Retirement Plan Advisory Committee
October 11, 2011
A meeting of the Retirement Plan Advisory Committee (RPAC) was held on October 11, 2011 via video conference between the Las Vegas System Administration Office and the Uninversity of Nevada Reno.
Present: Michelle Kelley, Co-Chair; Hank Stone, Co-Chair; Robb Bay; Nasser Daneshvary; Kent Ervin; Carla Henson; Patricia Hughes; Jim Labuda; Pat LaPutt; Judy Stewart, , Irene Tucker,
Also Present: Bart Patterson, Christine Casey, Michelle Meador, and George Dombroski
The meeting was called to order at 1:10 pm.
Michelle Kelley welcomed new members and thanked them for their willingness to serve.
Bart Patterson thanked the members for their service and expressed his satisfaction with the progress that the Committee has been making and the direction it is headed in. He invited members to share their thoughts and concerns about the structure of the Committee. Mr. Patterson was asked if there is any reason why new faculty members could not have a choice of participating in either the RPA or PERS. He explained that this choice is not permissible under Nevada Revised Statutes and would require legislative approval. He explained that such a change would have significant budget implications and would run counter to the current national trend away from defined benefit plans in favor of defined contribution plans.
George Dombroski informed the Committee that a contract had been signed with Hewitt EnnisKnupp by Chancellor Klaich on September 22, 2011. The contract took effect on October 1, 2011. The first meeting between the Investment Management Subcommittee and the investment consulting team is scheduled for October 17, 2011. The first order of business will be creation of an investment policy statement.
Pursuant to a discussion on spousal consents at the August 16 meeting, Henry Stone advised the Committee that he had done research on the subject and had concluded that spousal consents are not required by virtue of NRS 123.240, which generally immunizes NSHE from liability to a spouse or third party. Furthermore, he explained that governmental plans are excluded from the federal requirement that distributions from defined contribution plans be made in the form of a qualified joint & survivor annuity unless the spouse has consented to a different form of distribution.
George Dombroski presented a review of the RPA to bring members, especially new members, up to date on the direction that the Committee has been following in recent years and is intending to continue pursuing. He explained that the purpose of retaining an investment consulting firm is to assist the Committee in its duty to select and monitor appropriate investment options for plan participants. He further explained that the Committee’s intention is to simplify the plan in the future for the benefit of participants and the Committee by retaining either a single recordkeeper or master administrator and by streamlining and rationalizing the investment option menu. Michelle Kelley also expressed a goal of stronger NSHE branding to enhance appreciation of the RPA as an employer provided benefit.
There was a lengthy discussion about the relative advantages and disadvantages of PERS and RPA.
Each representative had an opportunity to share items of interest or concern at their campuses during a roundtable discussion. Most members indicated that faculty are more focused right now on health benefit issues than on the retirement plan.
The meeting was adjourned at 3:00 pm.
Prepared by: George Dombroski, Retirement Plan Alternative Manager