Brown County has less than $200,000 remaining of CARES Act funding after the county council approved moving more than $37,000 in February to cover IT and overtime costs due to the pandemic.

Another request, to use $45,000 for updating job descriptions, was postponed until the council’s March meeting.

The county received $494,248 in payroll relief funding through the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act.

The county requested a lump sum for public health and safety payroll, and then the money was moved to the general fund so the council can dole it out to cover COVID expenses. The procedure for doing that was approved in December.

As of Feb. 16, the council had approved moving $326,744.39 of the CARES Act funding to various accounts. That included $239,000 to the Brown County Music Center after the county used the building to hold jury trials and other functions, like county board meetings.

The county now has $167,503.61 of CARES Act funding remaining to cover costs related to COVID-19.

County Human Resources Coordinator Melissa Stinson presented the latest appropriations to the council on Feb. 16.

Of the $37,373.33 the council approved at the February meeting, $179.89 was for five additional meeting rooms on the county’s Zoom account.

The council also approved moving $7,193.44 to the IT services obligation line for DocuSign. The money will cover 2,000 secure virtual envelopes that can be sent around to board members who need to sign documents electronically due to COVID-19 restrictions.

“In order for us to get the best deal, we have to shoot for the highest amount we think we’re going to get. The price will never go down. We went with 2,000 as opposed to 1,000 because 1,000 will be closer to $4 per packet,” county commissioner Diana Biddle explained to the council.

Council member Darren Byrd abstained from voting on the DocuSign funds because he did not have enough information to make a decision.

To cover payroll costs related to COVID-19, it was requested that $30,000 be moved into the internship/clerical line in the commissioners’ general fund budget to cover additional help for the commissioners office and COVID-19-related overtime for other county employees.

“Last year, for two people, we spent $23,000. Those two people are still hot at working for COVID reasons. We just kind of rounded it up to $30,000,” Stinson said. Overtime related to COVID-19 for any county employee will come from that payroll line.

Job description study

There was also a request to move $45,000 of CARES Act funding into the commissioners’ budget so they could engage with Waggoner, Irwin, Scheele & Associates for a job description study.

“The reason for that request is because we have people currently who have been hired due to COVID reasons who have no job descriptions,” Stinson said.

Also, “we don’t have remote-working from home and Zoom working. None of that is on any of our job descriptions,” Stinson said.

“Some of them are so old, they don’t even have pay grades on them. They just have dollar amounts on them. We need to bring those up to date.”

“That doesn’t sound like very much (for $45,000), but there is a lot of job descriptions out there,” she said.

Biddle added that the firm may also come back with a recommendation for the county do a salary study. “It will come back with that information where we’re paying someone not enough or too much. We’ve been through that before,” she said.

Stinson said Waggoner, Irwin, Scheele & Associates may advise the county based on how counties of similar size pay their employees.

“The job description comes back to you completed, you guys add the pay grade to it and vote it in, then it is added to it and put in (Auditor) Julia (Reeves’) office for record keeping,” Stinson said.

Stinson has made a similar pitch before. A year ago, in February 2020, she asked the commissioners for permission to go before the council to ask for a job description study done by Waggoner, Irwin, Scheele & Associates. At that time, the cost was $39,000 for the job description and an employee compensation study. The goal was to have the study completed in time for the council to use it when planning for the 2022 budget.

Then, COVID-19 pandemic hit in March, so that request was never made to the council.

A committee of council members completed a salary study in 2018 that graduate students had started in 2017, but is not accurate and not useful, Stinson said in January 2020. The study did not address the job descriptions in place currently, and some are outdated, Biddle said at the time. At the Feb. 16 meeting, Biddle said the outdated job descriptions still exist, including ones that list duties as typing letters on a typewriter or using a counting machine.

“None of these job descriptions take into account the electronic uses. None of them take into account working at home and if their job description would allow them to work from home,” Biddle said.

Some job descriptions also do not reflect physical labor requirements for positions like drivers with the Brown County Highway Department.

In early 2020, Stinson said the study would also look at workloads in each office.

The county has 169 employees. The study would be done on all job descriptions for those employees.

Council questions

Some council members questioned the job description study proposal since they had not seen documentation for it yet.

Council President Dave Redding did the math during the Feb. 16 meeting using $15 as the minimum wage and estimated the cost of the study means the firm would spend 17 hours per job description.

“I guess I would be more comfortable if we could spend a little bit more time on this plan around modification of job descriptions. Wasn’t I pushing on that a couple of years ago when you guys did your employee handbook update? We were wanting to add a paragraph to all of the job descriptions and I was told no,” Redding said.

Before the budget hearings in 2019, Redding wanted to update job descriptions to refer to the county’s employee policy handbook. At that time, the council required each department to make sure job descriptions were in place for each employee and that each employee received an annual review or at least had a discussion with their manager to see where they stood.

“I need to get my head around this a little bit more. That’s just me. I am one of seven votes tonight,” Redding said.

Stinson said the reason why they couldn’t modify the job descriptions is because they all have to be redone first to make sure they are up to standards, like the Fair Labor Standards Act. “We can’t just add paragraphs,” she said.

Council Vice President Dave Critser thinks the county will have to pay $45,000 for the study instead of doing it on their own. “A long time ago we let them send their own job descriptions in and it was a freaking disaster. It was a disaster. It’s the price of being in government,” he said.

Biddle said that if the study started the next day it would not be done in time for the 2022 budget hearings this summer, but the job descriptions still need to be updated if salaries are going to be changed for different groups in the future. At the January meeting, a discussion took place about paying Brown County Sheriff’s Department officers more as a way to retain deputies, as several end up going to surrounding counties that pay more.

Council member Judith Swift-Powdrill agreed that the county’s job descriptions are old and do need to be looked at.

Council member Art Knight questioned adding work-from-home or Zoom meeting requirements in the descriptions since they came about because of the COVID-19 pandemic. “We’re not always going to be in this situation that we’re in,” he said.

Biddle said based on legislation pending the state legislature this year “electronic meetings are basically here to stay.”

“When we get to where we can start meeting again, it will be an option, but if people can do the meeting electronically then they will,” she said.

Byrd said he had a problem with approving the $45,000 study because he had not seen the paperwork on it justifying the cost. “Basically I’m being told we need a new car, here’s the contract, sign it. It doesn’t matter what’s in it. We’ve already read it. Trust us. Sign here,” he said.

Biddle said a meeting could be set up with Waggoner, Irwin, Scheele & Associates for council members who have questions.

Critser motioned to approve the $45,000 appropriation, but received no second vote to move the motion forward for a vote.

Council member Scott Rudd proposed postponing the vote until the council receives more documentation.

“One of my fears is we put $45,000 in these job descriptions then six months later we’re having to turn around and do something else. If we’re going to do this, let’s do it right,” Redding said.

“The council owns these, so we’re accountable for any money that is spent and any changes made.”

Stinson said she would organize a Zoom meeting to receive more information.