Employees’ Retirement Fund of the City of Dallas Will Argue to Texas Supreme Court

Dallas Voters Should Continue to Have a Voice in Major Fund Decisions

Dallas voters and civilian employees have a big stake in a case that will soon go before the Texas Supreme Court. Since 1943 Dallas voters have had a voice in whether there should be changes to the city’s Employees’ Retirement Fund (ERF). The City of Dallas has attempted to eliminate these voters’ rights by unilaterally and retroactively placing term limits on board members elected by plan participants resulting in a court battle that has now reached the state’s highest court.

In a ruling favoring ERF, the Fifth District Court of Appeals made it clear that the ERF’s trust document can only be amended by a three-step process with an ordinance initiated by either the board or city council that is then approved by both those bodies and the voters. The court ruled that the city cannot circumvent this process if it wishes to impose term limits on the elected board members.

This is much more than just a case about term limits. This case will determine whether the trust document that has governed administration of one of the city’s largest pension plans can be retroactively changed without voter approval.

If the city and Texas attorney general, who filed a brief in support of the city’s position prevail, they will have undermined the structure of the plan and robbed voters of their voice in its administration.

We are at a loss as to why the city council and now Attorney General Ken Paxton’s office would want to take away decision making from the voters of Dallas, whose taxes fund the pension plan. Pension plans, including their funding benefits and governance are one of the most significant financial decisions cities make and that is the reason voter approval was always part of the ERF plan.

“As someone who served the city for 19 years and is now retired, I am very concerned about the city council trying to take away the voters’ voice in these important matters,” said Dianne Gibson. “My ability to vote for three representatives on the fund board as well as to vote on major fund changes as a taxpayer is a long-standing best practice that should be respected by the council and attorney general.”

The ERF is confident in its legal position and is prepared to argue the case before the Texas Supreme Court. ERF objects to the fact that the city circumvented the express amendment process in Chapter 40A, which has been in place for 25 years.

“The city is sending a very negative message to its valued employees, their families and to taxpayers when it tried to claim that a process that has been in place for 25 years is suddenly unconstitutional,” said Gibson. “In today’s highly competitive environment for employees, the appearance of backing away from commitments will have a definite negative impact on recruitment and retention.”

“As a City of Dallas resident, there is no reason that this issue could not have been trusted to the voters in the past or could not be put to the voters in a future election,” said James Mongaras, Attorney at Law. “If voters want term limits ERF will not oppose that decision.”

Putting the issue before voters would still be the easiest and cleanest way to preserve voter rights while avoiding the continued costly litigation that will eventually cost the city or pension fund more than $1.3 million taxpayer dollars in attorney’s fees.

View source version on businesswire.com: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20230328005669/en/