Hickman County TN

Righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people. Proverbs 14:34

Budget, Finance & Human Resources · Work Session · Apr 20, 2026

Mon, Apr 20, 2026

Oversees the annual budget process, departmental funding requests, and personnel policies including hiring, compensation, and benefits.

Watch the recording on YouTube

Join the Substack

Outline

This outline was generated by an LLM from a transcript and may contain errors or inaccuracies. Prefer the original recording when available.

The work session centered on employee health insurance costs and on setting budget discipline before the next round of revisions. The county’s broker said the self-insured medical plan is still preferable to returning to fully insured coverage, but high claims are pushing up stop-loss costs. A new two-option plan was proposed: keep the current richer plan at the current employee premium, or add a no-premium base plan with a higher deductible and ER copays aimed at reducing convenience ER use. Staff said the county is barely covering the current year’s health claims and is now projecting about $3.1 million for the county medical-insurance bucket, up from roughly $2.6 million, even after hoped-for savings.

Committee members also moved through several budget items. They removed two community-center nonprofit requests totaling $20,000, raised the fire association appropriation by 3% to $160,680, approved some smaller funds as presented, approved an adequate facilities tax transfer of $400,000 into fund 151, and adopted a broader instruction for departments with larger budget growth to rework requests toward 3% salary growth and 4% overall unless justified by special circumstances. Other notable threads included smokeless-tobacco revenue being revised upward to $160,000, updated sales-tax trends, concern about budgets growing faster than county revenue, and brief discussion of future options such as HSA-compatible high-deductible health plans.

