[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6541587,"mediaKeyId","3351792-de8890f4ad69c4bd34ac2a81df680420","parentId",3351792,"title","Committee discusses tying commissioner pay to county-executive salary; cost estimate short of immediate action","audioSeconds",559,"startMs",6713000,"endMs",7272000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3351792-de8890f4ad69c4bd34ac2a81df680420&start=6713&end=7272","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3351792-de8890f4ad69c4bd34ac2a81df680420/thumbnail_6713000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6541587/White-County/Tennessee/Committee-discusses-tying-commissioner-pay-to-county-executive-salary-cost-estimate-short-of-immediate-action","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6541587-91dee0b03c7d2692672cc98261bdbe60/orig.mp4?Expires=1770447995&Signature=YERRSOeuoMoV5YCpuzR5tVs5K7jqdWcl074t6lI22esiZxA2GmLnX0wk0yZj5TGJIsx~AJ-6QYFT2Co-Nv0vxmhvT2gq7KNzE6VE6F0TMRoo2j7wR9qQfiEG9fWiGWTYWgG50LACRQw3lEe6qYC~rTK48~Ghpx3xby8k-padvwWH77ofgBOwUHdewuTA7cppGZY~yhGsx4XA~uiJneqSTyP7h~dCUnFWthKlAG2Yd~uT~PNCOc4RuLA~aFZgW1GYo2oTQeukk3YolEhEtarTlK573ugyqKccMap4FopnGpiehAFieF2nmP8cPZ0Pe3XFzq3BXCasuiaXnPv7KASzAw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","White County","date","2025-05-17T00:00:00Z","article","Committee members raised commissioner compensation as a distinct conversation during the budget meeting, discussing two principal methods for increasing commissioner pay and asking staff to model costs for the full commission.

Two methods outlined: one straightforward approach would tie commissioners’ pay to the county executive’s salary via a simple divisor (county executive salary divided by 14 was the working example used). Staff estimated the approach would require roughly $76,772 in additional recurring annual funding across the board in the scenario modeled. An alternative idea floated was a committee-weighted pay model that assigns higher pay to commissioners who serve on heavier-duty committees, but members described that approach as more complex and better suited to a later, fuller discussion.

Timing and procedure: members reminded the group that any change in commissioner compensation enacted now would not affect the current election cycle’s pay immediately; implementation timing for changes would be subject to standard budget-cycle and statutory timing. Committee members asked staff to put modeled options into the resolution packet so the full commission could discuss and, if appropriate, vote at a later date. No formal action was taken at the special-call meeting.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","County Commission 2025-05-17","oneSentenceSummary","Committee members raised commissioner compensation as a distinct conversation during the budget meeting and asked staff to model two methods for raising pay so the full commission can review.","taxTitle","White County, Tennessee","taxId",73494,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6541592,"Committee reviews electronic meeting voting and vehicle-tracking systems; asks staff for bids and a pilot plan",2462,3613000,6075000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3351792-de8890f4ad69c4bd34ac2a81df680420&start=3613&end=6075","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3351792-de8890f4ad69c4bd34ac2a81df680420/thumbnail_3613000.jpg","/articles/6541592/White-County/Tennessee/Committee-reviews-electronic-meeting-voting-and-vehicle-tracking-systems-asks-staff-for-bids-and-a-pilot-plan","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6541592-4a688aa85342eb7ef0c2036ffc8bc811/orig.mp4?Expires=1770447995&Signature=TJo6nSltBRNWODrUGhlVeldH1A4rn8osr9wILDuvI2VpF-VrY94MP0pwp7qS5kyDcJ1-1Mk3HdcuZNRSBL6473mJcGMckxevhPH7hhvSjntvHa2JfiF3f-I3Y74P9g5iHMDPEiI4IYeS0diCH941UiYCaowm4YT2ByruMNa1AiemB8FsoVry9qsT5G7DeLwrRcfQj07-urZZqgF7IOlFI1Ffrt2Ax4ZQHNTRCRf8kCDDWHHuPLMav70lkMyRvWzzFpK2y08kcYT4mNUXJjhP3tPxJW07TlIxQPNUOM0roNs5rRZ0Yrvuyz-mhWhl9IvoJTZ87RDIOQjHdJlHGFuaGw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Committee members reviewed two technology items during the special-call budget meeting: an electronic commission voting system and a GPS/vehicle-tracking subscription for the county fleet.

Electronic voting system: staff presented three vendor tiers. The “essential” tier cited in the packet carries an approximate one-time setup in the low thousands (roughly $7,000) and an annual support fee (about $3,750); a higher “pro” tier was roughly $10,000 one time with about $5,250 annually. Committee members said the purchase would improve transparency and integrate with recently upgraded cameras; several members recommended buying the entry or mid-level option now and leaving the higher-tier integration for a later upgrade.

