A successful salary grievance by Lubbock County Tax Assessor-Collector Ronnie Keister rekindled an ongoing rift on the Commissioners Court.
The court previously rejected raises in this budget cycle for elected officials. But in an August 24 meeting, the court voted 4 – 1 to grant Keister’s grievance and raise his salary from roughly $91,000 to $110,000 — an increase of about 20 percent.
“I don’t think that’s fair,” said Michael Dalby, commissioner for Precinct 1 in Southwest Lubbock County.
Dalby was the lone ‘no’ vote – saying, “Why did you vote to deny a 2 percent increase in pay raise for elected officials? But yet we come in and we vote to approve almost a 20 percent pay increase to one elected official.”
“I think Ronnie Keister does a phenomenal job. … He’s a personal friend of mine off the clock,” Dalby said.
But Dalby said he’s voted ‘no’ every time he’s been asked to consider a pay raise for elected officials since taking office in January 2025. That included a proposed across-the-board pay raise for elected officials in both 2025 (which passed) and 2026 (which did not pass), along with salary grievances for Keister, Sheriff Kelly Rowe and Justice of the Peace Susan Rowley.
“All of our elected officials probably deserve a raise, and our employees certainly deserve a raise. But I just don’t think it’s right to give one [without the others],” Dalby said.
The reason for ‘yes’ and Keister’s reaction
State law creates a county grievance process for elected officials who think their salaries are too low.
Curtis Parrish, county judge, introduced the issue by saying the county’s grievance committee voted 8 – 1 in favor of Keister’s increased salary in mid-August.
Parrish told commissioners, “Keister had 10 minutes to make his presentation to the committee. He did very well.”
Keister told LubbockLights.com, “I felt it was time. I hadn’t done a grievance on my salary since I’d been elected.”
Keister was first elected nearly 18 years ago in November 2008.
“We have taken on additional tasks,” Keister said – explaining that his office had to collect a venue tax for the proposed Expo Center and coordinate new regulations of local game rooms.
“The DMV thinks enough of us that we’re currently a pilot county for two projects,” Keister said.
One of them is a complete overhaul of how vehicles are registered in Texas.
“Right after COVID in 2021, we were given an award by the Independent Auto Dealers Association that they don’t usually give to tax assessors,” Keister said.
He’s tasked with overseeing 50 or more employees, he said.
Cary Shaw, commissioner for Precinct 3 in Northeast Lubbock County, reminded fellow commissioners that Keister took the initiative to process electric vehicles statewide – bringing millions of dollars to Lubbock County.
Jason Corley, commissioner for Precinct 2 in Southeast Lubbock County, agreed, saying, “I think we’re lucky to have him.”
Dalby responded, “100 percent agree with everything you said!”
Keister reacted to Dalby, saying, “I understand his viewpoint and why he’s saying what he’s saying.”
The priority is the employees
Dalby’s priority is a pay raise for employees – not elected officials.
There seems to be a consensus for the employee pay raise – a cost-of-living adjustment (COLA). But Dalby is still concerned even at this stage of the budget negotiations.
He told other commissioners in the August 24 meeting, “[We] still really don’t have a clear picture on COLAs for employees.”
Corley and Shaw both made public statements in August saying COLA is a high priority.
Rackler is committed to a 3.5 percent COLA, saying, “I had denied an elected official pay raise and said we will take care of our employees this year with a COLA before we take care of our elected officials, because our elected officials got a pay raise last year.”
Dalby told LubbockLights.com, “I voted five ‘no’ votes the past two years because, in my mind, that’s how important funding cost-of-living adjustments to the employees is to me.”
In addition to COLA, Corley, Rackler and Shaw are publicly committed to a no-new-revenue tax rate.
Dalby is more cautious.
“I think we’re passing a no-new-revenue rate with increased spending in some areas. There’s a fundamental problem with that,” Dalby said.
Dalby is opposed if the budget requires, for example, spending $8 million from reserves, he said.
“I think that’s an example of poor leadership – and saying one thing and doing another,” Dalby said.
The squabble
Parrish made the motion to grant Keister’s salary grievance. Corley gave the second.
Even though both supported Keister’s higher pay, they had a tense back-and-forth on the dais.
Parrish pushed Corley for a reason to support Keister’s pay raise but not any other elected official.
“Which offices would qualify for bringing in money income in order to justify a salary increase? … I’m trying to get a public policy from this dais as to what justifies a salary increase,” Parrish said.
Was it just a matter of bringing more money to the county?
Corley answered, “Ronnie [Keister] went through the process. … The [grievance] committee disagreed with my assessment on it, but I’ll accept their assessment.”
Parrish accused Corley of talking in circles.
“Here’s my particular problem. We talk about we need good employees, including we need good elected officials,” Parrish said.
Corley accused Parrish of talking about a separate subject that was not on the meeting agenda – pay raises for all elected officials versus the salary grievance for Keister.
Corley said, “Before you start your monologue, how long is this going to be?”
Parrish said, “Go get a drink of water. But please don’t interrupt me. We extend this courtesy of each other now.”
Shortly after that, Rackler asked if the court could go ahead and vote.
LubbockLights.com covered several instances of budget tension in the last three years. Use the links below to see our continuing coverage.
