The Adams County Administration and Finance Committee on July 9 approved an amended employment contract for County Administrator Cynthia Haggard and forwarded it to the full county board with changes to salary, termination language and benefits.

Committee members said they sought a compromise between market pay and public concern about county finances. The committee approved a starting salary of $150,000 in year one, rising in subsequent years to $155,000, $160,000, $166,000 and $172,000; it also revised the contract to make termination consistent with state law (majority vote) and to attach county PTO language as an addendum. The committee set the contract’s effective date as June 18.

Why this matters: the county administrator oversees multiple departments — including the landfill and Health and Human Services — and committee members said the position carries unusually broad responsibilities for the county. At the same time, members and public commenters pressed for pay that reflects Adams County’s population and budget.

Committee discussion and public comment

Public commenters challenged the proposed pay. Patty Younglebuff said she opposed language giving the administrator dual reporting and that the proposed top salary was too high for a “poor county.” “I do not feel that with the poor how poor our county is…she is one of the highest paid administrators, and we are one of the poorest counties,” Younglebuff told the committee.

Barbara Barnes, another resident, urged pay tied to county size and budget and suggested a shorter contract term. “The salary should reflect the county population size and budget,” she said.

County Administrator Cynthia Haggard addressed the committee directly. “I’m happy where I am,” Haggard said, and told members she seeks what is fair and is aware of the position’s responsibilities. She and counsel also noted the county’s prior wage-study work and that some director positions in the county are compensated differently.

Key committee decisions and rationale

- Salary schedule: After discussion and a motion, the committee voted to recommend a five‑year schedule that begins at $150,000 in year one and increases to $172,000 by year five. The committee used a voice vote; no roll‑call tally was recorded in the minutes.

- Termination language: Members debated whether contract termination requires a two‑thirds board vote. Committee members and counsel referenced state law and statutes; the committee replaced the two‑thirds threshold in the contract with majority‑vote language that the committee said aligns with state statute.

- Severance and PTO: Severance length drew debate. Some members called six months excessive; others said severance protects the administrator given the risks of the office. The contract was amended to attach the county PTO policy as an addendum rather than restating it in full.

- Effective date: The committee approved a June 18 effective date for the amended contract.

Next steps and context

The amended contract and the committee’s changes will go to the full county board for final approval. Committee members noted the contract was negotiated in part during closed session earlier in the meeting and that some details, including prior closed-session discussions, were not recited in full during open session.

The committee and public repeatedly referenced a prior county wage study and comparisons to other counties; committee members said direct comparisons are imperfect because counties assign different duties to administrators.

Ending

The county board will consider the amended contract at its next meeting; the committee’s vote sends the revised contract and the recommended salary schedule for full‑board action.