- Senator Joan Huffman State Rep. Dan Flynn
State Representative Dan Flynn from Van, Texas ran the Houston pension bill hearing last Monday. Speaker Straus has appointed Flynn to serve as Chair of the House Pensions Committee for the past two legislative sessions. Although Flynn claims that he has “never voted for a bill to raise taxes” he does not seem to mind increasing the tax burden of Houstonians. All for his good buddy Sylvester “Sly” Turner.
Last Monday, I attended the House Pensions Committee meeting. Flynn ran the meeting like an autocracy, which is just the way Turner wanted the meeting to function. Although opponents to the Flynn/Turner bill were permitted to speak, they were not allowed to sit in the hearing room until their turn to speak. When I attempted to enter the hearing room, I was told that I would have to go to one of the overflow rooms. I quickly learned that the city lobbyists were controlling the seating and only those supporting the bill were allowed to sit in the hearing room during Mayor Turner’s presentation and those of the resource witnesses.
The large overflow crowd took up two committee rooms and a large auditorium located in the Capitol extension. The red Houston firefighter t-shirts contrasted with the HOPE t-shirts worn by the City of Houston Organization of Public Employees. Some city employees drove to Austin in city vehicles.
Flynn is carrying Houston’s pension bill, HB 43, in the House and put words into the mouths of speakers before his committee. Flynn made every speaker announce their name, state whether they are for or against the bill, and asked all the speakers to acknowledge that they were speaking on the committee substitute to HB 43. I am sure that Flynn’s directions were confusing to the numerous witnesses who were new to the legislative process.
HB 43, as substituted, is the companion bill to Senator Joan Huffman’s pension bill, SB 2190. The two bills, as substituted, are identical except for the provision in SB 2190 that requires a vote on the process. These two bills contemplate a billion dollar pension obligation bond. Huffman’s bill 2190 requires a vote for the pension obligation bonds. It should be noted that the firefighters receive no proceeds from this bond. Turner and the police and municipal employee unions object to the voting requirement in Huffman’s bill. I believe this is because they know that Houstonians would not vote in favor of more debt. Please note that Turner does want to place a referendum on the November ballot that would allow him to lift the revenue cap.
Turner, the first witness, described how the world would end without the approval of HB 43. The truth is if HB 43 failed, several scenarios could play out. The city could:
- File for bankruptcy;
- Dramatically raise taxes;
- Continue to borrow money from unions running up the unfunded liability – or layoff union workers.
The bankruptcy option is never discussed because this process would remove the mayor as the decision maker on spending. Raising taxes would require lifting the revenue cap. Thanks to Bruce Hotze, lifting the revenue cap requires a vote by Houstonians. Mayor Tuner wants folks to vote on the revenue cap but not the pension bonds. If hypocrisy had a vote, the lifting of the revenue cap would fail. It is not an accident that Turner labeled his cap a corridor.
The revenue cap, approved in 2004, limits the increase in the city’s annual property tax collections to the combined rates of inflation and population growth, or 4.5 percent, or the lower of the two. Voters in 2006 adjusted the cap, allowing $90 million above the cap for public safety spending. Turner has not made his desire to spend above the cap a secret. Turner’s attempt to cap pension expenses and remove the property tax cap will be difficult for city voters to stomach.
The real story of Monday’s hearing was the testimony from the firefighters and their families. Many firefighters spoke, far more than any other employee group. The firefighters were respectful, polite, and prepared. The firefighters told compelling stories of the impact of HB 43. Firefighters argued that they negotiated with the city over wages and benefits and agreed to lower wages and higher benefits. Conversely, the police and municipal employees argued for higher wages. Now, the police and municipal employees want the firefighters to help them make up their pension liability shortfall.
Recently, the city has hired 700 new employees; but, hardly any police or fire employees. The city’s public works department has 4,000 employees compared to the more efficient county’s public works department that operates with 500 employees. The county’s public works department builds roads faster and better.
The city’s ability to borrow large sums from the unions by not paying them has allowed the bloated bureaucracy to breed inefficiency, redundancy, and a lack of accountability. Turner’s plan punishes the firefighters when they have been the responsible adult in the room for many years. Instead of bloated salaries, Houston fighters have been fiscally responsible by requiring a fully funded pension. Now, the pay scale between police and fire is significant.
Truth be told, the police cut a very fat hog and now they want their firefighter brothers to pay for it. Turner will do anything possible to pass HB 43 because it allows him to spend money at an irresponsible pace. The police and municipal employees want HB 43 to pass because it gives them a billion dollars to allow escaping union members to retire. Those left behind will have to deal with the increasing realization that their pensions may not be funded.