Vehicle tracking and telematics: staff reported that a neighboring municipality’s experience suggested fuel and maintenance savings sufficient to pay for the service. The city-supplied estimate in the packet showed an annual per-vehicle subscription of about $265; committee members multiplied that by an estimated fleet size (example given: ~200 vehicles) and arrived at a recurring cost in the neighborhood of $53,000 per year. The committee discussed piloting the service to confirm savings and whether to place the recurring cost on a half‑penny of the levy in the multi‑cent package discussed elsewhere in the meeting.

Funding and next steps: committee members suggested using part of the one-time county capital holdback to pay initial setup costs for the meeting-voting system and to pilot the vehicle-tracking system, and they asked staff to obtain formal vendor quotes and a written pilot plan. No contract award occurred at the meeting; the committee asked for bids and a recommended funding source in the resolution packet for the full commission.","The budget committee discussed one-time purchases for an electronic voting system and an annual subscription to a vehicle-tracking service. The group asked staff to return with formal bids; the committee suggested funding part of the initial cost from the capital allocation turned in the levy pennies.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6541597,"White County committee backs pay-scale increase approach; longevity and health insurance remain unresolved",2654,290000,2944000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3351792-de8890f4ad69c4bd34ac2a81df680420&start=290&end=2944","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3351792-de8890f4ad69c4bd34ac2a81df680420/thumbnail_290000.jpg","/articles/6541597/White-County/Tennessee/White-County-committee-backs-pay-scale-increase-approach-longevity-and-health-insurance-remain-unresolved","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6541597-ad5c84b46e431588ab4f8453ac46fe93/orig.mp4?Expires=1770447995&Signature=PbkHpo~dt3KZ~raSYw4TDa6kzfpVLEOjyZ1B4m2TZOgHbMiHIenBhpVn7Ayfuda3ORrife6ztCO6unaZjL~JMRYS5eoXaAQB3eQ3P-JD38nIeFfMtKCegUrD0RH6oY7-5sJWKqqEqv4Zg7CuSA1IhVZSS8oLhrOqhIvXN4adA-Iz-coO1nLxO9KGbjaqYYn~gY5TXbaoFdS7K2eSItx-Z0-KEeJ2GvebxAXHenywPVIZjmIeGEZ3pO8ozv1NZk360Z1~GTQTN2ilH18eRfuEIQsQ~J~hHMJCvu3zUWunvc1VW05QHb3z1dIN0LBdkhbdCeKSg-PlDR457fErdtGbPg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The White County Budget Committee spent substantial time on employee compensation and benefits during its special-call meeting, reviewing a pay-scale proposal staff labeled the “original” pay schedule and several alternatives that trade pay increases for head-count reductions.

Staff said the pay proposal in the packet averages about a 15% increase across positions and includes an additional $1/hour increase layered on top of that scale in the staff’s “original” scenario. That package — combined with other budget lines — is the basis for the levy adjustments under discussion.

Positions and pay-grade alignment: staff described roughly ten requested positions that could be deferred under some scenarios (five EMS positions, four for the sheriff’s department and one for county buildings). Committee members also discussed internal grade alignment: patrol detectives were moved by staff into the same grade as patrol sergeants in the current scale and several members asked staff to raise detective pay to a higher subgrade so detectives would be paid above sergeants.

Longevity pay and IRS treatment: staff explained longevity as a one-time supplemental payment added to a payroll check and subject to standard IRS withholding; it would be paid on a regular payroll check (staff offered December as an example) unless the board instructed a different method.

Health insurance: staff reported the county currently pays 92% of employee-only coverage on the plan tier the county uses as its baseline and pays about 65% on dependent tiers (employee + child, spouse or family). Meeting figures showed roughly 67% of eligible county employees currently use the county plan; staff provided counts during the meeting (for example, 106 employees on employee-only coverage and additional employees on dependent tiers, as stated during the session). The staff estimate for employee-only coverage at the county contribution level is roughly $50.16 per month.

Trade-offs discussed: some commissioners proposed using one penny from the capital or school allocation to partially fund a higher county insurance contribution. Other members cautioned that redirecting a penny would reduce money available for capital projects or school allocations and that roughly one-third of eligible employees — as reported in the meeting — do not take county coverage; commissioners warned that shifting the cost could incent additional enrollments and change the fiscal math.

