Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission votes to pursue supervisor for judicial commissioners, moves to closed session on hiring
Summary
After comparing neighboring counties’ structures, the Coffee County commissioners voted to pursue creating a supervisor position for judicial commissioners, asked HR to review job description and moved into closed session to complete interviews for a judicial‑commissioner opening.
Get email alerts on the Personnel topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners debated whether Coffee County needs a dedicated supervisor for the judicial‑commissioner office and voted to move the recommendation forward for further review.
Speaker 6 initially proposed asking the mayor to consider appointing a supervisor for the judicial‑commissioner office. "I'd like to make a motion for the mayor to look at, appointing someone as a supervisor in the judicial commissioner, office," Speaker 6 said. That motion was later retracted and reframed: Speaker 4 moved that the committee recommend creating a supervisor position and to investigate who should appoint that person.
Commissioners said HR is reviewing a proposed job description and noted pay and hiring would require action by budget and finance and, ultimately, approval by the full commission. Speaker 5 summarized research of surrounding counties (Bedford, Moore, Warren), reporting that several counties use a supervisor role under judges or a supervisor who handles training, scheduling and personnel issues. Speaker 5 also said Coffee County judicial commissioners currently are paid more than in surrounding counties.
The motion to pursue creating and filling a supervisor position was seconded, called for a vote and approved (ayes recorded). Commissioners agreed to determine whether the mayor, general sessions judges or another authority would appoint the supervisor and to bring the job description and pay considerations through HR and budget processes.
The commission also addressed a separate judicial‑commissioner hiring process: members said they interviewed candidates and that two finalists remained. To discuss personnel matters, Speaker 5 announced the meeting would go into closed session and the video recording would be stopped; commissioners planned to reconvene on the public record to make a hiring recommendation before adjourning.
What’s next: HR will continue reviewing the supervisor job description and the commission will route pay and posting decisions through budget and finance before any hire or appointment.