Public Comments / Insurance presentation 0:46

Medical insurance proposal 0:53

  • 1:16 The county’s broker, Benefits Inc., reviewed the health-plan strategy and stressed why the county’s move three years ago from fully insured coverage to self-insurance was important: instead of absorbing annual carrier renewals of 20%–25% or more, the county now funds actual claims and buys only stop-loss coverage.
  • 4:27 The current stop-loss structure uses a $100,000 specific deductible per covered person; claims above that threshold are covered by reinsurance rather than the county’s claims fund.
  • 5:48 Over the last 12 months, the plan had $1.853 million in claims above the $100,000 stop-loss threshold, showing the stop-loss coverage is actively protecting the county from catastrophic claims.
  • 6:48 The broker said 43.26% of claims were above stop-loss, leaving the county to pay about $2.433 million in claims below the threshold from its own claims funding.
  • 7:17 The one true “renewal” the county still faces is the stop-loss premium; it is rising because a small number of high claimants are driving underwriter pricing, though the broker argued self-funding still limits county exposure compared with a full insured-market increase.
  • 8:10 The current plan was described as generous: a $250 deductible, then 80/20 cost-sharing until the out-of-pocket maximum.
  • 8:26 The proposal for next year creates a dual-option plan:
    • 8:42 Option 1: a lower-value, lower-cost base plan.
    • 8:49 Option 2: the existing plan, at the same employee premium as today.
  • 8:58 Under Option 2, employees who want to keep the current plan would continue paying $50 per month or $25 per pay period.
  • 9:18 Under Option 1, employees would keep the same doctor, pharmacy, and hospital networks but move to a $1,000 deductible; employee-only coverage would be free, intended as a transition-year alternative rather than a forced cut.
  • 9:59 After the $1,000 deductible on Option 1, the county would pay 80% and the employee 20% until a $3,000 out-of-pocket maximum.
  • 10:51 The underwriter’s assumption is that around 50% of current employees may choose the free base option, which the broker said could suppress claims if employees with low utilization shift to the higher deductible.
  • 11:43 A major rationale for plan redesign was emergency-room utilization, especially at a freestanding ER in East Hickman. The broker said claims data showed people were using that site for non-emergency care because the current benefit design makes it cheap and convenient after the deductible is met.
  • 13:01 To discourage non-emergency ER use:
    • 13:01 Option 1 would add a $150 ER copay.
    • 13:21 Option 2 would add a $100 ER copay even though it otherwise stays the same.
  • 13:51 Claims analysis identified about 64 non-emergent ER claims last year totaling roughly $100,000, which was offered as evidence that the copay change is targeted at a real cost center rather than a hypothetical one.
  • 15:25 On prescriptions, both options would keep preventive-drug copays at $10 generic, $35 brand, and $60 non-preferred. The practical difference is that on the new base plan, non-preventive drugs would be subject to the $1,000 deductible before the county’s 80% share begins.
  • 16:57 The proposal also shifts from a simple employee-only/family premium setup to a four-tier structure:
    • employee only,
    • employee plus spouse,
    • employee plus child(ren),
    • family.
  • 17:10 The broker said this is meant to better match actual coverage risk and avoid charging employee-plus-spouse households the same as larger families.
  • 18:24 The broker added that because the county is self-insured, it now also receives pharmacy rebates and similar recoveries; Blue Cross is increasing those rebate reimbursements and that is already built into the projections.
  • 19:31 Finance staff said the current budget for county medical insurance is running extremely close and, if it gets through the year, it will “barely” do so.
  • 21:13 The broker cautioned that savings estimates are not exact, but the underwriter projected:
    • about $500,000 lower claims from adding the dual-option structure, and
    • about $100,000 of additional avoidable spending pressure tied to non-emergent ER use, for a rough combined opportunity of around $600,000.
  • 22:15 The broker also said these design changes do not move the needle as much as premium increases would, because the county has not raised employee premiums in several years.
  • 23:24 Staff said the medical-insurance request had originally looked like it might reach $3.4 million, but after revisions they were asking for about $3.1 million.
  • 23:39 Staff said fixed costs are rising by about $350,000 due to stop-loss and high claims, and that the county has $2.9 million in the line now; the revised request would raise it by about $170,000.
  • 24:49 The broker said eight covered members account for the $1.85 million in high-cost claims over stop-loss, which is what is driving fixed-cost increases.
  • 25:47 Members asked whether the four-tier structure might encourage some spouses to move to their own employer coverage. The broker said it could, and noted some employers even bar spouses from joining if they have other employer-sponsored insurance available, though that is not being proposed here.
  • 27:35 A member clarified the county was at about $2.6 million last year and is now looking at $3.1 million, which was criticized as a roughly 16%–17% increase despite the redesign.
  • 28:52 The broker responded that similar fully insured groups are seeing much steeper increases this year, citing examples from his desk of 49%, 45%, and even 60% renewals, and said federal changes and reimbursement pressures are worsening the market.
  • 30:25 It was clarified that the solid waste insurance budget is separate and not included in the $3.1 million county figure.
  • 31:34 Staff gave a broader projection of about $4.439 million in medical-insurance budgeting across all departments.
  • 31:57 The broker said splitting departmental insurance buckets now makes it clearer which groups are driving claims, and noted the highway department previously reduced exposure by moving retirees to a Medicare Advantage plan.
  • 32:34 Members asked about a future HSA-compatible high-deductible plan. The broker said that could become a third option later; he referenced the state plan’s high-deductible/HSA offering as popular with younger employees and said premiums on such a plan would be much lower because employees assume more upfront risk.
  • 34:27 No vote was taken on the insurance design in this segment; the presentation was for budget planning and future recommendations.

New Business / Agenda Items 35:35

General budget status and revenue adjustment 35:35

  • 36:14 Staff corrected a revenue estimate for code 44131 (smokeless tobacco), saying the earlier figure was wrong and should increase from $95,000 to $160,000; committee members voiced no objection to making that change.
  • 37:18 Staff said the county was projecting a beginning balance of about $5.6 million and a budgeted fund balance around $3.176 million under the current draft, though figures were being adjusted live.
  • 38:17 Staff said the budget remained about 48.7 cents short on the tax-rate side after updates, indicating the draft still did not balance at the current assumptions.
  • 38:50 A member translated part of the shortfall discussion into dollars at about $85,000 per penny, underscoring the scale of any tax-rate changes.

Nonprofits 40:10

  • 40:32 Members noted the Child Advocacy Center did not request funds this year and expressed surprise they had not presented.
  • 41:13 A motion was made to remove the two community-center requests from the nonprofit section, based on the view that countywide funding should go to organizations serving the whole county rather than only local community centers.
  • 41:40 The motion specifically removed two $10,000 requests, a total of $20,000.
  • 42:20 Roll-call vote: approved unanimously, 10–0.

