ESCANABA — An often-overlooked public official became the focus of discussion this week when the Delta County Board of Commissioners decided not to raise the salary of the county’s drain commissioner from $50 to $6,000, plus actual expenses.

“Oh, I’m sure he just going to say ‘screw you guys.’ You know, at this point, why wouldn’t he? We obviously don’t care about our elected officials,” Commissioner Christine Williams said after the board split in a 3-2 vote not to approve the wage increase.

Drain commissioners are elected officials that administer laws involving flood protection, stormwater management, and soil and erosion with the goal of protecting “drains,” which can be underground pipes or natural features like creeks. The position is unique in that drain commissioners can levy drain assessments to property owners and governmental units within set drainage districts, though the power hasn’t been used in Delta County in recent memory.

Comments made by Former Delta Conservation District CEO Rory Mattson during public comment about the history of the position suggest the $50 annual salary was put into place sometime in the early- to mid-2000s, when seated commissioners determined there was not enough work to warrant the roughly $11,000 that was being paid to the drain commissioner at the time.

“This is an elected official who is doing their job and who, when they first got into the job thought ‘it must not be that big of a job because people told me there’s only one drain and there’s nothing to do’ but there is a lot to do, this person is working very hard, they are working every day doing the work that needs to be done,” said Williams of current Drain Commissioner Dean Auger.

Outside of pushback from Mattson and Former Delta County Commissioner Bob Barron — who argued the position itself was unfair taxation and regulation on landowners — during public comment, the majority of the pushback against the proposed raise came from Commissioner Patrick Johnson. Johnson made a series of arguments against the wage change, saying the wage increase did not guarantee the drain commissioner would do more than the minimum amount of work — a statement not directed at Auger specifically, but made generally to apply to anyone who was elected to the role. He also argued that the county needed to have a funding source for the wages other than the county’s general fund or marijuana revenue, which he argued should only be used for law enforcement activities despite the county having more latitude in its application under the law.

Unlike Barron, Johnson did not directly argue that the role amounted to unfair taxation. However he did say the drain commissioner’s ability to tax “seems like a pretty high risk.”

“This position has always had that authority, whether you pay them $50 a year or you pay them appropriate wage. They have that authority,” said Williams in response to Johnson’s concerns over assessments being levied.

Based on the monthly required meetings in Lansing, the drain commissioner’s mileage is expected to be about $6,000 annually, which when combined with the $6,000 salary brings the wages in line with what was being paid to the position prior to the drop to $50. While Auger legally can submit mileage now, he has not been doing so for the roughly two-and-a-half years he has held the position.

Johnson argued for a significantly lower wage for the position, and one based on how much work the drain commissioner did. He floated paying the drain commissioner for each individual meeting with a landowner rather than a set salary. In either case, the county would be required by law to pay actual expenses, such as mileage, if Auger turned in the necessary documentation.

When it came to a role call vote, the board of commissioners split, with Williams and Commissioner Kelli van Ginhoven supporting the wage increase and Johnson and commissioners Matt Jensen and John Malnar both voting against it. Both Jensen and Malnar expressed concerns over using general fund balance for the wages.

At the request of Delta County Administrator Ashleigh Young, the board voted to send the issue back to the finance subcommittee for further review and a possible new proposal.