Humboldt County supervisors on [date not specified] discussed whether to pay overtime to jailers, deputies and other safety‑sensitive employees who worked during a recent courthouse closure and directed staff to update the county employee handbook to clarify compensation rules.

The discussion began when Dean Krueger raised concerns about his staff having to work during the closure and whether they should be paid overtime. “I only have 4 people or 5 people times 9 hours — 45, 50 hours, probably overtime,” Krueger said. Board members and department heads exchanged views about union contract language, budgeting limits and public‑safety needs.

The debate focused on two tensions: the public‑safety expectation that certain positions must remain staffed during severe weather, and the county’s budget and union contract constraints that limit ad‑hoc overtime pay. Supervisors noted the practical problem that closing the courthouse to keep the public off the roads can leave front‑line staff working in hazardous conditions. At the same time, several supervisors warned against creating an unpredictable budgetary precedent for paying overtime after closures.

Board members said the sheriff’s office and dispatch had received pay for a similar closure last February, but staff said that payment flowed through public safety procedures and was not explicitly guaranteed in the union contract. County staff and supervisors identified Mike Galloway and other public‑safety officials as points of contact to determine whether prior payments complied with contract language and budget authority.

Rather than adopt a one‑time payment, the board directed staff to: revise the county employee handbook to spell out compensation and time‑off rules for courthouse closures and other emergency situations; include department heads and relevant public‑safety staff in the revision process; and return with recommended policy language that addresses safety‑sensitive positions, budgeting implications and any required approvals. A supervisor said the handbook rewrite will be considered in upcoming personnel‑policy updates.

The board’s action was procedural: supervisors did not take an immediate vote to grant retroactive overtime pay for the recent closure. Instead, they asked staff to craft clearer written policy and to report back so future incidents are handled consistently.

County officials said they will consider whether to pursue changes in the next union contract or to identify a standing procedure for authorizing overtime that preserves budget controls and recognizes safety‑sensitive duties.