* From Gatehouse…

Someone elected to two positions in different local governments could not collect two pensions under legislation that passed the Illinois Senate Friday.

The bill’s chief sponsor, Sen. Don Harmon, D-Oak Park, said he believes state law was already clear about pensions for people who serve both as a county board member and another locally elected position. However, a legal opinion from a state’s attorney made the already “tangled web” even more complicated, he said.

House Bill 5078 clarifies that officials cannot get credit toward a pension for both jobs. It passed on a vote of 31-18 Friday.

* From the synopsis…

Prohibits any person who holds elected office in a unit of local government from entering into an additional elected office in another unit of local government if he or she is: (i) earning service credit under the Pension Code as a result of holding the first elected office and (ii) will earn service credit under the Pension Code as a result of simultaneously holding the second elected office.

* The bill would also take away one person’s pension sweetener. From the Sun-Times…

A former suburban police chief who benefited from an obscure pension sweetener and unapologetically declared “I deserve every penny of it, and I deserve a lot f—— more” could wind up getting a lot less.

By a 31-18 vote, the state Senate Friday moved to repeal a state law that allowed retired Oak Brook Police Chief Thomas Sheahan — a member of one of Chicago’s better-known political families — to boost his pension by more than $30,000 a year.

The deal that originally benefited Sheahan passed the General Assembly in 2007 and was signed into law by former Gov. Rod Blagojevich, eventually blindsiding the western suburb with a tab of $750,000 in unfunded pension liabilities. […]

Sheahan was the only person to benefit from the 2007 provision that was tucked into a larger bill aimed at safeguarding the pensions of police widows. That bill was sponsored by state Rep. Robert Molaro (D-Chicago), who has since left the Legislature and signed on as a contract lobbyist for Oak Brook,

In short, the law that benefited Sheahan created a now-expired six-month window for members of one public-sector pension fund (the Municipal Employees’ Annuity and Benefit Fund or MEABF) to transfer credit into another (the “Sheriff’s Law Enforcement Personnel” program of IMRF) if they participated in both.

That enabled Sheahan to shift five years of credit from MEABF into IMRF so he could retire in 2011 with roughly 24 years of combined service. Without the legislation, he would have had fewer than 19 years of service and retired with two pensions worth a collective $45,000 rather than one worth $77,000.

Sheahan, who worked for Oak Brook for six years, is drawing that pension now on top of a $65,000-a-year salary he draws for being the part-time village manager of Lyons. […]

Even though the state Constitution bars any diminishment of pensions, Dillard said he believes his measure will pass constitutional muster and said that it is patterned after November legislation Gov. Pat Quinn signed that repealed the pensions of a pair of Illinois Federation of Teachers lobbyists, Steve Preckwinkle and David Piccioli.

* From the legislation…

“Section 1. Retroactive repeal. This amendatory Act of the 97th General Assembly hereby repeals and declares void ab initio Section 8-226.7 of the Illinois Pension Code as contained in Section 5 of Public Act 95-504 as that Section furnishes no vested rights because it violates multiple provisions of the 1970 Illinois Constitution, including, but not limited to, Article VIII, Section 1 and Article IV, Section 13. Upon receipt of an application within 6 months after the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 97th General Assembly, the System shall immediately refund any contributions made by or on behalf of a person to receive service credit pursuant to the text set forth in said Section 8-226.7, as well as any amount determined by the Board to be equal to the investment earned by the System on those contributions since their receipt.

“Void ab initio” means that a “contract is null from the beginning if it seriously offends law or public policy in contrast to a contract which is merely voidable at the election of one of the parties to the contract.”