OPEB - Questions for Council Candidates

Editor's Note - Welcome to seventh installment of Questions for Council Candidates. Recently, Hyattsville Patch sent a 15 part questionnaire to candidates running in this year's Hyattsville City Council election. The questions, developed with the help of Hyattsville Patch readers, probe the candidates thoughts on city policy, development, and also asked the candidates to do a little self reflection. 

Between now and May 6, Hyattsville Patch will be publishing their responses to each question to help you, the reader, make a more informed decision at the polls on May 7. Here now are the responses to the seventh question. Responses are organized alphabetically by ward.

Question - It would cost roughly $1 million per year to fully fund the projected health care costs for current and future retirees under the city's current post employment benefit scheme. The city council is currently debating revising retiree health care benefits to bring this cost under control. Some city employees have suggested raising tax revenue to fund a robust benefits program. How should the city handle this dilemma?

Ward 1 Candidates:

William Jenne - Editor's Note - Jenne's response to this question was added after this post was published. Jenne, citing work and family obligations, did not submit his responses to the candidate questionnaire until May 2, well after the publication deadline, and well after the first seven candidate responses had been published.

I would ‘grandfather-in” existing retirees and those retiring this year and steadily decrease over a long period of time those benefits for future retirees that would put the city’s finances in jeopardy. In order to be fair to those close to retirement, those farthest from retirement, having more time to make alternate plans, would shoulder more of the proposed benefit cuts. The actual amount of cuts and schedule I would leave to the city administration and other experts in retirement benefits to determine.

Bart Lawrence - Not being on the Council, there is a great deal of information concerning retirement benefits (OPEB), staff compensation, and the municipal budget that I’ve not seen. When it comes to OPEB, we must first meet our legal obligations to staff past and present. To be clear, meeting our legal obligations does not preclude a reduction in benefits. From there, we must seek an outcome that is fair to staff members and their families, provides an attractive benefits package to attract future employees, and ensures the fiscal well-being of the City.

Ward 2 Candidates:

Robert Croslin - The city has hired a consultant to do a compensation study. The council should wait until the consultant’s report is received. They should review it carefully and consider recommended cost saving changes for future employees.

David Hiles (Incumbent) - The number is incorrect, perhaps it is referring to the $972,000 cost this year.  For the FY14 budget currently under consideration, it will be $1.1 million.  It is growing every year, at such a rate that we can’t raise taxes enough to pay the cost.  I’m committed to a competitive package of salary and benefits. I don’t see how we can maintain a package that is out of line with comparable jurisdictions and is not sustainable. 

Ward 3 Candidate:

Patrick Paschall - Unfortunately, the cost of providing full health benefits for retirees and their families is incredibly high as a percentage of the city budget, and continues to grow. It is clear that the current retirement benefits are structured in a way that is completely unsustainable for the city budget. Regardless of what got us into this situation, the benefit offered to future employees must be changed to a sustainable benefit that provides effective retirement benefit for our employees without the inefficiency of the current program.  Nobody is happy about this dilemma, but increasing taxes on residents in a time where most residents just got property assessments indicating reduced home values is also not the solution.

We should not change anything for retired City employees, they have put in their time and have earned their benefit. For current employees, those that have been here longer and are closer to retirement have earned their full benefit and nothing should change for them, either. However, for employees that have only worked for Hyattsville for a few years, we can make amendments to their retirement packages early enough for them to plan accordingly, and find we can find a way to provide a progressively higher proportion of the original benefit to those that have been with the city longer and are closer to retirement. 

Ward 4 Candidates:

Ross Gateretse - I am supportive of the investment of city resources in capital expenditures for re-development and improving and enhancing city facilities. Residents need a government that looks confidently into the future and able to provide healthcare policies that are constructive and competent. What Hyattsville has achieved so far is not enough. We want a better quality of life for our city residents, the type of Hyattsville we want for our children to inherit. The government should provide affordable healthcare for seniors and the city should invest significantly in long term care. 

Edouard Haba - There is no easy answer to this question of benefits. However, we need to make sure that we have all the necessary information and give all concerned parties an opportunity to express their views before deciding on the matter. In other words, the benefit debate should not be isolated but rather as part of a larger budget plan.

Ward 5 Candidates:

Pastor Herrera - Editor's Note - Herrera did not submit responses to this questionnaire before the publication deadline.

Joseph Solomon - I am not in favor of any new taxes, however, I believe in order for anyone to accurately answer this question the city must first produce a budget! Then all residents can clearly see where the money is being spent.

Clayton Williams - The current council is correct that we need to fully fund the employee post-employment benefits. They are correct that doing that under the current plan creates an unsustainable burden on the budget. They are NOT correct in the timing. A compensation study ordered by the city will be presented in a month. Only with that information can we determine what a reasonable compensation and benefits package will look like.

To put off this reform for so many years was foolish. However, it is more foolish to rush a reform right before the release of a city-funded study addressing this very issue. Only with complete information can we ensure that Hyattsville appeals to homeowners in regards to the tax burden, but also to our valued employees in regards to their compensation.