BACKGROUND:

Established in 1947, the Texas Municipal Retirement System (TMRS) is the statewide system, which administers retirement, disability, and death benefits for employees of those Texas cities which voluntarily elect to participate in the system.  Each of the 837 participating cities chooses a plan of benefits from the various options available under TMRS.  The plan of benefits selected is then funded separately for each city through a combination of employee contributions as a set percentage of compensation and employer contributions determined annually utilizing generally accepted actuarial principles and practices within the parameters established by the TMRS Act. These funding requirements are the responsibility of the individual member cities of TMRS.

ACTUARIAL EFFECTS:

SB 1164 would allow participating TMRS municipalities to grant optional Cost of Living Adjustments (COLA) and/or an annual supplemental payment (13^th check) to certain retirees and beneficiaries. The plan’s actuary has described the potential impact of the provisions under the proposed bill as outlined below:   

Optional COLA increases:  SB 1164 would provide additional flexibility in the design of a TMRS member city’s COLA provision.  As a result, TMRS member cities would have additional flexibility in managing the actuarial funding costs associated with the COLA provisions- in particular by allowing a participating municipality to adopt a non-retroactive flat rate (non-CPI based) COLA on an ad hoc or repeating basis. The funding requirements and cost impact are the responsibility of the member cities of TMRS; therefore, the changes proposed under SB 1164 are not expected to have an actuarial impact on TMRS as a system.  In addition, the changes proposed by the bill are not expected to have any material effect on the actuarial status of TMRS; nor is there any immediate or long-term actuarial impact expected on any TMRS municipality or on TMRS in total.

TMRS uses a Projected Unit Credit cost method to provide advance funding of annually repeating COLAs. In 2009 the TMRS Board of Trustees adopted a revised ad hoc COLA funding policy that shortened the amortization period to a maximum of 15 years for financing future ad hoc benefit enhancements. According to the actuarial analysis, these important changes to advance fund annually repeating COLAs and rapidly fund ad hoc COLAs have increased the likelihood of sustainability in the contribution rate and benefit levels of TMRS cities that provide COLAs. If the prior financing arrangements had continued, contribution levels may have continued to increase until a point at which the current benefit structure was no longer affordable. However, these changes have put significant upward pressure on the immediate contribution requirements of many cities.

Annual Supplemental payments (13^th check):  SB 1164 would allow the governing body of a participating TMRS municipality to grant an annual supplemental payment to its retirees and beneficiaries in lieu of, or in addition to, an annuity increase on an ad hoc basis. The bill would not limit the amount of supplemental payments.

The actuarial analysis states that not fully funding the benefit at the time of the distribution may not comply with the Actuarial Standards of Practice. Furthermore, the plan’s actuary described that if unfunded or inappropriately funded multiple supplemental payments were allowed to flow into the Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability (UAAL) and amortized over a period of years instead of immediately, the funding status of the municipality’s plan would decline and the contribution requirements would increase. Therefore, the plan’s actuary recommends to fully fund the cost of the additional supplemental payment at the time of the distribution if a TMRS city wishes to grant a 13^th check. If funding for supplemental payments over an appropriate length of time is not statutory, the actuary recommends the TMRS board require it. According to the actuarial analysis, if annual supplemental payments are fully funded by the granting TMRS municipality, the changes proposed by SB 1164 would not have any material effect on the actuarial status of TMRS; nor would there be any immediate or long-term material actuarial impact expected on any TMRS municipality or on TMRS in total.

SYNOPSIS OF PROVISIONS:

SB 1164 would amend the Texas Government Code and provide changes relative to the Texas Municipal Retirement System (TMRS).

Optional COLA increases: The provisions of the bill, if enacted, would provide more flexibility to member cities in granting COLAs by allowing cities to adopt COLAs without the “catch-up” feature of the current COLA under TMRS. The current methodology for providing COLAs under TMRS benefit provisions is to increase the retiree’s original benefit, by 30%, 50% or 70% of the CPI increase subject to a cap of 70%, measured from the date of retirement.

SB 1164 would allow a city the option to grant a COLA without the cumulative aspects of this current COLA methodology. As a result, a COLA granted for a specific year could be based upon a flat percentage increase and not the cumulative increase in the CPI since retirement. Any increased payments to a retiree resulting from such a flat rate COLA adopted by a city would be limited to 100% of the CPI. Annuitants would be required to have been retired for at least 12 months to receive a flat rate COLA increase and the increase would have to be in compliance with the Internal Revenue Code Section 401 (a)(9).

SB 1164 would allow a city to decrease its future COLA expectations without eliminating the COLA for certain current retirees over the short term. In addition, if the city decided not to grant a COLA at all or grant a lesser COLA for a specific year, future COLAs would not automatically become increasingly more expensive. The bill would require that if a TMRS city adopted an ordinance to either discontinue an annually repeating COLA or to change an annually repeating COLA, then the city must give written notice to members and annuitants at least 60 days prior to the effective date of the change adopted in the ordinance.

