Authorizes certain persons in an optional twenty year retirement plan of the police and fire retirement system to receive credit for previous service as a uniformed court officer title series employed by the Unified Court System or a correction officer employed by a county, a municipality or the state.
S10387 would amend the Retirement and Social Security Law to let certain members of an optional 20-year retirement plan buy additional pension credit for prior service as either a uniformed court officer in the Unified Court System or a correction officer employed by a county, municipality, or the state. Eligible members must already have 20 years of service and, upon retirement, could receive up to five years of additional service credit, with each credited year increasing the pension by one-sixtieth of final average salary.
To obtain the credit, the member must pay the retirement system an amount equal to 3% of the compensation earned during the 12 months immediately before applying, multiplied by the number of years being claimed. The bill takes effect immediately and is aimed at recognizing earlier public safety or court service for retirement purposes, while requiring employee contributions toward the added benefit.
The bill would expand retirement benefit eligibility under section 384-e of the Retirement and Social Security Law for certain public employees in the New York State and Local Employees' Retirement System and the New York State and Local Police and Fire Retirement System. It creates a new mechanism for qualifying court officers and correction officers to convert prior service into additional pensionable credit, up to five years, which would increase retirement allowances and affect employer contribution costs. The fiscal note indicates the added costs would be borne by the state and participating local employers, with immediate and future actuarial impacts on the retirement systems.
The available record shows no committee transcript or recorded votes, so there is no direct evidence of debate or opposition in the materials provided. Based on the bill text and fiscal note, the measure appears to be framed as a targeted retirement benefit enhancement for a defined group of public safety and court personnel, with the employee contribution requirement suggesting an effort to offset part of the cost. The overall tone of the filing is technical and supportive of the benefit change, but the fiscal note highlights significant system costs.
The main point of potential contention is fiscal impact: the actuarial note estimates substantial past service cost and ongoing additional costs to the retirement systems and participating employers. Another possible issue is policy fairness, since the bill grants a specialized pension enhancement to a narrow class of members—certain court officers and correction officers—rather than to all public employees. No specific objections, amendments, or opposing arguments are included in the provided record, so any contention is inferred from the structure and cost of the benefit rather than from documented debate.