BrownDeerNOW
search all things local
     
Blog Home |        Welcome to MyCommunityNOW - Blogs Sign in | Join

The Vanguard

Jefferson Davis is a longtime resident of Menomonee Falls. He is the proud parent of two wonderful boys. He enjoys singing, volunteering, reading, gardening, politics, antiques, history, guitar, violin, piano, officiating, helping neighbors and yard work. He served as Village President of Menomonee Falls from 2003-05. He is a member of Northbrook Church and serves on the Advisory Council for the Salvation Army Rehabilitation Center. He is an independent registered representative practicing in the areas of insurance, investments and retirement.

August 2008 - Posts

"Excuse me, Could you please tell me how to get to the high school?"

By Jefferson Davis
Sunday, Aug 31 2008, 01:36 PM

Destination Signs 

As promised last week, our posting this week will be on destination signs and why Menomonee Falls doesn't have any.

Invariably, no matter what community you travel through today they all seem to have beautiful destination signs to assist visitors and guests in locating attractions within that community. 

How frustrating is it when you are in a hurry to get somewhere and then you have to stop and ask for directions when a destination sign would have been so helpful and much quicker.

Before we delve into that, first some updates from our previous postings because of responses that we have gotten from readers.

Vanguard Updates

We promised to provide you with ongoing updates on local issues and follow ups to our postings to keep readers informed about what their local government is up to.

So often, taxpayers are unfortunately and unnecessarily put in a position of being reactive instead of proactive with their local government by design of that government due to the lack of coverage by the media and press or by that government not utilizing the resources (website, newspapers, mailings, newsletters, cable access, community group meetings, focus groups, fliers, water/sewer bills, etc.) available to them to keep citizens informed of Village Board policy and how their taxes are being spent. 

The Vanguard wants to be proactive instead of reactive for the taxpayers of Menomonee Falls.

Thank you for your phone calls, tips, information and comments.  We appreciate your input and will continue to follow up on those leads.

Garbage Financials Update...The Vanguard has been asking the Village Manager's Office for the 2006-07 taxpayer fees paid to Waste Management for garbage collection and Waste Management's payments to the Village for tipping fees for over a year now.

The Village Manager's Office refuses to disclose that information because of renegotiations with Waste Management to expand the size and life of the dump in Menomonee Falls which we were told was scheduled to close in 2014 because of DNR permit purposes.

In documents released from the Village, the taxpayers paid an initial $1.2 million in new taxes to have their garbage picked up which used to be part of property tax bills until 2006 when the Village Manager created a new tax for garbage pick up and the Village Board went against the citizen's wishes to impose this new tax starting in 2007.

The new tax, which is in addition to existing property taxes, started at $85 per household in 2007 or a cumulative of $1.2 million for the entire village and is indexed at 3% a year without any vote by the Village Board. 

This is the beginning of a slippery slope like the City of Milwaukee who has implemented these extra taxes as "fees" over the last 10 years that now include the following fees on sewer and water bills above and beyond normal property taxes:

  • Ice and snow removal
  • Solid Waste Charge
  • Storm Water Charge
  • Local Sewage Charge

Property tax increases in the region have averaged 6.1% annually in the last two years.  Click here (http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=778810) to see how Menomonee Falls has fared during that time.  It may surprise you how much taxes have gone up under the Governor's and Village Board's Tax Levy Freezes the last two years reversing the lowering of taxes in 2003-04.  Only in Wisconsin can an increase in taxes be considered a freeze. 

We don't need any new taxes especially those that are indexed automatically without a vote by the Village Board.  We need to have a Village Board that will find ways to reduce spending first just like homeowners and businesses do every day that will automatically lower taxes instead of increasing taxes without voting on it.

The tax per household will grow, without any vote by the Village Board, to $98.55 or $1,391,128 cumulatively by 2013 and $114.26 or $1,612,695 by 2018. 

This is just like the State Indexed Motor Fuel Tax that was eliminated (the indexing) recently because the Governor and the Legislature didn't have to vote on the increases as part of the budget process but reaped the rewards of taking more of the taxpayer's money without them ever really knowing about it (http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:LKgyKDYqOQwJ:www.legis.state.wi.us/LRB/pubs/Lb/06Lb2.pdf+state+indexed+gasoline+tax+wisconsin&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=5&gl=us).  

Just like all innocent government programs that start out with hidden taxes to pay for spending programs that at the time seem to be appropriate and justified, the State Indexed Motor Fuel Tax started out at $.02 a gallon in 1925 and is now $.30 a gallon.  If no one is watching the store, more and more of this type of taxation without representation will continue.

If a democrat governor and a democrat controlled senate can eliminate the indexing of the State Motor Fuel Tax to support their sometimes out of control spending habits, can't Menomonee Falls do the same with our Village Board to bring us tax relief from having our garbage picked up by a company (Waste Management) that stands to make millions off of us every year at our expense? 

Of course we can. 

We just need the right leaders in the right place at the right time to do so before it's too late and a deal is cut with Waste Management without the taxpayers knowing about it and once again the community will be put in a reactive position instead of a proactive one when it may too late after the contract is signed and approved by the Village Board with little or no public input.  

The dump was scheduled to close in 2014 as part of the 2004 agreement between the Village Board and Waste Management until it was discovered by several new Village Board Members at the time that our community was not told the truth by previous and some current members of the Village Board about the $42 million obligation to the taxpayers for the new library, village hall and police station as part of the Municipal Facilities Fund.  

The community was told of course by previous and current Village Board Members that the $42 million obligation was not going to cost the taxpayers "one penny" because Waste Management was going to pick up the tab with tipping fees paid to the Village.

As we have learned, this was not true and no one was held accountable for this gross negligence and what appears to be deliberate oversight.

Instead, the remainder of this $42 million obligation, which was known to be $17 million but was purposely kept from the public's knowledge, was going to secretly show up on property tax bills starting in 2015-16 through 2022 to the tune of $800-$900 for the average homeowner to pay off the $17 million debt service when most everyone would have forgotten about it.

Because of this discovery, the new Village Manager told members of The Vanguard in a meeting from over a year ago that he was immediately given an edict from the Village Board to "fix" this and that is why negotiations were reopened with Waste Management in 2007-08 to expand the size of the dump and to extend its life.

The Vanguard will continue to ask the Village Manager for the garbage financials in hopes of letting the public know the true impact of the renegotiated agreement with Waste Management and the Village Board before it's too late like it was in 1994 and 2004.

If you want your garbage tax to continue to be indexed without a vote by the Village Board, then do nothing and your taxes will continue to go up without a vote by the Village Board without justifying the expenditures. 

If you want your garbage to be picked up for free with immediate tax relief of $85 per household and also have Waste Management pay for the $42 million Municipal Facilities Fund like we were told they were going to do in 2003 at the dedication ceremony for the new complex by the former Village President and some current Village Board Members, then contact your Village Board and tell them so by clicking here (http://www.menomonee-falls.org/index.asp?nid=292).

Other communities in very similar situations across America have had their local officials ask Corporate America to pay their fair share for domiciling a business such as Waste Management in their backyard.

