New York Senate Bill S06440

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/13/25
• Refer: 3/13/25
• Refer: 1/7/26

Caption

Authorizes Brian Studley, a police officer employed by the New York state university police department at SUNY Fredonia, to transition his pension from the New York state and local employees' retirement system to the New York state and local police and fire retirement system.

Summary

This bill is a one-person pension authorization for Brian Studley, a police officer employed by the New York State University Police Department at SUNY Fredonia. It deems him to have become a member of the New York State and Local Police and Fire Retirement System effective December 19, 2015, the date he was previously offered the opportunity to transfer from the Employees’ Retirement System but did not do so through no fault of his own. The bill allows him to file the required application and certification within one year of the act’s effective date so that his retirement status can be corrected retroactively. The measure also specifies how the pension costs are handled. Studley’s employee contributions already made to the Employees’ Retirement System would not be refunded; instead, those contributions would be used to offset past service costs created by the transfer. Any remaining past service costs would be paid by the State of New York, and the act would take effect immediately.

Impact

The bill would amend the retirement treatment of a single SUNY police officer by effectively moving him into the police and fire retirement system under section 383-d of the Retirement and Social Security Law, with retroactive effect to 2015. It does not create a broad class-wide change, but it does establish a precedent for individualized pension correction legislation for state university police officers. The fiscal note estimates an annual state contribution increase of about $18,000 for the 2025-2026 fiscal year and a one-time past service cost of about $76,200, both borne by the state.

Sentiment

The available record shows no committee debate or recorded votes, so there is no documented opposition or support beyond the bill’s introduction and referral. Based on the bill text, the measure appears remedial and narrowly tailored, suggesting a generally favorable or noncontroversial posture focused on correcting an alleged missed retirement election opportunity. The fiscal note acknowledges a state cost, but the bill’s limited scope likely reduces broader policy controversy.

Contention

The main point of potential contention is the retroactive pension adjustment and the associated state fiscal responsibility. Because the bill grants a special retirement status to one named individual, any concern would likely center on fairness, precedent, and whether the missed transfer was truly through no fault of the employee. The bill addresses that issue by requiring a certification that Studley is not barred from participation due to his own negligence, and by directing the state to absorb the remaining past service cost.