001I didn't charge my computer. So, how was the finance uh conference? Spec financing. Is that like is that like the same as like >> fulfilling finally? >> Hi Jo. >> How are you doing today? >> Nice to see you. At least it's not snowing here. It was snowing when I left >> here. It was or where you were at? >> I am. Yeah, I'm in Wakau. >> I have to call this meeting scooters to order. Please stand for the pledge by our Boy Scouts. years for the tier one and tier two. We our recommendation is is 15 years and the only reason we did that the only reason we did that is part of the strategic plan focused on recruitment and mention of staff and if we're going to be in the market to recruit
002experienced people uh by go by having that as a 15 year years of service for that benefit. That's why we move that from 20 to because if you hire somebody at 40 with experience they're in a desirable position that's hard to find. We want to have as many tools available to attract the best talent to for our kids in our community. >> And it's important to note too that the tier one and tier 2 people, I believe the majority, if not all of them already have the 20 years of experience. So even if it's below even even if the tier three has less than 15 years, everybody's already kind of hit that years of service in the other tier. So, um, we're not taking anything away essentially from those first two tiers, >> and it's
003just a tool in our arsenal to be able to attract the best talent for positions. So, >> um, and and then um this would be this would this year or if approved by the board, we would we would do a catchup. So, for each year of service, they would get $1,000 put into a pre-unded HR. And I'll go over that in the next slide. Um, so for example, someone's here for 10 years, they're going to get $10,000 immediately contributed to an HR. That's that's just this one year. So that'll be the biggest cost this year will be that catchup. Um, we also added as a benefit at the end that the district will pay 130 per sick day up to 120 days at retirement with the employee choosing between an HA contribution, a cash payout.
004Where does $130 come? That's the right now the current price of a cost of a a substitute. So >> we might have to finagle that language because that's constructive receipt >> giving employee a choice between tax free and t cash. >> Okay. Yeah. Yeah. >> The only thing I still object to on this tier three it doesn't mention that um they get their HR if they retire from the district. It just says if they reach 15 years and they go. So, we're essentially creating a savings account for somebody and handing over the the funds to them. The only place it actually says it is on the bottom where it says if they don't reach the the 15 years, say they have 10 years, then then it comes back. But I don't actually I guess I'm
005just not >> Yeah, I think I think the the the the discussion that we've had uh Tim, Chris, and I have had is the retirement perspective. It's you're keeping someone here maybe longer that already has the age and years of service. And while we want them to move on and do whatever they want to do, it's significant savings to the district if we don't force them to retire. And and those savings are in the IKRA. Um which we can talk about at some point, maybe later. Um how much that costs per month for someone that's over 55 years old. It's significant. Um and then additional um uh salary with salary too. you know, if if someone leaves at 55 or 58 or however old they want to be, uh, however old they are, um, replacing
006them probably most likely with someone younger, the salary difference is going to be there, too. So, it's significant savings to the district by not attaching a retirement retirement to a benefit like this. Um, while also the employee flexibility is there as well. Um, but obviously that's up for discussion. >> What uh in in tier one, what where is the 15k come from? Like where in that number? >> I think I think it was just something that we've kicked around and budgetwise like where we are with within the budget like what can what can we do, right? including the gold plan too. Like today a single plan is just over uh 15,000. This year when we had that huge increase, it was like a 30% increase. Um so we're we're hitting that single goal plan uh
007with that $15,000 number. Um and and I think that's pretty much where we got the numbers. Do we factor in the cost savings for a salary of what we'd save for a tier one teacher? That makes sense. We're going from say $85,000 to $50,000. >> So let me Great question, Brian. So So when you look at this, we put in I'll walk through this this slide so you can see the dollars and cents. So currently this year, this is an So when you look at an IKRA, basically it's an age scale, right? So let's say if you're a 25y old teacher, okay, single, you may cost the district ballpark, $500 per month. Okay? If you go up to a 55 year old, that could be upwards between 13 and $1,500 per month. Right? >> And
008then every year you go up, those dollars significantly increase. You see almost a $500 jump from 55 to 60. So that's why when we look at this, the board has to make that decision and vote on this. Is this a retirement benefit or is this a uh postemployment benefit? I mean, and that and that's the decision that um our recommendation. as a post-employment benefit uh because then we see that there's cost savings over time and and and so this is like we took our best average here but I just want to show you because I think what what happens is when we look at these benefits we all you know we we we look at where we're currently at and having a having a a benefit here for insurance that was under that was u
009in language staff was under the impression what hasn't been discussed is the is the overall cost to the district and what is even fiscally viable and sustainable. And when you look at the um current marketplace, this is not the Riverview marketplace. This is the United States marketplace. We looked at our current cost which we saw a 30% increase from last year to this year. In addition, we're projecting a we're going to possibly we're considering budgeting anywhere between we're looking at 20% possible increase next year. Um that's on the high end, but we're we want to do our due diligence and make sure our budget reflects our true potential cost. So you see the 20% increase on the goal plan brings that cost up to here up to 18,000. When you go out to year 11,
