Melbourne Beach commissioners press for clearer payroll data, split stormwater and roads funds during budget workshop

The Melbourne Beach Town Commission on July 15 held a budget workshop that centered on proposed employee pay changes, the town’s calculation of a cost‑of‑living adjustment and how capital funds for stormwater and road projects are organized.

Commissioners pressed Town Manager Elizabeth Mascara and Finance Manager Jennifer Kerr for more documentation — including job descriptions, completed performance evaluations, the salary surveys used to set pay, and a side‑by‑side comparison of current versus proposed total compensation (base pay plus benefits). Vice Mayor Don Barlow, Commissioner Tim Reed and others questioned large, single‑year raises proposed for several positions and said the commission needs written justification tied to either documented performance or clear recruitment/retention needs.

“This is discussion we need to have with the numbers in front of us,” Commissioner Tim Reed said, arguing that salary adjustments above an across‑the‑board COLA should be supported with evaluations and market comparisons.

Why it matters: Commissioners said they want the budget and supporting records in a format that makes it possible to review and justify exceptions to any general COLA. The discussion covered several individual proposals that would materially increase payroll costs if adopted, including a proposed 10% increase for the town clerk and double‑digit raises for department chiefs in draft figures presented to the commission.

Most important details - The manager’s draft showed a 3% across‑the‑board COLA in the working budget; some commissioners and staff cited a regional CPI‑based figure near 2.4% and asked that the COLA number be verified before the commission adopts it into the budget. Commissioner Reed said any adopted COLA should match the documented CPI or be labeled and budgeted separately from merit adjustments. - Several individual adjustments above the proposed COLA were highlighted: the town clerk’s position appeared in the draft to receive a proposed one‑time increase of about 10% (manager’s explanation: to align the clerk’s pay with comparable local clerks), the police chief’s cap/target salary shown was $125,000 (discussed as a previously advertised cap and a large increase over the current chief’s prior pay), and the fire chief and other department heads had proposed increases described by staff as “level ups” tied to retention/market positioning rather than a single uniform formula. For multiple recent hires commissioners asked why short tenure staff would receive a full year’s COLA soon after starting. - Commissioners asked the manager to supply completed, typed performance evaluations and the metadata for each evaluation that exists, and to provide salary‑survey comparators used to make level‑up decisions. Staff said evaluations exist for most long‑tenured employees but not for some very new hires. - The commission and staff found inconsistencies and ambiguous entries in a payroll spreadsheet that had been circulated as a handout (several rows labelled “maintenance” without unique job titles or dates). Commissioners asked that the town correct the spreadsheet, add a column showing the percent change for each position, and include a column that shows how long each employee has held the position. - On capital funds, Commissioner Reed urged the commission not to commingle stormwater and roadway expenditures. Commissioners asked staff to reestablish separate capital/project funds: (recommended) Fund 341 dedicated to stormwater projects and Fund 351 (or similar) dedicated to road/land improvements. Finance staff agreed to prepare a mock reallocation and the resolution language that would be needed to transfer balances if the commission elects to separate funds and reassign existing reserves. - The manager explained updated millage calculations provided to the county had increased projected revenue; staff placed a portion of that additional revenue in the draft stormwater/road fund line items. Commissioners asked for the source spreadsheets and the specific FRS (Florida Retirement System) and millage inputs used to derive the updated totals.

Discussion versus direction - Discussion: Commissioners extensively debated whether large, individual salary adjustments in the draft budget (examples cited by commissioners: town clerk ~10%, police chief to $125,000, fire chief “level‑up”) were justified by documented performance, recruitment/retention needs, or simply selected to balance the draft payroll calculations. Several commissioners said they were unwilling to agree to large merit increases until staff provided the requested supporting documentation. - Direction: The commission asked the town manager and finance manager to: provide job descriptions for every position; deliver the completed (typed) performance evaluations and associated metadata that exist for current employees; supply the salary survey comparators and the side‑by‑side current vs. proposed payroll worksheet with an explicit percent‑change column and a column showing how long each employee has been in the position; and correct ambiguous spreadsheet labeling (for example, change rows labelled only “maintenance” to unique job titles). Commissioners also asked staff to add a fund‑classification indicator (restricted/unrestricted or statutory classification) to each fund listing and to prepare a mock reallocation showing how existing long‑term capital balances would look if stormwater and road funds were separated. - Operational next step (consensus): Town Manager Elizabeth Mascara agreed to compile the requested documents and to email a concise checklist of the outstanding items to the commission. Commissioners indicated they will not finalize decisions on COLA, differential pay or other contested items until they have reviewed the materials.

Public comment and process requests - Resident Steve Walters and others spoke during public comment. Walters opposed some proposed police staffing changes and said he had polled neighbors who objected to additional paid fire staffing. Several speakers urged caution on large compensation changes without transparent records. - Commissioners asked staff to consider producing verbatim (or more detailed) meeting minutes or at least more complete written recaps for budget workshops so the public and newer commissioners can find the exact commitments and clarifications made during multi‑hour fiscal discussions.

Action taken - Adjournment motion: The commission moved, seconded and voted to adjourn the workshop; Mayor Allison Dillington called for the ayes and the meeting was adjourned. (Vote recorded as “aye” by the members present.)

What’s next - The manager will supply the requested personnel documentation, corrected payroll worksheets and fund reclassification mock‑ups as soon as practical. Commissioners anticipated scheduling an additional budget workshop after they review the materials; the commission also discussed holding formal budget votes in August so the town can meet TRIM/millage filing deadlines.

Ending note: The workshop unfolded without any formal salary or budget adoptions; commissioners emphasized that decisions about COLA, merit adjustments and capital reallocations will await the more complete supporting documentation they requested from staff.