Back to States List

Idaho

Idaho has one main public pension system: the Public Employee Retirement System of Idaho (PERSI).

  • The PERSI board represents all eligible state and local employees; the board consists of 5 members: All are appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate.
    • According to its 2024 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report, PERSI’s general investment consultant is Callan LLC.
    • Idaho delegates proxy voting authority to its asset managers. According to its 2024 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report, “The Board, unless otherwise stated, will delegate the voting of proxies to the investment managers or custodian. Proxy voting is considered to be a component of the investment decision process, therefore, the investment managers are responsible for voting all proxies in a manner consistent with the best economic interest of the System, for the exclusive benefit of the System, prudent and otherwise consistent with Idaho Code section 59-1301(2), the Idaho Uniform Prudent Investor Act (Title 68, Chapter 5, Idaho Code), and applicable Federal law.”

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 PERSI’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 Idaho does not publicly disclose this information to its pensioners. The 1792 Exchange encourages Idaho 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

Adelante Funds

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

-

Bernstein Funds

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

-

BLS Funds

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

-

BNY Mellon Funds

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

21%

Brandes Funds

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

35%

Donald Smith Funds

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

-

Fiera Funds

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

-

Genesis Funds

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

-

Longview Funds

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

-

Mondrian Funds

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

47%

MPI Funds

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

-

Peregrine Funds

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

-

Walter Scott Funds

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

-

Asset Manager Voting

Pro-ESG

28.8%

Anti-ESG

1.5%

Anti-Fossil Fuels

30%

Anti-Pollution/Waste

28%

Animal Rights

4%

DEI

30%

Weapons/Defense

20%

Human Rights

48%

Income Equality

26%

Political Speech/Lobbying Spending

37%

Health Care

16%

Race/Gender targets on Board

18%

Non-Pecuniary

38%

ESG-Focused Governance

22%

Abortion

25%

Pro-Fossil Fuel

4%

Equality not DEI

1%

Controversial Cause Support

2%

Geopolitical Rivals/China

2%

State Voting

Pro-ESG

18%

Anti-ESG

1%

Anti-Fossil Fuels

22%

Anti-Pollution/Waste

0%

Animal Rights

7%

DEI

16%

Weapons/Defense

15%

Human Rights

21%

Income Equality

30%

Political Speech/Lobbying Spending

23%

Health Care

0%

Race/Gender targets on Board

0%

Non-Pecuniary Corporate Purpose

7%

ESG-Focused Governance

13%

Abortion

17%

Pro-Fossil Fuel

0%

Equality not DEI

0%

Controversial Cause Support

0%

Geopolitical Rivals/China

5%

Generate Reports
Clear
Toast