03/03/2007

Officials settle health insurance lawsuit, but terms remain a secret

By CRAIG McCOOL

cmccool@record-eagle.com

CHARLEVOIX — County officials settled a lawsuit brought by a former employee who alleged the county improperly cut off her health insurance benefits after she left her job.

But the settlement with former prosecutor's office administrator Jacqueline Rozema — which may have cost taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars — remains a secret, an arrangement apparently reached behind closed doors at a meeting not recorded in any official minutes.

Charlevoix County Clerk Jane Brannon said the county commission approved a "confidential” settlement during a closed session in December, though records of the county board meetings don't reflect any such session.

"I can't tell you that they did (vote on it), but there was discussion and a consensus that it could be settled up to a certain amount of money,” Brannon said.

Rozema, a county employee for more than 20 years beginning in 1981, was involved in a series of contentious Whistleblower Protection Act lawsuits beginning in 2003.

That's when current county Prosecutor John Jarema, formerly an assistant attorney in the office, filed a wrongful termination lawsuit against his then-boss, Mary Beth Kur. Rozema testified in that case and later filed one of her own lawsuits, claiming Kur retaliated against her for cooperating.

A jury in 2005 awarded Rozema and a co-plaintiff a combined $1.1 million verdict. Days later, the county cut off Rozema's health benefits, court records show.

The move prompted Rozema to file a second lawsuit last year. She claimed $300,000 in lost insurance damages and an additional $100,000 in attorney fees and other costs. Lawyers for both sides signed an agreement for that case on Dec. 15, county court records show.

Rozema's Traverse City attorney, Grant Parsons, said the agreement came less than two weeks after a panel of mediator attorneys reviewed the evidence of both sides and issued a non-binding settlement recommendation of $350,000.

Parsons declined to disclose how the final settlement compared to the mediators' recommendation, but said his client was "very pleased” with the outcome.

Brannon said she believed the payout would not be covered by the county's litigation insurance policy.

County board chair Shirley Roloff said she "was aware” of the agreement but declined to answer specific questions about the settlement or the process by which it was reached before first speaking with the county attorney.

"I'm trying to figure out if it's something we can disclose,” she said. She said she could not recall whether there was a closed session in December to discuss the Rozema case.

Attempts to reach the county's lawyer in the case, Janice Hildenbrand, both Thursday and Friday were not successful.

Laurie Michelson, an attorney with the Michigan Press Association, said courts have required governments to disclose so-called "confidential” settlements.

"The Michigan courts have ruled that public bodies can't contract away their obligations under (the Freedom of Information Act),” she said. "So even though a public body may designate settlement agreement as confidential ... it does not mean that the public does not have a right to understand the financial details of the settlement.”