Kenosha board directs actuaries to cost retiree-health options after benefits debate
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
After months of discussion about administrator retiree benefits, the Kenosha Unified School District board voted to direct administration to prepare equalization options and engage an actuarial firm to produce a cost-impact analysis for other post‑employment benefits (OPEB).
The Kenosha Unified School District board voted to direct administration to develop equalizing modifications to retiree‑health benefits and to hire an actuary to estimate fiscal impacts.
During a presentation on the district’s other post‑employment benefits (OPEB), Finance staff and the board’s OPEB trustee described three broad approaches: keep the status quo; equalize eligibility and contribution requirements across employee groups; or move to a fixed‑contribution model such as a health reimbursement arrangement. The presenters said any parameter changes require an actuarial study and estimated that engaging a firm such as Milliman would cost roughly $10,000–$15,000.
“Anything that changes the parameters of the current offering triggers [an actuarial] study,” said the staff presenter; the district’s current approach funds a trust with 3% of salaries and spends just over $4 million annually to contribute to that trust.
Board members who supported the motion said equalization addressed long‑standing perceptions of inequity among employee groups and would provide a basis for future budgeting decisions. Dr. Price moved for the board to pursue the middle path — keep the basic OPEB structure while asking administration to model equalizing modifications and engage an actuarial firm for a cost‑impact analysis. The motion was seconded and carried on a roll‑call vote.
Supporters emphasized protecting current retirees in any redesign. Staff noted the timing requirements for contract nonrenewals under state law (January 31 for certain notices) and said HR would meet with affected employees and offer multiple meetings in December and January to explain options.
Next steps: HR and administration will draft the specific equalization scenarios and present them to the board in January; the board directed staff to include grandfathering parameters for the actuarial request so the firm can model the fiscal outcome under different grandfathering windows.