[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6552951,"mediaKeyId","5083301-d8712eb6f4d1fc7aac482c9d904698ca","parentId",5083301,"title","CIO reports year‑to‑date gains for Federated funds; private markets show early realizations","audioSeconds",894,"startMs",8641000,"endMs",9535000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5083301-d8712eb6f4d1fc7aac482c9d904698ca&start=8641&end=9535","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5083301-d8712eb6f4d1fc7aac482c9d904698ca/thumbnail_8641000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6552951/San-Jose/Santa-Clara-County/California/CIO-reports-yeartodate-gains-for-Federated-funds-private-markets-show-early-realizations","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6552951-b217557e22264f0a531e024f042ebafa/orig.mp4?Expires=1771144442&Signature=BNlwp3S-rSJuspiBbq5KQquC59AXh3GJBI-114XtcOEbDM3gPTdflxqIu9YXaVMnVmB4i6n3f5PlMc0PVHb6BH3SEdRJaHKvuhmbgK-rQ0SUmkyqp1qaqMg2syuuPvpQ90lCfyXTsu~miriiskSe4YcQv5ycFvnC3f3JuBcN3dlbatwRjn-9qLoGTe0NBWnnb3BrN4dCCUCLYj~TEIQ2~62QAoaPB9qG~xK7JbuzGOg1yD8~5xa5I~wt-LX2HF2GgScU0AhAw3B-DymkZg1B06WyLUMP2bDU9UekJ-cmt6dS2W5qrZSrNoKKR4~A-pb~caMkhQ6Iag1~QJAU9oMwEg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","San Jose CA","date","2025-06-27T07:40:26Z","article","The board received quarterly investment updates on June 26, 2025, reporting strong year‑to‑date returns for the Federated retirement funds and early distributions from private markets investments.

The system’s chief investment officer told trustees the pension fund was up 8.79% fiscal‑year‑to‑date and the health care trust was up 10.18% (preliminary Meketa estimates), with two trading days remaining in the fiscal year. The CIO added: “I don't know if it'll keep us top decile, but, you know, I'm more interested in making sure that we beat the discount rate for sure.”

Private markets staff reported that distributions for the fund’s private equity/co‑investment program were stronger than the broader market in the quarter ending Dec. 31, 2024. Casey (private markets) said the program returned roughly $12.5 million in distributions in Q4 and had distributed nearly an additional $6 million post‑quarter. Series 1 private investments showed a net multiple near 1.9x and Series 2 at about 1.2x (early stage), staff said.

The private debt program represented about 3.7% of the fund at Dec. 31, 2024 (policy target 3%). Staff reported a since‑inception internal rate of return of roughly 6.5% for that program and noted three new private‑debt investments totalling about $7 million each in Q4. Private real assets and real estate commitments were also active: staff said two private real‑assets commitments (Pelican and Lime Rock) and a roughly $11 million real‑estate commitment were made during the quarter.

On total fund performance, staff reported a fund size of approximately $3.2 billion as of March 31, 2025, with a five‑year annualized return near 10.7% that ranked in the top quartile of a peer group. In the early part of 2025, non‑U.S. equities outpaced U.S. stocks and commodities and REITs provided diversification; staff noted that private‑markets valuations are lagged and will be updated as later private‑market reports become available.

Trustees asked for deeper education on private‑market valuation practices and TBPI/IRR calculations at a future investment committee meeting. Trustees also asked for a single‑page summary of secondaries exposure (LP interests vs. GP‑led continuation vehicles) to be circulated to the investment committee.

