BOSTON — An attempt to override Gov. Deval Patrick's veto of a bill to restore a $36,000-a-year pension for a former western Massachusetts official, convicted of an environmental crime, was put off in the House yesterday when the measure was suddenly withdrawn.
Patrick vetoed the bill in December that would have allowed former North Adams Highway Superintendent Leo Senecal to receive his municipal pension despite a state law that prohibits those who commit a crime while on the job from receiving public retirement benefits.
House lawmakers were supposed to vote on the override yesterday, but the legislation was withdrawn suddenly. A spokeswoman for House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi would not comment, instead referring calls to Rep. Daniel Bosley, a North Adams Democrat who has pushed to restore Senecal's pension.
Bosley did not return a call on whether the override would be taken up again.
Bosley, speaking earlier in the day with The Eagle-Tribune, defended his effort to restore Senecal's pension, saying its denial was "cruel and unusual punishment."
"He shouldn't lose his entire pension because of one mistake in over 40 years," Bosley said.
Senecal pleaded guilty in 1998 to a charge of dumping 150 gallons of waste oil on city property. He was suspended, demoted, placed on probation and fined $9,000 for the cost of the cleanup.
"I would suggest Leo Senecal has served his sentence and has been made to pay for his transgression," Bosley said.
Unaware that his crime, committed in 1996 while on the job, barred him from receiving his pension, the 61-year-old Senecal continued paying into the municipal pension fund even after his conviction. Bosley said Senecal should at least be able to access the money he contributed to the pension fund.
Bosley said he got involved only after the North Adams Retirement Board and the state retirement board refused to act on Senecal's behalf.
Because of this, legislators said Senecal should be exempted from the rule denying pensions to convicted criminals. But Patrick disagreed.
"I do not believe the public is well-served by making individual legislative exceptions to a rule that is meant to apply uniformly," Patrick said at the time of the veto.
Special exemptions to public pension rules cost money. A Pioneer Institute study last year found that legislative-approved exceptions to public pension rules cost the state $125 million. An Eagle-Tribune series on public pensions detailed the cost to individual cities and towns, which have to pay for legislative tinkering.
Rep. Harriet Stanley, D-West Newbury, said special legislation to help specific people undermines efforts to reform the public pension system.
"You can't have it both ways," Stanley said. "You can't say you're going to reform the system and then be doing individual deals for people who are in some way connected" to legislators.
Jim Stergios, executive director of the Pioneer Institute, a public policy research group, would not comment on the Senecal legislation. However, he said the practice of approving exemptions for specific people has a long-term cost.
"When you start piling up the exemptions, they do add up to a lot," Stergios said. "And worse, they do open up opportunities for large groups of employees to seek favorable treatment."
This is the most high-profile pension exemption bill sought by lawmakers since 2006, when the Legislature approved such a bill for former Rep. J. Michael Ruane, D-Salem. Even though he did not pay into the state retirement system, Ruane received a $33,000-a-year pension.
However, the Legislature failed to act on a measure that allowed Methuen to provide a pension to the widow of David San Antonio. San Antonio was a Methuen police officer who, as he was dying from a rare brain disease, mistakenly directed his pension not to go to his wife.
