Travis County Commissioners Court
June 19, 2007
Item 21
Number 21 receive a briefing and take appropriation actions on the citizens committee on salaries regarding fiscal year 2008 salaries and after this item we'll pick up the tax rate item. Morning, how are do youking?
>> morning. How are you all doing this morning?
>> with me this morning are chris and dr. Springsteed from your citizens advisory committee on official salaries. In preparing for the budget you called your committee together to do a short review of positions for '07 but asked me meet again in proaption for fy08 and do a comprehensive very -- review of salaries disregarding the judicial salary scale, and so he is here today to give you an overview of their report.
>> doctor, welcome.
>> thank you. As most of you know, I am woodard springs is -- associate professor, and in looking at salaries this year we followed the same procedure we have in past years, however one of the things we did do this year was to be much more comp sennive -- comprehensive in look at laterrer -- at salaries across counties. I did exclude Travis County but that would be a little bit too much of a feedback, and this year we had about 22 counties in our sample. And of course, getting the counties, the data is very much dpentd on getting -- denied nt on getting the other -- dependent on getting the other county's cooperation. We looked at home price and a whole series of variables. And in the end, when it all shook out, a variable based on population was the best explanatory variable. We also looked at budget numbers but because they are so tiegly correlated -- tightly correlated with population we could not looking at those without creating a lot of statistical problems. Of course, this is just a starting point for our discussion. It's not the final point. And to make it short, we looked at total compensation for the position rather than salary, and we did include issues like health insurance and retirement benefits, et cetera. And I would like to digress and say thank you for belinda and the folks at Travis County. The economy just do not -- the committee just do not do its work without their efforts and hard work and I would like to say a big thank you. That has been the situation as long as we've been doing this. We got our basic values and we looked and to give you the bottom line, the committee recommended that elected officials receive the same 3.5 % increase that rank and file are getting. Some of the positions -- actually the predicted salary was less than their -- they're currently receiving and others were receiving somewhat more than the model predicted but on the whole, the 3.5% increase that rank and file are receiving seemed to be the best compromise on what to do. Do you have any questions?
>> questions? (pause in captioning)
>> .
>> committee did not meet for two years simply because you people on the Commissioners court decided there was no money to give elected officials any raises so, you I know, I think there are probably a number of factors that play into this. To be perfectly honest, since these are electtive offices, I'm sure there are some political consideration considerations that come into that.
>> that is why I ask the question. To me there is a clear difference in going out and tell the constituents that you voted to give vowers a raise versus you voted to take the same cola that everybody got. I mean, because I do think that citizens do understand colas, but they also understand salary versus a salary increase. Maybe it's just the way you tell them. You try to get them to understand, you know, I really, yes, I knew what the job paid whenever I took the job. I ran for the office. I had nothing in my my-- my--literature when I was running saying I was going to vote to give myself a raise. I think it's fair that they get the same as rank and file get. I think people are more an understanding of that. Maybe it's a way each of us present when they say, what was your salary when you started and what is your salary now, so I guess it's really sort of everybody, each individual's taking on how we need to couch that.
>> right. Our recommendation on compensation is really about we're saying that we think as a committee, this is what the office is worth. I know in the past some elected officials have as a matter of conscience apped to take not the full raise or any of the raise. I know that. Certainly that would be the official's choicement I can understand that. I think if I were in that situation I might do that too. But that is is separate issue in our mind from the issue of whether or not the office, regardless of who is in there, is worth a certain compensation. So, you know, I would say that our discussions did not involve individual office holders at all. We looked at the office, the position, regardless of is in there. Like I say, if you for example, choose to not accept the raise, certainly that would be your choice.
>> when you look at, trample let's just take the tax assessor, since she is here. I think it's going to be a pretty hard swallow to go from 101 down to 89. Now, is this a situation where you feel like every couple or threer years that we go out and these really are strictly predicated on what is going on in the state? Because, you know, the salaries really should be attached to more of a here is what the survey shows across the state, and shows bounce back and forth? I mean, it's hard to imagine first of all, that you go to somebody and say, hey, guess what, I mean, salary, survey shows that you're making 14 14,000 too much and, but that is what it is.
>> right.
>> maybe some people would go, well, if that what it shows, then pay me that.
>> well, that is why that number that popped out of my statistical model was not our final recommendation and we recommended the same four percent or three and a half percent or whatever, the same cola that the rank and file get for that office also. One would not expect the predicted salaries for any county to be right on, spot on with the model, because there is a certain amount of random variability in the model from county to county. The model takes and the results I got this year could be samples specific. In other words, if we had been able to get data from 34 counties instead of 22, the numbers might have look different. Although it tends to be the smaller counties that we have trouble getting the numbers from. The large county are really good. They have the staff and the people to send the information to planning and budget, whereas some of the smaller counties may not have that. Those resources. So that is one of the things I emphasize to the committee every year when I do this, is my predictions and models cannot do our thinking for us. They can give us a starting point, not a finished product.
>> we have been joined by ms. Beeny. Sorry to start without you. If we had known you were on the way, we would have held things up. Okay, move that we accept the committee's reportsecond.
>> any other discussion? All in favor. That passes by unanimous vote.
>> thank you.
>> we continue to appreciate you all's work for us. When we pointed the committee, we thought we would use y'all one or two years but it's been now five five?
>> I think six or seven coun having the opportunity to serve.
>> thank you.
>> there's a lot of work that has to be done in the buildings first in the way of remodeling.
>> congratulations on that
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Last Modified:
Wednesday, June 20, 2007 8:59 PM