New York Senate Bill S08216

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 5/21/25
• Refer: 5/21/25
• Refer: 1/7/26

Caption

Grants retroactive tier II membership in the New York state and local police and fire retirement system to Daniel Rizzo.

Summary

This bill grants retroactive Tier II membership in the New York State and Local Police and Fire Retirement System to Daniel Rizzo, who was first employed by the Monroe County Sheriff’s Office on October 19, 2009 but, through no fault of his own, did not become a member of the retirement system on that date. The bill deems him to have been a member beginning on his first day of employment and provides that he be treated as a Tier II member rather than a Tier V member. The bill also requires that an application for this retroactive membership be filed within one year of the act’s effective date and directs that any employee contributions Rizzo made that would not have been required under Tier II status be refunded. It further states that all past service costs associated with implementing the act will be borne by the state, and the act takes effect immediately.

Impact

The bill would amend the application of retirement system membership rules for a single named individual, creating a special statutory exception to the normal tier structure in the New York State and Local Police and Fire Retirement System. It would change Daniel Rizzo’s credited membership date to October 19, 2009, shift him from Tier V to Tier II status, require a refund of excess employee contributions, and impose the actuarial past service cost on the state rather than the local employer. The fiscal note estimates an immediate one-time state cost of about $56,500 and an ongoing increase in City of Rochester contributions of about $9,100 for the first fiscal year, with future costs varying over time.

Sentiment

The available materials suggest the bill is a narrow, individualized retirement correction measure rather than a broadly controversial policy change. There are no recorded committee transcripts or votes in the provided context, so sentiment must be inferred from the bill’s structure and fiscal note: it appears to be a remedial bill intended to fix an administrative omission affecting one employee. The fiscal impact is modest, which may support favorable consideration, but the bill still creates a special exception to standard retirement rules.

Contention

The main point of contention is likely the fairness and precedent of granting a special retroactive retirement benefit to a single named individual, especially one that changes tier status and shifts costs between the state and the local employer. Another possible issue is the fiscal responsibility allocation, since the bill places past service costs on the state while also increasing the City of Rochester’s annual contributions. No opposing arguments, committee debate, or recorded votes are provided, so these concerns are inferred from the bill text and fiscal note rather than documented discussion.