Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Payroll And Benefits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Maumee finance committee reviews 2026 payroll, health‑insurance costs and the '27th' pay impact
Summary
At a Nov. 5 finance committee meeting, staff presented the draft 2026 payroll package covering 152 FTEs, 13 proposed/vacant positions and higher health‑insurance premiums; an employee survey favored keeping current HSA and premium calculations and the committee agreed to budget for the extra pay period rather than change benefits now.
At its Nov. 5 finance committee meeting, the Maumee City Council’s finance committee reviewed a draft 2026 payroll budget that staff said includes 152 full‑time equivalent positions, current employee raises, rising health‑insurance costs and 13 proposed or vacant positions that together add about $2.1 million in vacancy/new‑hire cost.
Jennifer, the staff presenter, summarized the packet and the assumptions behind the numbers, saying the payroll reconciliation figure between current and projected 2026 totals was a rough $64,000,000. She told the committee that wage and benefit differences reflect variations by bargaining unit, overtime and workers’‑comp rates. “So I wanted to make sure to get those numbers out to council so they understood the impact of the new hires and how that impacts funds and funding sources,” she said.
Why it matters: staff emphasized estimates have widened after updated health‑insurance renewals and are sensitive to the mix of single versus family coverage, union contract constraints and an occasional '27th' pay period that raises budgetary costs in specific years.
Staff outlined that many of the 13 positions are restorations of previously held roles or transfers (for example, a sewer administrative position held after an employee left in September), while others are genuinely new hires (including five firefighter‑paramedics and an urban planning position). Jennifer also described administrative and succession‑planning roles intended to free managers for higher‑level duties.
On health coverage, staff presented a renewal summary tracing the city’s HSA history back to 2020 and explained the city is operating a self‑insured plan in which the city covers claims up to $125,000 and a stop‑loss carrier covers excess. “The city is the insurance company up to a 125,000,” Jennifer said, noting three individuals exceeded that stop‑loss limit this year and that the health fund is projected to end next year with roughly $1,600,000 despite higher claims.
Staff also shared results of an employee survey on premiums and HSA contributions, which had roughly 52% participation. “The number 1 choice was to keep keep it the same,” Jennifer reported; she cautioned that the survey does not obligate council action. Committee members agreed to follow the survey guidance for now and not change the HSA or stipend calculations immediately.
Committee members pressed staff on the mechanics and budgetary impact of an extra pay period in 2026 (the so‑called 27th pay), with staff explaining the occurrence is calendar driven and that flexibility to alter payments is limited by existing ordinances and union contracts. Staff estimated the additional pay liability for the affected salaried categories at roughly $130,000–$150,000 (the exact count of affected employees was discussed as approximately 31 people, per committee dialogue).
What happens next: there was no formal action at the meeting. Staff was directed to fold the updated payroll and benefits assumptions into the 2026 budget process, seek any additional clarifications requested by council members and consider timing some new hires to align with anticipated development revenue rather than moving them forward immediately.
