Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Personnel topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee debates 14% highway patrol salary survey, raises questions about locality pay and funding source
Summary
Legislators discussed a proposed salary survey for Montana Highway Patrol troopers that would raise pay about 14% statewide (DP111), debated whether locality pay might better target high‑cost areas, and noted funding would require a contingency tied to Senate Bill 324.
Helena — A subcommittee discussed a proposed Highway Patrol salary survey that would raise trooper pay about 14% statewide and debated whether the increase should be a uniform raise or paired with locality pay aimed at high‑cost areas.
Committee members and Highway Patrol representatives described the package as a full salary survey with an overall increase reported in committee materials as roughly 14% (one committee member cited 14.6% in preparatory notes). The package under discussion would replace an earlier item (DP301) and includes a proposed fund switch from state special revenue to the general fund unless contingent funding in Senate Bill 324 is enacted.
“On the salary survey it’s a 14% increase,” a committee member said while reviewing submitted materials. Members asked whether locality pay targeted to Bozeman, Missoula and Kalispell could avoid raising salaries across the whole state; Highway Patrol staff replied that, without building a detailed spreadsheet in the meeting, they could not definitively say whether locality pay would reduce the statewide increase.
Legislators expressed concern about recruiting and retention in Eastern Montana, where staffing levels are lower. Committee members noted prior use of targeted locality adjustments and said implementing locality pay now would raise additional questions about collective bargaining and consistency across unionized troopers.
Staff and witnesses indicated the salary survey accounts for county-level pay increases and that some local jurisdictions have already boosted pay substantially. DOC and fiscal staff said locality‑style pay had been discussed in earlier budget work but was not included in the governor’s submission to the legislature.
The committee did not take a formal vote on DP111 during this session. Members asked agency staff and budget office representatives to provide locality-pay modeling and to clarify the funding switch that depends on Senate Bill 324.
Ending — Committee members signaled interest in further analysis and possible interim work on locality pay if costs and collective-bargaining implications can be clarified.
