Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Finance Pensions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Jackson County approves two-year actuarial valuation contract for post-employment benefits
Summary
Jackson County approved a two-year agreement with Niheart to provide actuarial valuation services for other post-employment benefits for fiscal years 2026–27 at a stated price of $7,200; the county auditor and HR staff said the vendor is a routine recommendation from the state auditor.
Get email alerts on the Finance Pensions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Jackson County's Board of Supervisors on June 2 authorized a two-year agreement with a firm identified in the meeting record as Niheart to produce actuarial valuations for other post-employment benefits for fiscal years 2026–27 at a stated cost of $7,200.
Becky Chapman of the county human resources office presented the request and said the county relies on actuarial valuations to meet auditing standards. Chapman told the board the vendor’s rates have ‘‘increased very minimally’’ and that counties commonly follow the state auditor’s recommendations when selecting a firm. "They have increased very minimally over the years," Chapman said; "they're very competitive in the market."
Supervisor Mike Stein moved to approve the contract and Nin Flegel seconded the motion. The board voted in favor and the chair was authorized to sign the agreement.
Why it matters: actuarial valuations determine the county’s reported net other post-employment benefit liability and are required for audited financial statements. The county recorded the contract amount in the meeting packet as $7,200 for the two-year engagement.
What the record shows: the transcript refers to the firm as "Niheart" (transcript spelling). The record also uses several variant spellings for the statute requiring valuation (examples in the record include "Gazby 75" and "GSP75"); the precise statutory citation was not clarified during the discussion. The board took the contract vote during routine business and did not request further competitive bidding information during the meeting.

