The Cobleskill-Richmondville school board last week revised and lowered the amount the school district is asking retired teachers to pay for their health insurance.
Mailed to retirees last Wednesday, the move is a reaction to protests by active and retired teachers.
But retirees continued to protest, with many panning the lowered payments after hearing about them at last Monday’s school board meeting.
The former policy, sent without warning to retired teachers in late October, asked holders of individual policies to pay 16 percent of their health insurance. It was also retroactive to July 1, meaning retirees were already in arrears when they received the letter.
The unannounced policy triggered angry responses from retirees, and school board President Dan Schulte apologized last Monday for the way it was handled.
“We should have let you know when we ratified the [new teachers’] contract in early October,” Mr. Schulte told the audience of about 60 active and retired teachers.
The new policy, Mr. Schulte said, would have retirees pay 10 percent of an individual policy starting July 1, 2010. On July 1, 2011, they would begin paying 16 percent.
The district will return any checks retirees sent from the October letter.
Although the payments will be lower, they’re necessary, Mr. Schulte said.
“What we need is everyone to participate and be a shareholder,” he said, adding that the cost of insurance to the district could rise next year.
Also apologizing, board member Rose Surman agreed that the payments were essential.
“I have enormous respect for all the years you put in,” she told the retirees. “You taught my children.
“But we walk a tightrope, balancing what the district needs and what the community can afford.”
Retired teachers at Monday’s meeting, however, didn’t like the new, lower payments.
“If you think a one-year extension will appease us, you’re wrong,” said retired teacher Dan Zeh.
He pointed out that letters sent by the district to teachers upon their retirement said that health benefits “will continue at no cost to you.”
Retiree Russ Smith argued that the burden of paying falls more heavily on retired teachers than it would if spread among all taxpayers.
Using the figures from the district’s October letter, Mr. Smith said a family whose house is assessed at $100,000 would save $16.75––less than a nickel per day––if retirees paid their share.
The savings isn’t worth it and isn’t fair, Mr. Smith said.
“I don’t care if it’s now or 2029, it’s wrong. It’s never too late to right a wrong,” he said.
Recent retirees argued that they wouldn’t have retired when they did, had they known the payment plan was coming.
“I feel a sense of betrayal,” said retiree Christina Stark. “Who changed the rules of the game after the game is over?”
Ms. Stark also touched on what several retirees have discussed privately––that they may sue the district to rescind the policy.
“You do not want to consider the alternatives,” she told the board. “You do not want this taken out of your control.”