Greenfield health insurance to increase 15.54 percent, not anticipated 44 percent
Lead Summary
By
Brandy Chandler-brandychandler@gmail.com
Two weeks after they were presented with a possible 44-percent increase to health insurance, the Greenfield City Council has voted on an option that will leave the city with an increase of 15.52 percent.
The council met in a special session Monday night to discuss several financial matters that had been tabled during a Nov. 16 council meeting, including health insurance, pay increases for the chief of police and finance director, as well as ordinances regarding collective bargaining, longevity pay, salaries and benefits, the base pay for non-union employees and an emergency ordinance to increase appropriations in police department accounts.
Council member Harvey Everhart said that in total, the legislation that was considered Monday, if all are eventually passed, will cost the city $86,350.92.
Health Insurance
Council's finance committee has met twice since the Nov. 16 meeting to examine figures regarding the health insurance and to seek out alternatives. On Monday, they voted 5-0 to continue healthcare coverage through Anthem, their existing provider, for the month of December. The extension allows the city time to enter into a contract with the Ohio Plan Healthcare Consortium, Inc.
"After reviewing several employee health insurance plan options, the finance committee believes the Ohio Plan Healthcare Consortium, Inc. is able to provide the best coverage to the city employees at the most reasonable rate," according to an ordinance authorizing City Manager Betty Bishop to enter into a contract with the health insurance company.
Council voted to suspend the rules and passed the ordinance 5-0 as an emergency.
The city previously stated that the proposed 44-percent increase was a shock, as the city had seen reductions in their health insurance premiums over the last two years. The finance committee has since discussed alternatives to finding a cheaper rate, such as contacting additional brokers and providers and potentially putting the insurance out for bid, which has not been done in recent years.
Everhart said for the month of December it will cost the taxpayers, above the premium, $3,145.36 and will cost the employees $314.54.
"After the turn of the year, it should even out and be a lot better," said council president Betty Jackman.
Regarding the Ohio Plan, Everhart said the increase to taxpayers for 2011 will be $21,619.08 and the increase to employees will be $2,316.34.
"That is for 19 employees," Everhart said. "The increased cost to the city per employee is $1,137.84, bringing the total health care cost per employee for next year to $9,098.81."
Council member Robert Bergstrom noted those numbers are a lot better than the figures that would have been seen with the 44-percent increase.
Financial Ordinances
The council heard the third reading of an ordinance to "execute a new collective bargaining agreement with the Fraternal Order of Police as amended" and voted 3-2 to pass it. Council members Bergstrom, Betty Jackman and Brenda Losey voted for the legislation, and Everhart and Redenbaugh voted against it.
During an October meeting of council, Everhart had said that Greenfield does not meet the qualifications to be considered a city due to declining populations. Villages are not required to participate in collection bargaining with unions. Had Greenfield not agreed to increases from the Fraternal Order of Police, they would not be in a position to grant increases to other city employees.
On Monday, Everhart explained why he voted against it.
Reading from a spreadsheet he had compiled and distributed to council and administration members, Everhart said, "I'd like to state what the cost of this is going to be to the city, to the taxpayers. For the first year, the cost is going to be $4,397.55. Second year will be $4,837.30. The third year is going to be $5,321.03 ... If any of you folks have a different figure, or something different, please speak up."
Finance Director Karen Daniels said she believed the only difference in her number and Everhart's spreadsheet was that she was looking "at the overall picture, annually, and you are showing only what the increases are."
"It's not a total cost, it's just a difference of what we will be paying next year," Everhart said.
Everhart had figures for each of the financial ordinances that were addressed, and when each piece of legislation was read, he stated his estimate on what it would cost the city.
Council then considered an ordinance regarding longevity, which had been introduced by City Manager Betty Bishop in October. At that time Bishop had said, "When I discussed the concerns that I had with (the related ordinance) with the finance committee, they asked me to look at making some changes. One of their requests was to look at initiating step increases instead of longevity ... "In making this recommendation, I am keeping in mind the FOP freezing wages for a year and non-bargaining employees wages being frozen for two years and longevity cut in half. Since it looks like our finances are stabilizing and in good faith readjusting our pay in a small amount to reflect this stabilization."
