image description
The City Council cut $39,168 from the current budget proposal to bring the mitigation fund in line with the final estimates.

Pittsfield Finds Health Insurance Contract Overfunded

By Andy McKeeveriBerkshires Staff
Print Story | Email Story
PITTSFIELD, Mass. — The City Council cut another $39,168 from the budget Tuesday night after discovering a union contract had been overfunded.
 
In 2014, then Mayor Daniel Bianchi had negotiated with the Public Employees Committee to switch from the Group Insurance Commission to Blue Cross Blue Shield, which saved the city around $2 million over the course of three years. The city's Public Employees Committee, which is made up of representatives of the city's 15 workers unions, approved a contract with the city on how to share those savings. 
 
The contract calls for the city to establish an "employee mitigation fund." 
 
In the first year of the contract, the city was supposed to put 25 percent of the savings between the GIC and Blue Cross Blue Shield plans into the mitigation fund. In year two, the city would place 25 percent of the savings seen, but that was not to exceed $250,000. The same is called for in year three. 
 
But the city jumped ahead a year by funding the line at $250,000 in the FY16 budget. Director of Finance Matthew Kerwood described it on Tuesday as having "preloaded" the fund. Instead, he said, the allocation schedule calls for the first year being in FY17, second in FY18, and third in FY19.
 
What Kerwood says the council should have done is budget the actual difference of $332,878 in FY17 and then $178,001 for this upcoming year. Whatever the 25 percent difference between the GIC and Blue Cross Blue Shield is next year would then get funded in 2019.
 
What actually happened is the council put in the $250,000 ahead of time, then followed up in FY17 with another $300,049. During this budget process, Kerwood put $250,000 in for this year as well, not knowing the exact savings. That had led to a debate on the City Council floor last week, which ultimately brought in legal counsel to review the fund.
 
In figuring out the issue with the fund, Kerwood then tracked down the actual amount needed to be allocated, which is $178,001 — some $70,000 less than allocated in the proposed budget. At this point, the city would have only needed $510,880.02 in that account. But instead has already $550,049, thus an overage of $39,168.98.
 
The City Council cut that amount from this upcoming budget to bring the totals in line with what the final cost estimate is expected to be. This year's allocation of $210,832 brings the account to a balance of $368,568, which could still be more than needed.
 
That total estimated the maximum the city should need because it would assume 2019, which is still a year away from being known, is at the maximum $250,000 allocation. If there are excess funds left over then, Kerwood believes it could go toward offsetting other deficits in other lines. He does not anticipate having to add any more funds next year.
 
Ward 5 Councilor Donna Todd Rivers, a former attorney, worried about the language in the contract reading that the accrued funds would be negotiated with the employees. She fears that the union would have a claim on any funds the city puts into the account above what the contract says it needs to put in. Rivers advocated for cutting that line item even more instead of funding through next year.
 
"I'd rather err in the line of taking too much out and have to add a little in FY19," Rivers said.
 
Councilor at Large Melissa Mazzeo had argued that the budget was overfunded last week and continues to suggest that the budget could be cut even further. She pushed for a $50,000 cut on Tuesday, saying the amount the city has been required to place into the account has been decreasing.
 
The amount needed has gone down for this year and, with a 12.9 percent increase in Blue Cross Blue Shield premiums, should go down again. The likelihood is that that the savings between the two plans will be less than the $250,000 currently estimated.
 
The city pays out each year to some employees to offset increases in their health insurance premiums. How to disperse whatever is left in that account is to be negotiated at the end of the contract. So far the city has paid out $216,246.44 in the first year, and $176,065.37 the second. It will know the final payout and allocation amount this time next year.

Tags: fiscal 2018,   pittsfield_budget,   

If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

BRTA Focuses on a New Run Schedule

By Breanna SteeleiBerkshires Staff

PITTSFIELD, Mass. — The Berkshire Regional Transit Authority is still working on maintaining its run schedules after dropping the route realignment proposal.

Last Thursday's meeting was Administrator Kathleen Lambert's first official meeting taking over the reins; retiring director Robert Malnati stayed during a transition period that ended last month.

Lambert is trying to create a schedule that will lessen cancellations. There was a two-hour meeting the week before with the drivers union to negotiate run bids and Lambert is working with the new operating company Keolis, which is taking over from Transdev.

The board spoke about anonymous emails from drivers, which Lambert said she has not seen. iBerkshires was not able to see those letters, but has received some. 

"They were lengthy emails from someone describing themselves as concerning BRTA employee, and there was a signed letter from a whole group of employees basically stating their concerns. So, you know, to me, it was a set of whistleblowers, and that, what my understanding is that this really triggers a need for some type of process to review the merits of these whistleblowers, not going to call them accusations, but basically expressions of concern," said member Stephen Bannon.

A letter iBerkshires received spoke of unhappy drivers who were considering quitting because of decisions being made without "input from frontline staff," frustration and falling morale, and the removal of the former general manager shortly after Lambert came in.

Lambert said it's difficult to navigate a new change. She also noted many drivers don't want to do Saturday runs and it has been hard negotiating with drivers on the new runs.

"I would like you all to keep in mind that the process of change is super difficult. Transdev has been here for 20 years, and some of these drivers have never known any other operating company, the way some of the operations have been handled has been archaic," she said. "So getting folks up to speed on how a modern transit system works is going to be painful for them. So I don't want to say that I'm unsympathetic, because I am sympathetic, but I am trying to coax people along with a system that's going to seem very strange to them."

The board spoke about better communication between them and Lambert, citing cooperation will be best moving forward.

"There's just a lot of stuff in the air right now, and there are a lot of fires to put out to make this a coordinated effort. And if we don't keep our communications open and be straightforward, then you get blindsided about how you know the input that you could get from us about your position, and how you know what's going on in your direction, and we get blindsided. And I think that we have to make sure that this is a collaboration," said member Sherry Youngkin.

"Both sides have responsibilities, because in the long run, this advisory board is going to have to make decisions as to how we brought forward and if we've gone forward in a fair and helpful way. And I think that's hopefully what everybody is looking for also." 

Transdev and Keolis held a three-day recruiting event interviewing almost 40 candidates and offering jobs to eight, but only three stayed on to start training. Lambert said it was disappointing but she will keep trying to retain more people.

In her first report to the board, she noted that ridership dipped a little over 10 percent, but still remains higher than last year, adding that was because of cancellations of services because of the lack of drivers.

Like the last meeting, some of the advisory board members were torn over the start of the Link413 service, worried that the start of the service took drivers away and the numbers of riders are low.

Lambert, however, said the ridership has doubled from last month.

"As I've spoken before, we have, generally, a six-month adoption for brand-new service before you can really go in and evaluate, are you being successful based on the grant that my predecessor wrote along with the team for PBTA and RTA, we are ahead of schedule, which is pretty good, so I'm hoping that will continue to improve," she said.

Member Renee Wood said the board never approved the service, adding the only thing she could find in the minutes was a vote to accept the equipment. She said it was supposed to be put on the agenda to discuss.

"The Link413 service has been three years in the making. It's been a grant that was accepted and has been working with our partners, PVTA and FRTA, to put into place. So I don't have the entire history of how that process worked, but it's been three years in the making, and did we not understand that once we accept that grant that we were going to put in new service?" Lambert said.

The board discussed if Title VI, the Civil Rights Act, was followed with an accurate review and accurate amount of time for public comment period on the service changes and if its attorney should review if the  grant conditions were properly followed.

Lambert said changes had the 60-day comment period included in the proposed route realignment packet, giving the opportunity for the community to respond to that as well but will look into the legality of the situation with their attorney.

View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories