Weaver v. Town of N. Castle

• Decision Date: 30 January 2015
• Docket Number: 4757/12
• Parties: William R. WEAVER, Gerald K. Geist, Robert McGoey, Robert D'Angelo, Norman Anderson, Bruce U. Barnard, Anna Maria Marrone, Craig Useted, Jamie D. Norris, Ann Leber, Annemarie Kelly, Mildred Wago, Rebecca Kittredge, Edward Ahneman, Shirley Brown, Marion Woods, Leonard Kaplan, John Moore and Kathryn A. Towndrow, Petitioners–Plaintiffs, For a Judgment Pursuant to Article 78 and Section 3001 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules v. The TOWN OF NORTH CASTLE, and the Town Board of the Town of North Castle, Respondents–Defendants.
• Court: New York Supreme Court

47 Misc.3d 574
3 N.Y.S.3d 896
2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 25021

William R. WEAVER, Gerald K. Geist, Robert McGoey, Robert D'Angelo, Norman Anderson, Bruce U. Barnard, Anna Maria Marrone, Craig Useted, Jamie D. Norris, Ann Leber, Annemarie Kelly, Mildred Wago, Rebecca Kittredge, Edward Ahneman, Shirley Brown, Marion Woods, Leonard Kaplan, John Moore and Kathryn A. Towndrow, Petitioners–Plaintiffs
For a Judgment Pursuant to Article 78 and Section 3001 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules
v.
The TOWN OF NORTH CASTLE, and the Town Board of the Town of North Castle, Respondents–Defendants.

4757/12

Supreme Court, Westchester County, New York.

Jan. 30, 2015.

3 N.Y.S.3d 897

Gleason, Dunn, Walsh & O'Shea, by Ronald G. Dunn, Esq., Daniel A. Jacobs, Esq., Albany, attorneys for petitioners.

Keane & Beane, P.C., by Stephanie M. Roebuck, Esq., White Plains, attorneys for respondents.

Opinion

LESTER B. ADLER, J.

47 Misc.3d 575

Petitioners–Plaintiffs (Petitioners), who are current and former elected officials, department heads, and deputy department heads of Respondent–Defendant the Town of North Castle, New York (the Town), brought this hybrid article 78 proceeding and plenary action to challenge the Town's determination in 2012 to reduce (and in some cases eliminate) their paid medical, dental, and vision insurance benefits. Petitioners contend that the actions by the Town and its governing Town Board (the Board), also named as a Respondent–Defendant, were illegal and seek (1) a declaratory judgment that those actions were null and void and (2) a judgment determining that they were arbitrary and irrational. For the reasons set forth below, Respondents–Defendants (Respondents) are entitled to a declaratory judgment that their actions in 2012 were legal and were not and void, Petitioners' application for a judgment under article 78 of the CPLR is denied, and the Verified Petition is dismissed.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

The Town is governed by the elected Town Supervisor and the elected members of the Board. Other elected officials include the Town Clerk, the Receiver of Taxes and the Town Justices. The Town also employs department and deputy department heads as managers who supervise Town staff employees.

The majority of the Town's staff employees belong or belonged to one of four unions certified as bargaining representatives for their members. The collective bargaining agreements between the unions and the Town dictate the union members' contractual rights to receive health benefits during and after their employment by the Town. Petitioners do not belong to any of the four unions and accordingly have no direct rights under the collective bargaining agreements.

However, from at least January 1969 through September 30, 2012, the Town maintained a benefit program under which

47 Misc.3d 576

Petitioners received medical, dental, and vision insurance at no cost or at a fixed contribution rate. The program benefits were provided through the Town's participation in the New York Statewide Health Insurance Plan (NYSHIP), the Civil Service Employees Association Employee Benefits Fund, and other carriers. Under the program, (1) the Town paid the entire premium cost for current elected officials,

3 N.Y.S.3d 898

department heads and deputy department heads, and (2) for retired elected officials, department heads and deputy department heads, the Town covered a varying percentage of the premium costs based on the retirees' years of service and date of hiring.

The Town's benefit policy for non-unionized officials and employees was promulgated by a series of Board resolutions. In 1968, the Board adopted a resolution providing that, as of January 1, 1969, the Town would cover the entire cost of “Health Insurance” for “all eligible employees and retirees.” The 1968 resolution specified that the cost of “Health Insurance” included “the cost of the Statewide Option plus the cost of Medicare.” Based upon the papers before it, this Court cannot determine who qualified as “eligible employees and retirees,” what was included in “Health Insurance,” or what the “Statewide Option” meant.

In October 1983, the Board carried a motion that, for non-unionized employees holding “[d]epartment [h]ead, [d]eputy [d]epartment [h]ead, [m]anagerial or confidential positions,” the Town would receive “[h]ealth and [w]elfare benefits” that would “not be less than similar benefits given to union employees.” Notably, one Petitioner, who was then a Board member, approved the resolution.

Thereafter, in February 2009, the Board adopted an Employee Handbook which, among other things, set forth benefit policies for medical insurance, a dental plan, and a vision plan. In its introduction, the Handbook stated that it was “a statement of the personnel policies of the [Town]” and did not constitute a contract “between the Town and any individual for any purpose or duration.” The 2009 Handbook provided that the Town would “make available” medical insurance coverage, a dental plan, and a vision plan “for each full-time and 17–hour or more part-time employee and [e]lected [o]fficial.” The Handbook further specified that, upon two months' notice, “[t]he insurance premium that a non-union employee or [e]lected [o]fficial is required to contribute is subject to change by resolution of the [Board.]” The Handbook was approved unanimously by the Board, whose members included three of the Petitioners.

47 Misc.3d 577

Finally, on June 27, 2012, the Board passed a resolution adopting a written “Town of North Castle Compensation and Benefits Manual,” which revamped the benefits for present and former non-unionized employees, managers and elected officials, including Petitioners. In relevant...