Detention center leadership updated commissioners on staffing, pay proposals and contract boarding negotiations during the meeting.

A presenter from the detention center said the facility currently lists roughly 340 employees and is supplementing medical staff through contracts. The presenter described heavy turnover—losing about 10–12 officers per month—while academy graduations yield about 12–14 new officers at a time; the center expects a January academy and hopes to enroll 25 recruits, expecting to graduate roughly 15. To address retention and staffing, the presenter requested an across‑the‑board pay increase that would raise starting pay for detention officers to about $50,000 and result in an estimated total cost near $3.4 million annually. As an alternative focused on detention officers only, staff proposed a narrower increase costing about $1.7 million per year.

Stevie Hampton, who identified herself as Stevie Hampton and said she has recently taken a role at OCDC, summarized October expenses and revenue variances: total expenses were below budget overall, salary costs were under budget but outsourcing and professional services ran higher; commissary revenue was above budget due in part to a partial guaranteed commission, and city contract‑boarding revenue was higher than budgeted but contract negotiations were ongoing after an offer was rejected.

On contract boarding, commissioners and staff said the city’s final offer was $1.66 per detainee for the first day, while the county’s MGT audit estimated the first‑day cost at $1.92. Presenters said the city was holding firm on their number and that further outreach would be needed to resolve where those inmates would be housed if a contract is not reached.

Officials also described operational adjustments such as using proceeds from the sale of an old transportation bus and an insurance settlement to acquire replacement vehicles, and continuing outreach to market the county pharmacy that has seen prescription volumes increase from 940 in February to 1,531 in October. No formal board vote on the detention pay plan occurred during the meeting; the staff-level request was presented for future budgeting consideration.