BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
X-WR-CALNAME:www.indybay.org
PRODID:-//indybay/ical// v1.0//EN
BEGIN:VEVENT
UID:Indybay-18768272
SEQUENCE:18887591
CREATED:20150209T055200Z
DESCRIPTION:2/11 SF Press Conference/Rally Keep Our Pension Money Out Of Hedge Funds! 
 \nStop The Speculation And Putting 10% Of Our Pension Funds Into Hedge 
 Funds \nRacists, Liars And Crooks Out Of SFPERS \nPress Conference and 
 RALLY on \nFebruary 11,2015 12:00pm 1245 Market St SF \nSTOP Speculative 
 Investments In Hedge Funds! \n\nDespite the fact that thousands of SF city 
 workers have signed petitions against investing our pension funds into 
 speculative hedge funds, the majority of the PERS Board are continuing with 
 plans to threaten our pension funds. They are pushing ahead and this 
 Tuesday the SFPERS management is pushing for them to vote to put 10% of 
 city worker pension funds into hedge funds. \nEven CalPers has pulled out 
 of hedge funds yet we are going in the opposite direction. \nThe corporate 
 controlled mayor Ed Lee and his billionaire financier pals want to get 
 their hands on our pension funds and they are pushing hedge funds with fees 
 to speculators and union busters. He also just reappointed Wendy Paskin 
 Jordan to the board for a five year term despite her financial conflicts of 
 interest and her malfeasance. She also has said she wants to invest in good 
 “hedge funds” but she has stated that she has no hedge investments in 
 her $674 million Paskin Capital Advisors LLC fund. She was also confirmed 
 unanimously by the Board of Supervisors despite her support for hedge funds 
 and the many financial conflicts of interest which are now bottled up in 
 the Ed Lee controlled Ethics Commission \nAt the same time, the POA and 
 IFPTE Local 21 leader Bob Mascat are pushing investments from hedge funds 
 and keeping information about the dangers of these hedge funds from their 
 members. This is the same POA that is supporting more militarization of the 
 police and Brian Stansbury who has racially profiled another policeman and 
 also arrested a SF Public Defender for defending her African American 
 client 
 \nhttp://www.sfchronicle.com/crime/article/S-F-police-won-t-press-charges-against-6063816.php#/0 
 \nPOA member Brian Stansbury has been sued for racial profiling. Joseph D. 
 Driscoll from the Fire Dep who makes over $200,000 a year and Stansbury are 
 pushing hedge funds and Driscoll is denying that our fund lost over $60 
 million in a currency hedge fund that he and the majority of the board 
 pushed. We need to organize and educate all city workers and the public to 
 stop this dangerous threat to our retirement security. We also need to 
 remove these people from the board and put in representatives who will 
 defend city workers and not the speculators and politicians who are getting 
 kickbacks by using our pension funds for financial speculation. 
 \nProposition C which unfortunately was supported by the SFLC and most 
 unions blamed public workers for the financial crisis. The city should be 
 paying 100% for our pensions instead of cutting the wages of many of our 
 lower paid workers. The politicians from Governor Brown on down are cost 
 shifting to make public workers pay more while giving tax subsidies to the 
 multi-nationals and billionaires. \nAt the same time, there are serious 
 conflicts of interest on the pension board. Wendy Paskin Jordon presently 
 has ethics charges against her for financial conflicts of interest and 
 since she is a sales person for financial securities. Why should she be on 
 the board when she is using her position to financially benefit herself? 
 \nIt is time to protect our pension fund and make sure that we eliminate 
 all conflicts of interest. \nJoin the press conference and rally in front 
 of the SFERS on February 11, 2015 at 12:00 noon. At 1:00 PM we will be 
 going in an letting the board and management know that enough is enough and 
 we want an end to speculative investments threatening our pensions. 
 \nSponsored by United Public Workers For Action http://www.upwa.info \ninfo 
 [at] upwa.info \n\nSF Cops Arrest Public Defender For Protecting Clients 
 Rights 
 \nhttp://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/S-F-public-defender-detained-outside-court-6046088.php 
 \nS.F. public defender detained outside court, office outraged \nBy Vivian 
 Ho Updated 1:51 pm, Wednesday, January 28, 2015 \nA San Francisco deputy 
 public defender was taken into custody Tuesday afternoon at the Hall of 
 Justice after she asked why city police officers were questioning her 
 client outside a courtroom, the public defender’s office said Wednesday. 
 \nAttorney Jami Tillotson was handcuffed to a bar in a Southern Police 
 Station holding area located at the Hall of Justice at 850 Bryant St. for 
 an hour following what public defender’s office spokeswoman Tamara Barak 
 Aparton called “blatant intimidation” by several police officers. 
 \nPolice officials did not immediately respond to requests for comment. 
