The first thing voters must know about the one billion dollar pension bond on the November ballot is where the money is going. The money is going to fund the DROP accounts of retired police officers and municipal employees for the City of Houston. This is largest bond in City of Houston history and none of it goes for Harvey relief!
The DROP stands for the Deferred Retirement Option Plan. The Texas Legislature created these accounts in 2001, which allow city police and municipal employees to retire after twenty years without really retiring. DROP allowed employees to accrue the retirement pay while being paid their normal salary in a separate account collecting eight percent interest. It was a pretend retirement. There were several bills that morphed into the system we have now. Mayor Sylvester Turner, as a state representative, carried every one of the bills. This irony should not be lost here. Not one dime of this money goes for any Harvey relief
Most police officers who have been in the system since 2001 have over one million dollars in their DROP accounts. Many officers have several million dollars in their DROP. Understand that this DROP account is in addition to their retirement benefits of 95 percent salary and medical benefits for the rest of their lives. This is why the City of Houston has an eight billion dollar unfunded pension liability and why we are compared to Chicago and Detroit. Voters are now being asked to make millionaires out of city employees.
The bond proceeds are divided between police and municipal employees: 750 million for police and 250 million for municipal employees. Obviously, there are a lot of police officers in the program. This billion dollar bond is just for this group of retiring officers and taxpayers can expect skyrocketing property taxes and more bond proposals in the future.
There is a group within the Republican Party, led by Paul Simpson, promoting this nonsense. Make no mistake, Paul Simpson is a big government establishment Republican, which is the reason the party was crushed in the last election cycle. Paul Simpson is not acting alone and his political consultant, Kevin Shuvalov, is being paid to promote Mayor Sylvester Turner’s billion dollar “kick the can down the road” bond deal. Shuvalov just happens to be a consultant to Joe Straus. You can bet that plenty of funds are fixin’ to flow into Paul Simpson’s coffers from both Sylvester Turner and the unions who are desperate for post-Harvey Republican support for this bond.
Once again, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, a longtime recipient of [police] union support, is carrying the water for the pension bond election. Patrick’s political consultant, Allen Blakemore, worked with Turner in 2001 and was the lobbyist for the HPOU at that time. Blakemore facilitated Mayor Sylvester Turner’s billion dollar bond proposal through the Senate long before education and property tax reform went down in flames in the House. Lt. Dan and his consultant have been delivering for the unions since he was first elected to the Texas Senate and this year is no exception. While good people in our community are flooded out of their homes, Patrick, Turner, et al. are trying to make millionaires out of city workers.
Expect to see Lt. Dan (with a special appearance by Senator Joan Huffman and crew) representing recipients of union largesse at Monday night’s Harris County Republican Party’s Executive Committee Meeting. Maybe Sly can ask Lt. Dan about the rainy day fund when he is in town. Lt. Dan can ask the mayor about all the nasty things Turner and the Houston City Council said about the Republicans when Houston filed suit over SB4.
This is being done for the love of money.
Mr. Hooper can you please provide the source that you used to state in your article that retired police officers receive retirement benefits equal to 95{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} of salary and medical benefits for the rest of their lives. As a participant in the Drop program when I retired my retirement pay was calculated at 55{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} of salary (prior three years worked) and I pay for my own health insurance, so maybe I missed something. You should have probably also mentioned some of the recent changes made to our pension system which include no cost of living increase for the next three years, and active officers contributing 10.5{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} (raised from 9{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}) of their paychecks into the retirement system, which is directly sent into the general fund and not their individual accounts as in the past, to help make up for the shortfall. And please don’t forget that the 750 million dollars earmarked for the police pension fund is to make up for the city not contributing over the years. Also, while maybe in 2001 officers were getting 8{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} it is now 5.2{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}. And finally most police officers do not have over one million dollars in their accounts, unless you were just referring to upper management, and then you might be correct. Thank you for allowing me to comment.
