Mesquite — City staff presented a detailed comparison of Mesquite police and fire base pay against peer cities and outlined options for step increases and targeted longevity pay to retain experienced officers.

Finance Director Ted Chin and department leaders told the council that Mesquite’s base pay for many public‑safety ranks sits below the averages for expanded peer groups, particularly in early career steps; the city’s total compensation package includes health and retirement benefits but base‑pay differences affect recruitment and retention.

Why it matters: Earlier this year the police and fire departments reported open positions and higher overtime; council members said holding services steady without pay adjustments would force difficult program or capital tradeoffs. Staff offered a set of funding options the council can consider during the FY2026 budget process.

Most important facts
- Staffing: Police Chief (Police Chief) reported about 10 police‑officer vacancies; Fire Chief Hopkins reported 253 total employees in the fire department and described the department’s recent hires and training needs.
- Regional pay comparison: Staff showed bench‑marks across two peer groups. For police the city’s average base pay placed Mesquite slightly under expanded‑group averages in early‑career steps. For fire Mesquite was below the peer average in base pay but closer after later steps and longevity pay were included.
- Overtime and vacancies: Chief Gill said total officer overtime varies widely by person and assignment; staff emphasized some overtime reflects SRO coverage or court and event duties while other overtime covers vacancy gaps.
- Staff proposals: Finance and HR proposed several options for council consideration, including (a) a general base‑pay increase for FY2026, (b) a targeted 5% increase to Step 1 (to raise starting pay and early career steps), and (c) a late‑career longevity step (for example a one‑time additional step at year 20) aimed at retaining veteran officers.

Discussion highlights
- Council members stressed that public‑safety pay is a high priority but flagged the need to balance raises against other demands in the budget, and asked staff to present clear budget scenarios (current tax levy, voter‑approval rate and a midrange option) so members can see tradeoffs.
- Several council members said they preferred a one‑time longevity step to keep experienced officers rather than only spreading increases uniformly.

What staff will present next: A short set of budget scenarios that quantify the cost of several public‑safety options (3% across‑the‑board, 5% Step‑1 bump, and a 20‑year longevity step), and how each option fits under the no‑new‑revenue rate, a midrange (voter‑approval) rate and a higher rate that would require a voter election. The council asked for costs tied to concrete tax‑rate scenarios before making final direction.

Ending: Council members and staff agreed on the urgency of the discussion and instructed finance and HR to return with dollar‑cost estimates for each public‑safety option as part of the August budget package.