Following a reading of the policy material and the proposal to Tunica County authored by Nick Floyd & Associates, I have a solid understanding of their costs and specifically the deductible.
The discussion has centered on the deductible for the Humana PPO policy. There is a $5,000 deductible for that policy. The question causing so much disruption is who is paying for that deductible.
The Medical Bridge Advantage Program will lower the deductible for the employee to $500. The $4,500 difference in the deductible is covered by the Medical Bridge Advantage Program (MBAP). The County will pay one premium to Humana for Employee Benefit Services. The premium that is paid by the County for the MBAP, the $4500, is put into a reserve account that will be used to pay claims.
Each claim will be processed twice; once thru Humana and then again thru Electronic Billing Services (EBS). The employee will have Dental, Vision, Short Term Disability, Cancer and Accident Disability Coverage. Additionally, each employee will have $50,000 in life insurance with $5,000 for his or her spouse and $2,000 for each child. The employee would normally have to pay for these benefits themselves through their current cafeteria plan and would be charged according to their age. The benefits being offered by NFA have one set rate for all ages.
The Accident Disability and Cancer coverage would pay money directly to the employees and if the employee leaves their employment with Tunica County, they will have the option to keep these policies. The Accident Disability policy also covers the employee on or off the job and will pay in addition to any Workers’ Comp they may receive.
The matter to be considered is which plan, Cigna or Humana, provides the best coverage. I do not have the Cigna plan. It is my understanding that the County Administrator does have the Cigna proposal and has had this information since April. I can find no Insurance Agent of Record or I would have contacted the agent myself.
That being said, the material provided by Nick Floyd and Associates shows Humana having superior coverage at a lower or equal cost to the employee than does Cigna.
Now that the employee issues are settled, that leaves one question, “What is the cost to Tunica County? The Premium fees are not in my materials.
Disclaimer: I have no financial interest in Nick Floyd and Associates nor is my family covered through the group policy held by Tunica County for their employees.
What is still disturbing is all of the commotion about this issue and why wasn’t the Cigna proposal given to the Supervisors by the County Administrator.
Bob Tuchel
Tunicans for Transparency in Government
Monday, June 25, 2012
Sunday, June 17, 2012
“Something is rotten in Denmark”
This business with the County medical insurance is most disturbing. This is so crazy it is hard to know where to begin. This is some of what I’ve learned by attending the Board of Supervisors’ Meetings.
For the past 6 or 7 years Tunica County’s medical insurance has been carried by Cigna. The County’s policy runs from 1 Jun to 31 May of each year. Apparently, the County Administrator received an update from Cigna sometime in Apr 2012 but he did not share this information with the Board of Supervisors. What was he thinking?
During this period of time, another insurance company made a presentation at a Board of Supervisors’ meeting and if I understand this correctly, the new company offered more benefits to Tunica County employees at a reduced rate to the County.
Now, this is where it gets interesting. At the first Jun meeting of the Board of Supervisors, representatives of both insurance companies were present. What I found very upsetting was a statement made by the woman from Cigna. She told everyone present that 1.) She needed an answer today as to whether Tunica County was going to renew the contract with her company and 2.) Cigna was holding and not paying all claims submitted to them from providers of medical benefits to Tunica County employees. What? Excuse me but this policy is paid monthly by our government and the Jun premium has been paid. How dare you come into our County and threaten non-payment of medical claims when your company has been paid for this service.
At the above meeting, the Board of Supervisors decided to continue discussion of the County’s medical insurance until the 15 Jun 2012 meeting.
In between these two meetings, more then a few Tunica County employees were given information that was either false or misleading. Who did this and why would they do this? To me, the answer became obvious at the 15 Jun 2012 meeting.
At the 15 Jun 2012 Board of Supervisors’ meeting the room was packed. Was the attendance staged or did the attendees come of their own free will. Who knows?
