While I battled my opponent, newly re-elected Councilman Lee Kleinman, these past three months, I heard the biggest fear in every taxpayer’s head: a vote for me would lead to a tax increase or a bail out for the DPA and the DFFA, both of whom supported me. Nothing could have been further from the truth.
I am so anti-tax, I’m practically a Libertarian. I had the support of the DPA and the DFFA because my opponent, who prevailed (but not by a long shot) treats them with disdain and has, in fact, so alienated the associations charged with protecting us they will not negotiate with him. They even tried meeting with him before endorsing me to no avail. They really tried, but he is arrogant and treats them like not just public servants, but servants, very much the spoiled rich boy he is.
I knew all along that the city would be bailing out the pension system, that the truth would come out after the election. The mayor etc. just had to spin in to look like a victory after their whipping by the Texas House and Dan Flynn. The bailout won’t involve extra tax dollars, but it will take a bigger bite out of our city budget. That means we won’t have extra dollars sitting around for my opponent to give to his buddies at the State Fair of Texas or build more bridges or fancy a $1.8 billion tollway on the Trinity levees.
It’s what I was saying all along.
Lee Kleinman is no fiscal conservative, he votes for practically everything the boys who give him $$$ ask him to vote for. And he had no part in this deal.
He did us no good in Austin. In fact, I heard from a reliable source he was asked to leave the room earlier this week and “sit in the hall” because of his nasty “four-letter-word-only” mouth. He was creating tension. He could not negotiate with any of the associations in good faith because he is not considered trustworthy. He had his chance to be a leader and failed, miserably. Even
That is why Austin is solving our pension issue.
Take a look at this email received from a Kleinman voter after the election:
We did not vote for you. Voted for Lee K.
I think you have him wrong in your thinking. He is trying to make it fair for everyone and not leaning to one-side on the issue of the pension plan.
I worked in precinct 2267 (not our precinct), and there were many voters there who came to vote and asked why Lee Kleinman was not on their ballot?? (of course, we could not speak to them about it). So you see, many people in this city want fairness.
I know it is hard for the police and fire fighters of Dallas to grasp the concept that they were wronged a long time ago by bad people and not the people of Dallas. We want to help, but do not want to take on the full responsibility – we did nothing wrong. You and your constituents think that we did and we should be the ones to pay.
We already paid for their pension once — why should we take on the FULL responsibility of paying for it again? (Think about it).
Well, you have Lee, and you are paying for it again. The City has been doing a marvelous spin job on us. Evidence: they have hired a political public relations firm to spin the story. The City and the leaders we elected over the past 20 years were every bit as responsible for the Pension Board mess as the police and fire fighter’s reps were. It was a former mayor, Tom Leppert, who urged the board to invest in Museum Tower, which was actually one of the board’s better real estate investments. Mr. Kleinman is only negative on it because of his heavy donations from the Nasher family. It was the DROP plan that hurt the pension, and Lee Kleinman telling the New York Times that we were going to go bankrupt. That caused a run on the bank.
I bet every voter in D11 would have grabbed their money and run, too, if they heard the “b” word concerning their retirement savings.
By the way, former police chief David Brown somehow knew enough to get his money out in October and resign before that “b” word was bantied. Interesting, no?
Oh and why is a member of the Dallas Citizen’s Council involved in this process? Who elected them?
By the way, DROP was adopted with the full consent of the Dallas City Council. It’s very hard, and it takes a lot of digging, to know who all the players were in this complicated mess. And yes, there was a lot of wrong doing on that board, and those responsible should be prosecuted, if possible. Funny Lee Kleinman quit leading the board right before the you-know-what hit the fan.
The truth is the City does owe it’s police and firefighters their pension, regardless of how screwed up it is, because it was part of their contractual compensation. I don’t want to pay twice, but it looks like we will be even with Kleinman in office. If we don’t, we will not only become embroiled in more lawsuits, we will lose police even faster than we are, which is something our city cannot sustain.
But watch how they will spin it, just watch. Mike Ward of the Houston Chronicle is calling it what it is, a bail out,
Despite growing tensions, which legislative leaders on Wednesday had characterized as leaving the Legislature close to a meltdown, at least two controversial bills were agreed to: One that would require health care centers to report abortion complications and another that could settle an ongoing fight over a bailout for the Dallas police and fire system.
But our mayor is saying um, no, this is a better deal for the taxpayers. Looks like what is brewing is a 6/5 board, with six selected by the City Council, and five by the Pension. (Some news outlets are reporting 7/5.) But it will take a full two-thirds vote super majority of all the 11 board members plus the extra swing vote to make any changes to the plan OR initiate clawbacks. That means 8 votes. Some police associations are still not buying it, but what I think is happening is Senator West and Senator Huffines are giving the Mayor a face-saving escape. It is also not a bad idea to discuss lowering the city’s contribution once the plan gets healthy, in fact, I think we should tae the plan’s temperature periodically. We should use an independent auditor to determine the plan’s health, no friends of Walt Human. I don’t have a problem re-evaluating the whole pension plan in seven years, when we have a vastly different city council.
The city had objected to Flynn’s bill because it set a minimum contribution amount for the city that would rise over time. Rawlings objected that it would effectively mean that the city would be paying for “phantom employees.” He called it a “taxpayer bailout.”
The Senate plan would set that minimum contribution amount at seven years.
Fair enough. Flynn did this minimum contribution because he knew Kleinman was hoping to bleed the plan when no one was looking.
By the way doesn’t Mr. Kleinman, who bemoaned #notaxpayerbailout throughout his campaign, who said nothing at the press conference, look kind of sickly in this picture? Maybe it’s because he was told to be quiet. Maybe he has had to severely disappoint his constituents because there will be a bail out after all, just as I said. It’s a very good thing. And maybe he won’t be able to sneak around and destroy the existing pension, as he said he wanted to do, leaving 10,000 without a dime to their name, without batting his eyelash.