Matthew Riley, former Narragansett Police officer (and now a guest of the Federal Bureau of Prisons), will, based on a 30-year retirement period (he retired at 50), collect a total of $2.5M courtesy of Narragansett taxpayers. A yearly pension of $54,562 began Aug. 1, 2017, with a 3% compounded COLA to begin on July 1, 2021. A $65,900 payout for unused vacation and sick leave was also made to Mr. Riley.
Why was Mr. Riley awarded a full pension by the Narragansett Pension Board a mere six weeks after raids by three agencies on Mr. Riley’s house — and the Narragansett police station — during which computers,phones etc were seized?
Why, despite being repeatedly advised (perhaps implored would be a better description) by former Town Manager Jim Manni, did our Pension Board not wait until the expected indictment of Mr. Riley was announced, but instead rush to award Mr. Riley a pension? Why did our Pension Board not even invite our Town Solicitor to the meeting?
Draw your own conclusions.
In their haste, our Pension Board failed to exercise Due Diligence. There were no hearings, no search for the truth,no review of the code of ethics which binds our police officers on and off duty and clearly, no respect for the taxpayers who will pay Mr. Riley’s pension despite the fact that he brought disgrace upon the NPD and the town. Most importantly, our Pension Board awarded a full pension to Mr. Riley despite the harm he wreaked on a young girl — a fact which was not even considered by our Pension Board.
Here are the names of the board members who voted to award a pension: Legasse, Stone, Holland, Boruta and Laurie
Those still on the Pension Board, namely, Stone, Holland and Boruta should, in my opinion, be removed.
Voted against: DeLuca and Ingegnieri
Our Pension Board is now considering a “claw back” — but please, don’t be fooled. Despite every Pension Board meeting at which Mr. Riley’s pension application was considered being open , the “claw back” — very difficult due to the errors made by our Pension Board — was discussed only in Executive Session due to the “sensitive nature of the case.” I objected to the closed meeting, which Mrs. Riley was allowed to attend (another error), because again, Mr. Riley is an adjudicated, sentenced inmate and we all know more than we need to know about Mr.Riley’s egregious ,criminal behavior (the matter has been continued).
Need to refresh your memory about Mr. Riley’s behavior while a sworn member of the NPD? Visit the link below in your web browser.
After you do so,think about how our town could have spent that $2.5M to a better end than to support a felon who, when released,will need to register as a sex offender for life .