Some union members have figured out that the defined contribution plan (in contrast with the defined benefit plan) actually costs less and gives more than Turner’s plan. Social media is interestingly enough playing a role in disseminating information about the cost of the corridor. Huffman’s bill has been placed on the intent calendar for floor debate in the Senate this week. It could be called at anytime. Will Bettencourt filibuster the bill? It will also be important to watch what happens to SB 2190’s voting requirement. This is where Turner and the city’s lobby team will attempt to get rid of the voting requirement.
Well written. Explains the issues better than anything we’ve read up to date. Thank you!
Wow Don!! Finally someone who sees past the smoke and mirrors and truly gets it. Thanks for taking up for us firefighters. Not many do these days. 19 years of getting nothing for the promise of my retirement now all hangs in the balance. Thanks again!!
The fact of the matter is when the City hired all these City Union Employees, there was no way that the city could honor their pension requirements. Why should the burden of paying for these lazy City Employees (aka Katrina Evacuees) be put on residents of Houston? I would rather city employees have a reduced pension than for me to get stuck with the bill of this bloated bureacracy.
Matthew is wrong. The city has mismanaged the money by not keeping up with obligations. Coddling voters like you to get re-elected. Firefighters have passed on raises mayor after mayor in lieu of a fair pension. Saving the city money. The city robbed from the police and muni funds to pay for their raises and other non-important pet projects. Don’t like police or fire or municipal workers, non are Katrina victims. Then don’t call for them in your emergency.
CJ,
I do not agree with the commenter’s sentiments. I thought about taking it down and did not. Today as we mourn Clint Greenwood I may change my mind.
Don: The man has a right to his opinions regardless of whether you agree with them and regardless of any unrelated tragedy
I agree
75{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} of fire pension fund is from employee contributions and investment returns. And the fund is 89.7{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} funded. That’s right where the city attorney said the funds need to be. Fire is there. No need to destroy that fund bailing out the other two.
The HFD fund is 89.7{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} funded, 90{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} is considered fully funded by most organizations/actuaries. If the city paid the money they are obligated to by law, HFD might be 100{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}.
HFD should not be required to bail out the other systems who didn’t manage their money!
Turner is a liar & thief, Huffman has trouble with truth too.
I agree
The City has far more pubic works employees because the City does far more than the County. 2300 of those City PWE employees work for the water and sewer division, which is handled by MUD’s and private water companies in the County. The City has 600 building inspectors, where the County makes you hire a private firm. The list goes on.
Ross,
That’s an interesting argument. However, if true why does the City complain about the TIRZs? Certainly, none of them are doing road improvements, storm drain, or sewer work. This is sarcasm. The County has the same road miles approximately and the County can permit, build, and construct to a higher quality in a a fourth of the time. I think the City is still building on Super Bowl improvements. It is a disaster. None of this work needs to be done by the City unionized work force. It should all be contracted out, even plan checking. Nice try though.
Mr. Hooper, the city is a full service city by the choice of the voters whereas the county lets you pay third parties for most of those same services people need. The non-sarcastic response to the TIRZ’s populating 20{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} of Houston is that they allow money to be funneled to developers without impacting the revenue cap. Hopefully, Paul Bettencourt will push legislation to sunset them all someday though it won’t happen this legislative session. I no longer own property inside the city limits but when I did, there was no difference in terms of the quality compared to county roads, the higher density and use of city roads presumably shortening their usable lifespan in a fair comparison to the bulk of county roads in the unincorporated areas. Given funding issues, bidding out roadwork, trash, and other services might save a great deal of money but only if those involved in the bidding process do not have a stake in favoring existing services.
Gentlemen, there’s no reason to fib. As of your last yearly report, your pension is funded just over 80{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}. You can educate yourselves by reading the facts at https://www.hfrrf.org/uploadedFiles/HFRRF/Content/Resource_Center/2016{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}20Comprehensive{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}20Annual{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}20Financial{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}20Report.pdf and look at the top of page 24 under the heading of Net Pension Liability. For the record, 100{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} funded is 100{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} funded, not 80{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}, nor 90{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}, that ten percent on over $4 billion in liabilities adds up very quickly.
As long as the city refuses to switch to a defined contribution pension for all three groups, it will be subject to the whims of the markets but Don is otherwise correct that the corridor provision is a cap but it is a cap on city expenses while the revenue cap is a cap on city revenues. As proven in recent posts, there are no fiscal adults involved in the conversation locally, each pension owing a great deal more in liabilities than can be paid given existing city finances. If the voters remove the revenue cap, property taxes are still limited to 64 cents per $100 so there is no chance of massive increases without a subsequent vote of taxpayers.
