Retired teachers land a delay for health care switch

By Emily Richmond (contact)

Tuesday, Oct. 28, 2003 | 9:47 a.m.

Retired teachers who feared losing their medical insurance will remain on the Clark County Education Association's health trust plan through the summer, thanks to a compromise brokered Monday.

The 550 retired teachers were notified in August that they would have to choose one of three new plans by Nov. 30 because the Teachers Health Trust could no longer afford to subsidize their coverage. The cost-saving measure angered retirees -- many with more than 30 years' experience in Las Vegas Valley classrooms.

The health trust, created in 1983 and funded by contributions negotiated with the Clark County School District, is overseen by the union representing active teachers.

Peter Alpert, chief executive officer of the Teachers Health Trust, said Monday retirees would be allowed to remain on the plan through June 30. Alpert made the announcement at a standing room-only meeting of more than 200 people at the health trust offices.

An open enrollment for the state employees' health plan is set for July 1, and at that time retired teachers may join the plan.

The alternative coverage options being offered through Health Plan of Nevada are significantly less expensive than the health trust plans being eliminated, Alpert said.

But Geneva Boley, whose husband spent 33 years as a drafting teacher in Clark County schools, said lower cost is just one factor. Switching plans will mean giving up the doctors with whom she and her husband have built relationships with since joining the plan two decades ago.

The Boleys pay $824 a month in premiums even though the health trust is their secondary coverage after Medicaid. That's an increase of $300 over last year, Boley said.

"It's ridiculous," she said. "My husband was a very good teacher, but it's like he's being punished."

Ann Hoskin, a retired teacher who has helped lead a grass-roots effort to fight removal from the health trust plan, said the coverage extension provides temporary relief.

"Come June 30 we'll be right back with the same situation," Hoskin said.

During the last legislative session lawmakers passed Assembly Bill 286, which required public agencies to increase contributions for health care expenses of retirees. But the bill passed without a fiscal note attached for the potential impact on local school districts, said Doug Thunder, associate superintendent of administrative and fiscal services for the Nevada Department of Education.

"Somehow, the fiscal notes for the school districts were overlooked," Thunder said Monday.

Preliminary estimates suggest it will cost the state's 17 school districts about $3.8 million to up their contributions, Thunder said. The legislative mandate puts school districts at a disadvantage compared with other public entities, Thunder said.

"The counties and cities have the possibility of increasing the tax rate to cover things like this," Thunder said. "School districts can't do that."

Thunder said he plans to ask the Interim Finance Committee in January to allocate money to cover the school districts' increased contributions. Assemblywoman Chris Giunchigliani, D-Las Vegas, and chairwoman of the committee, said she supports the request.

"The legislation that was passed ended up being an unfunded mandate," Giunchigliani said. "It was a mistake to approve the bill without the complete fiscal notes."

Giunchigliani said the committee will be looking at the issue of state employee health insurance and ways to negotiate better coverage plans.