What I saw was disgusting on the part of the Beat 2 Supervisor. This Supervisor can’t be bothered with other issues like paying the claims. Don’t take my word for it. Go read the Public Records and you will find “Absent” on the line that would have contained his signature had he cared enough to stay in the room for the discussion. So why was the Beat 2 Supervisor so upset about the medical insurance? Something is missing from this picture. Why would anyone be so upset if other Supervisors are trying to save the County money and give employees more benefits? As William Shakespeare said, “Something is rotten in Denmark.”
And here’s another thing I didn’t like. The same woman from Cigna was sitting right next to me during the 15 Jun 2012 meeting. While the representative of the other company was taking her turn addressing the Board of Supervisors, this woman was bouncing around in her seat and swinging her head around to look behind her. I don’t think she realized her long hair was hitting me in the face each time she did this.
When the meeting was over, I turned to this woman and said I was a resident of Tunica County and I wished she would act more professionally when attending our meetings. You know what she did? She jumped up and said OMG I’m being harassed and found a deputy to complain to while continuing to back out of the Board Room. What a joke! Something is really rotten in Tunica. We need to know just what it is.
For the past 6 or 7 years Tunica County’s medical insurance has been carried by Cigna. The County’s policy runs from 1 Jun to 31 May of each year. Apparently, the County Administrator received an update from Cigna sometime in Apr 2012 but he did not share this information with the Board of Supervisors. What was he thinking?
During this period of time, another insurance company made a presentation at a Board of Supervisors’ meeting and if I understand this correctly, the new company offered more benefits to Tunica County employees at a reduced rate to the County.
Now, this is where it gets interesting. At the first Jun meeting of the Board of Supervisors, representatives of both insurance companies were present. What I found very upsetting was a statement made by the woman from Cigna. She told everyone present that 1.) She needed an answer today as to whether Tunica County was going to renew the contract with her company and 2.) Cigna was holding and not paying all claims submitted to them from providers of medical benefits to Tunica County employees. What? Excuse me but this policy is paid monthly by our government and the Jun premium has been paid. How dare you come into our County and threaten non-payment of medical claims when your company has been paid for this service.
At the above meeting, the Board of Supervisors decided to continue discussion of the County’s medical insurance until the 15 Jun 2012 meeting.
In between these two meetings, more then a few Tunica County employees were given information that was either false or misleading. Who did this and why would they do this? To me, the answer became obvious at the 15 Jun 2012 meeting.
At the 15 Jun 2012 Board of Supervisors’ meeting the room was packed. Was the attendance staged or did the attendees come of their own free will. Who knows?
What I saw was disgusting on the part of the Beat 2 Supervisor. This Supervisor can’t be bothered with other issues like paying the claims. Don’t take my word for it. Go read the Public Records and you will find “Absent” on the line that would have contained his signature had he cared enough to stay in the room for the discussion. So why was the Beat 2 Supervisor so upset about the medical insurance? Something is missing from this picture. Why would anyone be so upset if other Supervisors are trying to save the County money and give employees more benefits? As William Shakespeare said, “Something is rotten in Denmark.”
And here’s another thing I didn’t like. The same woman from Cigna was sitting right next to me during the 15 Jun 2012 meeting. While the representative of the other company was taking her turn addressing the Board of Supervisors, this woman was bouncing around in her seat and swinging her head around to look behind her. I don’t think she realized her long hair was hitting me in the face each time she did this.
When the meeting was over, I turned to this woman and said I was a resident of Tunica County and I wished she would act more professionally when attending our meetings. You know what she did? She jumped up and said OMG I’m being harassed and found a deputy to complain to while continuing to back out of the Board Room. What a joke! Something is really rotten in Tunica. We need to know just what it is.
