Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
La Paz County votes to absorb roughly 8% FY27 employee benefits increase
Loading...
Summary
The La Paz County Board approved an employer–employee cost distribution for FY27 that has the county absorbing an approximately 8.06% increase in benefits costs, after staff presented three scenarios and supervisors discussed budget trade-offs.
The La Paz County Board of Supervisors voted April 6 to have the county absorb an approximately 8.06% increase in employee benefits costs for fiscal year 2027.
A county staff presenter told the board that benefits costs had started at more than a 17% increase at negotiations but counties achieved reductions and the effective increase was "about 8.06%". The presenter outlined three scenarios: the county absorb the increase, employees absorb it, or the county and employees share the increase using the current percentage allocations. "If we share the cost with the employee, the cost to the county per year is between $28,000 and $60,000," the presenter said; she gave an illustrative single-employee monthly premium of about $122.85 rising to $248.77 if employees took the entire hit and said a shared scenario would raise single coverage to $135.25 and family coverage to $880.69.
Supervisors asked for clarification about timing, revenue forecasts and implications for open enrollment, COLA or step increases and pay equity. The presenter said a labor model and five-year revenue forecast were still pending and that the answer to the county's benefits manager, Gallagher, had been due March 31 but the county had requested an extension to the meeting date.
After discussion, a supervisor moved to have the county absorb the benefits increase and the motion was seconded. The board approved the employer–employee benefit cost distribution with the county absorbing the increase by voice vote.
The board directed staff to continue budget analysis; staff noted the county could apply savings from prior PSPRS paydowns toward some costs but had not specified exact allocations at the meeting. Open enrollment timelines and further budget modeling were cited as next steps.
