Agenda Item 6A
March 1,2016
Action
MEMORANDUM
February 26, 2016
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
§\
Robert H. Drummer, Senior Legislative Attorney
(hd-
County Council
Action:
Bill 51-15, Non-merit employees - Salary Schedule - Established
(2-0,
Government Operations and Fiscal Policy Committee recommendation
Councilmember Riemer absent): approve the Bill with staff amendments.
Bill 51-15, Non-merit employees - Salary Schedule - Established, sponsored by Lead
Sponsor Councilmember Leventhal and Co-sponsors Councilmembers EIrich and Rice, was
introduced on December 8, 2015. There were no speakers at the January 12 public hearing. A
Government Operations and Fiscal Policy Committee worksession was held on February 4.
Bill51-15 would establish a salary schedule for heads of departments and principal offices,
and other non-merit employees. The Bill would require the Executive to propose a salary schedule
for heads of departments and principal offices, and other non-merit employees in the Executive
Branch for approval by the Council as part of the annual opemting budget for the County
government. The Bill would also require the Council to establish a salary schedule for non-merit
employees in the Legislative Branch as part of the operating budget. Non-merit employees would
be paid a salary within the appropriate salary schedule. The Bill would permit the Executive to
exceed the salary schedule established for a position for an individual employee, subject to Council
approval, if the Executive finds that
it
is necessary to attmct or retain a senior leader for a specific
position. The Lead Sponsor, Councilmember Leventhal explained the purpose of the Bill in a
memorandum to his colleagues at ©5 and added some additional information in a February 1
memorandum at ©9.
Background
The County needs a compensation system designed to attract and retain highly competent
senior leaders as heads of departments and principal offices, and other non-merit employees.
It
is
also important to ensure that the compensation system is in line with other competing
organizations.
The Council's Office of Legislative Oversight (OLO) recently issued
Memorandum Report 2016-1,
Comparative Data on High-Level Manager Salaries.
The Report
can be viewed at:
http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/OLO/Resources/Files/2015 Reports/OLOMemorandum
Report2016-l.pdf. OLO found that salaries for County non-merit employees was the highest in
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
the Washington-Baltimore region and higher than most non-local jurisdictions surveyed. The
Chief Administrative Officer's comments and the response to the CAO's comments from OLO
can be viewed at:
http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/OLO/Resources/Files/2016%20Reports/CombinedRespo
nseandComments20 16-1.pdf.
In the fall of2015, the Executive retained Public Financial Management (PFM) to do an
Executive Compensation Study for the County. A copy of the PFM Report can be viewed at:
http://\\,\vw.montgornerycountymd.gov/council/Resources/FilesfREPORTS/Exec Comp Study
Report 1-28-2016.pdf. The PFM Report looked at total compensation for directors, other non­
merit positions, and merit system management positions. PFM concluded that the County's
executive cash compensation lagged behind the private sector and was in the top quartile of other
local government employers. The PFM regional comparison table for directors and other non­
merit positions is consistent with the findings in the OLO Report. See © 11. PFM reviewed 16
different director and non-merit local government positions in the region, and found that
Montgomery County total cash compensation ranked either 1
st
or 2
nd
in 12 of these 16 positions.
Montgomery County ranked in the top third in 3 positions and top half in the other position.
Although PFM pointed out that the County rankings dropped when looking at maximum salaries,
this comparison is meaningless. Montgomery County does not have a maximum salary for
directors or other non-merit salaries because it does not have salary schedules for these positions.
While the PFM report may be useful for determining future salary schedules, the Bill would
not dictate what the salary schedules for non-merit employees should be. The Bill would simply
require the re-establishment of salary schedules for non-merit senior leaders.
February 4 GO Worksession
Lead Sponsor, Councilmember George Leventhal, attended the worksession. Shawn
Stokes, Human Resources Director, represented the Executive Branch. Robert Drummer, Senior
Legislative Attorney, represented the Council staff. Councilmember Leventhal explained the
purpose of the Bill. The Committee discussed the Bill and the staff recommendation to make the
Bill expedited and apply it to employees hired or promoted into a non-merit position after the
approval of the first salary schedule. Ms. Stokes said the Executive does not oppose the Bill and
the Office of Human Resources was ready to develop the salary schedules. The Committee
recommended (2-0, Riemer absent) approval of the Bill with the staff recommendation.
