Municipal FY 2015

There are 17 municipal retirement systems including 14 systems enabled by Article 6243, Vernon’s Civil Statutes and three created by city ordinances or charters, which are the Dallas Employees’ Retirement Fund, City of El Paso Employees Retirement Trust, and Galveston Employees’ Retirement Fund.

A retirement system's effective amortization period is defined by the PRB as the time it would theoretically take to fully fund the system's unfunded actuarial accrued liability (UAAL). The reported amortization period takes into account the plan's amortization policy and contribution history. The chart displays Municipal retirement systems' effective amortization periods for the selected fiscal year. If an actuarial valuation was not completed for the selected fiscal year, the immediately preceding fiscal year is shown.

A retirement system's funded ratio is the percentage of its actuarial accrued liability that is funded by its actuarial value of assets. In the graph, funded ratios of Municipal retirement systems are shown for the selected fiscal year. If an actuarial valuation was not completed for the selected fiscal year, the immediately preceding fiscal year is shown. National average data comes from publicplansdata.org .

Contributions into a retirement system are often reported as a percentage of payroll and are usually made by the employer and the employees. The actuarially determined contribution (ADC) is the contribution rate for the system to achieve and maintain an amortization period that does not exceed 30 years. This graph displays both employee and employer contribution rates compared to the ADC rate of Municipal retirement systems for the selected fiscal year. If an actuarial valuation was not completed for the selected fiscal year, the immediately preceding fiscal year is shown. If a plan does not report covered payroll, no data will appear.

A retirement system's unfunded actuarial accrued liability (UAAL) is the amount that is "owed" to the system for past pension obligations. In order to compare UAAL across retirement systems of various sizes it is helpful to look at the UAAL as a percentage of the payroll reported by each system. This graph shows the UAAL as a percentage of payroll of Municipal retirement systems for the selected fiscal year. If an actuarial valuation was not completed for the selected fiscal year, the immediately preceding fiscal year is shown. If a plan does not report covered payroll, no data will appear. National average data comes from publicplansdata.org .

Municipal Plans Actuarial Assumptions FY 2015
Plan Cost Method Discount Rate Inflation Rate Payroll Growth Rate Contribution Type
Austin Employees' Retirement System EAN 7.50 % 2.75 % N/A None
Austin Fire Fighters Relief & Retirement Fund EAN 7.70 % 3.50 % 3.50 % None
Austin Police Retirement System EAN 7.80 % 3.25 % 3.50 % None
City of El Paso Employees Retirement Trust EAN 7.50 % 3.50 % 3.50 % None
Dallas Employees' Retirement Fund EAN 8.00 % 3.00 % 3.00 % None
Dallas Police & Fire Pension System-Combined Plan EAN 7.25 % 2.75 % 4.00 % None
Dallas Police & Fire Pension System-Supplemental EAN 7.25 % 2.75 % 4.00 % None
El Paso Firemen's Pension Fund EAN 7.75 % 3.50 % 3.50 % None
El Paso Police Pension Fund EAN 7.75 % 3.50 % 3.50 % None
Fort Worth Employees' Retirement Fund Ultimate EAN 7.75 % 2.75 % 2.80 % Fixed
Fort Worth Employees' Retirement Fund Staff Plan EAN 7.75 % 2.75 % 3.00 % Fixed
Galveston Employees' Retirement Fund EAN 7.50 % 3.25 % 3.25 % None
Galveston Employees' Retirement Plan for Police EAN 8.00 % 4.00 % 4.00 % Fixed
Houston Firefighters' Relief & Retirement Fund EAN 8.50 % 3.00 % 3.00 % None
Houston Municipal Employees Pension System Ultimate EAN 8.00 % 2.50 % 3.00 % None
Houston Police Officers' Pension System PUC 8.00 % 2.75 % 2.75 % None
San Antonio Fire & Police Pension Fund EAN 7.25 % 3.00 % 3.50 % None
EAN = Entry Age Normal
PUC = Projected Unit Credit
UC = Unit Credit

Pension funding requires projections to be made about the future. These projections require actuarial assumptions, which along with current plan participant data and benefits are used to project future benefit obligations. Actuarial methods are the tools that are used to calculate a retirement system's liabilities, current and future costs, as well as amortization payments. The table displays what assumptions and methods Municipal retirement systems used for the selected fiscal year. If an actuarial valuation was not completed for the selected fiscal year, the immediately preceding fiscal year is shown.

The market value of assets of a retirement system is generally the value at which assets owned by the system could be traded in the market. This graph compares Municipal retirement systems' market values of assets for the selected fiscal year.

This graph displays the contributions and distributions by Municipal retirement systems over the past ten years. Contributions include those from both the employer and employees. Distributions include benefit payments, withdrawals, and refunds to current and former plan members.

Non-investment cash flow is the annual contributions less benefit payments and expenses of the fund, as a percentage of beginning total net assets. On its face, negative non-investment cash flow may not be an indicator of distress. For mature retirement systems, slightly negative non-investment cash flow (e.g. -1% to -3%) is the desired aim of pre-funding the system, allowing for lower contribution requirements. Significant negative noninvestment cash flow (e.g. less than -3%) over time, however, can be an indicator of distress, particularly for a plan that is not receiving its full ADC. For a retirement plan with a low funded ratio, significant negative cash flow can cause liquidity concerns and further imperil the plan by requiring too many of the assets to be held in liquid investments (which depresses investment experience) and/or by requiring imprudent liquidation of assets. Most public pension plans in Texas have a negative cash flow.

The types of expenses that go into running a retirement fund include investment-related, administrative, and occasionally, other miscellaneous expenses. In the graph, Municipal retirement systems' total expenses as a percentage of assets are shown for the selected fiscal year. Due to inconsistencies in reporting of investment expenses, this data may not be an entirely accurate depiction of true investment-related expenses paid.

Investment returns make up an essential part of a retirement system's funding strategy. The table shows the average 10-year investment rate of return and the expected rate of return of Municipal retirement systems for the selected fiscal year. Reporting periods vary according to the plan's Fiscal Year.

Data is unavailable before 2013, when plans were first required to report investment returns and assumption information to the PRB.

This data center contains information reported by retirement systems to the PRB in annual financial reports, actuarial valuations and other studies, and investment and membership reports. The information may not reflect a system’s current status, only its most recently reported information. Deadlines for reporting information vary and may be viewed here. Historical data and trends presented are not intended to predict future events or continuing trends.

The information in this data center is intended to meet the Texas Government Code Section 801.209(a) requirement to post each public retirement system’s most recent data from reports required under Chapter 802, as well as to meet the Section 2054.1265 requirement for state agencies to post high-value data sets created or maintained by the agency on a generally accessible internet website maintained by or for the agency.

This site is best viewed using the current browser version of Firefox, Chrome, Safari, or Microsoft Edge; some features may not work in Internet Explorer.