S.B. 235 Governor Compensation Amendments: transcript

Um, Senator Mikel was terrified to come in front of you today. Um, Actually here's, here's kind of the, the story on this. This, this was a bill that, that he ran to increase the compensation for the Attorney General. Um, I, I, previously, before serving the legislature, I sat on the Executive and Judicial Compensation committee. And, uh, you know, most of our Supreme Court judges, our Governor, attorney General, they're pretty severely under market for their skillset, but that's, that's pretty common. Um, but it's gotten to be quite a bit below market to where, um, you, you really, uh, You don't want to be in a position where you're attracting people that either are only independently wealthy and those that are not independently wealthy won't run for important positions, um, in our state. And so that's kind of where we're at. Um, with regards to this. The reason for the transfer of bill sponsorship, uh, I'll be candid with you, was because there was a feeling in house among certain house members that it was unfair to do it only for the Attorney General. And so they wanted us to bring the governor in and then tie everything to the governor and, and then have the, this is typically how the, the executive compensation goes, is there's a percentage that goes down. So, um, these match the governor to the, uh, Supreme Court, and then everything goes after that. And so because it raises the salary of the governor, the original sponsor did not feel comfortable because he's related to the governor, and so he did not want to be on the bill any longer because of that, I assume there's bad blood. That's my only thinking. Um, but so I learned about 10 minutes ago, maybe 20 minutes ago, that I was going to be the new sponsor of this bill, but that is the, the basics of it. Um, I do have a substitute, and so I'm speaking to that. And so what this does is it ties the, uh, the governor to the same as the Supreme Court Justice, uh, as, as the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. And then the Lieutenant Governor is 90% of that. The Attorney General is 95, the state auditor is 90%, the state treasurer is 90%. And so by changing the governor one, it addresses all of the others as well. And this ends up having about a $300,000 ongoing fiscal note, which we do believe is, uh, will be funded on this. And so with that, I'm open to any questions.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, Senator, do you think with kinda the specialization on attorneys and, and you know, the, the market salary for attorneys, I mean, even at 95%, does that put us in the market for,

It's a pay cut. There's going to be attorneys in the Attorney General's office that make substantially more than the Attorney General. Um, but that is, uh, I would also say that for the vast majority of people that serve in the legislature, it's a pay cut for your time up here. There is, there is some element of being under market in an elected position. Um, uh, however, so I, I don't know that we're trying to match market, but we're trying not to get so far below market that it discourages people that, um, uh, you know, would otherwise be willing to serve that are well qualified.

I I, is this fairly similar for other states where the Attorney General and others are tied as a percentage of the governor, or are the Attorney General uh, paid in some other fashion in other states, if, you know,

I'm not entirely certain on other states. I know that we've done this for quite a while where everything just is a, is a step down. You know, we do that with our judges as well. You know, there's the Supreme Court and the, or there's basically, they do it opposite with judges. It's usually like the district court judge, and then 5% more if you're a court of appeals and 5% more if you're on the Supreme Court. Um, but that's the, you know, that, that's kind of the structure. And I apologize that I don't know on other states how they do that. Okay.

That's right. Thank you.

Representative Ivory. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll make the motion. We adopt first substitute Senate bill 2 35.

I really appreciate the motion. Thank you.

Thank you. I support the motion, although I would support the Attorney general being 98 or 90% of the governor's salary as well. I think that's, uh, would be a well deserved little bump. I think 50% of our salary.

I did not say that. Okay.

I, I think that it's all competitive. We've always done it just as a step off of whatever the governor does. And so I wasn't really looking at competitiveness. I was trying to preserve the, you know, the structure of what we've had. Um, other states, I am told by a very kind person to my left that, uh, other states, what they typically do is, um, uh, they just set it by legislative enactment, what the salaries are. Uh, ours tries to have it be a little more lockstep, uh, percentage wise,

I'll make a motion that we pass out with a favorable recommendation for substitute Senate bill 2 35.

No, I think we've covered it. Thank you.

Thank you Committee, and thank you for letting me explain kind of the, the little switcheroo at the end there.

I do want you to know that through the process of this, there's been one person opposed to this bill and it is the Attorney General. Like, like he's the only person who has, who has opposed it, but Interesting. Yeah. Thank

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, pretty straightforward. Bill. I think the Attorney General of the state of Utah should be paid more. Um, the reason for that is his salary. It's, while it's 95% of the, the governor right now, um, it's, it's less than an associate attorney here in in Utah. There's been a, a huge escalation in, in, in that arena. And I, I just think the Attorney General gets paid too little. So that's what the bill does. We actually, you'll see, you'll see in the fiscal note, it, it, there is a fiscal note. It bump, it, bump, bump up the salary, and it would be commensurate with the, um, Supreme Court. I think the Supreme Court is a, is a good gauge. I think that makes sense. Uh, the Attorney General is the Chief legal officer of the state, and I think having it be the equivalent of the Supreme Court makes sense and that's what the bill does and I'm happy to answer any questions.

I, I, I have Senator Brammer. I was asked that in media availability. The only person that's lobbied against this bill is actually the Attorney General himself, and he's focused on his team and his attorneys. So, uh, if, if we let this bill move forward and it does need to do be done through statute, um, um, I would suggest that we take a hard look at his budget and see what we can do to help his other attorneys. But, uh, the only opposition that, that I have gotten is actually from the Attorney General himself. And it says a lot about him. Yeah. And, and my understanding is most of the senior attorneys on his staff make a lot more than he does. Uh, and so this is kind of an interesting dynamic. So thank you.

