My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2/14/1995
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1995
>
2/14/1995
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:05:10 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 2:15:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
02/14/1995
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
49
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
M <br />Chairman Macht questioned a mechanism for recovering costs <br />when an illness began under one contract and was transferred to <br />another contract, and Director Price advised that no provision was <br />made for this contingency. He did not know of any plan which <br />contains a provision of that sort. <br />County Attorney Vitunac asked if the plan were self-funded and <br />Director Price responded that it is not self-funded but is called <br />a "minimum premium" plan. To the extent that each department is <br />charged each month for the number of single and dependent employees <br />in that department, the plan is self-funded because that money goes <br />directly into an account which is drawn upon by Acordia in order to <br />pay claims. The plan is funded and departments are charged each <br />month based on this profile of benefits. A minimum premium plan is <br />slightly different from being self-funded in that, if the plan <br />experiences more demand in a given month than was funded by the <br />employer, then the insurance company must absorb this loss. For <br />example, Acordia paid out more claims money in January than was put <br />in the claims account, so Acordia had to be responsible for that <br />differential. <br />County Attorney Vitunac stated that if the Board wanted to <br />repay any of the employees, the funds would have to come out of the <br />Board's own funds, not the insurance company funds. <br />Commissioner Adams questioned whether AIDS was covered and <br />Commissioner Eggert advised that her reference was to home health <br />nursing aides, not the disease. <br />Commissioner Bird commented that he felt our employees are <br />fortunate to have this type of coverage with the County picking up <br />the lion's share; however, he does feel that it is a very important <br />fringe benefit to them and to all of us and anytime there are going <br />to be any significant changes in deductibles or in the amount of <br />coverage, we ought to be made aware of that as clearly as possible. <br />He was not blaming anyone or saying that anyone intentionally <br />misled the Commission, but he recalled that he was delighted at <br />budget time when the big savings in premium was announced. This <br />savings helped the County through a very tight budget year but, at <br />the time, it was not clear to him that the reason for that savings <br />was a reduction in coverages and a change in the percentage that <br />employees pay versus our carrier or our fund. He felt that if we <br />are going to make those kinds of changes, we need to be certain <br />that everyone understands the changes. <br />FEBRUARY 14, 1995 21 Boa 94 pAu,351 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.