City human‑resources and finance staff told the council that a comprehensive compensation survey of benchmark positions finds the city’s classified workforce is roughly 8.99% below market; the city manager incorporated a 4% cost‑of‑living adjustment in the FY2026 proposal and recommended targeted pay adjustments for positions farthest from market.
Human‑resources presenter Mrs. McDaniel said the survey compares pay ranges across demographically and size‑compatible cities and uses the midpoint of pay ranges to establish market. “Positions within 5% plus or minus of the market are considered competitive,” she said; the classified employee group averaged about 8.99% below market under the survey results.
What council learned: staff recommended a two‑step approach—implement the 4% COLA in the proposed budget and a subsequent, smaller targeted package to bring many positions closer to within 5% of market. Staff estimated the full set of recommended range changes would cost about $1.2 million; a smaller targeted package to bring most positions within 5% would cost approximately $337,135 (after the 4% COLA).
Why it matters: council members and the manager said compensation was a priority—staff noted progress over prior cycles and warned that sustained under‑market pay can increase turnover and recruitment costs. The police pay plan is described as competitive in the survey; the fire pay plan was closer to market but still recommended for a 5% increase to certain grades.
Next steps: staff included the COLA and some targeted changes in the FY2026 proposal and told council the full market implementation would be subject to council choices during budget adoption. Staff also recommended continuing the third‑year comprehensive survey cycle and monitoring recruitment metrics.
Ending: The survey results informed the manager’s proposed budget; final pay actions will require council approval during the budget adoption process.