is from the person’s personal funds.

Businessweek reached a State Street spokewoman for comment:

“We are cooperating with governmental authorities and have retained counsel to conduct an internal review of these matters,” said Alicia Curran Sweeney, a spokeswoman for State Street, while declining to comment further on confidential discussions with regulators.

Earlier this year, investment firm TL Ventures was busted when an employee was found to have made a political donation to Pennsylvania’s governor while the firm was working with the Philadelphia Board of Pensions. The consequences: the firm has to give up over $250,000 in fees it earned from the work, and pay a $35,000 fine.

New Jersey Lawmaker Pushes For Stricter Pay-To-Play Rules For Pension Investments

SEC rules prevent pension funds from investing with firms that have made political contributions to politicians with any control over the pension fund’s investment decisions.

But a New Jersey Senator wants the state to go even further. Reported by NorthJersey.com:

The law that restricts the state pension fund from investing in firms whose investment managers make political contributions to New Jersey candidates should be expanded to include donations to national political groups, a legislator said Wednesday.

Sen. Shirley Turner, D-Mercer, announced her intentions to broaden the state’s pay-to-play law a day after the Division of Investment confirmed the pension system had sold its stake in a venture capital fund with ties to a Massachusetts gubernatorial candidate who donated to the New Jersey GOP.

[…]

When the pension system approves an alternative investment — including venture capital firms and hedge funds — those firms are required to fill out disclosures listing the managers of the particular fund New Jersey is investing with and whether those individuals have made political contributions. But the state’s conflict of interest law does not cover political donations to groups outside New Jersey, like the Republican Governors Association, which Governor Christie heads.

“The method of investment should be selected based on performance and merit, not because of campaign contributions and investments should be made in the best interests of our retirees,” said Turner, whose district includes a significant number of state workers, said Wednesday in a statement. “There shouldn’t be even the appearance of political favorites.”

This is a hot-button issue in New Jersey. One union, the New Jersey AFL-CIO, filed an ethics complaint last week asking whether political donations have influence pension investments.

The issue was also raised at the meeting of the State Investment Council on Tuesday.

Photo by Truthout.org via Flickr CC License

Investment Firm Charged With Violating SEC Pay-To-Play Rule After Making Political Donations While Working For Two Pension Funds

A Philadelphia-area private equity firm has become the first ever to be charged by the SEC for violating a pay-to-play rule set up in 2010 designed to prevent conflicts of interest when pension funds hire investment firms.

The firm, TL Ventures Inc, was charged with violating the rule after an employee at the firm made political contributions to Pennsylvania’s governor and Philadelphia’s mayor while the firm was doing work for the Philadelphia Board of Pensions and the Pennsylvania State Employees’ Retirement System.

The employee, an investment advisor, made a $2,500 campaign contribution to a candidate for Mayor of Philadelphia and a $2,000 contribution to a candidate for Governor of Pennsylvania.

The SEC says that presented a conflict of interest because the Mayor and Governor appoint a total of nine members to the two pension boards for which TL Ventures was providing investment services for at the time of the donations.

Those boards are tasked with hiring investment firms to do advisory work for the pension funds.

Bracewell & Giuliani explains the specifics of the rule:

Rule 206 (4)-5, which was adopted in 2010, prohibits investment advisers from providing compensatory advisory services to a government client for a period of two years following a campaign contribution from the firm, or from defined investment advisers, to any government officials, or political candidates in a position to influence the selection or retention of advisers to manage public pension funds or other government client assets. Some de minimus contributions are permitted, topping out at $350 if the contributor is eligible to vote for the candidate, and the contribution is from the person’s personal funds.

TL Ventures has agreed to give up the $257,000 worth of fees it earned from the state, as well as pay a $35,000 fine.

Republicans are now suing the SEC in an attempt to block the rule, saying that preventing investment advisors from making political donations is, in effect, a restriction on free speech. From Reuters:

Republican politicians sued the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, seeking to throw out a rule that limits political donations by investment advisers.

The Republican state committees from New York and Tennessee said the federal securities regulator had flouted due procedure when adopting its Political Contribution Rule, which they said also violated the constitutional right to freedom of speech.

“The (rule) directly harms Plaintiffs, as potential donors have informed each Plaintiff that they will not make political contributions because of the SEC’s rule,” said the complaint before a federal court in the District of Columbia, which was filed late on Thursday.

The SEC in 2010 approved the rule, which prohibits investment advisers from making campaign contributions in the hope of being awarded lucrative contracts to manage public pension funds, a practice known as “pay to play”.

The plaintiffs want the court to decide that the rule violates the law and to stop the SEC from enforcing the rule with respect to federal campaign contributions.

Specifically, Republicans are arguing that the SEC violated the Administrative Procedures Act when drafting the law. The Act requires specific procedures to be followed when drafting rules.

The Administrative Procedures Rules has been used successfully to strike down previous SEC rules.

Photo by jypsygen via Flickr CC License