Councilmember Dave Warden: “This is a political stunt.”

Typically, topics on Belmont City Council meeting agendas categorized as “Item 9,” call for discussion, and in some cases, direction to staff. But last night’s Item 9 concerning eliminating lifetime benefits for eligible retired council members prompted a heated debate between council members Warren Lieberman and Dave Warden.

Lieberman requested the Item 9 be placed on the Oct. 11 agenda. “I think this is an inappropriate benefit,” Lieberman said.

In an earlier memo to councilmembers, Lieberman expressed his concern over the 1997 resolution that granted “health and welfare benefits commensurate with those granted to the Management/Confidential Bargaining Unit of the City.”

One of the consequences of the resolution is that council members can be eligible to receive lifetime health insurance upon retiring from the council. In the memo, Lieberman requested the council pass a resolution eliminating the health insurance benefits upon retiring from council.

“This is an inappropriate level of benefit,” Lieberman said.

To date, no retired councilmember has taken advantage of the benefit, and the cost to the city has been zero.

Councilmember Dave Warden viewed the timing of the proposed resolution as a dubious. “This is a political stunt,” said Warden. “The City has not spent a penny on this benefit, and I don’t see any urgency to discontinue it.”

“You happen to pick four weeks before the election,” continued Warden.

Lieberman, who is not up for re-election,  responded that his timing of the discussion was based on the start date of the and had nothing to do with the upcoming election. This was Rennie’s first Council meeting in his new role.

“It’s odd that you would accuse me of a political stunt,” countered Lieberman. “It’s something Council has an opportunity to provide leadership on.”

Warden replied, “I agree, there will be a lot of opportunity to provide leadership, not just on this red herring that doesn’t cost the City a cent.”

Other councilmembers weighed in on their views, but none were as resolute in their opinions as Lieberman and Warden.

“I have no problem with it (Leiberman’s resolution),” said Councilmember David Branstein. “It represents a financial issue for future discussion. I don’t think it’s the right benefit and I don’t think it’s where the tax payers’ money should be going.”

Councilmember Christine Wozniak expressed that prioritizing this resolution would take away from green initiatives. “We should take a look at the whole benefit package, and not just this one piece,” she said. “I’d rather spend time working on green initiatives than this issue—this is not urgent.”

Mayor Coralin Feierbach suggested this issue should be revisited once the new City Council is in place after the Nov. 8 election.

“I think whoever is elected should take a look at all Council benefits,” said Feierbach.

The Council was in agreement that more discussion was needed and directed City Manager Greg Scoles to compile a report analyzing all Council benefits for review.

“I’ve heard from all of you tonight that you’d like to have clarity and transparency. After the election, and the new councilmembers are seated, we can take a look at this,” said Scoles.