Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Crawford County supervisors debate payout of large compensatory-time balances
Summary
Supervisors reviewed a countywide comp-time inventory and debated whether to force payouts, allow department discretion, or phase payments over time; concerns included budget impact, staff coverage and inequities when pay rates rise between accrual and payout.
The Crawford County Board of Supervisors spent a lengthy portion of its May 26 meeting debating how to handle large accrued compensatory-time balances held by several departments.
Auditor/HR staff provided a comp-time report showing department-level totals and a preliminary cost estimate. Roger (department head) told the board the sheriff’s office numbers have already declined after recent scheduling changes, and he said he was confident the office “could manage” a plan to bring hours down within the year. Chelsea (staff member advising the board) urged a formal check-and-balance: "If an exception is going to be made, the BOS should make a a rule that says that it's run past the board before it is granted," she said, recommending that department heads coordinate exceptions with a board member and document them in the minutes.
Supervisors raised three main options: (1) pay down large accrued balances to the policy maximum (40 hours) immediately; (2) allow department heads discretion to manage balances down over a set period (with board oversight and periodic reporting); or (3) pay a phased amount (for example, half now and half later). Proponents of immediate payout warned that delaying payments can increase long-term cost because future raises raise the payout rate; others warned that an immediate lump-sum payout would strain department budgets and could create coverage gaps if employees take extended time off.
Roger and several department heads argued operational coverage must be considered, especially for public-safety functions where backfilling shifts would be costly or infeasible. Board member Kyle urged quarterly monitoring and a firm check-in, while another supervisor said he supported department-head discretion provided the board receives regular trend reports.
The board did not adopt a final policy at this meeting. Members asked staff to deliver a department-by-department breakdown of comp-time accrual dates and the dollar impact of several payout scenarios so the board can decide whether to require payouts by June 30 or adopt a phased approach. The board also signaled it will revisit the item at the June 23 meeting.
Ending: Supervisors agreed to collect more precise numbers and return the issue to the agenda with specific payout options and estimated budget impacts.
