Victoria County Commissioners Court on Wednesday reviewed a draft emergency compensation and office‑closure policy intended to standardize how county employees are paid when the county responds to incidents such as storms or other emergencies.

The draft would define when a countywide "official closure" qualifies employees for enhanced pay (either double time or 2.5 times regular pay in some circumstances), clarify the distinction between essential and nonessential positions during incidents, and set recordkeeping and timekeeping requirements to support reimbursement requests to state or federal programs.

Gianni, county staff, who led the subcommittee that prepared the draft, said the committee’s goals were "to ensure clear and consistent communication, for all offices and departments that may respond in the event of an emergency or incident, clarify how those county wide office closures will be determined and how compensation is determined, define the practices for employees who are required to work during an event and, incident." The county judge and several commissioners pressed for clearer language on how an employee’s "essential" status could change depending on the nature of the incident.

Becky, county finance staff, explained the limits of federal reimbursement: "The administrative will not be reimbursed. So you basically have to work at a 40 hour week before you get any overtime compensation. And overtime compensation is all that's eligible during emergency protection measures." Commissioners discussed how holidays and preexisting shift schedules affect eligibility. The draft as written allows holidays to count toward the 40‑hour threshold for reporting but FEMA reimbursement rules would still not cover holiday/admin leave time, Becky said.

County discussion also addressed who has authority to declare the type of closure that would trigger enhanced pay. The county judge said he would issue uniform official closures so pay eligibility is applied consistently rather than leaving a patchwork of office‑by‑office decisions. The court clarified elected officials retain their statutory authority over their own offices and the policy would not be applied to employees already on shift schedules (24/7 operations) or to law enforcement regular shifts.

Commissioners and staff debated the proposed pay levels. The draft aligns with recent practice in the county: "the historical method has been double time," and the court noted that during the last ice storm the effective compensation reached 2.5 times in practice. Several commissioners said they were comfortable retaining the 2x / 2.5x framework but asked staff to make the language and examples clearer.

Court members emphasized documentation requirements for any future claim for federal Public Assistance: accurate time sheets, daily activity logs tied to incident objectives, and 214 forms (activity logs) are essential to support any reimbursement. Gianni and finance staff said the policy will include expectations for incident timekeeping and be embedded in incident action plans.

The court asked staff to revise the draft to (1) clarify that an "official closure" can occur outside of a formal Chapter 418 disaster declaration when the county judge deems it appropriate, (2) specify that enhanced pay eligibility requires an official closure rather than individual office schedule changes, and (3) refine the essential/nonessential designations and examples. The court took no action on the draft and will return the revised policy for further review.

Looking ahead, the subcommittee will prepare scenario examples comparing current practice to the draft language so the court can see "apples‑to‑apples" outcomes before any final adoption. The court did not vote on policy adoption; staff will bring an updated draft back for consideration.