010that's what we're projecting. After year three, we cut that down to 15% increase. This is the cost, projected cost of an individual insurance plan for a single beneficiary. >> That is absolutely not sustainable. I mean, this is obviously projections, you know, we're on the high with all of that because it's 15% per year, but with the last Medicaid cuts and the subsidy cuts, the marketplace just blew and that was something we weren't expected when we went to at all. Like, we were expecting things to remain and we were looking at maybe a 10 to 15 10 12% increase and we got 30%. And so we'll see what what it is here next year. But obviously with that gold plan and we were we were tied into that gold plan for the full year. So with
011the IKRA being what it is, I mean that was just the jump in cost there. Um but when you look at what $15,000 can get you, I mean it's pretty it's it's a pretty dang good plan that you can get you on the market. >> I think you said the previous meeting it's about the like the 85th percentile of plans that you've recommended. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, well, the the tier one and tier two benefits that we're we're projecting, they would be probably in the 80 85th percentile of retirement benefits in the state. Okay. The the tier three benefits are probably in line with a lot of my groups that I have that move to define contribution plans. >> Can you say that again, please? the first part >> that the that the tier one
012and tier two benefits um what we're projecting as far as dollar amounts are probably in the 85th percentile of uh retirey benefits in the state. >> So still on the very high end. We're we're on the we're on the high end, but you were also on the very very very probably top >> we were in the top tier previously percentile percentile and and what we tried to do is fiscally for the district and then still not pull the rug out of you know those tier one tier 2 employees and still give them a really good benefit and then moving forward it's we're probably on on in the middle here then moving forward with the >> I guess one one question I have is if you go Back up, Chris. Yes. >> As you look like
013year three, the bronze plan's $16,300, >> right? So, >> again, I'm a little more concerned with the tier one in the sense that, you know, these these group people have done their due diligence for the district and um we're saying 15k for that year three isn't even going to cover a bronze plan for them. >> Correct. >> That that's potentially >> based on a 20% increase. that would be by the time it gets to year three that would be a 35% increase in the market. Um whether it's 35% you know we're just projecting I I do think >> they would be paying full coverage for them. I don't think anyone is entitled. >> One thing one thing to keep in mind too is those retirees that have retired previously they were also responsible for 12
014and a half% of that premium. This is not include that. So if you look at that $15,000 number that's what the district has given them. If you do 12 and a half percent and add to that, that's what they would normally have paid if they were staying on the district plan. >> So Brian, one of your previous questions, let me just keep going through this so you can kind of see this. So, so just to understand the spreadsheet, one, two, three, and four are current retirees and our current costs for them. So you can see here this is a family. This is a family. Um and the the rest are one and two are I I uh or two and three I'm sorry are individuals. Um and then you can see that number one comes
015off at the end of this year. uh the number four that family plan comes off at the end of next year and then the other two extend for the next seven years plus. >> But what we did is Brian coming back to your question we balanced this out. Now this is not you can see here that we have 5 through 12 are the people who are in tier one and then what their what their benefit would be based on their um based on their uh uh acred sick days. And then 13 through through 19 are tier two. And we just staggered these out based on best estimated guess. We can't dict, you know, we won't know if somebody retires. If five people go this year, then that will change that if you know it's we're
016this is all just assumptions, right? But if you look one important piece, Brian, you brought this up. You can see that budgeting for next year, the onetime catchup would be 96,000 and then the individual contribution would be 20. So you see a $210,000 right away. That includes two retirees. But if you go down, we Tim estimated just on the low side a $20,000 uh savings just simply from uh salary and that's on the low end. That does not include the cost too, which would be probably anywhere between 10 and $12,000 per year. So again, these are conservative estimates. But even at conservative estimates, when you when you um take this out x amount of years, you can see by year, here's the current year. Next year, two, three, four, five, six. By year six, we're
017already starting to experience a cost savings for the district. >> That's based on conservative numbers. It's still providing It's still providing >> the current the current proposed benefit. Correct. >> Can we Can we go back up to tier three real quick? >> Uh you want the >> Okay, so our onetime catchup is the 96,000. That's next year. >> Yeah, we budget that for the 26 27 >> and the 20,000 included is included in that 96. >> No, that's in addition to that one. That would be the 20 people that are in there. They get the 1,000. >> Okay. Okay. So the 20,000 is the thousand for that year. The 96 is the catch up. >> So total catchup or basically total for this year >> then is 108 $116,000 >> for tier for tier three.
