re: #239 freetoken

The school district in question in that news story is Contra Costa county. I looked briefly at their proposed budgets… very complex (as these things have become), but one can see that they are being saddled by retirement expenses.

Indeed, on April 9 the county of Contra Costa had handed to a report (intended not just for the school district but for other county tax payer supported institutions), entitled:

Retiree Health Care Benefits Leaves County Tax Payers On The Hook (pdf), the executive summary of which states clearly that the county’s retiree health care benefits have become a burden that the County can no longer afford.

This is well known throughout the State. From the local City retirement programs to County and School District retirement programs to the State employee programs - the future that has been promised (by benefits) is not fitting the reality.

To change retiree benefits is very, very difficult politically.

And changing these benefits is also, frankly, unfair to people who spent a career working under an employment “contract” that promised them these benefits.

If it’s to be done, and if it’s really worth doing, they should change it for those hired from a future date forward, not those hired under the current arrangement.

In many public jurisdiction budgets, some “employee” costs are hidden by having the work done as “contract” work.

If you are checking the budget, check out what is being spent on “contracts”. There are some public jurisdictions that try to move away from hiring employees by putting things out on contract. It is cost-effective for short-term or temporary needs, but if any of those contracts are for long-term or permanent needs, the cost for the jurisdiction may exceed that of hiring employees.