While I still believe that the school district – which has passed five parcel taxes since 2007 – is in better fiscal condition than the city overall, and that it is the city’s turn to attempt to turn to the voters to help stabilize the city’s fiscal situation, after having discussions with a number of district teachers this past weekend, I think there are some legitimate concerns here, especially with the discrepancy in the coverage between city employees and teachers.
As one teacher told me, “This isn’t a leadership based move this time around.” Instead, it is “truly a grassroots upwelling of teachers who are at a breaking point.” In part, they explained that the district passed on to teachers a $200 per month increase in benefit costs, which amounts to a pay cut. As a number of people have explained, teachers are paying up to $1500 out of pocket for benefits and there are many, especially the younger teachers, who cannot afford to stay.
One teacher at Davis High, who gave permission to be quoted but not identified, told the Vanguard, “I take the family benefit package of $11900 per year which covers 100% of my vision plan and dental plan. The district contributes $951.91 per month towards my medical. My contribution is $1617.72 for Blue Shield.”
“I do not choose the cheapest option of Kaiser because I prefer the care offered by the UC Medical group,” the teacher said. “I do not know the exact difference between the two plans, but I believe it to be around $200 per month. I do know that a friend of mine who teaches in the Elk Grove school district pays $50 per month for the exact same benefit package. “
Now the district does not necessarily buy into this. For one thing, Elk Grove teachers have about the highest compensation coverage in the state and region. They covered this through continued enrollment growth.
The district believes that they provide better coverage than most districts our size. And the district believes they cannot ever cover full health.
A $200 per month increase in costs for teachers, on top of having to pay $100 to $150, is putting a huge strain on the teacher’s ability to live on their current income. Many teachers will receive a net decrease in pay this year.
A full time city employee receives $1657.86 for medical, $220.64 for Dental, $5.90 for life and $35 for LTD (Long Term Disability) for a total of $1920.40.
The stunning thing is a half-time, 50% employee receives $956.75 from the city, slightly more than what the school district contributes to medical coverage for teachers.
We do remain concerned that the city is now facing a more severe economic crisis than the school district. For six years, the school district could have no better partner than the city of Davis. The city of Davis never put a competing parcel tax measure on the ballot. The city of Davis in 2012 asked for only a $49 parks tax when they probably needed three times that. Every single councilmember in the city of Davis backed every single parcel tax measure on the ballot.
The city of Davis now faces its own emergency. It needs to pass a sales tax measure this June and it really needs to pass a second tax measure in the fall to fund parks and roads. It seems unlikely at this point in time that the city would be able to get voter approval for two tax measures this year, given the amount of money homeowners are already paying for the district’s parcel tax and the water rate increase.
The school district should be mindful as well that the people most likely to benefit in this community from a city parcel tax are kids and families. We have a decaying street system that makes it a hazard for kids who are walking and biking to safely get to school.
Parks are badly in need of an infrastructure upgrade and the prime benefactors of those will be children.
These remain tough times and the district is going to have to prioritize its spending. Bruce Colby at the Thursday meeting noted that, while this was the first budget increase in several years, the $4.3 million is not nearly enough to cover all of the needs that have accumulated over the years.
He argued that, while the additional money is nice, it does not begin to cover the $15 million which the district has lost over the last five years.
Our inclination this weekend was to ask the district to return some of the parcel tax money so that voters might be more willing to support a city parcel tax. However, the reality of the teacher’s situation was not as clear then as it is now. Based on this information, the school district is going to need to use its $4.3 million boost both to alleviate class size problems and hopefully cover more of the teacher’s medical coverage.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
“The district contributes $951.91 per month towards my medical. My contribution is $1617.72 for Blue Shield.”
Their contribution is $1617.72 a month or for the year? A very misleading article.
The $1600 figure is yearly, but the $200 addition is monthly. I struggled trying to reconcile those numbers, but I believe them accurate there.
I am the teacher that contacted David. I am sorry if I was not clear. I pay $1617.72 every MONTH for Blue Shield.
So your contribution is $1617.72 monthly plus the district kicks in $951.91 more?
That makes for almost a $31,000 a year health care policy. Do you think taxpayers should support teachers getting cadillac health care plans?
What do you think the city paying for health and retiree health?
Not $31,000 a year.
Wow… talk about conflation! Most retirees under 65 pay 1/2 of the medical costs until they are qualified for Medicare. Once the retiree is enrolled in Medicare, the City only pays for the supplement to Medicare, hence the City’s payments drop considerably.
David, how about enlightening folks instead of making these retorts? I’ll bet you know the city is paying. So, if you want us to consider this comparison, you could list it. I notice you’ve been engaging more in this kind of terse challenge lately, and worry that you’re getting grouchy.
I’m not getting grouchy, sometimes, I’m trying to do a few things at the same time and my response might be more short and thus appear more direct than was intended. What exactly is it that you want to know? I laid out how much the city is paying for health care, $1940 per month. What other figure are you looking for?
Could easily support a disrict contribution equal to Kaiser for employee. Could support full coverage for dependents IF dependents had no coverage available on their own.
Would not support any cashout of medical benefit.
District and employee should share future increases, similar to City model.
Oppose salary increases until a healthy reserve is fully funded, AND deferred maintenance is fully covered.
Just my strongly held opinion.
I agree with you hpierce. Where I worked there was always one health care plan like Kaiser that the company paid 100% of the coverage, but if you wanted to upgrade and not have an HMO you had to pay the extra costs.