Saturday, June 16, 2012
Report on the Election Commission
At this evening's Board of Supervisors' Meeting, 15 Jun 2012, the Transparency Committee again reported on the Election Commission. These are our findings:
A. Meetings are not being posted as required by the MS Open Meetings Act. Tunica County employs a full-time Public Information Officer. If the Election Commission cannot find the time to comply with the Open Meetings Act, why can't the Public Information Officer be assign this task? Come to think of it, why isn't the Public Information Officer publishing all meetings of public entities?“
B. Jun 2012: No meeting was held because the Courthouse was locked. And this isn't the first time this has happened. For this year alone, the Election Commission has been locked out of the Courthouse in Feb and Jun 2012.
C. A meeting couldn't be held anyway as only 2 Commissioners showed up and there had to be 3 of the 5 Commissioners for a quorum. What is the deal with the Tunica County Election Commission? Why don't you have a quorum at so many of your meetings?
D. There has been no transcription help offered as requested by the Board of Supervisors on 13 Apr 2012. From the Secretary of State's website, we learned that “they (the Election Commission) act as a group, through their minutes, which should be filed with the circuit clerk of the county." Conclusion: At the 13 Apr 2012, Board of Supervisors' President, James Dunn, asked the County Administrator to check into this situation and see what could be done to help. This hasn't happened. Surprise!!! NOT!!!!
We also found information in the MS Code:
25-41-11. Minutes of meetings
(1) MS Code 25-41-11. Minutes of meetings: "Minutes shall be kept of all meetings of a public body, whether in open or executive session, showing the members present and absent; the date, time and place of the meeting; an accurate recording of any final actions taken at such meeting; and a record, by individual member, of any votes taken; and any other information that the public body requests be included or reflected in the minutes. The minutes shall be recorded within a reasonable time not to exceed thirty (30) days after recess or adjournment and shall be open to public inspection during regular business hours." End of MS Code
Since Feb 2012, the Transparency Committee has been asking both the Circuit Clerk and the Election Committee to review their minutes for 2011. All we are getting is a run around. Additionally, Election Commission Minutes are hand written and therefore are subject to change by anyone who can lay their hands on these documents.
E. Election commissions are also responsible for hearing and resolving disputes concerning the denial of voter registration by a circuit clerk. If the dispute is resolved in favor of the applicant, the individual is placed on the voter rolls by the election commission. This is the only time that the election commission may place a name onto a voter roll. However, if the public is unaware of when the Tunica County Election Commission meets, how can they get their problem(s) solved?
F. “A circuit clerk is required to attend the regularly scheduled meetings of the election commission.” This is not being done. I've been there and the Circuit Clerk has not.
G. “A circuit clerk must also give all assistance that he is capable of giving to the election commissioners to assist them in the revision of voter rolls.” So, let's see, the Circuit Clerk is not at the Election Commission Meetings; the Circuit Clerk does not provide the Election Commission with a printed copy of the current voter rolls for use during their meetings; and during their meetings, the Election Commission does not have computer access to the SEMS system. All of this is just plain wrong.
H. “A circuit clerk keeps copies of the minutes of the meetings of the county election commissioners. Those minutes are prepared by the election commission when official action has been taken.” But when a person goes to the Circuit Clerk and asks to see the minutes, she doesn't have them and tells you they are in the locked Election Commission room upstairs.
In conclusion, just what are the citizens of Tunica County supposed to do? In answer to this question, this is what we found in the MS Code:
25-41-15. Enforcement of chapter; civil penalty
"The Mississippi Ethics Commission shall have the authority to enforce the provisions of this chapter upon a complaint filed by any person. Upon receiving a complaint, the commission shall forward a copy of the complaint to the head of the public body involved. The public body shall have fourteen (14) days from receipt of the complaint to file a response with the commission. After receiving the response to the complaint or, if no response is received after fourteen (14) days, the commission, in its discretion, may dismiss the complaint or proceed by setting a hearing in accordance with rules and regulations promulgated by the Ethics Commission.
