Broker warns Grand Forks County of 15–20% baseline rise in 2027 health premiums

Jeff LeClaire, an insurance broker with The Insurance Center, told the Grand Forks County Board of Commissioners that actuarial analysis of county claims projects a baseline 15–20% increase in health‑plan costs if the county keeps its current plan design.

"The actuarial team is showing anywhere between 15‑20% would be the … increase for your plan if you did nothing," LeClaire said, adding that the renewal from Blue Cross typically arrives in early to mid‑September and that the projection is not a guaranteed final rate.

LeClaire outlined several options the county could use to reduce that pressure: narrowing network access (a steerage model favoring local provider Altru), moving into NDPERS (the North Dakota Public Employees Retirement System plan that currently favors Sanford’s network), captive or self‑funded arrangements, higher deductibles and coinsurance, or dual‑option plan designs that offer a richer plan and a lower‑cost alternative.

"There is ways to save money guaranteed. It's just a matter of how much appetite of change do you have for your employees," LeClaire said, while warning that self‑funding carries greater downside in years with poor claims experience.

LeClaire also highlighted a specific operational risk if the county joins NDPERS: a potential "true‑up" if the county leaves the program within five years and claims have exceeded premiums, meaning the county could be required to cover the shortfall. He said firm NDPERS rates and plan designs will not be known until mid‑2027.

Michelle Steele, who presented staffing and compensation context to the board, said carriers generally will not provide final quotes until July and that staff expects firm comparative quotes — including the Blue Cross renewal and responses from other carriers and self‑funded vendors — in September.

Steele and LeClaire noted the county’s claims are concentrated at local providers: LeClaire estimated roughly 60% of claims occur at Altru providers, which both said affects how disruptive a steerage model would be for employees.

LeClaire offered an estimate of possible savings from removing the county's HRA: "about a $400,000 to $450,000" in reduced costs, but he characterized that figure as a range tied to usage and claims experience.

Commissioners pressed staff for practical scenarios that can be used for budgeting: examples included lowering the county share of single coverage to 80% and family coverage to 75%, reducing or restructuring the HRA, and presenting estimated impacts for 5%, 10% and 20% health‑cost increases. Commissioner Mark urged that staff model specific contribution scenarios so commissioners can decide on a "soft landing" approach that balances budget stability and employee impacts.

Staff told the board they will prepare scenario modeling and bring valuation information to the next three scheduled budget work sessions (July 21, July 28 and Aug. 4) so the commission can begin detailed discussions before the September renewal window.

The meeting closed with the commission directing staff to present multiple plan and contribution scenarios for consideration.