Fire association appropriation 43:17

  • 43:17 A member argued that because county growth year-over-year was about 3%, government spending should generally not outpace that growth.
  • 43:48 Using that logic, the committee took up the fire association, which had received $156,000 last year.
  • 43:53 A 3% increase was calculated to bring the appropriation to $160,680.
  • 44:02 Motion to set the fire association amount at $160,680.
  • 44:30 Roll-call vote: approved unanimously, 10–0.

Civil defense / EMA budget 46:19

  • 46:45 Staff said the total civil-defense increase was about $20,000, though part of that came from a corrected entry that should have been $3,600 rather than $36,000.
  • 47:15 Members focused first on EMA’s request to move an existing employee into a full-time operations/deputy role while also creating new positions in another salary line.
  • 47:56 Staff explained the current full-time person had previously been paid from fund/account 189, was being moved into 106, and that the two positions left in 189 were proposed as two new positions. The stated plan was to make one person the deputy/operations manager and add a planner.
  • 48:48 Members asked what the budget would look like if departments were held to 3% growth with no new personnel.
  • 49:20 A member said keeping the existing person at 3% but adding no new people would be acceptable.
  • 50:33 Another member said the EMA request as presented was too irregular and should be sent back rather than approved as-is, with a target closer to a 4% total increase after revisions.
  • 51:56 The broader argument was that county revenue grew about 3%, so letting departmental spending rise at double that pace would worsen budget problems.

Budget-growth policy direction for departments 52:39

  • 52:39 Members discussed using statewide budgeting practice as a guide and noted the state was budgeting around 2.6% salary growth, while the committee had generally been considering 3% for county employees.
  • 53:14 A member proposed setting an overall target and sending higher-growth budgets back to department heads: preserve roughly 3% salary growth, but hold the overall budget increase near a set cap.
  • 53:42 To ground that discussion, members reviewed sales-tax performance and broader revenue trends.
  • 54:23 Staff reported March sales-tax actuals at $1,643,985.24.
  • 55:07 Members observed that the county appeared on track to beat the $2.3 million sales-tax estimate and argued that sales-tax growth is now outpacing property-tax growth, helped by online retail deliveries.
  • 55:58 Staff said the county’s sales-tax trend had been around 8% growth over the last four or five years.
  • 57:22 Members noted some departments may deserve exceptions; the sheriff’s patrol budget was said to be around 3.7% growth while the jail side was around 8.1%, and some line items such as gasoline or special situations like the trustee’s bond costs might justify higher totals.
  • 58:25 Motion by Commissioner Jordan: send offending department budgets back with a target of 3% on salaries and 4% overall, unless there are extenuating circumstances.
  • 59:15 The motion was clarified repeatedly: this was not a blanket rejection of all budgets, but direction to revise those exceeding the target, while still allowing exceptions for fuel, new-building impacts, and similar unavoidable costs.
  • 1:01:12 Members asked who would communicate the revisions and when. Staff and the county mayor were to relay the guidance, with a goal of having revisions back by Thursday.
  • 1:02:11 Roll-call vote: approved unanimously, 10–0.

Fund approvals: 122 and 127 1:03:06

  • 1:03:19 A motion was made to approve funds 122, 125, and 127 as presented.
  • 1:03:45 Before finalizing, a member raised a policy question about the adequate facilities tax and how Hickman County’s charges compare with surrounding counties.
  • 1:04:08 It was said that Cheatham County charges $7,500 plus 50 cents a foot, and that Hickman County is well below several nearby jurisdictions; some neighboring systems use impact fees instead.
  • 1:05:13 Members agreed that changing the underlying fee or rule should not be done inside the budget process; the budget should reflect policy already set elsewhere.
  • 1:05:27 The original motion was amended to approve only funds 122 and 127 as presented and take up fund 125 separately.
  • 1:06:21 Roll-call vote on amended motion: approved unanimously, 10–0.

Adequate facilities tax / transfer to fund 151 1:06:43

  • 1:06:48 Members said the adequate facilities tax needs broader policy attention, but for budget purposes they wanted to continue last year’s practice.
  • 1:06:58 Motion: make a $400,000 transfer out of fund 125 and move it into fund 151.
  • 1:07:11 The rationale was administrative simplicity and the need to keep systematically catching up on how adequate facilities tax revenues are used; moving a set amount annually into 151 was described as easier than more complicated case-by-case handling.
  • 1:08:18 Roll-call vote on approving fund 125 with the $400,000 transfer to 151: approved unanimously, 10–0.

