Watch group sues Phoenix chief for double dipping

PHOENIX — A public interest group filed a lawsuit against Phoenix police Chief Jack Harris and the city’s pension board, saying taxpayers are outraged that Harris is collecting pension benefits and a yearly salary.

Washington, D.C.-based Judicial Watch filed the taxpayer lawsuit Wednesday in Maricopa County Superior Court over the issue — a practice known as double-dipping — on behalf of five Phoenix taxpayers, including three current Phoenix police officers who pay into the pension system.

“It’s a lot of money and it’s a waste of taxpayer funds,” said Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch. “Our taxpayer clients don’t want to see their money being misspent, and frankly, the chief and the pension board ought to know better.”

Phoenix police Detective James Holmes said Harris would not comment on the lawsuit. “He hasn’t even had the chance to look at it yet,” Holmes said.

Harris has said in the past that his transition was verified by the state retirement board and that a gap in leadership of the police force could have proved costly for the city.

Donna Buelow, retirement administrator at the pension board, did not immediately return a call for comment.

Harris retired in January 2007 and began collecting his $90,000-a-year pension before quickly transitioning from police chief to a position called public-safety manager, performing largely the same job in the nearly three years since and getting a salary for it.

Fitton said that’s in violation of an Arizona law that says if someone retires from the police force and subsequently becomes employed in the same position by the same employer, they can’t get pension benefits while collecting a salary.

The lawsuit against Harris and the pension board seeks to stop Harris from getting pension benefits as long as he’s serving as police chief and reimburse the five taxpayers named in the suit for their costs and attorneys’ fees associated with the suit.

Judicial Watch had asked the Arizona Attorney General’s Office to sue Harris and the pension board, but the office declined, citing budget cuts.

“These cuts have forced significant staff reductions that in turn force us to carefully evaluate the litigation our office undertakes,” Donald Conrad, chief counsel in the Attorney General’s Office’s criminal division, wrote in a Sept. 25 letter to Judicial Watch. “We believe our resources can be better used to address other matters of concern to our citizens.”