Robert Desjarlais

Subject: 2011 State Pension Law

I respectfully send this letter to express my objection to the Proposed Settlement in Rhode Island Public Employees' Retiree Coalition, et al v. Raimondo, et al. , No. PC 2015-1468;. The process in which this whole pension reform was arrived at was a disservice to the people that have already retired from the system under the terms agreed to as expressed in contracts reached through lawful collective bargaining agreements between either municipal or state entities. I attended the hearing held at CCRI on 12/14/2023 but was not able to stay long enough to testify in person and as such submit the testimony I would have given as follows.

As a retiree under the MERS system, I feel that, not only was a valid contract I retired under voided, I as a MERS retiree, was totally discounted in the entire process. Once I retired from the North Kingstown Police Department ( MERS Retirement System) I no longer was or am represented by the International Brotherhood of Police Officers, the union bargaining agent which I was a member of prior to my retirement. Therefore, throughout this entire process, my opinion or vote was never solicited or counted. I would have had to hire legal representation at my expense, to be counted amongst those heard to fight for what I worked and sacrificed for, that being my pension as outlined by the contract in place when I retired. During this whole process, from its inception with closed door bargaining sessions, to not even getting to vote on the fate of proposed changes to a contract of which I fall under, in my opinion, flaunts the notion of Fair and Open Government at its very core. We are strongly advised to get out and vote during General and Presidential Elections as a way to participate and show our connection with the governmental process. We are encouraged to participate in the governmental process at the local and State levels. Then why was I, and other retirees from municipalities who participated in the MERS system not allowed to participate by voting on the fate of something that could have and did have dire economic implications for many retirees in the MERS system. Throughout the entire process, retirees were never looked at as being a part of the solution, only as the problem.

I believe contracts should be honored when agreed upon in good faith and understanding between all parties involved. I have lived my life by this belief, having served on active duty in the Army from 1982 to1985 earning an Honorable Discharge. I continued my public service with a career spanning 21 years of honorable police service serving the citizens of North Kingstown and upholding Rhode Island Laws. Twenty - one years may not seem like a lot to the casual observer, but twenty - one years in law enforcement, or public safety for that matter, encompasses working nights, weekends, holidays, long hours with mandatory overtime, missing family times and losing touch with friends and family, not to mention the emotional and physical toll these careers can and do take on those employed in them. I hold my head high knowing that during my career, I performed my duties to the best of my abilities and served the citizens of North Kingstown and the State of Rhode Island honorably.

In the matter of criminal law, laws cannot be enacted that are retroactive to crimes already committed. I realize that the elements of civil law are very different then criminal law. To me, the settlement that was reached is tantamount to playing in a championship game, playing by the rules in effect at the time the game was played, winning, and then being told three weeks later that you lost your title because the rules have been changed and according to the new rules you would have been cheating. Furthermore, I was lumped into a class of retirees that I have no connection with in terms of who contributed to my pension. I wasn’t a state employee and as such, was not a member of a union to which the State of Rhode Island contributed to my pension. Being a member of a MERS bargaining unit, I contributed and the town from which I retired (North Kingstown) contributed what the State said was required to secure the benefits of a 3% COLA (non-compounded) at the time I retired. I never missed a payment. Prior to entering into the MERS system in 1996, the North Kingstown Police contributed to a private pension fund. Only after exploring the MERS system, bargaining with the Town Administration and being accepted by the State, did the North Kingstown Police Dept. join the MERS system. Had we known that the State would consider laws in the future that would break contracts already in effect, we may have reconsidered our decision. Since then Governor Raimondo proposed and subsequently reached back in time and changed the rules of the game, maybe she should have offered us the opportunity to be reappointed to our old jobs at the same position from which we retired. But she didn’t. Had I known, or any retiree for that matter, known that the rug was going to be pulled out from under us; we may still be employed in our old positions. I retired when I did based on what I was told I would be getting from the people at the State Pension Office. I also signed papers (a contract) with the Town of North Kingstown that concurred with what the State said I would be getting. Once the bell has been rung it can't be un-rung.

There is nothing fair about this law, from its inception to its enactment, when it comes to those individuals who retired before the 2011 law went into effect. I will not venture to speak for those who retired after the law was passed and went into effect or for those who are still employed by the State or by municipalities participating in the MERS system. I retired under a different set of rules at the time I signed my papers and therefore shouldn't be subject to the elements of the new law simply by the fact of ex post facto laws are unconstitutional. As a retiree under the MERS system, I was never even afforded the right to exercise my Constitutional Right to vote on any proposed changes. The Teachers Union (largest in the State at the time) got to vote and we , the MERS active members and retirees, had to sit idle on the sidelines and watch somebody else decide our fate. If the majority of retirees, as a whole, had voted in favor of this settlement, I could live with that. I have never been afforded the opportunity to have my vote counted in any way shape or form. I, as a MERS retiree feel as if my honorable service doesn’t matter at all.

In conclusion, I respect the tough decisions that must be made. I also know from experience that the right decisions are not always the easiest ones to make. In my former career I too worked to uphold the laws of Rhode Island and worked hard at being fair and impartial with respect to how I carried out my duties as a law enforcement officer and took pride in the job. The citizens I served expected me to honor the oath I took and I respected that and worked under that premise. Why then is it OK for the State of Rhode Island to break a contract with me? I didn't do anything except uphold my end of the deal. Yes. I am a retiree with a pension. I have been vilified as such in the press and through the media for having a State pension. But I didn't steal, coerce, bribe or do anything illegal to obtain my pension. I am not and have never been a politician. I was a police officer. All I did was my job, as the people I served expected and demanded of me. I did it to the best of my ability, with honor and dignity. Is it too much to ask the State of Rhode Island and the Town of North Kingstown to do the same and honor the terms of the contract under which I retired? The whole process was ill conceived, fraught with misinformation and shrouded in secrecy. To have what I, and many others like me, worked hard for, used as a stepping stone for one person’s political gain at our expense, was a total misuse of the Rhode Island Judicial System and the entire process was and remains a total disgrace as a whole.

Respectfully

Robert D. Desjarlais

Submitted via online webform