SCITUATE - The taxpayers had their turn last Thursday night at the Town Council meeting to react to news that their former Department of Public Works director needs $183,000 of their money in order to fully collect on a pension that neither he nor the town contributed to for one half of the time he collected a public paycheck.

None favored the payment, with the general sentiment being that Richard A. Iverson made his own bed and should sleep in it.

The Valley Breeze & Observer reported the story that day of the council meeting. In it, Iverson conceded, "It was a foolish move on my part, but there was no deadline involved at that time."

On Thursday night, Richard Finnegan, a local lawyer who has sued the council over its appointment of a new police chief without first conducting a search and advertising the job, told the seven council members, "I find it appalling that the council will pay in $183,000 because a man did something foolish."

Iverson's payment would be about $2,000 and the taxpayers' share $183,225, according to letters sent to him and the town by the Employees' Retirement System of Rhode Island.

Neither Iverson nor the town paid a dollar into the state's pension system for the 10 years that Iverson, a Republican, held a seat on the Town Council. He and the town subsequently paid into the state pension system when Iverson was appointed by his former colleagues to the post of DPW chief, a period of 10 years until his retirement last May.

The requested payments would "buy-back" the years Iverson and the town should have been deducting his future pension from his bi-weekly pay checks as a council member.

Democratic council candidate Richard Kells raised the issue after town officials denied his access to the town's records regarding Iverson's pension. He has filed a complaint with the Attorney General's Office, alleging town officials violated the Open Records Law in denying his written requests.

Kells also suspected that the council had secretly voted to pay the retirement board's request for $183,225. Council President Robert Budway, however, said on Thursday that the council has not voted to allocate funds to pay the bill.

Neither Budway nor other council members, however, ruled out doing so.

"When the $183,000 bill was presented to us, I think I can say we were all taken aback," Budway said.

"The pension benefit is based on the last three years [of Iverson's employment] and his wage was much higher," Budway said - $77,258 in 2005; $76,028 in 2006, $75,042 in 2007 and $38,225 in 2008, according to his filing with the retirement system. He earned $600 a year as a council member.

"The $183,000 is not reflective of his 10 years on the council but reflective of his employment by the town ... Despite what my feeling is, is he entitled to this?"

Council member Wayne Salisbury said that during a closed session in April the council learned "a great deal of information that was shared with us by the pension board ... if he is eligible this particular bill reflects what we would have to pay."

Salisbury explained that the law controlling the issue is unclear in the case of town council members across the state with some now eligible to buy back only five years of credits and others eligible to buy back 10 years. Salisbury said he thinks that Iverson should be allowed to buy back five years.

Michael Marcello, an attorney and a candidate for state representative, said that when he served on the council he opted in to the state's pension system and that he believes that Iverson had the same opportunity but failed to either join the pension system or opt out of it.

A sticking point for those opposed to the town paying the $183,225 is a record provided by the pension board that showed Iverson inquired about buying back pension credits for his 10 years as a council member when he left the council.

He explained the legal doctrine of estoppel applies: "If you know your rights and fail to exercise those rights you lose those rights."

When Iverson applied for a status of his retirement benefits on Feb. 28, 2008, it was his second inquiry. In 1994, after he had left the council, he asked for and received an invoice for $1,049.93 to buy back his years on the council plus interest. The taxpayers' share would have been $1,220.72 at that time.

Despite the retirement system's notification, the town and Iverson did not pay to buy back the time. Iverson has also inquired about buying back pension credits for military service, but had not paid that bill for $25,000, either by last week.

Kells also has inquired about an affidavit signed by Council President Budway that was authorized at a special meeting held by the council on April 24 by what Budway disclosed Thursday night as unanimous. The affidavit was sworn to on May 1 by Budway, the day before Iverson was to officially retire. Sandra B. Young, former deputy town treasurer, notarized the document.

The affidavit was submitted by the town to the Employees' Retirement System of Rhode Island and stated that Iverson had been a "full-time employee of the town since Jan. 14, 1994."

It continues, "That a review of the employee records of the town of Scituate indicates that Richard Iverson was not a contributing member of the Municipal Employees' Retirement System from 1983 through 1992."

"Based on information presented to me, the failure of Richard Iverson to be a contributing member of MERS for the time period referenced ... was due to inadvertence, mistake and excusable neglect on behalf of the town of Scituate and/or the employee, Richard Iverson."

Finnegan, Marcello and others pressed the council on Thursday night to identify the "mistake" or either the "inadvertence" or "excusable negligence." Budway offered that by not opting to join the retirement system as a council member Iverson had made a mistake.

The Employees' Retirement System responded to Budway on May 12, ten days after Iverson had retired. Executive Director Frank J. Karpinski wanted to know why Iverson hadn't resolved the matter 14 years earlier when the same question was posed and a less expensive remedy was available.

"In 1994, an inquiry was made by Mr. Iverson and the town of Scituate regarding a request for purchase credit of prior service by Mr. Iverson for time he spent on the Scituate Town Council from 1983 to 1993. In 1995 the town and Mr. Iverson were billed for this time. No payments were ever made to ERSRI by either the town or Mr. Iverson. Recently, 14 years later after the original request, this same request was presented to ERSRI. The only differences are that now the amount due has increased significantly and the requests go through a process which helps ERSRI in the decision making process." He later identifies the required affidavit as the second change.

Budway attempted to excuse the affidavit. Asserting that it is form "fill in the blanks document" that leads him to believe others have also attested to the same.

Marcello cautioned Budway that an affidavit is still a sworn document and carries legal weight.

"I believe this council should not pay that $183,000," Finnegan urged the council. "He knew he owed that money. He was neglectful. It is not the council's problem. It is Mr. Iverson's problem. Do not make it the council's problem."

Marcello said that the council should exercise the same "fiduciary duty" as the retirement system is exercising in its query about what Iverson failed to do 14 years ago, and how his position has changed.

Budway said that Iverson has said he does not recall being offered the right to join the state pension system or the option of opting out of it.

Barbara Stetson, a retired public employee, told the council that she took care of her responsibilities to secure her pension in a timely manner and now receives it.

"Mr. Iverson, the barn was closed, the horse was away," she said. "If he didn't do it, the responsibility was his to do it. He is going to have to bite the bullet."

Council member John Winfield objected to the public discussion of Iverson's pension predicament.

"We are holding a court without the defendant," he said.

Finnegan asked the council if its members were aware that the Town Treasurer's Office had already "requested" of the retirement system "that the $183,225 be included in its employer rate. Is the council aware of that?"

No answer was forthcoming from the council members.