Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Compensation Benefits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council debates raises and health benefits for elected officials; some members oppose increases
Summary
Councilors discussed withholding raises for the county assessor and county clerk because of recent performance concerns and reconsidered whether future council members should be eligible for county health benefits.
Get email alerts on the Compensation Benefits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Elkhart County Councilors debated Wednesday whether to approve anticipated pay increases for two elected officials and whether future council members should remain eligible for county health benefits.
One commissioner said he was “advocating a no to both” raises for the county assessor and county clerk, citing performance concerns tied to earlier problems that affected county operations and payroll timing. “When that happened, I was like, okay. Wait till budget season,” he said, referring to prior operational issues.
Why it matters: Raises for elected officials and their chief deputies were automatically included in departmental personnel calculations, councilors noted, but several members argued that recent performance and operational errors weighed against approving increases without further review.
Benefits debate: Councilors also raised the prospect of changing future eligibility for council health insurance. One member proposed a resolution to grandfather current councilors but prohibit future council members from enrolling in the county health plan, estimating potential taxpayer savings of “about a 100 and 100 plus thousand dollar[s]” over time. Other members objected to removing benefits, saying benefits form part of a pay package and can be an important incentive for qualified candidates; one commissioner said, “You don't cut people's pay… Why should we do it to ourselves?”
Councilors noted legal and administrative constraints: HR policy was cited regarding eligibility (work hours threshold) and state guidance was referenced informally about whether elected officials are categorically “full‑time” or part‑time; county staff said statutory classifications of elected officials vary and that some offices historically are effectively run by chief deputies.
Next steps: Councilors signaled opposition to at least some of the proposed raises and said adjustments to elected officials’ benefits would require legal review and possibly a resolution. They planned further discussion during Friday’s personnel meeting and to include deputy compensation in those conversations.
Ending: No formal votes were recorded on raises or benefits during the session; councilors asked staff to include the items in the upcoming personnel discussion and to prepare the legal and fiscal analysis necessary for any change.

