Grants Pass task force recommends modified market grid, council asks for multi‑year cost projections

Grants Pass City staff and a citizen task force recommended adopting a reconfigured salary grid to align nonbargaining employee pay with market data and comply with Oregon pay‑equity law, but the City Council asked for more analysis before voting.

At a council workshop, Stephanie Nuttall presented the task force’s work and the consultant McGrath’s market study, which the group modified. The recommendation would set McGrath’s market average at step 6 on the grid, apply an October 2024 12‑month CPI adjustment (presented to council as 3.2%) to the grid before placements, and use an experience‑based rubric to place current employees on the new schedule. The task force also recommended a longevity incentive (1% after 10 years, 2% after 15) and several reclassifications, with the placement methodology effective July 1, 2025.

Staff provided payroll snapshots for the roughly 50 employees on the reviewed list: current total payroll at $5,156,005; the May 21 proposal had been estimated at $5,950,019; and the task force’s recommended placement was estimated at $5,857,746. The presentation said the average grid shift needed to align with market was 18.84% (range 0.1%–42.76%) and the average per‑employee increase based on tentative placements was about 11.71% (median 10.76%). Projected added cost beyond the FY24‑25 budget was presented as approximately $977,639, with the general‑fund portion smaller than in the May 21 proposal.

Nuttall and task force members emphasized that the recommended methodology would not reduce anyone’s pay during initial placement: "So nobody gets a pay cut as a result of this," Nuttall stated during the presentation. Staff also explained pay‑equity protections such as redlining (freezing a step) where necessary to preserve internal parity.

Councilors pressed for more detail before making a policy choice. Questions included requests for: - Specific examples and the minimum payroll increase needed to cure any current pay‑equity/compression liabilities (described verbally as a "handful of positions"); - Recruitment and retention data to show whether pay has driven departures or deterred applicants; - Multi‑year fiscal projections (council asked for 3–5 years) showing how payroll and the share of wages in the general fund would evolve under the recommendation; and - Analysis of an alternative 7‑step schedule (market at a lower step and larger step differentials) that some councilors asked staff and the task force to model.

Task force members said they are willing to analyze an alternative 7‑step structure if the council directs it. Staff committed to provide the recommended grid, more accurate placement numbers, the multi‑year projection scenarios, and a "bare minimum" option that would address legal pay‑equity exposures without a full system change.

No formal vote was taken; council directed staff to return with the requested data and analyses before council action.