The taxpayers are faced with long term issues of environmental, legal, aesthetic and lost tax revenue from the dump when it closes.  This is too important an issue to just have the taxpayers "trusting" their elected officials when the truth was not fully disclosed to the community before with some of the same people who are on the Village Board yet today. 

We can, should and must do the same for the taxpayers of Menomonee Falls with the following examples that have been brought to the attention of The Vanguard by readers to help us get there:

Remember the following information about Waste Management (www.wm.com) as of 12-31-07:

  • Total Revenue: $13.31 Billion
  • Net Income: $1.16 Billion
  • More than 47,000 employees      
  • Some 277 landfills
  • 5 year projected growth rate 10.89% (www.ameritrade.com stock symbol WM)
  • $17.9 billion market cap

We will let you know before it's too late this time.

Police Department computer concerns...The Vanguard has also been asked to look into two extremely expensive computer programs (The Phoenix and The Enforcer) in the Police Department that were purchased by the taxpayers, recommended by the former Police Chief in 2004 and apparently, from what we have learned, are working extremely poorly.  So much so that police personnel have to use the former system to get their work done.  Other communities around the state purchased these programs and are experiencing the same problems.

The police chief has responded to our questions, but requires more time before we can report to you the details of this apparent failure of a very expensive program(s) purchased by the taxpayers that has not been working very well for the last four (4) years.  We will let you know what we find out once the police chief gets us the information we are looking for.

The Vanguard has also learned there are some rumblings at Village Hall due to excessive smoking breaks between the library and village hall in the courtyard.  

There was an expose done some time ago on City of Milwaukee workers who abused smoking breaks by a local television station.  Let's hope Menomonee Falls doesn't have to go through that to get this corrected.

$5 million unused sick leave lump sum cash payouts to retirees update...A very high ranking Village official contacted The Vanguard last week for minor clarifications for the cash payouts and was extremely polite and professional.

The official asked for confidentiality because in their words, "...still "have to work" for the Village."  The person was very appreciative for their job and benefits.  What a welcomed change.  As Americans, we do have it pretty good and it's nice to know that most people realize that instead of those who tear down our country every chance they get. 

As they say in the movies, "And now it's on to the show."   

Why doesn't Menomonee Falls have Destination Signs?

The Vanguard has noticed through its travels throughout the state that almost every community has destination signs pointing out attractions, schools, churches, parks, swimming pools, museums, libraries, police departments, shopping, etc. 

While not an absolute necessity, the destination signs do provide a visitor or guest to a community a quick reference of how to get somewhere that they may not be familiar with.

The Vanguard has been asking the Village Manager for over a year now if he plans to have destination signs installed in the Falls.

On the advice of the Village Attorney, he states that he doesn't have to respond to that question.  So, we will continue to try and figure out how to get that information from the Village Manager's Office.

This idea was initially brought up five (5) years ago to the Village Board and of course a majority of them deep sixed it because it would "cost" too much and they wanted to know who would install them and maintain them.

The signs are a minimal cost (maybe $2,500) and can easily be installed and kept up with the Village's outstanding Public Works Department.  That's how other communities do it, why can't we?

How silly, when every community in the area has figured out how to "get it done", why is Menomonee Falls once again lagging behind with a concept that is so simple and easily doable while providing a very needed benefit and improved image of our community?

Signs Provide a Sense of Pride and Community

When the names of communities like Cedarburg, Elm Grove, Whitefish Bay, Delafield, Hartland, Dousman, Wales, Lac la Belle and Oconomowoc are mentioned, what is the first thought that comes to mind?

Charm?  Elegance?  Warmth?  Inviting?  Relaxing?  Quaint?  I want to go there?

The competition for the almighty dollar on a daily basis for small businesses is extremely tough.  We should be doing everything as a community to support these small businesses with promotional ideas that would encourage families to get in their cars and drive to the Falls or for those families that live in the Falls to stay here and spend their money instead of taking it to other communities.

How often does someone visit a town and aren't sure where various attractions are?  Think of those who are going somewhere for a school sporting event, a family reunion, a wedding, an anniversary party, a funeral, a picnic, a graduation, shopping or dining and are in a hurry to get there and don't want to stop to ask for directions.

Wouldn't it be nice to have destination signs to help them on their way?

Communities work very hard to provide a well balanced variety of opportunities for its citizens and their guests with various attractions.

The least we could do as a community is to make those guests feel welcomed and appreciated by showing them how to get around our village.

Examples of Other Communities

The Vanguard, in its travels throughout the area and around the state, was able to take some pictures of how other communities showed their pride and assisted visitors by implementing a destination sign program.

Enjoy the examples of other communities:

             

                  

      Greenfield                   New Berlin                Greendale                  Bayside                        Elm Grove

                  ?????????

     Glendale                        Shorewood                  Menomonee Falls

Menomonee Falls has a lot to be proud of that should be promoted to our local citizens as well as those who visit our community or are guests to the Falls.

Our destination signs need to include some of the following to help promote our attractions:

  • Old Falls Village with the Davidson Estate Residence from the Harley Davidson Company that should have been aggressively promoted during the recent 105th Harley Davidson Anniversary but unfortunately wasn't.
  • The Harley Davidson Plant
  • Wells Fargo Funds
  • Kohl's Corporate Center
  • All public and private schools
  • Major parks (Rotary, Menomonee, Little League Complex, Oakwood, Willow wood, Village, Wanaki and North Hills Golf Courses, etc.)
  • Churches
  • Library
  • Shopping Districts
  • Police Station
  • Village Hall
  • Fire Stations
  • Downtown Historic District that desperately needs to be promoted
  • Athletic Field locations (football, soccer, baseball)
  • Restaurant District

Having destination signs would give our community pride and a sense of welcome to those who choose to visit the Falls and will hopefully come back.

What do think? 

Let us know what you think about this idea by using the comment section below to answer our questions.

Question 1

Should Menomonee Falls have destination signs like almost all of our neighboring communities do?

_____yes

_____no

Question  2

With a minimal cost that could be taken out of the "taxpayer's $9 million surplus account", should the Village Board use that money to pay for the signs and have the Village Public Works Department install them?

_____yes

_____no

Contact the Village Board to let them know if you would like destination signs in the Falls by clicking here (http://menomonee-falls.org/index.asp?nid=292).

Next week...How we can make sure voter fraud is not occurring in Menomonee Falls for the September and November 2008 Elections with the Village Clerk's Office?


 

$5 Million Taxpayer Tab for Unused Sick Leave Backdrop Pension Cash Payouts to Retirees

By Jefferson Davis
Wednesday, Aug 20 2008, 10:57 PM

Vanguard Updates

Many thanks for all of the comments, suggestions and ideas for The Vanguard over the last 6-7 weeks.  With this posting, we will have enjoyed over 12,000 hits for our columns so far.  We promise to keep reporting stories in a fair and balanced way to inform the taxpayers who pay the annual $30 million tab for the privilege of living, working and having a business in the Falls as to what is really going on in their community with their Village Government.

The Vanguard has been asked to look into the apparent failure of a costly computer program that the taxpayers were asked to purchase by the former Police Chief in 2004 that requires the Police Department and the Municipal Court to use the "old computer system" for numerous tasks because the new program, The Phoenix, hasn't worked properly for the last four (4) years.

