The Columbia School Board approved an increase of 20% to employee medical insurance premiums Thursday.
The change will take effect Jan. 1, 2027, Columbia Public Schools spokesperson Michelle Baumstark said.
Chief Financial Officer Heather McArthur said an employee insurance increase will affect employees with no dependents on their insurance plan the most. This group represents 82% of those on the district’s insurance plan. Their insurance rates will still be covered by the district. Employees with additional dependent coverage, representing 18% of those on the district’s plan, will be required to contribute out-of-pocket.
The vote was 5-2, with board members Paul Harper and April Ferrao dissenting. Harper moved to amend the proposal to a 15% increase, and Ferrao seconded.
McArthur said dropping the increase to below 20% could lead the health insurance balance to negative levels. Harper was adamant.
“I realize what I’m saying. I’m saying it because I feel like for this one year, we need to protect some of our employees,” Harper said. “In my opinion, I’m prioritizing, admittedly, not 100% of our employees, but a subset of our employees, more than that. So if we need to shore up the budget in another way, I’m OK with another budget line to do that for this one year.”
The decision comes after months of discussion, identifying solutions for a projected $2 million budget deficit. Previously, the district’s Finance Committee had approved a recommended 29.9% increase to be approved by the board, according to previous Missourian reporting.
The 20% increase is expected to generate $5.6 million for the district, according to Baumstark. It will be the district’s first raise in employee health care rates since 2019.
Public comment
The board continued to discuss a proposed change to policy BDA, which describes certain board meeting procedures. The change would remove the recording and online streaming of public comment.
The proposed policy would look to resolve issues that can arise during the public comment section of school board meetings, including sharing private or incorrect information.
Susan Goldammer, the district’s general counsel, said she added the sentence to the proposal to give the district an opportunity to discuss it.
“I don’t want anybody to think this was some sort of nefariousness on the administration to sneak anything in,” she said. “I knew there were districts who had contemplated recording, and not recording, and so I added that in there as something for the policy committee to discuss. … I think this is healthy debate, I am not recommending one way or another.”
Many board members expressed their concern with removing the recording and broadcasting of public comment.
“I think it’s a good format, and I hope that we keep it,” board member Alvin Cobbins said. “Transparency is everything.”
Community member Lara Wakefield spoke against the proposed policy during public comment at the meeting. She said recording makes the entire meeting accessible for those who cannot attend, particularly parents with children who have disabilities.
“You’re a district who claims you want transparency and engagement, and removing the recording public comment does not meet that goal,” she said. “In my analysis of public comment going back eight years, the majority of people are sharing their opinion on a board agenda and sharing their lived experiences directly to the board. These need to be preserved as part of the public record.”
