Legislative-pay panel gives raises initial OK

State legislators, judges and constitutional officers are one step closer to big pay raises after the approval of a review by the citizens commission tasked with setting the salaries.

The Independent Citizens Commission’s Monday morning meeting ended nearly two months of study, discussion and testimony to determine salary increases for lawmakers by backing higher pay, including a recommended 148 percent increase for legislators.

By unanimous vote, the commission moved forward figures set Friday. The “proposed salary adjustments” would bump legislators’ pay from $15,869 to $39,400 and give the governor and attorney general $53,241 and $56,868 raises, respectively.

But even before Monday’s vote, objections to the proposed raises started coming in from voters.

At the close of Monday’s meeting, commission Chairman Larry Ross said he was pleased with the group’s thorough work and its ability to come to agreement despite differences of opinion.

“Is this a big change? Yes, it’s a big change,” Ross said. “The initial [salary recommendations] to me [are] a pragmatic, realistic and sen-

sible start.”

The group, which first met in December, had to finish its initial review Monday in order to change any salary by more than 15 percent, according to the recently adopted Amendment 94.

Although the public will have a chance to comment, the commission has the final say.

After the adoption of the initial review of salaries, and the recommendation that the Legislature end annual office-expense payments of $14,400 to most legislators to offset some of the increase in salaries, the commission reset the date for its final vote on the salaries.

The recommendations to the Legislature are not binding, but Senate President Pro Tempore Jonathan Dismang, R-Searcy, said he is already figuring out the best way to wind down office-expense reimbursements.

Dismang said he and House Speaker Jeremy Gillam, R-Judsonia, can make the rule changes that would end monthly office-expense payments to all legislators except committee chairman, but that he would be working with members to expedite the process.

“I think for the most part [opposition to the recommendations] is minimal,” Dismang said. “Most of us would like to put [public skepticism over office expenses] behind us.”

Gillam said that once the commission finishes, he will do what he can to help carry out their requests.

But before the commission settles salaries for elected officials on March 13, the group must oversee a 30-day public comment period for residents to weigh in, as well as a public meeting scheduled for 10 a.m. March 2 at the University of Arkansas Administration complex in Cammack Village.

If the current proposals held through March, the lieutenant governor’s salary would remain at $42,315 while the secretary of state’s salary would go from $54,848 to $90,000. The state auditor, treasurer and land commissioner would see their annual pay go from $54,848 to $85,000.

Dismang and Gillam would see their salaries raised from $17,771 to $45,000.

The proposed pay increases for the judiciary were:

Chief justice: from $161,601 to $180,000.

Supreme Court justice: from $149,589 to $166,500.

Appeals court chief judge: from $147,286 to $164,000.

Court of Appeals judge: from $144,982 to $161,500.

Circuit judge: from $140,372 to $160,000.

Arkansas district judge: from $125,495 to $140,000.

Although the public comment period has yet to officially begin, the commission has already received more than a dozen emails since Friday from residents concerned — and some upset — by the commission’s green-lighting such large raises.

Rufus Herndon of Fayetteville wrote that in 23 years as a state employee, he never received a salary increase of more than 3 percent, comparing it to the commission’s suggestion to more than double legislators’ salaries.

“According to [a state employment report], the average salary is $18.42 per hour. How can we justify paying part time employees more than another state employee who works 40 hours per week, 52 weeks per year,” Herndon wrote. “I feel it is only fair to look at the average part-time salary of all citizens.”

Glen Pate of Mena wrote to the commission and said that the pay raises, if finalized, would create “a new class of career politicians” in the state.

“I do not object to a modest pay increase but 2.5 times [the legislators’ current salaries] is ridiculous. Our representatives SERVE the people, not for pay but for the privilege of serving,” Pate wrote. “Doubling legislators’ pay will not benefit constituents as incumbents usually are re-elected as it is now. Arkansas should not become Washington, D.C.!”

Another email, from someone described as a “concerned voter,” said such large salary increases were “an outrage and slap in the face” to working Arkansans.

“These huge pay raises should not happen until after the working public has a significant increase in pay and our disabled/social security recipients get an increase of more than an [annual $15 increase],” the voter wrote. “I oppose these pay increases that should be voted on by the public instead of being handed out by a panel.”

On Monday, Ross said that the commission’s recommendations were far from set and that the public comment period could shake a few things up.

“I think public comment will have its effective intent [and do] what it’s supposed to do,” Ross said. “It’s not over until we vote on it [again]. I invite public comment. The committee was not unanimous in all of its votes. You never know what’s gonna happen.”

Meanwhile, legislation has been filed by Sen. Jon Woods, R-Springdale, that would empower the commission to shift its focus to prosecutors’ pay.

Woods, who co-wrote the initiative that led to Amendment 94 and the creation of the citizens’ commission, said that state prosecutors’ salaries were omitted due to an oversight.

Senate Bill 177 would empower the commission to evaluate salary increases for prosecutors no later than 30 days after it became law.

Once the evaluation began, the commission would have another 30 days to recommend any increases or decreases in prosecutors’ salaries. The legislation would then require a public comment period of no longer than 45 days.