.
Feedback

Waterford Pays $1.6 Million Off Of $2.6 Million Health Care Deficit

In one year the town has shaved off the majority of its debt in health care costs and hopes to remove it all by next year.

On June 30, 2011, at the end of last fiscal year, Waterford had run a $2.6 million deficit in health care costs.

One year later, Waterford Finance Director Rudie Beers presented much better news. As of June 30, that deficit had been cut to $973,986, after claim levels came in low and the town used its surplus funds to pay down the dept, Beers reported to the Board of Finance Wednesday night.

“In explanation, we had a banner year,” she said.

The town has been wrestling with skyrocketing health care costs for the past five years, and that led to large deficits in the town’s health care account, Beers explained. By reducing the deficit by $1.6 million in one year, the town has the far more leverage in its negotiations with health insurance companies for the upcoming budget year, and more control of its most volatile cost, health insurance.

What does it mean for taxpayers, and the citizens of Waterford? Hopefully, not as large of a tax increase for next year or a better chance of avoiding the cuts that happened in 2011,

“It gives us more options,” Beers said.

History

Until this fiscal year, which began in July of 2012, the town was self-insured. That basically means the town puts aside a certain amount of money they estimate it will cost for all the medical services for all town employees over the course of a year, and then pay the real medical costs as they come in.

For many years, this worked well and Waterford could budget the right amount for health insurance, Beers said. But that changed around 2007, when both the price of healthcare and the amount of claims the town was experiencing began to skyrocket, and the town was spending more money on health care claims than it had budgeted, Beers said.

This peaked in 2011, with the town budgeting $2.6 million less than it needed to cover the cost of employees’ medical claims, causing a $2.6 million deficit. That money comes out of the general fund, but to satisfy auditors and to properly run the town’s finances, it must be paid back, Beers said.

That led to around a 30 percent increase in the town’s budgeted cost for health care for the 2011-12 Fiscal Year, meaning a $1.6 million increase for the Board of Education alone. That, , forced the board to shed more than 20 positions, many of which were teaching positions.

The Solution

The town readjusted its budgeted amount for health care claims in 2011-12 (hence the large increase in cost), and actual claims came in less than what the town expected, Beers said. Additionally, the town and the Board of Education both underspent their budgets, all of which amounted to $1.6 million to pay off the deficit, she said.

In 2012-13, the town went to a fully indemnified plan, which is essentially a standard health insurance plan where the town pays a set fee and the insurance company takes on all the risk. A plan like that was used because it does stabilize prices, but Beers contended it will be more expensive than a self-insurance plan, because the health insurance company needs to make a profit above the amount of claims it pays out where the town does not.

The goal this year is to again use surplus funds to pay down the deficit, and hopefully get it to zero, Beers said. Then, the town can again look to go back to a self-insurance model, or at least have the possibility of doing so, which will give it leverage in negotiating a price for a fully indemnified plan, she said.

“That’s the big decision,” Beers said. “We are going to have to figure out what we are going to do for the future of health insurance in this town.”

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Waterford Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Richard Waselik May 19, 2013 at 05:57 am
There is no "suckles away". The money is deposited by those that use it. The rest isRead More relentless retoric...
Daniella Ruiz May 19, 2013 at 05:44 am
another 'not for profit' that suckles away at the very core of peoples generosity?? better toRead More 'retire' the banking/WS thieves that casually gore the system with relentless greed, schemes and secrecy.
Ivy's Simply Homemade
nascarblue May 17, 2013 at 08:05 am
happy happy anniversary, i love your food, you can tell when a business takes pride in what they do.Read More wishing you many many more years, i will definatly be back, along with my friends, we love your food.
Naty Bush May 18, 2013 at 11:44 am
Where will the meeting take place? I might be able to go to say why it shouldn't be demolished.
Kate May 15, 2013 at 06:36 pm
There are two state agencies that are involved. Both of them are historical preservation societies,Read More and this is what they do, help communities find viable purposes for historic buildings. While the building has been treated as more or less an inconvenience for the town, it is important to remember it is an historic site. It matters. Every town, every city, must look carefully at it's historic buildings and sites with an eye toward preservation, or, you end up with a community full of houses and walmarts. Cohanzie is a unique building for it's architectural style, for it's historic quarry site, and it's importance as a community hub, not to mention the thousands of citizens that passed through. An old building like Cohanzie is built to last. We won't ever see buildings built like that again. We can always build another Walmart. You raise a good question. Maybe once we hear about what could be done with the building, we need a town referendum to find out how the people of Waterford want to proceed. Many historic buildings are saved at the last minute by people who decide history matters. Will Waterford do the same. I don't know the answer.
Maggie L. May 15, 2013 at 01:56 pm
Do you have any proposals for the use of the building? If the town were to keep the building it mostRead More likely will have to be staffed. Do you believe that most town residents would be willing to see an increase in the town budget to allow for additional staff? I'm just tossing out questions because I haven't heard any concrete proposals for the use of the building
Liz May 12, 2013 at 09:06 pm
Mr. Steiner wants to build 72 three story homes on 32 acres in addition to the 60 condos in the twoRead More large buildings. That is more than two individual units per acre or if you include the 60 condos - that is MORE than 4 units per acre! The area around the property for new building is zoned 3 acres per unit. The average of currently built housing abutting the property is about one acre per unit. That is not in keeping with the neighborhood character.
Daniella Ruiz May 12, 2013 at 05:36 pm
Mr Steiner may be the last hope for this decrepit place. The neighbors need to move along, or buyRead More the place themselves. Change might help the stonewalling attitude that has become evident in nearly the entire town, revolving around exclusive entitled old farts with nothing better to do than remember their glory days of Seaside. Its gone, & it's not going to revert back to a pasture either. (too many complaints about that cow smell and so forth). My advice is to listen carefully and try to work something out, get over your own selfish grandious dreams of Pelham Manor style estates and do SOMETHING before it simply falls apart like Norwich Hospital, the countless thread/manufacturing mills, and every other historic building that has been left to rot.
Daniella Ruiz May 14, 2013 at 08:53 am
mary m>> common sense? heee hee. in this day and age? lawyers have made every attempt toRead More eradicate that concept from our every life activity. write it into some law, that can be thence used as future gurantee of use of, by and for their own existence? it's like job security for that entire group, keep the general public at a disadvantage, unable to apply common sense (whats left of it they havent entombed in laws) and uneasy about acting on their own. John Y has the right attitude, heave the cra.pp on the peoples lawn, and hope it doesn't lay there for days as well!
John Yannacci, Sr. May 13, 2013 at 10:09 am
Mary May, I don't know the legality of posting signs on telephone poles. But, take a ride aroundRead More Waterford on Saturday mornings and you'll see signs on anything that is verticle. Take a ride around the same neighborhoods on Wednesday and half the signs will still be there. I wonder if the folks who have had the same yard sale sign at the corner of Great Neck and Rope Ferry Rds. for two and a half weeks wonder why cars are still stopping at their house every Saturday morning.
Mary May May 13, 2013 at 09:53 am
Um I believe it is ILLEGAl to post ANY sign on a telephone pole ANYWAY but free standing signsRead More should be removed after sale is over ! Really a state law just COMMON SENSE we have lost along the way !