New York Senate Bill S08024

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 5/15/25
• Refer: 5/15/25
• Engrossed: 6/13/25
• Refer: 6/13/25
• Engrossed: 6/17/25
• Enrolled: 9/10/25
• Chaptered: 9/10/25
• Passed: 9/10/25

Caption

Provides accidental disability retirement benefits for deputy sheriff Richard Stueber, a participant in World Trade Center rescue, recovery, and cleanup operations.

Summary

S08024 is a private relief bill that grants a posthumous accidental disability retirement benefit to the surviving spouse of Richard Stueber, a former Suffolk County deputy sheriff. The bill states that Stueber participated in the World Trade Center rescue, recovery, and cleanup operations while serving with the New York City Police Department, later became permanently incapacitated due to mental illness associated with that service, and died before receiving the benefit. It directs that Stacie Stueber, on behalf of her deceased husband, receive a 75% accidental disability retirement benefit under the Retirement and Social Security Law, retroactive to the date of his retirement in 2019. The bill also specifies that the benefit is based on the New York State and Local Employees' Retirement System determination that Stueber was permanently incapacitated as a result of his World Trade Center service. It requires Suffolk County to bear all implementation costs, while the fiscal note estimates an immediate past service cost of about $1.04 million, described as a one-time payment if enacted during the 2025 session. The measure would override any contrary general or special law, rule, or regulation and take effect immediately. The bill's impact is narrow but significant for the named beneficiary: it changes the retirement benefit payable to the Stueber family from a service-retirement continuation to an accidental disability retirement allowance. In practical terms, it creates a special statutory entitlement and shifts the financial responsibility to Suffolk County, while also affecting the administration of the state and local retirement system for this specific case. The overall sentiment around the bill appears strongly supportive and noncontroversial. It passed the Senate Rules Committee, the Senate floor, and the Assembly floor unanimously, with no recorded opposition in any vote. The lack of committee transcript material suggests there was little public debate, and the unanimous votes indicate broad sympathy for the circumstances of a first responder whose death was linked to 9/11-related service. The main point of contention, to the extent one exists, is fiscal and structural rather than moral: the bill creates a one-off exception in pension law and assigns the cost to Suffolk County. More broadly, such private pension bills can raise concerns about precedent, but no recorded opposition appears in the available legislative history. The measure is framed as a targeted remedial act for a deceased World Trade Center responder and his surviving spouse.

Impact

This bill amends the application of the Retirement and Social Security Law for one named individual by authorizing a 75% accidental disability retirement benefit retroactive to the date of retirement, notwithstanding contrary law. It effectively converts the benefit payable to the Stueber family from a service-retirement continuation to an accidental disability retirement allowance, and it requires Suffolk County to fund the implementation costs. The bill does not broadly change pension law for all members, but it creates a special statutory exception administered through the New York State and Local Employees' Retirement System.

Sentiment

The legislative sentiment appears uniformly favorable. The bill advanced through the Senate Rules Committee, passed the Senate floor 59-0, and passed the Assembly floor 134-0, indicating bipartisan support and no recorded opposition. The context suggests the measure was treated as a compassionate, corrective bill for a World Trade Center responder and his surviving spouse, with no visible controversy in the available record.

Contention

There is little evidence of substantive opposition in the available materials. The only likely areas of concern are the fiscal cost, estimated at about $1.04 million, and the fact that the bill creates a special, individualized pension exception that departs from ordinary retirement rules. Any contention would likely center on precedent for private relief legislation and on which government entity should bear the cost, but the bill itself assigns the cost to Suffolk County and the votes show no recorded dissent.