THEODORE R. McKELDIN, GOVERNOR                  1299

House Bill No. 208—Baltimore Police Pension Fund

AN ACT to authorize and direct the Police Commissioner of Balti-
more City to return all monies to William Delaney, 117 South
Strieker Street that were contributed by him to the Pension Fund
while he was a member of the Police force of Baltimore City.

May 9,1955

Honorable John C. Luber
Speaker of the House of Delegates
Annapolis, Maryland

Dear Mr. Speaker:

I am returning herewith without my approval, House Bill 208,
which provides for refund of all contributions made to the Police
Pension Fund by Mr. William Delaney, while serving as a member of
the Baltimore City Police Department. The late Commissioner Ober
recommended veto of this bill, which provides special treatment for a
single individual different from all others similarly situated under
the general provisions of the police pension law.

The bill recites that Mr. Delaney was dismissed in August, 1940,
without ever having been disciplined for any infraction of the law or
police regulations. The Police Department record is completely to
the contrary. Although the basis for his separation from the service
is immaterial, it is significant in another connection. Many persons
have been separated from the service of the Police Department for
other than disciplinary reasons. No matter how blameless the record
of such former officers, neither they nor their surviving widows and
children, can secure a refund of contributions to the pension fund.

While there is no sound or reasonable basis for discrimination in
favor of one given individual, it nevertheless may well be that the long
established general policy is unfair and unduly harsh. Compelling
arguments can be made for the equitableness of return of all such
contributions upon separation from the service, or at least for those
falling in certain categories. Undoubtedly there is basis for an op-
posite view. In any event, a minimum requirement in any modifica-
tion of the law should be general applicability to all similarly situated
persons. The extent and desirability of any such modification in-
volves many factors, including its cost, and this veto message is not
to be considered as in any manner an expression of opinion, one way
or the other by me upon the matter. As a matter of general policy,
however, it would be extremely desirable if once and for all the
question could be examined and finally determined so that the perennial
host of bills for individual former members of the Police Department
with their inevitable veto, could possibly be terminated. It would
mean a saving of time not only for the legislative and executive de-
partments, but also stop the practice of raising false hopes in the
minds of those who would benefit by such legislation.

The entire matter would seem to be one for discussion between
officials of Baltimore City, the Police Department and the City Legis-
lative Delegation in order that the atmosphere may be cleared au-
thoritatively. I have, accordingly, sent copies of this message to the
Mayor of, Baltimore City, the Acting Police Commissioner and the
chairmen of the City Senate and House delegations at the last Session,