In a recent government meeting, discussions centered on the contentious exclusion of certain firefighters from a supplemental retirement benefit plan. A representative expressed frustration over the lack of clarity regarding the decision-making process that led to this exclusion, highlighting that both the union contract and the enabling ordinance appear to support their inclusion.

The representative recounted a conference call with an attorney who referenced prior conversations with the board chair and actuary, emphasizing the intent behind the ordinance. However, it was revealed that the union contract does not apply to the affected firefighters, leaving them without the ability to grieve the decision as union members would.

The ordinance, established in 2012, clearly states that an individual share account should be created for each active firefighter and retiree, with no date restrictions mentioned. The representative argued that the decision to exclude them from the share plan contradicts both the union contract and the enabling ordinance, which should entitle them to these benefits.

Despite ongoing discussions, the representative noted a lack of definitive answers regarding who made the decision to exclude them and why. The meeting underscored the need for transparency and resolution in addressing the firefighters' concerns about their rightful benefits.