Thursday, October 1, 2026
A proposed resolution that would have given non-union employees with 15 years of service to the city, regardless of their age, and their families the same level of health benefits as Civil Service employees was removed from the agenda shortly before the March 1 City Council meeting, and City Council President Thomas Sofield Jr. said the initiative was no longer being considered.
The scrapped agenda item was aimed at amending the city’s code of ordinances’ personnel code. Specifically, the resolution stated that after completing 15 years of service to the city, an exempt, or non-union, employee and his or her family would be entitled to receive health benefits when their employment with the city was completed — the same level of benefits as Civil Service employees covered by collective bargaining agreement section 7-1.1.
“That was pulled from the agenda tonight and is not for consideration,” Sofield said after a resident inquired about the resolution. “That’s no longer something the city is considering doing.”
Currently, non-union employees with 15 years of service are eligible for health benefits when they retire at age 55. One city official who declined to be identified said the move would have given those employees more benefits than Civil Service Employees Association members, since they would have been able to collect health benefits before reaching age 55.
The official said he believed the resolution was a “gift” that some officials were looking to award themselves at a time when many taxpayers feel they can no longer afford state worker retirement benefits that are considered to be among the most generous in the nation.
Another city official, however, disagreed that it was a “gift,” and said that there was no support for the initiative among City Council members and even some appointed officials, and that its removal had more to do with the way the it was drafted and the fact that it was proposed during a rough economy.
City Councilman Len Torres said that the resolution came as a shock given the sluggish economy. Torres said he was not told how many non-union employees it would have covered and what the overall cost to the city would have been. “It was pulled of the agenda — of course they published it — and there was a tremendous amount of resentment,” he said. “The concern that we have is over the fiscal health of the city, and they continue to propose these things. How do you intend to pay for these projects?”
City Manager Charles Theofan confirmed that the initiative has been abandoned. While he would not comment on its details, he characterized the resolution as “flawed.”
“There were some good reasons behind that resolution, but it was flawed for a number of reasons that I don’t want to go into,” Theofan said. “Maybe one day there may be some reconsideration, but for now it’s a dead issue.”
Theofan cited the tough economic times as one reason for not moving forward with the resolution. “Now is not a popular time to be tinkering with public employee benefits in any way …,” he said.
