Town Council Meeting of 10/17/2017 - Summary - 'Despotism' in King's Grant, Ball Fields, Health Plans and School Enrollment
This month's Town Council meeting was much more crowded than usual. Looking around, the audience was filled with children, including many in baseball uniforms. It was apparent many of those were there to discuss the issue regarding the MRC and use of the playing fields by for-profit companies.
The night began with recognition of the Marlton Reds, a 12U team
who went undefeated in a tournament in Cooperstown last spring. They went
6-0, ranking #4 out of the 104 teams in the tournament, hitting a staggering 31
home runs in 6 games. The kids were all brought up and individually
recognized, with the mayor talking and joking around with all of them, and
reading a proclamation on their behalf. The kids greatly enjoyed
their time in the spotlight and receiving the recognition from the Mayor.
After the baseball team was recognized, a presentation was given
on the town Health Care plan. The presentation was given by Township
Manager Tom C, along with Tony Mahon, Managing Director at Assured Partners AJM
Insurance Management, Greg D’Orazio, Sales Lead at Assured Partners AJM
Insurance Management, and Linda Maxell, Director at Insurance Administrator of
America. Tom began with a brief history of the history of Evesham’s
health care policy. The town was in the New Jersey State Health Benefits
Plan and saw skyrocketing costs every year. The NJSHBP is a plan
setup by the state of NJ to provide group coverage for municipalities and
school districts in NJ. After the 2009 election , the town began
looking at alternatives to the NJSHBP. The NJSHBP is self-funded and has
been historically underfunded. It is also a plan that takes ‘all-comers’
– regardless of your claim history or participation rates, you will get
accepted into the program and every municipality pays the same rate.
Evesham looked into plans using private funding, fully insured plans, partially
self-funded plans and remaining in the NJSHBP. Through a long and arduous
process, the town settled on its current partially self-funded plan. The
plan compared favorably to the NJSHBP plan, offering the same tiers of coverage
and benefits. The representatives from AJM touted the wellness program,
encouraging member weight loss and smoking cessation, creating healthier
employees.
Slides were presented showing how costs to the town have
stabilized and that the 2017 expense of $2,650,000 is actually lower than the
2008 expense, $2,691,815. Had the town stayed in the NJSHBP plan, the
expenses would have increased astronomically, thus the change in policies saved
Evesham millions of dollars.
Unfortunately there was no mention made of the number of employees
and dependents covered under the policy, nor mention of the participation rate,
so the fact that our expenses have leveled presents an incomplete picture.
There are several scenarios where the number of covered lives and the
participation rate is important.
- Without knowing the number of employees covered, there is no way to determine the cost to the town per employee. If the town employs 20% less people than in 2008 (or if less people opted for coverage) and the total expense is the same, is that a good result? While I don’t think the town has 20% less employees, I don’t have a way of knowing for sure. The information provided is incomplete.
- What percentage of employees are participating in the plan? If 80% of township employees used to participate and now only 50% do, that will indeed save the town money. But is that because we aren’t offering as good benefits to our town employees as we used to, so they are obtaining insurance through their spouse? The fire and police departments are filled with people who risk their lives for us, fighting crime, protecting our homes, and keeping us safe – is this really where we want to save money? Will providing lesser benefits attract the best available to apply for jobs in our town? Again, I don’t know if the percentage participating has changed, just that the information was not provided.
- Have the out of pocket costs gone up for the insured? This information was not provided, but as mentioned above, will this help retain and attract the best available to apply for jobs in our town?
While I did appreciate receiving the information I received, I would have liked a lot more. There is not enough information to fully appreciate the outcome and there was no public comment time allowed. Since I believe this was presented to the public to try to galvanize support to move the Evesham Township School District into this policy as well, I don’t believe there is enough information to warrant that support, though I certainly hope the ETSD has looked or will look at the plan.
The next item up for discussion was the use of town fields by teams using a for-profit trainer or coach. I will admit I do not fully understand the issue here, and I will defer to anyone more knowledgeable than I am. From what I can understand, the Town Council is concerned that there are for-profit entities using public lands without paying the requisite fees to the town and/or not having a contract in place to protect the town and its residents. Township Manager Tom C explained that the town can’t allow anything of value to go to a private vendor without sending it out for bid and that is what is currently happening. Currently there is a contact between the MRC and the town to provide youth sports in town. The MRC is a non-profit group, but some teams hire paid coaches and trainers to assist. These individuals are paid for by the teams, but are using town fields. Most of these trainers do not have contracts with the MRC.
To address this issue, Ordinance 25-10-2017 was passed, which does not take effect until 21 days after passage. And the current contract between the town and the MRC runs until December, 31, 2017.
In response to this ordinance, several members of the public spoke. While the dialogue was heated at times, everyone remained respectful. The members of the public made the following points:
- The lack of a contract with the vendors is not new, it has been this way for decades
- While some vendors have no written contract, there are oral agreement, invoices, background checks, and the trainers are certified through the state
- The language in the ordinance is heavy handed, threatening jail time for violation of the ordinance
- The language is unclear whether a dad and his kids are violating the ordinance by using the field without permission to practice lacrosse. (While Tom C insisted this was not the case, I admit I had that question written down as well, that if at my son’s birthday party we walked down to the field for an impromptu kickball game, are we in violation of the ordinance Article 1 Paragraph B?)