The following charts summarize the current and proposed options cities have with respect to COLAs. Both currently and under the proposed bill, a benefit ceiling based on a 70% of CPI COLA applies:

        Current COLA Options for Cities:

        Proposed COLA Options for Cities:

*Other COLAs may not produce a benefit adjustment in excess of the 100% of CPI COLA.

Annual Supplemental payments (13^th check): SB 1164 would allow the governing body of a participating TMRS municipality to grant an annual supplemental payment to its retirees and beneficiaries in lieu of, or in addition to, an annuity increase on an ad hoc basis. If the effective date of retirement of a person eligible for a supplemental payment was less than 12 months before the date on which the amount of payment is calculated, the supplemental payment would be prorated based on the number of months the person is retired. 

The bill would require that for an annuity increase or an annual supplemental payment to take effect, it must be approved by the TMRS Board of Trustees. Furthermore, the TMRS Board could not approve the increase unless the actuary first determined that all obligations of the municipality could be funded within its maximum contribution rate, and within its amortization period in effect at the time.  

The provisions of this bill will take effect immediately if it receives a vote of two-thirds of all the members elected to each house.  If this bill does not receive the vote necessary for immediate effect, it will take effect September 1, 2011.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS:

COLAs are an optional benefit provision within the TMRS menu of available plan design options that member cities can adopt either on an annually repeating or ad hoc basis.  Cities have to advance fund their annually repeating COLAs and have to rapidly fund their ad hoc COLAs. The current methodology for providing COLAs under TMRS benefit provisions is to increase the retiree’s original benefit, by 30%, 50% or 70% of the CPI increase subject to a cap of 70%, measured from the date of retirement.

According to the plan’s actuary, the “catch-up “ provision under current methodology, may make it difficult for cities to either not grant a COLA in a specific year or to change the expectation to a lesser COLA going forward.  If the city does not grant a COLA for one year, and then attempts to grant a COLA the following year, the city would effectively have to grant two COLAs, “catching-up” the retirees based on the cumulative CPI since retirement.  Furthermore, if the city were to lower its COLA provision (for example from 70% to 50%), then current retirees who are furthest from retirement would not receive a COLA for subsequent years until the 50% of CPI calculation “caught-up” to the prior 70% of CPI levels.  This would result in the more recent retirees receiving COLA increases sooner than the longer term retirees.

SB 1164 would allow a city the option to grant a COLA without the cumulative aspects of this current COLA methodology.  As a result, a COLA granted for a specific year could be based upon a flat percentage increase, not to exceed 100% of CPI. The bill would allow a city to decrease its future COLA expectations without eliminating the COLA for certain current retirees over the short term.  In addition, if the city decided not to grant a COLA at all or grant a lesser COLA for a specific year, future COLAs would not become increasingly more expensive. The changes proposed by the bill are not expected to have any material effect on the actuarial status of TMRS; nor is there any immediate or long-term actuarial impact expected on any TMRS municipality or on TMRS in total.

According to the actuarial review, the cost associated with the changes proposed by this bill could be material for an individual city that elects to grant a COLA or supplemental payment that would not otherwise have been available; in that case, the System would require a city contribution increase sufficient to preserve actuarial soundness.

METHODOLOGY AND STANDARDS:

The analysis rely on the participant data, financial information, benefit structure and actuarial assumptions and methods used in the December 31, 2009 actuarial valuation of TMRS, The analysis assumes no further changes are made to TMRS and cautions that the combined economic impact of several proposals can exceed the effect of each proposal considered individually. According to the PRB actuary, the actuarial assumptions, methods and procedures appear to be reasonable.  All actuarial projections have a degree of uncertainty because they are based on the probability of occurrence of future contingent events.  Accordingly, actual results will be different from the results contained in the analysis to the extent actual future experience varies from the experience implied by the assumptions.

SOURCES:

Actuarial Analysis by Mr. Mark R. Randall, Executive Vice President, and Mr. Joseph P. Newton, Senior Consultant, Gabriel, Roeder, Smith & Company, March 18, 2011.

Actuarial Review by Mr. Daniel P. Moore, Staff Actuary, PRB, April 15, 2011.

GLOSSARY OF ACTUARIAL TERMS:

Normal Cost-- the current cost as a percentage of payroll that is necessary to pre-fund pension benefits adequately during the course of an employee's career.

Unfunded Liability-- the amount of total liabilities that are not covered by the total assets of a retirement system.  Both liabilities and assets are measured on an actuarial basis using certain assumptions including average annual salary increases, the investment return of the retirement fund, and the demographics of retirement system members.

Amortization Period-- the number of years required to pay-off the unfunded liability.  Public retirement systems have found that amortization periods ranging from 20 to 40 years are acceptable.  State law prohibits changes in TRS, ERS, or JRS II benefits or state contribution rates if the result is an amortization period exceeding 30.9 years.