Local elected officials not necessarily entitled to health coverage, court rules

Local elected officials looking to reduce spending next year to adjust for the tax revenue reductions forced upon them by state lawmakers through Senate Enrolled Act 1 have a green-light from the Indiana Supreme Court to eliminate their own health insurance coverage.

In a first-of-its-kind decision, the state's high court recently ruled 4-1 that local elected officials are not automatically classified as full-time employees entitled to health insurance benefits under Indiana law.

Instead, the Supreme Court said local elected officials may be deemed part-time employees ineligible for health coverage if the local unit of government exercises its option under state law not to offer health insurance to its part-time employees.

"While local unit public employers are not required to do so, they may categorize their locally elected officials as full-time or part-time employees. Thus, local unit public employers may exclude group health insurance for those they designate as part-time employees," said Justice Mark Massa on behalf of the court.

A local unit includes a city, town, county, township, public library, municipal corporation, school corporation, charter school, or any related governmental employer, according to state law.

In this case, records show the three-member Perry County Board of Commissioners voted in 2023 to exclude all part-time county employees from health insurance coverage, and classified themselves, the elected members of the county council, and some additional elected officials as part-time employees.

Perry County Councilman Keith Huck, a Republican from Tell City, objected to the classification and insisted he was entitled to an annual health plan totaling $28,863.12 in county-paid costs, on top of Huck's yearly salary of $4,783, according to court records.

Huck initially won injunctive relief at the trial court level but that was reversed in April 2024 in a 3-0 decision by the Indiana Court of Appeals.

The Supreme Court agreed with the appellate jurists that Huck was unlikely to prevail on the merits of his claim based on its interpretation of the relevant statutes and the trial court therefore abused its discretion by issuing an injunction.

"If we are mistaken in our interpretation, the General Assembly remains free to revise its statutes to provide more clarity," Massa said.

Chief Justice Loretta Rush concurred in the high court's judgment and said Huck also was not entitled to injunctive relief because he failed to demonstrate that losing his health insurance posed a risk of irreparable harm because he had other means of obtaining coverage.

On the other hand, Justice Christopher Goff dissented from the court's ruling because he contends state law deems all local elected officials as employees of their unit, not part-time employees subject to the potential loss of health coverage.

"Ultimately, the issue of health insurance coverage for local elected officials is an important policy issue best left for the Legislature to address, and I welcome further clarification," Goff said.

Earlier this year, the Republican-controlled General Assembly and Republican Gov. Mike Braun approved a number of tax policy changes aimed at reducing the property taxes paid by residential homeowners and businesses.

According to the nonpartisan Legislative Services Agency, Senate Enrolled Act 1 will shrink revenue to all Lake County taxing units by $235.2 million over the next three years — more than any other county in the state — while Porter County schools and local governments will lose $49.6 million, and LaPorte County units $18.1 million.

Perry County v. Huck ruling of Indiana Supreme Court

Perry County v. Huck ruling of Indiana Court of Appeals

Meet the 2025 Northwest Indiana legislative delegation

© 2025 The Times (Munster, Ind.). Visit www.nwitimes.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.