Issues
1.
Do other government agencies have salary schedules for non-merit senior leaders?
OLO found that the Federal government
has
a salary schedule for non-merit positions that
are appointed by the President, typically with the advice and consent of the Senate. There are 5
levels of this Executive Schedule ranging from Cabinet Secretaries to appointed directors and
deputy directors across multiple federal agencies. See the excerpt from the OLO report at ©6.
OLO also found that the State of Maryland has a salary schedule for non-merit executives
in
State
government. See the Maryland Executive Pay Plan at ©7. Howard and Prince George's Counties
in Maryland and Arlington and Fairfax Counties and the City of Alexandria in Virginia also have
salary schedules for non-merit executives.
2
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Prior to 1997, each County employee holding a non-merit position was paid within a salary
schedule approved by the Council in the operating budget. Each department director was assigned
a specific salary grade that coincided with a salary schedule. See the Appendix to OLO
Memorandum Report 2016-1 showing the former salary grades for County department directors
at ©8. Bill 51-15 would not mandate any specific salary schedule.
It
would require the Executive
and Council to re-establish a salary schedule for each non-merit position. The Bill would apply to
any employee who is hired or promoted to head of a department or principal office or other non­
merit position after the date when this Act becomes law.
2. What is the fiscal and economic impact of the Bill?
OMB estimated that the Bill would require a one-time expenditure of $4,350 in OHR
employee time and $35,727 in DTS employee time to implement the salary schedules. The DTS
time to input the salary schedules into the County database was unexplained. The creation of
salary schedules by OHR should not have a significant fiscal impact since both the OLO Report
and the PFM Report recently benchmarked salaries for comparable positions in the region.
Finance found that the Bill is unlikely to have a significant impact on the County's economy. See
the FEIS at ©13-16.
3. When should the Bill take effect?
The Bill contains the following transition clause:
This Act must apply to any employee who is hired or promoted to head of a
department or principal office or other non-merit position after the date when this Act
becomes law.
As pointed out by Assistant CAO Bonnie Kirkland, the Bill would become law when the
Executive signs it, but before any salary schedules are approved by the Council. See Ms.
Kirkland's email at ©16. If the Bill is enacted in February or March, the first salary schedule
would not be approved until May. Therefore, it is possible that someone is hired or promoted into
a non-merit position after the Bill takes effect, but before a salary schedule exists.
If
the salary
approved for that person does not fit into the salary schedule approved later, does that require a
salary reduction? One reasonable solution, as suggested by Ms. Kirkland, would be to make the
Bill apply to an employee hired or promoted into a non-merit position after the approval of the
first salary schedule by the Council.
In
addition, in order to ensure that the law takes effect soon enough to require the
establishment of salary schedules in the approved FYI7 budget, the Committee may want to amend
this Bill to be an expedited Bill. Therefore, it is likely to take effect before the Council approves
the FYl7 budget, and possibly before the Executive submits a recommended FYI7 budget on
March 15. Committee recommendation (2-0, Riemer absent): amend the effective date to make
the Bill expedited and to make it applicable to an employee hired or promoted into a non-merit
position after the approval of the first salary schedule by the CounciL See lines 45-49 of the Bill
at©3.
3
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
4. Should the Bill contain a provision authorizing the Council to exceed the salary schedule for
a position in the Legislative Branch?
The Bill contains the following authority for an exception in the Executive Branch:
The salary schedule may contain a provision permitting the Executive to exceed the
salary schedule established for a position for an individual employee, subject to
Council approval,
if
the Executive finds that it is necessary to attract or retain a senior
leader for a specific position.
There is no corresponding exception permitting the Council to exceed the salary schedule for an
individual position. However, the Executive Branch salary schedules must be approved by the
Council. The Legislative Branch salary schedules do not need to be approved by the Executive.
1
If
the Council finds a Legislative Branch salary schedule unworkable, the Council can amend it.
Committee recommendation (2-0, Riemer absent): no amendment is necessary.
5.
Should the Bill be enacted?
