Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Labor Policy Budgeting topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Sawyer County finance staff warns reversal of Act 10 could raise county retirement costs by about $800,000 annually

3785135 · June 12, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Finance presenter outlined how a full reversal of Wisconsin's Act 10 could require the county to pay both employer and employee shares of the Wisconsin Retirement System, potentially costing about $800,000 per year; board members discussed options but took no formal action.

Finance staff warned the Sawyer County board that a full reversal of Wisconsin's Act 10 could increase county retirement contribution costs by roughly $800,000 annually and put pressure on the county budget.

At the meeting, the finance presenter explained elements of Act 10's changes to public-employee benefits and bargaining rights and described how a restoration could affect the county. He said the county already charges employees a 12% contribution for premiums and has used plan design changes and an HSA option to manage costs. "The potential big cost then, if it went that far, if it was restored where the employer paid both halves of WRS, that would be about an $800,000 hit for the County," he said.

Board members asked whether the change could come in stages and what the county could do in response. Finance staff said the $800,000 figure would be an annual cost and difficult to pre-fund, and outlined possible responses: seek state funding if available, make county budget cuts, pursue additional revenues or exemptions, or consider referendum options. The presenter described options already available under state law, such as routing certain costs outside revenue limits for court-ordered out-of-county placements or debt service for property/casualty insurance.

Members did not take formal action; the discussion centered on monitoring the legislative situation and keeping the potential liability in mind for future budget planning. Public commenter Linda Zilmer had urged stronger budget practices and wider public engagement on the county's budget timeline earlier in the meeting.