Commissioners repeal 'Attendance on Demand' ordinance, form county task force to review timekeeping

Vermillion County commissioners voted 2–1 to repeal the county—s Attendance on Demand (AOD) ordinance after months of debate over training, system performance and whether the county auditor will use the product for payroll.

Commissioner Tim Yoakam moved to repeal Vermillion County Ordinance 2024-5—an ordinance that had required county employees to record hours using AOD—and the motion passed on a 2-to-1 vote. The transcript records the final result as “Motion carries 2 to 1 to rescind. County ordinance 2024-5.” The commissioners did not record individualized roll-call votes in the audio record.

Commissioners and county staff said the underlying issue is that the county auditor has signaled she will not use AOD for HR/payroll. Several commissioners argued that the county should not keep paying roughly $5,655 billed for July–December 2024 if the auditor and HR will not use the system; staff said AOD invoices are billed in six-month increments (the meeting included a citation of $5,655 for July–December 2024, producing an approximate annual cost of $10,500 if billing continues).

Despite repealing the ordinance, commissioners agreed not to immediately cancel the AOD vendor contract. Instead they directed staff to form a seven-member task force made up of county employees who use timekeeping systems—representatives from departments such as highway, sheriff, probation, courthouse offices and extension services—and asked departments to nominate members. Commissioners said the task force should review the current system, compare alternatives (including a return to manual paper cards only if the group recommended it), and propose changes or training to make the system workable. The board also said the county auditor may instruct county offices that they are no longer required by ordinance to use AOD.

Public comments reflected the division. Faith Burry, who said she had worked on implementing AOD, said training had been offered and that the system integrates with the county’s other software and could reduce manual errors. County Council member Ron and other speakers urged more training and a careful review before canceling the system. Other commenters and some commissioners said there had not been sufficient training or buy-in when the system went live and that staff reported clocking and comp‑time calculation problems.

The board agreed to solicit volunteers for the seven-member task force and to let the task force review capabilities, training needs and alternative systems before making a contract decision. In the meantime the county will continue to monitor vendor billing and the auditor will decide which system to use for payroll.