Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Pay And Benefits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County employees urge board to equalize pay increases after supervisors approve different raises for some services
Summary
Multiple county employees and residents voiced frustration at the Board of Supervisors over differing raise levels—EMS employees were approved for 6% while many county staff were provisionally set at 4%—calling for equity and clearer communication before the board finalizes budgets.
Several county employees and residents used the public-comment period at the Feb. 27 Kossuth County Board of Supervisors meeting to press the board for parity in pay increases and clearer budgeting decisions after supervisors discussed differing raises for county services.
Lede: Multiple speakers asked why EMS employees were approved for a 6% raise while most county employees were discussed at 4%, and several urged the board to treat all county employees more equally or explain the distinctions.
The nut graf: Public commentators and some supervisors said the disparity in raise percentages had lowered morale in several county offices and asked the board either to equalize the increases or to provide stronger public explanation of the budget calculations and levy implications before finalizing decisions.
Public comments: Several speakers identified themselves and described long tenures and duties that extend beyond normal hours. A courthouse employee described frequent after-hours work assisting the public with driver's license issues, re-examinations and emergency calls; a county recorder said morale in her office had declined sharply over the past four years and asked the board to treat staff fairly. Other employees noted that 4% would not restore previous losses in compensation and asked the board to consider starting-point language that had appeared earlier in budget discussions.
One resident asked why certain functions (notably EMS and possibly sheriff's deputies) were being singled out for higher increases; supervisors and staff explained differences arise in part from separate levies, advisory boards, staffing certifications, 24/7 operational requirements, and advisory-board budget recommendations. Some members of the public pushed back, noting many county roles involve 24/7 response duties (maintenance, courthouse staffing and others) and urging equal treatment.
Board response and next steps: Supervisors acknowledged public concern and said budget workshops later in the day would continue discussion. The board did not adopt a final change to the compensation schedule at the Feb. 27 meeting; supervisors signaled a desire for further review and for communicating options to employees before final action. No formal vote on county-wide wage parity occurred during the meeting; the board reiterated that budget workshops were ongoing and that changes could be considered before final certification.
Ending: Members of the public and several supervisors asked for more education and outreach to employees about possible insurance and compensation models prior to final budget votes. The board left the matter open for further discussion in upcoming budget meetings.