An executive salary schedule is common in Federal, State, and local governments. This
Bill
would not break new ground; it would add Montgomery County to the majority rule in the area. While
one may debate whether the County's current non-merit salaries are reasonable or excessive, the Bill
would delegate that debate to the establishment ofthe salary schedules as part ofthe operating budget
process. The Council would have general control over the minimum and maximum non-merit salaries
just as it has control over merit salaries and the County budget. The Executive would retain control
over the amount of an individual non-merit Executive Branch salary within the broad guidelines of
the relevant salary schedule, and would have the authority to seek a waiver where appropriate.
Committee recommendation (2-0, Riemer absent): approve the Bill with the amendments
recommended above.
This packet contains:
Bill 51,.15
Legislative Request Report
Leventhal Memorandum
Federal government Executive Schedule
Maryland Executive Pay Plan
Former Montgomery County Executive Salary Grades
Leventhal Second Memorandum
Kirkland email
PFM Report Excerpt - Regional Comparison Table
Fiscal and Economic Impact Statement
F:\LAW\BILLS\1551 Salaries For Non-Merit Employees\Action Memo.Docx
Circle #
1
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
Although
the Executive may veto part ofthe budget, the Council retains the authority to override a veto.
4
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Expedited Bill No.
=-.:.......:.=.._ _ _ _'---­
Concerning: Non-merit emolovees ­
Salary Schedule - Established
Revised: February 4,2016 Draft No.
§..
Introduced:
December 8, 2015
Expires:
June 8, 2017
Enacted: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Executive: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Effective: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Sunset Date: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Ch. _ _• Laws of Mont. Co. _ __
COUNTY COUNCIL
FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND
Lead Sponsor: Councilmember Leventhal
Co-Sponsors: Councilmembers Eirich and Rice
AN EXPEDITED ACT
to:
(1)
establish a salary schedule for heads ofdepartments, principal offices, and other non­
merit employees;
(2)
require certain salaries to be set under the salary schedule established for these
positions; and
(3)
generally amend the law governing compensation for non-merit employees.
By amending
Montgomery County Code
Chapter lA, Structure ofCounty Government
Section lA-104
Boldface
Underlining
[Single boldface brackets]
Double undedining
[[Double boldface brackets]]
* * *
Heading or defined term.
Added to existing law by original bill.
Deletedfrom existing law by original bill.
Added by amendment.
Deletedfrom existing law or the bill by amendment.
Existing law 1DUif.{ected by bill.
The County Council for Montgomery County, Maryland approves the following Act:
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
EXPEDITED BILL
No. 51-15
1
2
Sec.
I.
Section
lA-104
is
amended as follows:
lA-104.
Heads of departments and principal offices; other positions designated
as non-merit.
3
4
(a)
Names.
The head ofa department or principal office is called the Director
of the department or principal office, except that:
(1) the Director ofPolice is also called the Chief ofPolice;
(2) the Director of the Montgomery County Fire and Rescue Service
is also called the Fire Chief; and
(3)
the Director of the Office of the County Attorney is called the
County Attorney.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
(b)
Qualifications.
(1) Each head of a department or principal office should be
professionally qualified.
(2) A person holding any other position in the Executive Branch
designated by law as a non-merit position must be professionally
qualified for the position under a position description established
by regulation under method
(1).
(c)
Status.
Heads of departments and principal offices, and holders of any
15
16
17
18
19
other position in the Executive Branch designated by law as a non-merit
position, are County employees but are not merit system employees.
(d)
Special reinstatement rule.
A person who was a merit system employee
of the Police Department when appointed as an Assistant Chief of Police
may return to the merit system in the Department at the same rank that
the person last held in the merit system. The person must elect to return
to the merit system within 10 days after leaving the Assistant Chief
position, by notifying the Chief Administrative Officer in writing. If the
previous
rank
was abolished, the person must be assigned to the closest
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
@
f:\law\bills\1551 salaries for non-melit employeeslbill 5.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
~~~BILLNo.51-15
28
29
equivalent rank, and must receive the salary and benefits that would apply
if the person had remained in the merit system at the previous rank and
the rank still existed.
30
31
32
33
34 .
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
ill
Salaries.
