Nassau
County Elections
November brought a dramatic change to the face of
politics in Nassau County.
The Republican Party swept the elections here and
not only did they achieve the majority in the County
Legislature but they also won back the County Executive
seat. In our
many dealings over the past eight years with the
Legislature we enjoyed a good working relationship with
Diane Yatauro, Judy Jacobs and the former Democratic
Majority and we appreciate their past support.
We look forward to working with the new
Republican Majority and their leader, Peter Schmitt.
Pete has always had an open door policy with us
and we are confident that this relationship will
continue.
The County Executive race was a real nail-biter
and we were very happy to see Ed Mangano, the former
County Legislator from Bethpage, emerge victorious.
We had endorsed Ed in his bid for County
Executive and wish him much success in what I am sure
will be a challenging task, but one that I am confident
he can accomplish.
In addition, Ed appointed Rob Walker, a former
NYS Assemblyman and a friend from Albany, to the post of
Chief Deputy County Executive.
Rob was always a pleasure to deal with while in
the Assembly and I am sure his pleasant demeanor will
continue. While
we acknowledge that fiscal constraints will remain a
real problem for the County for at least the short term,
we believe that there will be a much better line of
communication between our Union and the County
Executive’s Office.
We have already had very positive meetings with
them, which we greatly appreciate.
In addition, I am sure that any future
interactions, even when we disagree, will be much less
painful!
Legislation
Update - Albany
The
2010 Legislative Session has commenced in Albany and our
committee has begun the yearly six-month grind of
meeting with our State Representatives in order to
promote our agenda and protect our benefits.
Unfortunately this year I think we will spend
more time in a defensive posture than an offensive one.
The State has serious problems, there is little
money to spend, and lately public employees and their
pensions always seem to be in someone's sights.
You would think that with the recent passage of a
Tier V Pension Plan we would be safe for a while, but I
fear that the attacks will continue.
I can tell you that it is times like this that we
need to maintain a presence in Albany, even more so than
during the good times.
As
you are probably aware the Tier V Pension Plan has been
enacted for all members hired after January 1st of this
year (unless your collective bargaining agreement spells
out Tier II coverage, which ours does, then Tier V takes
effect at the expiration of the contract) and we are
already having problems with it.
During the negotiations with the Governor's
Office we were assured that the provision concerning the
amount of overtime used to calculate a retiree's pension
would be similar to the way it is presently calculated
with a slight decrease.
The bill itself was poorly written (probably due
to the fact that the Governor's Office did not bother to
ask counsel from the Retirement System) and because of
that there is a problem with the interpretation by the
Retirement System. I
cannot blame the Retirement System for this as the fault
lies with whoever drafted the bill.
Anticipating a problem we asked the sponsors
during voting on the bill to read into the record the
legislative intent of the law, which they did for us.
However, the Retirement System told us, during a
recent Albany meeting, that they have to go by the
letter of the law, not what is read into the record.
We now know that we will probably have to do some
type of correction bill to clear up the language as
submitted by the Governor.
We do not want to wait 20 years to address this
problem until the first Tier V member retires, by then
no one will remember what the legislative intent was.
All this was done in a hurry, as it was more
about receiving a favorable editorial than in insuring
that the bill was properly written.
Politics are definitely in play upstate!
Two other issues that we will probably have to
deal with in the near future could both have an effect
on our pensions. The
first is a call from some camps, most notably from
Attorney General Andrew Cuomo and others, that the
Retirement System change from a sole trustee of the fund
(our present Comptroller Tom DiNapoli) to a Pension
Board, as is done in New York City.
The sole Trustee has worked very well for us in
the past and has prevented raiding of our fund by
previous Governors.
It would take a lot of convincing for me to
believe that this change would be in our best interest.
If you are interested in this proposal you can
read about it on the Attorney General's website at
http://www.ag.ny.gov/media_center/2009/oct/oct8a_09.html.
Secondly,
there is a renewed call by some politicians for the
voters to call for an early Constitutional Convention.
