Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council February 25, 2002 <br />Regular Meeting Page 13 <br /> <br /> <br />Council Member Thomas indicated that the City did not change the benefit as supplemental <br />insurance is not a benefit provided to employees. <br /> <br />Council Member Quick indicated he had no interest in continuing the illegal action by a former <br />staff member and stated he feels Council Members would be putting themselves on the line by <br />doing so. <br /> <br />MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Thomas. To Deny the Grievance Filed by Marge Norquist. <br /> <br />Council Member Marty read the wording in the personnel policy under policy insurance benefits <br />and commented that he did not see where the policy said employees have to use the City’s plan. <br /> <br />City Attorney Riggs indicated the HealthPartners agreement says so and the personnel policy <br />needs to be read in conjunction with the HealthPartners master contract. He then commented <br />that this issue was discussed at the last meeting. <br /> <br />City Administrator Miller pointed out that reading one paragraph further down in the policy it <br />states “according to the established guidelines for the City’s plans.” <br /> <br />Council Member Stigney indicated, as explained to him by the City Attorney, the way things are <br />written it does not allow for the possibility of an outside supplemental health care policy to be <br />paid for by the City. He then commented that he does not feel the door for insurance should be <br />shut on someone as soon as they turn 65 and he would like City Staff to contact HealthPartners to <br />determine whether they offer a supplemental insurance policy that the City would be able to offer <br />that would not be in violation of its master agreement and determine what the costs to do so <br />would be. <br /> <br />Council Member Thomas indicated Council had discussed looking at the option of providing <br />supplemental insurance when the healthcare contract is renegotiated but it is not an option at this <br />point. She then stated that, because the City has to abide by law now, does not mean that there <br />are not options to be discussed and investigated. She further commented that the City has not <br />said Ms. Norquist needs to cancel her policy because she is a member of this separate from the <br />City but, the City is not allowed to reimburse her for it at this time. <br /> <br />Mr. Serfling commented that, if people of goodwill really wanted to resolve this problem, <br />Council would direct Staff to sit down with the union and HealthPartners to discuss the options. <br /> <br />Mayor Sonterre indicated he did not want Council portrayed as vindictive or cold hearted in this <br />matter because Council has said it would be amenable to discussing that type of coverage and <br />determining whether the City can afford to offer it as a benefit to all employees in the future. <br /> <br />Council Member Marty commented that Ms. Norquist is part time and has limited funds. He <br />then asked whether City Administrator Miller could contact HealthPartners to see if this type of <br />policy is offered by them.