On December 20, 2011, I attended the LRFOP meeting that was conducted by Vice President Everett Hooper when President Bart Simpson and Secretary Tommy Hudson were unable to attend that meeting.  Also present were approximately a dozen active duty LRPD officers including State Lodge President Allen Hamby.  I haven’t previously reported on this meeting because I have been very busy with the Christmas season.

I attended that meeting expecting that the issue of retired member’s rights in the LRFOP would be on their Agenda after I wrote my last article concerning that issue on this website that lead to the State Lodge President declaring that their Executive Board’s attempt to ask for a vote of their membership on that issue was unconstitutional under the National FOP Constitution.  Consequently, the LRFOP is currently in the process of rewriting their Constitution to comply with the National and State Constitutions in that area.

While that issue was apparently NOT on their Agenda for discussion, I brought it up anyway because I believed it was important to our pension membership and explained that I had contacted State Lodge President Allen Hamby about this issue because I did not believe the vote being proposed by the LRFOP Executive Board was authorized under the National FOP Constitution and I was concerned that this vote could strip me and other retired members of our rights in the LRFOP that was unfair and improper.

The LRFOP Executive Board assured me that they DID want their retired membership to have a place in the LRFOP and that they will continue to offer their retired members the option of enjoying the privilege of LRFOP lodge membership as an “Honorary” member free of charge, but in the future, anyone who wants to be an “active” member with full rights in the FOP will have to pay LRFOP dues apparently because they believe it is warranted if we wish to have “voice and vote” in the LRFOP.  They also explained that they will be sending each of their retired membership a letter explaining this issue and the various options available to their retired officers very soon because they recognized that many where not aware of the need to pay National and State dues and to announce this new requirement for “active” membership.

When I requested to know how much those dues may be, Past-President John Gilchrist told me that, at that time, they were looking at only charging retired officers half the amount they charge their active duty membership or approximately $15 per month but that no firm determination of the amount to charge their retired members has yet been made.  In response to that statement, I reminded them that most of their current retired membership live only on the small police  pensions provided under the old retirement system that has no automatic cost of living increase, such as is authorized under the LOPFI retirement system, and recommended a reduced amount for those retired members.

Since that meeting, I have had the time to give what was said during that meeting some additional thought.  It would now appear that the past promise of allowing retired members to remain in the LRFOP as “active” members by only paying their National and State dues without the need to pay any LRFOP dues will soon become a thing of the past, if what Mr. Gilchrist mentioned is adopted.  Unfortunately, such a suggestion is totally within the LRFOP ability under the National and State FOP Constitutions but, of course, they will have to put that matter to a vote of their membership to obtain such a change in their Constitution that I expect will pass such a vote  because that matter would only affect their retired membership and many active duty members are not cognizant of the fact that, one day, they too will be retired although with much better pension benefits than we have including an automatic cost of living increase provided under the LOPFI retirement system.

Personally, I might have been willing to pay up to another $20 per year for the luxury of being an “active” member of the LRFOP but I quite certainly have no desire to add an additional $180 a year to my expenses to achieve such membership and, in my opinion; I am not very interested in an “honorary” membership as being an honorary member would only allow access to lodge functions that I don’t use anyway and would NOT provide me with the ability to claim FOP membership without paying the new LRFOP dues for retired members.  I strongly suspect that obtaining our failure to pay those retired dues is the true objective of the LRFOP Executive Board anyway so that they can use that excuse to kick us out of the FOP while still providing us with the seemingly generous opportunity to stay, where we are apparently not really wanted, as nothing more than “honorary” members.

Consequently, I have contacted State FOP President Allen Hamby about the possibility of starting a Retired Police Officer’s FOP Lodge.  He told me that it is certainly possible but that such a lodge would have to admit ANY retired officer in the State and could not be limited to only LRPD retired officers.  He also stated I would only need ten (10) retired officers who wished to join the new lodge to get it started but that a person can only be a member of one FOP lodge at a time and that anyone who joined the new Retired Lodge could NOT also be an “active” member of their old local lodge; however, given the strong possibility of our having to pay LRFOP dues, I do not really see that as much of a problem.  While he didn’t mention anything about “honorary” lodge members, I suppose any new lodge member could remain as an honorary members in their old local lodge if they wished because ANYONE can be an “honorary” member of a lodge regardless of law enforcement experience.

Because I have already contacted the required number of retired LRPD officers who expressed an interest in forming such an FOP lodge, I believe that option is a viable alternative for our retired membership who wish to keep their FOP membership active by paying only the $21.50 a year in State and National dues and perhaps another $10 per year to be able to have some funds available to do the necessary paperwork, maintain a new lodge checking account, and pay the National and State dues that must be paid only by that lodge, without totally emptying our checking account, to keep the Retired State FOP Lodge going for our retired membership even though such a lodge would be open to law enforcement retirees anywhere in our State.

The cost for the ten retired officers to pay their annual National and State FOP dues is only $215 per year and with the additional $10 per year would only be another $100 for a grand total of $315 per year for all ten officers.  Those same ten retired officers would have to pay a total of $1,800 per year if they remain as active members of the LRFOP and the LRFOP charges $15 per month for a retired member’s dues.   I can’t recall if they said the National and State dues would be paid from that amount but, if not, that would add another $215 to that total bringing that cost to $2,215 per year.  Of course, starting a new FOP lodge would mean that the founding members would have to reach a consensus of opinion on the membership of a new “executive board” but I do not believe that would be a problem as many of the officers contacted also expressed an interest in serving in that capacity to get the new lodge started.

