Citizen Portal
Sign In

Council committee forwards multiple sheriff’s office transfers to cover jail overtime and retroactive salary changes

St. Joseph County Council (committee session) · November 19, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
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 committee advanced several sheriff’s office transfer and salary-ordinance items to the full council to cover overtime, adjustments from part-time to full-time special deputies (some made retroactive), and other staffing-related shortfalls; members pressed for clarity on who authorized benefit changes and requested tighter oversight.

Troy Warner, filling in for Major Newnan, presented several appropriations and transfers for the county jail to cover overtime and to correct salary-ordinance line items. Requests included a new appropriation (~$320,000) for overtime and multiple transfers (totaling more than $1 million across items discussed) to rebalance line items after personnel changes. Warner said the jail has made progress reducing overtime but remains roughly 12 corrections officers short. He noted recent reimbursements from the Department of Corrections and outside partners but said some funds still require appropriation.

A major point of debate concerned a retroactive correction after some special (part-time) deputies were offered full-time positions with health benefits earlier in the year, creating unbudgeted benefit costs. Council members questioned who authorized those changes and why they were not presented earlier. Staff explained that federal/HR rules make employees who work 30+ hours eligible for benefits and that scheduling/management contributed to the issue; an email trail and attached documentation were referenced in the request.

Council ultimately moved the sheriff's transfer and salary-ordinance items forward to the full council—some with favorable recommendation and some without recommendation—so the full council can reconcile budget impacts and review supporting documentation. Members asked for further follow-up and for legal and HR staff to clarify approvals and timelines.