Steve S, sure https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=https{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}3A{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}2F{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}2Fwww.click2houston.com{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}2Fnews{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}2Freport-shows-money-city-employees-earn-during-retirement&h=ATO_HtAVotYURxE5R7DTC1olRLyMumCKRPSPDsyO9iTEO-1yPY_xJfu1Um_7MILUQ2OQCRGnWUAcHR32aJD1iU4RwkgeXtfZ6gxAni-rwruEW34spHE8WOpBmvFpvjALLuanK8iOb4KStX0UOcAqglqL
but I would be more worried about this http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-01-06/city-dallas-looks-clawback-ill-gotten-pension-gains-dallas-police
Look at the bright side if the bond fails you don’t have to give up anything. Let’s be clear about why the City owes you this money. The union wanted pay raises and the mayors said ok you guys need to defer your pension payments in exchange. Fire Department was not this dumb. They made the City fund their DROP. I think you should vote against the bond. You are being cheated. See Steve there was never any money in your DROP account. Btw, what’s in your DROP? Senior patrol officer making 75K should have about 1.75 million.
From your link:
Houston Police officers with 20-25 years on the job:
$6,786 average final salary at retirement
$3,811 average monthly pension benefit
$132,108 average DROP balance
I worked 25 years. Numbers above are a little high but reasonable. I don’t know if you came up with the 1.75 million number on your own or it was supplied to you by another source, but it is way off. Your police officer/millionaire connection that you make probably needs to be removed as a point in your argument as it is way off base and does a disservice to the readers of this article who might have to make a decision come voting time.
Steve S,,
My source for the DROP number came from Ray Hunt. I noticed you left out your DROP amount? In Dallas the public never saw the DROP amounts until everyone started suing each other. You know there was a guy in Dallas who had 4 million in his DROP account. The amount of every DROP account should be disclosed.
Don, your numbers suggest that HPD/HFD start a DROP account when they are newly hired but this is not the case. They do not start until the employee has hit their 20 year mark and for police, do not include overtime in the calculations. I suspect your union buddy Ray Hunt was joshing you if he said he makes anything close to that amount, as an officer scheduled on day shifts, weekends up, and no special assignment pays, he likely makes less than Steve S. does. You can use a calculator to approximate a DROP benefit, by multiplying salary times .55 and add 5{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} interest from their 20 year mark, their DROP has been capped at a lower interest for most of the program. According to his bio page, officer Hunt has only been with the city for 25, 26 years, so I don’t see how he could make even half what you suggest. If you can provide proof that 5 current officers, not ranked individuals of days gone by, have even a million in their accounts, by all means prove it to shut up the critics.
As for my DROP account, if I am supposed to have 1.75 million dollars in it, then I am currently 88-90{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} shy of that, and that includes contributions I made, which were deducted from my paycheck when I was active duty, starting when I hit the 20 year mark. Also you stated in the first paragraph:
“The first thing voters must know about the one billion dollar pension bond on the November ballot is where the money is going. The money is going to fund the DROP accounts of retired police officers and municipal employees for the City of Houston. ”
Just so your readers know, that money, if approved by the voters, is meant to make up for what the city hasn’t paid over the years , and will go into the general fund, not our individual accounts. My account balance will not change.
You also state in your article:
” Voters are now being asked to make millionaires out of city employees.”
” While good people in our community are flooded out of their homes, Patrick, Turner, et al. are trying to make millionaires out of city workers.”
Not true. The voters are being asked to approve the pension obligation bonds so that the city can make up for what they have failed to pay over the years. This is in addition to the concessions made by us (no cost of living/3 years, increase of pension contributions by active employees that is sent directly to general fund, not their drop accounts, etc)
Again, your constant use of the connection city worker/millionaire does not work and clouds the issue in front of the voters. I am sure on an emotional level it hits a chord, but since the voters are being asked to approve a billion dollars of obligation bonds, the facts should probably be used also.
Finally, just a thought: How many of the good people flooded out of their homes that you refer to, were city retirees, active police/fire/municipal employees?
I forgot to comment earlier on this statement in your reply:
The union wanted pay raises and the mayors said ok you guys need to defer your pension payments in exchange. Fire Department was not this dumb. They made the City fund their DROP.
Are you calling our union leaders/pension system leaders dumb? How about more accurately stating that our union/pension system leaders over the years made concessions and tried working with city leaders as they continually failed to make payments into our system, for the good of their members and in hopes of avoiding what we currently now face.
Steve, I think he’s wrong about that too but for a different reason. I lived in the city when all this was going on and it was crystal clear that the people seeking raises, union officials, did not do anything to assist those in charge of pension benefits, pension board trustees, and vice versa. Those at HFD have been re-writing that narrative for generations but they unsuccessfully sought raises continuously through the 1990’s and 2000’s, never once “trading” raises for pension benefits, their union was just not very good at picking political candidates to then champion their cause at city council. They picked Orlando when your leaders endorsed Brown, the spoils going to the victor.
