Insurance move legal, even if unpopular

A lifelong health insurance option that New Bern leaders granted themselves during a 2003 Saturday budget meeting was legally approved, even though some residents clearly disapprove.

Some residents who don’t like the idea of longtime elected leaders being able to have a lifetime of health insurance after they leave office have questioned whether the city was abiding by the law when the move was approved.

“An ordinance, or any action having the effect of an ordinance, may be finally adopted on the date on which it is introduced by the affirmative vote of a majority of the members elected to the board of aldermen,” according to the city charter.

The part of the city charter that deals with introducing and adopting ordinances and resolutions also says that either of those items must be introduced “only in written or printed form.” Former City Manager Bill Hartman, Alderman Robert Raynor and the paperwork itself all support that the health-insurance amendment was, indeed, available in written form on June 7, 2003, the day it was voted on and approved by the aldermen, and signed by Mayor Tom Bayliss.

David Lawrence, an expert from the School of Government at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, said that a budget meeting could be a “perfectly legitimate” place to consider the health-insurance option for aldermen, because the move would clearly have financial implications for the city.

Insurance benefits, available to “governing board” leaders who have served “a total exceeding 16 years in office,” according to a city ordinance, have been a source of contention during New Bern’s campaign season. Twice since his fellow aldermen were ousted, Dana Outlaw has tried unsuccessfully to rescind the benefits. A group of concerned residents led by Terry Startsman is trying to do the same thing, and has a petition about it with more than 600 signatures.

Startsman, when speaking to aldermen recently, said that the city leaders could have had “transparency” by simply choosing to publish the amended ordinance. The city has that option, according to its charter, but the decision about whether to publish New Bern ordinances is determined by the direction of the aldermen.

“We are not saying your action was illegal, just that it was wrong,” Startsman said. “So, I encourage you to consider how you wish to be viewed by your fellow citizens.  You have the option to forever be remembered as the board that stuck it to the citizens for your own self-interest or you can be remembered as the board that did the right thing for New Bern on your way out of office.”

Raynor, the alderman who seconded Julius Parham’s insurance motion in 2003, said that Hartman brought up the idea to “ensure that good people are always in office, because good people make the best decisions. That gives continuity to the city.”

Raynor said the ordinance was available for review that day in 2003, and the former city manager said the same thing.

“My recollection is that it was,” Hartman said recently.

Raynor said the insurance issue came up four years ago during the 2005 election, and that the people who are pushing it now have a “demonic spirit” and intend to create a “mob syndrome.”

 “It’s not enough that they beat us,” the recently ousted Raynor said. “Now, they want to beat us into the ground.”

Nikie Mayo can be reached at 252-635-5665 or nmayo@freedomenc.com.