HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.nyscompop/nyscomo1995 and id is 1 raw text is: Opinion 95 - 1
Opinion 95 - 1
This opinion represents the views of the Office of the State Comptroller at the time it was
rendered. The opinion may no longer represent those views if, among other things, there have
been subsequent court cases or statutory amendments that bear on the issues discussed in
the opinion.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCIES -- Officers and Employees (municipality's responsibility to
pay health care costs)
INSURANCE -- Health Insurance (municipality's responsibility to pay health care cost of urban
renewal agency employees)
MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS -- Powers and Duties (contribution to urban renewal agency for health
care benefits)
GENERAL MUNICIPAL LAW, §§503-a, 554: A city is not responsible for paying the cost of health
care benefits to retirees of a city urban renewal agency. The city, however, may determine to provide
city funds to the agency to cover costs of such benefits.
You state that an existing city urban renewal agency provides health care benefits to its retirees and
ask whether the city is responsible for paying the cost of these benefits in the event the agency has
insufficient funds to cover the cost. For purposes of this opinion, we assume the agency is properly
providing and funding these benefits (see Civil Service Law, §§163[4], 200 et =a.; 1988 Opns St
Comp No. 88-64, p 126).
A city urban renewal agency is a corporate governmental agency, constituting a public benefit
corporation (General Municipal Law, §553[2]). As such, the agency has a corporate existence
separate from the city (1981 Opns St Comp No. 81-117, p 119; 34 Opns St Comp, 1978 p 68).
Among other things, the agency has express authority, independent of the city, to appoint its own
employees, prescribe their duties and fix their compensation (General Municipal Law, §554[7]).
Therefore, since the agency, not the city, is the employer of employees appointed by the agency (see
1979 Opns St Comp No. 79-20, unreported; Civil Service Law, §§163[4], 201[6][a][v]), the agency is
responsible for paying the costs of benefits properly due agency employees and former employees.
There is no provision of law which makes the city secondarily responsible for such expenses of the
agency (34 Opns St Comp, 1978, g.,
While the city is not required to pay these costs, we note that it is authorized to make advances,
loans, grants, subsidies, contributions and any other form of financial assistance to the agency, for
purposes of effectuating the purposes and provisions of the urban renewal statutes (General
Municipal Law, §503-a[4]; see also General Municipal Law, §§501; 551). Pursuant to this grant of the
authority, it is our opinion that the city, in its discretion, could determine to provide city funds to the
agency to cover costs of health care benefits to retirees of the agency (see 34 Opns St Comp, 1978,
p 68, suora.
Accordingly, a city is not responsible for paying the cost of health care benefits to retirees of a city
urban renewal agency. The city, however, may determine to provide city funds to the agency to cover
costs of such benefits.
February 15, 1995
Paul L. Wollman, Esq., City Attorney
City of Amsterdam
Opinion 95 - 1](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.nyscompop/nyscomo1995&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)