This is a continuation from part two of this interview…
D: And it would be helpful going ahead to have the letter that was sent out to everyone, to have a copy of the legal opinion which states… I think what you said is that you must treat everyone the same and cannot grandfather former employees. You said you have a legal opinion that states that.
M: Yep…
D: And that would be helpful to have so that we have language for that…
M: Who’s “we?”
D: The Valley Advocate.
M: Okay.
D: It would be helpful to know when the Human Resources Director issued the policy to department heads, what form was handed out to department heads.
M: It looked just like this, and it was handed out, effective date was 11/22/05, and the revision date 12/08/06, so we handed it out at some department head meeting during that period of time.
D: So it would be helpful to know when the department…
M: We don’t keep that tight of an agenda so I can’t give you that, it’s not a public meeting, we’re not required to take minutes, and we don’t.
D: So…
M: So I can tell you that she gave it out.
D: So the policy was crafted in November of ‘06…
M: ‘05.
D: ’05, and you said amended…
M: ‘05. Yes, there was a revision made, and I’m not sure exactly what it was, but we made some revisions.
D: You don’t now why or…
M: Daryl, look around the room, there’s a lot of paperwork that comes across my desk.
D: There is.
M: I can’t remember every single reason why everything happened. I can certainly check on that, but again, the goal here is to reduce the city and the taxpayers liability going forward. I have talked about this in the Finance Committee meetings. We’ve talked about GASB 45 extensively over time, and I’ve talked about unfunded liability.
We have struggled to pay city employees what we think they are worth on the market. And if we’re paying health insurance for people who have only worked here for a relatively short time, that’s less money that we have available to pay our current employees the kind of raises that we deserve, that they deserve. That’s a concern because we are struggling in the market to pay for people, you know, to pay for good employees to work here. Our health insurance policy, I think you may have seen in the Springfield Union, we’ve done a very good job of controlling health insurance costs compared to our neighbors. I think we were fourth from the last in terms of increases in health insurance.
D: I didn’t know that. So let me ask you the same question…
M: Well, let me just say this. Our city employees have worked very closely with us in trying to contain health insurance costs. We have a representative on the IAC…
D: So that’s the question actually, because you asked me “who’s we?” and I’ll ask the same question because you said, “We’ve contacted other communities to see what they are doing” but you said that the insurance advisory…
M: I’ve talked to other people who are in other communities about this, and the Insurance Advisory Committee was presented with this when we reduced the retirees share of health insurance from 90 to 80% just like…
D: And they approved it?
M: Well, it’s not theirs to approve or not approve…
D: Okay, so what did they…
M: …but they were asked for advice on the policy…
D: …and they gave advice?
M: And they gave advice, yeah.
D: So, what is there to assume there? You spoke to them about this policy. They didn’t have any formal say in the policy or vote in the policy. I can’t say that they endorsed the policy because they didn’t vote for it…
M: Well, because we don’t have…
D: I could say that they were aware of the policy…
M: Yeah, they were aware of the policy. My memory is that there were no strong objections to the policy, quite frankly. We had a long extensive discussion about moving retirees from 90 to 80% when we negotiated with all our unions, and the Insurance Advisory Committee certainly understood that change as well. The way that our government is set up is that the mayor and the executive branch of government does make these decisions. There are some advisory committees that weigh in and these certainly also…
D: So ultimately, as I reported earlier, the decision is yours…
M: Yes, absolutely.
D: So when you say that “we contacted other communities” you’re meaning your staff, you and your staff…
M: Yeah, the executive branch.
D: And you have two mayoral aides.
M: The previous finance director [John Musante] was involved in this decision. There were a lot of people involved in this decision.
D: So Glenda had been involved in this decision as well?
M: Sure, sure, yeah. Yeah.
D: So when you say, “we” you’re just covering the executive branch…
M: Yes, I’m covering the executive branch of government….
D: So anyone related to your office, basically.
M: Well, anybody who it was in their province to have something to say about this, so that included the city solicitor, it included the HR director, it included the finance director, it included myself.
D: And your mayoral aides as well?
M: They don’t, they don’t…no.
D: I’m trying to establish how you contacted other communities, I guess.