Without knowing the health care options offered to DJUSD teachers it’s hard to make any conclusions. On top of that group plans are less expensive than individual plans.
Either way I can’t see how anyone is paying $1400/mo.
I’m a teacher in the district and we do pay this much. Also it is not a “Cadillac plan”. I found the memo from the district on last years (calendar year 2013) and this is what it says….
Monthly premium for blue shield basic….$784.63- employee only, 1569.26 – employee plus one, 2040.04 employee & 2 dependents.
Kaiser….668.63-employ only, 1337.26 – employee plus one, 1738.44 employee &2 dependents
PERS choice 667.03 -employee only, 1334.06 employee plus one, 1734.28 employee &2 dependents.
Delta dental…. 55.55 employee only, 113.96 employee plus one, 164.28 employee & 2 dependents
Vision service plan.. 9.72 employee only, 20.45 employee plus one, 29.91 employee & 2 dependents. (District mandates coverage for employee only for dental and vision.)
Certificated (teachers) employees: based on full time employment. We require employee coverage for dental, vision and employee assistance program. Employee taking group health insurance receive $491.67 for employee only, $816.67 for employee plus one, $991.67 for employ plus two.
This year (2014) all health plans went up a minimum of little over $200 for each plan ….some went up more, but the district passed that on to us teachers….they couldn’t help. So yes I can see a family paying over $1400 a month for insurance. I wish I had saved that memo, but alas I didn’t.
This increase cost is hurting a lot of the younger teachers with families. For years I put my children on an individual plan since it was cheaper than what the district offers. But now that they are older, they get it through their colleges.
“Also it is not a “Cadillac plan”.”
Well, according to the ACA, which I’m sure most teachers embrace:
“Excise Tax on High-Cost Coverage (Cadillac Tax)
Beginning in 2018, a 40 percent excise tax will be imposed on the value of health insurance benefits exceeding a certain threshold. The thresholds are $10,200 for individual coverage and $27,500 for family coverage (indexed to inflation). The thresholds increase for individuals in high-risk professions and for employers that have a disproportionately older population.”
Not $31,000 a year.
It looks like the city is paying $23,000 per year. If the $951 figure is correct, the district is paying $11,412 a year for their portion.
Lets be clear, the number you cite for the city is employee & 2+ dependents. If the employee has no dependents, it’s not that high. I’d support DJUSD coverage equal to City formula, except I do not support ‘cafeteria cashout’ for either public employer, and that would include not paying for any dependents who could be covered under another employer’s plan IF that resulted in a cashout for that dependent.
I believe in full coverage for an employee and dependents, at the Kaiser rate.
This isn’t about whether it is or isn’t a “cadillac” plan. But nice try at setting up another straw man argument.
Oh you and your straws. It’s about employees thinking they’re entitled to cadillac plans that most of the taxpayers don’t have themselves.
You sound like a very jealous and angry individual, GI.
What are your thoughts on universal healthcare?
Do you like/use medicare?
No, not at all and I resent your accusations. I’m against ACA as I know what it’s going to do to jobs and the economy. Read the latest CBO report if you don’t believe me. Not on medicare either, I have a health plan from my former job that I carried over and now have to pay a portion of the premiums. I’ve seen my copay and my max payouts go up this year which in part was do to Obamacare (not me saying that but my employer). I’m a Davis homeowner who’s being asked to pay more in school parcel taxes because the school district declared an emergency. Now that the district is seeing some of their funds returning they should look to alleviate the parcel tax burden on homeowners before they start the giveouts. That’s my opinion and I’m allowed that, right Greg Brucker? I’d appreciate it if you would stop the personal innuendos and stick to the subject and facts.
You’re welcome to whatever opinion you want, GI. I was making an observation based on how you consistently post. If I am wrong, great. I would hate to think that emotions are what drive your posting.
And for the record, you were the first one here to move away from the facts and subject and start rallying against obamacare, “cadillac” plans, and public employees in general. If you are going to make a comment like the below:
” I’d appreciate it if you would stop the personal innuendos and stick to the subject and facts.”
..I would ask you first to uphold that which you accuse of others, because your attacks on public workers, including calling us entitled (and everything else you have over the years) reeks of personal attack against large groups of people you seem to dislike.
It falls on deaf ears to pull the victim card when you are as guilty of that which you accuse others of doing.
Heed your own advice would be my suggestion. I actually agree with the thought, but not the manner in which you model it.
hpierce: until a healthy reserve is fully funded, AND deferred maintenance is fully covered.
Those were two budget items that were discussed as a priority in the district budget in last Thursday’s meeting.
Were there commitments made as to priorities, or were the needs just identified?
At this stage, the district staff lays out what they see as needs to be addressed, and begins to get feedback from school board trustees. In the next few board meetings, the board and staff will put together a budget. It will probably use the current year’s budget as a starting point and modify from there. The budgeting process will probably be more relaxed this time around than it was in the midst of budget cutting because no budget-related layoffs are expected.
Thank you for answering my question, factually (I presume), and dispassionately.
The cost is about right. UCD has a UC Medical Center plan (UC Blue & Gold) for around $2300 per month for an employee plus children (health, vision and dental). The premium is in tiers starting at $52 for its lowest paid employees and raising to a few hundred for high paid employees.
Instead of raises, the Teachers Union should have been negotiating health insurance. However, older teachers without families would not particularly find this as a priority. For some lower paid teachers, they may do better to insure their families through Obamacare and only pay for themselves on the District’s insurance. Or find a job in a better situated district.
There are solutions. Close another school and increase class sizes.