Baltimore judge rules city violated contracts by cutting police and fire pension benefits
Judge
"The city breached its contract," she wrote in an opinion that handed several victories to the unions and others to the city.
The partial ruling in favor of the police and fire unions -- who have battled the city in court for years -- was hailed by retirees.
"The city is going to owe a lot of money," predicted Lt.
In her ruling, Rubin did not state what damages -- if any -- the city would have to pay. But council members said they are bracing for a potential impact of being forced to pay out tens of millions of dollars in pension benefits dating back to the law's passage.
An actuary has estimated the city could be liable for as much as
The next court date in the matter has not been set.
City Councilman
"This has been ongoing for seven years," Costello said of the legal battle. "I'd like to see it resolved as quickly as a humanly possible. This is something that's outstanding that public safety officers are upset about and rightfully so. We want to get it resolved as quickly as possible."
Rawlings-Blake overhauled the city's police and fire pension system to prevent an imminent fiscal crisis, she said. The city's pension fund for firefighters and police officers is funded at about 70 percent of the long-term costs of providing benefits. Its unfunded long-term liability is more than
City officials say the mayor's legislation -- which was passed by the
The unions, in response, launched a campaign against Rawlings-Blake and her
Since the law's enactment, the city and public safety unions have traded court victories in the case.
In 2014, the
Judge
Under the mayor's overhaul, firefighters and police have been required to increase contributions to the pension fund -- now 10 percent of their salaries. Officers were told that they would no longer be able to retire after 20 years, but would have to stay on the force for 25 years to receive their pensions.
Retired workers also lost what was called the "variable benefit," an annual increase tied to the stock market. Instead, the youngest retirees receive no annual increase through the variable benefit, and older retirees receive a 1 percent or 2 percent annual increase.
In 2012, U.S. District Judge
The plan "had the pernicious effect of eliminating and/or reducing annual increases from retirees under 65 at the time of enactment and, consequently, significantly reducing their pensions when they became 65," he wrote.
The law was "not reasonable," Garbis wrote at the time.
City Solicitor
"Under the judge's decision there's going to be a trial," he said. "We look forward to meeting with the judge."
"We have to sit down with the solicitor and get a clear understanding of the city's plan going forward," he said. "When folks dedicate themselves to public service, they deserve to be compensated in retirement. We also have to make sure we're not bankrupting the city so we can continue to take care of folks who put their lives on the line for the city."
___
(c)2018 The Baltimore Sun
Visit The Baltimore Sun at www.baltimoresun.com
Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
Disaster aid approved for NH counties hit hard by October storm
What Agents Need To Know About Winter Flood Risks
Advisor News
Annuity News
Health/Employee Benefits News
Life Insurance News