M: It was so long ago. I mean I talk to mayors and other people from other communities all the time and ask them their opinion on various things. I can’t give you the date and time of when I talked to somebody. I talk to people all…
D: But you did it yourself basically, in person…
M: Yes, yes, yes. They have way too much to do to be doing that as well.
D: The activity with the employee from the Academy. You’re going through the legislature, you’re trying to, what did you call it, a Home Rule Petition?
M: It’s called a Home Rule Petition.
D: …to allow that person to buy back into the pension system.
M: Correct.
D: Ah, the question that comes to my mind is: “Will other employees in the future opt not to buy into the city pension system while they’re employed and later come back and try to re-enter the system…”
M: Yeah, I understand why you’re trying to ask that question. That’s a good question.
D: And it seems that that’s what you’re trying to change with the group health insurance benefits policy. You’re trying to prevent people from leaving and then coming back.
M: And I hear what you’re saying, and I think I said this at the council meeting: this is really a unique situation. Anybody who gets regularly hired to work for the city is required to pay into the group health insurance, excuse me, the pension system, it’s not an option for them. They can add deferred comp if they want, but they have to have a minimum pay into the retirement system.
D: So, is there anybody else like the Academy employee?
M: You know we really looked at that question, and really didn’t think that there was anybody else. There may be one other Academy employee, and if that comes to pass, that comes to pass. But nobody else at the Academy fit the requirements except one other employee who didn’t seem to be interested. I also think the parallel situation, and I’ve also said this at the council meeting, is the Forbes Library, where they actually are a separate entity. We don’t run their payroll. They run their own payroll but they’re on our health insurance and on the pension system. Just like the Academy where they ran their own payroll, they run the health insurance, they have access to our health insurance but not our retirement. It’s a unique situation. I met with the Retirement Board. They understood that it was a unique situation and were supportive of the petition to allow that to happen, and I also say that the previous director definitely was on the retirement system because I saw that the documented evidence that he had been on. So, it seemed like that should have been corrected a long time ago…
D: Okay. So you can’t foresee that as…
M: I can’t see it happening with anybody else, I really can’t. I mean small New England cities have lots of interesting kinds of arrangements, you know. Lilly Library — those folks don’t work for us, aren’t on our health insurance, we don’t even own the building. But we have an arrangement with them if they’re a public library, right?
D: Right.
M: Childs Park is a city park, but it’s not really, we don’t own it.
D: Right.
M: So, you know there’s all these interesting arrangements, but I think this parallel one doesn’t exist anywhere else really. We already had given them the health insurance benefit — and that was before my time — and so I’m just here now trying to say “okay, what’s the fair thing to do” and fairness is always relative, you know. But we have, I will say that there have been people who have come to us and said, “You know I worked for the city in a grant funded position, and now I’m working for another municipality, can I buy back that time?” and they have been able to buy back that time. We’ve done that with people. So, the board has to vote to allow them to buy it back. The other thing is the state government has allowed people to buy back military time. Anybody who says “I have the military time,” they’re allowed to buy it back. So, there are circumstances where people are able to do that.
D: Well, you’ve given me a lot to digest, and I guess the requests I would make are…
M: So, lets make a list, so we all agree what they are.
D: The letter that was sent out that I believe you said was sent out to everyone.
M: No, it was a letter to vested employees who had left and not retired.
D: Okay, the legal opinion that you cited regarding grandfathering, and …
M: We know we gave it out, and…
D: The reason I ask that is there doesn’t seem to be any hard evidence that each employee was notified. That’s all I’m just trying to establish.
M: Right.
D: Your opinion…
M: I think it’s very difficult for us to go back and establish what date that was of the Department Head and when we gave it out because we don’t keep hard fast minutes of those meetings. We know what we want to talk about in those meetings and we do that.
D: Sure.
M: So can I establish that? Probably not. And can I guarantee that every single department head hung it up? You’re telling me that you know one, but you’re not willing to tell me who it is. So, I guess one didn’t, but I can’t tell you if anybody else didn’t. But we also know that there are other ways that that information has gotten to employees, and I’m comfortable that anybody who has to make a decision will have the information available to make the decision in the right way.
D: I think one of the issues regarding current employees [is] that may have eight years of service. If they were not made aware of this policy, maybe they’re staying on…
End of Part Three of this Interview
This interview between Daryl LaFleur and Mayor Higgins continues and concludes in part four.
