Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Employee Compensation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Madison County board weighs cutting 3% COLA to 2% and creating merit pool to fund targeted raises
Summary
At a special meeting, Madison County supervisors discussed reducing a planned 3% cost‑of‑living adjustment to 2% and using the savings to fund a merit-based pool to be awarded after November evaluations, a structure staff said can be budget neutral.
Madison County’s Board of Supervisors spent the bulk of a special meeting reviewing a staff proposal to reduce a proposed 3% cost‑of‑living adjustment (COLA) to 2% and to establish a midyear, performance‑based merit pool for FY27.
The option presented by staff would free roughly $90,000 by dropping the universal COLA from 3% to 2%, then create a merit pool that would be awarded on Jan. 1 based on November performance evaluations. Miss Warren, who presented the plan, said the arithmetic can be budget neutral when the midyear merit pool is sized to available savings and noted the sheriff’s office had a separate $38,000 request already included in staff calculations.
Why it matters: staff told the board the structure preserves budget neutrality for FY27 while giving department heads discretion to reward high performers rather than distributing a single across‑the‑board increase. The approach is intended to balance employee retention and fairness with taxpayer concerns about overall costs.
Staff outlined timing and scope: the 2% COLA would be effective July 1 for all eligible county employees. Merit increases would be tied to standard performance evaluations completed in November and, if approved, paid Jan. 1 (six months of fiscal cost is the initial budgeted amount). The sheriff’s office — a constitutional office with a separate merit system — would receive its merit pool beginning July 1 under the current calculations.
Staff and board members ran a micro example to show household impacts: using an illustrative employee earning $60,000 and enrolled in a family plan that experienced a 16.9% premium increase, staff calculated the county’s additional monthly cost for that employee’s insurance would be about $46. Board members used that and other figures to discuss optics and fairness for employees who rely on take‑home pay.
Several supervisors favored the pool approach and emphasized safeguards. Board members and staff discussed limiting abuses of the evaluation system and asked that Human Resources review and validate evaluations so merit awards reflect documented performance rather than inflated ratings.
No final formal vote was recorded on a specific percentage cap for the merit pool during the special meeting. The board asked staff to finalize the pool calculations and confirm the approach can be made budget neutral, and staff committed to returning with the precise, budget‑neutral numbers for inclusion in the FY27 budget.
What’s next: staff will recalculate the exact pool and distribution, ensure budget neutrality, and return to the board with final figures and recommended ordinance/budget language for formal action.