018>> For tier three, >> correct? >> Okay. >> Yep. Just for tier three, the 94,000 comes from from the retiree benefits plus the potential for two possible departures or retire retirements. >> And then going forward, if you scroll back down, Chris, the The annual cost for all tier three is 22,000 24,000. It's >> it's an incre incremental. >> Every time somebody retires, you get someone new. That's >> and then that doesn't even include anybody that leaves and is not vested, >> right? >> Where that comes back to the district >> and that offsets whatever you're sending in. So technically, you might not even send in any money one year because you have more. >> Do you want to share that example of another district without saying their name that has dollars? Did you say there
019was a district that had ketchup dollars? >> $400 million. >> Yes. >> So, this this is staff that didn't get to the 15-year vested and all of those contributions were returned to the district. >> And those contributions are returned in a in an interesting account. And then when the district whatever whenever they make their next contribution, we offset it by what's in that account, what you're sending in. So, >> so technically you can be offsetting with interest gained off of the return. >> Yep. You could be you could end up getting more money back than you put in with you most likely will. And then that forfeite balance could end up covering your entire year. >> Correct. >> Are the tier three HSA are they interestbearing or do they have any kind of investment vehicle
020>> attach? So they they have we have a fixed rate and then we have investments. Now, any tier three benefit like this, I always recommend >> we're trying to get as many people invested as possible because all of these people are further away from retirement. Just like anybody's retirement benefits, you're not stuck in the most conservative thing. We're probably a little bit more aggressive. So my recommendation for that and I don't know if we really talked about that as much is to pick a default investment that invests it for them because in my experience and I just talked to a group today that did that. They picked a balance fund and their employees made out >> within the last you know this past year made 17%. you're you're stuck in a fixed rate. you're getting
021two 3% >> at best and you're not you're not making anything like it's it's most important like even if there's risk with that long term you're probably going to see more money than back than you so and it gets people's balances growing further yeah might be by you >> and on top of it you you'll see other plans around the state and even locally where there's a TSA investment >> into a well the challenge with the TSA that that's just an investment account and If you're going to use that for any insurance benefit post retirement, you're going to have to pull that you're going to pay taxes on this where this is this these dollars could be used for any health related need including you could purchase um uh premiums. >> Yeah. So this >>
022unlike an HSA where you're not allowed to >> this benefit like because we're on a we're on a similar dollar amount across the board, we can make it all eligible medical expenses. So prescriptions, doctor visits, co-pays, deductibles, and premiums as well. So they have a little bit more flexibility in what they can use and they can use it in Medicare if they still have money left. >> Seems like significant more flexibility. >> Yes. >> So can we when we go through this can we go by tiers like that's starting tier one, tier two, tier three and once you're done with your presentation and then just ask questions that way. So I feel like we're jumping around to like a lot of different things right now. >> Makes sense. >> Sure. >> So I don't know
023where you were if you want to finish that if you want to get right into that part of it. Yeah, we can keep going. Um, so basically proposed plan, we're seeing an individual cost savings of $69,000 over five years for each retiree. We believe this honors the commitment. Previous benefit was in place until July 1. Is it matching? No. But it's a benefit that as as Michael said is in the 85th percentile. It allows to the strategic plan goals of uh around staff support retention and addresses OPED liability. um and and recommendation from the 2025 audit. When you look at um the cost the cost this is I I put together some calcula I calculated the cost from act 10 till 2026. Whoops. I apologize. the um the district spent, this is from Skyward, $1.3
024million from 2011 to two to 2026 on retirement insurance and benefit. Um please note that I brought that up in that spreadsheet. From 26 to 2033, we're going to spend another 433,000 on the current four with the one coming off this year. Our new plan, when you total it up, the tier one and two is 765,000 and just the one-year catch-up's 96. That equates to a total investment of 861,000. If you look on the right column, the traditional versus the new one, that's a cost savings of 97,000 97, $110.50 >> and that's over the course of that entire period. And that exactly that which is matches the window from 2011 to to now. Y and then and then here's just a quick bar graph showing showing the differences. So um we can go back to
025Brian. You said you wanted to go back to the tiers. Um >> I feel that might just be the best way for us to >> just go through them individually so everybody has a good grasp. I agree. So again with the can you explain the involvement like you know I know there was originally a committee for oped benefits and how >> and Luke took my spot on that so how that all kind of went? >> Yeah. You want to talk a little bit Luke about the the group that >> Yeah. Um I I think we had a a dual goal which Chris alluded to that um obviously the path we were on is unsustainable. uh we wanted to provide some certainty for our staff that is getting close to retirement are starting to think about
026that. But um we also had to do what was best for the district. So um I I think we we wanted to take a look and make sure that that um our staff that's been here that has been working with the assumption um that there were going to be post-employment benefits that we tried to keep it as close as we could. Um, we wanted to honor all of the acred sick days that that um people have been uh stocking up for years. Um, and so are you asking like how the shears broke down or how the conversation went? >> No, just you know, was there a lot of feedback? Was there a lot of collaboration amongst all stakeholders? >> Yeah, I'd say uh Mr. Trudier um Mrs. Gallich and I met first to kind of
027go over the basics and then we brought in um some of the leaders from the staff and talked through and kind of shared our thinking behind it and uh gave them a chance to ask questions, collect their feedback. Um >> and that was the original committee. >> Yep. The same committee. Yeah. And in general, I have to say that I think that uh at least the feedback that we received in person um the people on the committee said that they appreciated that we were we were doing our best to to give a good and generous benefit. Um, obviously it's not what what was on the books before, but um, it seemed like it was pretty good feedback and that >> and I met with the union president a couple times and shared this in December