The Executive must design
~
compensation system to attract
and retain highly competent senior leaders as heads of departments and
principal offices, and other non-merit employees in the Executive
Branch. Each of these employees must be paid
~
salary within
~
salary
schedule proposed
.by
the Executive and approved
.by
the Council in the
Operating Budget of the Montgomery County Government. The salary
schedule may contain
~
provision permitting the Executive to exceed the
salary schedule established for
~
position for an individual employee,
subject to Council approval, if the Executive finds that it is necessary to
attract or retain
~
senior leader for
~
specific position. The Council must
establish
~
salary schedule for non-merit positions in the Legislative
Branch as part of the Operating Budget of the Montgomery County
Government.
Sec. 2. Effective Date.
The Council declares that this legislation is necessary for the immediate
protection ofthe public interest. This Act takes effect on the date on which it becomes
law.
This Act must apply to any employee who is hired or promoted to head of a
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
department or principal office or other non-merit position after the date the Council
approves the first salary schedule required in Section 1 [[when this Act becomes law]].
Approved:
50
51
52
Nancy Floreen, President, County Council
Date
o
f:\Iaw\bills\1551 salaries for non-merit employeeslbill5.docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
LEGISLATIVE REQUEST REPORT
Bill 51-15 .
Non-merit employees
-
Salary Schedule
-
Established
DESCRIPTION:
The Bill would require the Executive to propose a salary schedule for
heads of departments and principal offices, and other non-merit
employees in the Executive Branch for approval by the Council as part
of the annual operating budget for the County government. The Bill
would also require the Council to establish a salary schedule for non­
merit employees in the Legislative Branch as part of the operating
budget.
Salaries for non-merit employees are not controlled by a salary
schedule established by the Executive and the Council.
To establish a salary schedule for all non-merit County employees
designed to attract and retain highly competent senior leaders as heads
of departments and principal offices, and other non-merit employees.
CAD, Office of Human Resources
To be requested.
To be requested.
To be requested.
To be researched.
Robert H. Drummer, Senior Legislative Attorney
Not applicable.
PROBLEM:
GOALS AND
OBJECTIVES:
COORDINATION:
FISCAL IMPACT:
ECONOMIC
IMPACT:
EVALUATION:
EXPERIENCE
ELSEWHERE:
SOURCE OF
INFORMATION:
APPLICATION
WITHIN
MUNICIPALITIES:
PENALTIES:
Not applicable
F:\LAW\BILLS\155 I Salaries For Non-Merit Employees\LRR.Docx
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
MONTGOMERY COUNTY COUNCIL
ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND
GEORGE LEVENTHAL
COUNCILMEMBER
AT-LARGE
MEMORANDUM
December 1, 2015
TO:
'FROM:
SUBJECT:
Council members
George leventhal
tf--,
Bill on Compensation for Senior Non-Merit Employees
On December 8, I plan to introduce a bill on compensation for senior non-merit county
employees. The bill would require the Executive to propose and the Council to approve a salary
schedule for non-merit employees in the Executive Branch. It would also require the Council to establish
a salary schedule for non-merit employees in the Legislative Branch.
It is important, as the bill text states, for the county to have a "compensation system to attract
and retain highly competent senior leaders as heads of departments and principal offices, and other
non-merit employees ...."
As
the recent OLD report made clear, compensation for our senior non-merit
employees is in fact highly competitive. My concern is that since 1997, when County Executive Duncan
abolished the salary schedule for these employees, there has been a steady upward drift in
compensation with no apparent framework. This has had an impact on the county's entire salary
structure.
The bill is prospective; it would apply only to employees hired for non-merit positions after the
bill becomes law. Also, the bill authorizes the Executive to exceed the salary schedule, subject to
Council approval, "if the Executive finds that it is necessary to attract or retain a senior leader for a
specific position."
The common-sense approach in this bill will enable us to attract and retain outstanding
employees while meeting our obligations to the taxpayers. This approach is especially important in our
current tight fiscal Situation, including the possibility of a significant tax increase. I would welcome you
as a co-sponsor of this bill.
