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.

$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) in the fall of 2006 that they had "gotten rid" of the current benefit analyst in closed session when no vote had been taken by the Board yet, because he was brought in under the Davis Administration.  A citizen member of the CBAC contacted The Vanguard with this revelation.

Because of what appears to be inappropriate, prejudiced and unethical behavior by Trustees McDonald and Steliga, the Village Attorney advised them to not vote on the benefit analyst contract later that year even though he didn't feel they had done anything wrong.

Obviously the weighted score for the analysts was so skewed because of Trustees McDonald and Steliga's political vendetta that the current analyst didn't have a chance.

Because of Trustees McDonald and Steliga's obvious "political punishment" to the current benefit analyst, the weighted score put him in last place out of 3 firms.

There has been very little if any coverage of the Village's Health Care Plan for nearly two years when the 3 local newspapers have known all about this for a long time. 

The taxpayers have a right to know what is going on especially since they pay for about 95% of the apparent annual $3 million premium. 

Village Manager Asked for 2007-08 Health Care Numbers   

Members of The Vanguard started meeting with the Village Manager a year ago for updates on the Village's Health Care Plan regarding annual premiums, employee cost share amounts and rate increases paid for by the taxpayers.

Getting that information has proven to be a very difficult experience over the last year.  When it is obtained, it will be published.

Because we have no idea what the costs are for 2008 or 2009, it would be nice to have them sooner rather than later to see if the Village Board has reverted back to the old way of doing things like they did from 1978-2003 with former Village Presidents Greco and Steliga.

Tell us what you think

By using the comment section below to answer questions, you can have a voice as to what you would like to see done with this matter.

Question 1

Should the Village Government be more transparent with the Village's Health Care Plan by releasing the numbers and costs of the Plan?

_____yes

_____no

Question 2

Should Village Employees pay more for their health care plan benefits?

_____yes, at least 10% of the annual premium if not more.

_____no, 5% of the annual premium is plenty for employees to pay.

Question 3

Should the Village Board implement the reform ideas proposed by the former benefit analyst to bring costs down for the taxpayers while maintaining excellent benefits for the employees?

_____yes

_____no

Next week..."Is the doctor in?  I think I'm sick."  An in-depth look at the sick leave policy of the Village.

Will retiring State Representative Sue Jeskewitz waive her free medical coverage in retirement like Menomonee Falls Senators Darling and Kanavas are along with State Representative Pridemore?  


 

"Sir, please put your hands above your head and spread your legs"

By Jefferson Davis
Saturday, Aug 9 2008, 12:03 PM

False Arrest with Menomonee Falls Police

A friend and reader of The Vanguard recently shared an experience that they were intimately aware of involving the Menomonee Falls Police Department.  For obvious reasons that will become very evident, the party asked for anonymity until the matter is resolved on a professional level.

Menomonee Falls has a very good reputation for its Police Department.  Sure, there is the occasional mix-up or questionable way of handling things, but by in large the Police Department does a very good job.  The overwhelming majority of the department's rank and file are hard working and dedicated professionals.

Enjoying a Leisurely Ride When....

Imagine that you are out for a leisurely ride enjoying yourself on a beautiful day with your significant other when you are pulled over for a routine traffic stop by a neighboring county sheriff's deputy.

The deputy is very nice and professional as it is explained to you why you are being stopped.  The deputy asks for your license and informs you that he will be back in a few minutes.

Everything checks out, but upon his return, he regretfully informs you that there is a warrant out for your arrest from the Menomonee Falls Police Department much to your shock, dismay and utter disbelief because of an unpaid minor ticket.

"Sir, I'm going to have to arrest you"   

You explain to the deputy that you were never notified of any arrest warrant from the Menomonee Falls Police Department and the minor ticket that he is referring to was already paid for quite some time ago.

The deputy contacts the Menomonee Falls Police Department and is informed by them that the ticket has not been paid for and the individual needs to be brought in under the warrant for their arrest.

The deputy is polite, understanding and apologizes, but is required by law to arrest you and take you to the Menomonee Falls Police Department.

You are humiliated by having to go through the arresting routine of being frisked, hands above your head, spreading your legs, handcuffed and stuffed into the back seat of the squad to be hauled off to jail for something that you did not do and have not been legally notified of in any way.  

You inform the party you are with to contact their family to come and pick them up as they will have to take care of your mode of transportation that is left on the side of the road and to post bond for your release from jail in Menomonee Falls.