028and January to get some eyes on it just to >> just to review it prepare and then prior to that meeting met with the group too. So, >> okay. Yeah. I just I I guess I question is where the number 15K came from. that that was that was established prior to my arrival. I mean, that was and I think >> I think Michael can speak to that. That was just looking at I think trying to find a number that matched up best with what the district could afford, but also give somebody a benefit. I mean obviously as Michael said the the the increases Noah was planning on that significant an increase but um if the increases are lower uh and I think we were looking at hope hopefully right around 10% if you look at
029a bronzer a silver plan you know that would get you hopefully out a couple years. Yeah, because right now if you go back to that well I don't know we don't want to jump around too much but that spreadsheet showed the current retirees um the district is giving them $13,000 because their plan is 15,000 something but they have to pay 12.5% of that. So 13,000 is the number they pay for old plan >> um right now as a retiree and you go out on the marketplace. Um, I'm not sure and it's gonna it's going to vary for everybody because everybody's different ages and everything and we know like as you get older those costs go up. But the $15,000 number um Kim Kim probably worked with other people to to find to figure out that
030number. Um because we threw out a lot of different things. Um and that that's where we were kind of starting. Yeah, I think it was again compared to what we're paying >> retirees right now. >> In our original group discussion with staff and uh us, we had already discussed that we don't feel that the district should pay um retirement benefits 100% when they retire. They should make a contribution also. I mean, and you know, if the 15,000 gets them in a bronze plan and that's paying for their insurance, then God bless them. But other than that, I don't think that the district uh should have to pay 100%. And I think that when we originally met with that group, that was part of the discussion. >> And Brian, the other the other thing I would
031bring up is with the non-renewable ACA credits, you know, I think that >> definitely impacted some some costs, >> but that's but that's being felt. I mean, I'm not like unfortunately across the nation. >> Um, and you know, you look at um that we're also basing these decisions and looking through the lens of gold, silver, and bronze. Um, you can go to the marketplace and get other plans that are not those three. >> So, this is going to be what my question was. So all of the figures that we have up for the gold and the bronze and the silver that was >> those were the rates for the district >> moving forward with us carrying it. These HO HOA comp H contributions are usable in the marketplace. >> They're usable in the marketplace. You
032just can't have a subsidized plan. >> Right. So, and the reason the reason that I wanted some clarification on that is because I think what what you will find and and this is a little bit of a m misnomer amongst and it's not their fault. Employees in in lots of different fields that have had insurance through work have become dependent on it and think that that's the best option for them because it's all done and provided. I think what they will find if they go to the marketplace is they will get considerably better rates than what we're seeing for our packages that are offered to us as a district. So the $15,000 although it doesn't look great for what we're looking at as a district for those packages on the marketplace that $15,000 may travel
033a lot farther than what we're able to provide. >> And and we in my previous district that was echoed by numerous retirees. Do we offer in our current insurance short-term disability? >> That's an added benefit I believe that you have to pay. It's >> usually voluntary. It's not something >> correct. Yeah. Long-term is I think part of the handbook. >> The reason I ask >> shortterm is a paid >> I think about some of the sick days of you know does this encourage people not to take sick days um if they're sick because they want to is that does it make sense? I think when you look at the total sick days of certain people >> so and I'm more thinking you know not like the common flu but if someone is has you know
034>> serious need >> like serious medical issue where they feel obligated to come to work are they going to have to struggle between choosing insurance benefits and >> and we're in like this slippery slope too with you know 60 to 120 and we talked about it a little bit where someone has >> um let's say 200 sick days well I have 80 sick day to 80 sick days that I'm not going to get credit for. So, I'm just going to use those and then you're paying for stuff. So, with the sick days, I mean, >> I think we just tried to do the best of what we could with this. This language was kind of already created. >> Um, but I think there could be some discussion around the sick days, too. We wanted to
035create some incentive um just because it makes sense uh for the district to encourage people to be here. >> As long as it sounds like that there was communication for all stakeholders or that's my question that people had an opportunity for some of that. >> Yeah, we we we shared this this exact document with them. Um gave them a chance to ask questions and and we did get some questions. We got some good discussion with it. I think like you're experiencing and like Jose like this is these are they're they're based on assumptions they're based on market values they're based on history you know your decisions are made by history and and and some of this is the best you know decision the district can make based on current financial state and and you're trying
036to find the best number could, you know, the the number is not always, you know, a tangible with a specific benefit. It's it's basically this is where the districts can safely offer a benefit that is as close to what uh our pre our our experienced uh staff members assume they were going to get. And it it is good for the district. It's good for it's good for staff. It's just not what everybody has known >> different and it's a a pivot that many districts made years ago that Silver Lake has not made. >> That was that was the point that I was going to make is is although it's it seems like a tough pill to swallow, it really is par for the course and we're way way behind the eightball on this. It's it's
037something that unfortunately should have been addressed probably a decade or more ago. Um and so it's unfortunate because it has created a situation where there's obviously an expectation but that expectation is it's not based on something that's tenable. >> And the committee all this is the recommendation. Do you have one? >> Yeah. >> Tim, do you have any comments, parting words, magical things to say? Yeah, I wish I did, but I agree with um with the rationale that you've delivered and uh certainly Mike has has added uh a lot of the points that that uh all three of us uh discussed and then of course um Mike uh was able to compare with different districts and I was able to do that as well of the maybe 15 to 18 districts that I've had experience