The HFFRF (HFD’s pension) agreed to almost $800 million in cuts but the city wants more. Until elected city leaders stop spending on everything under the sun, this will never change as all employees will be bled dry. Forget the percentages that change every year and concentrate on following the money.
Listen people my husband is 10 months into his retirement after a 43 year career with HFD, After federal taxes, inflated insurance premiums (HFD retirees pay 9{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} more than Police or Muni) we do not qualify for a home loan. We have to sell our home first. Really? Yes, his pension check does not provide enough income to borrow $200,000 to purchase another home while we prepare ours for sale (it’s paid off). We have custody of a 3 year old grandson who has asthma so we wanted to move first to get him away from the fix up process for health reasons. We have done the everything right, went without the raises, took the benefits offered instead, he did his job and then some. We have been the responsible one but now we are being called greedy, stalling Turner’s reform. All so far from the truth. Fire Cadet pay $28,000; police cadet pay $42,000 – over$46,000. And now we have to give more. This step child is madder than hell. Politicians are good at taking the money, they see it they take it. Politicians are good at favors, they give favors and call in favors. I believe that firefighters will be petitioning the state for Medicaid expansion very soon. We have learned that doing a job with honor, dignity and sacrifice will only bring you more hardship unless you can live off the satisfaction of a job well done, lives and property saved. That won’t pay the bills, you can’t have a dream and this is not Undercover Boss rewarding you for going above and beyond.
Mrs. Olivia Parsons, You are incorrect. You did read the article from HFFRF. which I appreciate. What you failed to include in the 80.56{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} Pension fund was the City’s part of 9{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} and change. Those added together will give you a funding rate of over 89.56{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}. The total pension obligation is 4.6B, HFFRF and City. The HFFRF obligation is 3.7B(80.56{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}). The city owes $899mil or 9{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}. ( I rounded for simplicity). The fact remains that HFFRF pension is comprised off 70+{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}investments, and 9{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} from employee contributions. The city is only liable for 20{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} of the total pension obligation. Which equates to 1.9{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} of the city’s annual revenue. Houston Firefighters have and always will be responsible with our money as well as the citizens of Houston. There has not been a person that can explain to me why is it that HFD is responsible to bail out the other plans. I feel that Don Hooper explained how HFD has been the adult here. However; being the adult will cost us our pensions. This is something that we have earned. This wasn’t a gift.
Dear Tommy,
You are mistaken. By statute under the existing pension law, the city of Houston is responsible for any shortfalls your fund makes when investments do not obtain a net 8.5{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}. For the last 10 years, your fund has averaged approximately 7.5{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}, a downward slope observed with high variability clearly established. In layman’s terms, that means that your pension investments are less likely each year to obtain the needed amount of revenue, this the basis for your board of trustees to agree to lower the discount rate under the new proposal.
With 3 out of 5 years missing the targeted return and your pension having a five year smoothing provision, the city doesn’t have to immediately pay for losses when they are incurred so they are displayed in the report as shown, the city having $900 million in liability to the fund for its lack of performance. Note that despite this downward trend in returns, no benefit adjustments have been made so labeling anything about your fund as adult is a stretch of the imagination, but the 80{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} figure is accurate, not tied to any lower portion of your fund.
The true amount of total liabilities your current benefits have incurred is stated as $4.6 Billion, the city required to fully pay any amount needed to obtain that number whether you have another wonderful year or if you incur additional losses, as such the 80{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} figure is indeed accurate no matter how much spin you put on the figures. Given historical precedent, your fund should do better this year but not enough to erase this $900 million from smoothing, noting that previous losses will only be reduced after the required 8.5{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} is obtained.
I am talking about a long term pension. They are over 10 yrs. Our 30 yr rate of return is over 10{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}. I do like your tenacity. It really is apples to oranges. The 2008 downfall was unlike any other since 1929. And for our fund to have sustained and bounced back is fantastic. Yes, in fact every 3 yrs. the actuaries inform the city of any adjustments that need to be made to keep the fund solvent. Some years their contributions will go up and some years they will go down. And after this legislative session the 2008 year will fall off. That is why there is a big push for reform now. They want to be able to add the 2008 year in the 10yr average. That is why you and others want to say 10 yr rate of return and not 30yr rate of return, because your argument will not hold water. I stand by the 89{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} funding. I have checked and double checked. When there is a shortfall, the city must pay the shortfall. That is a difference (not the only) between Defined Benefit and Defined Contribution. Under a DC plan the employee would have to make up the shortfall. Again, over the last 30yrs we have averaged over 10{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} rate of return. and that is even with the downturn of 2008.