STELLA B. WERNER OFFICE BUILDING
100 MARYLAND AVENUE, 6TH FLOOR, ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND 20850
240n77-7811
OR
240n77-7900, TTY240n77-7914,
FAX240n77-7989
WWW,MONTGOMERYCOUNTYMD,GOV/COUNCIL
f~
PRJNTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Comparative Data on High-Level Manager Salaries
2. Federal Government
The US Office of Personnel Management (OPM) publishes average salary data for federal employees,!
and Table 8 summarizes average salary data and salary schedules as of March 2015 for:
• Executive Schedule - positions that are appointed by the President, typically with the advice
and consent of the Senate. Includes five levels ranging from Cabinet secretaries (level I) to
appointed directors, deputy directors, etc. (level V) across multiple federal agencies.
• Senior Executive Service (SES) - high-levelll)anagement and supervisory positions across
multiple federal agencies just below Presidential appointees.
• G5-13, GS-14, GS-15 - career position grades on the federal general salary schedule. The
Montgomery County Office of Human Resources
Personnel Management Review
reports that
these grades are comparable to the MLS series in the County.3
For the SES and GS series positions, OlO included the average salary nationwide as well as the weighted
average for positions in DC, Maryland, and Virginia only. Additionally, the salary schedule shown for the
GS positions includes the DC region locality pay differential. The maximum salaries for federal Executive
Schedule and SES employees are lower than the average director salary In Montgomery County.
Table 8. Federal Government Manager Average Salary Data, 2015
Position
Executive Schedule
Levell (n=18)
level II (n=43)
level III (n=95)
Level IV (n=251)
level V (n=18)
Actual
Average Salary
Salary Schedule
Maximum
Minimum
$198,450
$179,846
$166,509
$158,434
$149,494"
-
-
-
-
-
All Executive Schedule (n=426j
Senior Executive Service
United States (n=7,862)
DC, MD, and VA only (n=5,994)
General Salary Scale (GS115
United States (n=61,405)
DC, M 0, and VA only (n=40,963)
General Salary Scale {GSl14
United States (n=122,741)
DC, MD, and VA only (n=63,738)
General Salary Scale (GS113
United States (n=250,038)
DC, MD, and VA onlv (n=79,256)
$163,720
$170,572
$171,351
$150,966
$151,715
$124,363
$126,530
$102,990
$104,291
-
$203,700
$183,300
$168,700
$158,700
$148,700
-
-
$183,300
$121,956
-
$126,245
-
$158,700 •
-
-
$107,325
$139,523
-
$90,823
-
$118,069
"The OPM database does not Indicate why the actual average is higher than the maximum.
2
The OPM data covers most Executive Branch agencies except for several Intelligence offices and agencies (CIA,
NSA, etc.), White House and Office of the Vice President staff, and the U.S. Postal Service.
http://www.fedscope.opm.govldatadefnlaboutehri sdm.asp
3
http:Uwww.montgomerycountvmd,govlcouncillResources/Files!agend
a/cm/2015/150423/20150423
G02­
CountvGovernment.pdf, p.36
8
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
STATE OF MARYLAND
Executive Pay Plan - Salary Schedule
Annual Rates Effective January 1, 2015
Grade Profile
EPP 0001
EPP 0002
EPP 0003
EPPOO04
EPP 0005
EPP 0006
EPP 0007
EPP 0008
Scale
ES4
ES5
ES6
ES7
ES8
ES9
ES10
ES11
9904
9905
9906
9907
9908
9909
9910
9911
Minimum
$79,953
$85,902
$92,333
$99,275
$106,773
$114,874
$123,618
$133,069
Midpoint
$93,277
$100,252
$107,785
$115,923
$124,711
$134,203
$144,451
$155,522
Maximum
$106,604
$114,600
$123,236
$132,569
$142,646
$153,532
$165,281
$177,977
EPP 0009
EX91
9991
$153,027
$204,9~!
$256,866
CALCULATING BI-WEEKLY SALARY:
Annual Salary x .038143
=
Bi-Weekly Salary
Bi-Weekly Salary x 26.071428 - must equal at least
the annual salary, adding a penny until
it
does.
