Commissioners debate compensation plan and public-comment rules; no change to tabled pay plan

Dickinson County commissioners on Dec. 19 debated whether to remove a previously tabled employee compensation plan from the agenda and whether to allow public comment on that item; no final change to the tabled plan was adopted.

A commissioner asked that members of the public who attended because they expected the compensation plan to be discussed be given an opportunity to comment. A second commissioner asked whether changing the public-comment rules for a single meeting was appropriate. The meeting chair declined to take public comments on the compensation-plan item that day, saying the board would follow existing rules that allow comment on agenda items at the time they are on the agenda.

Commissioners discussed details of the pay plan and the broader context: some residents on Social Security are receiving a roughly 2.5% cost-of-living increase, and commissioners said employees expressed concern that a flat 2.5% pay increase under the plan could be disappointing given prior practice of 3%–5% raises in some years. One commissioner identified in the transcript as Greg said the county conducted a pay study and that the recommended plan included adjustments to address pay inequities across positions.

Commissioners debated options for addressing payroll timing if the pay plan remained unresolved. County staff (Doug) described an accounting option—using a budget extension carryover—to apply an interim percentage increase (for example, a 3% increase) for the first pay period(s) of the year while the commission continues to consider a formal pay plan. Staff identified April Larivarney (accounting) as a resource for confirming procedures. A county official stated that the 2025 budget as passed includes the pay plan at a percentage, but commissioners noted the practical need to provide guidance before the first January payroll if they wished to do so.

An attempt to amend a motion by removing language referencing an attorney-general investigation and placing the compensation plan on the Dec. 26 agenda was made; that amendment failed for lack of a second. The transcript records that the original attempt to take the item off the table also did not result in the item being removed from the table during the Dec. 19 meeting. Commissioners directed staff to research options; no formal change to the pay plan took effect at the meeting.

Ending

Because the compensation plan remained tabled, county staff did not implement employee raises tied to the plan for the first January payroll at the Dec. 19 meeting. Commissioners discussed follow-up options, including a possible budget-extension approach to provide an interim increase pending further commission action.