As the reimbursement saga wound down after more than two years of debates over the details, members of the Township Council jokingly jabbed each other and then nearly rejected the measure.
Ultimately, however, Councilman Charles Morgan put his opposition to the mayor’s continued monthly reimbursement aside and joined three of his colleagues to pass the reimbursement policy, 4-1. Kamal Khanna, who was opposed to the measure from the beginning, cast the lone “no” vote.
Township administrators had argued that adopting such a policy — which gets rid of the automatic monthly $250 reimbursements for employees — would “handcuff” them during contract negotiations.
The council abandoned its original idea to continue automatic monthly $250 mileage reimbursements only for those employees whose mileage reimbursements under the new policy (based on an IRS rate per mile) would cost the township more, based on the large number of miles they travel. That language was removed from the final resolution, passed September 7.
Instead, council ultimately opted for language that encourages employees to use township vehicles whenever possible and then to be reimbursed at the IRS rate per mile if they had to use their own personal vehicles as a last resort.
The new reimbursement policy will become effective at the conclusion of any collective bargaining agreement or employment contract.
The council spent more than an hour going through the details of the four-paragraph policy, which has been pared down from the original proposal by Morgan and Councilwoman Linda Geevers. Council President Diane Ciccone chose to go through the document’s paragraphs one at a time so that council could come up with language and come to a consensus before voting on the final document.
In the final draft, the policy calls for new agreements and contracts to be negotiated to replace the current policy with the least costly method of reimbursing employees for travel and meal costs.
Further, in lieu of a monthly allowance and “in the absence of an available township vehicle,” employees will be reimbursed for business when driven in their personally-owned vehicles at an amount not to exceed the IRS rate.
There was some debate over whether going to a rate based on the IRS rate would end up causing trouble for the township, and Hary said it would hinder his ability to negotiate.
“This is not going to empower me; it’s going to make it more difficult,” he said. Under the former policy, the automatic $250 monthly reimbursement was useful in contract negotiations, he said.
However, Ciccone said that all of the employees should be encouraged to use township vehicles, eliminating the need for reimbursements.
But Hary said that there would not be an available vehicle at all times for all of the employees to use. Ciccone and other council members asked for an exact number of employees the new policy would affect. Of the 12 employees who currently receive the monthly reimbursement, nine would be affected, Hary said. Ciccone said she could not see how nine employees would not be able to share the cars.
Hary said that all of the employees are field/inspecting personnel and are constantly on the road, and having a personal vehicle available for work purposes is not currently a condition of employment. He argued that some would then have to begin using their vehicles. Ciccone maintained, though, that she felt there were enough vehicles at the municipal building to accommodate their work needs.
Councilman George Borek said he felt part of the goal for establishing the new reimbursement policy was, in fact, to encourage less use of vehicles, in keeping with the township’s green efforts. So, when employees really need the vehicles, there should be a township vehicle available.
However, “all these people need vehicles,” Hary said. “They all potentially need them at the same time. And in fact, I’m trying to reduce our municipal fleet.”
Geevers asked if there was a list of employees who drove so many miles in one month that the IRS rate of reimbursement would end up costing the township more than the $250. “There were some people who were under the $250,” Geevers said. “But if there are people who are above the $250, it would be in the best interest of the township to keep that reimbursement.”
The language in the final document, though, did not mention a provision for those employees.
The council also took out language specifying limits for meal amounts for breakfast, lunch, and dinner, and replaced it with a simpler clause: that daily meals should not exceed $50 a day ($75 for out-of-state meals). There was some debate over specifying whether the council should specify whether the meal reimbursements applied to conferences, meetings, and other instances where an employee would be away for business, but ultimately opted out of getting into too much detail.
The current meal reimbursement policy caps daily allowances at $35, but has not been increased since the reimbursement policy was adopted in 2001.
The idea did cause debate, though, as Geevers felt the resolution needed to define the types of business for which a meal reimbursement was valid. In debating the language, she said employees should be reimbursed for meetings they attend on behalf of township business, “but not for meeting with the Planning Board chair,” Geevers said, a reference to the controversial meal reimbursement that Morgan submitted in 2008 for a meal that he had with Planning Board Chairman Marvin Gardner to discuss the redevelopment process. Gardner maintains he did not know Morgan was going to submit a reimbursement voucher for it, and paid the township his portion of the meal. Morgan referred to the incident as an example of why a clear reimbursement policy was needed.
“Linda, please don’t go there,” Ciccone said in response to Geevers’ comment, creating laughter at the dais.
A few minutes later the in the conversation, Morgan continued the jabbing. “I took a shot with the Planning Board meal (comment),” he said. “I think we should be excluding alcohol, Ms. Geevers.” Morgan began to insinuate that one of Geevers’ reimbursements in the past had included alcohol, and Geevers began to defend herself, creating more laughter at the dais.
Ciccone had to bang the gavel to bring the meeting back to order, but Morgan’s suggestion stuck with council members. “I agree,” said Borek. “Liquor should not be included in any reimbursements.”
The final paragraph of the reimbursement policy continues the mayor’s monthly mileage allowance of $250. Throughout the process, most council members maintained they felt he should continue to receive the allowance because he drives to many meetings related to township business and should keep the mileage reimbursement in place.
It was this last paragraph that played a part in stalling the process temporarily during the meeting. “I would vote for it, if not for number 4,” Morgan said referring to the paragraph as the reason he would not offer a motion to pass the resolution. Morgan said he felt the mayor should not be treated differently than other employees.
But he was not the only council member who fell silent — none of the council members offered a motion to approve the resolution.
Ciccone pointed out that the debate had been going on for years, and questioned why the council would spend the time to go through and find consensus on the policy’s language, but not be comfortable enough to pass the resolution. Finally, Morgan made a motion. Ciccone issued a second.
In August, the council agreed it would vote on the policy, but originally asked Hary to determine which of the 12 positions that currently receive the reimbursement allowance should continue to receive it.
Throughout the process, however, Hary has maintained that the monthly allowance actually saves the township money in reimbursement costs, which would increase if a person were reimbursed at the actual IRS rate of 50 cents per mile (the current policy uses a rate of 40 cents per mile) — as stated in the new policy. When it was originally suggested by council members that employees should be required to use a township vehicle already at the municipal building for work-related travel, Hary said there were not enough vehicles, and the township would need to buy more.
Further, Hary said, providing transportation is not a condition of employment. And during contract negotiations, a union might argue that the township simply provide vehicles for the employees if it does not provide a monthly reimbursement allowance.
The numbers themselves may also cause more costs, Hary argued. Currently the township reimburses mileage based on a rate lower than that allowed by the IRS. At the IRS rate, which is right now 50 cents per mile, it would cost the township more money, he argued, saying that the current rate of 40 cents saves the township about $5,000 a year.
Hary said the reason for the flat reimbursement was that it is easier to predict for budgeting purposes. In addition, the new caps on meal allowances are above the threshold currently allowed, he said.
The idea to re-examine the reimbursement policy first came in 2008, when the council deliberated a 50 percent council raise from $5,000 a year to $7,500, and then a salary increase for the mayor from $17,685 to $25,000.
Proponents argued that the raises would eliminate the need for submitting reimbursement forms and dealing with questions that could be raised when it comes to determining which reimbursements are associated with the job. Opponents said that expenses legitimately accrued by council members as part of township business should be submitted and reimbursed.
