Is change in retirement benefit legal?

I respond to last Monday’s Dispatch article “OPERS may cut retiree cost- of- living benefit hikes.” I retired from the city of Columbus at the end of 2008. I was promised a 3 percent annual cost- ofliving adjustment based on my base retirement amount. To some degree, this promised annual increase influenced my decision to retire.

The Ohio Public Employees Retirement System is now proposing to reduce the COLA for those who retired prior to 2012, but does not seem to be concerned as to whether such a change is legal. The U. S. Constitution specifically forbids states from interfering with valid contracts or passing ex post facto laws.

The OPERS retiree COLA is specified in Ohio law. As a retiree, I have a definite relationship with the state of Ohio. If the Ohio Legislature amends the Ohio Revised Code to reduce the COLA of existing retirees, the revised law would be an illegal ex post facto law.

Further, upon my retirement, I believe a valid contract was formed between myself and the state of Ohio. At the time of retirement, I had satisfied my contractual obligations. Ohio set the terms of the contract. Ohio has a legal requirement to fulfill its side of the contract and a constitutional requirement not to interfere with the contract.

I hope the legality of the changes proposed by the Ohio Public Employees Retirement System is investigated.

Dale Harmon Palm Coast, Florida