Auditor (Speaker 4) presented options for an electronic time‑management system and described associated professional‑services costs at the July 21 budget hearing.
The auditor said the county is evaluating timekeeping systems that would let some employees phone or log in from the field instead of using traditional time clocks, which carry higher hardware costs. She warned that scheduling modules in some packages do not integrate well with the county’s payroll and that a payroll‑compatible product is needed to avoid duplicate work. “If the trucks have GPS systems and they could fob in from that way, then that would be the most ideal way for them because then they can go right to the job,” the auditor said.
Commissioners and staff emphasized coordination with HR and IT to ensure vendor selection supports departmental workflows. Speaker 7 (staff) said any solution that requires hardware installs needs IT involvement; Speaker 8 noted HR’s interest in vacation‑tracking features. The auditor said the county will narrow vendors to two finalists and schedule a third meeting Friday to review the final proposal and that implementation would take roughly six months.
The auditor also recapped several professional‑services items — Baker Tilly (audit/consulting), EDA consulting for TIF administration, pension reporting, and cost‑allocation reporting — and said certains contracts (TrueRoll) were being renegotiated because a flat $53,000 fee appeared high relative to a percentage arrangement.
Why it matters: a new timekeeping system would affect payroll accuracy, worker time capture for field crews and recurring software and service costs; commissioners sought assurances the system would integrate with payroll and that implementation timing and vendor contracts would be clear before the county committed funds.
Next steps: staff to return with vendor comparisons, integration requirements, and refined professional‑services estimates for council review.