Loading...
96-1359 . �o r', � ``�` � � �� � Council File # G �—��Sq R ' �, , . .. � . o . . . ,a� Green Sheet # 2 3 6 6 5 UTION CI F SA PA , MINNESOTA aO Presented By � Referred To Co ittee: Date 1 2 3 RESOLVED, that upon execution and delivery of a release in full to the City of Saint 4 Paul, the proper City officers are hereby authorized and directed to provide early retiree 5 health insurance benefits to James C. Lombardi under the terms of the No. 84 benefits 6 package that was in effect at the time of Mr. Lombardi's retirement on June 30, 1995, which 7 would be based on the 1992-1993 Bargaining Agreement between the City of Saint Paul and 8 the Saint Paul Supervisors Association. 9 Y� Navs Absent Requested by Department of: a e ostrom arri s � �— ��'� �y� uerin e ar ettman �� une �— BY� � � O �� 3���y� Form Approved b City Attorney Adopted by Council: Date � ����j�� � Adoption Certified by Council Secretary By: '�►' ` By� � Approved by Mayor for Submission to Approved by Mayor: Date � �, Council B -��G� CG By: � �- \ '1,�; Y� . �t�.-�3s� DE �ity Atto'rney's �Office �8 I�27 96 GREEN SHEET� ` �N_ 2 3 6 6�� PE � E�,. INITIAUDATE INITIAL/DATE .�� •a, GEPARTMENT DIRECTOR �CITY GOUNCII cf 0 Yll1 B. �T�Ic C o rftt 3 C�C•: 2 6 6-8 71'8 �ssroN �cmr arroaN�v �CITY CLERK, . ��E�� �BUDQET DiRECTOR �FIN.8 M�T.BERVICES DIR: ROUTING Ma�tha Larsoin :26b-8797. � ' °RDE" [�]�u►ro��a+nssiST"rm ❑ � T,OTAL�OF$KiNATURE.PA��ES � (CLIP ALL LOCAt10N�FOR SIGNATURE) REOUESTEDr - Approval of� resolution settling claim of James C. Lombardi against the City of Sa,i�nt Paul l � RECOMMENDATIONe:Approw(AT o►i'�.1(R) PERSONAL YERVlCE CONTRACTS MU�T ANSWER THE FOLLOWING OUE8TIONS: �PIANNINO CO�AMI8810N' �GVIL SERVICE COIr1M18810N 1. Hes this psroon/firtn ever worked under a contract for Mb d�pn'bneMT _���E ` YES NO _�� _ . 2. Hes this psraonMirm evsr been a city employeeT YES NO —��T�►� �— 3. Does thia penoMirm poasees a akill not normally po�eesaed by eryr curreM dty�mployes4 8UPPORTB WHICH WUNCIL�CTiVE4 YES NO Explain ell yss an�wsn on sep�rK�shwt and�te�ch to pn�n�M�t INITIATIl10 Pf�BLEM.ISSl1E�OPPORTUNITY(Who.Whel.WMn.WMn.�NhY):. r�tLElY�U See attached �CT �7 ���6 �n4Y0�� O��ar.F F I'1Y��IRi1Gp,r IYrPN/�CO: � . See attached DISADVANTAOEB IF APPROVED: { See attached Cotmcil F�sa�r�h C�rt�r OCT 2 91�6 DISADVANTAOES IF NOTAPPFiOVED: -__._.__ � ___. .. . .- J TOTAL AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION = 2�62�-.36 to ��,368.�� COST/REVHNUE BUD�iETED(CIRC�.B ONE) YE8 �X , FUNOINGSOURCE Gerleral Govt. Acct . ACTIVITYNUMBER 09002 FINANC�AL INFORMATION:(EXPLAIN) 1 NOTE: CQMPLETE DIRECTIONS AFiE INCLUDED tN THE QREEN 3HEET IN3THUCTIONAL MANUAL AVAILABLE IN THE PURCHASINt3 OFFiCE(PHONE NO.298-4225). ROUTIN(3 ORDER: Below are correct rou�ngs for the five most frequent types of documeMS: CONTRACT8(aasurtbs authorized bud�t exists) COUNCI�RESOLUTION(Amend Budgets/Accspt.arants) �, p��qge�y 1. Depertment Dfrector 2. DepartmeM Ofroctor 2. City Attorney 3. Ciy Attorney 3. Budget Dfrector. 4. Mayor(for contracta over$15,000) 4. MayoNAssistant � 5. Human Rbhts(for contracts over 550,000) 5. City Council 6. Finance and Management Services Director 6. Chief Accountant,FMance and Manapement 3ervices 7. Finance Axounting ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS{pudqot Revision) COUNCIL RE30LUTION(all othera,and Ordtnances) 1. Acdviry Manager 1. Depanment Diroctor 2. Depertment Acoountant 2. City Attorney 3. Dspartment Director 3. Mayor Assistant 4. Budget Director 4. City Councii . 5. City Cleric 8. Chief Accountant, Finance and Mana�ement Servioes ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS(all others) 1. D�artment Director 2. Cky Attorr�y 3. Finance and Management Services Director 4. City Clerk TOTAL NUMBER OF SIGNATURE PAQES indicate the�of pages on which signatures sre required and papKCUp or flag ach of tM�e pa�s. ; ACTION RE�UESTED � Describe whst the proJect/request seeks to acxomplfsh in either chronologi- cal order or order of importance,whichever is most eppropriate for the � iasue.Do not write c�mpNte sentences.Begin each item in your list with ; a verb. RECOMMENDATIONS f Complete if the issue in question has been presertted before any body,public or private. SUPPORTS WHICH COUNCIL OBJECTIVE? Indicate which Council objsectivvs(s)you�project�equest supports by listing ths key word(s)(HOUSINC�1,RECREATION,NEICiHBORHOODS,ECONOMIC DEVEIOPMENT, BUDQET,SEWER SEPARATION).