Back to States List

Alaska

Alaska has two main public pension systems: the Public Employees’ Retirement System (PERS) and the Teachers’ Retirement System (TRS). Alaska’s Division of Retirement and Benefits (DRB) administers pension benefits but the Alaska Retirement Management Board (ARMB) oversees the investment of the funds.

  • The ARMB represents all eligible public employees and its board consists of 9 members: 2 Ex Officio (Commissioner of Administration; Commissioner of Revenue); 2 trustees who are members of the general public; 1 trustee who is employed as a finance officer for a political subdivision participating in either the PERS or TRS system; 2 trustees who are members of PERS; 2 trustees who are members of TRS.
    • According to a 2023 report, the ARMB’s investment consultant is Callan LLC.

The “By Asset Manager” and “Asset Manager Voting” tables show the proxy voting records of the state’s asset managers who manage the pensions’ stock market portfolio through index, exchange-traded, or mutual funds. Since these are externally managed funds, the asset managers typically retain and exercise proxy voting privileges. This data is used to calculate the state’s pro-ESG and anti-ESG scores to see how the state leverages its externally managed funds in proxy voting.

The “State Voting” table shows the state’s proxy voting records for directly owned securities through pension fund portfolios. This data was obtained by a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request since Alaska does not publicly disclose this information to its pensioners. The 1792 Exchange encourages Alaska to publish its proxy voting records instead of keeping its pensioners in the dark about how the state votes on ESG issues with their money.

Both tables are important to show a comprehensive picture of the state’s proxy voting record.

By Asset Manager

Arrowstreet Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

-

Baillie Gifford Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

29%

Brandes Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

35%

Cap Guardian

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

-

LGIM America

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

-

McKinley

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

-

Northern Trust

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

75%

Pine Bridge

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

37%

T Rowe Price Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

3%

Asset Manager Voting

Pro-ESG

13%

Anti-ESG

1.3%

Anti-Fossil Fuels

12%

Anti-Pollution/Waste

17%

Animal Rights

10%

DEI

13%

Weapons/Defense

5%

Human Rights

16%

Income Equality

17%

Political Speech/Lobbying Spending

13%

Health Care

4%

Race/Gender targets on Boards

15%

Non-Pecuniary Corporate Purpose

2%

ESG-Focused Governance

3%

Abortion

5%

Pro-Fossil Fuel

1%

Equality not DEI

1%

Controversial Cause Support

1%

Geopolitical Rivals/China

2%

State Voting

Pro-ESG

35%

Anti-ESG

5%

Anti-Fossil Fuels

32%

Anti-Pollution/Waste

25%

Animal Rights

29%

DEI

38%

Weapons/Defense

22%

Human Rights

29%

Income Equality

41%

Political Speech/Lobbying Spending

63%

Health Care

43%

Race/Gender targets on Board

33%

Non-Pecuniary Corporate Purpose

10%

ESG-Focused Governance

16%

Abortion

19%

Pro-Fossil Fuel

0%

Equality not DEI

0%

Controversial Cause Support

7%

Geopolitical Rivals/China

17%

Generate Reports
Clear
Toast