Pine County commissioners on Tuesday approved a package of revised job descriptions, authorized internal and external recruitment for several reclassified positions and directed that the full board participate in interviews for the auditor‑treasurer post.

The vote followed a report from Commissioner Ludwig on a personnel‑committee review that proposed reclassifying several positions, updating reporting lines and advertising for the auditor‑treasurer and environmental services manager. Ludwig said, “So the result, I think you saw on the pack, was with the restructuring.”

The board approved revised job descriptions for an "auditor treasurer grama 18," an assessor/recorder reporting to the county administrator, an environmental services manager (retitled from land and resources manager with cannabis zoning added and GIS removed), an environmental technician (senior) with a new grade and rate range, a property records/GIS specialist, a fiscal officer (new grade 10) and title changes to information technology and human resources managers to directors. The personnel committee directed the human resources manager to complete memoranda of agreement with exclusive representatives as needed to implement the changes.

Commissioners stressed that no new positions were being created. "There is no new positions here. These are all current positions," a commissioner said during discussion. Commissioners also clarified that one environmental technician position has been vacant since spring and that one of the three environmental technicians could be promoted to the senior technician role without increasing total headcount.

On recruitment and selection, the board debated whether the personnel committee or the full board should participate in hiring the auditor‑treasurer, a role formerly filled by election. County policy 3.1 (as referenced in the meeting packet) allows either the full board or a committee to be involved in department‑head selection; Human Resources later explained typical practice is to have HR screen candidates and bring the top three to the board for interviews. After discussion the board voted to involve every commissioner in the interview process; Human Resources will publish proposed interview dates with applications so candidates know when interviews will occur.

The motions to approve the restructuring package, authorize recruitment and to involve the full board in auditor‑treasurer interviews carried on voice votes. No new hires were added to the county headcount as part of the approved plan.

The board did not set a specific hire date for the auditor‑treasurer in the meeting; commissioners asked HR to propose interview dates and coordinate schedules so the full board can attend.