The Vanguard has asked the new police chief for information on this issue and will gladly report the findings once the details are obtained.

US Senator Dirksen Had it Right on Out of Control Government Spending

Everett Dirksen served in the US House of Representatives and the US Senate from 1933-1969 for the State of Illinois.  He was well respected and oversaw many government spending programs in his 36 years of service.

He was most famous for the following quote regarding out of control federal government spending, "A billion here and a billion there and all of sudden it's real money."  Unfortunately, the likes of Senator Dirksen did little to control federal government spending which has greatly contributed to the more than $9 trillion debt that we currently have in America (http://www.askquestions.org/details.php?id=75&gclid=CPfqmOeFn5UCFQQiIgod6gf2aw).

Government at all levels too often fall into this type of thinking because it is so easy to spend someone else's money when there is little or no oversight or accountability for those expenditures for the Village Board to just get along with the unions in hopes of getting re-elected without any challenges for an official's seat or else.

A little known policy of the Village Board for employees is a true reflection of the Board's mentality when it comes to this type of thinking for spending the taxpayer's money with very little if any coverage from the three (3) local newspapers over the last 20-25 years.

Former and disgraced Milwaukee County Executive Tom Ament and his assistants were held accountable for excessive unused sick leave lump sum cash payouts to county retirees in the last 5-6 years that cost the taxpayers of Milwaukee County over $30 million from 2001-2002 and ultimately lead to the resignation of the County Executive and many others who may have been criminally prosecuted for this gross indulgence.

The taxpayers are still paying for these payouts today and will continue to pay for them for many years to come.  The total payouts are $137 million so far according to published reports.

This has put a great strain on the budget for Milwaukee County without any choice but to pay them when these funds could have been used for many other purposes instead of cash in the pockets of the select few.  Thank goodness County Executive Scott Walker was able to get this stopped for new employees to the County.

A reader asked about the announced retirement of State Representative Sue Jeskewitz later this year and whether or not she would be taking her payout for health care in retirement at the taxpayer's expense.  More on that later.

The reader also asked for an update on the Village Board Policy for unused sick leave cash payouts to Village Retirees that has been unreported by the three (3) local newspapers over the last several years at considerable expense to the taxpayers each year.

Here goes. 

Village Board Sick Leave Policy Examined

The Village Board has to approve contracts for the village employee groups on a regular basis (every 2-3 years).  The taxpayers pay an unheard of amount of money for these negotiations as outside legal counsel is hired to hopefully protect the best interests of the taxpayers which sometimes comes under question when these approved contracts are examined a little more closely (http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:LNlXyISmUMcJ:werc.wi.gov/interest_awards/int_pre-99_vol_2_of_2/int26581.pdf+sick+leave+menomonee+falls&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us).

Unfortunately, the three local newspapers provide very little if any coverage to the taxpayers of these contracts when they are being negotiated and or once they are approved by the Village Board.

This posting has nothing with the good people of the Village Employee Staff who do a good job of providing our services on a daily basis, but it does have everything to do with the Village Board who sets public policy at the taxpayer's expense.

The Vanguard reviewed the 2004-06 Employee Contracts for the Village Board unused sick leave policy and found the following information:*

  1. Telecommunication Association Local 510 - shall receive up to 22 weeks or 5 1/2 months cash payout upon retirement or death for any unused sick leave at the hourly rate being paid to the employee at the time of retirement or death.  Can accumulate an additional 15 days of sick leave annually not to exceed a cumulative amount of 110 days.
  2. Police Support Specialists Association Local 813 - shall receive up to 22 weeks or 5 1/2 months cash payout upon retirement or death for any unused sick leave at the hourly rate being paid to the employee at the time of retirement or death.  Can accumulate an additional 15 days of sick leave annually to an unlimited amount.  If an employee accumulates 17 weeks or 4 1/4 months of sick leave and doesn't use any sick leave for six (6) consecutive months they shall be entitled to a bonus vacation day. 
  3. International Association of Firefighters Local 3879 - shall receive up to 26.40 weeks or 6.6 months cash payout upon retirement or death for any unused sick leave at the hourly rate being paid to the employee at the time of retirement or death.  Can accumulate an additional 18 days of sick leave annually to an unlimited amount.
  4. Municipal Employees Union Local 31 - shall receive up to 22 weeks or 5 1/2 months cash payout upon retirement or death for any unused sick leave at the hourly rate being paid to the employee at the time of retirement or death.  Can accumulate an additional 15 days of sick leave annually not to exceed a cumulative amount of 110 days.
  5. Non-represented Employees - shall receive up to 22 weeks or 5 1/2 months cash payout upon retirement or death for any unused sick leave at the salary earned at the time of retirement or death.  Can accumulate an additional 15 days of sick leave annually to an unlimited amount.  If an employee accumulates 17 weeks or 4 1/4 months of sick leave and doesn't use any sick leave for six (6) consecutive months they shall be entitled to a bonus vacation day with a maximum of two (2) bonus vacation days a year.  After probationary period, employee will be granted 3 1/2 personal days and may be used for any purpose.

*The Vanguard has repeatedly requested additional information for this Village Board Policy from the Village Manager's Office to include 2007 and 2008 over the last year and has yet to receive any information from that Office.  Once it is received, it will be passed on.

In addition to the Village Board Sick Leave Policy, the Village Board also has a policy for vacation, holidays, maternity leave and Family Medical Leave Act.

Most Village Employees, depending on the number of years of service, get anywhere from 2 weeks to 6 weeks of paid vacation.

Most Village Employees also get the following 11 1/2 paid holidays:*

  • New Year's Day
  • Memorial Day
  • Independence Day
  • Labor Day
  • Thanksgiving Day
  • The day after Thanksgiving   
  • 1/2 or all of Christmas Eve
  • Christmas Day
  • 1/2 or all of New Year's Eve
  • 3 1/2 floating holidays

*Some employees who work on these holidays are paid overtime.

The Village Board policy also includes the Family Medical Leave Act of 1993 where an employee can take up to 12 weeks off for the care of a spouse, parent or child without pay.

$5 Million Taxpayer Tab for Unused Sick Leave Backdrop Pension Cash Payouts to Retirees

The Vanguard has reviewed many Village documents involving these payouts since 1990 and has found the following information very interesting.

According to Village Hall documents and communications released to the public over the last couple of years, the tab for the taxpayers for unused sick leave cash payouts since 1990 and for future unused sick leave cash payouts that is considered an "unfunded liability", is approximately $5 million.

