Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pension Benefit Dispute topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Dunmore pension board tables request to raise retired officer’s disability pension after legal dispute
Summary
The Pension Board delayed a decision on retired officer Anthony Garzella’s request to raise his disability pension from 50% to 60% after union counsel argued state law and audit records support a higher benefit and borough counsel said ordinances and CBAs fix the rate at 50%.
The Dunmore Pension Board on March 11, 2025 voted to table a request by retired officer Anthony Garzella to increase his disability pension from 50% to 60% while borough and pension counsel review documents and actuarial filings.
Attorney Debra Dominick, representing Mr. Garzella, told the board she believes the pension calculation should be 60% of the member’s compensation at the date of disability and that Auditor General audit reports and the Borough’s Act 205 filings show inconsistencies that support her client’s position. Dominick said she had spoken with pension auditors in Harrisburg who had flagged Dunmore’s filings; she quoted an official as calling the Borough a “problem child” for discrepancies between audit findings and the Act 205 submissions.
Borough attorney Neil MacDonald summarized a February 7, 2025 letter from the Borough’s solicitor, Lawrence Durkin, concluding that local ordinances and collective bargaining agreements determine pension entitlements and that, on their face, those documents set a 50% benefit. MacDonald said the actuary’s listing of 60% in a filing increases the Borough’s contribution requirement but does not by itself create an entitlement for a retiree.
Dominick disputed that account in a lengthy presentation that traced a history of local ordinances and actuary filings and cited provisions of the Pennsylvania municipal pension statute commonly called Act 600 and the Borough’s Act 205 actuarial reports. She said earlier ordinances had referenced higher disability percentages and that a 1998 ordinance altered the calculation; she urged the board to resolve the claim administratively rather than by litigation. “If you look at Act 600 … the amount and commencement” and the Auditor General’s compliance work, she said, “I don't think anybody wants that for somebody in Harrisburg to refer to us up here as a problem child.”
Board members and counsel said they needed time to review Dominick’s materials, including actuary Joe Duda’s reports, the relevant collective bargaining agreements and the cited ordinances. The board moved to table Garzella’s request pending that review; Mayor Max Conway made the motion and Mark Burton seconded. The motion carried unanimously.
Dominick said she would supply copies of the documents and, if the parties cannot resolve the matter, she intends to file a mandamus complaint in mid-April. The board said it will confer with borough counsel and the pension solicitor and may call a special meeting if counsel recommends prompt action.
The Pension Board’s next regular meeting is scheduled for June; in the interim board counsel will review the materials provided by the union attorney.
