Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget And Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Milford adopts FY26 budget with police pay adjustments after weeks of debate
Summary
The Milford City Council adopted the fiscal year 2026 operating budget (option B), which includes pay adjustments for police command staff. Council approved the resolution after debate about the Evergreen pay study’s methodology and with direction to make the police chief’s supplemental study part of the public packet.
Milford’s City Council adopted the fiscal year 2026 operating and capital budget (Option B), a measure that includes pay adjustments recommended by Police Chief Asha for the department’s command staff.
The council vote adopted Resolution 2025-B after extended discussion about the consultant pay study and the chief’s supplemental analysis; the motion to adopt Option B carried 6-1 with one abstention. The motion included direction to revert to the cuts identified in the council’s prior memo (from the Monday packet) and to consider further staff-provided data if council elects to revisit any pay adjustments later.
Why it matters: The budget contains what Council staff described as a significant pay allocation for employee compensation and specifically funds adjustments the police chief argued were necessary to address on-call time, overtime and recruitment pressures.
Key numbers and staff recommendations: Finance staff reported that Option B includes roughly $370,969 earmarked for pay increases affecting about 80 employees; two-thirds of that amount (approximately $247,255) would be spread among 75 employees while the remaining ~$123,714 would apply to five positions the chief identified as command roles. Staff also provided two budget scenarios and recommended adoption of Budget 1 (the conservative option) earlier in the presentation, but council moved forward with Option B after discussion and amendment.
Debate over pay-study methodology: Chief Asha told council she had conducted a targeted salary survey of comparable local agencies and said the consultant Evergreen’s study did not adequately include the police command staff, citing low response rates and methodology gaps. The chief said her survey produced a higher response rate and included local comparators she judged comparable to Milford. Several council members and department heads raised equity concerns for other supervisory staff (public works and utilities supervisors) who are on call and do not receive overtime; Willis (public works) and other supervisors asked the council to consider parity for non-police supervisors.
Council direction and transparency: Councilmember Jason and others pressed for transparency; at the end of the vote council asked that Chief Asha’s supplemental study be added to the public packet. Council also flagged the option of a follow‑up pay study by a different consultant if members remain unconvinced by the existing data; council agreed to leave room for adjustments later rather than delay adoption of a budget for fiscal operations.
Outcome and next steps: Option B was adopted by council (6-1, 1 abstention). Staff will add the chief’s supplemental materials to the agenda packet and the council may revisit pay adjustments after reviewing the supplemental data or commissioning another pay study.