Yeah, I move that this committee favorably recommends Senate Bill 2 35 Attorney General Compensation Amendments. Alright,

This is a great bill tonight. Um, we are, we're gonna take the salary of the Attorney General and we're gonna have it match this, the chief of the Supreme Court. Um, this would, this would be an increase for our Attorney General. Um, right now our Attorney General makes, makes less than a starting associate in Salt Lake. And I, I think our Attorney General should be better, better compensated. And that's what, that's what the Bill Bill does. And, uh, I, I look at what our Attorney General is doing. I look at, um, his leadership team, they all get paid more, more than him. And it's not, it's not about an individual. I, I think when you look at what we're starting associates in Salt Lake and what they make, I think our Attorney General should be paid more. Um, I will note that the only person who has lobbied against this bill is actually the Attorney General. He, he has lobbied hard for his team and his attorneys and said, put put them first. But this is, this is an important bill and I think it's important to catch up with his salary. With that, I'm open for questions,

Senator Vickers Baldy. Lewin Aye. Bramer Bus Comore Escamia Fillmore Aye. Grover Aye. Harper Kins. Ipson Aye. Johnson k Juab McKay Mikel Aye. Milner Musselman Owens pitcher Plum Rebi Aye. Sandal Stevenson Stratton Bickers Weiler Wilson Winterton Weiler Weiler Aye.

Senator Mikel. Thank You Mr. President Pro Tem. Um, this is, this is a salary increase for our Attorney General. Um, currently our Attorney General is, is not being compensated at a level that I, I think is appropriate. The current Attorney General, um, makes less than an associate attorney in Salt Lake and that, that that's what this bill does. It, it ties his salary directly to that of the Supreme Court. Without, I'm open for questions.

Thank you. I'll waive summation. I move that this bill pass.

Senator Mikel. Thank you Mr. President. Uh, this bill, um, the, the irony is that the, the Cory Richens trial is actually starting, starting this week. I talked about it on second reading that, and this is where this bill came from. I had, I had prosecutors reach out and defense attorneys, they were, they were concerned it was a possible capital case. It was a murder case and they wanted to do in-person jury selection. And the court told them no. Uh, they stipulated, they, they thought that doing in-person jury selection made sense to be able to judge the body language of those going before deciding the fate. The fate in this case. And it, it's a unique, it's a unique bill, it's a rule change. And this simply simply says on, on a third degree felony a criminal case that, uh, Juab in-person jury selection is the default. And that, and I've been up here a long time, getting defense attorneys and prosecutors to both testify in support of a bill and a committee is unusual that that's what has happened in this case. That's who's asked for this rule change. With that, I'm open for questions and would urge support

Thank you. I'll waive summation and move this bill pass.

Senator Owens. Thank you Mr. President Pro tem.

Thank you, uh, Mr. Speaker. Um, colleagues, we've been looking closely initially at the, um, the State Attorney General's salary. Uh, as you know, many of, um, the legal market has drastically shifted in the state of Utah, um, with some bigger firms moving in and wanting to make sure that we are not, uh, keeping pace with the market because we certainly can't do that. It is a sacrifice to serve in those positions, but ensuring that there is, uh, an enough of an, an incentive for good attorneys to be able to run for that position. As we looked at the bill, um, and just raising the Attorney General's salary right now, it's tied to the governor's salary, we looked across the board and said, you know, we have a little bit of a gap here between what the Chief Justice makes and what these other executive officers make. And so the compromise that was struck is to just tie the Governor's salary then to the Chief Justice salary, um, so that they're in parity. And then we can keep the same structure where the Attorney General makes 95% of the governor's salary. And then the other constitutional officers make 90% of the governor's salary. So this will raise the vote for all of our constitutional officers salaries to go up, but it is, uh, in, in the grand scheme of things, a, a fairly minor adjustment within our budget. With that Mr. Speaker, happy to answer any questions.

This is a new bill that I inherited yesterday at about 3:00 PM uh, it's what the, what the House did was they wanted to, uh, originally when we sent it over to the house, uh, this was just the Attorney General. What the house said is we don't really want the Attorney General to be paid more than the governor. So then they brought the governor in and then the original bill sponsor, um, I'm informed, has bad blood with the governor. And so, uh, and they might be related. And so they dropped off of the bill and I became the new sponsor, um, at that point to avoid any conflicts of interest. Um, and I don't know which way those conflicts go. Yeah, I'm not sure which way that would've been a conflict. I'm not sure I've seen, I've seen the governor veto that particular person's bills on numerous Occasions. I was gonna say, it might be kind of hard on the governor is what I'm saying. Yeah. Um, however, uh, and, and I, uh, and I think that for the governor's sake, it's nice to, that he can go to family dinners and, and not look at someone and, and know that that, uh, an increased pay would, would, uh, was due to them.

Okay. So in any event, what this does is it, it puts the Governor's Pay equal to the Supreme Court, the, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and then all of the other pace, uh, pay amounts follow at 95% or 90% depending on the executive office. Uh, I was on the Executive and Judicial Compensation Committee before joining the legislature. Uh, uh, they are, uh, even on this new pay scale, they're underpaid for the skill set that they have and what they could go do in the private market. But this does bring it a little bit closer and it makes it so that you know, professionals that may not be independently wealthy, uh, can run for these offices. And, and it's still less than market, which I think is appropriate for these positions, uh, because there's other things that people are running for, but it does create a wage so that people can run for these offices in the middle of their careers and still be able to serve the state well. So, uh, with that I would move to Concur.