The following is a summary of unused sick leave backdrop pension cash payouts to retirees since 1990 at the taxpayer's expense:*

  • 1990 payout total:$123,499.18.  8 payouts with the lowest being $7,318.48 and the highest being $25,278.96 for an average of $15,437.40.
  • 1991 payout total: $ 29,436.34.  2 payouts with the lowest being $14,626.90 and the highest being $14,809.44 for an average of $14,718.17.
  • 1992 payout total: $ 34,734.72.  2 payouts with the lowest being $13,010.16 and the highest being $21,724.56 for an average of $17,367.36.
  • 1993 payout total: $ 80,590.00.  6 payouts with the lowest being $1,801.80 and the highest being $18,515.20 for an average of $13,431.67.
  • 1994 payout total: $ 57,339.65.  5 payouts with the lowest being $377.25 and the highest being $16,755.20 for an average of $11,467.93.
  • 1995 payout total: $ 62,845.65.  4 payouts with the lowest being $8,347.25 and the highest being $20,389.60 for an average of $15,711.41.
  • 1996 payout total: $ 42,709.04.  5 payouts with the lowest being $99.28 and the highest being $14,335.20 for an average of $10,677.26.
  • 1997 payout total: $ 73,198.40.  4 payouts with the lowest being $14,889.60 and the highest being $22,228.80 for an average of $18,299.60.
  • 1998 payout total: $188,165.14.  9 payouts with the lowest being $10,507.20 and the highest being $32,908.60 for an average of $20,907.24.
  • 1999 payout total: $217,510.03.  9 payouts with the lowest being $15,998.40 and the highest being $31,922.88 for an average of $24,167.78.
  • 2000 payout total: $119,715.22.  5 payouts with the lowest being $22,430.45 and the highest being $25,273.60 for an average of $23,943.04.
  • 2001 payout total: $162,068.21.  8 payouts with the lowest being $9,947.76 and the highest being $32,535.94 for an average of $20,258.53.
  • 2002 payout total: $ 73,579.80.  4 payouts with the lowest being $16,893.47 and the highest being $21,507.20 for an average of $18,394.95.
  • 2003 payout total: $ 67,272.18.  3 payouts with the lowest being $17,736.98 and the highest being $26,796.00 for an average of $22,424.06.
  • 2004 payout total: $123,060.35.  5 payouts with the lowest being $7,219.46 and the highest being $46,092.09 for an average of $24,612.07.
  • 2005 payout total: $110,545.89.  5 payouts with the lowest being $8,019.12 and the highest being $28,747.57 for an average of $22,109.18.
  • 2006 payout total: $ 88,260.15.  3 payouts with the lowest being $22,774.40 and the highest being $36,872.13 for an average of $29,420.05.
  • 2007 payout total: $ 69,060.00 for the Village Manager who retired for the second time after he had retired once before in 1996.

Total: $1,723,592.95

*The Vanguard has repeatedly requested an update for this Village Board Policy from the Village Manager's Office over the last year for 2007 and 2008 and has yet to receive any information from that Office.  Once it is received, it will be passed on.  Including the 2007 and 2008 cash payouts to retirees, it is estimated the taxpayers will have paid out over $2 million since 1990.  

The Village's Finance Director in a memo released to the public in 2006 put the "unfunded liability" for future unused sick leave cash lump sum payouts for current employees at $3 million when they retire.

The Finance Director also stated that the Village budgets $120,000 from the taxpayers each year to cover retirements with anything over that presumably coming from the Taxpayer's Surplus Account of some $10 million or with leftover monies from the End of Year Operating Results.

Justification for Unused Sick Leave Cash Payouts by Village Officials in 2006 Questioned

When this policy was confronted by the Citizens Budget and Advisory Committee (CBAC) looking for ways to save the taxpayers money in early 2006 with the Village Manager, it was explained by the Village Manager that this policy was absolutely necessary because the Village did not have disability insurance coverage and was done in lieu of paying for retiree's health insurance for their lifetime at retirement since the 1960's.

The CBAC, in a memo released to the public in 2006, state that, "...our study in the early 90's showed this benefit far exceeded comparable communities' policies" and recommended that the policy should be dropped or greatly reduced for new hires and revised for current employees.

Was anything done by the Village Board with the CBAC's recommendation?  Do horses fly?

The only problem with the Village Manager's explanation of not having disability insurance for Village Employees is that it is totally false.

The Village does have disability insurance coverage for Village Employees that has been in place for decades at the taxpayer's expense with Village Employees contributing nothing toward the disability insurance coverage premiums.

The taxpayers, on behalf of the Village Employees, have been paying into the Wisconsin Retirement System's (WRS) Disability Insurance 40.65 Program (www.etf.wi.gov) for decades at no cost to Village Employees.  

The Village, according to a Human Resources Department memo in late 2006, has at least three (3) Village Employees on disability at the taxpayer's expense with one employee being on disability since 1994 and the other two since 2002 and 2004 respectively from the Police Department. 

Why would Village Officials say something that they know is absolutely not true and get away with it from the three (3) local newspapers without being held accountable by the Village Board who knew this to be untrue as well?

The Village's Benefit Analyst at the time made this a priority for the Village Board to look at additional disability insurance coverage for the various Village Employee Groups in lieu of unused sick leave cash payouts because it would be much more affordable for the taxpayers to purchase additional disability insurance coverage for Village Employees than to pay out between $100,000 - $200,000 a year in unused sick leave cash payouts.

The Benefit Analyst also suggested to the Village Board at the time to implement Health Savings Accounts (HSA's) for all Village Employee Groups that have been available to municipalities for almost five years (5) as a way to substantially lower health care premiums while maintaining the best of coverage which is what the City of Brookfield and Waukesah County have done for their employee groups. This benefit can be used in retirement at no cost to the taxpayers.

The Benefit Analyst also tried to implement a wellness program with proven results similar to those in Germantown (http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:ZlgTrP4MReoJ:www.village.germantown.wi.us/PDFs/VillageBoard20080505Minutes.pdf+sick+leave+menomonee+falls&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=42&gl=us) but was met with great resistance from certain members of the Village Board wanting to know how much he was going to "make" off of the program which was nothing except for the gratifiacation of having a healthier employee group for the Village that saved the taxpayers a ton of money with less employee claims and lower premiums.

Seriously, does this Village Board get this at all?

Of course, as it has been documented in The Vanguard's earlier posting in the month of August, "A Really Good Deal Gone Bad, reeeeeeally bad!" (www.menomoneefallsnow.com), the Village Board, led by Trustee Ellis' evaluation system which took the decision out of the hands of the Village's Administrators who always handled these matters in the past, fired the benefit analyst in late 2006 for coming up with such great ideas to lessen the burden for taxpayers while maintaining excellent benefits for Village Employee Groups.

In the words of the Village Manger at the time to the Benefit Analyst, "You were fired for pure political reasons."

The current Village President apparently threw his hands up with a defeatist attitude regarding the matter and was quoted in December 2006 in Menomonee Falls News as saying, "...little can be done to revise sick leave."  Now that's leadership, especially when every community in southeastern Wisconsin is constantly looking at ways to change this policy along with those in the private sector who don't even have the benefit or have eliminated it to keep costs down.

Even Germantown just recently changes their policy for unused sick leave (http://www.germantownnow.com/story/index.aspx?id=779808). 

So something can be done Mr. President to "revise" sick leave.

The excuse for providing such a benefit to those public employees who retire in their 50's has always been that they need to pay for their "expensive" health insurance premiums in retirement.

Truth be told, these retirees always seem to get a new job in retirement with health benefits or go on their spouse's plan or are hired back by the Village with health coverage of which the Village had five (5) such employees as of 2006.

No one retires without knowing if they have health coverage in retirement.

Those that retire at age 65 or later are automatically covered by Medicare which is primarily paid for by the taxpayers with an additional supplemental plan. 

