Reactions were mixed among local officials to the idea of taking a 5 percent pay cut and paying either 15 or 20 percent for their health insurance as proposed last week by state Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop (R-Rochester).
‘I think it’s a good idea. I don’t have a problem with it,? said Ron Davis, director of the Oxford Township Parks and Recreation Department. ‘If everybody can give a little bit and help out, I think it helps us all in the long run.?
‘That would cripple a lot of folks,? said Oxford Fire Chief Pete Scholz. ‘You’re almost putting people back into poverty again when you take 20-25 percent off somebody’s pay. That would be hard to take for a lot of people.?
Some viewed the proposals as a step in the right direction and a reflection of their own beliefs.
‘I appreciate where Sen. Bishop’s coming from. He’s trying to cut the expenses instead of raising taxes. I, for one, am in favor of that,? said Oxford Village Councilman Tony Albensi. ‘In these times of declining property values, declining revenues, my feeling has always been cut expenses before you start raising taxes. That will always be my philosophy. I would like to see more local units of government take it upon themselves to do it.?
Others viewed the proposals as an unwarranted intrusion from above.
‘I would really be livid with that because I don’t think the state has the right to mandate what we’re doing at the local level. That would be just like having Washington say everybody is getting a 10 percent pay cut,? said Michele Presley, director of the Addison Township Public Library. ‘The people at the local governing level are very responsive to what’s going on in our community. I don’t think Lansing has the right to dictate what goes on at the local level. I don’t see where we should get punished because they’re fiscally irresponsible.?
Oakland County Commissioner Brad Jacobsen (R-Oxford) said reducing public servants? pay across-the-board by a fixed percentage is the ‘easiest way? to make cuts.
‘I’m not sure about 5 percent,? he noted. ‘I might be looking more for 2 or 3 percent. Something along those lines.?
As for the proposed mandatory health care contribution, Jacobsen, who owns Jacobsen’s Flowers in Lake Orion, said, ‘Most employers these days are probably having some kind of co-pay. I know we do here. The state’s got to do something.?
‘I would think it would be a fairly reasonable proposal. It would be a quick fix,? Jacobsen continued. ‘And it’s the only proposal that’s come out of there (Lansing) that’s made much sense, that’s going to show immediate results.?
But for government officials whose livelihood would be greatly impacted, the proposals don’t seem very reasonable.
‘I would not be in favor of it,? said Oxford Township Clerk Curtis Wright. ‘It’s a big hit for me personally,?
Under the proposals, Wright’s annual pay of $50,577 would be reduced by $2,529 while his health insurance contribution would go from zero to $3,744 per year.
‘I understand others in community have had to make adjustments because of the economy, but on the other hand, you’re trying to do the best you can for yourself, your family and your community,? Wright noted.
As it stands right now, public servants working for Oxford Township, the Oxford Public Library and the Oxford Fire Department contribute nothing toward their health insurance coverage.
Oxford Village employees contribute $10 per month to their health savings accounts. Addison Township employees currently pay 13 percent of their health insurance premiums.
Although employees of the Oxford Township Parks and Recreation Department make no financial contributions to their health insurance, Office Administrator/Senior Citizen Coordinator Becky Paquin noted the agency has switched to a new type of plan that will save between $9,500 and $18,000.
Under this Health Reimbursement Arrangement as it’s called, employees are reimbursed for qualified medical expenses using funds set aside by the parks/rec. department.
Any money paid out by parks and rec. that isn’t used by the employees by the end of the year goes back to the department’s budget. ‘It’s actually a pretty good deal that saves us money,? Paquin noted.
Oxford teachers make no payments toward their health insurance, but Jim Gibbons, president of the Oxford Education Association (the teachers union), explained they’ve given up things to keep it that way.
‘We’ve made concessions in other areas, so we are not currently contributing to the health care,? he said.
Rather than pay a percentage of their insurance premiums, Gibbons said the teachers agreed to take smaller wage increases and increase the amount of their co-pays for prescriptions and visits to the doctor.
