Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Employee Benefits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Green Bay Area school board reduces new disability income protection from 82.5% to 70% for future enrollees
Summary
The Green Bay Area Public School District board voted to change its internal income protection plan so future enrollees would receive 70% of pre‑disability income instead of 82.5%; existing claimants are unaffected until their claim ends. The board debated a 60% option and approved a last‑minute amendment raising the replacement level to 70%.
The Green Bay Area Public School District Board of Education voted June 23 to change the district’s internal income protection plan (IPP) so that new enrollees will have 70% of their income replaced if they claim disability, down from the current 82.5% replacement level.
Board member Lynn, speaking during debate, said the change applies only to future enrollees and that “anyone who's already involved in the ... income protection plan is not gonna be affected.” She described the change as one of several difficult decisions intended to address a projected $10 million deficit.
Board member Andrew moved an amendment to raise the proposed replacement level from 60% to 70%. Andrew said the amendment reflects trade‑offs between salary and benefits and noted that 60% would put the district’s benefit below some private plans; he asked the board to record the choice between the two options. Board member Jeanette and others argued 70% is generous but justified by the board’s assessment of staff value.
After the amendment passed, the board voted on the main motion adopting 70% as the new replacement level for future enrollees. Board members discussed that the term “enrollee” includes people who will enroll after current claimants stop drawing benefits; current claimants will remain at 82.5% for the duration of their incidents.
The board did not change benefits for staff currently drawing IPP; those employees will remain on their present terms until a claim ends and then be subject to the new schedule. The transcript shows the board approved the amendment and then the main motion; the result was recorded as carried.
The board discussed the measure as part of broader deficit‑management options; members said savings from the change would help the district’s budget but did not specify a precise savings figure in the public discussion. The board gave no direction in the meeting to reverse the decision or open further negotiation with employee groups.
The decision now goes into the district’s personnel and benefits processes to implement the change for newly enrolling employees and for employees whose claims end going forward.
