Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Employee Health Insurance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Brown County approves FY25–26 employee health plan renewal; commissioners agree to revisit employee contribution
Summary
Brown County Commissioners approved renewing the countyemployee health insurance plan at the proposed renewal rates for FY2025—6, while directing staff to explore other insurance pools and to attempt to clarify whether the employee contribution can be adjusted before final budget adoption.
Brown County Commissioners on an agenda item considered and approved renewal of the countyemployee health insurance plan for fiscal year 2025—6 at the carrierrenewal rates, while asking staff to research alternative pooled options and whether employee cost-sharing can be changed before final budget adoption.
The discussion matters because the county faces a double-digit premium increase and rising claims costs that could affect the county budget and employee take-home pay. Commissioners focused on short-term contract deadlines and longer-term options to rein in costs.
A county staff presenter said the renewal reflects a 10.7% rate increase and showed a renewal increase of $135.14 per month for an individual on the existing plan; the staff presentation said the family premium increase was $339.62 per month. The presenter also said the county paid $4,000,661.33 in premiums to the pooled plan (TAC) last year while plan payouts were approximately $6,000,056.50. The presenter reviewed three plan options: one with a $750 deductible (current plan), one with a $1,000 in-network deductible (option 1) that would raise the individual premium about $100.60 per month and family premium about $250.12 per month, and an option with a $3,000 deductible that staff characterized as less favorable for employees.
Commissioners discussed several cost-control levers: raising the employee contribution for family coverage (currently $200 per month), increasing deductibles, encouraging preventive care and annual physicals, and shopping other pools or carriers. Judge Britton noted the employee contribution line must appear on the contract and asked whether that figure can be changed after the county signs the renewal; staff said the county will try to determine whether the employee-share amount can be altered before budget adoption.
Commissioners also directed staff to explore other pooled carriers and to bring back comparisons. Multiple commissioners urged more frequent market review rather than accepting annual quotes from the same pool.
Action taken: a motion to approve renewal at the presented renewal rate was moved and seconded and carried; the motion document and vote tally in the transcript are not recorded by name. Commissioners also instructed staff to report back on (1) whether the employee contribution shown on the contract can be changed before budget adoption and (2) alternatives to the current pool.
The renewal would take effect Oct. 1; commissioners asked for additional detail about out-of-network usage, counts of covered employees (staff provided recent monthly head-counts), and the distribution of high utilizers by age group to inform future decisions.
