On and after January 1, 1987, the provisions of G.S. 143-166.41 shall apply to all eligible law-enforcement officers as defined by G.S. 128-21(11b) or G.S. 143-166.50(a)(3) who are employed by local government employers, except as may be provided by this section. As to the applicability of the provisions of G.S. 143-166.41 to locally employed officers, the governing body for each unit of local government shall be responsible for making determinations of eligibility for their local officers retired under the provisions of G.S. 128-27(a) and for making payments to their eligible officers under the same terms and conditions, other than the source of payment, as apply to each State department, agency, or institution in payments to State officers according to the provisions of G.S. 143-166.41.
(1985 (Reg. Sess., 1986), c. 1019, s. 2.)
CASE NOTES
Authority of Municipalities. - Section 143-166.41 and this section do not authorize municipalities to make separation allowances based on overtime pay, longevity pay, and accrued vacation. Bowers v. City of High Point, 339 N.C. 413, 451 S.E.2d 284 (1994).
Pursuant to the plain and unambiguous language of G.S. 143-166.42, as well as of G.S. 143-166.41 upon which it was based, the actions of a county and a county board of commissioners in entering into a contractual relationship with a retired local law enforcement officer, wherein he was to receive a special separation allowance, were legislatively authorized; accordingly, such was not an ultra vires act on the part of the county entities. Wiggs v. Edgecombe County, 361 N.C. 318, 643 S.E.2d 904 (2007).
Reemployment By Local Government. - Retired city police officer lost his right to receive a separation allowance pursuant to G.S. 143-166.42 when he became reemployed by a county sheriff's office, which was a local government as defined by G.S. 143-166.41. Campbell v. City of Laurinburg, 168 N.C. App. 566, 608 S.E.2d 98 (2005).
Resolution Restricting Vested Allowance was Improper. - County's resolution, pursuant to its authority under G.S. 143-166.42, restricting a former officer's ability to collect a special separation allowance, impaired the obligation of the state's contract with former officer under the retirement system; because the resolution was enacted after the former officer had retired and his right to receive the special separation had become vested, it was improper. Wiggs v. Edgecombe County, 179 N.C. App. 47, 632 S.E.2d 249 (2006).
Contracts Clause Violated by Retroactive Resolution to Stop Payments. - County and county board of commissioners' attempt to terminate a retired local law enforcement officer's payments of a special separation allowance under G.S. 143-166.42 was violative of the contracts clause of U.S. Const., Art. I, § 10, as the statute allowed the parties to enter into the payment arrangement without any restrictions and, accordingly, the county entities could not pass a resolution to terminate the payments upon re-employment by the retired officer with another participant in the North Carolina Local Government Employees' Retirement System; such a resolution would have retroactively terminated his contractual right, which would have unconstitutionally impaired the contract. Wiggs v. Edgecombe County, 361 N.C. 318, 643 S.E.2d 904 (2007).
Opinions of Attorney General
"Creditable service," for purposes of determining a local law enforcement officer's eligibility for the special separation allowance benefit and for calculating the amount of that benefit, is service for which credit is allowed under either retirement system of which the officer is a member. See opinion of Attorney General to Claire McNaught, Public Safety Attorney, City of Winston-Salem, 56 N.C.A.G. 40 (1986).
A local law enforcement officer's eligibility for the special separation allowance benefit is in all instances determined by the officer's local government employer. See opinion of Attorney General to Claire McNaught, Public Safety Attorney, City of Winston-Salem, 56 N.C.A.G. 40 (1986).
----------