The New Jersey Supplemental Annuity Collective Trust (SACT)

[joel]

This is a 401(a) defined contribution plan which is funded solely by the voluntary contributions of the public-sector workers in New Jersey. It started in 1963 with a single investment choice---a common stock portfolio. It has never expanded its investment menu. Are the Trustees in breach of their fiduciary duty?

[QDROphile]

How high is up?

[eeyore]

I'm not an attorney, but the ERISA sections dealing with fiduciary issues are generally not applicable to governmental plans. This question may fall under NJ law, if that concept is not an oxymoron. (Mandatory Sopranos reference.) Are investment choices in this plan set by statute? If not, is there a NJ statute governing the duties of fiduciaries? If trustees weren't sued about this by participants in 2008/2009, they can probably sleep soundly.

[joel]

The investment choice(s) is set by statute.

[joel]

Because the sole investment choice is set by statute, is the Board of Trustees free of liability for failure to offer a diversified investment menu?