Relating to a pay raise for certain state employees.
Summary
SB 572 would provide a $10,000 gross annual salary increase for each full-time state agency employee for each year of the state fiscal biennium beginning September 1, 2025. The bill also extends a prorated increase to part-time state agency employees, based on the ratio of their hours to a full-time schedule. The proposal expressly includes employees of institutions of higher education within its coverage.
The bill excludes members of the Legislature and members of boards, commissions, or other governing bodies of state agencies who may receive only per diem or expense reimbursement rather than a salary for full-time employment. If enacted, the pay raise would take effect September 1, 2025, and would apply across the 2026 and 2027 fiscal years of the biennium.
Impact
SB 572 would amend state compensation policy by mandating a uniform salary increase for covered state employees rather than leaving pay adjustments solely to agency budgeting or appropriations decisions. It would directly affect payroll obligations for state agencies and institutions of higher education, increasing state personnel costs for the biennium beginning in fiscal year 2026. The bill does not create a new program or regulatory scheme, but it would materially change how much the state must appropriate for employee compensation and would set a statutory floor for covered salaries.
Sentiment
The available record shows the bill was referred to the Senate Finance Committee and no votes or committee testimony are included, so there is no documented floor or committee sentiment in the provided materials. Based on the bill’s subject, it appears to be a pro-employee compensation measure aimed at improving state workforce pay. The absence of recorded opposition or support in the provided context means the overall sentiment cannot be measured from the transcript record here.
Contention
The main policy issue likely to generate debate is cost: a $10,000 across-the-board raise for all full-time state employees, including higher education staff, would require significant new state spending and could draw scrutiny from budget writers and appropriators. Another possible point of contention is the bill’s broad, uniform approach, which does not distinguish among agencies, job classifications, or current salary levels. The exclusion of legislators and governing board members is explicit, but no other carveouts are provided, so questions may arise about fairness, fiscal impact, and whether a flat raise is the best way to address recruitment and retention.
Relating to the requirement by certain governmental entities for diversity, equity, and inclusion statements and training from employees, prospective employees, and contractors.