Dallas Police and Fire Pension Board Approves Rescue Plan

The plan, something of a poster child for America’s struggling pension funds, includes a normal retirement age of 58, with an early retirement age of 53, as well as a benefit multiplier of 2.5%.

The Dallas Police and Fire Pension’s (DPFP) board of trustees has voted unanimously in favor of a plan proposed by Texas State Rep. Dan Flynn to rescue the retirement system from financial ruin. .

The Dallas Police and Fire Pension System fund has become something of a poster child for America’s struggling pension funds, with an estimated $2 billion to $5 billion in unfunded liabilities attributed to bad investments and poor prior management. And over six weeks last year, anxious retirees withdrew $220 million from the fund.

The fund troubles are so bad that it has put the city of Dallas at risk of municipal bankruptcy, despite it being one of the fastest-growing cities in the country. In November, Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings told the Texas Pension Review Board that “the city is potentially walking into the fan blades that might look like bankruptcy.”

Rep. Flynn’s plan, which is effective Sept. 1, includes a normal retirement age of 58, with an early retirement age of 53, as well as a benefit multiplier of 2.50%. The plan also includes:

For more stories like this, sign up for the CIO Alert newsletter. 

Unreduced early retirement if benefit multipliers earned equal 90% of average computation pay.
Immediate elimination of COLA’s for all participants, including annuitants; the Board has the option of granting ad hoc COLA’s based on financial benchmarks. These benchmarks would not be expected to be achieved in the near term.
DROP accounts will be paid out over the expected lifetime of the participant upon their retirement based on the actuarial mortality tables in effect at the time of their retirement.
Active members who have not yet entered the DROP will receive no interest on their DROP account while active or upon retirement.
Current active members who are in DROP will keep the interest they have earned in DROP; they will not receive further interest while in active DROP but will receive interest upon retirement based on a Treasury rate for a period comparable to their life expectancy on the DROP account balance as of September 1, 2017; future contributions to their DROP accounts after September 1, 2017, will not receive interest while in DROP or upon retirement.
Current retirees with a DROP account will receive interest based on a Treasury rate for a period comparable to their life expectancy.
City contribution rate of 34.5% of computation pay, plus $11 million per year.
Employee contribution rate of 13.5%.

The DPFP selected Rep. Flynn’s proposal over that of Mayor Rawlings, in which the city of Dallas would contribute $18 million per year to the fund, with the remaining gap was closed through a combination of benefit modifications, increased member contributions, and equity adjustments, such as recovering money that has already disbursed.

Assuming those equity adjustments are eventually upheld by courts, the Rawlings plan called for Dallas to commit to 30-year Actuarially Required Contribution with a limit. And if the equity adjustment were to be disallowed by courts, the city would have reduced the contribution by $7 million per year, and provide a contribution of $11 million per year.

By Michael Katz

It’s hard to believe that U.S. President Donald Trump has only been in office for a month, given the dizzying activity in Washington. Yet, at PIMCO, our observations from before the inauguration seem to be holding true, at least so far: Governing is indeed harder than campaigning.

This is especially the case when it comes to the ambitious legislative agenda of President Trump and congressional Republicans, which includes overhauling the healthcare system, reforming the tax code, rolling back financial regulation and boosting infrastructure spending. Addressing even one of these complex issues in one year would be tough under the best of circumstances; moving all of them would be downright Herculean.

Reality check

Why do we expect a slower pace for President Trump’s legislative agenda? For one thing, it was the Founding Fathers’ intent for Congress, particularly the Senate, to take a deliberative (read: slow) approach to lawmaking to provide the checks and balances to the executive branch. This is especially relevant for issues as complex as an overhaul of the healthcare system or tax reform. Further complicating matters is the lack of a unified vision among Republicans and President Trump on how to proceed; debate continues about how to roll back and replace Obamacare, and the controversial border adjustment tax is snarling tax reform discussions.

For more stories like this, sign up for the CIO Alert newsletter. 

Additionally, while Republicans have a significant majority in the House and can pass legislation readily, it is a different story in the Senate: With 52 seats, Republicans lack the all-important 60-vote filibuster-proof majority. This means that to pass legislation, Republicans must either secure at least eight Democratic votes (which seems unlikely in an increasingly partisan Washington), or use an arcane process known as budget reconciliation, which allows the Senate to pass legislation with only 50 votes – but comes with strings attached.

Because of the way the reconciliation process will work in this Congress, Republicans would have to address Obamacare before they can bring up tax reform, should they want to use reconciliation to pass both bills (which is the plan). This is a key point, given that a healthcare overhaul could take all year (it took President Obama 14 months, even with the benefit of higher approval ratings, healthier majorities in both chambers and a shared vision for healthcare overhaul within his party). Tax reform could easily slip into 2018 (pushing back financial reform and infrastructure). And if it gets too close to the midterm elections in November of that year, tax reform may prove elusive.

Three ‘Ifs’

That said, it is still early days in the new Congress and administration, and if we know anything about Washington, it’s that things can change quickly and headwinds can rapidly turn into tailwinds.

What could change our outlook? It comes down to three (big) “ifs”:

If Republicans can quickly unite on a vision to repair or replace Obamacare
If policymakers can resolve the direction of tax reform, especially related to the border adjustment tax
If President Trump, who has sent somewhat mixed messages on tax reform and Obamacare, uses his bully pulpit to expedite the legislative process. (The president’s joint address to Congress on 28 February may give some indication of his approach.)

But all told, we think the prospects that President Trump will push through his policy agenda in the first year look tenuous at best.

Commentary by Libby Cantrill, PIMCO’s head of public policy

* The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of CIO or Strategic Insight.