According to Everhart's spreadsheet, the ordinance to restore longevity pay, with "pensions and PERS (Public Employees Retirement System) 14 percent" will cost the taxpayers $5,103.57 annually. "It will take one employee, with a longevity pay for 2010, I believe, is $520. Next year, it will go to $1,016 for longevity pay." Council passed the ordinance 3-2 with Everhart and Redenbaugh voting against it.
Council heard the second reading of two ordinances to increase the pay of Chief Hester and finance director Daniels. Everhart said that the raise for Hester adds $1.90 per hour, at a total additional cost of $5,103.57. For Daniels, it is a raise of an additional $4.73 per hour, for a total additional cost of $11,948.74. Bishop had stated that most Greenfield employees are underpaid compared to their counterparts in other cities and villages and suggested the raises because Hester and Daniels each manage employees who make more than they do.
In a separate ordinance, council voted 5-0 to amend an ordinance to increase the hourly base wage of all non-union employees 1 percent for the year 2011. The original ordinance had included additional 1-percent increases for 2012 and 2013. Council then heard the second reading of the amended ordinance. Everhart said the ordinance would be an increase to taxpayers of $4,961.23 for 2011.
In other business, council voted 5-0 to pass an ordinance "settling salaries and wage ranges for the classified and unclassified non-union employees. Everhart said that at this time the ordinance added no additional cost to the city, and there would only be additional costs if a new employee is hired. Council then heard the second reading and voted to suspend the rules and pass, as an emergency, an ordinance updating the floodplain map information per a request from FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency).
Everhart stated toward the end of the meeting that through the ordinances passed or through the second readings of legislation, "It's about 87,000 that we just committed to. I think it's kind of ironic that we do that tonight when the federal government today put a freeze on all raises. But yet, we're adding about $87,000 to our budget."
Citizen Comments
At the end of the meeting, Greenfield resident Eric Coleman addressed council regarding an ordinance that was passed in recent months that limits the number of dogs that may be kept at a residence within the city, and eliminated kennel licenses. Coleman, who said he had a kennel license, said that due to health reasons he was unable to come to council before the ordinance was passed. Council members said that his license will not be "grandfathered in" but that the city and police would work with him to come to some sort of resolution, and encouraged him to get on the agenda for the Dec. 7 regular council meeting.
Two weeks after they were presented with a possible 44-percent increase to health insurance, the Greenfield City Council has voted on an option that will leave the city with an increase of 15.52 percent.
The council met in a special session Monday night to discuss several financial matters that had been tabled during a Nov. 16 council meeting, including health insurance, pay increases for the chief of police and finance director, as well as ordinances regarding collective bargaining, longevity pay, salaries and benefits, the base pay for non-union employees and an emergency ordinance to increase appropriations in police department accounts.
Council member Harvey Everhart said that in total, the legislation that was considered Monday, if all are eventually passed, will cost the city $86,350.92.
Health Insurance
Council's finance committee has met twice since the Nov. 16 meeting to examine figures regarding the health insurance and to seek out alternatives. On Monday, they voted 5-0 to continue healthcare coverage through Anthem, their existing provider, for the month of December. The extension allows the city time to enter into a contract with the Ohio Plan Healthcare Consortium, Inc.
"After reviewing several employee health insurance plan options, the finance committee believes the Ohio Plan Healthcare Consortium, Inc. is able to provide the best coverage to the city employees at the most reasonable rate," according to an ordinance authorizing City Manager Betty Bishop to enter into a contract with the health insurance company.
Council voted to suspend the rules and passed the ordinance 5-0 as an emergency.
The city previously stated that the proposed 44-percent increase was a shock, as the city had seen reductions in their health insurance premiums over the last two years. The finance committee has since discussed alternatives to finding a cheaper rate, such as contacting additional brokers and providers and potentially putting the insurance out for bid, which has not been done in recent years.
Everhart said for the month of December it will cost the taxpayers, above the premium, $3,145.36 and will cost the employees $314.54.
"After the turn of the year, it should even out and be a lot better," said council president Betty Jackman.
Regarding the Ohio Plan, Everhart said the increase to taxpayers for 2011 will be $21,619.08 and the increase to employees will be $2,316.34.
"That is for 19 employees," Everhart said. "The increased cost to the city per employee is $1,137.84, bringing the total health care cost per employee for next year to $9,098.81."