038with and I I think that we're on the right track with the proposal. Any more questions on tier one? >> Tier two. No, for me that it's it's it's you you have all the same questions in tier two and tier three that you have in tier one. >> The only question I have in tier three >> the same >> is why 15 years not 20 years like tier two >> which I >> sorry >> that was the that was the incentive >> drawing in new talent. Got it. >> Okay. So then the other question for the board would be is this a post-employment benefit or a retirement benefit >> which we see this as a post-employment benefit because when we look at as much as you know and I I appreciate what Vicki said about
039like you know dollars and cents you know exiting our district without retirey retirement um you know from a fiscal alone standpoint there's cost savings there too. I just know other um employers, whether it be private or uh government employees, that the only way you get postemployment benefits is for a it's a true retirement. So, I get what you're saying. And I mean, if you retire, it's a post-employment benefit. That's what it is. But I don't think that we should be in the business. I don't think it's fiscally uh financially responsible for us to uh give money to people if they're not truly going to retire from our district. I don't think we're in a financial position where we can just do that. So on tier three, um if we're approving this as a package, I'm
040voting no because I still believe that it should be based upon retirement, not based upon just 15 years of service. send you leave. >> I agree with Vicki on that. I think you should have to retire from here to receive that benefit. Um I would also say though part of the recruitment piece and retention piece is given that this tier three is not going to see the same similar benefits of you know $15,000 or getting $1,000 per year. Is that um are we looking at the um guess salary schedule of >> Y >> any kind to increase like that initial tier initial cell and then move it up that way if we're not going to offer so much as a robust retirement package like we were offering you know more money in our pockets to
041invest in a 403b or HA of our own. >> Yeah. And as we're working through with budget and balancing all these costs and the catch up on when to do that, is that this year? Is that next year? Looking at the budget. So, >> so I do I do agree with Brian on that that I think um what people are entitled to is a fair salary and I think that we should be competitive in that so that we attract people and we retain them with what their salary. that's truly what they're what they deserve here. And so, but I think um this is beyond that. And so, I mean, the salary benefit isn't part of our agenda. But I agree with that comment. >> So, the beauty of of defined contribution plan like this and
042if you put it in investing right away over 30 years, that that $30,000 contribution the district made is more like 70 or 80,000. So that's why the investment piece m makes so much sense and why these plans are in a lot of different districts is because it cuts your cost down at the district level, but the compounding interest is really doing the work for you. >> Is is there data that shows districts that have this h the rate of return of these balances? the the the the funds um that you can choose from and the and the the rates or the you know the the earnings that they've had over periods of time. Um >> I I meant from a standpoint more of like for example we have the 15 years and if they don't
043reach that 15-year mark that money comes back to the district. Is there any data that shows in a situation like this where this where this contribution setup exists, how many staff meet that 15-year mark, how much how much funds are actually returned to the district? Is there is there a a data point that gives you a >> I'm not I would have to look to see if we have some school districts. But >> the reason I ask is because Vicki 15 years in today's education field is is a long time for a teacher. There's not there there's a lot of movement amongst teachers. You don't see 15ear teachers in districts frequently >> not making a wage that they'd be making here currently. >> Right. That's so that's what I'm saying. So, what we're talking about
044is essentially putting in a contribution for staff into an account that is acrewing interest that there's a high likelihood we won't ever pay out. It will come back to the district with the >> I just don't want to take that chance. It's not I mean it's all of our money and if you >> I think we have to be responsible and so I would like to see in tier three uh the years of service at change to 20 years and they have to retire from the district. That's all I I think that's fair. I get the point about retaining maybe >> not so much about retaining. It's about drawing in >> drawing in an >> I get your point. If we if we were to go if we were to go to instead of having
045this where we're using this is as a recruitment tactic increase the salary and reduce a contribution because the thought process is the younger students are >> they want the money. They're not concerned about the health insurance person's not looking at their retirement. We're looking at the income. So this is a discussion and an action item. Right. >> Right. So we could there's not unless you see otherwise Michael or the board we could easily make this pivot right here and change us to 20 if the board would would like that. But I also think to Vickiy's point, you know, we've kicked this Ken down the road here for 15 years at this point, >> plus >> I think we might have to get it right. And I do think it needs to be retirement benefit. And
046it's >> I don't think there's any any language in here that prevents you from voting on that. Unless you can see it in here that says retirement versus other >> Well, I think we want to add retirement then. >> My question though is what's the enforcement mechanism like? Right. That's >> how do we Somebody says they're retiring. How do we, you know, do we turn into >> totally >> private investigators? >> Well, well, they they wouldn't be able to take a job in the state of Wisconsin because all that is >> 75. >> Really? >> Yeah. >> 75. >> Yeah. But can't we have language in this that if they were to take employment and get benefits somewhere else that these would no longer they'd be null on? >> But I think we'd also save
047money then because someone who's here for 20 years leaves, we're going to save money on new teacher salaries. So, it's going to work out the right way. >> That's how we looked at it, too. >> Yeah. >> And the retirement, you're going through the Wisconsin retirement system. So, you'd actually officially file a retirement not with the Wisconsin retirement system. >> Yeah. And then you would only be able to work a certain amount of time anyways. >> Can you cut the VRS? >> Under 880 hours. >> Yeah. >> They mod and they've modified that so that it's a little bit different. >> And so, if they were to go over that, >> they're cost. >> Right. Right. right-w within within a Wisconsin school district, not this district, just any school district >> or Illinois. >> Yeah.