70+/-{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} comes from investments 9{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} from employees and 21{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} from city and ironically only 1.9{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} of the city’s annual revenues.
We will have to agree to disagree….
I have to ask, what about the other 98.1{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}? Also, why isn’t a government official ever held accountable for misspending? Why is HFD having to bail out the other 2 funds? Why is it that HFD is being lumped in with the 2 funds that are so underfunded? Who is benefitting from all of this? Will the corridor keep me from ever getting a raise? If I were to get a raise, will I have to give up more benefits? As usual, this is a one way street. The fact remains that when I signed up and took my oath, I was told what my job duties were and what my benefits package was. I have performed the work and now the city wants to pull back their benefits package.
I am assuming that you have a job. I assume that you were told what your pay would be and what your job would be. After you have perform your job duties do you think that you should get paid to what you and your employer agreed upon?
As for the 900mil shortfall. That is why they call it a long term investment. It allows for the ups and downs of the market and therefore is figured over a 30yr. to be absorbed over the long haul but you knew that……
Tommy, while I agree with her regarding the funded ratio, I think both sides use the statistics that favor their argument. A 30 year time horizon includes the longest bull market in history while a 10 year horizon includes the biggest hit. As long as the Federal Reserve keeps interest rates artificially low, it is increasingly difficult to get better returns like in the 1990’s. It is my belief that the city has a spending problem more than a revenue problem but none of the reforms brought forth deal with addressing that core issue.
Dear Tommy,
Your own pension board of trustees claim the liability for your current benefits is over $4.6 Billion while your assets are $3.7 Billion. From there it is simple math to determine the 80{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} they then claim is the funding ratio of your pension as of last summer. That is not manipulating statistics nor is it putting a slant on the matter.
According to Senator Huffman, the further reduction of your benefits was more due to your board’s unwillingness to provide requested data than any attempt to subsidize the other funds. Your pension benefits have increased over time and that also increased the costs to the city of Houston. They are now drawing a line in the sand so they can presumably eliminate some of the liabilities you have accrued all on your own, the smoke screen about the other two funds unbecoming given they have enough self inflicted problems of their own.
Contrary to your unstated but heavily implied position, your well paid market experts can no more predict the future than anyone else and no one in the financial markets believes 8.5{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} average returns are likely moving forward, at least not without significant amounts of added risk that you refuse to take on your own, so your 30 year average is a moot point, remove the outlying years of high and low returns and your fund still under performs from 8.5{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}. I’m willing to wager that your mayor would be willing to guarantee the first 5{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} of returns while you assume all the risks and rewards after that but nobody from your side would like that.
Regardless, your benefits and the resulting costs have both risen continuously no matter how your fund performed, and like it or not, that is how many of us are compensated in the real world unprotected by ponzi schemes. Last, your continued use of the entire city budget as the basis for your percentages instead of the normative operating budget that all your compensation comes from is a rather crude manner to manipulate the numbers, the nearly $100 million your one benefit costs each year is just more than they want to pay. You might also remember that your pension benefits have changed numerous times over the years and always for the better, maybe each of you would be happier getting the exact benefit you were promised on the day you started working for your organization?
Mrs Olivia,
Hmmmm…..
Typical response…. I must have missed the answers to my questions. I did read the constant misreprisation of the fact.s. You seem to have a plethora of knowledge . I do have some reading for you. Also, attatched is the info that you can read for yourself from the Houston Chronicle.. I am curious how you will spin this, but please do not let the facts get in the way of your motives.
Shared by a HFD Chief……(name left out on purpose)
To Members of the Houston Fire Department,
The pension crisis in the City of Houston is neither an accident, nor simply a victim of a bad economy. Included below is an article from the Houston Chronicle from nearly 15 years ago where Texas Governor Rick Perry stated the city’s pension plan with the police officers pension was fiscally irresponsible and could bankrupt the city.
