, Salem, MA


March 25, 2013

Letter: Council should return Salem health board to three members

To the editor:

What follows is an open letter to the Salem City Council:

We thank you in advance for taking the time to meet with us regarding our request to appeal the 1972 amendment that provided for the expansion of the Salem Board of Health. In preparation for this meeting, we would like to make certain that we have provided you with a clear understanding of the history and rationale for this request.

In 1912, Massachusetts General Laws, Section 111, Chapter 26, established that all “boards of health have three members.” Up until 1972, Salem was in compliance with this law and had a three-member board. There were no documented issues with this. All members were appointed by the mayor, and each received a stipend of $400 in addition to municipal health and retirement benefits.

Then, in 1972, Salem purchased and built the long-term-care hospital on the present site of Shaughnessy-Kaplan Hospital. It was at that time that the city petitioned the state to expand the membership of the board to seven. The purpose of this was to retain the three members of the existing Board of Health and to accommodate the three-member board of the hospital to include doctors Kaplan and Shaughnessy; the seventh member was added to break a tie. This plan also allowed for all to keep/receive stipends and municipal health and retirement benefits.

Currently, the city no longer manages a long-term-care hospital, so the reason for the expanded board of health no longer applies. In compliance with the Mass. General Laws, Section 111, Chapter 26, our surrounding communities of Beverly, Danvers, Peabody, Marblehead and Swampscott all have three-member boards. In some communities, the members of the health board receive stipends; in one, the chairperson receives $6,000 and the other two members each receive $5,541 per year. The Salem Board of Health no longer receives either stipends or municipal health/retirement benefits. Our point is not that we should be paid or that others should not. The point is that if this were the case in Salem, the cost of retain a seven-member board would be $39,246, and that expense would certainly be a great incentive to grant our appeal to reduce the size of the expanded board.

Text Only | Photo Reprints

AP Video
Johnson: Six Arrests, No Tear Gas in Ferguson Raw: Rescue, Relief Efforts at Japan Landslide Cadavers, a Teen, and a Medical School Dream Raw: Woman Escorted From Ferguson Protests California Drought Stings Honeybees, Beekeepers Officer Who Pointed Gun at Protesters Suspended Holder Hopes to Bring Calm to Ferguson Today in History August 21 Holder Pledges Top Investigators for Ferguson US Mission to Rescue Hostages in Syria Failed Manfred, Torre and MLB Take Ice Bucket Challenge Bank of America Reaches Record $17B Settlement Holder Reassures Ferguson Community With Visit GlobalPost CEO Remembers Foley As a Brave Man Seth Meyers Rolls Out Emmy Red Carpet Obama: World Is Appalled by Murder of Journalist Israel, Militants Trade Fire After Talks Fail Pres. George W. Bush Takes Ice Bucket Challenge Pierce Brosnan's Call to Join the Expendables Changes Coming to No-Fly List
Comments Tracker
Roll Call
Helium debate