House concurs in bill requiring 1% longevity for detention officers; debate centers on local cost and unfunded mandate

House members debated Senate Bill 236, which would require counties to provide detention officers a 1% annual longevity payment, bringing them into parity with sheriffs and other county law enforcement longevity benefits.

Sponsor Representative Estman said the change would improve recruitment and retention and cited an average detention officer wage near $19 per hour. "This is gonna give them 1% per year after they've worked there for a year, and it will be given to them in their monthly paychecks," Estman said.

Opponents called the measure an unfunded mandate on counties. Representative Byrne said the state ‘‘owes nothing’’ and urged a no vote; Representative Mercer and other opponents argued counties should retain bargaining discretion and local control over county budgets. Supporters, including representatives with corrections experience, described detention work as demanding and largely unseen and argued the modest longevity would help retention.

During debate Representative Esman noted an existing statute referenced in floor remarks (transcript reference to "MCA 7 4 2 2 5 0 7"), arguing the omission of detention officers from a prior statutory longevity requirement appeared to be an oversight the bill corrects. The sponsor described 37 counties as having detention facilities; the sponsor said 21 of those counties already provide longevity by contract, leaving roughly 16 counties that would be affected.

The committee recommendation to concur was adopted by the House on a 58–42 recorded vote. The transcript records absentee recorded votes for Brewster, Falk and Vinton as "aye."