City filed petition for judicial review of order of the State Retirement Systems assessing actuarial costs against city following retirement of one of its employees.
The Circuit Court affirmed. City appealed. The Court of Appeals, 2019 WL 2896454, affirmed. City sought discretionary review.
The Supreme Court held that:
- Pension-spiking statute, which seeks to limit practice of increasing pay of public employee in years immediately leading up to retirement with effect of increasing employee’s pension benefits in retirement, applies retroactively;
- Evidence supported determination that city employee’s pay increase was not a result of a bona fide promotion; and
- Pension-spiking statute was constitutional.
Pension-spiking statute, which seeks to limit practice of increasing pay of public employee in years immediately leading up to retirement with effect of increasing employee’s pension benefits in retirement, applies retroactively.
Evidence supported determination of State Retirement Systems that city employee’s pay increase was not a result of a bona fide promotion, in action under pension-spiking statute, which seeks to limit practice of increasing pay of public employee in years immediately leading up to retirement with effect of increasing employee’s pension benefits in retirement; employee’s formal rank and title within police department did not change despite his additional responsibilities, and employee was doing practically the same inspection work before purported promotion.
Pension-spiking statute, which seeks to limit practice of increasing pay of public employee in years immediately leading up to retirement with effect of increasing employee’s pension benefits in retirement, is not unconstitutionally overbroad; parameters of statute are reasonably tailored to purported end.
Pension-spiking statute, which seeks to limit practice of increasing pay of public employee in years immediately leading up to retirement with effect of increasing employee’s pension benefits in retirement, is not an unconstitutional ex post facto law.
Decision of State Retirement Systems to assess actuarial costs to city following retirement of police officer, under pension-spiking statute, which seeks to limit practice of increasing pay of public employee in years immediately leading up to retirement with effect of increasing employee’s pension benefits in retirement, did not violate Contracts Clause; relationship between city and Retirement Systems was purely one of statute, not contract, and statute did not affect any employer-employee obligations between city and employee.