Outcome and next steps: the committee did not adopt a final benefits package. Members asked staff to include longevity, the pay-scale changes, and insurance-cost options in the resolution that will go to the full commission so the full body can weigh the trade-offs and adopt final funding.","The budget meeting discussed a county-wide pay-scale change averaging ~15% plus an additional $1/hour in many grades, longevity bonuses, detective/sergeant pay alignment and the county health-insurance match. Committee members discussed options to reallocate tax pennies to cover insurance, but no final decision was made.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6541602,"White County budget committee leans toward modified \"original\" plan, debates penny allocations and tax impacts",5651,181000,5832000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3351792-de8890f4ad69c4bd34ac2a81df680420&start=181&end=5832","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3351792-de8890f4ad69c4bd34ac2a81df680420/thumbnail_181000.jpg","/articles/6541602/White-County/Tennessee/White-County-budget-committee-leans-toward-modified-original-plan-debates-penny-allocations-and-tax-impacts","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6541602-9d7610d21f2f858c6c87d98b95625c4f/orig.mp4?Expires=1770447995&Signature=SsjJQhw1ybUIoVqJ5VKr3yT1V~QLT1BiZPZl5iP~ZXTPH11yzegW7icUSqycj2z6p8DJS70l5lb961c5oyY7h2Q8EC87~3HQiJrvtLU1K-bzhAW4hFW~aGBbgODE9VAjb0tA7AmDpTXeaJ~jEdj2m9zX1-lOiO-NKU28URNNRurdKQoVCzM~Rls2Q0WlXUGNSuCUpu8-Geowh2QCjPzk-Nohk7ZEnmWim54V~2ikHqHAJQfsHmfs3wGhQWMfqvvw7WaUGgUZ5QO-MBqj2DOszmqg4XypnQ56mzKnhpjZ6mSrEkNUkuq69rUsX6wrW~j5EmwRUtyydVCfVeNGgSN1Yg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The White County Budget Committee met in a special-call session to review multiple budget scenarios and discuss how pennies in the property tax levy would be distributed among county general, school, highway and debt-service funds. Committee members said they were inclined to advance a modified version of the “original” scenario and asked staff to convert the proposal into a formal resolution for the full commission to review Monday.

Committee staff presented five scenarios labeled “original,” A, B, C and D. The options vary primarily in two dimensions: changes to the county pay scale (a roughly $1/hour adjustment across many grades) and whether to fund 10 positions requested by departments (including EMS and sheriff’s patrol positions). The scenarios also assume different allocations of tax “pennies” across funds: county general, county capital, general purpose school, highway/public works and debt service.

Why it matters: the proposals affect both county operations (raises, new positions, one-time capital items) and homeowner tax bills. Presenters used a residential example to show how reappraisals and the chosen tax rate would change bills. Under the example given, a homeowner’s annual bill could rise by roughly $118 at one baseline estimate and by about $304 if a higher overall levy is used; committee members repeatedly noted that these are estimates and tied to yet-to-be-certified rates and appraisals.

Details of the scenarios: the staff summary showed county-general tax rates under each option with the “original” scenario showing county general at about $1.23. Option A reduced the pay scale across many positions and removed funding for roughly 10 requested positions (5 EMS, 4 sheriff, 1 county buildings); option B restored the per-hour dollar increase but kept the 10 positions unfunded; option C kept the positions and removed about $1/hour from pay; and option D converted requests into a 3% cost-of-living increase plus a longevity payment without the full pay-scale changes. Committee members emphasized that large reductions in pay or in positions would both materially cut the budget but have different operational impacts.

Penny allocations and capital: the original scenario also contemplated a four-cent allocation held in county general for capital or to be moved later to debt service if needed. Committee discussion focused on whether to move some of those cents immediately to debt service (to capture current interest earnings) and whether to shift pennies to highway/public works to cover projected raise costs in that department. One working compromise discussed was moving two cents from the school allocation into highway/public works and moving two cents from the reserved county capital into debt service while leaving the total county levy unchanged.

Next steps: committee members asked staff to draft a formal resolution reflecting the committee’s modified “original” package and present it to the full board in a Monday meeting. No formal vote to adopt a final budget occurred at the special-call session; committee members agreed to reconvene the material for full-court review and a possible vote later in the budget process.

Ending: staff will prepare a resolution that captures the committee’s preferred allocations and the spreadsheet adjustments discussed; the full White County Commission will see the proposal at the next scheduled meeting for final action or revision.","At a special call meeting, the White County Budget Committee reviewed four budget scenarios that change pay, headcount and tax allocations. Committee members favored a modified version of the \"original\" plan and directed staff to draft a resolution for the full commission to review Monday.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee discusses tying commissioner pay to county-executive salary; cost estimate short of immediate action

Committee reviews electronic meeting voting and vehicle-tracking systems; asks staff for bids and a pilot plan

White County committee backs pay-scale increase approach; longevity and health insurance remain unresolved

White County budget committee leans toward modified "original" plan, debates penny allocations and tax impacts