The Dunkirk Common Council tabled a local law on insurance benefits for full-time elected officials Tuesday.

The council voted unanimously to table a resolution that was apparently put forth by Mayor Kate Wdowiasz’s administration. The move to table came after council heard criticism of the proposed law by three current and former city officials.

Wdowiasz said the law was intended to rescind and replace a 1992 law concerning the benefits. She stated that the state Comptroller’s Office recommended a legal clarification of elected city officials’ insurance benefit packages.

“It does not reduce the compensation package. It clarifies what was expected. … We are not changing the compensation. The compensation will remain the same, the option is, you take the insurance or you don’t. I, myself, choose to take the insurance. It’s a personal choice,” the mayor said.

Practically speaking, the law would currently cover just two people: Wdowiasz and City Assessor Erica Munson. Munson was one of a trio who criticized the proposed law during a public hearing before the council meeting opened.

“The facts here are straightforward and documented. From February 2021 through December 2024 the insurance payout premium was paid consistently on the last Thursday of each month without interruption. This established a clear and uniform administrative practice. In January 2025, the buyout was withheld — but only as to my benefit,” Munson said.

“That action was subsequently reviewed, reversed and corrected in February 2025,” she continued. “After that correction, the city resumed the regular last Thursday payment schedule for the remainder of the 2025 calendar year.”

However, Munson said that changed again Jan. 8 when she was told she would not get an insurance buyout. “At that moment, no local law had been adopted modifying the benefit,” she said. “One week later, payments were issued to others. Mine was not.”

Munson said her main concern was not the timing of any single payment, “but whether the law is being applied consistently and perspectively required. … Administrative action should not precede the legislative authority required to support it.”

She concluded, “I respectfully request that this body carefully evaluate whether (the law) is being applied retroactively in practice, whether unequal treatment has occurred, and whether the city’s actions are fully aligned with governing New York law and its own established practice matters.”

Munson’s disdain for Wdowiasz is not new — exactly one year ago, she suggested that the mayor resign or the council conduct a no-confidence vote in her. The assessor later continued her criticism of Wdowiasz’s mayorship during the public comment portion of the council meeting.

Two former city officials joined Munson in criticizing the proposed benefits law. Ex-Councilwoman Abigail Zatorski said the proposed change was both improper and illegal because it fails to follow the city charter.

Christine Pinkoski, briefly the city fiscal affairs officer, echoed Zatorski in saying the benefits law didn’t follow the charter. They stated the law should have been changed by last June in order to have any real effect — if it passes now, it won’t go into effect until after the next elections for assessor and mayor.

“If you require your employees to pay a percentage of your health insurance, you too should require it of yourself,” Pinkoski opined. “However, this local law states that the insurance will be offered at no cost to the officials.”

She said elimination of cash buyouts also eliminates any cost savings that could occur. Pinkoski noted there was no estimated cost or savings attached to the law, and called for such information to be publicized for future laws.

Just prior to council’s tabling of the law, Councilman-at-Large and Finance Committee chairman Nick Weiser sought to “clarify a few matters that have generated some confusion.”

He confirmed that the law concerns the fringe benefit packages for full time elected city officials. “It does not apply to city employees generally and it does not attempt to amend or override any collective bargaining agreements.”

Weiser said Insurance buyout discussions concerning city employees “are entirely separate.” Council has taken no action so far on that, and “any administrative decisions or negotiations in that area are not actions of this body.”