Bourbon County commissioners spar over proposed sick- and vacation-leave overhaul; motion to restore 2025 balances introduced

A long-running debate over Bourbon County’s proposed vacation and sick-leave policy dominated the commissioners’ meeting on April 26, as board members and staff weighed whether to restore employees’ time to their December 31, 2025, balances or adopt new front-loaded accrual rules.

Commissioner David Birbauer, who presented the draft resolution, said the goal is to correct discrepancies discovered during a recent personnel records audit and to ‘‘restore employees’ years of service for vacation and sick leave to their appropriate pre-2026 levels,’’ while simplifying the county’s leave structure to improve recruitment and retention. Birbauer read sections of the resolution that would front-load annual vacation based on years of service, set maximum carryover caps, and specify payout rules at separation and retirement.

The nut of the disagreement centered on how to treat employees who already have large balances and on the mechanics of switching from the county’s prior system. Commissioner Greg Motley moved ‘‘to carry over the leave balances as of 12/31/25 and follow Resolution 51-25,’’ a motion he described as a pragmatic ‘‘band-aid’’ to restore employees to the status they expected prior to the audit. Motley’s motion was seconded and opened for discussion; no final vote on the motion was recorded before further debate resumed.

Chairman Samuel Tran said the proposed resolution, while likely well-intentioned, contained internal contradictions that could produce inconsistent results and administrative complexity. Tran delivered an extended critique, saying sections that define years of service, grandfathering and payout rules can be read to contradict one another and could lead to unequal treatment. He warned, ‘‘You cannot define service one way and then reconstruct it another,’’ and said the proposed approach risks ‘‘manufactured longevity dates’’ and a case-by-case system that would be difficult to administer fairly.

Other commissioners and staff highlighted the practical payroll impact. Commissioner Milburn warned that any immediate payout for employees above the proposed caps could create significant one-time expenses for departmental budgets; he estimated a single high-balance employee could trigger roughly $25,000 in payouts if paid at historical rates. County staff and department representatives requested more time to reconcile records, calculate what has already been used by employees since Dec. 31, 2025, and assess which accounts would fund any payouts.

The clerk and others emphasized operational constraints: switching between an accrual method tied to each employee’s hire date and a front-loaded annual award would require individualized calculations and additional payroll work. Birbauer said the front-loading approach was intended to reduce complexity and to avoid the errors that prompted the audit. ‘‘This is a work in progress,’’ he told the board, and said he proposed the resolution as a corrective measure not intended to penalize long-serving employees.

Several commissioners called for department heads and affected employees to be consulted before the board adopts final language. The meeting record shows the motion to carry over 12/31/25 balances was placed and discussed but not finally resolved in the transcript provided; commissioners agreed to continue working on the resolution with the possibility of further revisions.

Next steps: commissioners agreed to continue discussion, involve department heads to verify budget impacts and usage since Dec. 31, 2025, and to refine the draft so it can be applied consistently if adopted.

Ending: The resolution remained under consideration at the close of the transcript; no final recorded vote on the PTO resolution appears in the provided segment.