After a hearing, the Ethics Commission may order the public body to take whatever reasonable measures necessary, if any, to comply with this chapter. If the Ethics Commission finds that a member or members of a public body has willfully and knowingly violated the provisions of this chapter, the Ethics Commission may impose a civil penalty upon the individual members of the public body found to be in violation of the provision of this chapter in a sum not to exceed Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) for a first offense and One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) for a second or subsequent offense, plus all reasonable expenses incurred by the person or persons in bringing the complaint to enforce this chapter."
Don't know about you, but I'm ready to file a complaint.
A. Meetings are not being posted as required by the MS Open Meetings Act. Tunica County employs a full-time Public Information Officer. If the Election Commission cannot find the time to comply with the Open Meetings Act, why can't the Public Information Officer be assign this task? Come to think of it, why isn't the Public Information Officer publishing all meetings of public entities?“
B. Jun 2012: No meeting was held because the Courthouse was locked. And this isn't the first time this has happened. For this year alone, the Election Commission has been locked out of the Courthouse in Feb and Jun 2012.
C. A meeting couldn't be held anyway as only 2 Commissioners showed up and there had to be 3 of the 5 Commissioners for a quorum. What is the deal with the Tunica County Election Commission? Why don't you have a quorum at so many of your meetings?
D. There has been no transcription help offered as requested by the Board of Supervisors on 13 Apr 2012. From the Secretary of State's website, we learned that “they (the Election Commission) act as a group, through their minutes, which should be filed with the circuit clerk of the county." Conclusion: At the 13 Apr 2012, Board of Supervisors' President, James Dunn, asked the County Administrator to check into this situation and see what could be done to help. This hasn't happened. Surprise!!! NOT!!!!
We also found information in the MS Code:
25-41-11. Minutes of meetings
(1) MS Code 25-41-11. Minutes of meetings: "Minutes shall be kept of all meetings of a public body, whether in open or executive session, showing the members present and absent; the date, time and place of the meeting; an accurate recording of any final actions taken at such meeting; and a record, by individual member, of any votes taken; and any other information that the public body requests be included or reflected in the minutes. The minutes shall be recorded within a reasonable time not to exceed thirty (30) days after recess or adjournment and shall be open to public inspection during regular business hours." End of MS Code
Since Feb 2012, the Transparency Committee has been asking both the Circuit Clerk and the Election Committee to review their minutes for 2011. All we are getting is a run around. Additionally, Election Commission Minutes are hand written and therefore are subject to change by anyone who can lay their hands on these documents.
E. Election commissions are also responsible for hearing and resolving disputes concerning the denial of voter registration by a circuit clerk. If the dispute is resolved in favor of the applicant, the individual is placed on the voter rolls by the election commission. This is the only time that the election commission may place a name onto a voter roll. However, if the public is unaware of when the Tunica County Election Commission meets, how can they get their problem(s) solved?
F. “A circuit clerk is required to attend the regularly scheduled meetings of the election commission.” This is not being done. I've been there and the Circuit Clerk has not.
G. “A circuit clerk must also give all assistance that he is capable of giving to the election commissioners to assist them in the revision of voter rolls.” So, let's see, the Circuit Clerk is not at the Election Commission Meetings; the Circuit Clerk does not provide the Election Commission with a printed copy of the current voter rolls for use during their meetings; and during their meetings, the Election Commission does not have computer access to the SEMS system. All of this is just plain wrong.
H. “A circuit clerk keeps copies of the minutes of the meetings of the county election commissioners. Those minutes are prepared by the election commission when official action has been taken.” But when a person goes to the Circuit Clerk and asks to see the minutes, she doesn't have them and tells you they are in the locked Election Commission room upstairs.
In conclusion, just what are the citizens of Tunica County supposed to do? In answer to this question, this is what we found in the MS Code:
25-41-15. Enforcement of chapter; civil penalty
"The Mississippi Ethics Commission shall have the authority to enforce the provisions of this chapter upon a complaint filed by any person. Upon receiving a complaint, the commission shall forward a copy of the complaint to the head of the public body involved. The public body shall have fourteen (14) days from receipt of the complaint to file a response with the commission. After receiving the response to the complaint or, if no response is received after fourteen (14) days, the commission, in its discretion, may dismiss the complaint or proceed by setting a hearing in accordance with rules and regulations promulgated by the Ethics Commission.
