Commission, personnel committee disagree on VSO hire; chair and staff move to advertise assistant position

Commissioners spent substantial time clarifying a previously approved appropriation for the Veterans Service Office (VSO). Last month the commission approved funding of $53,095; this meeting revealed confusion about whether that funding was for a full‑time VSO or for an assistant. The finance director said the funding is in place, but the personnel and hiring process required clarification.

The personnel committee met and approved job descriptions. Committee members said they had approved descriptions for both a VSO and an assistant and recommended advertising an assistant job description that the VSO had prepared; personnel chair Haida said she would work with the county clerk to prepare an advertisement. The personnel chair and the clerk said they would advertise for 30 days and aim to return recommendations in February.

A speaker who identified as the VSO explained technical constraints: assistants typically start with lower federal clearance levels and a VSO holds higher clearances (the speaker said he/she carries a “level clearance 12” while an assistant would carry a level 7). The speaker said that accreditation and clearance requirements mean hiring someone with full VSO credentials may be difficult immediately, and argued an assistant would provide continuity if the VSO were ill or activated.

Commissioners asked for transparency on process and minutes; one commissioner read the minutes aloud and said they recorded approval of the full $53,095 amount. Personnel and budget committee representatives acknowledged the confusion and emphasized that the money is available and that posting the assistant position was the quickest path to get help into the office. The chair said the advertisement process would be started as soon as possible with an aim to fill the role following the 30‑day posting and a February follow‑up.