While the devil may be in the details in setting a new reimbursement policy, most council members seemed to be on the same page when it comes to one idea — eliminating the current flat, monthly mileage and meal allowance of $250 given to certain township employees.
The issue of reimbursements, and how to handle them, has been a recurring issue over the past two years. The council gave it another shot on June 14 when it reviewed a draft ordinance proposed by members Charles Morgan and Linda Geevers. Ultimately, however, the council assigned Township Attorney Michael Herbert to draft a policy based on the discussion.
The debate was not over the need for a clear standard. Rather, the debate surrounded whether the council was overstepping its authority under the Faulkner Act form of government in trying to create a new, detailed ordinance that would be engrained into the township code.
But as township officials prepare to head into rounds of negotiations with all of the employee unions this year, eliminating the current monthly allowance could prove detrimental to the collective bargaining process, argued Business Administrator Robert Hary. “We’re reinventing the wheel here when it’s not necessary,” said Hary, who argued that guidelines for employee reimbursements belonged in the administration’s policy and procedures manual and not in an ordinance.
However, Herbert told the council it has authority in two ways: it has the right to establish polices, which could include abolishing the monthly allowance and replacing it with a voucher system; and approving contracts. “Council can direct the administration and say, ‘We know you are going to negotiate the contracts, but we don’t want to have the $250 a month in there,’” Herbert explained.
“You have to approve the contracts ultimately. I think you can have a broad idea as to what you want in a policy under your budgetary contract approval. You can have general statements and a resolution saying, ‘This is how we’d like you to proceed.’”
The idea to re-examine the reimbursement policy first came in 2008 the idea of creating a reimbursement policy surfaced after 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.
Morgan argued then, however, that he submitted vouchers that still had not been paid, and controversy broke out over the legitimacy of those reimbursements. One was reimbursement for a conference call and another was reimbursement for taking Planning Board Chairman Marvin Gardner to lunch to discuss the board’s involvement in the redevelopment process.
The issue resurfaced in September, 2009, when Morgan pointed to the $250 blanket reimbursement for the mayor as a reason a clear reimbursement policy was needed. Morgan had argued that a $14 voucher for parking the mayor submitted in addition should have been included in the mayor’s $250 blanket travel reimbursement, and not approved as an additional reimbursement. The issue resurfaced again earlier this month, when Morgan questioned a claim submited by Councilwoman Linda Geevers. Both he and Geevers had drafted their own policies in the past, but came together before the June 14 meeting to work together on a draft.
The ordinance drafted by Morgan and Geevers terminates the monthly meal and travel allowances and institutes specific standards to govern reimbursements. The proposal included a provision that specifies the township would not violate any negotiated terms under union contracts, but sets a policy for the negotiation process. Vouchers for reimbursement would have to be submitted within 30 days of the occurring expense, and the administration would have to get it on the bills and claims list within 30 days, Morgan explained.
The voucher process is divided into travel and meals. The policy states that the least expensive mode of transportation will be used whenever reasonably possible, and that no amount will be reimbursed for travel between home and the employee’s regular place of work. The proposal also calls for an employee to use public ground transportation for township business when practical and appropriate. For example, said Morgan, if the mayor had to attend a conference in New York City, it might be cheaper and more reasonable to pay for a train fare rather than paying for employees’ mileage and toll expenses. However, as Geevers argued, “you don’t want to require the mayor to take a train into Trenton for a meeting,” Morgan said. “So that’s why we have ‘economical’ and ‘practicable’ and ‘appropriate’ in here. It gives discretion.”
In addition, the proposal called for township vehicles to be used whenever possible. “Mileage will not be reimbursed, but gasoline will be reimbursed in its actual cost. Tolls and parking would be reimbursed for actual cost,” Morgan explained. He said an employee could be reimbursed for travel, including tolls and parking, if no reasonable township vehicle is available.
With regard to meals, the ordinance proposed that the actual cost of meals will be reimbursed, subject to a limit, when the meal “occurs during the course of performing duties on behalf of the township, and where work stops for the meal and work resumes after the meal,” explained Morgan, who reasoned that road crews plowing the road can stop for a meal and go back to work and be reimbursed.
“My lunch with the Planning Board chair would not be reimbursable under this idea,” he said. “There was no work before. We had lunch, and there was no work after.”