By the same token, nobody at either the municipal pension or police pension gave up a penny so their people could get better raises, they focused on their interests which included retirees not eligible for raises to secure benefits. The city’s lack of funding their pensions came when they were strong armed by Mayor White who demanded payment holidays lest he lay off hundreds of employees, HFD were not subjected to that because of their ace in the hole in the legislature, Mario Gallegos, himself a retired fireman, that made it clear any changes to their retirement benefits would cost the city dearly in any legislation he could screw with. Without union support, neither HMEPS or HPOPS dared defy White’s demands, city voters keeping him in office as long as they could. As such, it is on them what happened, not worker drones with no say.
Steve S.,
Your union rolled the dice, and now the City is forced to borrow money for a debt they could not afford to pay in the first place. The question is whether voters agree to it or not. If they don’t your concessions supposedly go away. I say supposedly because I do not understand your concessions and question whether they exist. Maybe you can explain why it is such bad deal for you if you get these concessions back? Let me put it this way, what concessions? I keep hearing about 2.9 billion in concessions from the employees why don’t you explain your math and how you get there?
Mr. Hooper, It is not my math to explain. I am sure while you conducted your extensive research prior to writing this article, you came across info like this:
http://www.houstontx.gov/pensions/, where under supporting documents you would have found a fact sheet for HPOPS showing the changes being made and that were effective 7/1/17. The math will be explained or have to be explained by those who compiled and issued their findings.
For retirees such as myself, the most direct impact is no cost of living increase for 2018/2019/2020. What you see in your monthly check is what you will get till May 2020. So on the off chance that prices/inflation rise over the next three years a retiree must either cut back spending or dip into their not nowhere near a million DROP account to supplement. For active duty the most direct effect is having 10.5{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} of your paycheck pulled out and put into the general fund of the pension system, along with other changes. Of course this is all dependent on the voters approving the bond matter. If not approved, then all the changes made go away and those in power go back to the drawing board. To question whether these changes exist or are just “a big lie” insults the thousands of people who were being affected by this and had to make career or financial decisions because of it.
Finally, you know that mention of retirees receiving 95{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} of their salary and medical benefits for the rest of their lives in the 3rd paragraph is incorrect. Our retirement is calculated at 55{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} and we pay for any medical benefits, it is not given to us. As a matter of principal and truthfulness, please correct it.
Thank you for allowing me to comment and allowing others who view this article to see my comments.
Steve S,
Like I said the professed concessions are not real and if you had to live by that wording to get paid from the City it would be unacceptable to you. I would like to see 1.9 billion in real cuts, not whatever you said. I am not real happy that your DROP accounts are not treated as community property in the family courts either. You can read that story next week.
I am opposed to the HCRP Executive Committee endorsing a Billion Dollar bond to bail out the Ruling Class who created the mess.
Why are the Republicans engaged in loading up a credit card, to the tune of $1 Billion that must be paid back by future property owners, with interest, to keep a Sanctuary City that has been run into the ground for a Century by the Progressive Ruling Class? The Progressive Democrats Bankrupted the City, why should Republicans be placed in a position of future blame for endorsing the bonds by the very Progressives Dan Patrick is trying to bail out?
This bond situation, impacting taxpayers, kind of reminds me of the Republican lunacy, at the national level, of continuing to fund OBAMACARE, and keeping the ever-increasing taxes in place. No one is held responsible for looting the Treasury, and foisting this massive boondoggle on the citizens, but the producers continue to be over-taxed so as to accommodate the tens of millions riding in the subsidized wagon..
Contrary to what the op-ed says, Jerry Patterson (R) sponsored the initial legislation in 1995 and it was signed by Governor George Bush (R), nobody voted against giving firemen or police a deferred retirement benefit (DROP). Houston started DROP for firemen and police in the same year. No police officer in the history of the program in Houston has made “millions” from it, though that might be true of a couple of police chiefs and ranked members and no officer has a pension of 80{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} or more, that’s an HFD benefit.
The most important thing about the bond proposal is this: if it gets voted down, police and municipal workers will go back to receiving larger pensions until at least 2019, all of their concessions are tied to the bond passing. The bond will have no impact on HFD whether it passes or fails but if it fails, cuts to all three pensions will have to be bigger in 2019. I haven’t seen Paul Simon advocating the pension bond and the op-ed makes no specific reference to such a stance but given there is no fall back stance until the next legislative session, the bond conditions seem better than Don is claiming.