The board heard the investment reports as information; no board action was required.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","JUN 26, 2025 | Federated City Employees' Retirement Plan Board","oneSentenceSummary","At the June meeting trustees heard that the pension fund was up roughly 8.8% year to date and the health care trust about 10.2%; private markets distributed roughly $12.5 million in Q4 and early 2025 showed additional realizations.","taxTitle","San Jose , Santa Clara County, California","taxId",2857,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6552956,"Trustees grant postponement for disability‑retirement hearing after late request; set six‑month window for rehearing",3302,3032000,6334000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5083301-d8712eb6f4d1fc7aac482c9d904698ca&start=3032&end=6334","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5083301-d8712eb6f4d1fc7aac482c9d904698ca/thumbnail_3032000.jpg","/articles/6552956/San-Jose/Santa-Clara-County/California/Trustees-grant-postponement-for-disabilityretirement-hearing-after-late-request-set-sixmonth-window-for-rehearing","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6552956-034ef579a071c59f42a9ceaef7a296e8/orig.mp4?Expires=1771144442&Signature=n939D13Eo~DTt5bDUvKoL0t-hqfr8FdkpOVloL7jyteI391oUVPOQj~utNgdcZpLNB-48R2EB0WN4hQnb66oUf6g4-rbWd4MyJG9NjgvEvdd8~sWnsDawghTo3O-puUgO2rdV1sNifuZLSwkqRIRwupzDJMmQ9b2Qky0qSEAL3rQda1zU0ygmi~Wruo3fD-4bQum-5w9tJ1BLO93cuhFxBQ6n7QpPPTygV6mHRgpyHb7SU96IGiVCJOuISL4N7g5O5woB839heu9tcMFFtvcGa~I2UmHMFioSEu6ge1gciKXWQ5TV3Oe7eVH3j42oXoHO~KL-UjUoYt~MFyNIfZD-g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","At its June 26, 2025 meeting the Federated City Employees Retirement System board granted a postponement for a disability‑retirement hearing after the applicant, identified in meeting materials as Miss Barnes, requested a late rescheduling to allow time to secure legal representation and attend client obligations.

Staff told the board the request to postpone arrived June 23, inside the plan’s five‑day window that allows ORS (the office that manages hearings) to grant an untimely postponement only with a showing of “good cause.” Mariah (staff) summarized the legal point to trustees: “the request to reschedule the hearing was on June 23. And because the request was outside of the 5 day window that would enable ORS to grant the postponement, staff did not have the authority to grant the untimely request.”

Board staff representative John read the applicant’s emailed reasons into the record. The applicant wrote that an on‑site client meeting had been scheduled for June 26 and that she is working to secure legal counsel, writing in part: “Serving and supporting my clients is how I'm able to supplement my retirement from the city of San Jose.”

Sandra, a staff member, provided a timeline of prior communications with the applicant. She said the office had mailed or emailed the disability rules on multiple occasions (02/28/2024, 08/23/2024 and 06/02/2025), sent scheduling proposals in March 2025, and received confirmation from the applicant on June 10 that she would attend the June 26 hearing. According to staff, the applicant first asked to postpone on June 23 and staff followed up to request a statement of good cause.

Trustees discussed the balance between following published procedures and permitting a single, equitable postponement when circumstances arise. Trustee Linder moved to grant the postponement to allow the applicant to obtain counsel and set a rehearing within six months; Trustee Abbott seconded the motion. Trustees also discussed whether a time limit should be attached to avoid indefinite delay. Staff noted the board is setting precedent because the rules are silent on this specific late‑request scenario.

The motion passed. The roll‑call vote recorded: Trustee Abbott — aye; Trustee Nakagawa — abstain; Trustee Avasti — aye; Vice Chair Chandra — abstain; Trustee Faulkner — no; Trustee Linder — aye; Chair — aye. The board specified the rehearing would occur within six months and directed staff to coordinate scheduling with the applicant.

The board record shows ORS had repeatedly provided the disability rules and reminders to the applicant, and staff recommended deferring to the board because the June 23 request fell outside the five‑day window in the rules. Trustees praised staff’s thorough outreach but differed on whether allowing a postponement rewards noncompliance with published timing requirements.

