Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Compensation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Chippewa County board approves $408,113 levy for 2026 salary adjustments amid health-insurance concerns
Summary
At its Aug. 12 meeting, the Chippewa County Board approved Resolution 27-25 to include $408,113 in the 2026 levy to fund salary-schedule adjustments recommended by a market study. Supervisors debated timing and whether percent-based raises will offset new employee health-insurance premiums.
Get email alerts on the Compensation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Chippewa County Board on Aug. 12 approved Resolution 27-25 to include $408,113 of levy funding in the proposed 2026 county budget to cover salary-schedule adjustments, a board presentation and extended discussion showed.
The measure, forwarded by the executive committee, implements a market-driven package of adjustments recommended by consultant Cunningham Butler and described by county staff. The resolution authorizes: an across-the-board wage adjustment proposed at 2% effective Jan. 1, 2026, and up to 1.5% on July 1, 2026; a 1% adjustment to the salary schedule’s control point on Jan. 1, 2026, and 1% on July 1, 2026; and selected grade movements for specific positions. The resolution passed by voice vote, yays 13, nays 5.
The board heard a detailed presentation of the market analysis. Staff said the county’s market index is about 95% (i.e., roughly 5% behind the comparator market) and that Cunningham Butler benchmarked 61 positions to set recommendations. Staff described the salary grid as grades 1–26 and said the consultant recommended adjusting the control-point progression between grades to improve competitiveness at higher grades. The county intends the Jan. 1 increase in part to offset the planned introduction of employee contributions toward health-insurance premiums; staff said the exact employer/employee split for 2026 had not been finalized and will be presented at the board’s September meeting.
Supervisors debated timing, distribution and fairness. Supervisor Seidlitz said, “I have a hard time… being almost irresponsible for me to vote on the subject tonight,” citing uncertainty about the scale of employee premium sharing and the effect on lower-paid employees. Other supervisors asked for more data on retention, usage of health benefits and the projected distributional effect of percent increases versus flat-dollar increases.
Staff provided additional numbers during the discussion: county staff estimates about 425–440 total employees, with roughly 360–380 eligible for the county health plan depending on seasonal hires. Current monthly premiums cited in the meeting were about $900+ for single coverage and $2,102 for family coverage in 2025; staff said those are the 2025 premiums and that premiums for 2026 remain subject to final actuarial review. One presenter said the total estimated levy ask is $408,113, and that the full cost of wage changes across all funds (including non-levy reimbursements) was discussed in the packet; a figure of roughly $830,000 was referenced during discussion as the broader wage-impact number across all funding sources.
Board members pressed staff on which positions the adjustments would affect and how state- or grant-funded positions are treated. Staff said positions funded by state or Medicaid revenue—such as some Department of Human Services roles—are reimbursed through program billings and that if the underlying program funding is reduced or eliminated the county may be required to reduce or eliminate the position. That funding contingency is reflected in the resolution’s language and in related positions proposed elsewhere on the agenda.
The board majority approved the resolution after roughly two hours of discussion and multiple questions from supervisors. The resolution was forwarded to the 2026 budget process; staff said final wage and premium decisions will be updated as the budget is finalized.
The board’s vote, the market analysis and the pending health-insurance proposal together set parameters for the 2026 budget process and prompted requests from several supervisors for additional, itemized analysis of distributional impacts on lower-paid employees and on positions funded largely by non-levy sources.