This is where a panel would be set up to open up the New
York State Constitution for review and to recommend
changes to this body of laws.
The last one was held in 1967 and the next
scheduled one is not until 2017.
These politicians are asking for a Convention to
take place within the next two years.
Our problem with this lies in the fact that it is
the State Constitution that guarantees our pension
benefits and it makes us nervous when people with
different agendas are poking around in an area that
could possibly alter these provisions.
Although I do not believe this is their intention
we will definitely have to follow any new developments
closely.
Legislative
Update - Washington D.C.
If
you have kept up in the newspapers with some of the
provisions of the President's plan for Universal Health
Care you would have noticed that one of the ideas to
generate funds to pay for it was to tax municipalities
that provide its employees with Health Care plans that
the Administration feels are "too generous",
the so called "Cadillac Plans".
While our health care package did not presently
fit into this definition there was one problem, the plan
only called for a 3% yearly adjustment in the premium
threshold of what defined a "Cadillac Plan".
The problem with this is that the cost of Health
Care is rising at a much steeper rate than 3%, therefore
in as little as 10 years our health coverage might just
become a "Cadillac Plan", which would not bode
well for us or the County. Fortunately this idea was
only in the Senate version of the bill and the House
remains opposed to it. Two recent developments have also
helped us with this problem.
NAPO (National Association of Police
Organizations), of which we are members, was able to get
an amendment through which exempted Public Safety
Officers (and other union employees that receive health
benefits through a collective bargaining agreement) from
the provisions of this bill until at least 2018.
In addition, the recent election of a Republican
to the Senate in Massachusetts now insures that the
Democrats do not have a filibuster proof majority to ram
it through. We
will continue to follow this issue as it unfolds.
New
Duty Weapons
This
Department has carried the Sig Sauer 9mm semi-automatic
pistol now for approximately 20 years as our duty weapon
and it has served us well.
However, the introduction of new types and
calibers of pistols to the market and the age of some of
our present weapons, the Department set out on a course
of evaluating our current handgun with the aim of
possible replacing it.
I, along with other union representatives, was
asked to serve on a Weapon Selection Committee, to
evaluate other pistols for a possible replacement.
After consideration by range personnel of several
different manufacturers of firearms the choice was
narrowed down to two weapons, the Glock and the Sig
Sauer. We
were also given a choice of staying with the 9mm round,
or upgrading to the .40 S&W cartridge.
After listening to representatives of both
manufacturers, and test firing all of the pistols, the
committee recommended to the Department that we replace
our existing weapons with the Sig Sauer .40 caliber.
The Sig models tested were fitted with a new type
of double action only trigger system (the DAK trigger)
and are an improvement over our current model.
As in the past I believe the Department will
offer members a choice between two models, the P226 or
the P229 models, both with the frame rail system for
accessories such as a flashlight or laser sights. While
no firm date is set, and pending approval from the
County, we hope to see new weapons start to arrive
before the summer. This
weapon will be provided to members at no cost as a
trade-in on your present model.
We were also told that accommodations would be
made for members who wish to keep their present weapon
in addition to the new duty firearm. This would involve
some out of pocket cost, but then both weapons would be
yours to keep upon retirement as per the collective
bargaining agreement.
I will keep you updated on any progress or
problems.
Retirement Questions
Just as a reminder, from January through the end
of June I am in Albany every week.
We frequently meet with representatives during
this time from the Retirement System and the
Comptroller’s Office.
If there are any problems that I can help you
with in your dealings with these offices, or just
general questions about our retirement plan and options,
just let me know, I would be happy to help you out.
As
always, any questions on any of the above items please
call me at the office or email me at nassoa@aol.com
HELPFUL
LINKS FOR UP-TO-DATE
LEGISLATION
http://www.senate.state.ny.us/
http://assembly.state.ny.us/
http://sobb.com/states/newyork/nylinks.html
http://www.state.ny.us/
