A discussion about county commissioners donating their pay raise to other elected officials caused some testy moments at Monday’s meeting with two commissioners using the word “shady” to describe what happened.
State law requires the Lubbock County Commissioners Court to set salaries ahead of the upcoming budget. That way, elected officials can use a grievance process to request a higher salary as budget talks continue.
The base proposal, 2 percent cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) for elected officials, was approved. The county plans a 3 percent increase for most employees – based on budget talks held in June.
Then County Judge Curtis Parrish offered an amendment to give his salary increase to the district clerk, county clerk, tax assessor collector and county treasurer. That would get them to 3 percent just like their employees.
“If that’s what you want to do with your increase, I don’t have a problem with that,” said Mike Dalby, Precinct 1 commissioner.
Parrish asked commissioners to vote by raising their right hands. That got some mild pushback from Jason Corley, Precinct 2 commissioner.
The measure passed, but the real fuss was just getting started, which included a failed effort to increase Sheriff Kelly Rowe’s pay.
Four amendments
Parrish told the commissioners, “I am the only county official that has consistently not taken their salary adjustment,” Parrish said.
Parrish put a written copy of proposed amendments to commissioners. It would have allowed commissioners to redirect their own salary increases to justices of the peace and county constables.
“These four amendments, I’m not offering them, but I’m handing them to you for you to look at. These amendments will do what at least three of you have said that you want to do, and that’s zero your own COLA adjustment. Your adjustment then would go to your JP [justice of the peace] increasing their salary to 3 percent – and then also to the constable of your precinct,” Parrish said, adding, “You wish to do the right thing now?”
None of the commissioners acted on the amendments Parrish put in front of them.
As Parrish began making the case for the amendments – the ones he wanted other commissioners to act on – Corley called out a point of order.
There was not a proper motion and second to discuss any of the amendments, Corley said.
“I’m getting text messages from people talking about how shady this move is, right now. Get on with it,” Corley said.
Parrish asked, “Do you wish to make a motion?”
Corley shot back, “I do not!”
Cary Shaw, Precinct 3 commissioner, then directed a comment to the judge, saying, “My problem with this is that you are backhandedly raising the salaries as a permanent increase on the taxpayers.”
Jordan Rackler, Precinct 4 commissioner, after the meeting said, “ … Judge pulled some shady stuff.”
“I was prepared to go in and vote for a 2 percent increase for elected officials. I was not prepared to go into a bunch of different amendments,” Rackler said.
Rackler added it’s not what Parrish did so much as how he went about it.
“It was all just to publicly shame us, because he wasn’t getting his way,” Rackler said.”
Parrish disagreed.
“Everything that I did was above board. … any commissioner has the right to offer any amendment,” Parrish said after the meeting.
“I think the thing that they probably felt blindsided about was I gave each of them the opportunity to offer an amendment on their own,” Parrish said.
Since none of the four amendments were acted on, that ended that round of discussion.
Move to increase sheriff’s pay fails
Parrish then offered an amendment to raise the sheriff’s salary to $150,000. The original proposal was to budget $132,586 (a 2 percent increase from last year).
As Parrish began to explain, Corley interrupted him.
“Point of order,” Corley said, adding the judge was getting into the discussion when no one had seconded the motion for Parrish’s newest amendment.
After a brief back and forth, Corley asked, “Is there a second?”
Parrish chided Corley, saying, “Hold on. No, you don’t call that! … You will be called upon when I recognize you.”
Unphased, Corley responded, “We do not have discussion until after we have a second.”
Parrish then said, “Your point of order is well taken and sustained.”
No one seconded the motion to amend the sheriff’s salary to $150,000. The issue died.
Commissioners then approved the 2 percent increase with the exception of the extra money Parrish put toward four other officials mentioned above.
Hard feelings in June
LubbockLights.com asked if this was leftover frustration from June when county budget talks disintegrated into yelling, which we covered here.
“Generally the commissioners and the judge get along. It’s just whenever people aren’t getting their way, they seem to throw little fits and try to blow stuff out of proportion.” Rackler said.
Parrish said, “We’ve asked our elected officials who are also department directors to cut, cut, cut. … So, I wanted that first vote today, the first vote to be my own cut.”
“I’m willing to zero out any cost-of-living adjustment that’s been given to me. … I’m willing to make that sacrifice. I asked the other commissioners if they were willing to make that sacrifice, and clearly none of them wanted to,” he said.
Parrish thinks the frustration witnessed during commissioner meetings in June could resurface over the next month as the county chooses a tax rate. If the county adopts the no-new-revenue tax rate, Parrish said the county will fall short by up to $19 million – assuming roads and building repairs are included.
As for the sheriff’s salary, that issue might not be done yet. Rowe can appeal his proposed salary to a county grievance committee.
Rackler said, “He will have the ability to do the grievance process. … He did grieve his salary three years ago and was not granted an increase.”