Peter D,
Paul Simpson was advocating for the bond yesterday morning at the Houston Realty breakfast;-) ask him. Jerry Patterson was one of many. There were a series of bills not just one bill. The main authors of all three bills were Sly Turner, Mario Gallegos, and John Whitmire. Btw, there was a group of folks including me who opposed this back when it was done. I don’t recall testifying at the Capitol but I did at City Hall. Orlando Sanchez rang the alarm bell the loudest. I would have to go back and look at the legislation to see Patterson’s involvement. I do know Jerry has had a relationship with the HPOU lobby team in Austin going back many years. You have no idea what is anyone’s DROP accounts because Ken Paxton won’t release them through his opinions. However, Ray Hunt will walk you through the math. A senior patrolman maxing out at 75k and entering the program in 2001 will have approximately 1.75 million in their DROP. You need to look at the size of the HPD command staff. We have very few patrolman.
Don, I wasn’t disputing his involvement, merely stating that I hadn’t seen Simpson advocating the proposal, even you appear to think he just started doing so. Regarding my other comments, as I directed Royko so too I direct you to the original legislation that started in 1995 during the 74th Legislative session with SB 855. The primary author was Patterson, a Republican, and the co-sponsor was Yarbrough, neither Whitmire, Turner, or Gallegos joining the two. These are the legislative facts regarding DROP for public safety, the municipal workers received their bill later on but your emphasis was on the police.
As far as what I know about a senior officer’s DROP account, I have seen several of their statements and none of them have anything close to what you describe. If a senior officer obtained their 20 years in 2001, he most certainly wouldn’t have been making 75 grand salary a year, that amount in 2001 would be closer to what a captain or maybe Lt would make. Conversely, your comment suggests that you have no personal knowledge outside of what a union leader ribbed you with, so I advise you to more thoroughly vet your sources if you want to appear credible. But a generic 20 year officer making 50k/year in 2001 who was still employed today might have an account close to what our firemen friends leave with, there just aren’t many 37 year officers according to city records that are freely available online. In your original example of using officer Hunt, his bio says he was hired in 1991 so he’d have been a 10 year officer at the time and barely vested, never mind in a DROP account situation.
To the last comment, HPD has a dozen or so command staff, all of them recently appointed according to Mike Morris of the Chronicle, because the old ones left rather than lose pension benefits. The worker drones of theirs seem divided mostly between street patrol and investigation divisions, all of this also freely available in the city budget, the number in related administrative positions dropping each year, no pun intended. I won’t begrudge a paramilitary organization having a dozen or so assistant chiefs for the various functions out of their 5200 officers but at the same time, I don’t think the city can afford many more than that no matter what their designation.
Peter D,
Let’s just put every DROP account on the table. No one needs to know names. Let’s see the amounts in every account. Police officers and municipal employees should want a reference that the voters to make an informed decision. There is not one dollar that goes to any asset. It is nothing more than a wealth transfer from property taxpayers to employees. Taxpayers should know what they are buying.
I absolutely concur that data should be made readily available for all such accounts, including municipal, police, and fire. That would make public decisions regarding compensation better informed for things like bonds, referendums, or even deciding how many of each such employee residents of the city are willing to support.
Link to Patterson’s bill: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/History.aspx?LegSess=74R&Bill=SB855
Note that it was place on Local and Uncontested and passed unanimously and without a single amendment.
Proof that the Local calendar is extremely important.
Thank you David! Coming from you, maybe the two of them will listen.
“…nobody voted against giving firemen or police a deferred retirement benefit (DROP).”
How can you have any credibility making such a statement?