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
MONTGOMERY COUNTY GOVERNMENT
APPOINTED
CLASS
C~~ES
CODE
CLASS
TITLE
County Attorney
County Health Officer
Director, Addiction, Victim, and Mental
Hea1th Services
Director, Department of Transportation
Director. Department of Police
Director, Office of Finance
Director, Office of Management
39
7905
7910
7911
7915
39
36
39
39
39
7917
79?O
7921
7922
&
Budget
39
36
39
Director, Department of Environmental
Protection
Director, Department of Fire
&
Rescue
Services
Director, Department of Public libraries
Director, Department of liquor Control
Director, Department of Correction and
Rehabilitation
Director, Department of Facilities and
Services
Personnel Director
Oi rector, Department of Fam1'ly Resources
Director, Department of Recreation
Director, Department of Housing and
Community Development
Director, Office of Economic Development
Director, Office of Planning Policies
Director, Office of State Affairs
7927
7930
7935
36
39
36
36
36
7940
7945
7946
7947
7950
7952
7954
39
36
36
3S
7958
7959
35
35
Page 47
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
MONTGOMERY COUNTY COUNCIL
ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND
GEORGE LEVENTHAL
COUNCILMEMBER
AT-LARGE
MEMORANDUM
February 1, 2016
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Councilmembers
George Leventhal
~
~U
Bill on Compensation for Senior Non-Merit Employees: Additional Information
On December 8,2015 the Council introduced Bill 51-15, Non-merit employees - Salary Schedule
- Established.Councilmembers Eirich and Rke joined me in sponsoring this bill, which would require
the Executive to propose and the Council to approve a salary schedule for non-merit employees in the
Executive Branch. It would also require the Council to establish a salary schedule for non-merit
employees in the Legislative Branch.
My December 1, 2015 memo to you noted that the bill is prospective; it would apply only to
employees hired for non-merit positions after the bill becomes law. Also, the bill authorizes the
Executive to exceed the salary schedule, subject to Council approval,
II
if the Executive finds that it is
necessary to attract or retain a senior leader for a specific position."
Many other governments have adopted salary schedules for senior non-merit employees - for
example, the federal government's Executive Schedule, which ranges from Cabinet Secretaries to
appointed directors and deputy directors of multiple federal agencies, and the State of Maryland's
Executive Pay Plan. Howard and Prince George's counties in Maryland, as well as Arlington and Fairfax
counties and the City of Alexandria in Virginia, have such salary schedules as well.
Until 1997, Montgomery County also had a salary schedule for senior non-merit employees.
Restoring such a schedule now makes good sense. The approach in this bill will enable us to attract and
retain outstanding employees while meeting our obligations to the taxpayers. I welcome your support.
STELLA B, WERNER OFFICE BUILDING' •
100 MARYLAND AVENUE, 6TH FLOOR, ROCKVI LLE, MARYLAND 20850
240n77-781
1
OR
240n77-7900,
TTY
2401777-7914,
FAX
2401777-7989
WWW.MONTGOMERYCOUNTYMD,GOV/COUNCIL
,~
PRINTED
ON RECYCLED PAPER
(j)
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Drummer, Bob
From:
Kirkland, Bonnie
Wednesday, January 27, 2016 3:02 PM
Drummer, Bob
Firestine, Timothy; Kassiri, Fariba; Stokes, Shawn Y.
Bill 51-15 Salary Schedule
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Hello Bob - This is to follow up on our earlier conversation about the bill, in particular Section 2 which provides that the
Act will apply to hires or promotions "after the date when the Act becomes law." This is a little confusing because the
Act will become law on the day the CE signs it (presumably around February 1S, if enacted by the Council on Feb 9). But
the Bill will not actually take effect until 91 days after signature, setting up a period between Mid-February and Mid­
May, during which the Act applies but has not yet taken effect (and during which there is no approved salary schedule).
Making the Bill an expedited bill is unnecessary and does not address the issue I described above. If made an expedited
bill (meaning it would go into effect roughly Mid-February), there would still be no "approved" salary schedule until the
Council takes action on the Budget later in May. So the same situation would exist.
Because you indicated the intent that this Act be prospective, and to clarify the above, I would suggest an amendment
that substitutes the language in quotes above with "after the date when the Council approves the salary schedule
required by this Act."
It is my understanding that you agree with this clarification and will present it to the GO Committee at its work session.
Thank you for your time and assistance on this issue.
