Rio Blanco County commissioners on Oct. 17 voted to keep the county’s current PPO 5 medical insurance plan for 2026 while requiring employees to pay modest premiums for dependent coverage and offering a $200-per-month incentive for employees who remove a duplicate-covered spouse or other plus‑one from the county plan.

The board said the county’s renewal had arrived with a 25% increase for 2026 and presented several scenarios for sharing cost increases. Commissioners approved a plan combining scenario B — a $30-per-month charge for employee-plus-1 coverage and $40 per month for family coverage — with scenario E, a $200-per-month incentive for employees who move a duplicate-covered spouse or plus‑one to that person’s other employer coverage. “It’s an incentive rather than … the stick,” one commissioner said when describing the rationale for the payment option.

Under the plan the board approved, the county will continue the PPO 5 plan with the county maintaining single coverage for employees and asking employees to contribute small monthly amounts for dependent tiers. Commissioners said the measures aim to reduce the number of people who are double-covered through county plans, which the county identified as a driver of high claims and the 25% renewal increase. “We had so many claims last year that our insurance went up dramatic in our pool,” a commissioner said during the discussion.

Employees in the meeting sought clarity on who would be eligible for the $200 incentive and how the county would verify duplicate coverage. County staff said the incentive would apply only when the dependent (spouse or other plus‑one) has active coverage elsewhere and that documentation of that coverage would be required. “Double coverage — so to make that clear, employees that their spouse is not or avail does not have coverage available for coverage … they’re not eligible for the $200,” a staff speaker said.

Employees in public comment described mixed reactions. Some said they valued the county’s current benefits and worried about higher out-of-pocket costs for households with significant medical needs. One employee said, “I’ve got two of them on the insurance, just migraine medicine alone. It’s $5,000 each per month,” describing high personal reliance on the plan. Others said the incentive could be attractive if it materially reduced household costs and if numbers were clearer. Staff and commissioners said final open-enrollment decisions and communications to employees must be completed by the county’s deadlines in October and that some implementation details would be finalized by human-resources staff.

Commissioners and staff discussed alternative cost-sharing proposals that had been presented in an employee survey, including higher deductibles and percentage-based dependent contributions. Board members said the $30/$40 flat-per-month option was more palatable in survey responses than a 10% dependent-premium share, and that offering an incentive (scenario E) could encourage enough employees to change coverage to reduce future premium growth. One commissioner summarized: “The bottom line is it’s our goal is to encourage moving that plus 1 so they’re not double covered.”

The county shared base premium figures shown during the meeting: roughly $1,074 per month for single coverage, $2,013 per month for employee-plus-1, and $2,004.71 per month for family coverage for 2026 projections presented by staff. Commissioners noted they could not make salary decisions at the same time and restricted this action to health-benefit changes only.

After discussion and public comment, a motion to keep PPO 5 and adopt scenarios B (employee contributions of $30/$40) and E (the $200 monthly incentive for verified duplicate coverage) was moved, seconded and approved by roll call. The recorded roll-call votes reflected aye votes from the commissioners who participated in the final tally. The county will publish specifics and verification procedures through human-resources channels before open enrollment closes.

The decision does not itself change salary or other benefits; commissioners emphasized that raises or other compensation changes are separate matters and would be addressed later if appropriate.