The Village Manager's Office was asked for an update for 2007 and 2008 over the last year and the Office has yet to provide any updates. 

It really seems like the lottery for most people looking at this objectively.

In the words of Russian Comedian Yakov Smirnoff, "What a country."

Other Communities Weigh in on their Unused Sick Leave Policy   

The Vanguard reviewed a Village Hall document released to the public in 2006 from Carlson Dettmann Consulting about other communities and their unused sick leave policy.

The following will illustrate what other communities are doing with different employee contracts:

  • West Bend - 12 days a year accumulated at a maximum of 120 days at retirement to be paid out in cash for 50% of those days (60 days) at the hourly rate of retirement or paid to a Post Retirement Health Plan.
  • Greenfield - 12 days a year accumulated at a maximum of 150-200 days at retirement to be paid out in cash of no more than 50-75 days at the hourly rate of retirement with at least 5-15 years of experience.
  • New Berlin - 12 days a year accumulated at a maximum of 132-264 days at retirement to be paid out in cash for 50% of those days at the hourly rate of retirement or for post retirement health insurance.
  • Franklin - 12 days a year accumulated at a maximum of 180 days.  No cash payouts or health insurance credits at or in retirement.
  • Mequon - 12 days a year accumulated at a maximum of 180 days at retirement to be converted to one month of insurance for each 10 days of accumulated sick leave.
  • Muskego - 15 days a year accumulated at a maximum of 250 days at retirement to be paid out in cash for 120 days for employees hired prior to 11-1-88 and 90 days for employees hired after 1-1-88 at the hourly rate at retirement.
  • Oak Creek - 6-12 days a year accumulated at a maximum of 110-880 days at retirement to be paid out in cash at a maximum of 45 days with at least 5 or more years of experience at the hourly rate at retirement.
  • Brown Deer - 15 days a year accumulated at a maximum of 120 days at retirement to be paid out in cash for 75 days for employees with at least 15 years of experience at the hourly rate at retirement.
  • Germantown - 12-15 days a year accumulated at a maximum of 150-187.5 days at retirement to be paid out in cash at a maximum of 50% of those days (75) at the hourly rate at retirement.

The Village of Menomonee Falls is clearly the most generous for unused sick leave backdrop pension cash payouts to Village Retirees.

The Vanguard has interviewed many private sector companies in Menomonee Falls and was not able to find one company that offered sick leave to their employees.  If the employee gets sick, they take the day off without pay or use vacation.

Most school districts give their employees 10-15 days of paid sick leave each year, but do not pay them a lump sum cash payout at retirement.  The sick days are either used or lost at retirement and can not be carried over for a cash payout.

Some Private Sector and State of Wisconsin Sick Leave Policies Revealed 

Merrill Lynch reduced their unused sick leave policy from 40 days a year to 3 days in 2007 (http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2007/05/24/merrill_lynch_cuts_sick_days_from_40_to_3/) because of the high cost to the firm.  

Michael Crowley, Reader's Digest (www.rd.com), disclosed in his December 2005 article, "That's Outrageous!: Just Sick of It", that this is an epidemic for many cities and states across America and has gone unchecked because citizens believed their elected officials were looking out for the taxpayer's best interest and not just that of the public employee union groups.

Once the benefit is in place, it can be very difficult to get it removed unless there is good leadership on local councils and boards that are willing to do the right thing.

Some examples are:

  • One teacher in the Chicago Public Schools retired after 35 years and cashed out at $133,000 for unused sick leave.
  • A police department personnel cashed out after 42 years for $60,000 in Massachusetts.
  • The City of Dallas paid out $6.2 million to retirees in 2002 alone for unused sick leave.
  • Local governments in the greater Boston area paid nearly $30 million to retirees one year in the early 2000's.
  • The State of Pennsylvania gave retired state employees $32 million between 2001-02.

The State of Wisconsin's unused sick leave perk for public officials was uncovered in late 2006 when it was discovered that numerous current and former politicians were in line to receive the following payouts for health insurance premiums at retirement or when they left office:

  • Supreme Court Chief Justice Abrahamson $447,500.
  • Governor Doyle $169,500 who wants to keep his perk (http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=536841)
  • Governor Thompson $290,797
  • Governor McCallum $230,920
  • AG Lautenschlager $49,000
  • Secretary of State LaFollette $163,000
  • State Treasurer Voight $43,000
  • School Superintendent Burmaster $37,000
  • Lt Governor Lawton $17,000

Menomonee Falls State Senator Darling (R-River Hills), Menomonee Falls State Senator Kanavas (R-Brookfield) and Menomonee Falls State Representative Pridemore (R-Hartford) have informed The Vanguard that they will waive this perk for themselves.

Menomonee Falls State Representative Jeskewitz is the only Menomonee Falls state elected official who outright refuses to declare that she will waive this perk.

Instead, she says in an earlier communication to The Vanguard, "I will work to make sure there is a policy and clear procedure to track and account for sick time, just as we have in place for state employees."  The Vanguard contacted the State Representative for this posting to see if she had changed her mind now that she is retiring at the end of the year and she did not respond. 

The Vanguard will monitor the situation to see if the Representative takes the payout in retirement or not in 2009.

Even some of the democrats on the state and national level realize this is a perk whose time is near the end of its life and should be eliminated.

State Representative Sheldon Wasserman (D-Milwaukee) said, "I think it's a perk the average citizen in this country doesn't get, and it should end...Sick leave is for when you're sick."  Wasserman is a candidate for the senate seat currently held by Alberta Darling in the November 2008 Election for Menomonee Falls.

Former NBC Anchor Tim Russert, in his book "Big Russ and Me" (www.bigrussandme.com), recalled a "life lesson" from his deceased father who was a garbage truck driver for the City of Buffalo regarding an unused sick leave cash payout that he was to get at retirement.

When Tim asked his dad why he wasn't using some of his 100-200 sick days before he retired and why he wasn't taking a cash payout at retirement, his dad simply said, "Because I wasn't sick and those days are only to be used when you are sick and not for cash." 

It is obvious that taxpayers can't continue to be asked to foot the bill for these types of perks to public employee union groups.

You can let the Village Board know how you feel about this by visiting the Village website (http://www.menomonee-falls.org/index.asp?nid=292) and sending them an email or by calling them.

Tell us what think

By using the comment section below, please answer our questions regarding unused sick leave cash payouts.

Question 1

Should there be unused sick leave cash payout at retirement?

_____yes

_____no

Question 2

Should there be a "use it or lose it" policy for unused sick leave at retirement?

_____yes

_____no

Question 3

Should the Village Board offer additional disability insurance to employees in lieu of unused sick leave cash payouts?

_____yes

_____no

Question 4

Should Representative Jeskewitz waive her unused sick leave payout when she retires in 2009?

_____yes

_____no

Question 5

Should Village Employee Retirees be given some kind of a credit toward health insurance premiums at retirement instead of cash payouts?

_____yes

_____no

Question 6

Should all new hires be excluded from getting unused sick leave cash payouts when they retire?

_____yes

_____no

Next Week...Why is Menomonee Falls the only community in the area that doesn't have destination signs? 