"Book 'em Danno"

Similar to the old TV show, "Hawaii Five-O", you are hauled off to jail where you are finger printed, photographed, asked a boat load of questions and given the old "rubber glove" treatment for intake purposes as you are booked.

You speak with a number of officers throughout the process who appear to be polite and professional.  You explain to them that you never received the warrant for your arrest and the ticket they are referring to was paid a long time ago. 

It is explained to you by the Police Department that according to their records that a warrant for your arrest was issued and that the ticket was never paid.

One officer was very kind and understanding and told you, "Working around here is like being in high school.  The politics are awful.  It's like a bunch of kids for some of these people.  I love what I do, but I don't know how much longer I can work here with this." 

Please Release Me, Let Me Go 

While sitting in jail being good natured about the silliness of the whole matter, you can only think of the Engelbert Humperdink song, "Please Release Me, Let me Go", as you prepare to be released. 

Your friend contacts their family and posts the bond for your release with the Police Department that same day. 

Once again you politely inform the Police Department of their errors of which they insist you are the guilty party and that you will have to pay the ticket because their records do not have any record of the ticket being paid.

Your friends take you to get your vehicle to go home for the evening.

"...Upon further review, the ticket has been paid" 

Like an NFL Referee who is asked to review a questionable play that a coach feels he is absolutely certain about, you arrive home to look at your canceled checks and find your check where the ticket was paid.

The canceled check is presented to the Police Department as proof that the ticket had indeed been paid a long time ago. 

Oops.

Ultimately, the bond posting was refunded and a letter of explanation was sent out admitting the error.

Waste of Taxpayer's Time, Money and Resources

The obvious question with this whole matter is, "How could something like this happen with the technologically advanced world that we live in?" 

The Menomonee Falls Police Department has asked the taxpayers to provide them with very costly state of the art equipment to perform duties in order to process things quickly and efficiently to keep the community safe.  This comes with a very high price tag. 

Imagine all of the wasted law enforcement resources and taxpayer's money because of an obvious error on the part of someone(s).

The Menomonee Falls Police Department is on their 4Th Police Chief since 2003 with retirements, an interim chief and now a new chief.

The Vanguard is not usually an advocate of litigation because it is so tedious and costly when matters could and should be resolved in a more efficient way by simply having those who made the mistake(s) take responsibility. 

But this case certainly warrants a very close look at the system to see how something of this magnitude could have fallen through the cracks to put an innocent person and their family and friends through such a horrific and totally unnecessary experience. 

A person can only wonder if something like this happened, how many other situations similar to this may be occurring as well.

Hopefully not too many.

Minimally, the Police Department needs to help this individual get this expunged from their record and a formal written letter of apology is due.

Law enforcement is a tough and demanding profession, but simple clerical and data entry functions are minimal requirements for job duties.

It is hoped that in the future mistakes of this nature can be totally avoided so that ours and the resources of others can be used more wisely and for necessary law enforcement matters.

Let us know what you think about this situation by emailing The Vanguard at thevngrd@yahoo.com.

Question 1

Should there be an internal investigation of this matter by the Police and Fire Commission?

_____yes

_____no

Question 2

Should those responsible for these mistakes be disciplined?

_____yes

_____no

Question 3

Should the Village of Menomonee Falls offer to pay the individual who was put through this experience for their incredible inconvenience without going to court?

_____yes

_____no

Next Week..."The Village's Health Care Plan...A really good deal gone bad, reeeeeeally bad!"  

  

Filed under:
Permalink |  Mail to a friend

 

Falls Cable Access...whatever happened?

By Jefferson Davis
Friday, Aug 1 2008, 09:12 AM

Posting update

The Vanguard never imagined with our first posting just 28 days ago that we would have had some 5,500 visits so far.

All we can say is, "Thank you."  The rankings of our postings in popularity are as follows:

  1. "State Agency Cites Village Clerk's Office" - where the office has been incorrectly interpreting and disseminating state election law over the last 5 years.
  2. "Happy 4th of July Menomonee Falls" - a celebration of our incredible heritage and history with links to our country's most sacred documents and songs.
  3. "The Great Garbage Debate" - an in-depth look at what has really been going on with the landfill agreement for the last 14 years and the $17 million shortfall for the new library, police station and village hall that the taxpayers will have to pay for at 100% starting in 2016 or earlier if something is not done.
  4. "Village President...not a bad gig if you can get it" - questionable professional, political and personal dealings between the Village President and businesses.
  5. "Falls Fest...how did it come to this?" - late tax returns, losing money, large cutbacks in giving, favorable real estate deals with Village Trustees and Falls Fest directors who serve on both Boards.