Royko, by all means look it up yourself. It was Senate Bill 855 in the 74th legislative session in 1995. One person abstained but otherwise it sailed through both houses and was signed by Governor Bush without opposition. My credibility in the matter is irrelevant but it is based on the facts, not your emotions. And to simplify matters, here is a list of those elected officials working at the city that voted for it:
Bob Lanier – Mayor
Helen Huey – District A
Michael Yarbrough – District B
Martha Wong – District C
Alfred J. Calloway – District D
Joe Roach – District E
Ray F. Driscoll – District F
John Kelley – District G
Felix Fraga – District H
Ben T. Reyes – District I
Gracie Saenz – At Large Position #1
Eleanor Tinsley – At Large Position #2
Lloyd Kelley – At Large Position #3
John W. Peavy, Jr. – At Large Position #4
Judson W. Robinson, III – At Large Position #5
You will note that Orlando was not elected until later and SJL had already moved to the US House of Representatives. The only person that spoke in Houston city council negatively about it was the controller, George Grenias as it established some liabilities. But Neither you nor Don spoke against it in the state legislator. I am not advocating for the benefit, merely reminding the two of you of the history behind it, the legislation approved by state and local authorities for public safety employees 6 years before Don claimed. When the benefit was amended later to include better benefits, the only real opposition was Bruce Tatro and he was steamrolled over by all of his colleagues, including Orlando.
Peter D.,
Do you have a break down for the union payoffs for these folks? Any chance we can take their pensions to pay for yours? Maybe you can explain why you would not want all theses concessions back you made for this latest taxpayer boondoggle. I have a hard time excepting there is 1.9 billion in concessions from any employee group. Also, if we know the DROP accounts are unfunded and the police and municipal employees made no concessions to their DROP accounts how do you come up with 1.9 billion in concessions. Isn’t it all just a big lie?
Btw, I am kind of like Jerry and don’t have perfect recall but I do remember going down to City Hall with Paul Bettencourt and others and going are you out of your ever loving minds. My memory was of Lee Brown, it was a longtime ago. I just don’t remember that far back for sure. I do remember Grenias’ comments, I may have read them though. There were several folks there that day and I will ask them.
Again, explain the 1.9 billion in concessions. I just don’t buy it. The mayor has walked it back to 1.4 billion on his website. Just for argument purposes let’s use 1.9 billion.
Don, in fact I did keep tabs on what monies the unions were contributing via their PACS, the amount combined by all three employee groups amounting to a very small fraction of what various corporate entities donated. You can look it up via finance reports yourself but keep in mind that each of the three groups also had other legislative priorities for each time frame, how exactly do you apportion it out per cause is up to you. As far as endorsements are concerned, we’ve seen that that didn’t appear to matter much given the results, not to mention employees tend to vote outside what their unions want, I knew of no firemen or cops that voted for Lee Brown for example yet he gained both groups the biggest boost in benefits.
Keeping in mind that I am not an employee of any governmental organization, nor do I draw a check as a vendor from any, I would guess that the threat of worse cuts fueled any marginal support from employees directly. If quizzed, I doubt you will find many public safety employees were happy about giving up anything since they historically always want to be paid more, especially when others in their field are paid so much better (one of them points out a 5 year fireman in Austin makes more than a senior fire captain in Houston with 30 years of service). Those that do support the concessions do so almost invariably because they fear worse cuts are in the offing.
As far as your questions regarding how the concessions add up and assigning them to anyone who disagrees with you, all I can say is that given the math you used previously, you might fare well speaking with someone at Edward Jones or other company that can explain the time value of money. All employees will be paying in more per check to get less in benefits. That’s the quick version but the time frame is 30 years. HFD joining the other groups to lose DROP for new employees and all DROP formulas being truncated form the deepest cuts. That is followed by the cost of living adjustments being frozen for a time and then lowered in the future adds up quickly as well. And the lowering of the pension formulas for each group cannot be overlooked, the movement to the “Rule of 70” for a truncated pension has special impact on those that typically join youngest.
HFD losing overtime and assignment pay in their calculation is very big, neither of the other groups having it, the lowered percentages and using the final three years instead of allowing them to pick the best 78 pay periods is huge too, this cuts out massive overtime programs stemming from the 9/11 attacks, various hurricanes or multi-alarm fires, and so forth where employees might have literally more than doubled their checks so cutting out spiking and capping other things is big in saving money.
HPD already made most of those changes some 13 years ago but it did cut off any pension perks for that command staff you hate so much, that is why they fled prior to July 1 else lose a lot of money. The biggest hit they took tied to their COLAs and DROP. As long as they are employed, none of their monthly check goes to their own account any more, the 10.5{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} they pay each check goes to the fund whether they are a command staff member, a captain, or a foot trooper patrolling public housing. While comprising a minority of their department, there are still enough remaining to mean that millions each year will no longer go to DROP but into pension coffers, the employees no longer getting a yearly increase from a COLA on such monies scaling back the program more than the new cap they have.
