Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Elections topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Izard County tables ordinance on election-commissioner pay after debate on hours, cost and coordinator status

Izard County Quorum Court · July 1, 2024
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 quorum court introduced an ordinance (20247) to set compensation for county election commissioners and poll workers including meeting pay, training reimbursement and up to 40 hours at $15 per hour; justices debated potential fiscal impacts and whether the county could designate an in‑house election coordinator before voting to table the measure for amendment.

The Izard County quorum court introduced an ordinance (referenced in the transcript as 20247) to establish compensation rules for the Izard County Board of Election Commissioners and poll workers and then voted to table the ordinance for revision.

Key provisions in the draft discussed by court members included $125 per public meeting (up to 10 meetings per election cycle), $25 for each additional meeting, $300 for mandatory training, mileage reimbursement under county travel policy, and $15 per hour for up to 40 hours of work outside meetings per election cycle. The draft also cross-referenced existing county ordinances and state reimbursement rules.

Justices and county staff disputed how the 'up to 40 hours' provision would operate in practice and whether the county should preserve the option to designate an in-house election coordinator (a county employee). Several members said the change could meaningfully increase county costs if commissioners or poll workers logged the full authorized hours; one estimate in the discussion suggested several thousand dollars (roughly $7,000–$8,000) could be added to election costs under certain scenarios.

Members asked county staff and legal counsel to clarify whether the ordinance should explicitly preserve the county's option to appoint a county employee as election coordinator and whether an emergency clause was needed to make the ordinance effective before the 90-day pre-election window. The court moved to table the ordinance and agreed to add language about the in‑house coordinator option and to consider an emergency clause at the next meeting.

The motion to table passed by voice vote with all in favor; the transcript does not record a roll-call tally or a named mover for the tabling motion.