North Castle Retired Employees File Appeal to Reclaim Benefits
The current and retired North Castle employees and elected officials who recently lost a legal bid to have their health benefits restored have filed an appeal in the Appellate Division of state Supreme Court.
The notice of appeal, submitted on behalf of the group on Feb. 25, adhered to the 30-day deadline. It came less than four weeks after Justice Lester B. Adler ruled that since the benefits for the nonunion employees and former elected officials were created by town board resolution, they could also be rescinded through legislative action.
In 2012, the previous town board decided that retired department heads and deputy department heads, who were nonunion employees, must contribute 15 percent for the town’s health care coverage and prescription drug plan. It also eliminated benefits for former elected officials who served at least 10 years. Former officeholders can still obtain benefits through the town if they pay the entire cost of the plan.
In the appeal, four points of Adler’s decision are questioned by the petitioners: whether the retirees had a vested right to health, vision and insurance benefits under principles of unilateral contract; whether the town was permitted to unilaterally modify the contribution amounts; and whether civil service law was violated by requiring that the retired elected officials must pay 100 percent of the health insurance premium for plans that are provided through New York State.
The fourth point specifically concerns former town justice Robert McGoey, who was a sitting judge at the time of the resolution. The appeal questions whether there was a violation of the constitutional separation of powers principles on the part of the town for reducing his compensation.
Messages left for Ronald Dunn, the attorney for the 16 petitioners who took the town to court, and Stephanie Roebuck, the counsel representing the town on the matter, were not returned.
Last month, Dunn wrote to the 16 petitioners that he believed the court incorrectly ignored their argument distinguishing the case from one of a simple town board resolution.
“Rather, we believe the facts of our case set up a unique argument that once a retiree fulfills the conditions in a Resolution promising continued health benefits at no cost and the employee retires based on those conditions and begins receiving the benefit, that then becomes a binding contract,” Dunn wrote to his clients.
He also contended that it “completely misapplied the facts and the law” regarding the argument of whether town acted inappropriately in charging the former elected officials 100 percent of the premium.
Dunn estimated in his Feb. 6 letter that appeal would cost between $7,500 to $10,000, including printing expenses.
“Assuming we can address the economics, we believe an appeal has a very viable (chance) of success,” he stated.
At the Feb. 11 town board meeting, former supervisor Howard Arden applauded the state Supreme Court decision, saying that the board majority at the time correctly concluded that the town would save significant sums of money that was needed for services.
Arden mentioned that in the first year, the town saved between $70,000 and $100,000, a sum that would multiply over the years.
“At the end of the day, it really was the right thing to do and that’s one of the reasons why we did that,” he said.
Martin has more than 30 years experience covering local news in Westchester and Putnam counties, including a frequent focus on zoning and planning issues. He has been editor-in-chief of The Examiner since its inception in 2007. Read more from Martin’s editor-author bio here. Read Martin’s archived work here: https://www.theexaminernews.com/author/martin-wilbur2007/