Deputy auditor says ClearGov eased budget review as Madison County Council weighs 3%–5% pay increases

Madison County Council members on Tuesday heard staff outline tighter property-tax projections and a plan to use ClearGov budgeting software to speed department reviews as they weigh 3%–5% pay increases for county employees.

Sam Lawrence, deputy auditor, opened a brief demonstration of ClearGov and said the software’s rollout ‘‘exceeded all of my own expectations’’ and lets reviewers compare adopted, amended and requested budget lines in real time. ‘‘Once you get the feel for it and you set it to how you wanna play in it, it’s pretty seamless,’’ Lawrence said, offering one-on-one help to council members.

The county’s finance presenter (staff member S7) told the council the county is projecting a decline in the county portion of property-tax billing compared with last year, and explained a spring/fall receipt pattern that typically splits about 57%/43% between installments. That presenter also flagged recent legislative changes to homestead and veteran deductions (referred to in the transcript as ‘‘Act 1’’) as a principal driver of reduced property-tax revenue for the county’s share.

The staff presentation included concrete figures: the presenter cited a fall cash balance projection of about $9,000,000 and a rainy-day balance previously reported at $17,700,000. The presenter said supplemental local income tax (LIT) receipts provided a one-time boost—rising from roughly $2,000,000 last year to about $2,200,000 this year—which helped close prior cash-flow gaps.

Against that revenue backdrop, councilors discussed whether to model a 3% or 5% salary increase for county employees. The presenter said a 3% across-the-board increase would leave the county roughly $1,000,000 short under the neutral-budget scenario presented; a 5% option would increase that shortfall further but could be trimmed by department-level cuts. The chair recommended that department heads submit budgets and suggested July 1 as a target for initial ClearGov submissions so the council can evaluate department-specific tradeoffs.

Council members asked staff to prepare comparative scenarios showing what 3% and 5% would look like on each department’s salary lines and how much discretionary room department heads would have to allocate larger increases to selected employees. The presenter confirmed ClearGov can show those changes on a departmental basis and that comment fields record requested new lines or salary positions for audit review.

The council did not take a final vote on raises. Members instructed departments to return budget rounds by July 1 and signaled a goal of reaching more finalized decisions by August, with follow-up budget work sessions planned. The meeting closed with instructions that staff will email department heads and offer training for council members who want personal walkthroughs of ClearGov.

The presentation and discussion were procedural and informational; no final compensation action was adopted at the meeting.