048>> And even out of state, too. And that's >> that's Luke's point is is when we become private investigators. >> I think the other thing coming back to when we talk about the dollars and cents, you know, one of the reasons why we've made an HA contribution is there, you know, you have to there is a retention and investing standpoint here. When we look at other public entities, I um a lot of districts are using a TSA contribution. >> Okay. So that I don't know if that's what Wilmont's using. Are they using HA or TSA? >> H. Okay. But a lot a lot of districts are going to TSA contribution, which I can speak personally to that. Our district had a matching dollar amount for TSA. There was no vesting schedule there other than five
049years and you get an additional contribution. So once you left the district and the TSA contribution is very common. >> It's common. I should >> Yeah, it's common. I think I think what happened was at 10 hit and h is so similar to health insurance at retirement except we're giving you the money to purchase health insurance because you're driving up our rates, you know, etc. So you're going to go find insurance elsewhere. It doesn't matter. That doesn't that piece doesn't matter as much here because we're on an acre. So, we're out of the health insurance business, but we're paying for. So, like if someone >> is a high utilizer or whatever, that it doesn't really matter to you as much. >> Um, but what does matter is the age of people that that's where you
050can increase your most costs. And I think that's where we were like 15 and 15 years. If you change this to 55 and 20 years, now you're going to have someone that's 55 and 15 stay for an extra five years. So now they're 60 and 60 and 20. And it's going to cost salary is much more salary and ankor contributions. But I think that's why we settled on 15. But that's just I'm just giving you the background on that. I'm not saying that one way is better than the other. >> I see your point Vicki about the 20 year and the retirement. But but the other impact there from the financial aspect is that at at 20 years that's a significantly more expensive employee than a 14 or 15 year employee. Well, and nothing precludes
051them from leaving. They can leave before they reach the 20 years. They can still retire. They just won't have this benefit. They'll have to find their own insurance. >> So, it would motivate them to stay the 20 years is the point. So, it's kind of counterproductive to the >> But I also don't creating the cost in that sense. I also think you know some some rum most experienced teachers can also be your greatest assets as well. >> I'm not taking away from that. Yeah. I don't want my commentary to be seen as anything other than that. It's just it's it's not to be harmless. But at the end of the day, this is an organization that has got to balance the books and sometimes you have to make difficult decisions to make it work financially
052because if you can't make it work financially, it doesn't matter how good your staff is. >> So that's my that's my only point there. >> Yeah, I'm gonna and I like the consistency for the 20 years of all three tiers. Um, I'm I'm I am going to go Vicki on that one. I like 20 years. >> So, if we go to the 20 years, then are you talking about doing a lower contribution and a higher salary schedule? >> Is that the additional conversation that we have to have? >> We don't have a salary schedule right now. >> I think we need to consider >> I should I I misspoke. I shouldn't say salary schedule, but starting starting salary. >> When you guys discuss that, that'll just have to be taken in consideration. >> I agree
053with that. I think that's the goal. >> Well, I if if that's what we're talking about doing, if we're going to talk about increasing that starting salary and reducing that contribution, then I would be okay with moving it to the 20 because I agree. I think >> the younger teachers coming up, the younger educators, they're more they want they want more dollars on their check. >> Yeah. >> So, >> and if someone decides to retire at 42 and change careers and they have they good for them, right? They've been here for 20 years and it is what it is. But I do think it needs to be a retirement benefit, not a >> I don't know language in here that precludes that. >> But postemployment is retirement. >> Correct. >> Right. >> All I'm saying
054is >> Well, I brought that up, Brian, so we could flush that out here and have agreement on what this benefit is because as Vicki just said, postmployment is OPE is >> Retirement. What we wanted to bring to the forefront so there was no questions. Is is this a retirement benefit or is this a post-employment benefit? Yes, OPED is defined as both, but we wanted to just clarify that with the board if that makes sense. I don't see anything in this language that precludes that. Do you? >> No, I mean I think we could just clear it up a little bit and just say >> Well, I'd like to make a motion that on tier three we change it to 20 years of >> make a motion for it. >> No, we can just do
055that. So then I'd like to >> Before you do, Vicki, I I just want to note that that tier three is a significantly lower benefit than tier one and tier two. And so if we're just doing 20 years across the board so that it's even, I mean, it 15 years is the one thing that makes that kind of softens that blow a little bit. >> What I'm saying is not even though I want to see those teachers compensated more fairly because they don't have the ability to kind of receive some of that benefit of So the tier three benefit is you're going to you're still saving money on an employee, but I think where the savings are really going to come in is once those those current people, those grandfather people are off and the
056tier one and tier two people are off. This benefit isn't going to make or break anything. >> Like because we we right we talked about the the the investments and everything with those dollars. Like a lot of times people are going to leave and this this the amount you're going to fund this is is probably not even going to be it might be nothing. >> So that that tier three essentially has basically no ability to have a negative impact. >> It can only be a net positive. >> I that's what I would say. >> Yeah. It can only be a net positive because they're either going to take the lower amount and it's going to be a lower dollar payout or they're going to return it all to the district with whatever compounded interest we
057got. $500. I mean, what what what is that save? It's going to save you maybe $10,000 a year. The big the big savings is going to be those tier one and tier two people once they're gone. And then um your your fund balance is now going to be in a much healthier. >> Correct. >> Yeah. >> The crux of this on a cost savings is tier one and tier two. If we change the language to require retirement and 20 years, that seems like uh it seems like a bit too austere for tier three because that is our I mean this is this is the benefit going forward. This is our >> if I'm if I'm a 22 year old teacher coming in looking at that I'm going 20 years. I can't picture acknowledgement that we're
