A Superior Court judge has dismissed a lawsuit brought by six Avalon Beach Patrol lieutenants who claimed the borough had an obligation under state law to pay them pensions.
The suit, filed in March, claimed that a New Jersey statute provides for pensions for lifeguards of a “city of the fourth class” who meet certain criteria concerning age and length of service. The six plaintiffs have met or are expected to meet the requirements of being at least 45 years old with 20 or more total years of service prior to seeking a pension.
But the question at issue for Judge James H. Pickering Jr. was whether they are working for a “city of the fourth class.” The law does not specifically speak broadly to Shore communities and thus the ruling hinges on the interpretation of the class of municipality to which the statute applies.
Avalon has maintained that it is not a city but rather a borough, and that therefore the statute does not apply in this instance.
In papers filed with the court, attorneys for the six lifeguards argued that the statutory language is ambiguous and on its face does not determine whether Avalon constitutes a city of the fourth class for purposes of the statute. The plaintiffs argued, “The court will have to look beyond the plain language of the statute and legislative history to resolve the question of interpretation.”
The case’s Sept. 16 dismissal was with prejudice, meaning the dismissal is permanent and the plaintiffs cannot refile the same claim in Superior Court. One avenue to continue the litigation is still open in that the plaintiffs can appeal Pickering’s decision to the Appellate Division.
Kevin D. Jarvis, lead attorney for the lifeguards, said, “We are weighing our options and reviewing the judge’s decision.”
“We are obviously disappointed with the court’s decision,” he said. “The Avalon lifeguards face the same risks as the lifeguards of Cape May City, Wildwood, North Wildwood and Sea Isle City but are denied a pension based solely on Avalon’s form of government, and because Avalon has refused to provide its lifeguards with a pension, though it could choose to do so.”
The case had implications for other Shore communities, since a ruling that Avalon was obligated to offer lifeguard pensions might encourage similar litigation elsewhere.
Avalon Business Administrator Scott Wahl said the borough’s long-standing position was confirmed by the court’s decision. “The statute directing lifeguard pensions has been clear for 96 years and does not obligate the borough to provide the benefit sought by the individuals who filed suit,” he said.
Wahl added: “Since 1928, the New Jersey Legislature could have changed the statute to include all municipalities, including boroughs, but has chosen not to do so.”
Contact the reporter, Vince Conti, at vconti@cmcherald.com.