Thus, if the LRFOP wants us to pay such dues for the privilege of remaining as active members of the LRFOP, I am ready, willing, and able to form our own Retired Officers State FOP Lodge for our retired police officers to join.  The option of starting a Retired Officers FOP Lodge may be the best thing that could possibly happen for us anyway because our retired interests are not always consistent with active duty interests and being a member of a new State FOP Lodge would probably provide us with more influence at the Arkansas State Legislature on various retirement issues then we now have as well as providing us with greater access to the vast resources available from the State and National FOP.  At the very least, we would all know that our membership in such a lodge was truly appreciated and welcomed.

Let me know if you too are willing and ready to join in that effort by commenting below about your possible desire to join a new Retired FOP Lodge or emailing me at sryoung24@gmail.com!

The Little Rock Fraternal Order of Police (LRFOP) has proposed a change to the LRFOP Constitution and By-Laws for a vote of their membership that would deny the rights of any retired member to his or her current rights to the “benefits” of the lodge, the right to vote on any issue before the LRFOP, as well as the right to hold any elective LRFOP office.  In effect, this amendment, if passed, would appear to kick all LRPD retired members out of the LRFOP and, by association, out of the State and National FOP as well because, without “benefits” and “vote,” what possible good could there be in continuing your retired membership in that organization? [Read more...]

I know this short article has nothing to do with our Police Pension Fund but I thought it may help some of our more budget conscious members.

A  little over a year ago, I was behind a vehicle at a red light waiting to go to a local K-Mart where I intended to buy one of my grandchildren a birthday present when I noticed the vehicle ahead of me had a license tag that said “Vietnam War Veteran” at the bottom of the tag and had a decal for the Air Force beside the plates numbers.  Because I had never noticed such a tag before and the fellow driving that vehicle had also pulled into the K-Mart parking lot ahead of me, I followed him and parked beside his vehicle. [Read more...]

As many of you are undoubtedly aware, the Little Rock Police Pension Board has engaged in numerous attempts to increase our police pension funding from State and City government in an effort to improve the poor financial condition of our pension fund due to the fact that our fund has been designated a “projected insolvent fund” that is capable of collapse within ten (10) years as has been reported for the past two years by the Arkansas Fire and Police Pension Review Board (PRB). [Read more...]

I recently received a questionable opinion or memorandum from the City Attorney’s Office that causes me to wonder if the Little Rock City Board of Directors is receiving adequate legal counsel.  Now, I know that one memorandum cannot possibly prove or disprove such representation but because the ten (10) members of the current city Board of Directors, excluding the Mayor, has only one person with any legal background, it seems apparent to me that they must almost totally rely on the City Attorney’s advice on such legal issues that affords the City Attorney with the opportunity to greatly influence their determinations on a multitude of City issues, including the issue causing my concern that I shall somewhat explain below: [Read more...]

Many of you may have read my article “A Revealing History of Our Underfunded Police Pension Plan” in which I explained our pension plan’s funding problems created in the past by Little Rock city government.  However, there is yet another big funding problem that is associated with the LOPFI retirement system that I feel compelled to mention even though I have not been able to convince all my fellow Board members that it even exists.  This is the second in my three part series of articles on our pension funding problems with the last article to be on my suggestions for possible resolutions to those problems. [Read more...]

As many of you know from reading the newspapers and watching television, the City of Little Rock has proposed a new 1 cent sales tax that, according to a new City Resolution, is intended to pay our fund $500,000 annually if passed.  However, the passage of a City Resolution is not enforceable or binding as we all learned after the 1993 passage of another City Resolution that claimed the City would assist our pension fund financially if that need should ever arise as it undoubtedly has after our fund was declared a “projected insolvent fund” by the State’s Pension Review Board.  Even if the sales tax passes and the City honors their stated intent, the payment to our fund will do NOTHING to increase our pension benefits and will actually cost a third of our membership an estimated $140 a year out of their fixed income that many existing on only $1,115 per month cannot afford. [Read more...]

On Wednesday, August 2, 2011, the police members of the Little Rock Police Pension Board held a press conference at 3:00 pm at City Hall.  During that press conference, Farris Hensley gave a brief presentation explaining why we believe the City’s sales tax proposal does not represent “responsible” city government and explained why our sales tax proposal filled that need before we responded to reporters’ questions. [Read more...]

to my fellow pension members:i recently had a phone conversation with farris and advised him that due to family obligations i would be unable to attend the meeting at training on the 8th.i expressed to him that should a vote be considered or taken;he had my permission to vote as my proxy for whatever the membership decides.as one of the “little rock 9″that is still actively paying in it scares me that with retirement less than a year away no one can say with any certainity that there will be a pension 5,10,or even 25 years down the line.it is almost with criminal intent to defraud our membership that the city has underfunded the pension all those years.although i have not always agreed with everything the pension board has done in the past that did not or does not mean that i dont support our postion”keep the fund solvent”.i have not always been good in expressing what im trying to say,but felt that my support could be shown through this letter and not through my absence on that monday. robert lusk

Some of our membership may believe that discussing this issue is unwarranted given the other financial problems our pension fund is facing and trying to work through.  However, I believe this issue now demands our immediate attention, discussion, and resolution as well as the necessity of providing an immediate warning to our membership about this issue to prevent their arrest.  This issue displays yet another example of City Manager Bruce Moore’s  utter contempt and hatred for retired police officers and, quite possibly, active duty police officers as well.

[Read more...]