Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the County Payroll topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Union County commissioners adopt 2025 salary ordinance after public criticism

2249056 · February 7, 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 Union County Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to adopt Ordinance No. 854-2025, which sets 2025 salaries for county elected officials and department heads. Public commenters sharply criticized the raises and raised related concerns about county projects and contracting.

The Union County Board of County Commissioners on a date shown in the meeting record voted 7-0 to adopt Ordinance No. 854-2025, which fixes the salaries of members of the Board of County Commissioners, the county manager, county counsel and department heads for 2025.

The ordinance, read aloud by the clerk at the meeting, was adopted following a public hearing and a roll-call vote in which Commissioners Granados, Kowalski, Mirabella, Palmeri Mudett, Williams, Vice Chairman Bodek and Chairwoman Leon all voted in the affirmative.

Public comment focused on county compensation and broader questions about operations and contracting. Bruce Patterson of Garwood criticized annual salary increases and detailed what he said were large raises and county capital-project problems, saying, “what the heck is this $672,000 being spent on,” in reference to a contract he identified in public comment. Meeting officials admonished Patterson for personal comments; the transcript records an official saying, “Be careful about personal comments. They are not allowed.”

Patterson named specific employees and alleged large salary changes and overlapping roles; those assertions were presented as his remarks. The transcript also records board members and attendees defending the county’s hiring and promotion decisions and objecting to personal attacks made during public comment.

The ordinance itself, as read by the clerk, affirmed salary schedules for 2025 but the text of salary line items beyond what was read into the record was not printed into the public comments portion of the transcript. The meeting record shows the board also moved the ordinance to final reading earlier in the agenda and later completed adoption by roll call.

Officials present noted the adoption was routine in form: the clerk opened and closed the public hearing, a motion to adopt was made and the clerk called the roll. The transcript does not record a detailed debate among commissioners about individual salary line items during the adopted vote.

Looking ahead, the board took additional administrative actions later in the same meeting, including the first reading of a separate ordinance amending the county administrative code (Ordinance No. 855-2025) and a group of resolutions adopted by roll call.

Votes at a glance: Ordinance No. 854-2025 — Adopted, roll-call vote 7-0 (Commissioners Granados, Kowalski, Mirabella, Palmeri Mudett, Williams, Vice Chairman Bodek, Chairwoman Leon — aye). Motion mover/second: not specified in the public hearing transcript.

The meeting record does not specify further implementation steps or effective dates for the salary changes in the ordinance text read on the floor.