No.

Colorado Attorney General Reports·Decided July 26, 2000·Published

Opinion

This request requires interpretation of § 24-36-113, C.R.S. (1999). This statute describes the duties of the Treasurer to manage the funds of the citizens of Colorado.

QUESTIONS PRESENTED AND CONCLUSIONS
Question: If the Treasurer purchases a corporate debt obligation that a national rating agency rates as investment grade at the time of purchase, must he sell that investment immediately if the security subsequently is downgraded below investment grade?

Answer: No. As a custodian of the public funds of Colorado, the Treasurer is charged to manage public funds in accord with the direction of the Legislature. Under Colorado law, the Treasurer must manage state investments to maximize returns and to avoid losses of principal, consistent with goals of safety and liquidity. The statutes afford the Treasurer considerable discretion in fund management. The credit rating of a bond commonly may vary over the life of the obligation, depending upon circumstances unknown at the time of the purchase. In his exercise of discretion, the Treasurer is not required to sell an investment security solely because the security has been downgraded.

DISCUSSION
Under the Constitution of Colorado, the Treasurer of Colorado is a custodian of public funds. Colo. Const., art. X, § 12(1). Colorado's Constitution declares that the Treasurer is to follow the direction of the General Assembly concerning the safekeeping and management of the State's funds. Id.

The Investment Responsibilities of The Treasurer of Colorado
More than one hundred years ago, early in the history of Colorado, the Colorado Supreme Court interpreted the State's Constitution to authorize the Treasurer to make only those investments approved by the Legislature by statute. In re House Resolution, 12 Colo. 395,21 P. 486 (1889) (holding unconstitutional a legislative bill that directed the Treasurer to deposit public funds in banks selected by the Governor). Nevertheless, the Treasurer retains constitutional authority, as custodian of public funds, to choose among permissible investments. Id. Also, through legislation the General Assembly may designate a custodian other than the Treasurer to exercise investment authority for particular funds.People ex rel. Miller v. Higgins, 69 Colo. 79, 168 P. 740 (1917) (State Board of Land Commissioners designated as the investment authority for Colorado's public school fund).

The question presented in this opinion requires interpretation of current statutory provisions that describe the classes of investments permissible for public funds. This inquiry begins with the goals of the General Assembly concerning such investments by the Treasurer. They are set forth in § 24-36-113(1), C.R.S. (1999):

In making such investments, the state treasurer shall use prudence and care to preserve the principal and to secure the maximum rate of interest consistent with safety and liquidity. . . .

The General Assembly gives the Treasurer specific instructions concerning investment of state funds in corporate debt obligations. Section 24-36-113(3.5), C.R.S. (1999) declares:

[t]he state treasurer may, in the state treasurer's discretion, invest such moneys in corporate debt obligations rated at least investment grade by a nationally recognized rating organization.

It is a general principle of statutory construction that all provisions of a statute must be construed so that "the true intent and meaning of the general assembly may be fully carried out." §2-4-212, C.R.S. (1999). To do so, these statutory provisions must be read together as a whole to give a harmonious effect to each part. United Airlines, Inc. v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office,993 P.2d 1152 (Colo. 2000); State v. Nieto, 993 P.2d 493 (Colo. 2000).

When read together, these statutes award considerable investment discretion to the Treasurer. "Prudence" and "care" are the directives contained in § 113(1), and these broad requirements evince substantial discretion to accomplish the specific instructions contained in § 113(3.5). Understandably, the General Assembly has chosen not to provide simply a laundry list of permissible investments to be checked off by the Treasurer in some clerical fashion. Finally, these statutes are silent as to the specific time when a permissible investment is to be sold. For these reasons, I conclude that a sale determination for an investment in a corporate debt obligation is left to the informed discretion of the Treasurer, to be bounded by the statutory principles of "prudence and care" to preserve principal and to secure maximum return consistent with safety and liquidity.

The Buy-And-Hold Investment Policy of the Treasurer
The current investment policy of the Treasurer is to buy fixed income investments and to hold them to maturity when possible. A large majority of state funds are invested in securities with maturity dates ranging between one and five years. Some securities held by the state mature over ten to twenty years.

The credit rating of a corporate debt obligation may change several times over the life of the obligation. This is a normal occurrence as circumstances surrounding the obligation change. Also, notwithstanding the downgrading of the credit rating of a bond, the issuing company often continues to make interest payments, and the principal of the bond is often repaid when the bond matures. The risk of loss of interest or principal in the investment depends entirely upon the specific facts involved, and can be determined based upon an evaluation of those facts.

In addition, it is almost always true that the downgrading of a bond reduces its price on the market. Thus, to adopt a rule that requires the state to sell its bonds when they are downgraded means that the state will almost always suffer a loss when it complies with the rule.

The Treasurer has adopted as policy the rule that he will sell immediately any corporate debt obligation that falls below an investment grade rating. It is this policy that is addressed directly by this opinion. The Treasurer's letter to the Attorney General of May 23, 2000 also states that the current policy of the Treasurer is to avoid purchasing corporate debt obligations rated in the lowest investment grade. The Treasurer reasons that a bond rated just above investment grade might easily be downgraded a step, and then the Treasurer would be obligated to sell the bond immediately.

Again, such a sale likely would result in a loss of principal. In appropriate circumstances, however, if the bond were retained in the state's portfolio scheduled interest payments would continue. Also in appropriate circumstances, when the failure of the issuer is unlikely the principal would be repaid at maturity.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

No., (Colo. 2000).

No. (No.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United Airlines, Inc. v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office
993 P.2d 1152 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 2000)
State v. Nieto
993 P.2d 493 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 2000)
In re House Resolution Relating to House Bill No. 349
12 Colo. 395 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1888)
People v. Higgins
168 P. 740 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1917)