‘We didn’t take a wage cut, but our percent increase would not be consistent with what a cost of living increase would be,? he said.
Oxford Superintendent Dr. William Skilling favors the idea of public servants paying up to 20 percent toward their health insurance.
‘On the health care proposal, I really support that. As a matter of fact, I was advocating for them to do that before the bill got introduced,? he said. ‘I think we do have to give back. I think by all of us contributing to our health care, it will force all of us to be more conscientious about managing the cost of that health care.?
‘If it’s left up to just contract negotiations, then not everybody at the table is going to be equally motivated about managing their health care costs,? Skilling noted.
However, Skilling isn’t sure if a 5 percent across-the-board pay cut is the right approach.
‘In general I support that every employee needs to give back at all levels of government,? he said. ‘I don’t know if it’s 5 percent or 10 percent. Each individual type of government may need to be different. You can’t apply simple solutions to complex problems . . . It may be that’s the right amount and it may be too much in some places.?
Scholz believes such a pay cut in conjunction with the increased health care contributions would drive qualified people away from working in the public sector.
‘If you start dropping everybody’s pay by 25 percent, you’re going to lose qualified people,? the chief said. ‘Why would you want to go to work for the government or for the municipality when you’re going to be making 25 percent less than anybody else in the normal job atmosphere??
‘You’re going to hinder yourself,? Scholz continued. ‘You’re going to get untrained, uncertified people that can’t get jobs other places doing some extremely important jobs because they’re willing to work for less. That’s a huge concern.?
Addison officials believe they and their employees have already sacrificed for the good of the township and its taxpayers.
‘In my mind, Addison was already proactive in that because we’ve already had employees participating in the cost of health care and we’ve already frozen wages,? said Addison Clerk Pauline Bennett.
Addison’s employees and elected officials currently pay an average of 13 percent of their health care cost. Altogether, they pay $11,576 of the $89,050 the township spends annually on health insurance.
‘The employees are already paying a portion of their health and if they take another hit (in wages), it’s going to be rough,? Bennett said.
Of the elected officials, only the clerk has health insurance through the township. The supervisor and treasurer have chosen to receive in lieu of payments, which are added to their paychecks and amount to $12,438 annually for both of them combined.
On the salary side, Addison’s supervisor, clerk and treasurer have been conservative when it comes to raises. They’ve had four raises in the past 10 years, the last one being a 3-percent hike in 2006.
Some officials view the proposed constitutional amendments as the state government overstepping its bounds.
‘It’s big government telling individual communities what to do again,? said Addison Supervisor Bruce Pearson. ‘You have to look at each individual case. I hate to lump them altogether.?
‘I have an issue with taking this out of local control,? Gibbons said. ‘I’m not saying there aren’t things at the local level that need to be done. I don’t like the state coming in and saying here’s what you’re going to do.?
Gibbons believes the state is merely ‘passing the buck? as opposed to addressing and solving the real problem.
‘The whole tax structure is screwed up in this state and rather than addressing that fundamental problem, they’re saying let’s do this,? he said.
Gibbons indicated the state is taxing a manufacturing economy that no longer exists. That’s why he’s a proponent of reducing the sales tax and spreading it out to include things like services.
‘I know that’s not a popular thing at all,? he said. ‘I wouldn’t be personally thrilled about doing that, but there’s too much imbalance in the system right now.?
That’s an idea Skilling also supports.
‘The (state) government’s not willing to do their part,? he said. ‘They’re trying to pass on 100 percent of the problem to the local level, the local governments, the local schools, etc.?
Given Michigan’s economy is ‘much more service-oriented today,? Skilling said it makes sense to lower the sales tax to 5 percent and spread it across ‘nonessential services.?
But the state government is unwilling to do that because ‘it’s not popular to say we’re going to redo the tax structure.?
‘They’re not willing to do the real hard work of fixing the funding structure,? Skilling said.