Once again the Indianola Board of Aldermen decided to table a decision on what to do regarding employees’ contributions toward their healthcare premiums.
The issue arose at previous sessions after the city fathers received notice of a substantial increase in its annual payment. The issue was tabled last session because the city leaders could not arrive at a consensus. There was talk of having the employees pay a portion of the increase since the citizens are currently paying 100 percent of the city employees’ premium; however the board could not agree on an amount.
City Clerk LaShanda Moore was asked to put together a spreadsheet that would summarize how much each employee could be expected to contribute at varying percentages and present it at the July 8 session.
After an extended discussion, they voted to table it and it was suggested that the lawgivers should first call the employees together and share with them what their portions could be in the event the city decides to go ahead with a plan to require a match.
Alderman Marvin Elder said, "We have some preliminary figures, what we may need to do is bring all of the city employees together and educate them upon exactly what we are talking about—the pros and the cons—because a lot of them might not really understand that big package of benefits we are giving them."
Elder surmised that making the employees aware of how much the city is paying on their behalf in comparison to the smaller amount they would be asked to contribute may let them see the benefit of retaining the coverage especially after the question was raised of whether an employee could opt out of the coverage.
The option to opt out is only one moot sub point of the discussion since according to Mayor Steve Rosenthal no decision has been made on how the city will move forward. “Nothing is decided, we’re just having conversation,” Rosenthal said.
The answer to the question of whether an employee would be able to opt out of the insurance coverage if the city required them to pay a portion of the increase is yes, according to Rosenthal, which then raised the question of whether they can be reimbursed for any difference, and according to him, they cannot.
Rosenthal said, "I disagree with allowing employees to opt out. I think we need to come up with something in the middle where all of the employees can afford to do something. I don't think we will be good stewards of our employees if we allow them to opt out.”
The aldermen also discussed how it would affect anyone who decided to stay with the coverage.
Alderman Gary Fratesi said there are only two ways to pay for the increase. “One is taxes, one is finances and we're low on the finance side,” he said.
Elder iterated that the “finer things in life” cost more. “And you've got to understand sometimes you have to bump up taxes. People don't like to talk about it, elected official scared to talk about it, but it's the truth.”
Fratesi expressed that he was in favor of the employees paying a portion of the cost, and feels it should be an equal percentage across the spectrum.
However, Rosenthal contends that would result in a heavier burden on those in the higher wage brackets. He again suggested a cap on how much should be deducted from a person’s pay in the event of an insurance match. “No, we don't need a cap,” Fratesi returned.
He said, “The more you make, the more you pay that's what the IRS does.” He stressed that he was more concerned about the persons who are making $8 an hour than those who were higher-paid. Referring to Moore’s report, Fratesi said, “I'm worried about the people on the first page, not the people on the last page.”
His assertion is that four people—on the last page—have a combined salary of over $200,000. He added that if it was legal to do, he would add a larger percentage to the top group and a lesser percentage to the lower paid. Rosenthal said he prefers an option where no one person pays the bulk of the expense.
He argues that the higher paid employees are paying more. "No, they are not paying more, they are paying the exact same percentage," Fratesi said.
Based on the supplied information the premium increased by $106.97 per month, per employee, which equates to $129,647.64 based on 101 full-time city employees. At a four percent match, depending on the employee’s wages, a city worker would be expected to contribute within the range of $771 to $2,230 annually towards their insurance premium.
Also up for consideration is if it is fair to lay the entire monetary burden on the rest of the citizens. Noting that the workers are citizens too, Rosenthal said, “The problem is we have to take care of all of the citizens.” He reasoned that the board’s decision affects everybody.
Alderman Ruben Woods suggested tightening down on the budget more and Fratesi recommended working towards getting higher trade-in values on the police vehicles as a way of saving money.
Chief Edrick Hall cautioned the city decision-makers about the effect their choices could have on the city’s dedicated law enforcement team especially since neighboring municipalities are paying officers higher wages.
Alderman Darrell Simpson assured the public that the board’s intent was not to be mean, but to find an amicable way to pay for the increase.
Rosenthal reminded the leaders that as elected officials they have certain responsibilities to all of the citizens and that doing what’s best for the city “means everybody.”
Elder added, “We better make doggone sure we take care of all city employees and their families and I'm going to stand up for that.”
Rosenthal and Fratesi both thanked and praised Moore for putting together the report.