Approval of fund 151 1:08:40

  • 1:08:40 After approving the transfer, a motion was made to approve fund 151 with the added $400,000.
  • 1:09:19 Roll-call vote: approved unanimously, 10–0.

Closing budget comments 1:09:53

  • 1:10:24 Members discussed the estimated-line and fund-balance implications under the current penny assumptions and said they wanted to revisit the general-fund balance after departments return with revised budgets.
  • 1:10:50 A member said a fund balance near 4 was the desired range once the revisions are “massaged.”
  • 1:11:25 The meeting moved toward adjournment after no further substantive work was raised.

Key figures and statistics

Figure Type Context / topic Timestamp
2,000 Client count Benefits Inc. group clients under management 1:32
4,000–5,000 Employee count Size of broker’s largest employer client 1:41
3 years Time period Time since county moved to self-insurance 2:11
20%–25% Percentage Typical old fully insured renewal increases described by broker 2:55
32% Percentage Example of prior Blue Cross renewal increase 3:25
1,000 Headcount Example group size used to explain predictability of claims 4:01
12 months Time period Claims lookback period 4:27
$100,000 Insurance threshold Specific stop-loss deductible per covered person 4:35
$150,000 Insurance threshold Example alternative stop-loss level discussed 5:28
$200,000 Insurance threshold Example alternative stop-loss level discussed 5:28
$50,000 Insurance threshold Example lower stop-loss level discussed 5:35
$1.853 million Claims cost Claims above stop-loss over the last year 5:48
43.26% Percentage Share of claims above stop-loss 6:48
$2.433 million Claims cost Claims below stop-loss paid from county funding 7:02
$250 Deductible Current plan deductible 8:10
80% / 20% Cost share Current and proposed coinsurance split after deductible 8:18
$50 per month Premium Employee premium for existing richer plan 8:58
$25 per pay period Premium Employee premium for existing richer plan 8:58
$1,000 Deductible Proposed Option 1 deductible 9:29
$3,000 Out-of-pocket maximum Proposed Option 1 employee cap 10:06
$100 Example expense Example doctor bill used to explain coinsurance 10:31
50% Percentage Estimated share of employees who may choose the free base plan 10:51
$150 Copay Proposed ER copay under Option 1 13:01
$100 Copay Proposed ER copay under Option 2 13:21
64 Claim count Non-emergent ER claims identified last year 13:51
$100,000 Claims cost Non-emergent ER spending identified in data 14:06
$10 Copay Preventive generic prescription copay 15:25
$35 Copay Preventive brand prescription copay 15:25
$60 Copay Preventive non-preferred prescription copay 15:32
$500,000 Projected savings Estimated claims reduction from dual-option plan 21:13
$600,000 Projected savings Rough combined effect of dual-option and ER changes 21:56
$3.4 million Budget projection Earlier rough medical-insurance estimate before revisions 23:24
$350,000 Fixed-cost increase Stop-loss/high-claim driven increase 23:33
$3.1 million Budget request Revised county medical-insurance ask 23:39
$2.9 million Budget amount Current county medical-insurance line 23:49
$170,000 Increase Approximate rise from current line to revised request 23:58
8 Headcount Number of members driving high-cost claims 24:59
$1.85 million Claims cost High-cost claims tied to those eight members 25:08
$2.6 million Budget amount Prior-year county medical-insurance level discussed 27:35
16% Percentage Characterization of increase from $2.6M to $3.1M 28:26
17% Percentage Alternate characterization of increase from $2.6M to $3.1M 27:45
49% Percentage Example fully insured renewal for another client 29:03
45% Percentage Example fully insured renewal on broker’s desk 29:10
60% Percentage Example fully insured renewal on broker’s desk 29:18
$4.439 million Budget projection Medical-insurance projection across all departments 31:34
$7,000 Deductible Example high-deductible plan/HSA design mentioned by member 32:43
40%–50% Percentage Recalled fully insured increase from roughly three years ago 34:51
44131 Revenue code Smokeless-tobacco revenue line discussed 36:14
$95,000 Revenue Prior smokeless-tobacco estimate 36:21
$160,000 Revenue Revised smokeless-tobacco estimate 36:21
$5.6 million Fund balance Projected beginning balance 37:18
$3.176 million Fund balance Budget/fund-balance figure in current draft 37:18
$2.4 million Fund balance change Implied hit to balance under current draft 37:32
48.7 cents Tax rate gap Remaining shortfall discussed in balancing budget 38:17
$85,000 Value per penny Dollar value assigned to a penny in tax discussion 38:50
$10,000 Request Each removed community-center nonprofit request 41:48
$20,000 Total request Combined removed community-center requests 42:05
10–0 Vote Vote to remove community-center nonprofit requests 42:20
3% Percentage County growth benchmark cited for spending discipline 43:17
$156,000 Appropriation Fire association funding last year 43:48
$160,680 Appropriation Fire association funding after 3% increase 43:53
10–0 Vote Vote on fire association increase 44:30
22.3 pennies Tax rate measure Tax-rate discussion after nonprofit/fire changes 45:09
$20,000 Budget increase Civil defense total increase discussed 46:45
$36,000 Entry amount Incorrect typed figure in civil-defense budget 46:56
$3,600 Entry amount Corrected civil-defense figure 46:56
106 Account/fund reference EMA salary line receiving moved employee 48:05
189 Account/fund reference EMA account with proposed new positions 48:05
3% Percentage Suggested salary-growth cap for returned budgets 48:48
4% Percentage Suggested overall-growth cap for returned budgets 50:50
2.6% Percentage State budget salary-growth benchmark cited 52:48
$1,643,985.24 Revenue March sales-tax actuals 54:23
$2.3 million Revenue estimate Sales-tax estimate likely to be exceeded 55:07
8% Percentage Sales-tax growth trend over recent years 55:58
4–5 years Time period Span for sales-tax trend cited by staff 55:58
3.7% Percentage Sheriff patrol budget growth estimate 57:29
8.1% Percentage Jail budget growth estimate 57:43
3% Percentage Motion target for salaries in returned budgets 58:25
4% Percentage Motion target for overall budgets in returned budgets 58:32
10–0 Vote Vote on sending budgets back with 3%/4% targets 1:02:11
122 Fund number Fund approved as presented 1:03:06
125 Fund number Adequate facilities tax fund taken up separately 1:03:06
127 Fund number Fund approved as presented 1:03:06
$7,500 Fee Cheatham County adequate facilities charge base 1:04:08
50 cents a foot Fee rate Cheatham County adequate facilities charge variable component 1:04:08
10–0 Vote Vote approving funds 122 and 127 as presented 1:06:21
$400,000 Transfer Adequate facilities tax transfer to fund 151 1:06:58
151 Fund number Destination fund for adequate facilities tax transfer 1:06:58
10–0 Vote Vote on fund 125 and the $400,000 transfer 1:08:18
$400,000 Addition Amount added into fund 151 before approval 1:08:40
10–0 Vote Vote approving fund 151 with added transfer 1:09:19
4 Fund balance target Desired fund-balance level mentioned near close 1:10:50

