Roaring Fork School District No. Re-1's Health Insurance Advisory Team said it is leaning toward recommending the district retain a PPO employee health plan for the 2025-26 school year, but acknowledged a roughly $600,000 funding gap and opened a two-week districtwide effort to surface savings ideas and staff preferences before making a final recommendation.

The advisory team told members that district budget forecasts for 2025-26 are uncertain because enrollment projections are down from last year and regional health-insurance rates reported by benefits vendor CBT are rising (participants in the valley saw increases in the 16.5% to 22% range). That combination, team members said, makes it difficult to guarantee the more expensive PPO plan without finding new recurring savings or reallocations.

Why it matters: health-plan design, employer contribution levels and any salary step/COLA decisions affect take-home pay, recruitment and retention of teachers, classified staff and bus drivers. Team members repeatedly tied benefits choices to staffing stability and student impacts, noting that higher out-of-pocket costs could deter employees from seeking routine care and heighten turnover.

Most important facts
- Funding gap: The advisory team identified an approximate $600,000 shortfall to fully fund a district-wide PPO option for 2025-26. Team members characterized that as the principal obstacle to adopting the PPO as the baseline plan.
- Trade-offs: The group discussed trade-offs between preserving a PPO and holding or pausing salary step/COLA increases. Several members said certified salary step increases deliver larger dollar gains for teachers than the monthly cost to buy into a PPO, complicating any districtwide reallocation.
- Alternatives: The committee discussed using a high-deductible health plan (HDHP) with health savings account contributions as a lower-cost alternative, partial employer funding of PPO buy-ins, or asking specific staff groups to accept different trade-offs. No final policy decision was made.
- Timeline and next steps: The committee will run a two-week crowdsourcing form for staff, ask building- and bargaining-unit representatives to discuss options with their groups, gather comparative data from neighboring districts, and reconvene the advisory team the week of March 18 to review results.

Discussion highlights
Budget context and enrollment: A district staff member reported that demographers' projections and a smaller-than-expected January/February enrollment bump have left the district more cautious for 2025-26. Team members said that, absent new recurring revenue or cuts, the district would likely avoid systemwide reductions in force but must examine lower-dollar recurring savings and discretionary budgets.

Health-rate pressure: Committee members said CBT and local employer pools are reporting double-digit premium increases across the valley. The group agreed the increase is "bigger than us" and is affecting multiple public employers in the region, which reduces local bargaining flexibility.

Equity and retention concerns: Multiple speakers tied benefits changes to workforce stability. School board Vice President Jasmine Ramirez warned that benefits and salary choices are linked to classroom stability and said, "When we advocate for teachers, we're not advocating against students." Members described scenarios in which employees facing higher out-of-pocket costs might stop seeking care or leave for neighboring districts with more generous packages.

Funding options explored: The team discussed (1) identifying recurring savings (examples discussed included reductions in food-for-adult hospitality, rental budgets and other discretionary line items), (2) redistributing step/COLA increases, and (3) partial employer contributions to a PPO buy-in if only some of the $600,000 can be found. Members emphasized that any savings used to fund benefits must be sustainable, not one-time.

Process and governance: The advisory team framed its role as a recommending body. Members agreed to collect staff input via a districtwide form open for roughly two weeks, ask IBB/representative groups to discuss the question with members, and bring compiled proposals and analysis back to the advisory team in mid-March. The advisory team did not present a final motion to the board at the meeting.

Unresolved questions and risk: The committee flagged several uncertainties: state budget actions (including possible changes to cost-of-living adjustments), federal grants and final local enrollment counts could materially change the district's budget between now and May. Members also said they need clearer comparisons of neighboring districts' employer contributions and total compensation packages to judge competitive risk.

Ending
The advisory team left the recommendation in draft form and asked staff to produce an analysis of crowdsourced ideas, a short list of sustainable savings to chase, and comparative benefits data from neighboring districts. The team plans to reconvene the week of March 18 to decide whether to formally recommend a PPO baseline, an HDHP baseline with HSA contributions, or a hybrid/partial-funded approach for the 2025-26 benefits enrollment window.