Council member Robert Bergstrom noted those numbers are a lot better than the figures that would have been seen with the 44-percent increase.
Financial Ordinances
The council heard the third reading of an ordinance to "execute a new collective bargaining agreement with the Fraternal Order of Police as amended" and voted 3-2 to pass it. Council members Bergstrom, Betty Jackman and Brenda Losey voted for the legislation, and Everhart and Redenbaugh voted against it.
During an October meeting of council, Everhart had said that Greenfield does not meet the qualifications to be considered a city due to declining populations. Villages are not required to participate in collection bargaining with unions. Had Greenfield not agreed to increases from the Fraternal Order of Police, they would not be in a position to grant increases to other city employees.
On Monday, Everhart explained why he voted against it.
Reading from a spreadsheet he had compiled and distributed to council and administration members, Everhart said, "I'd like to state what the cost of this is going to be to the city, to the taxpayers. For the first year, the cost is going to be $4,397.55. Second year will be $4,837.30. The third year is going to be $5,321.03 ... If any of you folks have a different figure, or something different, please speak up."
Finance Director Karen Daniels said she believed the only difference in her number and Everhart's spreadsheet was that she was looking "at the overall picture, annually, and you are showing only what the increases are."
"It's not a total cost, it's just a difference of what we will be paying next year," Everhart said.
Everhart had figures for each of the financial ordinances that were addressed, and when each piece of legislation was read, he stated his estimate on what it would cost the city.
Council then considered an ordinance regarding longevity, which had been introduced by City Manager Betty Bishop in October. At that time Bishop had said, "When I discussed the concerns that I had with (the related ordinance) with the finance committee, they asked me to look at making some changes. One of their requests was to look at initiating step increases instead of longevity ... "In making this recommendation, I am keeping in mind the FOP freezing wages for a year and non-bargaining employees wages being frozen for two years and longevity cut in half. Since it looks like our finances are stabilizing and in good faith readjusting our pay in a small amount to reflect this stabilization."
According to Everhart's spreadsheet, the ordinance to restore longevity pay, with "pensions and PERS (Public Employees Retirement System) 14 percent" will cost the taxpayers $5,103.57 annually. "It will take one employee, with a longevity pay for 2010, I believe, is $520. Next year, it will go to $1,016 for longevity pay." Council passed the ordinance 3-2 with Everhart and Redenbaugh voting against it.
Council heard the second reading of two ordinances to increase the pay of Chief Hester and finance director Daniels. Everhart said that the raise for Hester adds $1.90 per hour, at a total additional cost of $5,103.57. For Daniels, it is a raise of an additional $4.73 per hour, for a total additional cost of $11,948.74. Bishop had stated that most Greenfield employees are underpaid compared to their counterparts in other cities and villages and suggested the raises because Hester and Daniels each manage employees who make more than they do.
In a separate ordinance, council voted 5-0 to amend an ordinance to increase the hourly base wage of all non-union employees 1 percent for the year 2011. The original ordinance had included additional 1-percent increases for 2012 and 2013. Council then heard the second reading of the amended ordinance. Everhart said the ordinance would be an increase to taxpayers of $4,961.23 for 2011.
In other business, council voted 5-0 to pass an ordinance "settling salaries and wage ranges for the classified and unclassified non-union employees. Everhart said that at this time the ordinance added no additional cost to the city, and there would only be additional costs if a new employee is hired. Council then heard the second reading and voted to suspend the rules and pass, as an emergency, an ordinance updating the floodplain map information per a request from FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency).
Everhart stated toward the end of the meeting that through the ordinances passed or through the second readings of legislation, "It's about 87,000 that we just committed to. I think it's kind of ironic that we do that tonight when the federal government today put a freeze on all raises. But yet, we're adding about $87,000 to our budget."
Citizen Comments
At the end of the meeting, Greenfield resident Eric Coleman addressed council regarding an ordinance that was passed in recent months that limits the number of dogs that may be kept at a residence within the city, and eliminated kennel licenses. Coleman, who said he had a kennel license, said that due to health reasons he was unable to come to council before the ordinance was passed. Council members said that his license will not be "grandfathered in" but that the city and police would work with him to come to some sort of resolution, and encouraged him to get on the agenda for the Dec. 7 regular council meeting.
[[In-content Ad]]