1. Nothing. If he is receiving his pension benefit, it can't be taken away (except under certain extenuating circumstances...i.e. the IRS).
2. Legally (I think) No. Ethically...I think yes.*
(*) If the benefit has been "purchased"...i.e. the pension plan took money and bought an annuity to pay the retirement benefit...then the assets aren't with the pension plan anyway. However, you can't help but believe that his loyalty to his fellow firemen could very well outweigh the interests of non-city employee residents.
-- Edited by Agamemnon on Wednesday 13th of January 2010 06:32:12 AM
__________________
Free Speech does't require a multi-paragrah disclaimer Mr. Pilchesky.
I have to amend my first answer...while the pension is in fact protected, apparently the city has a law on the books dating back to 1964 that prevents him from receiving both a pension and a salary for his work on Konsil. From an article in today's paper, it appears that Ms Evans may try to get the 1964 law repealed.
Yupp...there is your paragon of virtue: if a law doesn't suit her needs, she simply thinks it should be changed.
__________________
Free Speech does't require a multi-paragrah disclaimer Mr. Pilchesky.
You mean like when she got herself a job as sitting school board director? If he so for the people like her highness why doesn's he just forgo the council cash? I mean he is just doing this for the people right? Like her? Or better? Why don't they all donate the equivelent of their salary for the year to the haitian relief fund? I mean all of them are only in this for the people not for themselves right?
Don't believe he can have both his pension and salary (I know, it's not much, but it's a salary all the same) if i remember correctly there was much whining and moaning when chief davis came out of retirement to head up the fire company. he is not allowed to collect his pension while serving his office. if this guy (nice guy or not) gets to do this..........would this entitle the chief to hmmmmmmm how many years of retroactive pay? think about it.
Is this rule set by the home rule charter ... or is it a pension board rule? Glenn maybe you can weigh in on this ... if it is a rule set by the home rule charter would that mean before it can be amended we would have to elect a home rule charter commission to study the current charter make recommendations and then have it put on the ballott for approval of the electorate of the city.
I do believe that if this were somthing that was going to be repealed it would have to have certain stipulations attached to it such as .... it would not be for anyone who is in a full time paid position but rather for someone who is elected into a part time office such as council is ... something that does not povide a salary that one could live off of. I am of the belief that it is something that needs to be looked at for the simple reason that we could be missing out on some great future council members if they are not willing to give up their pensions for a part time council salary. I know that I myself would not be able to do something like that.
__________________
I want everyone to stop and think about one thing ... Joe Pilchesky is not a lawyer ... he's just a guy playing a lawyer on the internet. Please don't trust your legal needs to this man.
The Home Rule Charter provides an umbrella under which all laws and ordinances must fall. In my opinion, as long as one does not conflict with the charter, one is good to go. This ordinance (code) seems to be implemented properly under the auspices of the HRC.
The ordinance can be repealed at any time, but there would be a severe political cost. As for the rule concerning "compensation", several issues must be further defined. What is "compensation"? Can the salary be refused? Can the council amend the salary (remember, no increases are allowed during a term) and provide an optional form of payment?
It is like defining "free public library".
There are loopholes. Some are sneakier than others.
3 months ago this guy had no idea 12000 a year was in his future so he can't possibly be used to having it in his checking account....If he is smart and wants to stay in politics. (remember sir not all politics are city and then you could be paid) Refuse the salary, do not try to amend the law and have Missy Jan look like a slime, ask for the city to send your salary to favorite charity (if the law allows), and move on......this council and it president already have enough bad press as it is....this could help.
-- Edited by IHavehadenoughofhaters on Wednesday 20th of January 2010 11:44:16 AM
There is a thought IHave ... but can he donate it? I don't know what the rules are on salaries.
__________________
I want everyone to stop and think about one thing ... Joe Pilchesky is not a lawyer ... he's just a guy playing a lawyer on the internet. Please don't trust your legal needs to this man.
