County Council approves funding for county administrator position

The Dubois County Council approved funding a new county administrator position during their regular meeting on Monday, despite concerns about adding another layer of bureaucracy during financially uncertain times.

The position, which has been discussed by county commissioners for several years, could cost over $100,000 annually, including salary and benefits. The exact salary amount was not specified in the meeting, though commissioners indicated it would be funded through the general fund.

“In order for the county to move forward, keeping up with the ever changing requirements necessary to operate government in a more efficient, effective and safe manner, we need a self-motivated person with vision as our partner in county government,” said council president Mike Kluesner, explaining the position’s purpose.

The county administrator would handle multiple responsibilities, including county development and planning, care and custody of all county property, developing a unified fleet management system, and assisting department heads with management. Additional duties include implementing the county’s comprehensive plan, overseeing insurance coverage, serving as the county’s safety coordinator, responding to inquiries and complaints, researching grants, and coordinating capital improvement projects.

Councilwoman Deena Lewis conducted research by contacting 15 counties, with 10 responding about their experiences with similar positions. The counties ranged in population from 31,000 in Wabash County to 207,000 in Elkhart County. Dubois County’s population is approximately 43,000 to 44,000.

“One of them was very satisfied with what the position brought to the county,” Lewis reported. “They cited better working relations and efficiencies within departments.”

Lewis also noted that Dearborn County, with 5,000 more residents than Dubois County, and Montgomery County, with 38,000 residents, both employ county administrators and pay more than what Dubois County proposes to start with.

“They were extremely happy with their individual,” Lewis said about Dearborn County’s experience.

Councilman Ryan Craig stated the position would be a valuable addition to the county’s management and planning.

However, the proposal faced significant opposition from some council members who questioned the fiscal responsibility of adding another position during budget constraints.

“I think it’s going to cost way too much,” said Councilman Doug Uebelhor. “I mean, we were squabbling over a percent increase for the employees this last budget time.”

Uebelhor stated that, by his estimates, the pay for the position would be enough to fund nearly a one percent pay increase for the current county employees.

He added that the position would likely come with additional costs beyond salary, including potential needs for a phone, vehicle, computer, office space, and possibly an assistant.

Uebelhor also questioned whether the proposed duties are already being handled by existing staff.

“All the job requirements, responsibilities seem to be something that someone’s already supposed to be doing,” he said. “And if that’s not being done, then I think we have to ask ourselves why aren’t the employees that are supposed to be doing it not doing it?”

Councilwoman Meredith Voegerl stated she was looking at the position as an investment.

“I think there is going to be a lot of efficiencies that we can gain,” she said.

Councilman Alex Hohl questioned whether the position would create another layer of bureaucracy. He also felt it would be hypocritical to hire someone as the chief administrative officer of the county while denying or reducing county pay raises.

Uebelhor agreed that with the budget uncertainties and the redundancy he saw in the position, it wasn’t necessary at this time.

Kluesner emphasized the importance of oversight, particularly regarding insurance and safety issues that directly impact the county’s financial exposure.

The administrator would also serve as a central point of contact for county information and continuity of planning.

“It would be good to have one person to contact that would probably have all the information,” said councilwoman Sonya Haas, who supported the position.

Hohl and Uebelhor voted against the funding, which passed 5-2. The decision provides funding for salary and benefits, leaving additional expenses, such as office equipment, computers, and travel costs, for future appropriations once the position is filled. The position would be appointed by county commissioners and work at their pleasure, meaning it could be eliminated if not funded in future budgets or if performance is unsatisfactory.

Now that funding is approved, commissioners will need to create a job posting, conduct interviews, and schedule appointments. The position would be filled through the standard county hiring process, with the final selection made by the Board of Commissioners.