(SEE COMPLETE LIST IN INSTRUCTIONAL MANUAL.) PERSONAL SERVICE CONTRACTS: This information wfll be uaed to detennlne the ciry'a lisbility for workers compensatfon claims,taxes and proper c(vil asndcs hi�ing rulss. INITIATINQ PROBLEM, ISSUE,OPPORTUNITY Explain the situation or conditlons that created a need for your project or request. ADVANTAC3ES IF APPROVED Jndicate whether this is simpty an a�nual budget procedure required by law/ charter or whether there are speciflc ways in which the Ck�r of Saint Paul and Its citizens will benefit from this proJect/action. DISADVANTAOES IF APPROVED Whet negative effects or mejor changes to existing or past processes might this project/request produce if it is passed(e.g.,traffic delays, noise, tax increases or assessments)?To Whom?When?For how long? DISADVANTAC3ES IF NOT APPROVED What will be the negattve consequences if the promised action is not approved?Inability to deliver service?CoMinued high trafNc,noise, accident rate?Loss of revenue? FINANCIAL IMPACT ARhough you must tailor ths infortnaUon you provide here to the issue you are,addressing,fn gensral you must anawer two questlons:How much is it going to cost?Who is going to pay? ��- ���� GREEN SHEET BACKGROUND REGARDING PROPOSED SETTLEMENT James C. Lombardi retired on June 30, 1995, after over thirty years as an employee of the City of Saint Paul . Mr. Lombardi has filed a claim against the City of Saint Paul to receive early retirement health insurance benefits under the terms of Employee Group No. 84 (tied to the SPSO contract) instead of under the Non-Represented Employee' s ("Non-Repped" ) package. When Mr. Lombardi retired, he was receiving benefits under the Non-Repped package. This proposed settlement would qualify Mr. Lombardi for the Group No. 84 benefits . It would translate into a difference for single coverage of $36 . 32 per month until reaching age 65 for a total of $2, 651 .36 over a four and a half year period. If family coverage is selected during any of the open enrollment periods in upcoming years, the proposed settlement could result in a difference of $138 .41 per month up to a total of $8, 368 .40 . Mr. Lombardi presently has single coverage but as in the case of all early retirees, can change coverages in any given year during the open enrollment period. The basis for Mr. Lombardi' s claim is that in 1989, he selected the Non-Repped package over Group No. 84 benefits, due to certain assurances provided by the then City Administration. He was allegedly guaranteed that if the Non-Repped retirement benefits had not kept up with the benefits of his previously held title, he would be allowed to go back to the previous title and benefits at retirement . This was offered as an incentive only to Mr. Lombardi and possibly some other "original" members of the Non-Repped package in 1989 . It appears that in Mr. Lombardi' s situation these representations were actually made and may have been relied on. The only difference remaining between these two benefits packages is the early retiree benefits cited above. Under the Civil Service Rules, the majority of the participants in the Non-Repped package have the right, at the time of their retirement, to return to their previous title . Under this rule, retirees have been allowed to return to their previous positions, both before and since Mr. Lombardi' s retirement . This particular rule does not apply to Mr. Lombardi . The difference in treatment of these other employees has been highlighted in his claim and would be argued in any future litigtion. The assurances Mr. Lombardi received will be argued as contractual in nature . It appears Mr. Lombardi' s reliance on these assurances was made in good faith and as a result he could claim to have suffered an injustice . As a result of the strong likelihood that Mr. Lombardi would prevail in court, the City Attorney' s Office recommends the claim be settled for the difference in benefits Mr. Lombardi should have originally received.