The Planet's always eccentric orbit was even more than usually full of zigs and zags last week, resulting in its absence at those scintillating governmental meetings readers so enjoy hearing about. The Planet has spent this week catching up and hereby passes on its accrued gleanings in the following summary.
June 20 Dade County Commission
On Thursday, June 20, the Dade County Commission held a special called meeting for the purpose of passing its proposed fiscal year 2020 budget. This was accomplished without incident or much discussion; the budget remained unchanged from the $10,715,000 total aired at a public hearing the week before.
The commissioners took the opportunity before they adjourned from the brief meeting to knock out another piece of routine business: okaying the Trenton-Dade County Historic Preservation Commission's application for a 2020 Georgia Heritage Development Grant toward the restoration of the historic Dade Courthouse, which has stood derelict in the middle of downtown Trenton since the county's legal offices were moved into the new courts facility in 2010.
Dade County Clerk Don Townsend explained that the grant was a 60/40 matching one. "Without it, we pay 100 percent; with it, hopefully somebody will pay 60 percent," he said.
Dade County Executive Chairman Ted Rumley added that that went along with the county's determination to refurbish the historic building using as little tax money as possible.
Questioned following the meeting, Townsend said the grant was for just under $100,000, so that the county's 40 percent match should be right around $40,000. He said the money came partially from the state from sales of a heritage license plate, partially from the federal government from fines assessed on oil companies in cases of environmental offenses such as oil spills.
Restoration of the old courthouse will, of course, cost much more than $100K; but this grant is the first step in the city and county's new funding path made possible by their formation of a preservation committee and establishment of themselves as "certified local governments." Townsend said it will be two or three months before he knows whether the grant applicaiton is approved.
Dade Water Board June 21
The governing board of the Dade Water Authority convened in the matutinal pearlescence of Friday, June 21, for possibly the last of these 8 a.m. red-eyes: The board is to meet next week for an organizational session to elect new officers and possibly set a new schedule pursuant to its recent reshuffling by local legislation. One possibility board members have mentioned is that of making water board meetings more accessible to the public by holding them in the evenings.
One item covered in the June 21 meeting was approval of a resolution amending the board's retirement benefit arrangement with longtime water company manager Doug Anderton, who left June 1 after nearly five decades of service. The resolution presumably formalized decisions from a specially called executive session on personnel earlier in the week.
As previously reported in these pages, during Anderton's early years at the water company, the Social Security Administration had considered the water authority an exempt organization and thus had not collected SS withholdings from its employees. Earlier this year, the water board learned that it had--or earlier members of the board, in any case, had--purchased a $400,000 insurance policy on Anderton in 2004 meant to mitigate the damage this had done Anderton's eventual collections from the SSA. Anderton had known about this policy, he said, adding that auditors had kept track of it through the years, though it seemed to have come as some surprise to acting board members.
The policy was one that would double in value with time and at maturity provide $400,000 in payout to Anderton while reimbursing the board for its $400,000 investment. Under terms approved this year, Anderton was to receive 10 yearly payments of $40,000 each, beginning this July.
But now a second policy had come to light, apparently, and the June 21 resolution dealt with that. The resolution refers to the second policy as having been purchased earlier, in 2003, and goes on to say the board had determined it had paid more than necessary in premiums; now Anderton was to reimburse the board those premiums through reduction of the amount of payout he was to receive each July, from the $40K to $32,372.36.
Which left The Planet hopelessly addled--if there was an additional policy, why should Anderton end up receiving less rather than more?--so The Planet sought elucidation from County Attorney Robin Rogers, the board's legal advisor.
“I think there was an additional policy, but it was for the same plan," said Rogers. "I think there was more than the one policy, but it was all done with that intent, to ensure that he had $400,000 in benefits.”
Upon examining the policies, explained the attorney, it became clear that the board had paid in about $70,000 more than it had needed to in order to procure Anderton's $400K payout, said Rogers, and that Anderton himself was the beneficiary of the second policy. So it had been determined simplest to let him keep the second policy as part of his compensation but to reduce his $400,000 by the $70,000 overpayment of premiums.
As for the original $400,000 policy, said Rogers, it was an insurance policy on Anderton's life with the water board as beneficiary. "The water board had the decision to cash in the policy or hang on to the policy," said Rogers. The days of man are like grass, says the Bible, and the board had determined that the policy would be worth more in the long run than if cashed out now, explained the attorney, with some delicacy of language.
As for the second policy, of which Anderton was the beneficiary and which he had been allowed to keep, Rogers did not elaborate on the value of that and The Planet was still battling strabismus from the previous figures.
The attorney said that all this buying of insurance might seem a peculiar way of compensating retirees but that in practicing law in Chattanooga he had seen it used by other governmental entities whose employees had also not had SS withheld on their wages. “It had several people caught in a bind, so there you would see this occasionally,” he said. "It’s not an uncommon practice."
As for who authorized either policy, Rogers said: "The only minutes I saw authorized this one for $400,000." That was a paragraph in minutes from 2001 or 1991, he said. He had not seen anything authorizing a second policy but: "When you can’t find minutes from 20 years ago, you go with the minutes you have."
As for The Planet's final question--what about the other longtime water company employee who would also be retiring soon?--Rogers could not help there. “I have no idea,” he said. “I knew that there were some rumblings about another employee.”
Frank Hawkins, manager of Dade's water plant, addressed the water board at its April 16 meeting to ask: So! If Doug Anderton's getting $40K, what are you giving me? He pointed out that he'd been working for the water company since 1976, that he was also affected by the SS gap, and that when he retires shortly he'll have only three fewer years of service than Anderton.
(Photo: Hawkins with water company employee Elizebeth Zeller.)
But attorney Rogers said he hadn't been at that meeting and hadn't been asked by the board to address Hawkins' plight. “I have no clue,” he said. “Is he still working there?”
Stay tuned for gripping coverage of more recent Dade doings as The Planet continues its eccentric ellipse around the center of the universe, after lunch...