058looking at >> not paying someone $42,000 from the 22. >> Well, right. Like >> Yeah. But we're only going to be able to increase it very minimally because we're only talking about a $1,000 >> contribution. I I I think these have to be separate conversations because I think right now, you know, when you're looking at budget development, you're looking at, you know, a >> 10 15 year cycle. Well, you're look well, initially as we looked at, you're talking about a catch-up that we're going to be putting into next year plus the plus the tier three benefit plus the retirees that are going on plus the current retirees. So, you know, yes, I think we are meeting tomorrow and one of our goals as we look at salary increases and CPI and is to increase that
059lower tier. How much is going to be dependent on the resources the district has? >> Well, and I almost think that if we kept tier three as it is in a very short period of time, you'll be able to increase that starting salary regardless because of the money that's going to be saved going this direction. So, it's something that's going to be able to be addressed in a short order regardless. >> Correct. because of the savings. >> You you made the statement to yourself. You have a 22 year old person coming in teaching. >> They only have to be here till 37 and then you're going to hand over the $22,000 to them. >> Well, this is why I'd like to see the data on how many of it is. I mean, >> especially if
060it's someone that wants to administration. >> No. Yeah. It's not They have to be 55. They can't be 22 and be here 15 years and then take it. You still have to get to 55. Yeah. You You can't >> It's not like It's not like at 37 they can all of a sudden go, "Oh, I got my 15 years vested. I'm going to pull it all." >> Yeah. >> No, they still have to get to 55 years old. >> That's why it says we're hired after and who are 55 and have 15 years. Okay. >> All All three tiers and have 10 years. >> I'm sorry. I'm sorry. >> So I >> I'll zip it. >> No, no, no. It's good that we go through this to make sure that we're all on the same
061page. >> Did Mike offer any feedback for you? Um yeah, he did. Let me go to the that sheet. Um you want me to read it? >> Yeah, >> I would like to hear it. >> Okay, there. >> Yeah. >> Um don't make fun of me for pulling it farther away from my face, please. Um I am sending this as my thoughts regarding the proposed OPED benefits as I will be traveling and unable to make the meeting. would like to thank Kim for bringing this to the board and starting this discussion. Chris for his continued work moving this forward. Our board members and staff for the time and effort that went into drafting this proposal. I appreciate the collaborative approach that has brought us to this point. This is a significant change from the previous
062plan. While change is never easy, we must recognize the prior structure was not financially sustainable as our entire fund balance was spoken for liabilities. This is a conversation that should have taken place years ago. As a district, we have a responsibility to be good stewards of taxpayer dollars. By continuing with this unsustainable model, we we would have put the district and taxpayers at risk and added additional strain to the district. Sometimes we have to make difficult difficult decisions as and use a long-term outlook. The plan positions the district to remain financially stable while still honoring the years of service. Our teachers have dedicated the students, district, and community. This plan allows the dis the district have a balanced plan moving forward while adhering to a student plan around retention. For these reasons, I in support
063of the proposed changes to OP anything else you see? >> Um, no, but I I do want to speak to the fact of that that the the benefit isn't a true retirement benefit. I think >> as we started to see probably like five, six, seven years ago that districts have kind of transitioned to more of like a and we could what this is what we've kind of proposed is the vesting schedule but more of like a step vesting schedule where it's based on years of service and less about retirement. Um, and the reason for that is there's savings to go into it and some people feel like a years of service benefit is more beneficial to keep someone here longer. um than a true retirement benefit. Um so we even see like there are districts
064that do like hey if you're here 15 years you'll get 50% of this money but you if you want to get 100% you have to retire and meet the guidelines. So the vesting schedules can go a lot of different ways. We probably have at least 20 different vesting schedules across the board with different districts. Um but so so that's something that I just wanted to speak to that you kind of you're seeing this go from a retirement benefit uh act 10 years of health insurance to this is now the same guidelines whether it be 55 57 and 20 years of service and now you're seeing districts use it more as a retract and retain benefit is how can I get people here throw little caveats out there and I understand salary is going to be
065your biggest thing um attracting people, but what else can you do for people? So, um, but with that said, we still have a lot of districts that use it as a true retirement benefit, but I just wanted to speak and >> and I mean, let's just be honest, this is a financial conversation, not talent, skills, experience, and how do you help people make future choices after 55 and reduce that cost to the district? because there's many districts that have people working in I mean I I left one that you know trying to figure out how to how to work till you're 65. Well, if you look at the per if you look at the uh current um adult scale, the jump from uh 55 to 60 is about 500. the jump from 55 to 64
066is even pretty close to another 500. So the question is you know after that you know h what are the cost of the district for that retention again you want people with years of service you want experienced people they add a lot I agree 100%. There's got to be a limit though >> and you have to look at the overall cost and flexibility that this gives people to make their own decisions instead of having to figure out what to do next. >> Yeah. And the nice thing from a strictly financial standpoint is that it removes the surprise. It removes the surprise from budgeting because we know what the cost will be. We don't know when people will retire, but and people who are retiring know what the benefit will be. there's, you know, they don't
067have to hold things up in negotiation. >> District everything's already there. You're you're already fully funded with your oped liability. So, your oped liability is going to be fully funded once you get down once those tier one and tier two people are off the books and our first year >> op liability. And there are benefits to that with regards to um whether it be loans or uh credits and stuff like that within the state. um having a fully funded OPEC liability. So, and also we talked about like this not being a great benefit, but if someone's here for 30 years, it's just as good as a benefit as any. >> Yeah. And like you said, the compounding interest, the rule of 72 or whatever, you know, if you invest in passive index fund, chances are
