Tisbury is looking to reduce the cost of health insurance by pushing town employees to shift themselves onto the policies of family members who don’t work for the town.

In return for getting themselves off the town’s health insurance, workers could be offered thousands of dollars toward subsidizing the cost of alternate arrangements.

The suggestion was one of a number of cost-saving and revenue-raising measures which came up at Tuesday’s meeting of the selectmen.

The ideas ranged from the macro — approaching the big ratings agencies to see if the town could arrange a better credit rating, making its debt cheaper to service — to the micro — installing meters at the town’s park-and-ride and raising the rent for the Katharine Cornell Theatre — to the frankly wishful — installing a new suggestion box for town employees with cost-cutting ideas.

Town administrator John Bugbee began by noting that in the current climate of declining revenues, “We need to do some belt-tightening, like everyone else.”

And one of the major and fast-increasing costs is the provision of health insurance. In Tisbury’s case, insurance for current and former workers eats up some 13.4 per cent of the total budget.

Mr. Bugbee told the selectmen that for every employee who could be persuaded to move from town coverage onto the policy of a spouse working elsewhere, Tisbury could save $20,000 to $25,000 a year.

“There are some legal hurdles to get over; however, this has been done in some other towns,” he told selectmen.

Later, speaking to the Gazette, he conceded it would not be an easy sell, getting workers to drop their insurance coverage with the town, particularly if the alternative was a less generous package, such as typically offered by private sector employers.

For that reason, it would be necessary to offer a cash incentive.

“What would happen is if your wife is working for the town and you are working somewhere else, and she decides to sign on to your plan as a dependent, the town would then give her an amount of money — $2,000, $3,000, some towns have even done $5,000 — to offset the premiums,” he said.

He also acknowledged the proposal might be seen as cost-shifting, from one employer to another, but argued that “to the system of health care as a whole” it could be seen as a saving.

“Two individual plans are probably going to cost around $40,000. Whereas a family plan would go from $20,000 to $25,000,” he said.

Another hopeful cost-saver Mr. Bugbee advanced was getting ratings agencies to reconsider Tisbury’s rating. He already had spoken with a couple of agencies, he said, seeking to have them analyze Tisbury’s financial health.

If the town’s bond rating is increased, he said, it could save thousands on interest costs.

And it would cost the town nothing to have it done.

His third suggestion was the installation of a town suggestion box to collect recommendations from town employees.

Again Mr. Bugbee thought incentives might be in order; perhaps gift certificates for those with the best ideas.

“I know it’s a little outside the box . . .,” he said, apparently intending no pun.

Selectman Tristan Israel said the town would welcome public suggestions via it Web site.

Wishful thinking? Mr. Israel next noted, “Some towns have wishing wells that make $1,200 a year.”

Mr. Bugbee went on to talk about an article which will come before town meeting for the installation of meters at the Tisbury park-and-ride. The town has been concerned for some time about people, including some businesses, leaving vehicles there for longer than the seven-day free period, and not paying for the extra.

Two machines would be installed at a cost of anywhere between $8,000 and $12,000. Users would have to display a ticket on their car dashboards. Mr. Bugbee estimated it would take about three years, at current rates of charging, to recoup the cost.

Next up was the most emotional suggested money-maker of the night, a proposal to double the rentals for groups wanting to use the Katharine Cornell Theatre. For nonprofit groups, who make up the bulk of bookings, the cost would go from $50 to $100 a night.

Rates have not changed since 2002, and in any case would still be cheap compared with other Island venues. But users still complained.

A delegation from the Island Theatre Workshop protested that the doubling would cost the organization $2,500 a year, which they could ill afford.

Richard Paradise wrote on behalf of the Martha’s Vineyard Film Society, warning it would have an adverse effect on the number of screenings and the types of films that would be shown.

Mr. Kristal insisted the theatre was still a “bargain” venue, but in the end, at selectman Geoghan Coogan’s suggestion the board agreed on a price of $75 for nonprofits, and that the price be frozen for any events already booked by them for this year.

For-profit renters, though, will pay the full 100 per cent increase, from $100 to $200 a night.