Life insurance levels for some Allegheny County retirees questioned

March 27--A question about life insurance policies for Allegheny County retirees that was raised earlier this month by Allegheny County Controller Chelsa Wagner continues to cause friction within county government.

Most recently, at a meeting Wednesday night of county council's budget and finance committee, when Councilman Michael Finnerty, D-Scott, said the committee would not consider legislation introduced by Ms. Wagner.

"It's illegal, period," he said of Ms. Wagner's resolution being on council's agenda, citing an opinion by council's solicitor Jack Cambest. "It never should have been there."

<p>He gaveled the meeting to a close before much discussion could take place, a move protested by council members including Heather Heidelbaugh, a Republican who represents the county at large, and Sue Means, a Republican who represents Bethel Park.

It was not a new topic for county council members.

Ms. Wagner, who serves on the county retirement board, raised the issue earlier this month of a problem with the life insurance for about 1,000 county employees. Her office said that when the county switched life insurance providers in January, some retirees who believed they would be receiving $10,000 in life insurance benefits were notified that instead they would be getting $4,000.

She introduced to council a resolution calling on council to open this year's operating budget and approve interdepartmental transfers to secure $200,000 to bridge the gap.

County officials have maintained, since Ms. Wagner first brought up the topic, that they already resolved the issue. Treasurer John Weinstein, president of the retirement board, said in an interview last week that retirees were being notified by letter that their $10,000 life insurance level was restored.

He repeated that message at a meeting last Thursday of the county retirement board, a gathering that included some sharp exchanges between Ms. Wagner and another member of the board, county Executive Rich Fitzgerald.

Ms. Wagner's legislation remained on the agenda for council's budget and finance meeting. But Mr. Finnerty removed it, then distributed a letter from Mr. Cambest that outlined the solicitor's legal opinion, based on council rules and the county's code and home rule charter, that Ms. Wagner, as controller, cannot recommend interdepartmental transfers.

Ms. Wagner was not at the meeting, but her deputy, Amy Griser, attended and said after the meeting that her office believes the controller is able to introduce legislation to council. She said the controller's office still wants to know more details of the life insurance fix.

Mr. Finnerty adjourned the meeting before Ms. Means or Ms. Heidelbaugh could propose further discussion about the legislation or the life insurance fix.

"If this is so easy, and it's so on the up-and-up, then why are we gaveling meetings to a close?" Ms. Heidelbaugh said after the meeting had been adjourned.

Ms. Means said she had planned to introduce legislation that would divert money from departments and row offices to make up the $200,000 amount.

Mr. Finnerty said there was no reason to open the budget now because the life insurance fix could be covered by existing revenues, and that the county executive can recommend interdepartmental transfers if needed in the future.

Reached by phone after the meeting, Jennifer Liptak, chief of staff to Mr. Fitzgerald and a member of the retirement board, again confirmed that the life insurance fix had been made and that the county does "feel comfortable" that existing appropriations available in non-departmental expenditures should cover the $200,000 expense.

Kaitlynn Riely: [email protected] 412-263-1707.

___

(c)2014 the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Visit the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette at www.post-gazette.com

Distributed by MCT Information Services