We promise to try and keep our community informed without fear of those who don't want the "truth" to be known by citizens who have been told by the press and individuals for years what "they" wanted them to know instead of what should have been known by our community all along.

Whatever happened to Falls Cable Access?

A reader recently wondered why the local press never followed up on the new agreement between the Village, Time Warner Cable and Falls Cable Access and asked us to provide some updates.  Again, we apologize for the length of this posting.  But there is so much material that needs to be covered and updated.

The Vanguard  will attempt to provide an update from a number of perspectives:

  1. Origin of Falls Cable Access.
  2. Confusion created by Falls Cable Access in 2003-04.
  3. Attorney hired by Falls Cable Access for failure to file federal tax returns.
  4. Tactics of Falls Cable Access Director.
  5. New funding agreement with Time Warner.
  6. Effect of Supreme Court ruling.

A huge thank you to the volunteers who help with the operations of the cable channel, the taxpayers who pay their monthly cable access fee (tax) and Time Warner for providing the cable channel and for returning the some $275,000-$300,000 annually to the taxpayers of Menomonee Falls who initially made the payment to Time Warner as part of the agreement with the Village. 

This posting is a review of policy, accountability and oversight of Falls Cable Access and the Village Board not the volunteers or the programming.  So often as is the case with government, agreements are signed and plans are made with little or no follow up.  Citizens have the right to know what is going on with their government without the fear of being attacked or accused by those who take exception to the questions being raised about the use of their (the taxpayer's) money.

Origin of Falls Cable Access 

The Vanguard  has reviewed many documents regarding Falls Cable Access.  We invite the challenge to any of these documents and will gladly print those challenges if warranted.

Falls Cable Access apparently was created as a 501 (c) 3 private non-profit and independent corporation separate from the Menomonee Falls Village Government in 1991-1992 as part of an exclusive agreement with Time Warner Cable and the Village Board through Ordinance 102-27 (www.menomonee-falls.org) that would be up for review approximately every 10-15 years.  This agreement covered all subscribers to Time Warner for cable television and internet.  

The IRS, in an April 26, 1992 letter to Falls Cable Access, granted them a 501 (c) 3 private non-profit designation (EIN 39-1712550 www.guidestar.org) requiring them to file annual 990 Federal Tax Returns for any receipts, at the time, over $25,000 and would be exempt from any federal income tax.  With the exception of maybe one year (1992?), Falls Cable Access did not file any 990 Federal Tax Returns as was required by federal law and the IRS subject to $10,000 annual fines and or penalties for every year that tax returns were not filed.

Falls Cable Access, by agreement with Time Warner Cable and the Village, was required to provide "access" for all citizens to the local cable channel without any censorship or review of programming as explained in the Village Ordinances and Falls Cable Access Policies and Procedures.

Falls Cable Access also had a Board of Directors that was responsible for the accountability and oversight of the Cable Access Channel to the community and Village Board on a regular basis each year.

The operation of Falls Cable Access continued with very little notice and under the radar screen until the early/mid 2000's when questions started being raised by some Village Officials and the local newspaper about an enormous taxpayer's surplus account (approximately $550,000-$650,000) that had been accumulated by Falls Cable Access with very little, if any, oversight by the Falls Cable Access or Village Boards.

Supposedly, the operations of Falls Cable Access were exclusively staffed by volunteers, who it was later found out to have been paid for their volunteerism, while costs were incurred for equipment, supplies, materials and misc. expenses. 

Confusion Created by Falls Cable Access    

Some Village Officials and the local newspaper in 2003-05, wanted an update on how the taxpayer's money was being spent by Falls Cable Access and a general overview of the operations as required by Village Ordinances.  What transpired after that was quite troubling and disturbing that something of this magnitude could have gone on as long (10 years or more) as it did without any apparent oversight or accountability by the Village Manager, Cable Access or Village Boards. 

Rather than making their records open and transparent to the public as is required by Federal and State Law and Village Ordinances, Falls Cable Access went into a defense mode until the Village Board voted unanimously in 2004 requiring Falls Cable Access and the Village Manager to make their financial records available to the public.

