Commissioners debate timing and equity of county pay plan after consultant's study

Montgomery County commissioners spent the bulk of an information session Thursday debating the timing and fairness of a comprehensive pay plan recommended by Human Resource Management (HRM).

Commissioner Sankey said the commission had "got to it a little fast" and urged further meetings to "iron these things out," arguing that administrative and clerical personnel could be unfairly disadvantaged if public-safety staff receive earlier, larger increases. "I just think we we got to it a little fast before I really had a chance to see look into it and see," Sankey said.

HRM principal Charles Wilkinson, who described an 18-month compensation study covering every county job, told commissioners the firm used consistent, market-based methodology across jobs and that the study found public-safety pay was materially less competitive in the local market. "My opinion is it's fair and equitable from the standpoint that every job was evaluated using the same methodology," Wilkinson said, noting entry rates for public safety were 5–8% below local competitors and top-end pay as much as 15–18% below market.

Wanda, identified in the meeting as the county finance director, urged caution on timing and said payroll and budget staff had unresolved questions about position lists and title changes that must be clarified before large-scale implementation. "My concerns are solely from a budgetary standpoint," Wanda said, noting she had emailed HRM on April 13 with payroll clarifications and that accurate position data are required to prepare the county budget.

The HRM presentation and subsequent discussion explained why the firm recommended an earlier effective date for public safety (May 1) while setting a later effective date (October 1) for other administrative pay changes: local employers had recently introduced significant hiring and multi-year retention bonuses, prompting urgency to reduce turnover in law enforcement. Wilkinson said leaders chose a conservative, phased approach to remain competitive and to limit fiscal shock to the county's budget.

Commissioners continued to press whether certain administrative job titles were being treated inconsistently across departments and whether pay differentials should instead be addressed through shift differentials or uniform administrative classifications. "An administrative assistant is an administrative assistant," one commissioner said, urging that similar roles be paid similarly across departments.

No final vote on altering the pay-plan start dates is recorded in the information-session portion of the transcript; the chair said the pay-plan items remained on the formal agenda and the commission would "vote today as it is on the agenda," while remaining open to bringing back amendments at a subsequent meeting. Commissioners were clear that they support public safety but emphasized the need for equity and accurate budget information before broad implementation.

Next steps: HRM will continue to work with county staff to answer payroll and classification questions; county payroll and finance staff will reconcile position lists for budgeting; the pay-plan resolutions remain on the formal agenda for a vote, and commissioners said they may amend effective dates or other provisions in a future meeting if data or clarifications warrant changes.