 

Village Health Care Plan...A really good deal gone bad, reeeeeeeeeeeeally bad!

By Jefferson Davis
Wednesday, Aug 13 2008, 05:33 PM

Brief Update on The Vanguard

A short note of thanks for your ideas, input and visits.  Our cumulative postings will have well over 9,000 hits by the end of this week on our way to 10,000 and beyond.  That seems like a really good number, but we don't have anything to compare it to.  The first five (5) weeks have been outstanding.  Thank you for reading our blog.

We appreciate your communications.  We promise to keep covering newsworthy items that for whatever reason the three local papers chose not to.

Village Health Care Plan 

A number of readers have asked why hasn't there been any coverage in the three local newspapers or discussion by the Village Board of the Village Health Care Plan over the last couple of years.  With health care plans being the subject of newspaper articles on an almost daily basis everywhere else, it seemed only fitting to look into the Village's Plan as the taxpayers are asked to foot the $3 million bill out of their pocket for the some 200 +/- Village Employees at a very minimal cost (approximately $150,000) to the employees on an annual basis.

Readers also asked for a truthful review of what really happened with the Plan several years ago by Village Administrators and the Village Board.  That seemed like a fair request in order to have their government be open, honest and transparent to the taxpayers who annually pay $30 million for the privilege of living, working or domiciling a business in Menomonee Falls.

This posting is not about the good people who work for the Village that for the most part do a really good job of providing services, but it is all about the public policy of  Village Administrators and the Village Board.

Health Care Statistics 

To properly understand and appreciate health care, it is important to find the areas that can be agreed on before any further insight is provided for the Village's Health Care Plan.

America, without a doubt and without question, has the best health care in the world and is the envy of everyone when it comes to providing care.  People from around the world flock to America for the best care from the best providers.  Yes, there will always be ways to improve and enhance health care.  But that is the American way and a challenge for us on a daily basis that we accept and welcome with open arms because we are Americans and we will meet, beat and exceed any challenge that is put before us (http://money.cnn.com/2008/08/26/pf/bottom_line.moneymag/index.htm?postversion=2008082618).  

The following health care statistics are commonly understood and accepted by all interested parties:

  • Americans annually spend approximately 16% ($2.2 trillion) of our Gross Domestic Product (GDP) ($14 trillion) on health care costs. 
  • 80%-90% of our annual health care costs are driven by only 10%-20% of our population (300 million +) on an annual basis.
  • There are only 4 reasons to use the health care system: sickness, disease, accident/injury or poor lifestyle choices.
  • Poor lifestyle choices make up for over 70% of the reasons why Americans use the health care system on an annual basis.
  • The poor lifestyle choices are: too much smoking, too much drinking, too much illegal use of drugs, social diseases and eating the wrong kind of food.

The following parties are the players in the health care market and nothing will change unless these parties can collectively agree to make the necessary changes without fear of retribution or consequences from turf battles:

  • Americans - we must work toward becoming healthier and to find ways to use the health care system less through incentive wellness education efforts implemented on an annual basis if not more often.
  • Facilities - hospitals, nursing homes, clinics and hospices must be transparent with their billing, caring, services, staff, collection, records, information technology, etc. (http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=786629)
  • Attorneys - lawsuits have to be limited and awards need to be capped.
  • Legislators - mandated coverage has dramatically increased the cost of health care.  Fiscal notes (cost) need to be attached to all new coverage mandates.
  • Providers - physicians need to constantly be aware of their care costs and to provide those services in the most affordable cost effective way. 
  • Technology - advancements in health care are great, but they come at a huge cost and we must either be willing to pay for them or just say no.
  • Pharmacy - drug companies and pharmacists need to constantly be aware of their products and services and to provide them in the most cost effective way.
  • Fraud and abuse - Americans themselves have to stop trying to "cheat" the "system".  Better oversight and accountability are desperately needed.
  • Insurance companies - they are only a conduit for the consumer (patient) to the provider (doctor).  They must always be looking for ways to keep costs down while working within the system that we have now.
  • Competitiveness - in a free market capitalist society, consumers need to be given as many options and flexibility as possible.  Health care is no exception to this rule.  This will drive costs down dramatically if the chains of restriction and inflexibility are lifted.

This challenge can easily be met and taken care of in very simple ways if we only had leaders that would be willing to do so.  If we don't, socialized medicine is just around the corner with a payroll tax to all workers (similar to social security) and the quality of health care will dramatically be compromised similar to that of Canada's, England's, Germany's, France's, etc.  

25 Years of Having the Same Health Care Provider for Village Revealed

In late 2003, the Village Board in a closed session was asked to accept the recommendation of Village Staff members who handled the daily administration of the health care plan to renew the Village Employee Health Care Contract with Blue Cross Blue Shield for the some 200 +/- village employees and their some 400-500 extended family dependents for a total of some 600-700 covered members at a renewal cost of approximately $3 million.

Members of The Vanguard were intimately involved and familiar with the renewal process because they served on the Village Board at the time.  

The Village Board, in a closed session, was not provided by Staff with any spreadsheets, cost analysis, claims information, historical rates, claims/loss ratios, etc.  The Village Board was simply asked to accept Staff's recommendation of the 6.4% increase by Blue Cross Blue Shield.  This would later raise many more questions.

Several members of the Village Board were giddy about the increase and wanted to immediately sign off on the renewal without getting any competitive bids on the $3 million contract that made up about 10% of the entire Village Budget.  Others on the Village Board, newer members, put the brakes on and started to ask Staff a lot of questions that revealed some very interesting information.

The Village Manager at the time stated that Blue Cross Blue Shield had been the Village's insurance carrier for about 25 years without, to his knowledge, getting any competitive bids from other carriers.

Blue Cross Blue Shield is undoubtedly a very good insurance company, but things and circumstances do change over 25 years (1978-2003).  After all, Ronald Reagan defeated Jimmy Carter during this time period, cell phones became a prevalent communication tool, communism in Eastern Bloc countries fell, we had to put up with Bill Clinton for 8 years, e mails came along and our country was savagely attacked by thuggish terrorists to name a few of those circumstances.

Everything in business, government and in the home needs to be reviewed on a regular basis.  Certainly more often than every 25 years.

Members of the Village Board Approached by Insurance Representatives

A number of new Village Board members were approached in early 2003 by a number of different Insurance Representatives asking for the privilege to review the Village's Health Care Plan to see if there were alternatives to the Village's current plan at a more affordable cost to the taxpayers with equal to or greater insurance benefits for village employees.

The new Board members welcomed the idea, but were perplexed by what the Insurance Representatives said at the time when they informed the different new Board members that this was a refreshing approach to what they had experienced in the past by not having phone calls returned and doors closed in their face by Village Staff for many years over the Village's Health Care Plan.  These representatives stated that they couldn't even get a simple appointment.

One Insurance Representative, a long time resident of Menomonee Falls, told the new Board members that they were the inside wholesaler for Blue Cross Blue Shield before they went out on their own and was responsible for the Village's Plan.  They stated that Blue Cross Blue Shield "loved" the Village of Menomonee Falls because they never asked any questions or asked for comparisons or options over the years, they just paid the renewals each year.

