Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the County Budget Personnel topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Hamblen County approves 10% raise for sheriff’s staff, 5% for other employees funded by property‑tax shift

Hamblen County Commission · June 4, 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

After hours of debate over staffing and retention, the Hamblen County Commission approved a 10% pay increase for sheriff’s‑department personnel and a smaller across‑the‑board adjustment for other county employees, funding the raises in part by shifting property‑tax pennies from the school allocation.

Hamblen County commissioners voted to give sheriff’s‑department employees a 10% pay increase and to adjust pay for other county employees, approving measures that shift county property‑tax revenue to help fund the raises.

The commission first approved a 3% cost‑of‑living increase for most county employees while excluding the sheriff’s department so sheriff pay could be considered separately. Commissioners then approved a motion to grant a 10% raise to sheriff’s‑department personnel and voted to shift six property‑tax pennies from the school allocation to the county general fund to help cover the cost.

The sheriff told commissioners the department has struggled to retain officers and cited recent losses and recruitment at younger ages. He said the jail population is ‘‘today probably around 350’’ and that the department typically averages ‘‘around 400’’ inmates, and argued the county must offer higher pay to avoid losing more experienced officers to neighboring counties.

‘‘We’ve got to make a drastic change to keep officers in Hamblen County,’’ a commissioner said during debate, adding that the county is ‘‘the lowest paid sheriff’s department in this area’’ and that failing to act risks further turnover.

Finance staff and commissioners debated funding options and tradeoffs at length. Staff cited that a single penny on the property‑tax rate yields roughly $279,000, and that a 15% targeted increase for law enforcement paired with a 3% COLA for others would cost roughly $1.6 million. Commissioners discussed alternatives including using fund balance, cutting capital items, or shifting school property‑tax pennies.

Commissioners also considered narrower definitions of who would receive the larger increase (for example, ‘‘post‑certified’’ or ‘‘PCI certified’’ uniform personnel) and whether supervisory or nonuniform staff should be included. Several commissioners expressed concern about raising senior officers’ pay by the same percentage as entry‑level officers; others said a larger, across‑the‑board raise was needed to keep pace with neighboring counties.

On funding, one commissioner urged caution about reducing the school allocation, noting the school system was already using fund balance to balance its budget and that shifting revenue creates a reliance on future sales‑tax growth. Supporters countered that projected sales‑tax revenue and the county’s current fund balance made the transfer feasible this year.

Roll calls were recorded for the key votes. The amended 3% COLA for non‑sheriff employees passed (recorded with one abstention). The separate 10% sheriff’s‑department raise passed on roll call. A motion to move six property‑tax pennies from the school allocation to the general fund also carried;

The commission concluded by scheduling a follow‑up meeting to finalize remaining budget details and implementation steps.

What the votes mean: commissioners formalized a multi‑part approach — a small across‑the‑board COLA for non‑sheriff employees, a larger targeted increase for law enforcement, and a temporary reallocation of property‑tax revenue to help fund the change. Implementation details (effective dates, payroll mechanics, which job classifications exactly receive each raise, and whether there will be adjustments to supervisors’ pay) will be handled by county staff as the budget is finalized.

Authorities and procedural notes: the votes recorded in the meeting set the commission’s budget direction; the transcript records the motions, roll calls, and several dollar figures and tax‑rate estimates cited by staff. The commission discussed but did not adopt alternative revenue sources such as one‑time transfers from capital funds or sweeping additional fund balance beyond the amounts discussed.

Next steps: county staff will update budget documents and bring back precise implementation language and schedule. The commission indicated it wants the budget finalized before July 1 and scheduled an additional meeting to continue work.