- The ordinance is amending the ‘Facilities Use Policy’, which is not available online. It was not available at the meeting either and no one seems quite sure how to get it.
- There are a lot of rumors swirling in the public
- “I heard a lot of legal jargon that I don’t understand.” (Sadly I agree with that. It is difficult to summarize this issue because much of it was in legal language.)
- Parents and coaches are fearful that they will be kicked off their fields. Tom C and Mayor Brown both insisted this would not happen.
The ordinance passed 5-0. As the contract between the town and the MRC runs until December, 31, 2017, Tom C recommended putting together a rudimentary contract with vendors that will last until the end of the year. This will give enough time for a long term solution to be worked out.
And if that issue wasn’t difficult enough to understand……
Many town residents from King’s Grant were in attendance to discuss the ‘despotism’ that neighborhoods in Kings Grant live under, due to policy decisions made by the Evesham Planning board back in the mid 80s. Evan Scott from the Williamsburg neighborhood of King’s Grant spoke for a while to provide the back story as to why he was there. Back in 1982, the Evesham Planning Board created an ‘irrevocable delegation of powers’ to the Kings Grant Maintenance Association to provide maintenance in all Kings Grant neighborhoods public lands and buildings. In 1997, the Water’s Edge neighborhood brought suit which made it all the way to the NJ Supreme Court, and the Act creating the ‘irrevocable delegation of powers’ was found to be unlawful, in violation of the Condiuminium Act.
While I could try to summarize it, I think it would be better for anyone interested to read the actual court summary here. It is a fairly short read, and I cannot do the topic justice.
So while the Act was found unlawful, neighborhoods claim to still have difficulty leaving the Association. When neighborhoods want to secede and leave the Kings Grant Maintenance Association, they claim to be losing their association fees. The president of the Kings Mill neighborhood association stated that they left 2 years ago when the neighborhood had $600,000 in association money which was never returned. They were sent a bill for $24,000 upon leaving.
Williamsburg currently has $128,000 in reserves and the neighborhood does not want to lose that money. The Mayor asked what it was they were looking for from the town, and was told they were hoping that the town would enjoin the lawsuit. Mayor Brown deferred to town solicitor John Gillespie, who said he had no guidance to give at this time, that he would need time to review the case and see if there were any similar cases in surrounding towns.
David Morelli from the Kings Grant Maintenance Association also spoke at the meeting. He stated that no judge had ever ruled in favor of the allegations against KGMA. He said that neighborhoods don’t need to litigate to leave the association and that they do get their money back, which caused laughter from some of the Kings Grant residents in the room. He also said they the residents would be better off waiting for it to play out in the courts.
The Mayor then wrapped up the debate, stating that nothing would be solved in the room at this time.
Other quick items of interest:
- Ken D’Andrea did confirm that the PJ Whelihan Restaurant Group was buying the liquor license from Café Corolla.
- A resident from Villa Royale asked for assistance in dealing with a bank owned abandoned house that was suspected of being full of black mold. She was referred to Nancy J for assistance.
- Rosemary Bernardi questioned the use of a municipal lot for parking for a private for-profit enterprise, the McKenna redevelopment project. The mayor explained that tonight they were only approving the appointment of a Master Developer. Questions regarding the actual plan would need to be addressed to the Planning Board when it comes up there.
- While Trick or Treating hours were set from 3pm to 8pm, the dais assured people that no one would be arrested for ringing a doorbell before or after those hours. They were guidelines only.
And finally, the Mayor wanted to talk about Evesham Township School Enrollment. He listed the names of the 5 school board members who voted to close Evans in 2016. He stated he had information from the ETSB showing their current enrollment and it was way higher than the projections the school board used in voting to close Evans. Mayor Brown reported that the current Evesham Enrollment as of 10/13 is 4428, and the estimates from Whitehall were 4,276, a difference of 152, or 'half a school'.
Those numbers are indeed correct . However, if you are trying to determine whether the elementary schools will be too crowded because Evans was closed, you need to look at K-5 enrollment only. The numbers cited above are K-8.
Total general education K-5 enrollment is currently 2,526. The K-5 general education projections from Whitehall were 2,485, a difference of 41.
Both Whitehall and ETSD count special education classes separately., though Whitehall does not specify grade level for special education classes. To compare total population at the elementary schools, you would need to use the page 22 of the ETSD 2017-18 Budget Proposal found here. (Note that these projections exclude 2 paid pre-K classes that were added over the summer since classroom space was available. These new classes were discussed at the last Evesham Township School Board meeting but were not included in any projections.)
Including general and special education classrooms, projections show a total population of 2,796 for all elementary schools. Total current K-5 actual enrollment is 2,760, a difference of 36 students.
For the town as a whole, there are also 62 pre-K students at Rice, 765 middle schoolers at DeMasi Middle, 841 middle schoolers at Marlton Middle. Adding the K-5, pre-K, and two middle schools, you get the current enrollment of 4,428.
The next meeting of the Evesham Township School Board is on Thursday October 26th at 7 pm at DeMasi Middle School if you would like to seek further information.
Finally, I would like to commend those who came out to speak in front of Town Council. While some of the discussions, especially those around use of public fields, were tense at times, they always remained respectful. Both the members of the public and those representing the town conducted themselves with the utmost professionalism.