The Board members immediately gave the Insurance Representative's information to Staff and asked them to pursue with these representatives what options might be available for the Village's Plan in time for renewal considerations later that year by the January 1, 2004 deadline.

When the Board, in closed session later in 2003, was asked by Staff to approve the 6.4% increase with Blue Cross Blue Shield without any supporting documents, several of the new Board members then asked if any of these Insurance Representatives had been contacted for comparison purposes and the Staff's answer was of course, "No." 

When asked by Board Members in closed session why not, Staff said, "We don't work with insurance salesman because they get paid a commission.  We work directly with the insurance company to save money.  We think this is a favorable renewal."  When asked if they had worked with any other insurance companies for a competitive bid on the Village's Plan for renewals, the answer of course was, "No."

The Board, in closed session, unanimously then asked Staff to contact these representatives to see what options would possibly be available for the Village's Health Care Plan before the January 1, 2004 deadline.  Staff asked if it was ok with the Board to work with a certain firm to get this done and no one objected to Staff's recommendation.

It was later found out through an Open Records Request, that this Closed Session Board Meeting Agenda in October of 2003 was not properly agendized by the Clerk's Office to discuss the health care renewal with Blue Cross Blue Shield and that the minutes of the meeting from the Clerk's Office did not reflect any details of the Staff and Board's discussion of the Village's Health Care Plan which is absolutely required by State Law and could be considered to be a punishable offense for not doing so.

Taxpayers Foot the Bill for the 1999-2003 $1.3 Million Health Care Plan Increase

Working for the first time in the Village's history with a professional benefit analyst at no cost to the taxpayers, some interesting information and suggestions became quite evident as to what should be done with the Village's Health Care Plan in late 2003.

The cost increase analysis of the professional benefit analyst immediately revealed what had been asked of the taxpayers for the previous five (5) years with the Village's Health Care Plan.

The following will illustrate those renewal increases with apparently no comparisons from the free market place or questions being asked by the Village Board or Staff of the insurance company:

  • 1999 $1,138,116
  • 2000 $1,200,711 an increase of  $62,595 or 5.5%
  • 2001 $1,649,784 an increase of $449,073 or 37.4%
  • 2002 $2,111,721 an increase of $461,937 or 28%
  • 2003 $2,447,488 an increase of $335,767 or 15.9%

That was a total increase of $1,309,372 for the taxpayers or an average of 21.7% a year.

Approximately 10-12 insurance carriers were approached at the time to provide a competitive bid on the Village's Plan with only 2 submitting an actual bid while the rest of the carriers declined because of unions and retirees.

New Plan Implementation Delayed  

The Village's Benefit Analyst, who received their compensation from the chosen insurance carrier and not the taxpayers, worked feverishly to save the taxpayers money and to provide the Village Employees with an excellent health care plan in late 2003 in order to meet the renewal deadline of January 1, 2004.

Unfortunately, the benefit analyst was met with numerous and unnecessary delays from Staff having to involve a Village Board Member(s) for the simplest requirements of information to get the new plan implemented.

Upon learning through the benefit analyst that the Village's Health Care Plan might be moved to another carrier, Blue Cross Blue Shield immediately lowered their 6.4% renewal increase to 4% for 2004.

Even with Blue Cross Blue Shield lowering their increase to 4%, the Village Board voted unanimously several times in early 2004 to save the taxpayers $259,442 by accepting Staff's recommendation to award the Village's Health Care Plan to United Health Care.

Had the Village stayed with Blue Cross Blue Shield in 2004-2005, which several members of the Village Board wanted to do at the time because of unreported news coverage and pressure from the unions, the taxpayers would have had to pay an extra $590,498 in 2005.

That is a total savings of $849,940 to the taxpayers thanks to the benefit analyst going to the free market which had not been done in the previous 25 years and several new members of the Village Board pushing for this reform.

Other Interesting Behind the Scenes Trustee and Union Efforts Exposed to Block Implementation of New Plan

The benefit analyst provided the Village Board a thorough and in-depth comparison analysis of the Blue Cross Blue Shield/United Health Care Plans in anticipation of criticism and challenges from certain Village Board members and the unions at no cost to the taxpayers.  

Unfortunately, the Village Manager and certain members of the Village Board would not accept this analysis and then took thousands of dollars of the taxpayer's money to ask an "outside" consultant for a comparison which ended up being identical to the one that had already been provided at no cost saying the same exact thing.

After numerous information and orientation meetings with Staff and employee groups/individuals from January-March of 2004, the benefit analyst was ready to launch the new plan on April 1, 2004.

The day (March 31, 2004) before the new plan was to take effect, the unions all filed grievances with the Village because of the new health care plan.  These grievances were later either dropped, dismissed or lost.

Several law enforcement employees were particularly upset because their doctors were not in the new network which turned out to be a mute point because the benefit analyst had made provisions to take care of this concern.

Some of the Board members, in an effort to embarrass other members of the Board for supporting the change and being beholden to the unions, tried the "Three Blind Mice" approach by going to the newspapers saying that they didn't recall voting on any of these proposals or benefit analyst and that this information wasn't explained to them.

This was later proven to be totally false even though the newspapers didn't print that part of the story after it was disclosed that they actually had voted several times to approve the new plan(s).  This may have served the self interests of these three trustees, but it certainly didn't help the community when these same three trustees have had many years to do the right thing for the taxpayers only to be beholden to the unions in effort to "go along to get along" and get re-elected every two years to the Board.

The benefit analyst also discovered unnecessary coverage for a benefit that was rarely, if ever, used and costing the taxpayers some $20,000-$25,000 annually for oral surgery coverage.  The benefit analyst simply suggested to self insure this benefit at no cost to the employees for a couple of years to see what the claims were.

As is turned out, the benefit analyst was right.  The taxpayers saved a ton of money and those that had this procedure done, 1 in 2004 and maybe 2 in 2005, were completely taken care of providing the same excellent care.

Again, the "Three Blind Mice" went to the newspapers with alarm and dismay.  One Trustee was so concerned that he referred to it as "ortho" surgery of which there is no such procedure or surgery.  Of course the gang of three were proven to be wrong once again and of course the newspapers didn't follow up on any of this as well. 

Then of course there was the false accusation(s) of one of the gang of three's surrogates, who has since moved to Texas, that one Board member was benefiting from the new contract which they new to be totally false because of letters they had received from the benefit analyst's firm and the insurance company at the time and before the new plan was implemented.

Shame on the gang of three.  It again may have served their selfish self interests in the newspapers by trying to embarrass a targeted Board member that didn't tow the line and automatically agree with them on everything that they wanted, but it certainly didn't help our community.

Trustee Ellis during this whole debate even went as far as to suggest to a fellow Trustee at the time something to the effect that in her words, "I'm going to work as hard as I can with other members of the Board to destroy the Village President politically, personally and professionally so that when we're done with him, he will have no choice but to leave the Village."

This vendetta by Trustee Ellis was born out in a communication with yet another Trustee at the time when she told the Trustee that she was going to "seek legal action" against the Village President because of her missing so many Board meetings.

This vendetta was also born out in a newspaper article at the time with Trustee McDonald stating, "If he (Davis) thinks this is bad, he hasn't seen anything yet.  This is our first shot across the bow."  

