Professional Documents
Culture Documents
required compensation report to the Executive Appropriations Committee. The conclusion of the 2012 Report, unanimously adopted by the EJCC, was the needforasignificantincreaseinthesalariesofUtahsfive(5)statewideelectedofficials. AlthoughtheEJCCisnotrequiredtosubmitanewreportuntilnextyear,theEJCCmembersstill feel strongly that there is a need to adjust the salaries of these elected officials. The EJCC has metseveraltimesthispastyeartoexamineits2012report.TheEJCCisstilloftheopinionthat itsconclusionsarevalidandisthereforeresubmittingits2012reportfortheUtahLegislatures consideration. ImplementationConsiderations Thetimingofanysalaryincreasewasnotpartofthe2012EJCCreport.TheEJCCmemberssaw those issues as being more political in nature and not necessarily part of its charge. If phasing inasalaryincreaseoveraperiodofyearsweretomakeanincreasemorepoliticallyacceptable thenthatoptionshouldbeconsidered.Anotherpossibilityistomakeanyincreaseeffectiveata futuredatesoastoallowtheexistingtermsofofficetobecompleted(January1,2017). Conclusion In discharging its statutory duties, the EJCC devoted considerable time and effort to its 2012 recommendations.Wearemindfulofthefactthattherearealwayschallengesassociatedwith increasing the salaries of public officials. However, we are now a decade since any meaningful increase. The EJCC sees its 2012 recommendations as still valid and meriting legislative consideration. WeappreciatetheopportunitytoservethecitizensoftheStateofUtah
2012
ToMembersoftheExecutiveAppropriationsCommittee: AsrequiredbyUtahlaw(UtahCodeAnn.6785),theExecutiveandJudicialCompensation Commission(EJCC)ispleasedtosubmitits2012ReportonExecutiveandJudicialsalaries. Since its inception, the EJCC has recognized the problems inherent in achieving adequate and equitable salaries for public executives. At the federal, state, and local government levels, salariesofexecutivepositionshavegenerallylaggedbehindexecutivelevelsinprivateindustry. Thissituationhasbeenparticularlytrueinthecaseofelectedofficials. TheCommissionisawarethatintheeyesofthepublic,acertainamountofprestigeandhonor is associated with the holding of an elected office. Accordingly, this characteristic of public officeisusuallyconsideredtobepartofthe"compensation"forsuchoffice.Atthesametime, it is imperative that the salaries for these important positions reflect the duties and responsibilitiesassociatedwiththem. The EJCC focused its primary study efforts during 2011 and 2012 on the salaries of Utahs five constitutionally established elected offices (Governor, Lt. Governor, Attorney General, State Auditor, and State Treasurer). The EJCC recommends substantial increases in the salaries for thesepositions.Thisreportoutlinestherationaleforthisrecommendation. In addition, the EJCC reviewed the salaries of Utahs judges. At this time the EJCC makes no recommendations for modifications in judicial salaries. However, we do note that questions have arisen regarding the nature and number of applicants for judicial vacancies. We believe thisissuemeritscarefulmonitoring. WeappreciatetheopportunitytoservethecitizensoftheStateofUtah.
Sincerelyyours, THEELECTEDOFFICIALANDJUDICIALCOMPENSATIONCOMMISSION _________________________________________________
November 2012
Contents
ElectedOfficialandJudicialCompensationCommissionMembers.............................................................3 RoleofElectedOfficialandJudicialCompensationCommission.................................................................4 STATEWIDEELECTEDOFFICIALSSALARIES................................................................................................... 4 EJCCRecommendationsforUtahsConstitutionallyEstablishedOfficials...............................................4 ConsequencesofUnrealisticallyLowSalaries.......................................................................................... 5 AppropriateTimeforChange................................................................................................................... 6 EJCCStudyEfforts.....................................................................................................................................6 Conclusion.................................................................................................................................................6 ProposedSalaryRecommendations......................................................................................................... 7 AdditionalRecommendations.................................................................................................................. 7 JUDICIALSALARIES........................................................................................................................................8 PriorJudicialCompensationAdjustments................................................................................................ 8 2012EJCCReviewofJudicialSalaries....................................................................................................... 8 CurrentJudicialSalaries............................................................................................................................ 8 Recommendations....................................................................................................................................9 APPENDIXA:StateAppointedOfficials ....................................................................................................... 10 APPENDIXB:LocalGovernment................................................................................................................. 11 APPENDIXC:UniversityPresidentSalaries................................................................................................. 13 APPENDIXD:UtahSchoolDistrictSuperintendents................................................................................... 14 APPENDIXE:StateComparison(StateElectedOfficialsSalaries)...............................................................15 APPENDIXE:StateComparison(JudicialSalaries)...................................................................................... 17
November 2012
AppointedbyElectedOfficialandJudicialCompensationCommission
KarenHale
AppointedbyUtahSenatePresidentMichaelWaddoups
DavidBroadbent
AppointedbyUtahHouseSpeakerRebeccaD.Lockhart
JohnA.Matthews
AppointedbyUtahGovernorGaryR.Herbert
DavidR.Bird,CommissionViceChair AppointedbyUtahStateBarCommission
November 2012
The Elected Official and Judicial Compensation Commission (EJCC), statutorily established as an independent commission since 1969 (called EJCC since 1981), is responsible to study and make recommendationsregardingthecompensationofUtahselectedofficials.Inaddition,theEJCC also studies and makes compensation recommendations for Utahs Judiciary (Utah Code Ann. UCA6784etseq.). The EJCC is composed of 6 members. Three appointments come from the Governor, the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate. One member is also appointed by the Utah State Bar. These members then appoint an additional 2 members. The law mandates that no more than 3 members may come from one political party. The EJCC leadership must also comefromdifferentpoliticalparties.Noemployeeoftheexecutivebranchofgovernmentmay serveontheEJCCandtheEJCCisstaffedbytheOfficeofLegislativeFiscalAnalyst.
