Gov. Andrew Cuomo has set his sights on exposing the morass of fraud and waste in New York. He has acknowledged this will be a Herculean task, and rightly so.
All are aware of myriad arrests and prosecution of elected officials ranging from outright theft and fraudulent schemes to the betrayal of principled behavior.
Could this be symptomatic of decay permeating our state?
Can one man undo all the inherent financial schemes and profligate spending endemic statewide? Is Cuomo the modern day Diogenes?
New York has a vast assemblage of government retirees. Some may deserve a generous retirement, but many question the basis upon which pensions are based. Recently, it has been revealed that several University at Albany professors and staff have received generous sabbaticals under dubious circumstances. They were supposed to enhance their skills and return reinvigorated to teach. Instead, they helped hike their retirement stipends and some retired upon their return.
Likewise, multiple police and fire officials, particularly downstate, still in their 40s and 50s are grossing $75,000 to $200,000 a year in retirement benefits. Some of their identities are concealed on the Web. Many are still capable of working and may in fact have other government employment.
Retirees can usually gross up to $30,000 from the state or locality and still keep their pensions unimpaired. Some exceed that limit with a waiver.
But were pensions and contracts contrived? Did negotiations truly occur at arms' length?
Was there a quid pro quo? Did union members support candidates in exchange for feckless contract negotiations?
Don't public servants hold a greater fiduciary duty to the public at large, versus loyalty to fellow employees? On what basis did public officials dispense overtime, pay increases, sabbaticals and promotions, particularly during pivotal years that counted most to an employee's pension?
Elected officials often agreed to these contracts and public employee unions used all their acumen and finesse to cajole such largess. Some argue arbitration was simply fatuous or illusory. Many pensions are based on a few consecutive years of gross wages of an employee; usually these are the highest paid years. But were gross wages inflated for that purpose?
Regardless, upon turning 65 each will additionally collect full Social Security benefits.
This is part of the corpus needing dissection. Noteworthy is a dearth of whistle-blowers. Grand juries with the power to study and report to a court can answer these intricate-yet-basic inquiries.
Meanwhile, New York will continue to bleed its finances and its populace to sustain pensioners in lavish luxury.
This is part of the labyrinth that Cuomo will have to unmask. The symptoms of this malaise have spread upstate and to various other professions; viruses tend to proliferate.
One answer may be legislation to restrain public service unions from supporting candidates for public office. Logic dictates that public needs should be nonpartisan, but surely the courts will intervene. State legislators will block such a proposal because they, too, seek contributions from such interests; they will not bite the hand that feeds them.
Campaigns are expensive and unions are keenly aware of this tenet and use it accordingly. With the exodus of business and manufacturing from New York, only special interests and the unions are left to take up the slack and subsidize candidates. There's always a payback, and this is the paradox.
So how will Andrew Cuomo resolve this dilemma and undo the consequences of the past?
He is resolute and panoptic, but did he arrive too late?
Peter A. Cristo is an Albany lawyer. His email address is pcristolaw@yahoo.com.