A 23% pay increase proposed for the six county commissioners and county chairman got the final okay Thursday in the commission’s last regular meeting of the year.
Commissioners voted 5-2 to go ahead with their first raise since 2011. Those who supported it said it is intended to keep salaries realistic enough that people of all financial backgrounds could afford to serve.
Although the job is officially part-time, several commissioners have said they put in much longer hours meeting with other boards and working with constituents.
Commissioners Michael Ashcraft and Charlotte O’Hara voted against the increase. O’Hara objected to the yearly inclusion of a 1.5% increase to be discussed in every budget. Ashcraft has said he dislikes the optics and timing of the raise just as property tax bills are coming due.
What are the new salaries?
The raise sets the salary for the commission chairman at $92,500, up from its current $75,000. The chairman is elected at-large every four years.
The other six commissioners, who represent geographically defined districts, will get a boost from their current $47,349 to $58,300.
The raises are to take effect January 13, as the new board is seated.
Future annual raises built into budget
The amounts were recommended by a special committee that studied commission pay for the past year.
The one-time 23% bump is equivalent to where salaries would be if they had been raised by a modest amount yearly, rather than all at once, said Commissioner Janeé Hanzlick.
The measure also spells out how future pay raises should be approached, in an effort to keep pay from stagnating again in the future.
A 1.5% increase will be automatically built into each budget, accompanied by a requirement that staff initiate discussion of it during the annual budget process.
Commissioners would be free to reduce the raise. A proposal for a pay increase higher than 1.5% would require discussion as a separate agenda item.
Additionally, commissioners’ pay would be reviewed every four years by a resident committee.
Points for and against the raise
Two residents spoke against the raises at Thursday’s meeting.
Debbie Detmer of Shawnee, a frequent presence at public comments, noted the job is part time. She called it “disgraceful” that commissioners would vote for the raise, “especially when many of us struggle to pay taxes and stay in our homes. So go ahead, pat yourselves on the back.”
Gaylene Van Horn of Lenexa said the raises should be tied to key performance indicators such as increasing transparency, reducing property taxes and audits.
Hanzlick noted that the time demands of a commissioner are far more than part-time and may prevent people from running who do not want to give up their full-time jobs.
“I’m a social worker. I’ve never made a lot of money,” Hanzlick said. “That’s not the reason I‘m supporting this. This is what is fair, and setting a precedent for future people who may be considering running for office.”
O’Hara, who was unseated in November’s election and will not be on the board next year, objected to putting the future raises in with the rest of the budget rather than requiring a separate vote each year.
“It will be buried deep within the bowels of the budget so no one will know what increases will occur on an annual basis,” she said. “It’s a slap in the face to the constituents.”
She said the raises don’t take benefits into account, and that the commissioners are hiding behind the committee that recommended them.
The 2025 raises can be absorbed within the 2025 budget already approved and will not require the use of reserve funds, commissioners were told.
