Following last month’s , city councilors will review a proposed procedure for approving retirement agreements for municipal employees.
The City Council unanimously agreed Monday to send an ordinance regarding guidelines for the appropriation of retirement funds and benefits to the Administration Committee. The document was prepared by Law Director Jeff Londregan at the request of Mayor Daryl Finizio earlier this month.
Under the ordinance, no retirement agreement appropriating any additional funds beyond collective bargaining or unaffiliated employment agreements, including health care coverage, may be negotiated without first receiving approval from the council for the additional expenditures. The ordinance would also have the law director review all retirement agreements for “correctness and consistency” with the ordinance. The conditions would have to be met before a retirement agreement can be signed between the employee and mayor.
Earlier this year, former captains William Dittman and Michael Lacey of the while Finizio decided . The city agreed to pay accrued compensatory, vacation, holiday, and sick time and include the men and their families on a municipal retirement plan for several years. The agreements represented $36,571.31 over regular retirement benefits due to Dittman and $198,069.69 and $15,000 above normal benefits for Lacey and Segar, respectively.
The council did not approve the additional funds in . Dittman and Lacey subsequently , accusing the city of breach of contract and other charges. The council voted 5-1 last month to settle the lawsuits by honoring the agreements and paying nominal attorneys’ fees after Finizio warned that the city’s insurer, CIRMA, was in favor of settlement and would rescind insurance coverage for the city if the case went to trial in Dittman’s case.
Dittman has since been hired as chief of the Mashantucket Tribal Police Force while Lacey has become an investigator conducting federal background checks, according to the New London Police Union.
In a letter urging settlement of the cases, Finizio accepted responsibility for the commencement of litigation and associated costs and said he should have done a more thorough job of reviewing the procedures of approving the retirement agreements. He has also recommended that the council consider several revisions to the retirement benefit process, including reducing the number of compensatory days that can be carried over to a new year, eliminating mayoral discretion in determining compensatory time limits for police and fire chiefs when they leave city employment, and including a paragraph in all separation agreements stating that the agreement does not become valid until approved by the council.
Councilor John Maynard, who chairs the Administration Committee, said he considered the proposal a positive step in improving the relationship between the administration and council. He said he wanted to get a better sense of the different retirement agreements offered to municipal employees.
“I’d like to know everything department by department what the benefits are, because New London has, by my understanding, 10 to 15 different kinds of retirement packages,” said Maynard.
Consider me part of the artsy crowd of supporters. And among us are some of New London's top bracket tax payers. Many small business owners see the sidewalks crumbling and know we'll never have a revitalized city unless we get our fiscal house in order. And many of us feel that this can only happen if the person we elected Mayor is allowed to do his job. It's New London's homeowners who have the most to loose if the Mayor and Council don't represent a united approach. Thomas - that's a good idea I think in principle, but I'd think the employment contracts of the current employees might preclude that?
"ALLOWED TO DO HIS JOB" This statement seems to indicate to even the most casual of observers that in order for Darly to do his job others have to facilitate the process for him. Does that make any sense? If Daryl was the skilled leader and non partisan builder of consensus that he portrayed during his campaign then he would be making progress. But he is making no progress and you as a Daryl supporter now make the bold move to shift the blame for the lack of progress in the city under Daryl to some sort of undefined or unidentified force that is not allowing him to do his job. Does Daryl ever accept blame or responsibility for anything without being forced to as he was when he sent the fall on his sword letter to the council in order to get funding back for his staff? By the way that was the same broad deal in which the fire fighter on the council coordinated the part that moved money out of the fire department making it a possibility to lay off fire fighters and paving the way to the new and improved pension deal that will fill the retired fire fighters pockets with extra cash at a huge cost to New London taxpayers.
maybe a civil action comeing soon by our former deputy ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,FOI WORKS IN FUNNY WAYS BUT SEGAR HAS A LITTLE TRAINING ON THE MATTER ,SEEN IT MYSELF FIRSTHAND
Why would I put someone else's name in a post? Are you kidding me? Get real. You can gather whatever you want. I've seen very little in my check back this evening worth reading except Mr. Cornick's thoughtful suggestion. Though it's likely not practical, at least it's a suggestion. Sure do seem to be a lot of 'observers' round here...
@Daryl Supporters - Remember when you ardently defended Daryl's supposedly god-given right to negotiate extant of council approval? Daryl's apology kind of exposes how blindly some people follow him...