After a hearing, the Ethics Commission may order the public body to take whatever reasonable measures necessary, if any, to comply with this chapter. If the Ethics Commission finds that a member or members of a public body has willfully and knowingly violated the provisions of this chapter, the Ethics Commission may impose a civil penalty upon the individual members of the public body found to be in violation of the provision of this chapter in a sum not to exceed Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) for a first offense and One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) for a second or subsequent offense, plus all reasonable expenses incurred by the person or persons in bringing the complaint to enforce this chapter."
Don't know about you, but I'm ready to file a complaint.
Friday, June 15, 2012
A Seat at the Table
For some time now, we have been watching the actions of the Tunica County Sheriff at Board of Supervisors’ Meetings.
Since the first of the year, Sheriff Hamp, when present, has walked in and stated: “All rise, the Tunica County Board of Supervisors’ is now in session.” What the heck is this all about?
This is what the MS Code says about the Sheriff’s attendance at Board of Supervisors’ Meetings:
MS Code Ann. 19-3-25 (2011) Sheriff to attend meetings. “The sheriff of the county shall attend all meetings of the board of supervisors, either in person or by deputy, and shall execute all its process and orders.”
That’s it. This one sentence does not say anything about the Sheriff sitting at the Board of Supervisors’ table. This one sentence does not say anything about the Sheriff wedging himself between the Board President and the Board Attorney. What is all of this foolishness?
Actually Sheriff Hamp, your time would be better spent learning when you may execute an arrest and when you may execute a citation.
Since the first of the year, Sheriff Hamp, when present, has walked in and stated: “All rise, the Tunica County Board of Supervisors’ is now in session.” What the heck is this all about?
This is what the MS Code says about the Sheriff’s attendance at Board of Supervisors’ Meetings:
MS Code Ann. 19-3-25 (2011) Sheriff to attend meetings. “The sheriff of the county shall attend all meetings of the board of supervisors, either in person or by deputy, and shall execute all its process and orders.”
That’s it. This one sentence does not say anything about the Sheriff sitting at the Board of Supervisors’ table. This one sentence does not say anything about the Sheriff wedging himself between the Board President and the Board Attorney. What is all of this foolishness?
Actually Sheriff Hamp, your time would be better spent learning when you may execute an arrest and when you may execute a citation.
Employee Handbook
At the Board of Supervisors’ Meeting this morning, 4 Jun 2012, the Board approved the new Employee Handbook. Yes!!!!
One Supervisor asked about the Moonlighting requirements. This section was read aloud and it was essentially the same policy as was contained in the 2003 Handbook. The District 2 Supervisor asked if this was legal. He was told by the Board’s Attorney that this requirement was legal. Next, the District 2 Supervisor asked if this requirement was fair and proposed to the Board that they have a “gentleman’s agreement” not to enforce this part of the Employee Handbook. This statement was followed by laughter from the Board and the audience.
So, here’s the deal Mr. District 2 Supervisor: Do you still have Tunica County Employees working in your place of business? Then get the letters written and bring them before the Tunica County Board of Supervisors for approval of their Moonlighting employment. Right now, you are out of compliance with the 2003 AND the 2012 Tunica County Employee Handbook.
One Supervisor asked about the Moonlighting requirements. This section was read aloud and it was essentially the same policy as was contained in the 2003 Handbook. The District 2 Supervisor asked if this was legal. He was told by the Board’s Attorney that this requirement was legal. Next, the District 2 Supervisor asked if this requirement was fair and proposed to the Board that they have a “gentleman’s agreement” not to enforce this part of the Employee Handbook. This statement was followed by laughter from the Board and the audience.
