Brockport mayor signs police chief waiver

Brockport mayor signs police chief waiver

It's been a year since Village of Brockport officials revoked the chief of police's contract. In that time, village officials and Police Chief Daniel Varrenti made attempts to resolve the employment contract issue, to no avail. It is now in the hands of the courts to decide.

But, at the September 5 board meeting, one of the contentious issues - the signing of Varrenti's 211 waiver - was decided by a three to two board vote.

Trustee Hanny Heyen brought up the resolution directing Mayor Mort Wexler to sign the waiver which would allow Varrenti to collect retirement benefits.

"When I was going door-to-door, people seemed to think this (the village's not signing the waiver) was the most unfair part of the contract revocation," she said. "This was something the chief earned when he was in Irondequoit. The 211 waiver has to be signed in order for him to collect retirement money earned in his prior position. I felt it was morally wrong not to have that waiver signed."

Heyen is the newest village board member, having run a successful campaign for a seat held by appointee Mary Jo Nayman. She joined the board in July.

Trustees Carrie Maziarz and David Wagenhauser agreed with Heyen in wanting the waiver signed. Trustee Connie Castaneda and Wexler voted against the motion.

Even with the signing of the waiver by the mayor, it still must be approved by both the county and the state and Heyen said the deadline had come and gone for its signature. "We aren't even sure it will go through now," she said.

"It's not the amount of money covered under the waiver, it is the principal of the item and it was wrong to take it away from him," she said.

Wexler said the board did authorize him to sign the waiver. "I had hoped this would have been resolved at the conclusion of the lawsuit. We are still trying to get a settlement with the chief. Right now the two sides are talking and that's a good sign," he said. "But, the only reason we are still talking as far as I am concerned is because the waiver wasn't signed."

Since the beginning, Wexler has continually stated he has a problem with perjuring himself if he signed the waiver. "The terminology states that we couldn't find anyone else, who was not within the retirement system, to fill the position of chief and the fact is, there are individuals out there who are not in the system that could fill the position."

Castaneda said, "I can't in good conscience have directed the mayor to sign a form that is illegal. The village would have to demonstrate there are no qualified candidates available - who are not retirees. - to fill the vacancy. Just because it was signed in the past doesn't make it right. The issuance of this 211 waiver is wrong as there are, in fact, non-retired individuals available."

By the village officials' signing of the waiver, "Varrenti is allowed to collect a pension of $47,000 while still collecting a salary of $113,000," Castaneda said. "We are not trying to get rid of him but there are discrepancies in the legal documents."

Maziarz said, "We made a last ditch effort to get this waiver signed and save the taxpayers of this village $17,000 a year for as long as he is employed here. I voted for the signing of waiver as a way to save the taxpayers' money."

Joan Hamlin, a village resident, who attends virtually every board meeting, said she was disappointed. "I feel this (waiver) should have been part of the lawsuit - it should have gone to court," she said. "This is not a strictly black and white issue and even if I hadn't agreed with the outcome I would have preferred this decision to have been made in court."

In an e-mail response, resident Linda Borrayo agreed with Hamlin saying, "The lawsuit against Brockport's taxpayers should be allowed to proceed to a court of law. The best way to reach a just decision is to let an impartial and qualified judge determine what is fair. The people of Brockport deserve their day in court."

The lawsuit Varrenti filed was against Wexler, Castaneda and Nayman. The three voted to revoke his employment contract. In the lawsuit, Varrenti states he has suffered a "loss of promised compensatory benefits" as well as suffering "mental stress, anxiety and other emotional pain and suffering."

The reason stated by officials for revoking the contract was to save taxpayers money by a reduction in Varrenti's pay and benefits package.

To date the village has expended more than $17,000 on the lawsuit. Bills for June, July and August have not been submitted.