In addition, the meal reimbursements would contain limits: the actual cost of the meal up to $15 for breakfast, including tip, $20 for lunch, including tip, and $30 for dinner, including tip. “Tips don’t exceed 15 percent of 18 percent, where mandated by restaurant policy,” said Morgan. The actual costs of meals will be reimbursed up to $75 per day in cases where township business requires an extended workday or trip out of the township, such as the League of Municipalities convention, Morgan said. Alcohol and in-room reimbursements will not be reimbursed, “the point being if you really need a candy bar, don’t pay $6 for it” in the hotel room, he said.
Councilwoman Diane Ciccone, however, said that she was opposed to the provision that allowed reimbursements at times when “works stops.”
“If I’m a Public Works guy, and I’m on the road, and I stop for lunch and then I go back on the road, we’re paying for the lunch,” she said. “I’ve never heard of paying for employee lunches. I’ve heard of paying for lunches if you are away from your normal workspace. If you’re going to a conference or continuing education courses, you’re there away from your normal work environment.”
“That means anyone in this office can be reimbursed for these meals,” she added. “They stop, go to lunch, and come back to the office and get reimbursed for it.” Morgan said he understood her point, but reiterated it was only a draft.
Herbert asked, however, “Do you really want to put this into an ordinance? Ordinances are permanent documents, and this includes setting prices.” He said the ordinance involved to much minutia.
Hary agreed. “We’ve established policy,” he said. “We’ve talked about the most cost-efficient way of providing transportation. Numbers change. It doesn’t belong in an ordinance.”
Hary said the council also needed to understand that “providing your own vehicle for business purposes is not a condition of employment.”
Ciccone said that just because the council is eliminating the monthly allowance does not mean the township is mandating that the employee provide his or her own vehicle. “What this is saying is we take it out, and you’re going to get reimbursed for actual mileage,” Ciccone said. “You’re just not going to get $250 automatically.”
Council President George Borek said that at his job, the accountant got rid of the flat rate reimbursement and replaced it with a policy that reimbursed for actual mileage. “It’s a clean way of handling it,” he said, adding that the township should be discouraging the use of vehicles anyway. And if one needs to be taken, it can be arranged so that a township vehicle can be used. “I don’t think we’re saying we don’t want to pay someone. We’re saying we want to do it in a different fashion.”
Years ago, the township had a large fleet of municipal vehicles, but opted out of continuing the practice for a number of reasons, including the costs of maintenance, that the township did not have its own mechanic, and costs associated with insurance and replacement. All of those factors do “not make it advantageous to have a fleet of vehicles. In addition, you would have more vehicles in an already-full parking lot.” The township already has a small fleet of vehicles used for certain off-roading purposes.
“If you look at the most cost-effective way of doing it from all standpoints, it makes sense to provide the vehicle allowance,” said Hary. “That’s why it was negotiated. It wasn’t negotiated as a benefit, but rather an allowance.” The allowance also keeps the budget predictable, he said. “It’s done in a fashion where we know where our expenses are going to be.”
He suggested that council provide feedback during discussions of the specific contracts, where it can look for more economic and cost-effective measures. He also said that the full-day allowance of $75 was too expensive. Currently, township employees are allowed only up to $35 a day when they are out. “We do use our discretion here to make it work.”
Morgan, however, said that by his calculation, the township could save up to $9,000 just by implementing a reimbursement voucher policy. When Herbert suggested having the council pass a resolution with generic policies in place, Morgan said the problem with resolutions are that they are passed but are easily forgotten. “An ordinance is there; it doesn’t go away.”
“We need it in the code if we are serious about it,” he said. He said he did not mind cutting back the specific monetary limits in favor of a broader description.
Still, Hary said, “once you put this in writing, you hamstring your ability to negotiate. We may find that they will leave the $250 allowances, and we’re going to get concessions or something more important to us” in the collective bargaining process.
“As a council, and in terms of the budget, we have to be accountable for almost every penny,” said Ciccone. “When you look at every penny, and you see a blanket $250 across the board that has worked for years, the question comes now: is it working going forward, and should be look at actual mileage?” She said that even if the township breaks even, it would show accountability.
While Morgan pushed for an ordinance, Ciccone said a resolution would give breathing room for negotiations. If Hary comes to council with regard to a specific contract and says that a union is willing to give certain valuable concessions in exchange for the monthly allowance, the council will not be restricted if it has a resolution setting general policy. Geevers said, however it would be easier with a simple policy.
Borek said the mayor has indicated that he is willing to “set up parameters before someone gets reimbursed for mileage, that they would have to meet certain thresholds.” When Morgan asked for specifics, Borek said it was a general conversation, but that the mayor is willing to discuss thresholds.
Herbert volunteered to draft a measure and get it back to council in a month.