So, here’s the deal Mr. District 2 Supervisor: Do you still have Tunica County Employees working in your place of business? Then get the letters written and bring them before the Tunica County Board of Supervisors for approval of their Moonlighting employment. Right now, you are out of compliance with the 2003 AND the 2012 Tunica County Employee Handbook.
Thursday, May 10, 2012
We made the national news tonight
....as the most impoverished state in the United States of America. And you know what the focus was? Education in the Delta. We should be so proud. NOT!!!
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
Tunica County Second Chances Program
The following is a copy of the letter this Committee sent to the Tunica Times.
"This letter is being written in response to the front page article in the 4 May 2012 issue of the Tunica Times. The title of the article is “Former sheriff back on county payroll.”
Let’s start with the “second chances” idea. This program may be beneficial to our community but it cannot be a program completely supported by our local government. If implemented, this program needs to be a joint effort between private and public entities.
Second, if implemented, the “second chances” program should not include those who broke the law while serving as an elected official. For our local government to thank these people by giving them a job is disrespectful to the rest of us. And as for these former elected officials not being given “desk jobs”? Are you kidding me? One of these people heads up the Meals on Wheels Program…a desk job.
And finally, if the Board of Supervisors wants to implement a new program don’t shoot from the hip. Work out the details, put it on paper, let the public know about it and then implement it. Not just on this idea, on everything. That’s how you gain the public’s trust and get re-elected."
Since submitting this letter, I have learned that there is a document being written to put this program in place. Here's hoping former elected officials will be "officially" excluded and private companies will participate.
Expanding on the contents of the Tunica Times article, it does seem preposterous that the District 1 Supervisor would vote against employing these individuals. The District 1 and District 2 Supervisors have been in office for a very long time. So, these two individuals can be held responsible for hiring prior to 1 Jan 2011. As a matter of fact, many moons ago I personally had a conversation with the District 1 Supervisor about the employment of the individual at Meals on Wheel. I remember what was said to me when I questioned this employment. I was told by the District 1 Supervisor that he would have vote for this individual because he was also his neighbor. As a point of interest, this Meals on Wheels individual is not listed with the agency. This individual is listed in the County Administrator's Department. Why is that?
Of course, we already know that the District 2 Supervisor was absent from this meeting. Seems he is absent alot when something that is really important comes up.
"This letter is being written in response to the front page article in the 4 May 2012 issue of the Tunica Times. The title of the article is “Former sheriff back on county payroll.”
Let’s start with the “second chances” idea. This program may be beneficial to our community but it cannot be a program completely supported by our local government. If implemented, this program needs to be a joint effort between private and public entities.
Second, if implemented, the “second chances” program should not include those who broke the law while serving as an elected official. For our local government to thank these people by giving them a job is disrespectful to the rest of us. And as for these former elected officials not being given “desk jobs”? Are you kidding me? One of these people heads up the Meals on Wheels Program…a desk job.
And finally, if the Board of Supervisors wants to implement a new program don’t shoot from the hip. Work out the details, put it on paper, let the public know about it and then implement it. Not just on this idea, on everything. That’s how you gain the public’s trust and get re-elected."
Expanding on the contents of the Tunica Times article, it does seem preposterous that the District 1 Supervisor would vote against employing these individuals. The District 1 and District 2 Supervisors have been in office for a very long time. So, these two individuals can be held responsible for hiring prior to 1 Jan 2011. As a matter of fact, many moons ago I personally had a conversation with the District 1 Supervisor about the employment of the individual at Meals on Wheel. I remember what was said to me when I questioned this employment. I was told by the District 1 Supervisor that he would have vote for this individual because he was also his neighbor. As a point of interest, this Meals on Wheels individual is not listed with the agency. This individual is listed in the County Administrator's Department. Why is that?
Of course, we already know that the District 2 Supervisor was absent from this meeting. Seems he is absent alot when something that is really important comes up.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)