November 2012
As we reviewed comparative information from other states, market data for private sector executive positions and current salary levels for appointed officials in state and local government, the EJCC felt that there was a compelling case for a more substantive restructuring of these salaries rather than a simple costofliving (COLA) adjustment. (It should be noted that current Utah law specifically sets only the salary of the Utah Governor. The remaining executive elected positions are based at 95% percentage of the Governors salary (UtahCodeAnn. 67221)).Afterreviewingthisinformation,ourconclusionswereinfluenced bythefollowingconsiderations: 1. Contemporary market analysis regarding private sector executive compensation has little applicability to Utahs statewide elected offices. In fact, market data for a private sector CEO of virtually any public or private entity with a budget of $12B and spanning the scope of responsibilities of a governor would require compensationvastlyhigherthananylevelwemightcontemplate. 2. The commission also feels that salary comparisons with other states are also of limited value. However, the most current information comparing other states is provided in Appendix B. The nature of the various elected positions varies from state to state. For example, while the title governor may be common among states, the actual powers and duties may vary greatly. In our view it appears these comparisons are more an exercise in political acceptability than any meaningful analysis. The hypercharged political dynamics surrounding elected officials salaries means it is difficult for a state to make significant salary adjustments. As such state comparisons act largely as a form of salary compression. Simply put, these offices are political offices and individuals seek them for a wide variety of politicalandpersonalreasons,noneofwhicharerelatedtosalary.
November 2012
indicates that many local government senior leadership positions are also paid significantly morethanthestategovernmentelectedpositions(SeeAppendixB). It is assumed these positions are fulltime and the compensation should reflect a realistic full timeamount.Implicitlythatmeansthereshouldnotbeanassumptionthatindividualsholding these offices are either independently wealthy or will be required to augment the positions salary with other financial resources. Unrealistically low compensation can add to the perception that officeholders may be required to augment their salary from political funds or othersources.
Conclusion
TheEJCCrecommendsasubstantialincreaseinthesalaryofUtahsGovernor.(Increasesinthe Governors salary automatically translate into increases in the other elected officials since they are tied to the salary of the governor.) Ultimately we find the current salary for the Chief Justice of the Utah Supreme Court, who is the head of the judicial branch, provides some underlyingrationaleforasalaryfigure.Theheadsofthelegislativebranchdonotholdfulltime positions. In total, these adjustments would increase state expenditures by $262,700 ongoing
6 November 2012
from the General Fund (salary plus benefits provided by the Office of the Legislative Fiscal Analyst).
ProposedSalary PercentIncrease $ 150,000 36.5% $ 142,500 36.5% $ 142,500 36.5% $ 142,500 36.5% $ 142,500 36.5%
Additional Recommendations
In addition to the actual salary proposals, the EJCC also recommends that the legislative mechanics for setting these salaries be modified. Currently any salary changes for these five positions, including COLA adjustments, are made via an independent piece of legislation (Utah CodeAnn. 67221).Thisprocessisentirelyuniquetothesepositions.Salaryadjustmentsfor all other officials, including judges, are part of the appropriations process and set out in the appropriations act. It is important to note that judges salaries are clearly delineated and are a separatelineitemintheappropriationsact.TheEJCCfeelsthesefiveelectedpositionsshould behandledinthesamemanner.