 \nTillotson’s client had just made an appearance in Department 17 on the 
 second floor with a co-defendant for a misdemeanor shoplifting charge when 
 he left the courtroom and began getting questioned by a plainclothes police 
 officer, Aparton said. \n\nTillotson had been conducting an interview with 
 another client in the courtroom’s holding tank when she was alerted of 
 the situation and rushed out into the hallway. \nShe found her client and 
 his co-defendant “surrounded by police officers,” being asked 
 identifying questions about their height and weight, Aparton said. \n“She 
 told the interrogating officer that she was the attorney and he said, 'I 
 just need two minutes with him,’” Aparton said. “When she asked why, 
 he just said it was a police investigation. Then he started basically 
 bullying her, telling her she’s interfering. \n“She wasn’t 
 interfering,” Aparton said. “She was just trying to protect her 
 client’s constitutional right to counsel.” \nWhen the officers started 
 taking photos of her client, Tillotson told them that wasn’t necessary, 
 Aparton said, and the officer told her he would arrest her if she continued 
 to interfere. \nThe plainclothes officer then asked a uniformed officer to 
 cuff her, and she was taken to a Southern Station holding cell. Tillotson 
 was released about an hour later, Aparton said. \nThe public defender’s 
 office was planning to release surveillance footage of the encounter later 
 Wednesday. \n“It’s definitely shocking,” Aparton said. \nVivian Ho is 
 a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. E-mail: vho [at] sfchronicle.com 
 Twitter: @VivianHo \n\nSF Corporate Controlled SF Mayor Ed Lee To Raid City 
 Workers Pension Fund 
 \nhttp://www.stoplhhdownsize.com/Affordability_Mayor_Housing_Bait_and_Swtich_April_2014.pdf 
 \nApril 2014 \n\nOn the Mayor’s Seven-Point Housing Plan 
 \n\nAffordability Mayor: \nA Housing Bait-and-Switch? \n\nby Patrick 
 Monette-Shaw \n\nTo believe Mayor Ed Lee’s pledge to build 30,000 housing 
 units in San Francisco over the next six short years, you’d also have to 
 believe P.T. Barnum said “There’s a sucker born every minute.” [It 
 wasn’t Barnum who said it; Wikipedia indicates several sources attribute 
 the aphorism to various con men.] \n\nblo-vi-ate (blō′vē-āt′) 
 Intransitive verb: Talking at length 1) in a pompous or boastful manner, or 
 2) in inflated, empty ways. \n\nWould that be the Mayor’s new-found 
 “affordability agenda”? \n\nFor openers, although the mainstream media 
 reported January 17 details of Mr. Mayor’s seven-point plan to solve the 
 City’s number one crisis (affordable housing), the media failed to note 
 the Mayor’s bloviated claim to issue 2,500 down-payment-assistance loans 
 during the next six years — and increase each loan to up to $200,000 — 
 may end up costing a half-billion dollars. The media didn’t report, and 
 apparently didn’t bother asking, where the Mayor plans to come up with a 
 cool $500 million in order to hand out 2,500 interest-free loans within six 
 years. \n\nWill Google, or Twitter — or Ron Conway, and Danielle 
 Steele’s ex-hubby, Tom “Don’t Persecute Billionaires” Perkins — 
 donate upwards of $450 million out of their \n\n\ncollective “tech” 
 deep pockets to make these interest-free loans happen? \n\n“The media 
 failed to note the Mayor’s bloviated claim to issue 2,500 down- 
 payment-assistance loans during the next six years — and increase each 
 loan to up to $200,000 — may end up costing a half- billion dollars.” 
 \n\nSpecial Favors For Wendy Paskin-Jordan Who Sits On 
 SFERS\nhttp://code.socialdashboard.com/news/investment-by-san-francisco-pension-official-raises-questions-about-favors\nINVESTMENT 
 BY SAN FRANCISCO PENSION OFFICIAL RAISES QUESTIONS ABOUT FAVORS\n13Dec, 
 2014 12:12 pm PDTVisited : 2 times | 0 Visits TodayTumblr0WordPress0 
 0Google +0 0 0 0\nAs a member of the board that manages the San Francisco 
 pension system, Wendy Paskin-Jordan is tasked with looking out for the 
 financial interests of the city's taxpayers and municipal workers. A 
 prominent financial executive and former San Francisco first lady, she 
 helps oversee a $20 billion pot of funds that are the source of retirement 
 payments for city teachers, cops and firefighters.\n\nBut as Paskin-Jordan 
 this week faces a vote on her reappointment to the board, she appears to 
 have blurred the lines between her responsibility to the city and her 
 personal financial interests.\n\nAccording to financial documents reviewed 
 by the International Business Times, Paskin-Jordan has invested her 
 personal funds in a firm called GMO, which also manages almost $400 million 
 of the San Francisco pension system's money. The documents show that 
 Paskin-Jordan invested in GMO while handing over far less money than the 
 fund's stated minimum investment -- a potentially valuable perk.\n\nLike 
 many cities and states across the country, San Francisco has rules designed 
 to prevent people who manage pension systems from placing personal money in 
 the same entities in which public funds under their supervision are 
 invested. Such rules are designed to prevent Wall Street money managers 
 from courting investment from public pension systems by doling out special 