External vendors, brands, and software

Name Type Context / topic Timestamp
Benefits Inc. Company County employee-health insurance broker presenting renewal strategy 1:25
Blue Cross Company Former fully insured carrier; current pharmacy rebate and stop-loss context 2:55
Cigna Company Carrier cited as one of the markets previously shopped for coverage 2:55
UnitedHealthcare Company Carrier cited as one of the markets previously shopped for coverage 3:03
HCA Company Operator associated with freestanding ER growth in East Hickman/Fairview discussion 11:53
Medicare Advantage Brand Highway retirees moved to this type of plan to control claims 32:05
Amazon Company Cited in sales-tax discussion about online retail deliveries 55:27
FedEx Company Cited in sales-tax discussion about online retail deliveries 55:27
Walmart Company Used as local retail comparison in sales-tax discussion 55:27
Chevron Brand Referenced as example of gasoline costs not staying within 3% 59:43

Laws and policies

| Citation / name | Level | Type | Context / topic | Timestamp | |---|---|---|---| | self-insurance / self-funded health plan | County | Policy | County’s strategic shift away from fully insured medical coverage, described as adopted three years earlier | 2:11 | | four-tier rating system | County | Policy | Proposed restructuring of employee medical premium categories into employee-only, spouse, child, and family tiers | 16:57 | | spousal-coverage eligibility rule | County | Policy | Broker described a possible but not proposed rule barring spouses who have employer coverage elsewhere | 26:03 |