Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Personnel Pay Grade topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Miller County discusses pay-grade correction for university-funded position

5796996 · August 20, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

County meeting included discussion of an IGP waiver and plans to realign a county position’s pay grade after the employee's payroll was processed through a university; no formal vote on the waiver was recorded in the transcript.

Miller County leaders discussed an IGP waiver and a proposal to correct the pay grade for a county position whose paycheck is processed through a university during a meeting in Fillmore.

A staff member said the position’s pay is handled through the university payroll and the county subsequently charges the university for the position, creating inconsistency with the county’s usual personnel progression. “our employees or at least this employee, their paycheck comes through the university, and then we charge it from the county session,” the staff member said.

The staff member told the meeting that the position was assigned to grade 7 but lacked the internal step progression other county offices use. “Yeah. So it’s, it’s a grade 7 right now, but there is no internal progression like every other office and department has internal professional development progression from grade 7 to a grade 2 type of concept. Right? But this was only assigned to grade 7,” the staff member said.

According to the discussion, the position previously had been placed on the county step-and-grade scale but later fell behind; an employee recently left and asked about a pay increase to remain with the employer. The staff member said the county hopes to restore the position to where it “should be” on the step-and-grade scale and then continue moving forward under the county’s progression system.

The transcript records this as discussion; no formal motion or vote on the IGP waiver or the pay-grade correction appears in the provided transcript segments. Earlier in the meeting, a motion to approve the minutes of Aug. 15, 2025, with suggested changes was made and seconded and the meeting then proceeded to the IGP waiver item.

County officials did not specify the dollar amount of any raise, the name of the university that runs payroll, or a timeline for when any formal pay-grade change would be presented for action.

Meeting participants signaled intent to align the position with county policy, but the transcript contains no record of a final decision, vote, or implementation date for the pay-grade adjustment.