Travis County Commssioners Court
June 3, 2003
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Item 21
Let's call up number 21, which we have three to four minutes for. 21. Review and take appropriate action on recommendation to deny liability claim of jim farris. We will call up the legislative item next. Mr. Farris was not here previously. Staff's recommendation is to deny the claim. Staff's recommendation for the following reason, please state those mr. Mansour.
>> thank you, judge. Mr. Farris is a Travis County employee who was enrolled in our benefit program for the epo plan and for dental insurance. He also previously worked for the state of Texas and learned in late September of last year that he qualified for retirement from the state and consequently would be covered at no charge for both dental and health insurance through the state of Texas. He requested to opt out of our coverage and initially that was rejected because we couldn't find a change in status rule. Subsequently it was approved and he was retroactively terminated from the county plan. Effective the day he became covered under the state's plan, which wa August 1st. This took place after I believe in last October of 2002 after the new fiscal year, new plan year started. His coverage was terminated, it became effective with the state on August 1st and we did pay mr. Farris his opt out pay for October and November. Starting in November. He has asked to be reimbursed for opt-out pay for August and September and we are recommending denial of that, that goes back into previous fiscal year, but also the purpose about opt-out pay was intended to help defray the cost of other insurance. Since there's no other cost associated with the state's plan, we feel that that would be an inequitiability to the county. That's the basis of our denial.
>> when did we learn that he had state coverage?
>> I believe it was late September of last year.
>> we found out in late September.
>> yes. And we confirmed it and took a couple of weeks to get things confirmed with the ers, the administrator of the state retirement system.
>> so it was late September or early October that your confirmation was made?
>> it was sometime mid October that the confirmation was made.
>> so we made it effective immediately?
>> we -- what triggers the date of effective coverage is the -- what would be in the change of status rules and that date of eligibility was August 1st, retirement date was August 1st and that's always the date it became effective under the state's health and dental insurance.
>> okay.
>> it was a retroactive retirement and a retroactive termination. Is that so we made it retroactive to October 1.
>> that's correct.
>> mr. Farris is saying it should be retroactive back to October.
>> August, for the opt-out pay.
>> opt-out pay.
>> so for October, August, September, did we pay for him or not?
>> we did not pay him opt out pay for August or September.
>> did we cover him during October, August, snept. Er.
>> no. His coverage was retroactively terminated back to August first.
>> well, we made it retroactive had we paid for him. We didn't pay for him for August or September.
>> that's correct.
>> okay. Mr. Farris?
>> and ms. --
>> okay. Hi my name is carol guthrie, I'm with asme and assisting mr. Farris in this. I would like to in a really brief point. We had no problem with the retroactive being effective in the new fiscal year as of, you know, October. They had notice that he was going to be able to be on the state's plan. Whenever they finished working that out to do the retro to October. The only reason that we actually have issue with this is that the county decided or whatever this change of status rule is, to make the insurance effective in August. And there was a claim. Mr. Farris had a claim under the Travis County insurance policy, but when Travis County decided to go back and change the effective date to August, his claim was then shifted to the state coverage. So we felt that, well, if you can retro his insurance all the way back to August, then you should also be able to retro his opt-out pay because he now just saved you quite a bit of money by changing insurance, so Travis County wouldn't have to cover him during that period of time. So we just felt like you can't have it both ways. If you are going to make it retro one way, you should make it retro both ways.
>> there's one issue to point out with regard to that argument. You don't select the date. The trigger date is the trigger date. And the date that you became eligible for coverage and retirement was August first. We don't select the dates that you terminate or become effective. Those are trigger dates within the change of status rules. So we didn't pick the October day. We didn't pick the August date. That's dictated to by the change of status rules and the dates that he actually became effective with the state of Texas. So we wouldn't have terminated him August first if the change in status rules did not dictate it then.
>> do you ask everyone who has to opt on when they first -- [indiscernible]
>> absolutely. We ask them to provide proof of it.
>> you are saying this was controlled by state policy?
>> it's controlled by federal law. Rule 15 of the i.r.s. -- rule 125 of the i.r.s.
>> that's the policy.
>> that's correct.
>> what assistant county attorney have you been working with.
>> barbara wilson for the most part on our health plan.
>> anything further? I would like to ask -- would like to talk with legal counsel in executive session this afternoon.
>> no. That's -- that's our basis of our recommendation.
>> okay.
>> I would just like to say, you know, we just believe that it's consistent that if Travis County has a policy that if you opt out of their insurance you are entitled to opt out pay. Then if you opted out on August 1, you should be entitled to opt on pay. Retro to that date.
>> but if we go back to August 1 because of a federal policy, the argument has the same force.
>> yes, I do. I did try to work this through the county -- not the county attorney. The unty auditor's office because originally, mr. Farris was told that this could not be done because it violated the law in crossing fiscal years. So wn I contacted the county auditor's office, I was trying to find out is this legal or not legal and oh, gosh I can't remember the woman's name, it was one of the attorneys over there. I said, it appears to me that if the effective date for the insurance coverage happens at one time and there's no line whether or not this is your fiscal year or not, it still becomes effective, then I don't see why that opt out pay wouldn't be justified the same way.
>> talking about $316.
>> if we split this down the middle, do you think that's fair, mr. Farris?
>> I -- under the heading let's get this matter off the agenda and move on about our business.
>> I have already spent a lot of time. I just -- on the dates, I learned from the state on the 10th of September that I would be covered under the insurance effective back on August 1st. Notified county h.r. On the 16th of September, and it wasn't until a meeting on the 24th of January with mr. Mansour and ms. Moore that they told me about the policy going back to August. At each point I was saying I would like to opt out as of October. [indiscernible] had a co-worker process and to my knowledge it was never an issue in her case. That she was asked to [indiscernible] benefits taken away for the [indiscernible] previous two months.
>> but you notified us on September 16th.
>> yes, sir.
>> I think the meeting that we had, unless there was a separate meeting, the meeting that we had to discuss your -- your termination and benefits was October 24th.
>> yeah. At that point I got an e-mail back saying that I would get benefits back [indiscernible] ([inaudible - no mic] (.
>> I don't have that date.
>> we will call it up in executive session. Check with barbara wilson, the county attorney on this. Let you all know this afternoon.
>> thank you.
>> thank you.
Last Modified: Wednesday, June 4, 2003 9:52 AM