Rockwall commissioners agree to review county pay scales after justices raise concern about top-out compression

Justice Tony Norton, justice of the peace for Precinct 1, told the Rockwall County Commissioners Court at a June 12 budget workshop that noncommissioned salary ranges used across the county are compressed at the top and asked the court to adjust the salary scale to reflect recent inflation rather than to grant individual across‑the‑board raises.

Norton said the county’s current pay scale has not been adjusted since an overhaul in 2022 and cited what he described as a 9.8% increase in the U.S. average inflation rate since Oct. 1, 2022. “I’m asking the court to consider looking at that scale and adjusting it accordingly to the current inflation rate that we currently have,” Norton said. He added, “I’m not asking for the raise for employees. I’m just asking for something to where they have some growth, in their salary ranges.”

The request grew out of repeated reclassification requests that county department heads brought during last year’s budget cycle, Norton said, and from specific concerns that some clerks in local justice courts are reaching the top of their pay ranges. Norton told the court he filed a formal reclassification for his clerks but said that an adjustment to the county salary ranges would remove the need to reclassify positions in many cases.

County officials and other elected judges who spoke during the workshop generally agreed the county should review its job grade ranges periodically. The court asked County Auditor Cammie to prepare a presentation on job ranges, historic context and county comparisons before the next round of budget deliberations in July so commissioners could choose consistent peer counties for benchmarking and evaluate total compensation (salary plus benefits). The auditor also was asked to include suggestions about whether only top ranges should be updated or whether bottoms of ranges should be adjusted as well.

Commissioners and judges discussed tradeoffs between adjusting ranges, providing flat percentage raises and targeted reclassifications. Several participants noted the court previously approved substantial increases in recent years; Norton and others said those raises helped employees keep up with rapid inflation at the time, but they argued the underlying range ceilings still create compression that pushes longer‑tenured employees to a pay cap with no step‑wise growth available.

The court directed staff to return in July with comparative data and a recommended approach; no formal pay changes were adopted at the June 12 meeting. The auditor and human resources will use the July presentation to outline options and, if directed by the court later, to implement either range reindexing or position reclassifications before adoption of the FY2026 budget.

Why this matters: compressed pay ranges can leave long‑service employees with no routine salary progression, which judges and department heads said can hinder retention. Commissioners said they want benchmark comparisons and total‑compensation figures (salary plus retirement and benefits) before taking action.

What’s next: Auditor Cammie will prepare a July briefing on job ranges and peer comparisons; the court will decide whether to adjust ranges countywide, approve targeted reclassifications, or use a budgeted “raise bucket” during the FY2026 process.