County employees press supervisors over pay, warn proposed insurance changes would raise out‑of‑pocket costs

Several county employees spoke during public discussion at the Feb. 4 Kossuth County Board of Supervisors meeting, urging the board to reconsider recent changes to pay and health benefits and to factor staffing retention into compensation decisions.

Tom (compensation board member) told supervisors the county compensation board had met previously and provided recommendations to the board. He cited comparisons with neighboring counties on office hours and described Kossuth County’s larger taxable valuation. Tom said employees “create value for our communities” and asked the board to pay special attention to the sheriff’s salary, noting the county’s current sheriff pay of $111,000 and a budgeted 7% increase that would raise it to about $119,000. He cited a Governor Reynolds May 1, 2024 letter and Senate File 2442 as the state guidance that affects sheriff salary standards and said the state guidance would require a larger increase to meet recommended benchmarks.

Treasurer’s Office staff Trisha Reitman and Sheryl Vaughn described the financial impact of recent changes on employees. Reitman said she understood the board has been discussing changes that include a high‑deductible option; she reported there are currently 83 employees on the county family coverage and that the $250 monthly employee contribution for family coverage amounts to $20,750 per month and about $249,000 per year. Reitman said that figure exceeds the board’s projected savings and that mid‑year deductible resets last year forced some families to start new deductibles partway through a plan year.

Vaughn recounted a recent emergency room visit she had in the middle of the night and described how the combination of heavier workloads and benefit changes has affected staff morale. Another speaker, Marla (county employee), asked supervisors to “show respect” and described staff taking calls and texts outside normal hours, saying takebacks of raises and new premium costs leave employees feeling undervalued.

Board discussion afterward did not produce a final policy change. Staff from the county’s benefit administrator (Wellmark/consultant) had been invited to earlier and later budget discussions to present plan options; supervisors agreed to continue budget‑cycle conversations about plan design and fund balance. No motion to change plan design or employee contributions was made during the public comments period.

Why it matters: County employees said recent steps — a $250 monthly family premium contribution, the repeal of a planned 2% raise, and increased deductibles — reduced take‑home pay, complicated recruitment and retention and, in staff testimony, had already prompted some departures. Supervisors heard requests to treat pay and benefits as tools to retain experienced employees who execute essential services such as road work, public safety and courthouse operations.

What remains unresolved: The board signaled it would continue exploring options with the county’s insurance consultant and review the fund balance during upcoming budget meetings. No change in policy was acted on at the Feb. 4 meeting.