2006-10-23 Regular Meeting, Public Hearing and Workshop Meeting of La Porte City Council

Browse Search

City Council Regular Meeting, Workshop Meeting and Public Hearing —October 23, 2006 Page S Mayor Porter questioned concerns on the nay votes. Rigby stated if retiree not costing the city more, retiree shouldn't have to pay the same as someone that is costing the city more money. Moser stated he does not understand where the 167% figure is coming from and has nothing to base the figure on. He does know for a fact when an employee reaches age 65 the insurance is supplemented. Human Resources Manager Robert Swanagan explained Neal Welch compiled a chart and looked at active versus retiree over under age 65 the cost was right at $387.00. An employee under 65 for a current active employee cost was $237.00. Someone 65 or older cost was $197.00 (he believes) a significant difference. Moser advised he was not comfortable with the many figures being discussed. Interim City Manager John Joerns advised he would resend the information provided by Neal Welch. 6. Recommends both Incentive Plans as potential Recruitment Incentives with the City Council determining which one it wants to adopt, or a combination of both. Motion was made by Council member Rigby not to offer incentives to new employees if incentives are not offered to current employees. Second by Council member Moser. The motion carried. Ayes: Mosteit, Beasley, Moser, Rigby, Engelken, Ebow, Clausen, Griffiths and Mayor. Nays: Abstain: None Council directed Staff to bring back incentives for both current active employees and new employees. 7. Recommends the current method of making the Retiree Calculations continue with clarification of language regarding City budgeted cost and that the coverage % discount amount applies only for retirees, not dependents. Also, the proposed Calculator that Neal is developing be implemented to allow any employee to be able to get an estimate of their insurance cost and their dependents cost at the current year budgeted City cost and for one additional year. Councilman Beasley and Moser requested Mr. Swanagan to explain the above recommendation. Mr. Swanagan explained an employee would have the ability to enter their information into a system and get all calculations previously discussed like combination of 20/80 years age etc. Neal Welch previously provided a format for four different plans that would determine the premium cost for employee and dependents as a retiree. One additional year would be added but the year would only be an estimate due to it being tied to the annual budget dollar allocated by the city. Councilman Rigby requested clarification on the city budget cost and the amount an employee would pay before and after retirement.