The municipal workers already received much less on average but their survivor benefit was cut by 20{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}, all of them pay 3{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} or 4{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} more depending on which group they are in and their pension check COLAs were cut in half while their DROP adjustments were removed completely until age 62. Their benefits are now based on a five year average of returns instead of the previous year but they also have a provision where their board can suspend any DROP withdrawals if need be, without notice, and subject to modification if the corridor is enacted due to low fund performance.
How does the math add up? Well, the changes in DROP and increases to employee contributions are major. If DROP accounts were even half as big as you think they are, those cuts alone would hit the target based on a 30 year timetable. Bond or not, my concern for the three pensions is that the benefit for leaving deferred funds alone have now been largely erased, my broker at Edward Jones salivating at the thought of all that money pulled out for he and his colleagues to invest, the run on the bank in Dallas showing how employee perception can cause great harm no matter what the likely course of events will be. And like it or not, most of the money put in DROP accounts has left over the years, retiring employees rolling it over to a protected private account elsewhere thanks to the rhetoric espoused.
SAD, very depressing! This action alone with The Gop of Harris County is going to sink more good Republican Judges off their benches. For reasons like this is where lack of trust came in and I drew my support for only the Judicial Conservative bodies, our Judgeships. I only trust in the Republican Judges they have not let the people down.
I remember nothing about this, but I also don’t remember where I parked my truck this morning. I just now read the bill text, and I don’t understand it, and am fairly certain I didn’t understand it then. It was on local and uncontested calendar because there was no opposition to the bill, and the one abstention was probably because that member was conflicted because he was a retiree, or eligible to be one. The bill passed not because it was a bad bill or a good bill, but because it had 0 opposition. When I went to the lege I pledged I was going to read every bill. After about 2 months, I revised that to say I would read every bill that was before a committee I was on, or that came to the floor for consideration. By the end of the first session I revised that to reading every bill that I authored or sponsored. While I read the bill in question I’m sure, I had no idea what it meant and relied on the fact there was 0 opposition. JP
Jerry, respect!
Keep up the good work Don Hooper!
I am coming late to fray I am afraid, but I am not a regular reader of Big Jolly Politics so I did not get the link to this until Texas Conservative Review sent it to me and heaven only knows how many other people. Since I am not a fan of Gary Polland, the owner of TCR, I almost deleted without reading anything. However, Paul Simpson’s name was prominently displayed so I decided to see what new slander had been concocted against the hardest working HCRP Chairman we have had since I can remember and I can remember back at least 25 years.
Let’s tackle the full disclosure issue first. Mr. Hooper, as an executive operating oil and gas assets and as someone with interests in power generation, perhaps you would be willing to disclose your net worth and in particular let us know how many millions you have available for your retirement. I wish I knew both Peter D and Steve S because I am impressed by their respectful and well informed comments. The one person who has disclosed nothing is you.
I did follow both links you provided. The Channel 2 investigative report gave the number as 1.15 not 1.75 million. So, Mr. Hooper, we still do not know where you got your figure. Also the Channel 2 report used pension plan reports as their source. Having read a few pension plan reports I can say that the ones I have read use projections. Those projections are based on assumptions that often never become reality.
The bottom line for me is that you have not adequately defined your point and have certainly not proved anything. You have, however, reinforced my belief that ex-lobbyists might not be the most credible source for information on anything.
The numbers are pretty clear and depends on your salary. There are many different groups of retirees. My estimates on the DROP are low because I calculated from 2001.
Can you ask Paul Simpson not to work so hard. His hard work resulted in the largest defeat in Harris County Republican Party history.
Peter D sometimes posts under this name or others. I get why he does not want to post under his name.
Interesting. . . .
Mr. Vander-Lyn, as you have noted Mr. Hooper has elected to make his fortune (I assume it’s a fortune I have no direct knowledge) in the private sector. As far as I know he is not relying on taxpayers to fund his pension or retirement. Therefore, as far as I’m concerned, the state of his finances are completely irrelevant to the conversation.
As for Mr. Simpson’s efforts as the HCRP Chairman – I can’t testify as to his work habits, but the results of his efforts surely leave much to be desired.
Finally, the fact that absolutely nobody can come up with a consistent set of figures to describe the situation is a source of some consternation. If the whole thing is so complex as to make accurate accounting impossible then I can assume it’s a really bad deal.
Let it be duly noted how political the roots of the problem are. While Peter D clearly declares this in several of his posts in this discussion I made it clear I understood this on a previous post at the same time.
