Miami Township Trustees decline legal review of reimbursements

• By Lauren Shows
• Published: August 2, 2026

Miami Township Trustees voted 2–1 Monday, July 6, not to seek additional legal advice on whether the Township can reimburse Township staff and officials for health insurance premiums, likely closing a months-long dispute over the legality and propriety of the practice.

During their regular meeting, Trustees Marilan Moir and Lori Askeland voted against moving ahead with a tax attorney consultation, while Trustee Chris Mucher voted in favor. The vote came after trustees reconsidered action taken at their June 15 meeting, when the board had initially voted 2–1 to accept Greene County Prosecuting Attorney David Hayes’ recommendation that the Township consult an attorney experienced in tax law before approving any premium reimbursements.

The issue dates back to April, when trustees voted to discontinue the Township’s practice of reimbursing health insurance premiums for elected officials who opted out of the Township’s group health insurance plan. Mucher said at the time that he had accumulated about $6,700 in unreimbursed health insurance costs for his family under the prior practice, and trustees agreed to ask Hayes to review whether there were any legal options for reimbursing premiums already paid in 2025 and 2026.

Hayes’ May 14 written opinion, obtained by the News via public records request and reported last month, pointed to ORC 505.601, writing that Ohio law allows townships to reimburse employees or officials for health care premiums “with no danger of a legal action” if the township “does not offer a healthcare plan to its employees.”

“Alternatively, the Township may continue to offer healthcare coverage to its employees, but may not offer premium reimbursement,” Hayes wrote.

Hayes also wrote that Miami Township could offer both a group health plan and premium reimbursement if trustees passed a resolution authorizing reimbursements, but that doing so could “potentially violate provisions of the Affordable Care Act and subject the Township to penalties by the IRS.” He advised trustees to consult an attorney experienced in ACA and tax law before proceeding with such a resolution.

At a May 18 meeting, Mucher moved that the board seek that additional legal advice, but the motion expired without a second. At the June 15 meeting, Hayes appeared before trustees and restated his advice in person, telling them that his office’s role was to provide its best reading of the law.

“The policy decisions are yours to make,” Hayes said. “They’re not the Greene County Prosecutor’s Office’s to make.”

Hayes told trustees that the safest course would be to offer employees a group health insurance plan without premium reimbursements, or to not offer a group plan and instead provide reimbursement for employees who obtain health insurance elsewhere. If trustees wanted to continue the Township’s past practice — or authorize a retroactive reimbursement — he said they should first consult a tax attorney who could better assess potential exposure under federal law.

“Stay away from it, because it is unknowable,” Hayes said of the potential risk of ACA violation and IRS penalties.

Moir argued June 15 that the question of retroactive reimbursement was not only a tax question, but also a question of whether the reimbursements had ever been properly authorized by the board. Askeland raised similar concerns, while Mucher said past boards had understood the practice to be lawful and cost-saving.

Ultimately, Mucher and Askeland voted in June to seek advice from a tax attorney on “those items referencing medical reimbursement” that Hayes believed merited further review. Trustees then voted unanimously to expand the prospective consultation to include how the Township handles insurance matters and pre-tax premium issues.

On July 6, after two residents raised concerns during public comment about Township spending and the prior reimbursement practice, Moir revisited the issue. She said the practice of reimbursing Medicare premiums had not been unusual among Ohio townships and, in Miami Township’s case, had saved money, as paying Medicare premiums was less expensive than paying coverage under the Township’s group plan. She added, however, that the Township had not approached the practice “properly.”

Mucher objected to public criticism of the practice, saying it had begun about 10 years ago by board action and had been used by several former trustees. He said the purpose had been to save taxpayer dollars while providing coverage comparable to what the Township offered employees.

“I am personally offended that someone is going to say that I personally took advantage of the board of trustees financially or for coverage that I was not supposedly entitled to,” Mucher said.

Askeland said she believed the trustees who began the practice had acted in good faith, and that Hayes had acknowledged that advice from county prosecutors on the matter had changed over time. But she also said the legal landscape had shifted and that the Township’s more recent motions and resolutions had been unclear.

Moir moved to reconsider the June 15 vote, saying she had reviewed prior records and found a 2018 resolution that referred only to reimbursement for Medicare Part B premiums, while the Township had also reimbursed Part D and supplemental coverage. She also noted that trustees had already voted earlier this year to end health insurance premium reimbursements for elected officials.

If the board asked a tax attorney whether it could reimburse past premiums, Moir said, “we’re going to run into thousands of dollars worth of legal fees,” and added that she would not vote to approve reimbursement she believed was not lawfully authorized. To that end, Askeland said the amount not reimbursed to Mucher ahead of voting to end the repayment of premiums — about $6,500 — would likely be matched or exceeded by the cost of additional legal advice.

Mucher opposed the reversal, saying no legal or fiscal authority had previously told trustees a resolution was required.

“Neither the fiscal officer of Miami Township, nor the prosecuting attorney, nor the county auditor, nor the state auditor, nor the state attorney general ever told the board of trustees that a resolution was required to reimburse for Medicare,” Mucher said. “Never, never, never.”

Data center moratorium approved

Later in the meeting, trustees voted unanimously to approve a 12-month moratorium on any new data center seeking to operate or locate in Miami Township, waiving a second reading of the resolution.

Askeland read the resolution aloud, defining data centers as facilities that primarily house infrastructure for “building, running, delivering, or transmitting technological applications and services” or storing associated data.

The moratorium is intended to give the Township time to study potential effects on “health, safety, utilities, and infrastructure,” and directs the Zoning Commission and Zoning Administrator Bryan Lucas to develop a section of the Township Zoning Resolution addressing data centers during the moratorium.

MTFR update

Fire Chief James Cannell reported that Miami Township Fire-Rescue has logged 677 runs so far this year, an average of 3.6 runs per day. Trustees approved the hiring of Anessa Stamper as an as-needed part-time member of the department; Cannell said the department has recently been able to fill three daily staffing positions 88% of the time, and that additional part-time personnel are needed to support that goal.

Cannell also reported that MTFR shift personnel have begun a trial 48/96 schedule — working 48 hours on and 96 hours off — while maintaining a 56-hour work week. Trustees also approved a contract with Fire Manufacturing Innovations LLC for custom shelving and tool mounts for Engine 82, at a cost not to exceed $21,320.28 from the department’s capital fund.

• Comments
• |
• Login
• |
• Community Standards
• |
• Help

No comments yet for this article.