November 2012
JUDICIAL SALARIES
Current Judicial Salaries Judgeship Salary DistrictCourtJudge $133,450 Juvenile CourtJudge $133,450 Courtof AppealsJudge $140,120 Supreme CourtJudge $146,800
There was some concern expressed about the number and backgrounds of individuals applying for judicial vacancies (the applicant pool). The composition and number of judicial applicants appears to be consistent with those applying for judicial vacancies over the past few years. Changes in the applicant pool can be an indicator of the adequacy of salaries. There was some concern the nature of the applicant pool is becoming somewhat weighted toward lawyers who are currently employed in existing government positions as opposed to lawyers from the privatesector.
November 2012
However,atthispointthereisonlyanecdotalevidencetosupportthisconcern.Therewasalso some question about whether information on the nature of the applicant pool is being maintained. In 2012 responsibility for the management of the judicial application process was shifted from the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) to the Governors office. We would hope that the transfer of these responsibilities will not result in the loss of any historical informationonthenatureoftheapplicantpool.
Recommendations
The EJCC does not recommend any structural salary adjustment for judicial salaries. We do recommend that if COLA increases for state employees are authorized that they should continue to apply to judicial salaries as was done last year. The EJCC does acknowledge that it hasbeenseveralyearssincethelastmajorjudicialsalaryincrease.Assuch,theremaywellbea needforanincreaseinjudicialsalariesinthenearfuture.
November 2012
10 November 2012
2. Attorney General The sample includes 19 local government head attorneys for both citiesandcounties.
Equiv.State Salary $120,044 $116,680 $101,801 $163,370 $61,569
3. StateAuditorThissampleincludes9localgovernmentleadauditorpositions
11
November 2012
4. StateTreasurerThissampleincludes18localgovernmenttreasurerposition:
Equiv.State Salary $84,403 $74,673 $61,472 $161,010 $99,538
12
November 2012
13
November 2012
$ $ $ $ $
14
November 2012
OF
STATE
GOVERNMENTS
Table 4.11 SELECTED STATE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIALS: ANNUAL SALARIES BY REGION State or other jurisdiction Governor 0 (c) 145,000 95,000 86,890 173,987 Lieutenant governor 134,592 115,000 (a-2) 41,896 130,490 Attorney general 160,002 135,000 90,000 72,408 151,127 Treasurer 85,248 119,328 70,000 54,305 139,189 Auditor 85,248 119,328 128,785 54,305 175,000
Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky (g) Louisiana Maine Maryland
90,000 150,000 171,000 130,273 (e) 139,339 117,312 115,348 177,412 107,881 130,000 99,636 151,643* 130,000 70,000 150,000
68,500 110,000 77,775 124,851 91,609 114,420 30,400 135,669 84,031 103,212 54,000 113,615* 115,000 (h) 125,000
80,000 110,000 143,769 128,972 137,791 114,420 103,984 156,541 87,790 123,669 98,901 113,615 115,000 92,248 125,000
68,500 110,000 112,250 128,972 115,781 108,972 93,756 135,669 72,974 103,212 86,003 113,615* 115,000 69,264 125,000
140,000 (d) 107,457 135,000 152,160 129,024 ... 149,005 72,974 103,212 N.A. 113,615 132,620 96,782 ...
139,832 159,300 (e) 120,303 122,160 133,821
15
November 2012
OF
STATE
GOVERNMENTS
SELECTED STATE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIALS: ANNUAL SALARIES BY REGION State or other jurisdiction Governor 108,167 105,000 141,000 113,834 175,000 110,000 179,000 (e) 139,590 110,283 148,886 147,000 93,600 183,255* 129,210 106,078 98,031 170,340 (k) 150,000 109,470 142,542* 175,000 166,891 150,000 144,423 105,000 Lieutenant governor 86,362 75,000 60,000 (h) 141,000 85,000 151,500 123,198 85,614 78,041 114,713 (a-2) 153,907* 108,808 46,545 120,000 57,027 (h) 7,200 (m) 104,000 60,507* 36,321 91,129 (h) 76,261 (a-2) Attorney general 99,712 95,000 133,000 110,114 141,000 95,000 151,500 123,198 113,266 109,986 132,850 77,200 152,443 115,610 92,007 97,928 167,976 150,000 98,509 108,202* 150,000 151,718 95,000 140,147 137,150 Treasurer (a-6) 85,000 97,000 104,364 141,000 85,000 127,000 123,198 82,849 109,986 114,713 72,000 152,443 108,808 92,007 78,363 182,880 (a-14) 104,000 90,376* 157,249 113,436 95,000 68,556 92,000 Auditor 86,018 86,018 ... ... 139,000 85,000 151,500 123,198 87,728 109,985 114,713 140,964 152,443 140,050 N.A. 98,345 182,880 198,000 104,000 90,376* 167,902 116,950 95,000 111,000 92,000
Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania(i) Rhode Island (j) South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont (l) Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming
16
November 2012
17
November 2012
18
November 2012