Beulah Chamber urges Mercer County help to keep motor vehicle office open as staff resignations threaten contract

Representatives of the Beulah Chamber of Commerce told Mercer County commissioners their local motor vehicle office faces imminent loss of its state contract unless two employees begin state-required training on Monday. The Chamber said volunteer board members have carried management responsibilities and that branch fees no longer cover wages or benefits needed to recruit and retain staff.

Erin Laviger, Beulah Chamber board president, and Dionne Gerke, a long-time Chamber volunteer who led the hiring committee, briefed commissioners on a month‑long hiring effort. Laviger said the branch serves the full county and nearby communities and that daily transactions average 20 to 30 visits, rising at renewal season. She described a hiring pipeline of applicants: about 30 resumes, roughly 10 interviews and four offers extended; the Chamber said one candidate had accepted and was scheduled to start, and a second candidate remained undecided as of the meeting.

The central short-term problem, the Chamber said, is state Motor Vehicle Department policy: the state requires two staff to attend three weeks of training in Bismarck and to demonstrate a period of on‑the‑job accuracy before renewing or continuing a county contract. Chamber leaders said two promising candidates turned down earlier offers because the position paid about $20 per hour, without benefits and without the certainty of future hours. The Chamber asked the commission to consider one-time financial support to cover the next month’s costs for two full-time hires and mileage for training (Chamber representatives estimated roughly $6,000 for the immediate need) and to explore longer-term options, including a county-supported staffing or enterprise model.

Commissioners called the request urgent but said they could not make a legally binding appropriation on the spot without consulting the county attorney and reviewing budget authority. Several commissioners queried whether Mercer County could accept the state contract directly (several counties run remote branches out of the auditor’s office), but staff said the state had told the Chamber the contract was not transferable; the county would have to meet state requirements if it sought to assume operations.

Commissioners discussed options including short-term stipend or grant routing through local economic development or MacEd (Mercer County Economic Development), conditional one-time county support with documentation of how funds would be spent, and asking the Chamber to pursue community donations or CVB/municipal contributions. Commissioners emphasized the need for a plan showing sustainability rather than repeated short-term requests. The commission asked staff and the Chamber to gather figures and legal options quickly; the commission’s state’s attorney said he would research the legality of a county appropriation to a nonprofit-managed branch and return with guidance.

No county funds were approved at the meeting. Commissioners said they would not vote today without attorney review; they encouraged the Chamber to resolve hires immediately and said they would explore potential avenues in the coming days. The Chamber representatives reiterated that the state’s timeline is firm and that, if two staff were not placed in training soon, the state could withdraw Mercer County’s motor vehicle contract.