Skip to main content
San Bernardino County Employees Retirement Association
File #: 26-028    Name:
Type: Action Item
File created: 1/6/2026 In control: INVESTMENT COMMITTEE
On agenda: 1/20/2026 Final action:
Title: Recommend that the Board approve and adopt updates to Investment Policy No. 007 (Due Diligence Policy).
Attachments: 1. Exhibit A: Investment Policy No. 007 (Due Diligence Policy)
Date Ver.Action ByActionResultAction DetailsMeeting DetailsVideo
No records to display.

 

FROM:                                           Barbara Hannah, Chief Counsel

 

SUBJECT:                                            Investment Policy No. 007 (Due Diligence Policy)

 

RECOMMENDATION:

title

Recommend that the Board approve and adopt updates to Investment Policy No. 007 (Due Diligence Policy).

body

 

BACKGROUND:

General Policy No. 005 involves the periodic review of Board Policies and indicates that the Investment Committee shall review investment policies every three years.

 

Investment Policy No. 007 (Due Diligence Policy) was last reviewed in 2024.

 

At the Investment Committee meeting on December 11, 2025, the Committee Chair requested that counsel review the existing limitation in Investment Policy No. 007 restricting participation in due diligence meetings to no more than two (2) Investment Committee members.  Following that request, staff conducted a review and determined that due diligence falls squarely within the jurisdiction of the Board of Retirement based on the Board’s fiduciary authority as set forth in Article XVI, section 17 of the California Constitution, the County Employees’ Retirement Law of 1937, and SBCERA’s Governance Policy.  This review forms the basis for the proposed revision to Investment Policy No. 007.

 

Governance Authority Regarding Due Diligence

 

Article XVI, section 17 of the California Constitution vests retirement boards with plenary authority and fiduciary responsibility over public pension systems, including:

 

                     “The sole and exclusive fiduciary responsibility over the assets of the public pension or retirement system,” and

                     The duty to administer the system “for the exclusive purpose of providing benefits to participants and their beneficiary and defraying reasonable expenses administering the system.”

 

The authority is exercised by the Board of Retirement as a body and is not delegated or diminished by any committee structures (i.e. Investment, Administrative, and Executive Committees). 

 

Additionally, Government Code section 31595 provides that the Board:

 

“Shall have the exclusive control of the administration and investment of the retirement fund.” 

 

This statute confirms that investment oversight and related fiduciary activities, including investigation, evaluation, and monitoring of investments are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Board, and not any individual committee. 

 

Due diligence is an integral component of the Board’s constitutional and statutory duty of prudence.  Activities such as on-site-visits, meetings with investment managers, and evaluation of operational, governance, and risk controls are undertaken to inform the full Board’s investment decisions and ongoing oversight responsibilities. 

 

While the Board may establish standing committees to assist with analysis and recommendations, committees serve as an advisory and preparatory function only.  They do not possess independent authority, nor may they restrict or replace the fiduciary responsibility of the full Board. 

 

Accordingly:

 

                     Due diligence falls squarely within the jurisdiction of the Board.

                     Individual trustees retain fiduciary responsibility regardless of committee assignment.

                     Investment Policy No. 007 governing due diligence participation should reflect Board-level authority.

 

SBCERA’s governance framework recognizes that the Board retains ultimate authority and responsibility for fund administration and investment oversight.  Limiting due diligence participation based on committee assignment is inconsistent with this governance structure.

 

Proposed Revision to Investment Policy No. 007

 

Investment Policy No. 007 currently limits participation in due diligence trips to two (2) Investment Committee members for Brown Act purposes.  This provision has the effect of:

 

                     Restricting trustee participation in fiduciary due diligence based on committee assignment;

                     Implying that due diligence authority resides with a committee rather than the full Board; and

                     Potentially impairing the ability of trustees to independently satisfy their fiduciary obligations under Article XVI, section 17 of the California Constitution. 

 

As a result, staff recommends revisions to Investment Policy No. 007 to:

 

a)                     Delete the existing restriction limited due diligence travel to two (2) Investment Committee members; and

b)                     Authorize participation by up to four (4) members of the Board, without regard to committee assignment.  

 

Essentially, the revision aligns the policy with the Board’s constitutional authority, statutory mandate, and SBCERA’s governance framework recognizing the Board’s fiduciary responsibility.

 

BUDGET IMPACT:

None.

 

STRATEGIC PLANNING GOAL/OBJECTIVE:

Prudent Fiscal Management

 

STAFF CONTACT:

Barbara Hannah

Don Pierce

 

ATTACHMENTS:

Exhibit A:                     Investment Policy No. 007 (Due Diligence Policy)