Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Health topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public health director says staffing and benefit changes lift FY26 ask; board seeks $100,000 reduction
Summary
Public health director Becky presented FY26 staffing and revenue projections showing a larger taxpayer subsidy unless the department increases revenue or trims expenses; the board asked public health to explore $100,000 in reductions and to resubmit budgets.
Becky, identified in the meeting as the public health director, told the Iowa County Board of Supervisors that the department’s FY26 budget reflects higher staffing levels and benefit changes that increase the projected property‑tax subsidy.
Becky said she used fiscal year 2024 actuals and year‑to‑date fiscal 2025 projections to form a FY26 proposal that assumes nine full‑time equivalent (FTE) positions for the department. She reported that, based on current projections, the department’s FY25 expenses would be roughly $866,643 with revenue near $307,000, producing a projected deficit of about $560,000 for the current year. She said the proposed FY26 numbers include wage increases and a staff member moving from single to family health coverage.
Becky described federal and state reimbursements that pass through East Central Iowa Council of Governments (ECICOG/ECICOG in transcript) and said the department has received about $123,000 so far this year from those sources. She cautioned that ECICOG reimbursements are not guaranteed until finalized in June and said those funds blunt—rather than replace—other payer sources.
Board members and staff discussed whether to budget for nine FTEs on the expense side and to match revenue assumptions to that staffing level. A supervisor observed that if expenses are budgeted for nine staff, the revenue side should reflect the larger staffing capacity; Becky agreed revenue should be increased if staffing is increased but cautioned census and client demand are variable.
After reviewing the numbers participants discussed how to reduce the department’s FY26 property‑tax ask. The board asked the public health director to identify ways to reduce the proposed ask by roughly $100,000, either by increasing projected revenues (e.g., services, grants) or trimming expenses. Becky said she had some ideas and would work with the board; supervisors scheduled further review in a special budget meeting the following week.
Ending: The board did not adopt a final appropriation. Supervisors asked public health to try to narrow the gap — either by increasing revenue or cutting $100,000 in expenses — and to resubmit revised budget figures in time for the next budget work session.
