Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel Compensation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Franklin staff propose 90th‑percentile pay plan update; implementation cost roughly $1 million
Summary
City staff and compensation consultants presented a classification and compensation update that moves pay ranges toward the 90th percentile of the market, adjusts pay grades for a subset of positions and builds a general market and merit increase into the FY‑26 budget. Staff said implementation across funds will cost approximately $1 million.
City Human Resources and compensation consultants presented the board with a proposed update to the city’s classification and compensation plan designed to align pay ranges more closely with the local market.
The plan and process: HR Director Kevin Townsville explained the update is a market‑based approach using public‑sector and private‑sector salary data. Consultant Steve Thompson said the consultants matched city job descriptions to benchmark titles, consulted department directors on job nuances, and recommended range adjustments to meet a new target generally at the ninetieth percentile of the market.
Scope and costs: Staff said the classification review covered roughly 300 positions. The recommended change to pay ranges averaged about a 15% adjustment to range midpoints and bands; as a result, roughly 19% of job titles (58 positions) moved up one pay grade and about 25 individual employees were directly affected in this implementation phase. The city capped any single individual’s pay‑range change at $15,000; six employees would hit that cap under the proposal. Townsville said about 56 employees who had previously been at the top of their ranges would regain progression space.
How the increases would be applied: Staff described a four‑step implementation sequence: (1) adopt updated pay ranges, (2) place employees in the new ranges and give a 3% base adjustment to those moved because of grade changes, (3) apply a market (cost‑of‑living) increase of 2.5% built into the FY‑26 budget, and (4) apply a merit component of 0.5%–2.5% tied to performance evaluations. Townsville told the board that the combination results in a minimum approximate increase of 3% for affected employees and up to a maximum of about 5% depending on performance; he said the overall FY‑26 budget impact across all funds is approximately $1,000,000.
Rationale and context: Thompson and Townsville told the board the city previously moved police and fire pay to a higher benchmark (90th percentile) in the last cycle and this update extends a similar market target across other job families. Kevin Townsville said department leaders reported increasing difficulty recruiting and retaining staff in a tight labor market and that matching local market pay is part of a broader strategy (professional development, workplace culture) to reduce turnover.
Board questions and clarifications: Aldermen asked about pay compression and about whether the study addresses employees who have been with the city longest. The consultant and HR staff said compression remains a concern and that the city would consider a second phase of targeted adjustments if needed; they said the present update raises ranges and restores progression room for employees who were previously “top of range.” Aldermen also asked about annual increases; staff said the city plans to continue an annual market adjustment (the 2.5% baseline in FY‑26) plus a merit cycle.
Next steps: Staff requested the board adopt the updated classification and compensation plan as a resolution (item referenced on the agenda). The presentation preceded consideration during the voting session; formal adoption was not recorded during the work session. Staff said they will work with department directors to finalize placements and bring implementation figures into the operating budgets.
