Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS

Commissioners’ job cut questioned

County administrator helps with annual budget; position gone Feb. 14

January 31, 2014

A heated discussion about eliminating the county administrator position arose during Thursday’s Washington County Commissioners meeting. The commissioners eliminated the position at a meeting Ja....

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Feb-03-14 11:51 AM

@Lester. It came directly from one of the Commissioners. I heard him say it. So don't attack me for telling the truth.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-02-14 1:36 PM

Blitz,I went and actually caught one of our new comm before the election and introduced myself and asked a few questions.We are(in my opinion) lucky to have our 2 newest members.Enthusiastic and well informed was my take.I had met one previously and already felt comfortable with that choice.As a person,im sure Cora ia a good person as well but does not represent the sentiments of the majority of working folks around here.I dont want a permit to build on my own property,I maintain my septic systems and dont need an $88k tap for its removal and I dont want the epa poking their nose where it doesnt belong.We are not a big city that is gobbling up the burbs..lets stay that way

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-02-14 1:26 PM

The commissioners have full responsibility for the county budget. They are elected to assure each department gets what they need and to produce a balanced budget. We all pay their three salaries for this service. There is no need to pay a fourth. If they can't do the job, then we have the opportunity to replace them after each four year term. The county has done very well in years past without the administrator position and will do so in the future without it. Creating and funding an unnecessary position just to make the lives of the commissioners a little easier is fiscally irresponsible. Eliminating such a position IS fiscally responsible.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-02-14 1:33 AM

Furthermore, the smart thing to do would have been to keep paying one of the counties longest tenured employees, who has 30+ years of experience in the "fiscal" department, and who has proven to do his job correctly and more efficiently like he has been for 30+years, with or without Mrs.Marshall!!! Ok Here's the deal, you can not justify this decision by saying " it's fiscally responsible to eliminate this position and his salary" in one hand, and in the other hand have two of the three people, who made that "responsible" decision, who both just had campaigns (that you will have to check, but I'm willing to bet), paid way more than $53,000+ (Paul's salary) just so they could have that decision making power without working 30+ years for the county!?!?! My point is this article has no reasonable or truthful answer to the commissioners reasoning, rather it proves that some people should not be allowed to pay for power, especially when it's your money they ar

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-02-14 12:07 AM

To be extra blunt, REALLY? STOP!! It's politics, the career built around lies and said liars!!!! I mean I stand for our country, and am currently doing so in a foreign county with honor! But I'm sorry there is nothing honorable about this decision whatsoever!!!! First of all, shame on anybody that believes that this was a "difficult decision"! Please, the only difficult decision was how to make it seem like the right thing to do. And double shame on any right minded taxpayer who believes the garbage that it's the "fiscally responsible" decision for you the residents of Washington County!!!! Just please stop and think about it for a second and realize that it's actually FISCALLY IRRESPONSIBLE, and quite stupid to trust your hard earned tax dollars to be managed, budgeted and controlled by someone who has NO experience doing so! Ah what the heck, surely it can't be any harder than taking pictures or fixing computer!!!! Too blunt???

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Feb-01-14 9:11 AM

To be blunt, Raylan, you are a liar. That hasn't been said by any of them and was in no way a factor in making this very difficult decision. You may not like the decision, but it was in no way personally motivated. Unlike Mrs. Marshall, who seems to be having a terrible time coming to terms with the voters desire to be rid of her, the current commissioners are simply trying to be fiscally responsible and eliminate the waste of our finite resources.

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-31-14 10:30 PM

Seems to me we now have commissioners who actually GO TO WORK and get the job done. No need for an administrator. I don't see it as a step back in time...I see it as Cora being ticked off. Apparently they are "undoing" her created messes.

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-31-14 1:07 PM

Cora robbed Peter to pay Paul...literally! We all played the part of Peter.

7 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-31-14 11:00 AM

Prior to Cora and company, Grimes, Steinel and Cook (I believe) considered a contract with former commissioner Sandy Matthews to assit them with the budget - because of her expertise. The democrats went balistic, stating that the commissioners were elected to develop and administer the budget and the contract would have been an unnecessary cost to the county. I agreed with them. Just a few years later Cora creates a brand new position for the exact same reason-she had no clue where to start. The county administrator position has been an unnecessary cost to the county year after year after year. Cora is upset now because she wants back in the courthouse, but can't do the job, and she knows it. Aside from that, I personally believe that Paul's personal feelings too often guides his recommendations to the commissioners. He's a retire/rehire as it is. I applaud his desire to continue working, but not anywhere within the county. Step aside and let new blood revitalize the county.

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-31-14 10:28 AM

We elected three Commissioners to run the county affairs; why would we need an administrator to tell them what to do.

Cuts need to be made to balance the budget and with the Commissioners making a cut, the other departments should follow along..

10 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-31-14 8:45 AM

The County didn't have the administrator position until four years ago and did just fine. That was another job created that wasn't needed. Don't even get me started on Cora's pet project (internet service for the WHOLE county). The majority of the ones that could use it, still don't have it and probably never will. The majority of those who do have it, already had DSL or cable available to them.

13 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-31-14 8:38 AM

I've heard one of the commissioners comment several times that they didn't like Paul and would try to find a way to get rid of him. Guess that's still the game plan.

2 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-31-14 8:38 AM

I've heard one of the commissioners comment several times that they didn't like Paul and would try to find a way to get rid of him. Guess that's still the game plan.

3 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-31-14 7:07 AM

The County Engineer's office is funded from license plate fees and the gasoline tax, not property taxes and fees. Check the ORC.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-31-14 5:18 AM

And then we almost had to pay a fee and jump thru hoops to get permission to build on our own property just so the fee's could generate revenue for the engineer's office to get it self funded and off county budget..thank goodness that a group[ of local township trustee's staved that off.

7 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-31-14 5:09 AM

Since we "renewed" our commissioners office with new is what we DONT have anymore. $7,000 spent hiring an out of town service to fly over residents homes and take pictures of a common discharge line and then turn them in to the EPA.Our current members also didnt "create an IT dept" that "I will gladly defend" that should have been farmed out by competitive bid from contractors.Our current comm also handled the lease on the mineral rights with a local atty that was fiscally responsible and prudent and at a reduced rate,but we still had to grandstand and make false,misleading statements to the press.

9 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-31-14 4:53 AM

Our current commissioners are doing what they were elected to do.We now have a member that will address the EPA,not call them in on our own citizens,The county IT dept has defined duties now and is streamlined.This is political grandstanding in preperation for Irvone's position.Just like when Cora threw a ninny about Huggins preoaring the leas for the county home mineral rights lease.She made a statement for the Times that was totally incorrect regarding Huggins fee's.Is Cora upset that if SOMEHOW she got back in that she would be "out of the loop" when it comes to the budget?As far as the step back in time..maybe we all need to take a little step back every once in a while.

10 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 17 of 17 comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web