Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Compensation And FES topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Brown County council weighs new Factor Evaluation System, WIS engagement and pay adjustments
Summary
Councilors heard a multi‑page presentation on a factor evaluation system (FES) and a proposed engagement with WIS to create objective job classifications and external pay midpoints; the presenter estimated targeted raises (90% of external midpoint) would cost roughly $217,089 to the general fund for affected employees, with larger totals for broader targets.
Brown County councilors spent the bulk of the July 9 work session discussing implementation of a new Factor Evaluation System (FES) for county job classifications and a proposed engagement with an external vendor, WIS, to compute external midpoint benchmarks.
A presenter described a three‑person committee to classify jobs using six primary categories and 19 subcategories. He said the county would use WIS’s “50% external midpoint” regression to the mean as a benchmark and then update those 2025‑based benchmarks to 2027 levels using an assumed annual adjustment (the presenter used 3% as an illustrative rate). The presenter emphasized the goal of restoring consistency and objectivity after a subjective pay scale and noted that some employees fell through the conversion process and have had their pay reduced; the council discussed making those employees whole without undermining system integrity.
Budget implications were a central focus. The presenter said bringing the 113 employees in scope to a 90% target of the 2027 adjusted external midpoint would cost roughly $217,089 out of the general fund, with other funds absorbing their shares. He gave larger aggregate totals for more aggressive targets and noted that benefit and payroll taxes (FICA/PERF) would add to the fully burdened cost. Councilors asked for the underlying county list WIS used for comparisons and the regression data, and several members said they wanted more transparency about which comparator counties were included because larger cities can skew benchmarks upward.
Members debated process: some favored adopting the WIS engagement and continuing to set clear written procedures for job reclassification and timing (request window: January–March, committee review in Q2), while others urged caution about immediate pay adjustments and insisted on documentation and staff reviews before formal action. The council did not adopt a final ordinance in the work session; members said the WIS agreement and any salary‑ordinance amendments would be considered in a regular, advertised meeting with full supporting documentation.
