Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Payroll And Scheduling topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Codington County approves pilot to integrate Aladtec scheduling with TimeClock Plus to handle law‑enforcement overtime

3029414 · April 17, 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

The Codington County Commission approved a pilot partnership with Aladtec to integrate employee scheduling with TimeClock Plus to better track overtime and complex shift accruals for deputies and corrections staff. Commissioners voted to proceed after questions about cost and contract terms.

The Codington County Commission on April 15 approved a pilot partnership with Aladtec to integrate scheduling with the county's TimeClock Plus (TCP) time‑tracking system, aiming to address overtime and accrual calculations for law‑enforcement and corrections staff.

Brent Solum, chief deputy with the Codington County Sheriff's Office, told commissioners the county has held twice‑weekly meetings with TCP staff to configure accruals and that the department faces complex scheduling needs: "As you can imagine, the accruals are extremely difficult to navigate through that process, and there's a lot of customizing that we gotta do." He said Aladtec — recently acquired by TCP — would provide a scheduling layer that can flag when shifts extend beyond an employee's scheduled hours so overtime is calculated correctly for workers on 8‑, 10‑ and 12‑hour rotations.

The county accepted Aladtec's offer to waive integration fees for a pilot and to provide extra implementation resources. County staff presented a quote during the meeting and said the vendor proposed a first‑year charge and an annual per‑year subscription thereafter; staff described the price to commissioners as an initial payment of $4,650 for the first year and $3,600 in recurring annual costs. Commissioners questioned the paperwork, pointing out other lines in the vendor document that appeared to show different figures; county staff said the contract also contains an annual termination clause tied to non‑appropriation so the county would not be locked into a multi‑year obligation.

Commission discussion focused on scope and on which employees would be covered. Solum said the pilot would include only employees with irregular shift patterns that cannot be configured in TCP (primarily deputies and corrections staff), while standard 8‑to‑5 employees could be handled in TCP without Aladtec. Commissioners also noted potential staff time savings for the corrections office if the system reduced manual time adjustments.

Motion to approve the pilot partnership was made by Commissioner Gable and seconded by Commissioner McElhinney. The commission approved the motion by voice vote; the clerk recorded the motion as carried.

County staff said they will circulate the vendor quote and continue configuration work with TCP and Aladtec as the pilot begins. The vendor will provide implementation support during the pilot; commissioners asked staff to return with any material changes to cost or contract terms.