Bonnie
1
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Relative to regional local government employers, Montgomery County executive management salaries
typically rank within the top quarter or third for similar job positions. This position generally correlates with
the larger size and complexity of the County's operations, and is also associated with the County's above­
median economic and demographic rankings. In addition, as previously outlined, Montgomery County is
one of two jurisdictions in the comparison group (along with the District of Columbia) that does not offer a
defined benefit plan component in its retirement benefit program.
The table below summarizes Montgomery County's executive management pay rankings relative to the
regional comparison group for Director and Question A position. Comparisons show combined cash
compensation - actual base pay received by the executive managers in each position plus other
allowances captured in the survey such as take-home vehicles, vehicle stipends, longevity, and uniform
allowance, where applicable. The table also shows Montgomery County's ranking assuming an
employee receives maximum base pay in jurisdictions with an executive management pay scale or salary
range - illustrating the potential for wage growth. When assuming an employee is at the range
maximum, Montgomery County's relative ranking falls for all positions surveyed. More detail can be
found in the "Regional Comparisons" section of this report.
Regional Combined Cash Compensation Comparisons - Director and Question A Positions
Effective June 30, 2016
$207,879
$210,143
of Corrections and
1 of 12
4 of 16
10f9
2 of 15
1 of 11
1 of 15
2 of 16
10f13
1 of 15
5 of 10
40f11
1 of 6
10f7
20f6
30f9
·1
-1
-2
$207,879
$216,336
$210,143
$210,120
$215,120
$216,336
Director, Office of Procurement [1]
Assistant Chief Administrative Officer
ASSistant Chief of Police [2]
Director, Office of Community Partnerships [3]
Chief, Aging and Disability Services [4]
!
$190,550
$175,873
$174,166
$176,837
$170,754
$159,266
$159,266
Chief, Behavioral Health and Crisis Services [5]
Chief, Children, Youth, and Families
. ·2
-1
[1] Alexandria provided base pay for maximum only;
[2]
Position for Baltimore County
is
vacant; only maximum base pay shown; [3]
Position for Howard County
is
vacant; only maximum base pay shown;
[4]
Position in D.C. and Baltimore City
is
vacant; only
maximum base pay shown
[5]
Baltimore County did not provide
a
response for actual base pay; only maximum base pay shown
15
@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
Isiah
Leggett
County Executive
Jennifer A. Hughes
Director
MEMORANDUM
February 3, 2016
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Nancy
~~nt,
County Council
Jennifer~.
Hughes, Director, Office ofManagement and Budget
FEIS BlHeasiml for Bi1151-15, Non-merit employees - Salary Schedule­
Established
. Please find attached the fiscal impact statement for the above-referenced legislation.
JAH:fz
cc: Bonnie Kirkland, Assistant Chief Administrative Officer
Lisa Austin, Offices of the County Executive
Joy Nurmi, Special Assistant to the County Executive
Patrick Lacefield, Director, Public Information Office
Joseph F. Beach, Director, Department of Finance
Shawn Stokes, Director, Office ofHuman Recourses
Alex Espinosa, Office ofManagement and Budget
Corey Orlosky, Office ofManagement and Budget
Naeem Mia, Office of Management and Budget
Office of the Director
10 I Monroe Street, 14th Floor • Rockville, Maryland 20850 • 240-777·2800
www.montgomerycountymd.gov
montgomerycountymd.gov/311
240-773-3556 TTY
@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Fiscal Impact Statement
Council Bill 51-15 - Non-merit employees - Salary Schedule - Established
1.
Legislative Summary.
This bill would require the Gounty Executive to design and implement a salary schedule
for
non~merit
employees.
2.
An
estimate of changes in County revenues and expenditures regardless of whether
the revenues or expenditures::are assumed in the recommended or approved budget.
Includes source of information, assumptions, and methodologies used.
This bill would have no changes to County revenues. County expenditures are estimated
to increase $4,350 to account for OHR hours spent on creating a schedule, and a
minimum of$35,727 for ERP staff time and system work needed to implement the
schedule.
It
is anticipated that implementing a salary schedule would result in no
additional expenditures, as well
as
no projected savings, from personnel costs.
3. Revenue and expenditure estimates covering at least the. next 6 fiscal years.
This bill is estimated to have a total first year impact of at least $40,077, and no
'
additional impact over the remainder of the next
6
fiscal years.
4.
