Greensboro City Council Work Session on Compensation and Bond Prioritization - May 1, 2026
Greensboro City Council Work Session on Compensation and Bond Prioritization - May 1, 2026
The Greensboro City Council held a work session on May 1, 2026, to review the proposed compensation plan for fiscal year 2627 and to prioritize capital projects for a potential November bond referendum. The meeting featured detailed presentations from staff on salary structures, benefits, and a decision-making framework for bond-funded projects. Council members engaged in extensive discussion on compensation equity, deferred maintenance, and balancing immediate needs with long-term community vision.
Discussion Items
Compensation Overview
- Assistant City Manager Larry Davis and Budget Director Jamaica Warner presented the compensation proposal for FY2627. Key components included:
- Step increases for sworn police and fire personnel: Employees on step plans will receive a 4% step increase if they meet performance expectations.
- General (non-step) employees: Will receive a 2.5% cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) plus a merit increase averaging 1.5%, for a total of approximately 4%.
- Roster employees (working <1,000 hours/year): Minimum wage increased by 4.6% to $18 per hour.
- Benefited employees: Minimum salary raised from $41,600 ($20/hr) to $44,200 ($21.25/hr). Only 175 benefited employees currently earn below the new minimum; they will be raised to that level plus receive COLA and merit.
- Staff explained that the general employee step plan (implemented four years ago) is being eliminated due to equity concerns; those employees will return to the general salary structure.
- Council members raised concerns about wage compression for employees just above the new minimum. Councilmember Holston argued for a compression adjustment, stating, "I'm concerned about those of our employees that we count on… we really should be doing more with compression." Councilmember Parker asked for a comprehensive cost analysis of a dollar increase across all 2,998 full-time employees.
- A discussion on total compensation highlighted that nearly half of all full-time benefited positions are in police and fire. Benefits such as separation allowance, deferred compensation, and signing bonuses differ between the two departments. Council member Black requested a comparative side-by-side chart of police vs. fire benefits, noting "I don't see a difference in public safety is public safety." Multiple council members expressed a desire to align fire benefits with police benefits where possible.
- Staff noted that the budget faces significant cost drivers: health insurance net increase of $4-5 million, state-mandated pension contribution increases of $5-6 million, and overtime normalization. City Manager Davis committed to bringing back more detailed estimates on compression impacts and a simplified benefits comparison.
Bond Prioritization and Vision 36 Implementation
- The second half of the session focused on prioritizing 33 capital projects for a potential $40 million bond referendum (targeting a November 2026 vote). Tiffany Shelton facilitated the process using a decision-making matrix aligned with the city's Vision 36 framework.
- Council members individually selected their top 5-6 projects, then placed green dots on a board to visualize collective priorities. The initial tier (5 dots) included:
- Parks and Recreation: Recreation center improvements (~$7.5 million)
- Transportation: Bridge replacements at Willow Street and Washington Street over Murray Boulevard
- Fire stations: Station 48 (new construction), Station 49 (refurbishment), and Box Road station (refurbishment)
- A second tier (3 dots) included bridge maintenance program and other transportation items.
- During discussion, several council members emphasized the need to address deferred maintenance. Councilmember Burr noted, "We can continue to grow, but it doesn't mean that the center has been taken care of." Councilmember Hoffman added, "Taking care of home… is where we want to have balance."
- Councilmember Parker advocated for setting aside a portion of the bond for "dreaming big"—innovative new projects not yet defined. Councilmember Thurn suggested considering a phased approach (2-year and 4-year plans) rather than a single referendum.
- Staff acknowledged that many projects might be eligible for federal or state grants, or public-private partnerships. Councilmember Wilson requested that staff provide information on potential alternative funding sources for each project.
- Councilmember Black raised the issue of traffic calming measures in neighborhoods as a high-impact item not currently reflected in the top priorities. Others cautioned against funding additional studies, preferring to implement existing plans.
Key Outcomes
- No formal votes were taken. The session was the first of several work sessions leading to a June 2, 2026 deadline for staff to prepare a bond resolution for council consideration.
- Direction to staff:
- Provide more detailed breakdowns on the top six projects, including specific scope (e.g., condition of bridges, specific recreation center needs, fire station status).
- Identify which projects are new construction versus maintenance/renovation.
- Evaluate each project’s potential for grant funding or public-private partnerships.
- Present a simplified comparative chart of police vs. fire benefits, and an estimate of compression costs for employees just above the new $21.25/hour minimum.
- Consider a phased bond approach and explore a separate category for "dreaming big" projects.
- The council will reconvene to refine the project list and determine final bond composition, with a target of presenting a recommendation to the Local Government Commission in time for the November 2026 referendum.
Meeting Transcript
And we will move forward. So today we'll be a little bit longer. So with that, we have a few refreshments for you. And just feel free to either get up or walk me. I'll let you know we'll get those to you. But the reason we want to take a little bit more time, we've got two presentations. First, we're going to turn it over to ACM Larry Davis, Director Jamaican Warner will navigate through our compensation. We'll have to probably think that around that. We know that that has been a big part of what you all communicated to me. And also a big part of what our staff is looking for. The second half of our presentation today will highlight some of the discussion. This is our kind of our second shot at talking about bonds. This is more materialized. If you have more information, you've got a email from that highlight a list. I know the fire department has a number of things. And we'll take some time to go through those. You see the boards that are up. This is again going to be a style where we will navigate through. You also have what we really dug in and worked on at the retreat. This will be the first chance to really put Vision 36 into action with our decision making matrix to help out with that. Tiffany Shelton is going to help us facilitate that portion to navigate through. And we will have to enjoy and have a good time. So ACM letters. Thank you, Mr. Manager. First presentation today, Jamaica Waterman, John Decker only. Items or issues that will be part of your considerations of 2627. This one deals with compensation. It speaks somewhat to 2627 itself. And what we are currently considering for the manager's recommended budget that's being worked on confirmed. And if some of them is more contextual in nature, just to give you a better sense of what part of the budget compensation makes up, and what are those some of the primary components within and how that term is much broader than it's sometimes considered. And it does go well beyond your actual salary, but includes a lot of other factors as well. So if that's your mind, John, let you think. So when you think about police exempt and fire exempt, we're talking about the managers of police and fire who are not eligible for overtime pay. The non-exempt are your rank and file police and fire swarm personnel. They are on step plans. Speaking of step plans, those employees will receive one-step movement, which equates to a 4% increase, provided that they have at least met performance expectations over the prior year. In addition, employees in rostered positions are the positions that work fewer than 1,000 hours per calendar year. They work for wages and no benefit. These employees will also receive uh increase to their minimum wage by 4.6% up to $18 per hour. Any questions about this slide? And if you have questions or comments at any time course stop, we'll go and break it. Yes. Question one. And number two, we have talked about general employees that were previously on a step plan off step plan. Can you tell us how the structure adjustment or whatever works for that? Thank you. Great question. So the journey for both those employees on the step plan and those who are not roughly will end up in roughly the same place. When it comes to step increases, those increases are predetermined and they're built in with a four percent increase.
openpublica.com