Peter D you and your cohorts are paying the price of playing politics. In this scenario either you as a beneficiary of the public largess will get what you were promised by highly motivated partisan democrat mayors and their cohorts in the legislature or the tax payers will prevail and not be forced to pay again, with penalty, for the promises you accepted.
I’d like to know what municipal pensioners were thinking several years into the program. You saw the lack of funding and kept quiet. You took cuts to the promises and let the charade continue but your unions endorsed the promise makers to keep the game going.
The mayors you elected have fully funded pensions. I bet the union bosses have fully funded pensions. I wouldn’t be surprised if the various representatives on the boards of the pensions from the muni groups are long retired with some sweet DROP accounts and monthly checks. Peter D you obviously have the math and politics of the issue covered as you so adroitly display.
But here’s where you expose yourself. Don made the comment that his recollection was that only Orlando Sanchez was ringing the bell about the pensions and that was at the very beginning. Orlando was right. How does that square with
“They picked Orlando when your leaders endorsed Brown, the spoils going to the victor.”
The ‘spoils’ was a good call on your part btw. DROP accounts notwithstanding this mess really started the first year Lee Brown initiated his new pension plan for muni workers. He pushed the notion it would only cost 15{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} of payroll. When he saw it project to over 3 times that he simply refused to pay it. That was 2002. 15 years is a lot of lost compounding, whether it’s 3{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} or 8.5{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}. Every mayor since then has underfunded the plans according to what I know. Every one has been term limited out. Every one has been endorsed by the unions. And every taxpayer under those mayor’s terms has paid their taxes this whole time.
My thoughts are the muni employees would be better off asking for relief from the tax payers instead of demanding it. And you might think about going after the people that got you into the fine mess you find yourself in.
Dan, like Don you make a lot of guesses, most of them simply not accurate but I’ll play along just for kicks. The public safety unions always played politics, both fire and police, and they received the bulk of any raises or benefits as far back as I can remember. The various municipal unions never had traction or bargaining power and as a result, other than management positions, such employees have always been disposable and far worse compensated compared to any other major city in Texas. The lesson was learned; no politics, no rewards.
You bemoan this as though employees had a better choice, they never have other than leaving public service which is what many have done. Let me ask you Dan, when was the last time that the Harris County GOP fielded a candidate for Houston mayor? Don’t start with the shtick how city races are non-partisan either, there is nothing preventing a well known Republican with demonstrated governance skills from being promoted by the party. Even half the people here have laughed at the suggestion Bill King would qualify for that designation, at best the man was considered the lesser of two evils, his recent support for Mayor Turner’s actions alone enough to throw that idea out the window. Orlando Sanchez? Hardly, can anyone tell me what he’s done in office since he ran on a platform of dismantling his current assignment? Don’t feel bad, no one else knows either. So blaming people for not picking a conservative Republican as mayor is foolish when no one fitting the description is willing to try.
And like it or not, those unfulfilled promises you always mention weren’t just promises, they were legally binding contracts that your elected agents were empowered to sign. Before you start in with the rhetoric how they weren’t your personal candidates, let me remind you how the system works, the person winning the election gets to make the deals we’re all stuck with for years. In Texas, all of those deals get to go through the GOP dominated legislature too so claiming one party is completely responsible for all the ills of the world is crazy talk, when was the last democrat governor again?
And all these memories of people speaking out against legislation are fine except for the most part, they just didn’t happen, the official records and transcripts devoid of any of you going in front of the legislature or city council to bemoan pension under funding. In the future, feel free to provide the exact dates any of you spoke on a topic at an official government meeting so the rest of us can look it up. How many of you spoke to city council that White’s pension payment schedule was flawed and would build up a bigger liability in 2004? None of you is the answer and you know it.
It should also be noted that the three employee unions rarely endorsed the same candidates or agreed on much of anything, the suggestion that each of them endorsed every winning mayor is completely untrue. Go research it for yourself, HFD endorsed one of their own against Parker, the police hawked Gene Locke, and half the municipal reps wanted Peter Brown, Turner was the first guy they all agreed on in over 30 years. Upon winning, each Mayor has made it clear that support was mandatory or else but you’ll have to ask HFD how that worked under Parker.
you’re not playing along, you’re playing with a weak hand
Wow! Talk about fake news! You’re way off on your stats!
Stop misleading/lying to the public!