Sustainable Town Medical Coverage?

Did you know: Effective July 1, 2001, the Town of Suffield created a separate fund to account for its self-insured medical plan. The town of Suffield has assumed all risk associated
with providing health insurance, up to a maximum of 110 percent of the premium it would have been charged had it purchased health insurance from Anthem Blue Cross/Blue Shield.

The town of Suffield's town budget proposed for 2011 -2012 shows Insurance and Benefits at $2,704,563. In 2010 – 2011 it was at $2,513,777 and in 2009 – 2010 the cost was $2,212,071.
The obvious question, is the increasing cost of medical benefits, in this case, sustainable over the long haul under existing economic conditions? Overly generous or on par with the private sector?

A peek at town of Suffield's medical coverage is presented in the Audit Report ending June 30, 2010 as follows: The cost per month for town employees receiving medical coverage is $514 per month for retiree only coverage and $1028 per month for retiree and spouse coverage. The cost per month for town employees receiving dental coverage is $26
per month for the retiree only and $67 per month for retiree and spouse coverage.

The cost per month for Board of Education employees receiving medical coverage is $472 per month for retiree only coverage and $944 per month for retiree and spouse coverage. For dental coverage the costs are $28 and $71, respectively.

As of  July 1, 2008, plan membership consisted of the following:

Retired Members – 67

Spouses of retired members – 28

Active plan members – 390 (may have increase by 15)

The audit didn't mention additional family members, however per Suffield union contracts children are eligible for coverage up to the age of 26. Employee contributions are specified within the town's union contracts. 

The Audit Report is available at the town clerk's office.  The availability of the audit ending June 30, 2011 is forthcoming. Very generous state and town union benefits are being
discussed across the nation as not sustainable.

Serious union concessions are required to lower the property tax burden and state taxes (not just my opinion). Approved Suffield town union contracts already parallel the Malloy tentative agreement which does not provide the needed concessions to reduce the tax burden, local or state.  

Considering this one benefit, Suffield town employee medical coverage, do you think the cost is sustainable over the long haul without state or town unions providing meaningful
concessions (larger give backs immediately without gimmicks)?

Don't conclude that state and town unions should only provide concessions to reduce the tax burden, however the union's resistance to provide meaningful concessions and
the elected officials' resistance to secure these necessary concessions is obvious from past and current actions. Do federal (Congress, etc), state and town employees at all levels, both union and non-union, deserve higher quality benefits then you or I?