Who pays for your family coverage ?

n January 2007 - without any public vote or discussion - Walton County's top officials and county commissioners received a perk most people only dream of: free health care for their families.

Actually, it's not free. The county's taxpayers have paid thousands of dollars to support the benefit.

Gary Mattison, the county's human resources director, acted in October 2006, apparently with no prodding or consultation, to authorize complete family insurance coverage for three high-ranking county officials and the five part-time county commissioners.

Mattison made "an administrative decision" to take the action he did, according to Karen DeBeauchamp, Walton County's benefits coordinator.

"As human resources director, Gary Mattison has the authority to plan and direct implementation and administration of benefits programs," DeBeauchamp said in an e-mail sent Friday. "The commissioners were informed that their family premium was being paid for by the county as of January 2007."

There was, in other words, no public mention made of Mattison's move and no citizen input into the decision to have taxpayers cover the costs of up to eight ranking county employees.

County Administrator Ronnie Bell, County Attorney David Hallman and Kriss Titus, then director of the Tourist Development Council, all took the family premium payout "in lieu of salary increases," DeBeauchamp said.

The benefit to commissioners, on the other hand, wasn't provided in lieu of a raise. County commissioner salaries are set by the state. Commissioners make $38,500 as part-time county employees.

The family benefits package was discovered when members of the Walton County Taxpayers Association made a routine public records request.

"That just absolutely flabbergasts me," association president Bob Hudson said after finding out the county confirmed there was no public discussion of the matter. "If there's no public record, nothing that says this was authorized, how did this happen?"

The logical person to answer that question, Mattison, is out on medical leave with serious health problems.

Bell, the county administrator, was on vacation last week and could not be reached for any reason, according to his staff.

Commissioners were similarly mum on the issue.

Larry Jones, a county commissioner since 2000, said only: "I'm not aware of any change in coverage."

Kenneth Pridgen, a county commissioner since 2002, declined to return numerous phone calls.


Their extended benefits began immediately upon Mattison's action, in October 2006. Commissioner Sara Comander, who had been elected in 2006, received them upon taking office in January of 2007.

Comander replied via e-mail through a county staff attorney and said nothing specifically regarding the benefits plan.

Commissioner Scott Brannon was also out of town, his staff said. Brannon, who is single, does not presently benefit from the additional family benefits, but he was a commissioner at the time Mattison's "administrative decision" was made.

Cecilia Jones, who was elected to the commission in 2008, said she learned of the family benefits she was receiving when she obtained job-related paperwork.

Commissioners are no different from rank-and-file Walton County employees in that they are provided 100 percent individual coverage for themselves.

The difference comes in the family benefits.

Typically, Walton County employees pay $334 a month for family coverage. The county contributes $159, according to Hudson, who was quoting from the Walton County Employee Handbook.

The employee benefit, Hudson noted, was approved by the commission at a public meeting.

Hudson also calculated what he believes the cost to taxpayers has been since the 100 percent family benefits were extended to county commissioners and the high-ranking administrative staff.

His unofficial estimate: $50,768.

Hudson and the Taxpayer's Association are consulting with an attorney to see what action they can take to halt the family health benefit for the commissioners, Bell and the TDC director.

"It is our position that absent a public record that authorizes the additional benefit, the benefit is being provided outside the legal authority to provide it and should be stopped," he said.

He wondered whether those who received the benefit should be required to pay it back.

Hudson also said he finds it "interesting" the benefit was secured by the human resources director, acting alone "without any involvement by the county administrator or the county commissioners."

"I personally find that hard to understand," he said.

Mattison's action - if it took place without consultation or permission from the county officials outranking him - concerned a couple of experts in public records law. So did his failure to make the action public.

"It's a classic case of a government act that wasn't open and transparent," said Fort Walton Beach attorney Matt Gaetz. "When public funds are dedicated, an open meeting and a public vote are required. I would also say that any position to the contrary ... is the exact mentality that's gotten so many public officials in trouble in this region."

Barbara Peterson, president of the Florida's First Amendment Foundation, also said the action taken sounded questionable, but without a full accounting of "who did it" and "how it was done" she could not say whether a violation of Florida's Sunshine Law occurred.