| |

Optimistic CalSTRS Board Lowers Its Assumed Rate of Return But Not All the Way Down to Our 7.5%

Since CalSTRS’ new assumption is still above ours, we can claim to be more conservative in our pension funding planning. See below:

CalSTRS lowers forecast on future investment returns (excerpt)

Dec. 3, 2010, Dale Kasler, Sacramento Bee

After agonizing for months, CalSTRS made a decision Thursday that seems subtle but has enormous financial implications. The teachers’ pension fund agreed to lower its long-term forecast of future annual investment returns by a quarter of a percentage point…

On an 8-3 vote, the board of the California State Teachers’ Retirement System agreed to cut the investment return forecast to 7.75 percent a year.

As significant as the board’s vote was, it was a partial measure. CalSTRS’ investment staff and outside consultants urged the board to lower the forecast by a half point, to 7.5 percent, in light of the long-term investment outlook.

…Pension funds in several other states are also lowering their forecasts. The board of CalPERS, the California Public Employees’ Retirement System, expects to vote in February on whether to change its forecast, which is 7.75 percent.

…Board members were reluctant to make any reduction, knowing it could weaken CalSTRS’ standing in the Legislature and put pressure on teachers. At the board meeting, representatives of three teachers’ groups urged the board to move cautiously…

Full article at http://www.sacbee.com/2010/12/03/v-print/3229533/calstrs-lowers-forecast-on-future.html

Similar Posts

  • | |

    Academic Senate Rejects New Pension Tier

    Representatives of UC faculty on all campuses delivered a strongly worded rejection of the proposed 2016 pension tier. Reports from the campuses were extensive and overwhelmingly negative (link to PDF). Berkeley faculty called the proposal “imprudent and potentially fiscally irresponsible.” Davis faculty said, “It is a myth that UCRP is too generous,” and went on to detail a long list of likely negative outcomes from the new tier. Irvine faculty noted “the level of disappointment and depth of passion expressed from all quarters about the negative impact that the imposition of the PEPRA cap has on the future of the…

  • |

    Faculty Voice Opposition to Pension Proposal

    On Friday, the UCLA Academic Senate hosted an informational meeting that explained in clear terms that this is a bad, bad plan for faculty. What to do about it was less clear cut. Shane White gave a deeply detailed account of financial aspects of the plan (Slides here: Pension Presentation by Shane White). Among the things we learned: Last year’s budget deal introduced the “PEPRA cap” to UC retirement benefits. This is not a limit on retirement pay-outs, but a cap on the earnings that are used to calculate retirement pay-outs. So any new hire after July 1, 2016 who…

  • | | |

    Pension Changes Proposed: lower benefits, little savings, weaker UCRS

    The University of California will soon have a third pension tier if the Regents approve a plan put forth by the Retirement Options Task Force on Friday. UC President Janet Napolitano charged the Task Force, which included management and Academic Senate representatives, with finding a way to implement her agreement with Gov. Brown to set a cap on pension benefits in exchange for state funds to support the pension system. Over the weekend, as faculty activists read the task force report and a second report produced by Senate leaders (Guide to reviewing the recommendations of the Retirement Options Task Force)…

  • |

    CalPERS Long-Term Care: What Happens Tomorrow?

    Although CalPERS doesn’t run the UC retirement plan, at one point CalPERS offered long-term care insurance to UC employees.  It seemed to some folks to be a good idea at the time and they took out policies.  Long-term care policies can be bought from commercial carriers.  The problem is that you have to trust that these carriers will do right by you many years in the future when you may not be in the best condition to assert your rights.  It appeared, however, that having CalPERS – a public entity – providing the policies might be a solution.  Sadly, there…

  • | | | | | |

    Follow Me, Says Crane

    We have previously reported on a proposed ballot initiative on public pensions in California that, as written, would cover UC.  There appears to be money behind the campaign for this initiative.  Another indication of such money comes in the form of a letter by former UC Regent David Crane on CalSTRS.  Crane was appointed by Gov. Schwarzenegger but the appointment was not endorsed by the state senate and thus ended.  In any event, the letter from Crane addressed to Gov. Brown – which his website says in today’s Sacramento Bee – seems to be part of the larger campaign for…

  • | | | |

    The Rewards of Good Behavior (and the penalties for the reverse)

    With a possible pension initiative coming to the ballot, it would be nice if public pension plans stayed on Good Behavior.  Alas: Federal investigators are looking into allegations that CalPERS violated insider trading laws this year when it purchased $26.6 million in restricted stock and then decided it didn’t need to reverse the trades when they were discovered. Two sources with knowledge of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s inquiry say on condition of anonymity that it involves stock purchases that the nation’s largest public pension fund made in March, including nearly $24 million in global financial firm JPMorgan Chase & Co….