Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the County Policy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

McDowell County board approves cash‑rounding policy amid penny shortage; service‑recognition policy tabled

McDowell County Board of Commissioners · February 10, 2026
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 board approved a 'penny shortage' policy to round cash transactions to the nearest nickel for in‑person payments and tabled an employee service‑recognition policy after debate over retroactivity and administrative complexity.

At its Feb. 9 meeting, the board took action on two county policies presented for second reading.

On the 'penny shortage' policy, staff recommended a uniform practice to round cash transactions to the nearest nickel because pennies are no longer being minted in meaningful quantities. Commissioners asked how small differences would be handled; staff said the policy as presented would not credit the fractional cents back to individual bills and that, under the current presentation, the small amounts would be retained rather than returned to individual accounts.

One staff member described the rounded cents as effectively disappearing under the proposed implementation: "As it's presented right now, that 2¢ would essentially disappear into the ether." The board discussed alternatives (customers paying by card or check to avoid rounding) but approved the penny‑shortage policy as presented.

On the employee service‑recognition policy—which would allow employees to use accumulated sick leave to reach milestone service years for recognition (for example, service pins)—commissioners debated whether the change should apply retroactively and raised concerns about administrative burden and the potential unknown number of retroactive claims. A motion to approve with a retroactive clause received no second; the board instead voted to table the item to a future meeting for further review.