068every seven or eight years that amount's going to double. So somebody's here 20 years, they're leaving with a pretty good >> and the retention is going to be on the culture and climate of the building >> and you know and that's that's the biggest part of this. >> Yeah, this is just an attractive to begin but you're absolutely right that the retention is going to come within the culture in the building. Vicki, were you were you satisfied understanding that that isn't available until 55 even after is that >> Yes, I am. I wasn't being >> No, no, no. I that's why I wanted that's why I asked if you were satisfied. make sure that you were comfortable with that like that. >> I'll make a motion to approve this uh postemployment benefit as presented. >>
069I'll second. >> Any further discussion? We're going to do a roll call for this one. Um Mr. Hamilton >> I. >> Mrs. Gallich >> I. >> Mr. Hurst. >> I not here. He did say he was in favor of it, but he does not have a vote today. And I am an I. Motion passes four to zero. Thanks Tim. >> Thank you for the presentation. >> Thanks Tim. Thanks Tim. >> See you tomorrow. >> Thanks Mike. >> Thanks. >> See you tomorrow. Thank you. >> Um very good from all sides. >> Thanks Tim. just go back down. >> Yes. >> And then um oh uh new business discussion possible approval partnership with options virtual charter school. Um I I shared this with the board. Um in an effort to remain current and also prevent create
070opportunity access for all of our families. Um I'm I'm proposing uh in a 6603 intergovernmental agreement with Options Virtual Charter School of Elorn. Um they we are looking to uh to provide our students opportunities for virtual programming um for K through 8. Um there is a a a many of our families have received marketing material from a local uh virtual charter school that's coming up. And um the benefit to this partnership is uh that district is willing to offer us services at 58% of the open enrollment. And the open enrollment dollars is $10,100. So that means our cost would be 5800 bucks. >> Um that would be prrated based on their schedule. So the only way that we would pay the whole 58 would be if the kid attends every day. That's how open enrollment
071is done in the state of Wisconsin. Right? If a kid decides for alternative open enrollment to come in in November, you don't get the full 10,000 for the student. This also gives us the benefit. We have some, you know, sometimes the hardest kid, hardest kids to love need the most love. And um there's districts regularly are looking for alternative placement um at Norris or other facilities that are significantly higher than $5,800 and require transportation. Um so this gives us the flexibility to do that. I did reach out to the local um virtual charter school to see if they were interested in partnering up and and um their executive director said not at this time. So I think for us this would uh allow us to create opportunity access for our families who are looking for
072different options. Um we have two enrolled right now. one is ex I don't want to say excelling but doing as well as >> they could and then another student were working through some challenges. Um this does give us a four uh a 4K through four option um and makes us competitive and prevents us from lo losing open enrollment seats which can be uh financially detrimental to our district. just gives a lot of flexibility at a low cost. And again, they the good news is they stay our students. They're still So even though we're paying $5,800, um if we get I'm just spitballing. Tim's not on 12,000 per kid. Um we're still keeping that number. >> I think it's close. Um we're still getting, you know, $6,200 for that kid at a low cost from a
073investment standpoint. This would not increase our FTE unless all of a sudden it became a magnet. >> Have you looked at other options similar to what was Oceania and Wheatland did that could benefit us as a school in the future? >> Uh, interesting enough, um, we Wilmont is looking to remain to be competitive. Um, and I have obviously I have some experience in this space and so I've been in conversation with uh with Mrs. W talk about u other opportunities but those are a little bit forward thinking and require some planning. This gives us um I would say some insurance some stability some opportunity and access right now. So I just need a motion to approve this resolution. >> Could you go ahead? Go ahead Vicki. >> Do you do you know how many students
074we have in our district that homeschool? Yeah, I asked that. I >> I I don't that's a great question and that is when options started 14 years ago. That was actually the re because we had a large population of students in Walworth County that were homeschooled and that was the reason we started the options charter school when I was an Elorn employee. >> Did you see that increase from Did you see an increase from those homeschooled students into the charter school? >> Yes. >> I make a motion to approve. Well, hold on. I just had one I just had one question about this. So, if if we were to do this, >> um I'm I'm a little naive on this. I don't have enough knowledge to to >> know the answer here. So, is there
075a potential that enrolled students in within district that we're getting the full 10,000 for could opt into the charter school and we would lose the 5,800 to the charter school. >> There's always that option. >> They can they can enroll any >> but they could do that now, >> right? They can roll a charter school now and we lose 100% of it. But if I mean because obviously what we're presenting I know um Elhorn is is pretty highly regarded in their charter school. It's it's one of the one of the more soughtafter programs if I understand correctly >> and most stable over time. >> Yeah. Yeah. And so, um, I just >> the good news to your point is the likelihood of of families wanting to access a district that's 30 miles away, 25 miles
076away is less likely than one that's 5 miles away. >> Yeah. And and I agree. I just wanted I just wanted to understand if there was that potential >> today. Yeah. So, and that's there's always that chance. I I would say based on my experience um trying to m mitigate the concern of kids choosing another district more local is a bigger concern. So um >> and plus it does give us a potential to hypothetically reach some of those homeschooled kids. It does whatever number that may possibly be. >> Yeah. And and it's opportunity access for kids, right? So families want to choose this route. this may be an ideal route for their families and give them the flexibility that maybe, you know, they don't want their kid at school four days a week at 4K
077or every day at 5K and maybe they just want them home a couple days because of travel or >> maybe just their kid learns better in that environment. >> Yeah. I mean, >> it just it opens us up to to reaching more kids. >> Lock our families into one type of >> Yeah. >> And this is this agreement is just for a year to start, right? >> Yeah. Yeah. We would Yeah, absolutely. see how it goes. >> Yeah. >> I make a motion to approve the partnership with options virtual charter school. >> A second. >> Motion by Hopkins, second by Hamilton. All those in favor? >> I I >> I opposed. Motion carries. Our next meeting is March 17th, St. Patrick's Day, 2026. At this time, make a motion to adjourn to close session uh
078pursuant to the following. Second. Thank you. All those in favor? >> I I >> I opposed. Motion carries and Mr. Gentiel detects me so he will join us for closure. >> And he did was supportive of the of the uh charter. >> Yes. >> I have to see the update. The next meeting comes