“We didn’t make no steenking promise!”

The following bundle of joy from Bill “the Pill” White was in my mailbox this morning. Check the highlights I added:

The Chronicle’s May 14th headline that said that the city of Houston “can’t keep its promise to the pension fund” was simply untrue. This administration has increased the city’s contribution to the Municipal Pension Fund and made it more secure by reducing unfunded liabilities by about $1 billion.

Neither I nor anyone in my administration has ever stated that the city would pay the “statutory rate” for contributions to the Municipal Pension Fund.

In 2004, we defined annual contributions for three years and agreed to negotiate with the Municipal Pension System concerning our contribution thereafter. No other promise was made, and for years I have told all who would listen that the statutory rate is unrealistic.

The article’s sub-headline was also wrong in stating that I am citing “strained resources” as a reason for letting workers “contribute less, get fewer benefits.”

To give our work force more options, our chief pension executive has proposed to allow workers to contribute more or less, and obtain more or less pension, depending on their personal choices about retirement planning.

In March, our finance director stated that we would budget the same percentage of payroll as we did last year – this is not some breaking news. We have budgeted to pay 15.8 percent of municipal payroll into the pension fund, a higher contribution than the 14.5 percent rate which was the basis for enhanced pension benefits in 2001. The Municipal Pension Board has the obligation to bring benefits in line with the costs, which they advertised in 2001.

I assure municipal employees that our city’s contribution to the pension fund, including both cash contributions and the transfer of the Convention Center hotel, has increased pension security. We avoided massive layoffs or pay cuts to pay for the Pension Board’s 2001 mistake or outright fraud. We are fully and deeply committed to the security of the pension system.

We have not broken any promise. We look forward to working with the municipal pension board to keep the city’s contribution affordable and sustainable to make municipal pensions more secure, and to give employees more options.

Bill White,

Mayor

Translation: “We’re more or less going to fsck you over. Oh, and the pension board is a bunch of lying thieves! We never promised to obey the law!”

I don’t think I can improve much on my initial response to Kevin Whited when he asked what my thoughts were on this–but I’ll try:

“Unprintable. And besides which, I don’t think he’s got the reproductive equipment to do that with a pig anyway.”

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. I don’t believe the pension is sustainable, and I have been expecting the other shoe to drop for three years now. I haven’t contributed into the pension because I don’t believe it will be there when I retire. His first attempt to fix the problem only delayed the reckoning, and while I supported the idea, I don’t support offloading the albatross of a convention center on the fund.

Nor do I care for the mayor’s weasaling and calling the board thieves. (I have my own issues with them, but claiming fraud isn’t one of them.) Every move White makes is designed to drive the city employees deeper into the unions that are in his hip pocket, while allowing him to claim to operate the city “like a business.”

I’m not optomistic about the outcome of all this.

Update: HMEPS responds. (Full .pdf text here.)

HMEPS currently has a Meet and Confer Agreement with the City, which was signed in September 2004 and amended three times. The Agreement addresses several pension matters, including plan benefits and funding. The funding provisions regarding the City’s required contributions expire June 30, 2007. At that time, the City must make its required contributions as determined by actuarial valuation in accordance with the pension statute, Art. 6243h, Tex. Rev. Civ. Stats. Ann. HMEPS provided the City the actuarial valuation as of June 30, 2006, which requires contributions of 24.63% of payroll. This actuarially determined City contribution rate for FY2008 is less than the rate that was projected by the HMEPS actuary and provided to the City during the 2004 meet and confer process. In fact, the dollar amount of the City’s required contribution is over $5 million less than what was expected for the City to contribute beginning July 1, 2007. The contribution amount is also right in line with the estimates in the HMEPS actuarial valuation as of July 1, 2005. Both valuations are available on the HMEPS web site at www.hmeps.org/Publications.

In addition, over the past two and a half years, HMEPS has consistently advised Mayor White, the City Council Pension Review Committee and other City representatives about the need to focus on the City’s funding plan for HMEPS beginning July 1, 2007. HMEPS sent letters to Mayor White on December 5, 2006 and March 1, 2007, notifying the Mayor that HMEPS was willing and prepared to meet and confer regarding the City’s plans to fund the required contributions beginning July 1, 2007. HMEPS has not received a response from Mayor White, nor has a designated City representative met to negotiate these matters with HMEPS. We would like to know what steps the City has taken to prepare for the upcoming funding period, which the City knew about far in advance, and which was structured this way at the recommendation of Mayor White during the 2004 meet and confer negotiations.

We believe it is important to emphasize that HMEPS negotiated the Meet and Confer Agreement in good faith and has met its obligations under the Agreement….