Village should not fight pension board

I am a recently retired 30- year Fire Department captain who has served two decades as trustee and secretary to a local pension board. Pension boards follow Illinois law when determining pension benefits, whether related to the line of duty or not.

Pension boards are guided through the statutes by attorneys by deciphering the law. In the firefighter line-of-duty case, Illinois law provides that certain cancers and heart and lung cases are presumed to be in connection to duty, as firefighters suffer much higher rates than the public, due to being exposed routinely by burned byproducts of materials including chemicals and plastics.

Apparently, the pension (in the line of duty) was granted to the Buffalo Grove case in question. What is troubling is the village is using taxpayer monies to fight what is granted, allowed and presumed by law. Further, the local pension fund has to now afford additional attorney fees and court costs to defend the elected and appointed board members who are charged with determining police officers and firefighter cases.

Finally, the spent shortfalls are considered in the annual funding requirements required from taxpayers. In essence, the taxpayer pays twice. These monies are drawn away from supporting all the other legitimate pensions to the retirees who have served their communities.

It seems it would be money well spent for the village to allow the line of duty pension and not waste both village and pension money fighting what is allowable by law. Or, is something else at play? We need as a society to provide for our front-line domestic soldiers, our cops and firefighters.

Al Jesionowski

Lake Zurich