They say it鈥檚 a moral and financial imperative in light of climate change and projections showing declining demand for fossil fuels as renewable energy demand rises. Opponents say it would risk negatively impacting the retirement benefits of hundreds of thousands of state employees.
Stephen Siegel, a special education teacher and one of three regional vice presidents for the Oregon Education Association, the state鈥檚 largest teachers鈥� union, gave testimony supporting the bill. Siegel and the association鈥檚 60,000 members are enrolled in the state pension fund.
鈥淲e believe there should be ethical, moral and transparent professional standards of conduct for how members鈥� retirement money is invested, and that those standards should not be overshadowed by a desire for a high return on investment,鈥� he said.
The 2023 Oregon Treasury Investment and Climate Act, or , would require the Treasury to disclose all of its investment holdings and to stop investing in 鈥渃arbon-intensive鈥� holdings, defined as investments in coal, oil and gas companies, and providers of equipment, services, transportation or storage related to oil and gas.
The bill would require the state to divest from companies, including oil giants Exxon Mobil, Shell and Chevron, that are on one of three lists produced by nongovernmental organizations. It also would direct the department to invest in companies working on climate-safe solutions, defined as entities that earn most of their revenue from practices that help with mitigation, adaptation and resilience against the impacts of climate change.
These include renewable energy companies, some companies in the forest-sector and construction companies developing low-carbon buildings. Chief sponsors of the bill are state Reps. Khanh Pham, D-Portland and Mark Gamba, D-Milwaukie, and state Sen. Jeff Golden, D-Ashland.
"The treasurer has pointed out that statutory interventions into the investment process are extraordinary. They are. Climate change is an extraordinary phenomena."Tom Sanzillo, director of financial analysis for the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis
The Treasury manages $137 billion in investments. More than $90 billion of that is vested in the state鈥檚 Public Employees Retirement System, or PERS, providing a pension for nearly 400,000 Oregonians.
At least $5.3 billion of the state鈥檚 total holdings is invested in fossil fuel companies, according to the nonprofit environmental group Divest Oregon. These include holdings in coal, natural gas and tar sands companies. It鈥檚 possible more public retirement money is invested in fossil fuels through private equity funds that the Treasury invests in, but those holdings don鈥檛 have to be disclosed under state law.
Opponents of the bill, including several large unions whose members are enrolled in the state retirement fund, say that divesting of fossil fuels entirely is too risky, and that the Treasury would be potentially losing money that belongs to individual pension holders, not to the state itself.
More than a dozen people spoke about the bill during a Thursday public hearing at the , and most of them supported the bill. More than 120 people and groups have submitted written testimony in favor of the bill, and 12 have submitted testimony in opposition.
Risk management
The state retirement money is managed by the state Treasury under the guidance of the state treasurer, Tobias Read and the oversight of the Oregon Investment Council, a governor-appointed group of four. Read told lawmakers in a January that he believes the proposal is too risky.
A significant portion of the state鈥檚 investments are in private equity funds, and do not need to be disclosed to the public under state law. This is the first issue that must be addressed, according to advocates of the bill.
Rick Pope, a retired lawyer, accused Read of deliberately withholding information from lawmakers and the public. Pope used public records requests to obtain a last year that was commissioned by the state Treasury, which found the retirement system would be negatively impacted if it continued to keep investing in fossil fuel holdings over the next five years.
Many advocates of the bill called Read out for being slow to respond to the climate emergency.
鈥淭he treasurer has pointed out that statutory interventions into the investment process are extraordinary. They are. Climate change is an extraordinary phenomena,鈥� said Tom Sanzillo, director of financial analysis for the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, a left-leaning think tank.
鈥淣o country on earth has found it easy to adopt solutions. The Legislature鈥檚 consideration of House Bill 2601 is a recognition that the climate issue is serious, and the choices are difficult but necessary,鈥� he said.
Unions divided
Joana Kirchhoff, a member of the social activist group Portland Raging Grannies, wrote in submitted testimony that the group joins tens of thousands of beneficiaries of the state鈥檚 pension system 鈥� including the teachers鈥� union 鈥� in supporting the bill.
House Bill 2601 makes, I think, a very damaging assumption that the retirement funds of public employees actually belong to the state of Oregon. That assumption is both dangerous and wrong. The money belongs to public employees. It belongs to firefighters, police officers teachers and all those Oregonians who do the everyday work in the state.State Sen. Tim Knopp, R-Bend
鈥淲e support development of new energy sources rather than continuing to maintain the dirty fossil fuel industry,鈥� she wrote.
But another large union, Oregon AFSCME, which represents over 25,000 state, county and municipal employees, came out against the bill, along with Oregon PERS Retirees, Inc., an association and lobbying group with about 10,000 members who rely on the state retirement fund.
The group鈥檚 lobbyist J.L. Wilson said in written testimony that recipients of the state retirement fund are already getting small returns.
鈥淭he reality is, with a $33,000 average pension benefit, retirees don鈥檛 have the luxury of lesser investment returns,鈥� Wilson wrote. A survey of association members during the week of Feb. 6 found that more than half oppose the legislation, Wilson noted.
State Sen. Tim Knopp, R-Bend, spoke against the bill at Thursday鈥檚 hearing.
鈥淗ouse Bill 2601 makes, I think, a very damaging assumption that the retirement funds of public employees actually belong to the state of Oregon,鈥� he said. 鈥淭hat assumption is both dangerous and wrong. The money belongs to public employees. It belongs to firefighters, police officers, teachers and all those Oregonians who do the everyday work in the state.鈥�
In a to lawmakers in January, Read wrote that no matter how well-intentioned, any effort to limit investment opportunities in the state pension fund would negatively impact retirement funds for the thousands who rely on it. He said employers and employees would be required to contribute more money to cover what he believes would be losses.
鈥淲hen public entities must direct more money to cover their retirement system obligations, they have less money for the classroom, the firehouse, child welfare offices, and other state and local government services,鈥� he wrote.
In November, Read to get the fund to 鈥渘et zero鈥� by 2050. This would mean that as a whole, the state鈥檚 investments would result in zero greenhouse gas emissions.
The plan will be presented to the state Investment Council in February 2024, according to the Treasury office鈥檚 communications director, Amy Bates.
鈥淚mmediate and broad sector-based divestment by the Oregon state Treasury is likely inconsistent with its fiduciary duty,鈥� Read wrote of the Treasury. 鈥淚nstead, 鈥榙ivestment鈥� should be used as a risk-reduction measure,鈥� he said.
The is a professional, nonprofit news organization. We are an affiliate of , a national 501(c)(3) nonprofit supported by grants and a coalition of donors and readers. The Capital Chronicle retains full editorial independence, meaning decisions about news and coverage are made by Oregonians for Oregonians.