BIDDEFORD — Vicky Edgerly, the longtime director of Biddeford’s Health and Welfare Department, fears that if a proposal to eliminate her position gets approved, the city could see a spike in the amount it spends on state-mandated general assistance for needy residents.
The proposal to eliminate Edgerly’s position is part of a sweeping plan to reorganize city departments, which City Manager Jim Bennett presented to the Personnel Committee last Thursday.
Edgerly began working for the city in 1986, left for a short time and returned in 1988. She is the only city employee who would be laid off if the plan moves forward as written.
According to Bennett, the plan would simplify the chain of command in city management while also saving about $177,000 annually .
But Edgerly said in an email Tuesday that she believes the plan could backfire.
In her experience, she said, less oversight of a municipality’s general assistance program often translates to an increase in general assistance spending, because applicants are not vetted enough, and those using GA are not given enough help to become self-sufficient.
“What I have witnessed as other municipalities have restructured and reduced staff in their GA offices is an increase in benefits often to the extent of being out of control,” Edgerly said.
According to data provided by Edgerly, Biddeford’s GA expenditures totaled about $88,000 in fiscal year 2015.
This figure is significantly lower than what was spent in similarly sized cities the same year: Nearly $170,000 in Saco, and about $166,000 in Sanford, according to the data. Neither Saco nor Sanford has a Health and Welfare Department.
At the same time, Edgerly said, the state recently increased its reimbursement for GA expenditures from 50 to 70 percent, so an increase in GA spending would cause less of an impact on the city’s bottom line than it would in the past.
Bennett, on the other hand, said Tuesday he does not believe the city would end up spending more on GA if Edgerly’s position were eliminated.
“I think it’s a significant misrepresentation to believe that by the elimination of that position that we are going to spend more on GA,” he said.
Bennett said under his proposed plan, the two employees who currently work under Edgerly would continue administering GA while also taking on other responsibilities.
As Edgerly’s department is also tasked with addressing health-related issues in Biddeford, Bennett’s plan would also make Code Enforcement Officer Roby Fecteau the city’s health officer. With this change, Edgerly said she fears some of the duties she has performed in that capacity may fall by the wayside.
While addressing health-related building issues such as cockroach and mold infestations has been part of her job, Edgerly she has also made herself available to residents “who fell through the cracks in the systems.”
“Often these were people who did not qualify for assistance from caseworkers,” she said. “Many suffer from disabilities such as mental illness, developmental disabilities and dementia. Much of my work has been interacting with other agencies and monitoring these folks in order to ensure that they are safe.”
The Personnel Committee, which is made up of four city councilors, is slated to discuss Bennett’s proposal again at a meeting tomorrow.
Overall, the proposed changes would reduce the number of city departments from 18 to 11.
Bennett said Monday that it is not yet clear if the proposal can be approved by the Personnel Committee alone, or if it has to be approved by the City Council.
— Staff Writer Angelo J. Verzoni can be contacted at 282-1535, ext. 329 or [email protected].
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less