Council committee sends maintenance salary amendment unfavorably after debate on retro pay and net savings
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
A committee recommended an unfavorable referral for a salary amendment that would reallocate $23,037 to increase pay for two maintenance employees and eliminate an advertised FTE, amid questions about retroactive pay, ongoing costs and projected savings.
A St. Joseph County Budget Administration Committee onetime transfer and salary amendment that would move $23,037 to the maintenance division was recommended unfavorably after extended debate.
The proposal, presented by Bree Roberts, director of physical assets, would allocate $7,080 and $15,957 in annual increases to an existing maintenance specialist and reclassify a current maintenance classification toward a building systems specialist, rather than hiring a second-shift supervisor. Roberts said doing so avoids creating a new full-time equivalent and “it is a net savings to the county.”
The committee heard detailed savings estimates from John Baker, facility maintenance manager, who said retaining and upgrading existing staff instead of hiring a new supervisor yields roughly $43,945 in combined payroll and benefit savings for the county. “It is $17,000 in payroll savings…then $4,500 for health insurance savings…and FICA taxes saved are $3,100,” Baker said when asked for the breakdown.
Members pressed staff on several points before voting. Council members asked why the proposed increases were retroactive to March 24; Roberts said that date reflected when the employees “fully took on these duties.” Members also asked whether the pay increases would make county wages competitive with neighboring counties; Roberts said the new pay places those positions “in the mid level range.”
The committee debated procedural options and then voted to send the salary amendment unfavorably to the full council. The motion to send unfavorably carried after a motion and second were recorded; the transcript does not supply a full roll-call tally in committee.
Why it matters: The measure would have raised pay for two maintenance employees, changed one employee’s job classification, and avoided adding an FTE, producing the county’s projected net savings but increasing ongoing salary lines. The committee’s unfavorable recommendation means the issue will go to the full council with that recommendation.
What’s next: The item moves to the full council for consideration; committee members noted the unfavorable committee recommendation does not predetermine the full council’s action.