Travis County Human Resources (HRMD) presented Commissioners Court on July 29 with a two‑phase plan to modernize the county’s pay system. HR proposed applying updated market benchmark data to the current unified pay scale, then creating a separate exempt pay scale (including IT and other professional/exempt jobs) to better align pay ranges with labor‑market differences. HR estimated 88 classifications would require movement, affecting roughly 719 employees via market adjustments and about 211 employees in the event of the exempt reclassification; staff said final costing and placement decisions would be returned to the court on August 26.

Dr. Jean Mite, CHRO, and Stacy McClure (assistant director, total rewards) said the county faces pay compression, unclear grade distinctions and frequent reclassifications. The recommended first phase includes updating pay scales to market levels, breaking out an exempt scale and reserving a separate across‑the‑board increase (amount to be determined); a second phase would complete modernization, focusing on IT, executive and attorney scales.

Courtroom testimony included extensive public comment and employee testimony, primarily from the Travis County Public Defender’s Office and allied unions. Multiple investigators and supervising attorneys described sharp pay disparities with their counterparts in prosecutor offices and other jurisdictions: Jolie McCullough (investigator) said maximum investigator pay in the public defender’s office was $67,000 while prosecutor investigators can earn up to $107,000. Supervising attorney Seth Mineta Dillon compiled salary data across county criminal and family legal offices and told the court 98% of roughly 270 attorneys in those offices earn less than their classification midpoint. Public defenders asked for higher pay for investigators, more investigator headcount tied to attorney hires, and for budgeting to use pay‑range midpoints rather than minima so experienced employees do not remain at low percentages of the range.

County executives and HR repeatedly said the plan’s goal is to first fix structural pay scales (the foundation) and then seek funding to move people deeper into those ranges. Paul Hopingartner (County Executive for Technology & Operations) emphasized that scale fixes are necessary before funding individual step‑ups: "If we don't fix the lower level, you're going to still have to come back and do it at another point in time," he said. Several commissioners said they wanted clearer crosswalks — specifically, department‑level lists showing each job title, current pay, proposed movement and the cost to bring each title to midpoint — and asked HR and PBO to return with that, costed, on August 26. HR agreed to provide individual‑level crosswalks, family‑level impacts and department rollups.

The court did not vote on the compensation plan but directed HRMD and PBO to return with detailed costing models and implementation scenarios (including midpoint vs. minimum funding options) for the August 26 meeting so the court can consider budget impacts before markup.

Ending: HR and PBO will return on August 26 with full costing, individual‑level crosswalks and department breakdowns and the court asked for a transparent backup package for departments and employees to review.