An
actuarial analysis through the entire amortization period for each biII that would
affect retiree pension or group insurance costs.
Not applicable.
5. An estimate of expenditures related to County's information technology (IT)
systems, including Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems.
See response
#2.
6. Later actions that may affed future revenue and expenditures
if
the bill authorizes
..
. future spending.
j
There are not likely to be later actions affecting projected expenditures.
7. An estimate of the staff time
~eeded
to implement the bill.
ORR
and
ERP
are estimating
a
total of
496
hours of staff time needed to implement the
bill.
S.
An
explanation of how the addition of new staff responsibilities would affect other
duties.
'
Additional responsibilities from this bill would be fit into the ERP project schedule, and
would slightly push back other projects.
9. An estimate of costs when an additional appropriation is needed.
An estimated additional appropriation of $4,350 to ORR and $35,727 to DTS for ERP
would be needed to implement the bill.
@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
10. A description of any variable that could affect revenue and cost estimates.
Any unforeseen IT issues with implementation) or competing priorities, could result
in
the need for increased hours to implement this bill.
11.
Ranges of revenue or expenditures that are uncertain or difficult to project.
If
additional ERP resources are needed to implement, expenditures could increase by up
to an additional $20,000.
12.
If
a biD is likely to have no fiscal impact, why that is the case.
Not applicable.
13. Other fiscal impacts or comments.
,.,
This bill is unlikely to introduce any personnel cost savings through the implementation
of a salary schedule for non-merit employees, and will take time away from
implementation of other IT needs throughout the County.
14. The following contributed to and concurred with this analysis:
Kaye Beckley, OHR
Mohamed Salem, OHR
Corey Orlosky, OMB
Date
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Eeonomic Impact Statement
Bill 51-15, Non-merit employees - Salary Schedule - Established
Background:
This legislation would establish a
salary
schedule for heads ofdepartments, principal
oftices, and other non-merit employees and require certain salaries to
be
set under the
salary
schedul(,;! established
for
these positions. Bill 51-15 would require the County
Executive (Executive) to propose a salary schedule
for
heads ofdepartments and
principal oftices, and other non-merit employees
in
the Executive Branch.
The
County
Council (Council) would then approve a salary schedule as part of the annual operating
budget. Bill 51-15 would also require the Council
to
establish a salary schedule for non­
merit employees in the Legislative Branch. The legislation would not mandate any
specific salary schedule. The legislation
will
not impact current employees, but will
impact
those non-merit employees
that
take positions subje<.-'1: to the legislation after the
effective date.
1. The sources of information, assumptions, and methodologies used.
The source ofinfbrmation
is
the OW Memorandum Report 2016-1. Comparative
Data on High-Level Manager Salaries, November 3, 2015. According to
that
report,
there are forty-nine (49) directors and non-merit appointees employed
in
the
Executive Branch
\\<ith
an average
salary
of$189,162. C\lrrently, these employees
have. not been covered bya salary schedule since 1996. In. addition, there
may
be
employees in
the
Legislative Branch that will become subject to the legislation.
2. A description of any variable that could affect the economic impact estimates.
The variables that could affect the future economic
impact
estimates arc:
1)
the
number of directors and non-merit appointees currently employed (49) in the
Executive Branch and those in the Legislative Branch, the difference between the
current salaries and the salary schedule approved by the Council, and 3) the number
of
emp}()yees
who reside in Montgomery County.
3. The Bill's positive or
o.egative ..
>ffect,; if
any on
employment,
spending,
savings,
investment, incomes, and property values in the County.
Without data on the
approved salary schedule,
it
is uncertain
¥lith
any specificity the
future impact on the County's total personal income. However. given the small
number of directors and
non~merit
employees as a share of
the
County~s
economy,
the impact on the County's total personal income would
be
de minimis.
4.
If
30Bm
is likely to have no economic impact, why is that the case?
Please see paragraph #3.
Page lof2
@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Economic Impact Statement
Bill 51-15,
Non-merit employees - Salary Schedule - Established
5.
The
following contributed to or-concurred with
this
analysis:
David Platt,
Mary
Ca.c;clotti, and Rob Hagedoorn. Department ofFinance.
f - - - 4 - - - - - - - ...........
f;vA-­
Page 2
of2
@