Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Roads And Bridges Staffing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners approve two temporary road crew positions, agree to contract work to catch up road maintenance in Precinct 2
Summary
McLennan County Commissioners Court approved two temporary Road & Bridge positions for Precinct 2 and discussed hiring private contractors to address a backlog of maintenance; the court asked staff to track results and review staffing at the next budget cycle.
McLennan County Commissioners Court approved a request to assign two Road & Bridge positions to Precinct 2 on a temporary basis to address deferred maintenance and an operational backlog.
Court members said the positions—paid at the standard budgeted salary of $56,518—would be used for an estimated three to four years while the precinct catches up on road repairs and fleet work. Precinct 2 leaders told the court the precinct has already road-milled roughly six miles this winter and expects two new dump trucks to arrive at the end of March.
The county judge opened discussion by noting the precinct’s backlog and moved to approve the request. Dustin, a county staff member who fields recruitment questions, said vacancies had been posted in the past and applications sometimes “would sit” without department interest in filling them. Anna, county staff working on budgets, confirmed the two positions were included in the FY24 budget as vacant positions and that the budgeted salary line remains available.
Precinct 2 leadership described the operational pressure from deferred maintenance and noted potential litigation risks from poor road conditions. “We’re trailing behind, in Precinct 2,” the precinct representative said. He added that new equipment will increase capacity but that the precinct is “just a little shorthanded.” The representative also said the additional staff would help while long-term attrition and rebalancing occur.
Court members discussed two approaches: temporarily adding employees to Precinct 2 and using third‑party contractors for targeted projects. One commissioner urged the court to consider contracting, saying it “would probably get more done” in the near term; the precinct representative agreed the court should use both temporary hires and outside contractors “at least for the next 3 to 4 years to catch up.” County staff told the court staffing ratios are calculated using miles of roadway per employee; adding two positions in Precinct 2 would change the precinct’s miles-per-position ratio to about 12 miles per employee, compared with the court’s target of roughly 15 miles per employee.
The court passed the motion to approve the two positions and directed staff to earmark and review the positions’ effectiveness during the next budget discussion. The court also emphasized continuing to use outside contractors where appropriate and requested a follow-up at budget to determine whether the temporary positions should be retained, reallocated or removed once attrition and project catch-up are achieved.
The motion passed with the court voting in favor; no roll-call tally naming individual votes was recorded in the transcript.
