“…A Fresh Approach: …The state [of
Connecticut] inventory of real assets on
its books, such as office buildings, parking lots, raw land or highway
right-of-ways, identifies nearly 7,000 properties. An initial estimate is that
these assets could have an overall value in the billions. If the state
were to include certain state enterprises, such as toll-roads, that number
could reach even higher.
“A question arose: In lieu of cash, can the state donate any of
these real assets as an in-kind contribution to its pension funds?
“At first blush, the potential positive outcomes seem to make
this very compelling. Obviously some of these assets don’t qualify—the state
isn’t transferring any of its public parks any time soon! However, many of
those assets that might qualify have been on the state’s balance sheet for
years. Correspondingly, book values are far below current market values.
Transferring those assets from the state’s balance sheet to the pension funds
investment portfolio re-categorizes their value from book to current market.
That’s an immediate mutual gain to the pensions and the state: the pensions get
a boost in asset values and the state gets a lower pension liability with no
cash outlay.
“Theory to Reality: Transferring billions
in state assets isn’t something one does in haste. It is a complex venture with
a host of political, financial and operational considerations. To analyze all
aspects of the policy and make recommendations as to how to proceed, the
Connecticut General Assembly created the Connecticut Pension Sustainability
Commission.
“The Chair of the 13-member Committee is State Representative Jonathan Steinberg (D-Westport,
136th District-CT). He is clear-eyed and unflinching about the
serious problem the state faces with the growing pension underfunding. As a
four-term legislator, he is keenly aware that reducing the liability is a top
priority if the state is to extricate itself from its persistent budget
problems. The pension underfunding burdens the state with underlying, long-term
structural financial issues that need to be addressed in a systemic way. He is
direct: short-term fixes or deferrals don’t provide true solutions—and that
includes further spending cuts and tax increases.
“With options limited, the asset contribution proposal has his
full attention. Acknowledging there are a myriad of factors that have to be
balanced, Representative Steinberg put three at the top of the list: identify
the highest opportunity assets, determine the value of those assets, and
establish what organizational structure might be best for the pensions to hold
those assets.
“Identifying Assets: To appropriately
identify the highest opportunity assets, the optimal framework focuses on
assets that maximize value for the pension as well as lower costs for the
state. Key targets are property or land that is currently underutilized but, if
transitioned to its highest and best use, could increase in value considerably.
“Equally interesting are state enterprises. Often affiliated
with infrastructure projects, such as toll roads or parking garages, these
offer generally stable, long-term cash flows and potential asset appreciation
consistent with the long-term liabilities of the pensions. This has
considerable precedent. In Europe, it is common for public pensions to own
interests in as well as fund improvements or expansions to state infrastructure
enterprises.
“Valuation: This is not the first time
public assets have needed objective valuations for transfer or sale; there are
numerous experts, best practices, market standard methodologies, and metrics to
guide in that process. Wisely recognizing that valuation is critical to
accurate accounting as well as maintaining the legislature’s role in due
diligence and oversight for the public, the Chair is holding hearings and
inviting experts to offer their views. Michael Bennon of the Global Project Center at Stanford
University is one such expert, with successful experience
internationally in public asset valuation and transfer. Models exist based on
completed transactions that maximized values for all stakeholders. Even so,
it’s always challenging, he noted in his testimony to the Committee. ‘There will
always be ‘ex-post’ reports,’ says Bennon, which only ‘adds to the difficulty
of valuing these assets.’ Apparently, even in pension asset valuations, there
are armchair quarter backs.
“Organizational Structure: Since the pensions
can’t hold physical assets directly, determining the pensions’ ownership in any
separate entity holding transferred assets has to be vetted. One structure
being actively considered is putting assets in a separate trust. The trust
would be a private entity, hiring private managers to run the business or
develop the property. While Representative Steinberg noted that a trust
structure where there would be shared risk was appealing, ‘the criteria we
might use to determine what to donate to an independent trust is still very
much open for conversation.’
“A High Impact Ancillary Benefit: Given
the pressures on the state budget and the pensions, nearly everyone is focused
on the immediate impact the transfer would have there. Overlooked is the
enormous economic stimulus this transfer policy could have around the state.
“Conversion to highest and best use of property or raw land
opens up opportunity for renovation, refurbishment, retrofitting, and expanded
development. For example, an office building can be re-purposed to address needs
in high impact sectors such as affordable housing, business incubators, senior
care, or satellite medical centers. Clean energy and LEED certification are a
component of retrofits, which could include matching Federal or foundation
grant dollars for solar panels and micro-grids. Not only does this create
construction jobs immediately, but also permanent jobs working in the completed
re-purposed buildings.
“A National Following: Other states and
cities facing pension shortfalls are quickly picking up on the implications of
this. Calls have come in from numerous state officials making inquiries about
the process Connecticut is considering. Since every state and city has some
assets on the balance sheet that are either underutilized, can be combined, or
simply cost more to own than an alternative, having a mechanism to transfer
those to the pension is potentially truly a win-win.
“Time Line: While the committee’s report
is due January 1, 2019, it might take as long as two years to put everything in
place before the state can even begin to create a schedule of asset transfers
and start to execute on the plan. For those impatient for a solution, that may
sound like a long time given liabilities are accruing at millions of dollars a
day. But considering it took nearly 100 years to get to where things are now,
two more years isn’t unreasonable considering the solution could have a dramatic
corrective impact.
