Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Personnel Budget topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Nash County staff propose 2.75% COLA, 1.25% merit and phased salary study that would add millions to the recurring payroll cost

Nash County Board of Commissioners · April 16, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Staff recommended a 2.75% cost‑of‑living adjustment effective July 1, 2026, a 1.25% merit pool and a phased three‑year salary study with an eight‑year to‑midpoint progression for group A; commissioners raised questions about benchmark tolerance, vacancy drivers and budget affordability.

Nash County staff recommended a multi‑part compensation approach that combines a cost‑of‑living adjustment, a modest merit program and a phased salary study to move county pay toward market medians.

Human resources and budget staff proposed a 2.75% COLA effective July 1, 2026, and budgeting a 1.25% merit pool effective Jan. 1, 2027. "The COLA recommendation is to provide a 2.75% cost of living adjustment effective 07/01/2026," staff said. Finance staff estimated the recurring cost for COLA plus merit at roughly $2.5 million ($1.75M for COLA and about $800K for merit, figures cited in the meeting).

To address market alignment, Nash County contracted a three‑year phased salary study; staff recommended an "8‑year to midpoint" progression model for the first third of county positions (group A, about 269 employees). That targeted adjustment for group A carries a projected FY‑27 budget impact of about $1,384,087, staff said. In all, staff estimated recurring payroll additions of about $2.5M for the COLA/merit components plus the one‑time/year 1 salary adjustments tied to the study.

Commissioners pressed for clarity on the benchmark methodology and what tolerance the county should accept relative to market midpoints, and asked whether vacancy and retention issues (particularly in EMS, detention and public safety) were purely a pay problem. Several commissioners urged staff to return with more granular results showing how many employees need small vs. large adjustments so the board could weigh affordability before committing to full implementation.

What happens next: staff said the COLA, merit and salary study costs are incorporated in the current draft budget and will be included in the recommended budget presented in May; they offered to provide detailed breakdowns and one‑on‑one briefings for commissioners prior to final adoption.