Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Payroll Benefits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kossuth County delays final payroll schedule change pending legal clarifications; board discusses benefits timing
Summary
Supervisors discussed switching county payroll from monthly to 26 pay periods and related impacts on EMS scheduling and flexible benefits; County attorney review and employee outreach were requested and no resolutions were approved.
Get email alerts on the Payroll Benefits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kossuth County supervisors discussed proposed payroll changes that would move most employees from 12 pay periods per year to 26, and considered how that change would interact with employee benefits, health plan timing and EMS scheduling. The board did not approve payroll resolutions at the meeting and directed staff to obtain legal clarification before taking final action.
The discussion centered on a proposed set of resolutions (listed in board folders) to convert payroll to biweekly pay periods. County staff said the draft came from counsel (identified in the packet as “Anne”), but that final approval from counsel was still pending. County Engineer/roads staff and an EMS representative raised concerns about operational impacts. "I'd like to ask you to table it until I can return because this is gonna cause quite a financial hardship in my budget," said Phil, an EMS representative, describing how a change in the start day of the EMS pay week could force schedule adjustments and require hiring additional staff.
County staff told the board they had circulated draft resolutions and that department heads had provided input; some changes in the draft reflected converting certain classifications from salaried to hourly or adding hourly equivalents. The auditor's office confirmed the draft resolution language (as prepared by counsel) used a salary divided by number of days approach and the board asked whether that should instead be worded as salary divided by number of pay periods (26). Staff said that wording originated with counsel and they had asked for clarification.
The payroll discussion expanded into benefits administration and timing. County Auditor Donna explained that the county’s health-plan contract runs on the fiscal year and that deductibles are measured on the calendar year. Staff described a potential downstream effect: moving to biweekly pay periods would require updating flexible spending account (FSA) and payroll-deduction paperwork because current deductions are captured "per pay period." Donna and other staff said that change would likely require a second open-enrollment or special enrollment period around the payroll change so employees could reconcile flexible-benefit elections and (if offered) a new high-deductible health plan (HDHP) option.
The board discussed a possible HDHP offering and the timing trade-offs between fiscal-year plan administration (county contracts) and calendar-year deductible windows for employees. Donna said employees who average 30 hours per week are eligible for health insurance under the Affordable Care Act rules the county follows; she and benefits vendors were examining whether an HDHP and associated HSA (health savings account) or FSA mechanics could be offered midyear, and whether WageWorks or other vendors would be the account administrator.
Supervisors agreed to wait for counsel’s written advice on the payroll-resolution language and on whether EMS (and other seven-day operations) could be on a separate pay-week schedule. They also requested a concise list from staff of the decisions the board must make to implement an HDHP and payroll change (e.g., effective date, employer contribution levels, vendor/HSA administrator, and whether to run a special open enrollment). The board asked staff to return with answers and to schedule workshops as needed; an insurance workshop was suggested for a future meeting if vendors could provide the required clarifications.
Discussion points and directions (not formal actions): - Staff: do not approve payroll resolutions until counsel responds; clarify whether payroll computations should use days or pay periods. (Staff memo and draft resolutions placed in board folders.) - EMS (Phil): requested the board table any final action until he could participate and explain scheduling consequences; asked that EMS be considered for a separate pay-week definition if needed to avoid consecutive 24-hour shifts. - Auditor/benefits staff (Donna): begin vendor conversations about HDHP/HSA/FSA mechanics and the timing of any special open-enrollment period; prepare employee communications explaining potential effects on flexible-benefit elections.
Why it matters: changing the county pay schedule affects payroll processes, employee take-home pay timing, FSA/HSA mechanics, and operational schedules for seven-day services such as EMS and law enforcement. Supervisors did not adopt the payroll resolutions at this meeting and requested legal and vendor clarifications before any binding decision.

