Commissioners incorporate sheriff pay request but leave correctional-pay decision for later

St. Mary's County finance staff on March 15 told the Board of Commissioners they had incorporated the sheriff's requested salary adjustments and vehicle costs into the draft fiscal 2023 budget as placeholders, but commissioners did not adopt a final pay plan for correctional officers and asked for more information and options.

The county's chief financial officer, Jeanette Cudmore, said the sheriff submitted a budget letter and spreadsheets that included a line-item request of $566,000 described as "increase to deputy's shares pay, closely aligned to MSP" and that the sheriff also listed a set of essential cost changes that together with vehicles total roughly $1.5 million. "If you look at the sheet on page 158 ... the sheriff had indicated that possibly increasing the scale for the law by 4.5%," Cudmore said, and the county placed that $566,000 request as a placeholder in the salary account pending the commission's direction.

Why it matters: Commissioners were balancing a larger draft budget that begins the day with an available surplus but includes nonrecurring federal ARPA money and other one-time items; approving recurring salary scale increases for the sheriff's office would add to on-going expense pressures. At the same time county leaders and the sheriff told the board that market disparities have left the department short of candidates, particularly for detention officers.

Discussion and staff accounting Cudmore described the reconciliation that followed the prior week's direction: revenues and expenses in the general fund were being moved to reflect the board's instructions. She said the sheriff's submission incorporated a set of rank-and-scale adjustments plus replacement and new vehicles. "Those items totaled, $1,400,000 ... plus the vehicles that were included ... equals the $1,500,000," Cudmore said while walking commissioners through the packet.

Commissioners repeatedly returned to the correctional officer staffing problem. A senior sheriff's office official (identified in the transcript only as "Major") told the board the office had about 24 corrections vacancies and expected six more vacancies within the month, and estimated it would cost "approximately $765,000 to get them into the market." The Major said the county had received 20 positions to open a new housing unit but was unable to fill many slots and that recruitment lagged the surrounding market.

Commissioner-level comments Commissioner Morgan and others emphasized that the board has historically provided an annual step increase and that the sheriff's request for a 4.5% scale adjustment appears to be above the baseline county COLA and merit amounts the board has proposed for all employees. "Would it be reasonable to think that that does not include the step? That that would be money over and above the step?" Morgan asked.

Several commissioners signaled openness to addressing correctional pay later in the process. One commissioner noted communications from the governor's office suggesting state police protection aid could increase substantially this year and suggested the county could revisit correctional pay when state aid is finalized in May or June.

What the board directed Commissioners accepted staff's incorporation of the sheriff's submitted allocations into the draft budget as presented (Cudmore said the sheriff "told us about a 1.5 [pot of money]; they came back" and staff had placed the top-priority items as placeholders). Commissioners asked staff to return with options that show how the sheriff's $566,000 request could be applied (scale change versus targeted adjustments) and to return in subsequent work sessions with the cost of a one-percent change and with the correctional-officer-specific calculations. The board also asked staff to treat the sheriff's vehicle requests as fund-balance-funded purchases where appropriate.

No formal ordinance or salary scale change was adopted at the session. Commissioners agreed to hold the $765,000 figure as an identified placeholder for potential correctional-salary work but did not direct staff to finalize a recurring appropriation at this time. Cudmore confirmed the $566,000 was included in the packet "as a placeholder" pending the board's decision on how to apply it.

Context and next steps Sheriff's office leaders and commissioners framed the salary requests in a regional market context (comparisons were made to Maryland State Police and neighboring jurisdictions). Commissioners asked for precise estimates of the correctional-officer pay gap and of how many vacancies would be filled by each scenario. Staff said they will return with the numerical impact of applying different scale adjustments and with an updated inventory of vacancies and payroll effects; commissioners signaled they would consider revisiting the matter after state aid numbers are finalized.

Ending The board incorporated the sheriff's submitted numbers into the draft budget as placeholders and asked staff for a follow-up analysis of options and costs for correctional officer pay. No final pay decisions or ordinance changes were adopted at the March 15 session.