Government House spokesperson Richard Motta Jr. chided the 36th Legislature for declining to investigate self-funded group health and dental insurance plans during a weekly press briefing Monday, three days after lawmakers unanimously rejected Gov. Albert Bryan Jr.’s proposal to create a special legislative committee to solicit proposals from third-party vendors.
“Refusing to act does not protect the existing fund,” he said. “It preserves a system that continues to drive costs higher while leaving us with few tools to manage those increases. Premiums under the current model rose 9 percent last year and are expected to rise another 19 percent this year.”
On Friday, Bryan’s financial team clashed with members of the Government Employees Service Commission Board, which would have been effectively boxed out of the process by a section of the bill stating that the board “shall have no role in the implementation of any contract resulting from this act.” Beverly Joseph, the board’s chair, told lawmakers during the session that while the self-funded model offers more flexibility, it also exposes the government to risks.
“Under the fully insured model, we do not have to pay for the claims that exceed our premium — that is the insurance company’s obligation,” she said Friday. “But under the self-insured model, we would need a fallback strategy to pay the claims and would have to absorb those excess claims costs or risk loss of coverage.”
Even if the board opted to stay with the same insurance model, Motta said, they and lawmakers could have explored better options at the same time.
“The Legislature’s position is difficult to reconcile with its recent actions. Senators have said the government cannot afford to continue absorbing rising premium costs, yet they voted to increase the government’s line of credit by $100 million,” he said. “They approved a significant increase in the minimum salary for classified employees. These actions may reflect important priorities, but they cannot be squared with the refusal to even study a plan that might reduce financial pressure on the very same workforce. This is not solid policy, it is political avoidance, and it comes at the expense of the people who rely upon us the most.”
On Friday, Finance Commissioner Kevin McCurdy noted that perhaps the best way to improve health outcomes for Virgin Islanders would be to put more money into the hospitals, which received millions of dollars of Jeffrey Epstein-related settlement funds this spring amid mounting debts to vendors. Motta acknowledged Monday that the lifelines were a “patchwork fix.”
Part of Bryan’s proposal, Motta added, included targeted investments in wellness programs meant to reduce long-term health care costs, which are not typically covered by the government’s existing fixed-cost model.
Motta also announced Monday that Bryan signed an executive order to expand enterprise zones in Frederiksted and in the Garden Street and Upstreet areas of Charlotte Amalie in a bid to stimulate economic growth and investment. The order also creates new commercial zones in Charlotte Amalie and Cruz Bay. Businesses in the designated areas could be eligible for incentives including tax credits.
“Enterprise and commercial zones provide a clear framework to support small business development, encourage building restoration and generate long-term economic activity,” Economic Development Authority Chief Executive Officer Wayne Biggs Jr. said in a Government House statement. “This action gives our communities new tools to grow responsibly and thrive.”
Toward the end of Monday’s briefing, Motta addressed his decision to bar a reporter from the Virgin Islands Daily News from attending Government House press briefings in November. The Daily News published an editorial Friday in which they contrasted the ban with Bryan and his administration’s repeated assertions of transparency. Motta said he made the decision as Government House’s director of communications.
“Let me just be clear on something: that editorial misrepresented the true picture of what actually happened there,” he said. “There was another incident that occurred approximately five months before that — with the same reporter — and that reporter was in Government House and there were a series of what we believe to be inappropriate professional behavior that was taken by that reporter.”
Motta said that included asking questions beyond the time allotted for each reporter and filming briefing attendees. He said the decision was not a response to the specific questions that the reporter asked.
Though reporters typically ask only three or four questions during the weekly press briefings, it’s not clear whether Government House ever explicitly put a limit on questions as a matter of policy. The right to film public employees, on the other hand, has been repeatedly upheld in court. In 2011’s Glik v. Cunniffe, the U.S. First Circuit Court of Appeals found that “a citizen’s right to film government officials, including law enforcement officers, in the discharge of their duties in a public space is a basic, vital, and well-established liberty safeguarded by the First Amendment.”
