Fired workers offered benefits

Three of the 12 Hudson River-Black River Regulating District employees fired in May because of budget cuts were rehired by the board of directors in June with the sole purpose of allowing them to enroll in the state's early-retirement incentive program.

During its June meeting, the board unanimously agreed to reinstate Mark S. Martin, Vernon C. Duesler III and Donald R. Town Jr., as long as the workers immediately filed paperwork with the state to participate in the state retirement program, meeting minutes show.

The three regulating district employees also each had 19 sick days given to them, allowing their employment to run seamlessly from the date they were laid off until the day the board agreed to rehire them.

The 12 employees were fired in May because of the Hudson River Area's financial insecurity. An employee roster shows the regulating district includes 18 full-time employees and one part-time employee. The roster does not include the six-member board of directors.

A bill authorizing the state early retirement incentive program, which was signed by Gov. David A. Paterson in early June, contained two options.

The first option made eligible employees who are at least 50 years old with at least 10 years of service. Under the other option, eligible employees must be at least 55 years old and have at least 25 years of service.

Municipalities and eligible agencies were given the ability to opt out of the program.

At its July 13 meeting, the board amended the resolution it had passed in June allowing two more employees a 90-day window to decide whether they want to enter into the retirement program: Black River Area Administrator Carol L. Wright and Executive Director Glenn A. LaFave.

Mr. LaFave announced his retirement last week. Mrs. Wright has not yet announced a decision.

In total, six of the regulating district's employees met eligibility requirements to participate in the program.

William P. Reynolds, spokesman for the state comptroller's office, acknowledged an e-mailed inquiry from the Times sent to him Monday, but did not reply to questions about the board's actions by late Wednesday. The e-mail included questions about the legality of the board's move and a copy of the resolution adopted by the board in June.

A message also was left for Mr. Reynolds on his cell phone.