Update: El Paso Firemen and Policemen's Pension Fund

The Local 51 leadership continues to monitor developments with the El Paso Firemen and Policemen's Pension Fund. This note is intended to clarify what we can do to influence the situation.

Like many firefighter locals around the nation, we face political challenges related to pension underfunding and municipal budget controversies. Today’s front page in the El Paso Times reflects the charged local political atmosphere. Firefighters are understandably concerned.

As you know, I have advocated that we maintain a constructive relationship with the city. As an association, we generally have taken the high road and worked diligently to resolve issues. For example, our help with deferrals of pay raises and other issues benefited the city during tough economic times. Regarding the pension, like the police participants in the fund, firefighters have shown our willingness to address the pension underfunding by creating a second tier and by agreeing to increase our contributions.

The political reality is, while we firefighters participate in the pension, Local 51 has no legal authority to impose anything on the elected pension board or the city. The city is the plan sponsor and is responsible for its solvency and the pension board is responsible for the fund’s management. For those reasons, Local 51 has historically kept pension and contract/workplace issues separate. This time, Local 51 has been dragged into a pension controversy our members did not start.

That said, here’s what we as firefighters and citizens can do:

·         voice our concerns to and support our elected pension board members

·         foster cooperation between the pension board and city leaders

·         advocate politically to protect firefighter interests

·         raise community awareness with fact-based communications

For the near future, two local pension controversies will be on the political agenda and in the news: 1) the status of the executive director, and 2) the underfunding of the pension.

In my opinion, the city is not serious about addressing the underfunding at this time. Some city leaders are creating a smokescreen and pointing fingers in order to distract and divide firefighters and police. Some Local 51 members ask, “What happens if the city is unwilling to take action?” The underfunding will presumably grow and will have to be carried on the books as a liability. In that case, city bond ratings may be affected which is important since the city will be looking to float $500 million in voter-approved quality of life bonds. Perhaps the most important question is, will we allow the city to force us to negotiate against ourselves on this underfunding issue?

Urgent issues

With that in mind, these issues deserve our attention:

1) The second audit of the pension fund was estimated to be completed in the next few days. We will speak with the mayor tomorrow (Wednesday) to see if that estimate still holds.

 2) The pension legislation filed by Rep. Joe Pickett (House Bill 2136) will not advance unless City Council endorses it. At this point, I believe that the focus has shifted and we must work hand-in-hand with the pension board and support their agenda

3) other pension bills filed this session.

4) the upcoming municipal elections will give us an opportunity to endorse candidates who

support our issues .

Looking ahead

To maintain our credibility and standing in the community, Local 51 cannot respond to every pension rumor or published fact or fiction. We should strategically choose times to go public with our concerns, but continue working behind the scenes to protect our interests.

Local 51 will continue to set the record straight on firefighter issues, as appropriate, as we did in this Feb. 21 letter to the editor. We must also continue to assure El Paso citizens – especially during political controversies – that they can count on us to deliver excellent service, be good stewards of city resources, and continue giving back to the community.

Fraternally,

Joe Tellez