No new rehearing date was set at the meeting; staff will work with the applicant and counsel to find a board meeting that can accommodate the hearing within the six‑month window.","The board found good cause to postpone an applicant’s disability retirement hearing after the request arrived inside a five‑day window; trustees set a six‑month timeframe for the rehearing and authorized staff to coordinate scheduling.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6552961,"Federated retirement board adopts revised investment policy statement after extended review",5649,2940000,8589000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5083301-d8712eb6f4d1fc7aac482c9d904698ca&start=2940&end=8589","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5083301-d8712eb6f4d1fc7aac482c9d904698ca/thumbnail_2940000.jpg","/articles/6552961/San-Jose/Santa-Clara-County/California/Federated-retirement-board-adopts-revised-investment-policy-statement-after-extended-review","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6552961-29f1e0985719b1b4c0d266c3e6178977/orig.mp4?Expires=1771144442&Signature=hf9Di6fGx3gJ90U25tK-yCzenB0LIJs82NsMJ5ObsH3RO-pxfUWGGTx0XerjkKVI7PuAoW8T8CV1JKSeX3bTIeHVBaHEG15-WaFm6eXVczz9LRrRPAAoUHaYlrkgw~nuAk9vApPlw7x9kIZerMxVXwreyU1gDYIecRk7mg77pb8ZUD3qmF7hTJRc~ps4eDFy2df1hx-eQDSPbpFGS5~0fuczuPxu4Za-JGD533XqCPgOlAcnKt13bbHTWoOE1kEdnBh4WNuExA2cMrJDums1D0bl9oWkfEwhZLf3v9lFlGygtRNBu9fjVlGEWuOUlnfHB299VLYrdDwKGPuTlweF0Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Federated City Employees Retirement System board on June 26, 2025, approved an updated Investment Policy Statement (IPS) that trims highly prescriptive language, relocates implementation details to a separate procedures document and clarifies who sets benchmarks for individual managers.

Board members and outside consultants said the new draft seeks to make the governing document higher-level and more durable while preserving the board’s ultimate authority over strategic policy.

Consultant Eileen said the team “abbreviated the language to focus on the most important, which was the fact that you maintain the decision for setting the strategic asset allocation policy.” She told trustees the revisions move delegated authorities (manager implementation items) into an implementation procedures document so the IPS remains a clear, governing-level statement.

The revisions also change how frequently the board undertakes a comprehensive asset‑allocation study. The IPS now describes an annual review of capital market assumptions and portfolio positioning while recommending — as best practice — a fuller, more detailed asset‑allocation study every three to five years. Consultants explained that annual inputs from the general consultant and staff will still be presented to trustees, and the board can initiate a fuller study at any time.

Several trustees pressed for clearer language distinguishing an annual review (routine updating of assumptions) from the multi‑year process that evaluates alternative policy options. Trustee Vazquez said the change from an annual cadence to a longer study period raised concerns that trustees might “potentially go through that exercise once … or even never,” and asked for phrasing that makes the distinction explicit. Consultants responded that the draft includes language intended to preserve the board’s authority and to describe the multi‑year asset‑allocation “process” distinctly from the annual review of assumptions.

Other changes trustees noted include moving detailed implementation constraints and manager-level limits into the implementation procedures (so they can be updated through staff and the investment committee) and retitling Appendix C to reflect the plan’s current functional asset‑class classifications rather than an exhaustive list of possible classes.

The board voted to approve the IPS as amended. The motion carried unanimously: Trustee Abbott, Trustee Nakagawa, Trustee Avasti, Vice Chair Chandra, Trustee Faulkner, Trustee Linder and the chair all voted aye.

Trustees and staff said the implementation procedures will be reviewed by the investment committee on a regular cadence and that the committee will escalate any substantive changes or exceptions to the full board when appropriate. Consultants and staff also said minor formatting and editorial corrections will be completed outside the approval vote.

The board’s general consultant (Meketa), staff and outside counsel collaborated on the revisions over several committee meetings. Trustees thanked consultants and staff for the months‑long effort to consolidate prior committee feedback into the final drafts.

Less critical items discussed alongside the IPS included appendix edits removing asset classes not currently used by the fund and language clarifying how manager benchmarks are chosen. The IPS now distinguishes allocation‑level and total‑fund benchmarks (set by the board) from implementation or manager strategy benchmarks (selected by staff under delegated authority).

The board directed staff to finalize the IPS and present the implementation procedures and any remaining format edits to the investment committee as part of regular oversight.","Trustees approved a streamlined Investment Policy Statement that moves implementation details to a separate procedures document, clarifies delegation of manager benchmarks to staff, and sets a regular asset-allocation review cadence.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

CIO reports year‑to‑date gains for Federated funds; private markets show early realizations

Trustees grant postponement for disability‑retirement hearing after late request; set six‑month window for rehearing

Federated retirement board adopts revised investment policy statement after extended review