Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Board Compensation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Executive committee refers board salary and $30 internet reimbursement to HR/Finance after motion to rescind resolution withdrawn
Summary
The Executive Committee sent the question of supervisor pay and a 2014 Internet‑reimbursement resolution to the Human Resources, Finance & Property Committee for review and did not rescind the resolution after a motion to do so was withdrawn.
The Marathon County Executive Committee discussed county board salaries and a longstanding Internet‑reimbursement policy and directed the Human Resources, Finance & Property Committee to review both items ahead of the November county board salary vote.
Administrator Leonard told the committee that county practice has been to include a 3% annual pay increase for supervisors in the initial salary resolution for each two‑year term unless the board acts otherwise. He said the county boards’ rule requires a vote in November of odd‑numbered years to set salaries for the next two‑year term and that any modifications are normally developed by HR/Finance before the full board acts.
The committee also discussed Resolution R17‑14, a 2014 resolution that established a monthly Internet‑service reimbursement (cited in the discussion as approximately $30 per month) and an annual budget allocation historically shown in the county board line item (budgeted at about $14,000). Leonard said the county has continued the budgeting practice but interprets the 2014 resolution as not binding future budgets; he asked for guidance on whether to include the stipend in the 2026 budget.
Supervisor Robinson said the Internet stipend could be eliminated to help offset the 3% increase if the committee approved it; Vice Chair Dickinson raised concerns about eliminating a stipend without a guarantee HR/Finance or the full board would follow through on an offsetting salary adjustment. Dickinson also noted practical connectivity needs for supervisors and said stipend elimination could effectively reduce take‑home compensation for some board members.
Robinson moved to rescind Resolution R17‑14; the motion was seconded but later withdrawn so no formal rescission occurred. Administrator Leonard and committee members agreed HR/Finance should consider the stipend and salary questions and forward a recommendation to the full county board for the November vote.
No formal vote to change salaries or to rescind the stipend resolution occurred at the Executive Committee meeting; the committee’s direction was procedural: HR/Finance will review and prepare the recommendation to the full board.
“Part of it is going to be investigation,” Leonard said when describing department‑level differences in data and expense management, and he asked the committee for guidance on whether to keep the stipend in the draft 2026 county board budget. Vice Chair Dickinson replied that eliminating the stipend without additional action would create a hardship for some supervisors and urged the committee to ensure HR/Finance follows up.
Ending: The committee asked HR/Finance to review supervisor salary setting and the Internet reimbursement policy and to bring recommendations to the full county board in time for the required November vote.
