Other Peabody News:
Fitzgerald heads to New Hampshire for town manager job
Warning label handed to PVMHS
70 Endicott could be kept as open space
Children's Hospital announces new location in Centennial Park
Area mayors to discuss regionalization of health departments
by Alix Roy
PEABODY – Mayors from Peabody, Salem and Beverly will meet next week
to discuss the possibility of combining their health departments under one
regional umbrella in an effort to save money during trying financial times.
Salem Mayor Kimberly Driscoll sent letters in late October to Mayor Michael
Bonfanti and Beverly Mayor Bill Scanlon requesting the Nov. 24 meeting, extending
the invitation to include each city’s health director and health board
members.
“Certainly, public health concerns do not end at the Salem city line
and given the likelihood of having to cut budgets either this year or next,
I think it is worthwhile to explore a regional approach to delivery of these
services as a means to preserve the current level of programs we offer within
our community,” she wrote.
Driscoll said a “combination of factors” led to her decision to
call the meeting, including Salem’s current vacancy in the Health Agent
position, the collaborative working relationship that already exists between
the health departments in all three communities and the fact that most departments
derive their authority from identical state statutes.
“That makes it a little bit easier,” she said, adding that both
Bonfanti and Scanlon were “really receptive” to the idea.
The cities are expected to discuss the possibility of merging their resources
and creating a regional health department that serves all three communities.
At this point in time, none of the three know exactly what that would entail
or how they would stand to benefit.
“We’re very open minded and ready to explore it,” said Scanlon.
Marcia Benes, Executive Director of the Massachusetts Association of Health
Boards, said the overall purpose of regionalization is to guarantee that all
cities and towns have access to the same level of public health services.
Some smaller towns struggle to perform basic requirements while others have
the resources but could benefit from sharing the cost, she said. In all cases,
towns retain their individual health boards, which are necessary when dealing
with local issues that could vary with a town’s geography or infrastructure.
“The purpose of regionalizing is not to remove the authority of the local
board of health,” she said.
In some Massachusetts towns, regional services have been the norm for decades.
Barnstable County Health Department, one of seven health districts in the
state, was the first of its kind in 1926, according to long-time Director
George Heufelter. The benefit is in the wide range of services the department
provides, which individual municipalities would not be able to afford.
“We establish staff in areas of expertise that they might not have the
means to acquire,” he said.
The 15 towns served by the department have access to health inspectors
specializing in areas such as indoor air quality, landfill maintenance, septic
management and youth smoking. While no single community would have the funding
or the need to hire a specialist in these areas, the district can provide
one when and if the situation calls for it, said Heufelter. He referred to
Barnstable’s regional health department as “cafeteria style,” because
each town can select the programs and services they want to partake in.
“Everybody’s got a piece of it one way or another,” he said. “As
the collaboration matures, there an efficiency that can develop.”
In today’s economy, rather than add new services, regionalizing would
allow cities to retain existing ones, said Driscoll, adding that eventually
she would like to see cities expand upon their areas of expertise.
“I and many others expect that it will be much more difficult to maintain
current local aid funding levels in the next fiscal year and beyond,” she
wrote. “Moreover, the state is encouraging municipalities to consider
regionalizing services as a means to create more efficient operations and as
a method to prepare for likely revenue shortfalls.”
The Massachusetts Public Health Regionalization Project, which has been
in the works since 2005, recently developed a plan to provide seed-money for
cities and towns to regionalize their health departments. According to Cheryl
Sbarra, Senior Staff Attorney for the Massachusetts Association of Health
Boards, the bill failed to pass the House of Representatives in formal setting
and will likely be refiled and presented to the Senate for a second time.
Sbarra said there was no opposition to the bill when it came before the Senate
last year, and that it failed to gain approval from the House because “other
things got in the way.”
“I don’t anticipate any opposition [this time around],” she
said. “There was no opposition to it when it was proposed.”
If the bill passes, cities would be provided with a monetary incentive
to regionalize their departments, but would not be obligated to do so.
“It’s not a mandatory imposition,” said Sbarra. “It’s
optional.”
The Department of Public Health and the Department of Environmental Protection
would be responsible for designing a funding formula, which Sbarra said is
still in the works but will likely factor a city’s population and geography
into determining how much financial aid they would receive from the state.
The possibility of state funding was part of what got Driscoll thinking
about regionalization in the first place, she said, and has generated interest
from neighboring cities as well. Danvers and Marblehead recently contacted
her about joining next week’s meeting, which will be held in Bonfanti’s
office.
“I’m hopeful we can get a dialogue going about the challenges
we are all facing and how to overcome them,” she said. |
