The Madison County Council voted Thursday to approve a framework to fund a proposed pay increase for merit officers, to impose an immediate countywide hiring freeze pending personnel-board guidance, and to pay a one-time 5% bonus to most county employees.

Council President Green presented the council's funding proposal for merit officers, saying, "I'm proposing is that we issue a 21% raise for our merit officers for 2026." He framed the plan as a compromise that would require contributions from multiple parties and short-term use of county reserves.

The plan as explained by Green and county staff would split the cost across the sheriff's department, the county commissioners and the council. Green told colleagues the salary increase alone would total about $527,245 a year and, with a reduced benefits contribution, about $584,000 per year; over two years that amounted to roughly $1.17 million. Green said the council's portion — after a proposed $300,000 contribution from the sheriff's commissary and a proposed $600,000 release of interest by the commissioners — would be about $369,192 (including FICA), or roughly $185,000 per year for two years.

Commissioner Garner described a legal mechanism for using interest earned during the tax-collection holding period and gave an illustrative calculation showing roughly $683,000 could be available from interest earned during the typical 42-day holding window. Auditor Todd Culp confirmed the county routinely adjusts budgets after adoption and that funding decisions could be implemented when the fiscal year begins.

The council voted 6–0 to approve the contract framework with the benefit treatment discussed by council members (roll call: Steele — yes; Lykins — yes; Grabowski — yes; Keller — yes; Vice President North — yes; President Green — yes). The motion adopted the 1-year contract language put forward at the meeting and the funding approach discussed on the record; council members said final contract details and any required reappropriations would be handled after budget adoption and during the January fiscal cycle.

Council members discussed alternatives for finding the remaining funds, including a modest increase in the property-tax levy percentage, expected savings from shift changes and overtime reductions in the sheriff's office, and one-time rainy-day transfers. Green repeatedly emphasized the proposal required "several parts working together" — including contributions from the sheriff and commissioners — and acknowledged the arrangement would require buy-in from multiple parties.

The council also debated and then approved an immediate hiring freeze to slow payroll growth while the county finalizes a personnel-board policy for filling positions. After discussion about exemptions and procedural safeguards, the council passed a motion to implement a hiring freeze "effective immediately, across the board," with personnel-board review for necessary exceptions. The vote on the hiring-freeze motion was: Steele — no; Lykins — no; Grabowski — yes; Keller — yes; Vice President North — yes; President Green — yes (motion carries).

Separately, the council approved a one-time 5% bonus for county employees earning less than $100,000 and excluding elected commissioners and council members. Auditor Culp provided the estimate for that payout as $1,031,932.95; the council adopted the bonus by roll call vote (motion carries).

The budget discussions were accompanied by specific line-item adjustments flagged by department heads and by several members of the public during the meeting's comment period. Dozens of deputies and residents urged the council to fund the sheriff's pay proposal, arguing recruitment and retention concerns and public-safety risks if deputies leave. Mason Brisendon, who identified himself as a county deputy, told the council to "use rainy day money to honor the contract." Deputy Jordan Allen said, "The pay increase we're asking for is not just about money. It's about whether this council values the men and women who risk everything for it." Other speakers, including retired officers and county employees, urged the council to consider the entire county workforce and to look for budget efficiencies.

Council members and staff stressed the budget shortfall the county faces heading into 2026. Green described a roughly $4 million shortfall driven by revenue below projections, an unbudgeted capital case estimated near $1 million, and the cost of an extra pay cycle in 2026. Councilors asked department heads to identify savings and prioritized discussing a personnel-board policy to allow limited, documented exceptions to any hiring freeze.

Green said the council would take the budget adopted Tuesday to the DLGF (the state local-government finance office) as required, and any contract or reappropriation tied to the merit-officer plan would be implemented through the regular amendment process after the fiscal year opens.

The council added the merit-officer funding framework, the hiring freeze policy discussion, and the employee bonus to its agenda for the next meeting and indicated it would continue negotiations with the sheriff and the commissioners, and hold contract follow-up sessions that include the merit officers' representatives.

The meeting closed after public comment and roll-call votes on the items described above.