Time Warner Cable was required to charge the taxpayer/subscriber a monthly access fee/tax and was then required by agreement to return that money to the Village on a semi-annual basis.  The Village Board directly received 60% of these fees/taxes and Falls Cable Access directly received the remaining 40%.  Most of these fees/taxes were in the $1-$5 per month range that inconspicuously showed up on the taxpayer/subscriber monthly bill.

According to Village Hall documents released to the public, the taxpayers have paid over $2.5 million to Time Warner Cable in taxes/fees between 1991-2005 with Time Warner Cable returning $1,529,452 (recently about $175,000 annually) to the Village Board for the General Fund and $972,648 (recently about $115,000 annually) to Falls Cable Access.  The Vanguard  asked the Village Manager for the 2006-07 receipts and the office stated that they don't have those records when the checks from Time Warner in the past have been sent to the Village Manager's Office.

A number of interesting observations and comments were made at the time that clearly bring the matter into a proper perspective.

When various Village and Falls Cable Access Officials were confronted about the non-filing of tax returns and the whereabouts of the money at the time, the following is a small sample of their insight that was published in various news outlets and or emails:

  • Former Village Manager Dick Farrenkopf, who was directly responsible for the oversight of Falls Cable Access, said, "I don't see anything here that concerns me."
  • One Falls Cable Access Official said, "No harm, no foul.", when asked about the large amount of funds.
  • Falls Cable Access Board Member Judge Hurt said, "I believe it has been over 8 years since I last attended a meeting or have been notified of a meeting."  Hurt later resigned as Municipal Judge for financial disciplinary reasons from a division of the Wisconsin Supreme Court in 2006-07.
  • Trustee McDonald said, "The corporation was created outside the auspices of the municipality to keep it free of government interference."
  • One Falls Cable Access Official said, "Falls Cable Access is a private, not-for-profit corporation, completely independent of the municipality."
  • The Village Attorney was listed on the roster for Falls Cable Access Board but said, "I have had no dealings with them since becoming Village Attorney in 1999."
  • One Falls Cable Access Official said, "All of a sudden the money is pouring in and we can't spend it fast enough." 
  • The Village Attorney said in an email to a citizen from 9-27-04, "Based on the facts presently available to me and the applicable law, my conclusion is that the FCAC is not a legal arm or sub-unit of the the Village, and therefore not an "authority" under the statute I cited in the previous paragraph.  It is instead more like a contractor with the Village."
  • Village Attorney stated in a 9-9-05 letter to the Attorney General's Office in response to a citizen's complaint that, "I have and continue to hold the belief that the FCAC is a corporate entity separate and apart from the Village.  The Village cannot legally control the corporation."  
  • Falls Cable Access Official wanted to know in an April 8, 2005 communication to a citizen inquiry, "Do you turn all of your neighbors who try to do nice things in to the IRS?"
  • One Falls Cable Access Official stated in an 8-6-04 email to a Village Official who was asking questions about the operations of Falls Cable Access at the time, "This is why people are after you.  As I struggle with 2 kids in college, overcome health problems and continue to slide into debt, it makes me sick that I have contributed more than $500,000 in services and 3,000 hours of services to this community." 
  • One Falls Cable Access Official stated in an 8-11-04 email to the Village Board at the time, "If the Village Board attempts to take any of these funds and put them in the Village General Fund, I will immediately begin charging for my services at the standard going rate for television program production."
  • Falls Cable Access website stated at the time, "Falls Cable Access is a private, not-for-profit corporation not subject to the open records request submitted by newspapers.  Any request for information must come from the Village of Menomonee Falls."  
  • The current Village President said of Falls Cable Access, "The Village just forgot about it (Falls Cable Access)."
  • One Falls Cable Access Official said something to the effect in a communication to a citizen about possible IRS fines and or penalties, "If there are any fines or penalties from the IRS, the taxpayers won't have to pay them.  Those responsible will pay the fines and or penalties."

Falls Cable Access had Strosahl & Co., a member of the Menomonee Falls Chamber of Commerce, look at their records in September of 2004 at the taxpayer's expense.  In their communication to Falls Cable Access at the time, Strosahl & Co., specifically stated, "We will not be conducting an audit or review of the financial statements of Menomonee Falls Cable Access Corporation, and therefore we will not express an opinion or any other form of assurance on them."  

A number of intere