Back to States List

Colorado

Colorado has one main public pension fund, the Public Employees’ Retirement Association (PERA).

The PERA board represents all eligible state employees; the board consists of 16 members: 1 Ex Officio (State Treasurer); 3 appointed by the Governor; 4 appointed by the School Division employees; 3 appointed by the State Division employees; 1 appointed by the Local Government Division employees; 1 appointed by the Judicial Division; 2 appointed by PERA retirees; 1 non-voting member appointed by the DPS Division retirees and employees.
- PERA discloses its specific proxy voting records on this website.

The first table shows the aggregated proxy voting records of the state’s asset managers, who manage the pension’s stock market portfolio either through mutual funds or ETFs, and are therefore exercising proxy voting privileges as well. The second table shows the state’s publicly disclosed proxy voting records for public securities that it directly owns through pension fund portfolios. Both of these tables are necessary to reflect an accurate and comprehensive picture of the state’s proxy voting records.

Averages

Pro-ESG

Anti-ESG

State Voting Average

41%

State Voting Average

0%

State Rank

46th

State Rank

19th

Asset Manager Average

49%

Asset Manager Average

6%

By Asset Manager

BlackRock

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

30%

Blackstone

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

31%

Invesco Advisors

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

38%

JP Morgan Asset Management

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

41%

Lazard Asset Management, LLC

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

42%

Miller Funds

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

42%

Mondrian Investment Partners

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

42%

Morgan Stanley

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

43%

Nuveen Real Estate

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

44%

PGIM Quantitative Solutions, LLC

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

44%

Principal Capital Investors LL

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

46%

Prudential Investments

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

46%

State Street Funds

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

46%

State Street Global Advisors

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

46%

UBS

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

46%

USAA Funds

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

49%

William Blair Investment Management, LLC

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

49%

Baillie Gifford

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

49%

Asset Manager Voting

Board Diversity:

31%

Require Environmental/Social Qualifications:

19%

Establish Environmental/Social Committee:

9%

Link Executive Pay to Social Goals:

17%

Climate Change:

41%

GHG Emissions:

47%

Climate Change Action:

21%

Report on Healthcare/Abortion:

30%

Weapons-Related Proposals:

12%

Social Proposal:

22%

Income Inequality:

25%

Political Activities and Action:

6%

Political Contributions and Lobbying:

44%

Political Lobbying Disclosure:

57%

Racial Equity Audit:

59%

Management Environmental Proposals:

93%

Anti-Social:

4%

Charitable Contributions:

8%

State Voting

Board Diversity:

42.9%

Require Environmental/Social Qualifications:

100.0%

Establish Environmental/Social Committee:

0.0%

Link Executive Pay to Social Goals:

0.0%

Climate Change:

30.4%

GHG Emissions:

62.5%

Report on Healthcare/Abortion:

20.0%

Weapons-Related Proposals:

20.0%

Social Proposal:

29.3%

Income Inequality:

21.1%

Political Activities and Action:

25.0%

Political Contributions and Lobbying:

80.0%

Political Contributions and Lobbying:

85.2%

Racial Equity Audit:

58.6%

Management Environmental Proposals:

100.0%

Anti-Social:

0.0%

Charitable Contributions:

0.0%

**The Retirement Systems of Alabama (RSA) has denied that State Street invests equities or casts proxy votes for the State. RSA has yet to publish its proxy voting records or disclose its investment managers. RSA’s public records list State Street a custodial bank and as a fund manager. No other investment managers are named in RSA public records, which is what is reported on the 1792 Exchange Proxy Database. RSA claims that Glass Lewis conducts its proxy voting. 1792 Exchange encourages RSA to publish these voting records in order that these records might be updated on this page. 1792 Exchange also encourages RSA to retain authority over proxy voting for ESG resolutions and not entrust these duties to Glass Lewis, a firm the Attorney General of Alabama has investigated for promoting ESG priorities at the expense of fiduciary responsibility.

Disclaimer: The information contained in this report, ‘Proxy Voting,’ is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial or investment advice. Click here for the full disclaimer.

Generate Reports

Clear

This website stores cookies on your computer. These cookies are used to collect information about how you interact with our website and allow us to remember you. We use this information in order to improve and customize your browsing experience and for analytics and metrics about our visitors both on this website and other media. To find out more about the cookies we use, see our Privacy Policy.

Accept