Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council advances 2025–27 budget review and adopts salary schedule changes to address staff retention
Summary
At a June 10 workshop staff presented a proposed biennial budget emphasizing public safety ($65M), a $52.2M two‑year Orange County Sheriff contract, a $18M CIP (mostly streets) and no net staffing increase; HR presented a compensation study and recommended range adjustments, bonuses and a December COLA. Council agreed to place the budget on the June 24 adoption agenda and to adopt salary/position resolutions effective July 1/July 5.
Get email alerts on the Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City staff presented the proposed 2025–27 biennial budget Tuesday and detailed revenue, operating and capital priorities before a prolonged council discussion and public comment.
Staff said the general fund will account for about 76% of total revenue in the biennium and noted the operating budget’s largest component is public safety (about $65,000,000, with the Orange County Sheriff contract totaling approximately $52,200,000 over the two‑year period). The proposed CIP budget totaled about $18,000,000 and is mainly street and road projects; staff noted the Quad Cities Veil Project is grant funded and one CIP item is not street related. The proposed budget was balanced for the cycle and did not use general fund reserves in the recommendation to council.
Monique Ghez, HR manager, presented the 2025 total compensation study and the staff compensation package. The study found benchmark base salaries ranged roughly 2.4% to 10.6% below comparator agencies; base salary averages were roughly 6.6% below median for benchmark positions. Staff proposed raising the top of salary ranges to median base salary, increasing the bottom of ranges for 101 classifications, adding a floating holiday (raising floating holiday credits from 1 to 2 days) and providing a one‑time non‑pensionable bonus in September plus a December cost‑of‑living adjustment up to 2% (label 32). Ghez said the adjustments were intended to improve recruitment and retention.
Public commenters repeatedly urged stronger measures on staff pay and retention. Robert Bertin and other residents told the council that staff turnover has increased substantially and asked for a paradigm shift in budget priorities to retain personnel. Council members pressed staff on carryover items, grant consultant contracts and parking feasibility funds and asked for clarifications on library finances, crossing guards and other departmental requests. Staff confirmed the compensation package is included in the proposed budget.
On a motion by Council Member Kelly to place the budget on the June 24 adoption agenda and to adopt the salary schedule and authorized position schedule resolutions (with discussion about an errata list for non‑financial policy objectives), the council voted 4–0 to move those items forward. The council deferred final budget adoption to the June 24 meeting but adopted personnel resolution changes effective July 1 (salary schedule) and July 5 (authorized positions) to implement compensation adjustments for payroll and recruitment timing.
