Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Plan Design topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board moves to seek consultant review of two plan-design options; timing for changes pushed to next year
Summary
Trustees discussed two deferred-compensation plan designs and moved to recommend paying a consultant to review the options; members noted cost differences between options and said final changes would likely not take effect until FY27 or later.
The Athens-Clarke County Deferred Compensation Board on Feb. 11 discussed two previously proposed deferred-compensation plan designs and moved to recommend engaging a consultant to analyze which option should move forward.
John, speaking to members, framed the discussion about the investment policy statement and plan responsibility: “what is an investment policy statement? ... it is basically kind of a roadmap as to what this board thinks is appropriate for our employees in terms of investment options.” Board members said the two plan-design options (referred to as Plan A and Plan B) were shared with the mayor and commission last year and that an outside consultant should update cost and participation projections if the board narrows to a single recommendation.
Members cited a notional difference between options (the transcript referenced roughly a $130,000 gap on certain annual figures) but emphasized that the underlying cost numbers were from FY26 and will be updated by the consultant. One trustee said the changes are likely to be considered for FY27 or later; another board member observed the process of obtaining consultant work and municipal approvals can be lengthy.
A motion was made to recommend paying a consultant to review the plan-design options and was seconded. The transcript records the motion and a second but does not include a recorded roll-call vote or final approval text.
Board members asked that the consultant update cost estimates and participation assumptions when the board selects an option; staff said they would forward the chosen design to the consultant for updated numbers.
Next steps identified in the meeting: select one plan-design option for consultant review, have Aon or the designated consultant update the fiscal projections, and revisit policy and possible IPS edits at the May meeting with attorney review before any vote is scheduled.