In the 2003 legislative session, HB-752 was filed and passed including support from State Representative Sylvester Turner. This Bill gave a huge pension increase to Mayor Lee Brown and Houston Police Officers as well. As stated below Governor Perry refused to sign the Bill and it became law under the sunset provision without the governor’s signature. What followed in subsequent years was just as, or more damaging to city finances than the original Bill. When Mayor Turner recently spoke before the House Pension committee in Austin he said the City had borrowed money from the Police Pension Fund and therefore the City owed the fund. The kindest spin I can put on that is to call it misrepresentation. If you check the history of Meet & Confer between the City of Houston and Houston Police Officers you will see that on more than one occasion they negotiated to waive payments to the pension fund and in return receive large pay raises when other employees receive none Stop and think about this! Leaders of the City of Houston and leaders of the Police Pension fund have a fiduciary responsibility to protect their respective organizations funds and financial stability. This is a legal obligation! Just as important the police officers themselves voted to do this by passing the Meet & Confer contracts and put their pension fund at risk. They made willing and conscious decisions to trade pension contributions for pay raises. NOW THEY ASK THE FIREFIGHTERS AND CITIZENS TO PAY FOR THEIR UNDERHANDED ACTS AND THE PAY RAISES THAT PUT THEM 50{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} AHEAD OF FIREFIGHTERS IN PAY. That is what the mayor means by SHARED SACRIFICE! Instead of allowing them to rob money from firefighters retirements, perhaps those leaders should be held responsible for violating their fiduciary responsibilities and the police officers should be told to lie in the bed they made by reducing their pension proportional to their share of the debt load. Mayor Turner helped create this mess as a legislator that supported and voted for the bill and now he is perpetuating a myth and trying to act as the savior that resolved the problem.
The Firefighters pension has given money in the past to help the city, most recently during Mayor Parkers term the fund re-evaluated the actuary and gave to (or forgave) approximately $38 million dollars in pension payments from the city without a trade for anything and the city refused to even acknowledge it publicly. In simple terms there has been collusion to serve self-interest that has left the City of Houston with severe debt and no one responsible is ever held accountable. This has come to a head because without help the city’s payment to the police fund will boom in the near future. Every firefighter should look up their state leaders and share this information and remind them that the 2003 State of Texas Legislature is in large part responsible for passing such a Bill. It is easily verifiable as the legislation is recorded in state law. Please ask them to consider this before they vote to harm your family’s retirement. THOSE RESPONSIBLE SHOULD PAY THE BILLS THEY CREATED! Remember the State Senators and Representative that vote to reduce your retirement to bail out those who were negligent in preserving theirs.
This is not meant to imply the Firefighters Fund is 100{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} funded and should stick their head in the sand. We should, and have been willing to make the minor changes necessary to keep us at the top of all funds and moving toward a 100{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} funding ratio.
________________________________________
Please also look up the archives in the Houston Chronicle.
Date: WED 06/25/03
Section: A
Page: 19 metfront
Edition: 3 STAR
I would have attached it but did not want to infringe on the copy write laws.
Have a blessed day and always remember, you can always count on the Houston firefighters….
Tommy….
Dear Tommy,
I’m glad you have finally stopped presenting your pension as being better funded than it is. That is a major step forward for you in this discussion and I appreciate the way you dropped the false information. While I appreciate your information appears to come from the Houston Chronicle, a far left leaning publication by all accounts, mine has come from your own actuarially certified yearly reports, some help on details provided by my staff. As far as Rick Perry is concerned, seeing as how he signed off on various pension bills, it is safe to say that I should hold my tongue regarding discussing him, what kind of man would knowingly approve such legislation if he felt that way?
My original intention in these threads was clear, most Texans do not care one way or the other about Houston’s finances. Then some of the responses intrigued me at the wide variety of comments that were contrary to public knowledge so I looked into things for myself, no disrespect to Don or David, and had a subordinate with the proper credentials assist my understanding. The first person that took up the charge was Jack and he didn’t fare that well, followed by others that also couldn’t answer basic questions. My opinion is that all employees should be mandated onto a defined contribution pension immediately, this being the true conservative approach to the situation according to Mr. King and Senator Bettencourt who have taken the lead in reforms.
Otherwise, any deal you may think was in place or was set in stone is a moot point should your employer go bankrupt. Some of the related legislative bills are almost comical in terms of people questioning them, of course Houston voters should have the chance to vote on any bonds they will have to pay off and given those same voters continue to elect far left liberals to office, the state should refuse any bailouts or assistance because the rest of the state told them to be concerned but no one listened. Unlike those who befriend you as a means of political payback toward Mayor Turner or when it is convenient, at least I’m stating the case according to my beliefs. If the city doesn’t change right now, it will change in bankruptcy court before too long. So firemen, policemen, and all the other city employees can move forward or start counting the days but none of you do any service to yourselves by misrepresenting the facts but I’m done with all this unless something new comes up.
Sincerely, Olivia