Fiscal impact reports (FIRs) are prepared by the Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) for standing finance
committees of the NM Legislature. The LFC does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of these reports
if they are used for other purposes.
Current FIRs (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) are a vailable on the NM Legislative Website (legis.state.nm.us).
Adobe PDF versions include all attachments, whereas HTML versions may not. Previously issued FIRs and
attachments may be obtained from the LFC in Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.
F I S C A L I M P A C T R E P O R T
SPONSOR Ezzell
ORIGINAL DATE
LAST UPDATED
2/10/07
2/22/07 HB 1031
SHORT TITLE Local Government Permanent Fund Investments
SB
ANALYST Propst
APPROPRIATION (dollars in thousands)
Appropriation
Recurring
or Non-Rec
Fund
Affected
FY07
FY08
NFI
(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)
Duplicates SB 511
SOURCES OF INFORMATION
LFC Files
Responses Received From
State Investment Council (SIC)
Department of Finance and Administration (DFA)
State Treasurer
SUMMARY
Synopsis of Bill
House Bill 1031 gives local governments with their own permanent funds of greater than
$10,000.0 additional abilities to invest these monies in a diversified portfolio of public equities,
mutual funds and bonds, as long as managed by advisors/investment professionals of sufficient
credentials currently managing $500 million+ of investments.
SIGNIFICANT ISSUES
The SIC reports that this legislation does not relate to the Permanent Funds managed by the State
Investment Council, but could apply to some NM clients who use the SIC to manage their local
permanent funds.
The SIC currently manages, in addition to the State Permanent Funds, funds for 16 state agency
clients, including universities, cities, counties, municipalities, and NM political subdivisions.
pg_0002
House Bill 1031 – Page
2
Currently nine (9) of these clients have assets greater than $10,000.0 and would qualify under
this proposed legislation to place these assets with an outside manager, if they choose to do so.
The SIC allows clients to invest their funds among eight diversified pools of asset classes,
including large cap and mid cap domestic equities, international equities, core and high-yield
bonds. Current SIC costs to manage these funds for state clients are 17 basis points, or
conservatively, one-half to one-third the average industry standard price for managing a
diversified portfolio of institutional assets, even in amounts greater than $10,000.0.
DFA notes that the investment instruments seem reasonable due to the long term preservations
requirements of the permanent fund. Additionally, the opportunity of investment diversification
could provide additional interest income to the municipalities and counties.
However, counties and municipalities should develop policies and procedures that dictate the
type and acceptable investment risks they are willing to place in their respective portfolios
because certain allowable investment instruments such as collateralized mortgage obligation
residuals carry high investment risk elements, particularly principal-only and interest-only strips.
The policy should also require an internal monthly portfolio valuation review and made part of
all monthly reports to the governing body.
The State Treasurer, however, reported that the types of investments permitted by this legislation
may not be appropriate for public fund investing at a local government level. Investment of
public funds should incorporate safety, liquidity and return, in that order. The investments
permitted in this bill are prone to net asset value fluctuations and the potential loss of principal.
Safety of public funds is a fiduciary responsibility and should mandate investment in the highest
quality securities such as those currently allowed by 6-10-10 and 6-10-01.1 (the State Treasurer’s
Local Government Investment Pool). Additionally the Treasure notes that inexperienced local
government finance officers may not understand the complexities and risk inherent in investing,
especially in the security types permitted by this legislation and potentially recommended by the
investment advisors.
ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS
This legislation does not relate to, and would have little if any impact on the SIC or the State’s
Permanent Funds.
DUPLICATES
SB 511
WEP/mt:nt