 terms on the personal investments of pension overseers.\n\nDisclosures that 
 Paskin-Jordan may have run afoul of such restrictions have prompted calls 
 for special scrutiny.  \n\n"The ethics commission needs to thoroughly 
 review this,” San Francisco Supervisor John Avalos told IBTimes after the 
 details of the documents were described to him. He is one of the elected 
 officials set to vote this coming week on whether to ratify or reject Mayor 
 Ed Lee's reappointment of Paskin-Jordan to the board.\n\nPaskin-Jordan did 
 not respond to IBTimes' request for comment. However, an official with the 
 San Francisco pension system emailed IBTimes a copy of a letter from the 
 agency’s executive director to the city’s ethics commission defending 
 Paskin-Jordan. The letter says Paskin-Jordan was given the right to invest 
 in the GMO fund at a lower level before she was appointed to the board, and 
 that it’s therefore permissible. Paskin-Jordan didn’t personally invest 
 in GMO until after she was on the pension board.\n\nPaskin-Jordan is merely 
 the latest in a string of public officials whose personal financial 
 investments have tripped concerns over the overlapping interests at work in 
 public pension investment decisions. Just before the New Jersey State 
 Investment Council in 2011 moved state pension money into the control of 
 the giant private equity fund Blackstone, the council chairman's private 
 firm invested in Blackstone. In San Francisco, an investment consultant 
 hired by the city to provide independent advice about hedge funds itself 
 runs a hedge fund in the Cayman Islands.\n\nThe firm in which Paskin-Jordan 
 has invested, GMO, has offices in Boston and San Francisco and describes 
 itself as a "private partnership" overseeing roughly $120 billion in assets 
 worldwide. The firm says it primarily serves institutional rather than 
 individual investors.\n\nAccording to San Francisco pension system 
 documents, GMO has managed city pension money since 1996. The value of San 
 Francisco's holdings managed by the firm are $388 million. At GMO's 
 reported fee rate, that translates to roughly $2 million in fees paid by 
 San Francisco to the firm each year.\n\nIn 2010, Paskin-Jordan was 
 appointed to the board of the pension system, which has the power to 
 continue or terminate San Francisco’s investments with GMO. On her 
 financial disclosure forms filed in April 2013 and March 2014, 
 Paskin-Jordan disclosed that in 2011, she invested in the GMO Quality Fund. 
 She did not list that investment on earlier disclosure forms.\n\nSan 
 Francisco pension system rules prohibit officers from "invest[ing] money 
 with managers of private equity, limited partnerships and non-publicly 
 traded mutual funds that are doing business with SFERS," which stands for 
 San Francisco Employees Retirement System. While the GMO mutual funds are 
 publicly traded, the minimum amount to be eligible to invest in GMO is $10 
 million, according to a GMO spokesperson. Paskin-Jordan’s disclosure form 
 shows she was able to invest in GMO with between $100,000 and $1 
 million.\n\nIn filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, GMO 
 says it may "waive eligibility requirements for some persons, accounts, or 
 special situations" including for those with  "a substantial ongoing 
 business relationship with GMO." But SFERS rules stipulate that no officer 
 may "accept a business opportunity ... a favor or anything of value from" 
 from a firm contracted to manage SFERS money.\n\nIn the letter to the San 
 Francisco Ethics Commission, SFERS Executive Director Jay Huish said that 
 in the mid-2000s -- years before she gained a seat on the pension system 
 board -- two of Paskin-Jordan’s former business colleagues who had gone 
 to work at GMO gave her the right to invest there at below the minimum 
 level.\n\n“Commissioner Paskin-Jordan was offered and accepted that 
 opportunity several years before she became a board member, and thus long 
 before the [rules] applied to her,” Huish wrote. “The fact that she did 
 not make a personal investment until later, after her appointment to the 
 board, does not in my view alter when she accepted that 
 opportunity.”\n\nSanta Clara University’s Ann Skeet, who studies 
 business ethics, told IBTimes that the situation is 
 “problematic.”\n\n“When you serve in a governance role, you are 
 accepting several duties and one of them is to put the interest of the 
 institution above your own, and to keep away from potential conflicts of 
 interest,” Skeet said. “It is surprising to me that as someone who 
 works in the financial industry, she wouldn't have a heightened awareness 
 and take certain steps to make sure that she is not doing things that could 
 be perceived as getting a personal gain from her role on the 
 board.”\n\n\nhttp://www.upwa.info\n 
 https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/02/08/18768272.php
SUMMARY:SF Press Conference/Rally Keep Our Pension Money Out Of Hedge Funds! Stop The Specul
LOCATION:SFERS\n1245 Market St SF 
URL:https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/02/08/18768272.php
DTSTART:20150211T200000Z
DTEND:20150211T210000Z
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR
