Spencer County Fiscal Court rejects proposed insurance premium increases after split votes

County Judge Executive John Riley reintroduced a proposal Feb. 3 to increase Spencer County's insurance premium tax as the court wrestled with tighter carryover and rising payroll pressures.

Resident Roy Legaspi used the public-comment period to urge magistrates to avoid another tax increase, saying "the overwhelming opinion of the voters was that they did not want a tax increase" and urging the court to hold committee meetings to scrutinize spending. Judge Riley said he had originally proposed a 7% increase but had reduced that to 5%, which he estimated would produce about $540,000 in additional revenue and would assist with payroll and pension obligations.

Magistrates traded arguments over whether the county should raise revenue or find further cuts. Esq. M. Moody pointed to higher cash balances compared with the prior year and argued the county was controlling spending; Esq. J. Moody warned raising taxes would harm efforts to attract business and would disproportionately affect farmers. Esq. Brewer framed the choice as a public-safety and professionalism issue for EMS personnel, noting that for a homeowner with a $250,000 property the increase would be roughly $40 per year.

Two formal motions failed. A motion by Judge Riley, seconded by Esq. Travis, to raise the insurance premium tax from 3% to 5% failed on a 3–3 vote (ayes: John Riley, Esq. Travis, Esq. Brewer; nays: Esq. M. Moody, Esq. Beaverson, Esq. J. Moody). A subsequent motion by Esq. Travis, seconded by Judge Riley, to raise the rate to 4% failed 2–4 (ayes: Riley, Travis; nays: M. Moody, Beaverson, Brewer, J. Moody).

The court took no further action on tax changes at the meeting. Debate highlighted competing priorities: officials urging additional revenue to stabilize EMS pay and benefits, and others advising caution because of tax burdens on residents and farmers. No follow-up timetable was set during the Feb. 3 meeting.