Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
After heated debate on clerk pay, Chickasaw supervisors direct attorney to draft limit on deputy positions
Summary
Following an extended discussion about deputy pay and job descriptions, the board voted to ask the county attorney to draft a resolution that would set one authorized deputy per selected elected office effective July 1; supervisors tied the move to budget pressure and recent deputy raises.
The Chickasaw County Board of Supervisors voted to direct the county attorney to draft a resolution that would set the number of authorized deputies in certain elected offices to one, effective July 1. The vote followed an extended and sometimes contentious discussion about deputy pay percentages, job descriptions and budgeting.
Chair opened the discussion asking whether the supervisors wanted to reduce the number of deputies in elected offices and when changes would take effect. Several supervisors raised concerns that deputy status carries a statutory pay-attachment (a percentage of the elected official’s salary) and that recent raises for one office’s deputy had outpaced increases elsewhere.
"I never support the second deputy in any office. Never have. Never will," the Chair said in the discussion of whether the board should limit deputies.
The county attorney framed the board’s options: if supervisors were dissatisfied with an elected official’s deputy pay they could either strip deputy status (and thereby take pay-setting control) or adjust budgets to limit pay. "If you don't like what she did, that's what I'm hearing. You have 2 options. Either strip the deputies and you decide it, or you adjust your budget accordingly," the attorney said.
Board members debated practical consequences: moving a deputy to clerk status gives the board direct control of pay but may require taking duties away or otherwise reassigning work; leaving deputies in place can raise budget pressures and public criticism. Supervisors also discussed job-hour definitions (35 vs. 40 hours) and whether the code requires separate job descriptions or MOUs for duties currently handled by other offices.
Motion and next steps: Supervisor Scott moved and another member seconded a motion to direct the county attorney to draft a resolution setting one deputy per selected elected office (auditor, treasurer, recorder and sheriff were discussed). The motion passed; the clerk will present a draft resolution for future consideration and the board signaled a July 1 implementation date would be preferred to align with the fiscal year.
Context and fiscal detail: The debate referenced specific pay figures discussed on the record: one deputy’s current hourly wage was recited in the meeting transcript as $29.99 and an example adjusted rate of $31.19 was also discussed as part of budget planning for next fiscal year. Supervisors asked staff to map duties, clarify MOUs and prepare numbers for the public budget hearing prior to final action.
Next step: County attorney to prepare a draft resolution and return it for board review; supervisors requested the draft give clarity about which offices would be affected, any transition language, and the wage implications for staff who change status.
