Carmel committee sends proposed salary ordinance back after staff presentation and widespread employee concern

The Carmel Finance, Utilities & Rules Committee on Sept. 23 heard a detailed Human Resources presentation on a proposed overhaul of the city’s civilian pay structure and voted to return the proposal to the City Council with a negative recommendation after lengthy public and council debate.

The presentation, led by HR staff, described a multi-step process that began in 2024 with a contractor, NFP, and continued in 2025 with an internal job analysis (JAQ) that produced 300-plus questionnaires and recommended widening pay bands so employees do not “max out” in five years. HR staff said the annualized fiscal impact for 2026 of the recommended grade moves is roughly $8,080,000 and that averted 2027 step increases could represent about $318,000 in cost avoidance depending on implementation. Finance staff said the proposal does not change overtime policy.

Why it matters: dozens of current and long‑tenured city employees turned out to the committee meeting and raised concerns that the rollout and employee communication were confusing and that some workers could see lower take-home pay or lose vehicle benefits. City employees warned the change could undermine morale unless the administration clearly ties any new pay bands to transparent performance metrics and implementation rules.

Committee discussion and public comment

Jim Spellburn, a Carmel resident and 45‑year city employee in the street department, told the committee the salary study and its communication felt like “a slap in the face,” saying his crew does far more than snow removal and paving and that employees are worried about losing overtime accrual opportunities. Karen Sutton, a 20‑year Carmel Police Department civilian employee who works in crime scene investigation, told the committee civilian staff need compensation that reflects their training and the difficult incidents they handle.

HR staff member Nicole said the original contractor work (NFP) produced useful but partly dated data for sworn positions and that the city paused and expanded the scope to run internal job analysis for civilian classifications because the job descriptions the vendor would have used were, in HR’s words, inadequate (“garbage in, garbage out”). Nicole said the JAQ process began with an employee notice in February 2025, produced more than 300 JAQs, and led to title and pay‑band recommendations that HR presented to the council in July and in an August letter to employees.

Zach Spott, a city staff member who discussed fiscal impacts, said the city expects to spend nearly $5,000,000 in overtime at the fire department this year and described the $8,080,000 figure as the estimated annualized cost in 2026 of the grade changes identified for movement. He also said some numbers depend on council timing and later implementation decisions.

Concerns raised by employees and council members

Multiple employees, including representatives from engineering, IT and parks, told the committee the letters notifying staff about title or grade results were distributed with little explanation and created fear. Morgan Reinhardt of IT said technology positions typically must be paid toward the top of market to recruit talent, making recruitment challenging under any rigid starting-minimum approach.

Councilor Ryan Locke pressed staff on why the city shifted away from the external contractor’s full scope and into an internally driven process, saying he wanted evidence the new structure would achieve retention and fairness. Councilor Locke also asked for clarity on the study’s intent; HR said the mayor requested a market‑aligned review to ensure staff “are compensated appropriately.”

Other councilors and employees urged better communication and a documented implementation plan. Councilor Roehl and others said long‑tenured employees who had been capped at salary maximums for years need clearer paths to higher pay; staff said the new bands would widen minimums and maximums (example shown: grade 10 minimum near $59,000 and maximum near $86,000 in HR examples) and that no employee’s current pay would be reduced by the change.

Committee action and next steps

After public comment and about two hours of discussion, the committee voted to send the proposed salary ordinance back to the full City Council with a negative recommendation. The committee chair called for a motion to return the measure to council with a negative recommendation; the motion was seconded and carried unanimously.

The committee and staff agreed the ordinance will be reworked for the 2026 salary ordinance cycle. Staff said they will continue to refine job titles, meet with departments, and consider development of a performance‑management tool and explicit policies to govern how employees move within the new pay bands. The committee set a follow‑up meeting for Oct. 6, the night the council will introduce the 2026 budget.

Ending note

Committee members and staff repeatedly said they want to avoid unintended morale damage and that further discussion is needed before enacting the structural change. Several councilors urged HR and department leaders to increase direct outreach to affected employees, to build performance measures with manager and employee input, and to return to the committee with clarified implementation steps before any final ordinance is adopted.