Los Angeles Scheme Realizes Expected Investment Return Is Too Rosy

The Los Angeles pension board has voted to lower its earnings estimates for the next several years.

(October 26, 2011) — The Los Angeles pension board has voted to cut its annual expected investment return to 7.75%, lowering its earnings estimates for the next several years.

In a 5-1 vote, the City Employees’ Retirement System board decreased its expected investment return from 8% to 7.75% per year, acknowledging that the scheme’s long-term expected 8% return on its investments may be too optimistic. If the board had remained loyal to its original plan to reduce the expected return in a single year, it would have cost the city $26 million to $50 million, according to The Los Angeles Times.

“We have a major American city saying that as far as the eye can see, it has nothing but deficits on the horizon,” attorney Harvey Leiderman told the panel, according to the newspaper. “That gives me great concern for this board — and the ability of this board to carry out its constitutional responsibilities.”

“We’ve been talking about the unrealistic 8% investment assumption for a number of years, and 7.75% is still an unrealistic rate,” added City Administrative Officer Miguel Santana, who had urged the board to delay a decision for one year.

Want the latest institutional investment industry
news and insights? Sign up for CIO newsletters.

The Los Angeles scheme is not the only fund to realize that its investment target has been too optimistic. In March, the roughly $230.1 billion California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) weighed the possibility of making a small accounting change to reduce its investment target. CalPERS staff suggested that the board lower its estimate about the amount of money the fund will make in the future, reducing its discount rate assumption from 7.75% to 7.5%. However, in the end, the board voted to keep the rate at 7.75%

The decrease in the investment earnings forecast would have put greater pressure on the state and municipalities, forcing them to increase the amount they pay into the pension fund, probably by $200 million or more. “There appears to be a consensus that returns are expected to be lower than historical returns over the next 10 years,” Alan Milligan, CalPERS’ chief actuary, said in a March report. “Given that the median investment return net of administrative expenses is 7.80%, we recommend that the discount rate assumption be lowered to 7.5% per year to have a margin for adverse deviation similar to that currently used. Given that the state of the economy has put severe pressure on employers’ budgets, we recognize that it may be appropriate to reconsider the level of margin for adverse deviation,” the report noted.

In September, following the decision by CalPERS to keep the forecast at 7.75%, Joe Dear, CalPERS’ investment chief, said that the return may be tough to meet. In an interview with Bloomberg Television, Dear said: “That’s going to be tough this year and maybe for the next few years. This low-return environment is structurally driven, and there’s not a lot of policy to move it.”



To contact the <em>aiCIO</em> editor of this story: Paula Vasan at <a href='mailto:pvasan@assetinternational.com'>pvasan@assetinternational.com</a>; 646-308-2742

Indiana Pension Forced to Divest From Sudan Over Human Rights Violations

The state of Indiana is working to divest itself from companies which do business in countries labeled as state sponsors of terrorism.

(October 26, 2011) — Indiana’s pension funds are ridding themselves of Sudan-linked firms.

Indiana’s pension funds have started unloading nearly $16 million in investments in two companies which do business in Sudan, according to Indiana Public Media. Indiana Public Retirement System (INPRS) executive director Steve Russo told the news publication that three companies were dropped from the state’s watchlist after the fund contacted them in February. Currently, the state is in the process of unloading investments in mining-equipment company Atlas Copco and the natural gas and diesel engineering firm Wärtsilä OYJ.

“It’s very hard for us to go back and say, ‘if we hadn’t had to have divested from that company, would the funds have been better off or not?,” Russo told the news service. “It’s almost impossible to go back and do that research.”

In 2007, Sudan’s human rights violations prompted legislators to prohibit pension-fund investments in companies doing business there. The law currently gives the Indiana scheme three years to begin the divestment process, and a total of five years to finalize the process. The state department lists Iran, Syria, Cuba, and Sudan as state sponsors of terrorism.

Never miss a story — sign up for CIO newsletters to stay up-to-date on the latest institutional investment industry news.

The decision by INPRS follows a move by the nation’s largest public pension fund to slash its investment associations with Iran and Sudan, fully complying with state divestment laws passed in 2006 and 2007. In May, the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS), worth roughly $236 billion, asserted that it planned to shed the rest of its Sudan and Iran-linked holdings.

The move came in response to strong sanctions adopted in 2010 by the federal government, the United Nations, and European Union, which started the withdrawal of several large multi-national oil and energy companies from Iran, which has been identified as a state sponsor of terrorism, as well as Sudan, which has been cited for genocidal acts. In 2006, the Legislature passed laws instructing the state’s pensions — CalPERS and California State Teachers’ Retirement System (CalSTRS) — to withdraw their money from Sudan and Iran a year later. Instead of ordering immediate divestment, however, the laws provided the pensions with additional time to give them greater ability to follow through on their fiduciary duty. Following the legislation, CalPERS adopted an initial Sudan divestment policy in 2006. While the nation’s largest public fund once had $2 billion invested in 47 companies in the two countries, as of May CalPERS owned shares valued at approximately $160 million in only eight companies that fell within the parameters of the State’s Iran and Sudan divestment acts, according to a statement on the fund’s website.

“The cost of continuing to hold the stock of these eight companies is greater than the value of divesting them,” said Rob Feckner, CalPERS Board President, in a statement released May 16 from the fund. “Consistent with our fiduciary duty as trustees, we’re taking this step in the best interest of the Fund.”

Other funds have faced mounting pressure to exit holdings of Iran. In August 2010, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick signed legislation that would force the state pension fund to divest from companies supporting Iran’s oil industry. According to the legislation, the Massachusetts Pension Reserve Investment Board (MassPRIM) – which manages roughly $42 billion on behalf of public entities in the state – had one year in which to hire an independent research firm to conduct a study of its holdings and divest from any companies that invest in the Iranian oil industry. The MassPRIM board must also update the list of prohibited companies on a quarterly basis, the law stipulated.



To contact the <em>aiCIO</em> editor of this story: Paula Vasan at <a href='mailto:pvasan@assetinternational.com'>pvasan@assetinternational.com</a>; 646-308-2742

«