“What legislators and public administrators understand is that,
with skeptical capital markets and an equally skeptical public, a careful,
prudent approach rebuilds confidence and demonstrates that policymakers are
serious in their intent to fix the problem.
“Moreover, because this is as much a political process as a
financial one, there will always be disagreements as to whether the actions are
sufficient or right. However, tangible actions towards a solution—albeit
initially modest—is a far better alternative than stagnation. It is a sign that
the state of Connecticut is transitioning towards stabilization.”
-----
Heartfelt thanks to Les Richmond, ASA, EA, MAAA, FCA, Vice President and
Actuary at Build America Mutual Assurance
Company for his invaluable guidance and endless patience in
walking me through the intricacies of the pension section of Connecticut’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for
2017.
This article is for informational purposes only and is not
intended to solicit an investment, nor constitute investment advice. The
information being presented has been compiled from both internal and external
sources. From time to time, Neighborly Investments’ clients may hold
security positions or other interests in companies, issuers or borrowers
mentioned herein.
Barnet Sherman has over 30 years of
investment experience in the fixed income markets in credit analysis and
portfolio management. Barnet Sherman. Director of Municipal
Impact Credit Research, Neighborly Investments. Mr. Sherman's
perspective comes from his over 30 years of municipal bond market experience.
And something else to consider as well:
ReplyDeleteRevamp the flawed Pension Ramp: “Starting in 1995, yet another funding plan was implemented by the General Assembly. This one called for the legislature to contribute sufficient funds each year to ensure that its contributions, along with the contributions by or on behalf of members and other income, would meet the cost of maintaining and administering the respective retirement systems on a 90% funded basis in accordance with actuarial recommendations by the end of the 2045 fiscal year. 40 ILCS 5/2-124, 14-131, 15-155, 16-158, 18-131 (West 2012). That plan, however, contained inherent shortcomings which were aggravated by a phased-in 'ramp period' and decisions by the legislature to lower its contributions in 2006 and 2007. As a result, the plan failed to control the State’s growing pension burden. To the contrary, the SEC recently pointed out:
“‘The Statutory Funding Plan’s contribution schedule increased the unfunded liability, underfunded the State’s pension obligations, and deferred pension funding. The resulting underfunding of the pension systems (Structural Underfunding) enabled the State to shift the burden associated with its pension costs to the future and, as a result, created significant financial stress and risks for the State.’ SEC order, at 3. That the funding plan would operate in this way did not catch the State off guard. In entering a cease-and-desist order against the State in connection with misrepresentations made by the State with respect to bonds sold to help cover pension expenses, the SEC noted that the State understood the adverse implications of its strategy for the State-funded pension systems and for the financial health of the State. Id. at 10. According to the SEC, the amount of the increase in the State’s unfunded liability over the period between 1996 and 2010 was $57 billion. Id. at 4.5 The SEC order found that ‘[t]he State’s insufficient contributions under the Statutory Funding Plan were the primary driver of this increase, outweighing other causal factors, such as market performance and changes in benefits.’” (Emphasis added.) Id. at 4 (In re PENSION REFORM LITIGATION (Doris Heaton et al., Appellees, v. Pat Quinn, Governor, State of Illinois, et al., Appellants) Opinion filed May 8, 2015, JUSTICE KARMEIER delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion. Chief Justice Garman and Justices Freeman, Thomas, Kilbride, Burke, and Theis concurred in the judgment and opinion).
Also from the Illinois Supreme Court Ruling: “Senator Hutchinson: Would another alternative be the proposal that the Center for Tax and Budget Accountability outlined before the conference committee, which would have re-amortized the current unfunded liabilities to a new gradual [level] dollar payment schedule to achieve well over eighty percent by 2059? Senator Raoul: Yes. So that—that and many other things could have been possible alternatives.”
The current “Pension Ramp” does not work for the five public pension systems. The “Ramp” entails larger payments today as a result of the 1995 funding law – Public Act 88-0593 – to pay the pensions systems what the state owes. There needs to be a required annual payment from the state to the pension systems. The debt needs to be amortized for a longer frame of time (a flat payment) just like a home loan that is amortized; though the initial payment will be difficult in the beginning, over the long term it will become a reduced cost and a smaller percentage of the overall Illinois budget as it is paid off throughout the years.
ReplyDelete“Decades of mismanagement and failure to match contributions are the predominant reasons that the state’s pension systems are suffering to the degree that they are today. Years of pension holidays, continually borrowing against the systems without a plan for repayment and a severe economic recession, which caused investments to plummet, further exacerbated the problem” (Senate President John Cullerton). Thus, there needs to be a required “actuarially-sound” annual payment from the state to the pension systems! Indeed, the State of Illinois has a revenue problem and its policymakers have stolen money for decades from public employees' pensions to hide this fact.
This Tuesday night (10/23), the PBS show Frontline will broadcast "The Pension Gamble" at 9 PM CST (their shows are usually an hour to an hour-&-a-half). If you miss it & have OnDemand, you can catch it there a few days later, or on pbs.org You can see the trailer; it's a must-watch for all of us.
ReplyDelete