Authorizes Scott Hoag, a city of Rome police officer, to receive certain credit under section 384-d of the retirement and social security law.
Summary
This bill is a private pension relief measure for Scott Hoag, a police officer employed by the City of Rome and a member of the New York State and Local Police and Fire Retirement System. It authorizes him to receive service credit under the special twenty-year retirement plan in section 384-d of the Retirement and Social Security Law, even though he missed the deadline to file the required application through no fault of his own and was instead placed in the general retirement plan under section 375-i.
The bill allows the City of Rome to elect this coverage by adopting a local legislative resolution and certifying that Hoag did not exclude himself from the plan through negligence. If the city elects to do so, Hoag may then file the necessary request with the State Comptroller within the specified time period. The bill also requires the city to bear all employer past service costs associated with the change, with the option to amortize those costs over ten years, and it takes effect immediately.
Impact
The bill creates a narrow exception to existing retirement law by reopening eligibility for the section 384-d special twenty-year police retirement plan for one named employee. It affects the Retirement and Social Security Law, particularly sections 384-d, 384-e, and 375-i, and shifts the financial responsibility for the retroactive pension credit to the City of Rome rather than the state retirement system. The fiscal note estimates increased annual employer contributions and a one-time past service cost, with an amortization option available to the city.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have received strongly favorable treatment throughout the legislative process. It advanced unanimously through the Assembly Governmental Employees Committee, Assembly Ways and Means Committee, Assembly Rules Committee, and both floor votes in the Assembly and Senate, with no recorded opposition in any of those votes. The lack of dissent suggests broad support for correcting what was presented as an inadvertent filing error affecting a local police officer's retirement benefits.
Contention
There is little visible contention in the available record, but the main policy issue is the cost and precedent of granting individualized pension relief. Supporters appear to accept the bill as a fairness measure for an officer who missed the filing deadline through no fault of his own, while the fiscal note highlights that the City of Rome must assume the additional expense, including a substantial past service liability. Any concern would likely center on whether reopening a retirement plan for a single employee could encourage similar requests in other cases, though no opposition is reflected in the votes.