No tax hike expected for borough

Health insurance costs continue to rise

It looks like next year’s general fund budget is coming in at just a little less than $3.6 million.

“The budget is balanced with just a little bit of money left over,” Borough Manager Mike Coll said during discussion at Souderton Borough Council’s Oct. 16 work session meeting.

Another budget meeting will be held at 7 p.m. Monday, Oct. 30, followed by the official presentation in November and final budget vote in December.

Taxes in the borough will remain the same, board members noted.

“I don’t anticipate any changes in any of the rates going into 2018,” Coll said.

That means the borough property tax rate stays at 5.51 mills, equaling $826.50 on a home assessed at $150,000. Each mill equals $1 of tax per $1,000 of assessed property value.

The 5.51 mills includes 5 mills for the general fund, 0.21 mills for the fire prevention fund, and 0.3 mills for the library tax.

Employee salary increases in the budget are about 2 percent, Coll said.

Health insurance costs are rising by 11 percent, he said.

“I did have our broker go and look at other venues,” he said. “They’re all seeming to be trending 11 percent increases.”

Coll said he’d like to set up a committee including borough employees and officials to look at changing in the future to a health savings account or some other way to provide the insurance coverage in a different, more economical way.

“It just seems to me that keeping the traditional health program for this small group is not a sustainable thing,” he said, “and shopping from carrier to carrier to carrier is not the answer because the carriers are all sort of doing the same thing.”

There will not be any changes made in the health insurance coverage for next year, he said. The current healthcare coverage is part of the police contract, so any changes would have to be agreed to in negotiations with the officers.

Council member Richard Halbom said everyone realizes the healthcare market is in a state of flux. He volunteered to be part of the Souderton group to try to work on finding a solution.

“When you go through our entire budget here and the sewer budget, that 11 percent increase is adding $100,000 to our total budget,” Coll said, “so it’s a big number.” to roll back the regulation from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The bureau had moved to ban most types of mandatory arbitration clauses found in the fine print of agreements consumers often enter into when opening a checking account or getting a credit card.

The vote reflects the effort of the Trump administration and congressional Republicans to undo regulations that the GOP argues harm the free market.

Democratic lawmakers said the CFPB’s rule would have given consumers more leverage to stop companies from financial wrongdoing. They cited the sales practices at Wells Fargo and the security breach at credit company Equifax as examples of misdeeds protected through forced arbitration.

“So who does forced arbitration help? Wall Street banks and other huge corporations that never pay the price for cheating working people,” said Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio.

Richard Cordray, director of the consumer bureau, said: “Tonight’s vote is a giant setback for every consumer in this country. Wall Street won and ordinary people lost. This vote means the courtroom doors will remain closed for groups of people seeking justice and relief when they are wronged by a company.”

Republicans said the arbitration system has worked wonderfully for consumers. They said the payouts for the average consumer in arbitration cases are generally much larger and come more quickly than when compared to the relief gained through classaction lawsuits.

“The effort to try to characterize this as some devious system that has been created to try to stop consumers from having access to fairness is simply false,” said Sen. Mike Crapo, the Republican chairman of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee. “We have a very fair system that has been working for over 100 years in this country.”

Crapo said the average pay-out for consumers in class-action lawsuits against financial companies was just $32, but lawyers stood to make millions.

Democrats argued that consumers generally don’t have the time and means to pursue claims in arbitration, and since most disputes revolve around small amounts, they typically just give up. They said banks and other financial firms know that in the end they won’t have pay a real price for taking advantage of a consumer.

But class-actions would serve as a powerful tool for consumers, they said.

“Once again, we’re helping the powerful against the powerless,” said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., as the Senate neared the vote, sensing the Democrats would lose.

Two Republicans sided with Democratic lawmakers to keep the rule — Sens. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and John Kennedy of Louisiana.