The Village Board, under the leadership of former Village President Joe Greco, attempted to form a consortium with other communities to "eliminate" insurance companies in 2000-2003 because of out of control spiraling health care costs with no relief in sight.

This attempt cost the taxpayers thousands of dollars to "study" and there were many articles in the local newspapers extolling the virtues of such a wonderful and glorious idea that would provide excellent health care, eliminate the insurance companies and save hundreds of thousands of dollars. 

Many meetings were held by the leaders of local communities and many public promises were made as this was promoted as the "trend" for the future.

The only problem is, this idea totally flopped and the taxpayers were once again left holding the bag with empty promises and ideas.  The consortium's failure was never covered after so many glowing articles were previously written by the local newspapers.  It just quietly went away without any follow up.

If Menomonee Falls had participated in this grand scheme, the insurance premiums would have gone up 62% the first year.  Don't think so.  This is something that should definitely be left to the professionals.     

Benefit Analyst Provides Quality Care for Employees at Substantially Reduced Costs for Taxpayers

The track record of the benefit analyst for 2004-2007 through free market options and minor tweakings (office visit co-pays, prescription costs, urgent care and emergency room) of the plan for employees resulted in average annual 2.9% increases for 4 years in a row.  A far cry better than the 21.7% increases the previous 4 years.

The taxpayers, through the incredible efforts of the benefit analyst, are currently paying about the same amount for the Village's Health Care Plan that they did in 2004 while everyone else is complaining about double digit percentage increases over the last 4 years for health care premiums. 

The benefit analyst also implemented the following reform ideas for the plan to incorporate the concerns and ideas of administrators, employee groups, unions and Village Board:

  • Provided claims/loss ratios that hadn't been done before.
  • Provided demographic information about the Plan that hadn't been done before.
  • Looked at prescription options instead of just paying for them.
  • Implement a Wellness Program with economic incentives.
  • Work toward 3 year union contracts instead of 2 year contracts for favorable financial and cultural outcomes.
  • Explore HSA Accounts for great coverage at a much lower cost.
  • Restructure Sick Leave Policy with short term disability plan.
  • Strengthen Insurance Committee for costs, updates, claims, renewals, etc.
  • Have an employee newsletter for overall better communication.
  • More cost sharing ideas with employees to keep increases down.    
  • Look for options for village retirees on the plan.

The benefit analyst also found out that only 2 companies would bid on the Village's Health Care Plan in the future because of unions and retirees.  Blue Cross Blue Shield, the Village's carrier for 25 years, no longer bids on the contract when some Board members in 2003-04 strongly wanted to stay with them no matter what.  Imagine where the Village would be today without a carrier for the employee health care plan.

Village Employees pay about $250-$300 a year for a single $6,000 plan and about $750-$800 a year for a $15,600 family plan on a tax deductible basis or about 5% of the total $3 million annual premium.  The taxpayers pick up the rest of the bill.  We would like to provide as accurate information as we can, but our request for this information has been with the Village Manager for quite some time now. 

According to the Village Manager in 2003, 61% of Village Employees reside outside Menomonee Falls and 39% live in Menomonee Falls.

Trustee Ellis Leads the Way to Fire the Benefit Analyst in 2006 for "Pure Political Reasons"

The 3 year Village contract, that the Village Board unanimously voted to approve in 2003-04, for the benefit analyst came up for renewal in 2006.

Normally under any circumstance involving a situation of this matter and magnitude, the Village Staff reviews the options and makes recommendations to the Village Board for approval.  This is a $3 million annual decision for the some 200 +/- Village Employees implemented by Staff on a daily basis with the assistance of the benefit analyst.

The Vanguard has learned that this decision was taken out of the hands of those administrators at the Village by Trustee Ellis and that she led the way to fire the benefit analyst with her "evaluation" system that she required the other Board members to participate in because of in the words of the Village Manager to the benefit analyst when he was fired, "...were for pure political reasons."

The Vanguard also learned that Trustee Ellis lead the way to ignore the recommendations of Village Staff to keep the existing benefit analyst and to fire him in favor of someone else.

Trustee Ellis' evaluation system discloses some very interesting information.

Against the recommendation of Village Staff to keep the existing benefit analyst, Trustee Ellis led the way to make sure her evaluation system apparently favored a different benefit analyst according to the Trustee forms reviewed through an Open Records Request.

The Trustees were asked to evaluate the three benefit analysts in 11 areas on a scale of 1-5 with 5 being the highest and 1 being the lowest.

Remember, the Village had 3 years of experience with the current benefit analyst and no experience with the other 2.  Also remember, the current benefit analyst had kept increases to 2.9% a year for 4 years in a row (2004-2007) compared to 21.7% increases the previous 4 years (2000-2003) saving the taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars for great benefits to the employees. 

The Trustee rankings of the three analysts from 2006 are as follows:

                                Ellis        Farrell          Steliga         McDonald     Rechlicz          Jeskewitz

Analyst A                  4.5              4                  5                     5                     5                     5

                                4.75            5                   5                     5                     4                     5  

                                5                3                    5                    5                     5                     5 

                                4                5                    5                    5                     5                     5

                                5                4                    5                    5                     5                     5

                                5                5                    5                    5                     5                     5

                                5                3                    5                    5                     5                     5 

                                4.5             5                    5                    5                     5                     5

                                5                4                    5                    5                     5                     5

                                4.5             3                    5                    5                     5                     5  

                                4.5             3                    5                    5                     4.5                  5

Analyst B                 4                3                    4                    4                    3.5                   5  

                                5               4                    4                    4                     5                     5 

                                4.75          5                    4                    5                     5                     5  

                                4.5            4                    4                    5                     5                     5  

                                4.75          3                    4                    4                     5                     5

                                4              4                     4                   4                     4                     5     

                                4.5           4                     4                   5                     3.5                   5

                                3              4                     4                   4                     3.5                   5 

                                3              5                     4                   3                     3.5                   4.5

                                4              4                     4                   5                     5                      5  

                                4.5           4                     4                   4                     5                      5   

Current Analyst         4             5                     1                   1                    4                      5  

                                 4             5                     1                   1                    2                      4

                                 4             5                     1                   1                    4                      4

                                 4             5                     1                   1                    3                      5  

                                 4             4                     1                   1                    4                      4

                                 4             5                     1                   3                    5                      5 

                                 4             5                     1                   3                    3                      5      

                                 4             5                     1                   3                    5                      5

                                 4             5                     1                   2                    4                      4.5

                                 4             4                     1                   2                    3                      5 

                                 4             5                     1                   1                    3                      5

Trustee Newman did not evaluate any of the analysts.

Judging from the Trustee evaluations, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that the "fix" was in for the current benefit analyst.  All of the analysts agreed to accept the same compensation schedule from the insurance company.  It appears that the only objective evaluator was Trustee Farrell.  

How could anyone in good conscious give evaluations of 1's and 2's even 3's to a firm that accomplished what the analyst had like those of Trustees McDonald and  Steliga along with Village President Rechlicz?

Trustees McDonald and Steliga bragged to members of the Citizen's Budget Advisory Committee (CBAC)