Bill: SB 2190, 85(R) - 2017

Committee

Senate State Affairs

2nd Chamber Committee

House Pensions

Vote Recommendation

Vote Recommendation Economic Freedom Property Rights Personal Responsibility Limited Government Individual Liberty
Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral

Author(s)

Joan Huffman

Sponsor(s)

Dan Flynn

Bill Caption

Relating to the public retirement systems of certain municipalities.

Fiscal Notes

No fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.

The City of Houston estimates the required contribution to the pension systems in fiscal year 2018 would be $704,556,462 without legislative changes and $381,441,348 with legislative changes and Pension Obligation Bonds (POBs) issued. The debt service in fiscal year 2018 for POBs would be $25,527,988. 

Over a five year period the City of Houston estimates without reform the city would contribute $3.6 billion to the pension systems. With reform and issuances of POBs the city would contribute $2.0 billion. The estimated debt service would be $0.2 billion. The city projects a savings of $1.4 billion dollars over a five year period.  

Bill Analysis

This is a local bill affecting only the Houston pension funds.

General Provisions would:

Provisions Relating to Firefighter Pension System would: 

Provisions Relating to the Police Pension System would:

Provisions Relating to the Municipal Pension System would:

Vote Recommendation Notes

The public pension system in Houston is broken and rapidly growing worse. The city's current $8 billion dollar unfunded public pension liability is alarming and unsustainable. Urgent reform is needed to stop the bleeding, shore up the system, and provide pension security for those who are counting on it. This bill in its current form fails to enact the reforms necessary to achieve these goals. 

True pension reform that is sustainable for the long term will restore local control, significantly increase transparency, get the system up to a minimum of 80% fully funded, require elections before issuing new pension obligation bonds, and move to a defined contribution system for new hires. Legislation that fails to enact these reforms would simply kick the can down the road for a future legislature to address at a time when the system will almost certainly have grown more indebted, become further destabilized, and consequently make the problem even more difficult to fix than it currently is.

We appreciate that this bill includes a provision for pension obligation bond elections but without the other reforms this alone is insufficient.

We oppose the continuation of local pensions relying on state legislators to reform their broken systems. The biennial nature of passing state-level laws is time-consuming and inflexible for addressing local problems that require immediate resolutions and can't wait for the next legislative session to begin. 

We also oppose continuing on with a defined benefit system for new hires rather than a defined contribution system. The committee substitute has removed from the original bill any pathway to changing to a defined contribution system.

Ultimately this bill can not truly be considered a reform bill. It tinkers around the edges without addressing the problem and kicks the can down the road to the next legislature. It can hardly be said that passing this bill in its current form would be a worthy improvement over the status quo. 

We recommend this bill be amended to include a provision to reestablish local control and discontinue the cycle of perpetuating the encroachment of state government in issues it should have little to no engagement in.

We recommend this bill be amended to require that new hires be placed in a defined contribution plan which is inherently more stable and viable than a defined benefit plan. If such an amendment is adopted we would support this bill as a clear improvement over the status quo even if not the full measure of needed reform.


Source URL (retrieved on 04/25/2024 02:04 PM): http://reports.texasaction.com/bill/85r/sb2190?print_view=true