Charter panel debates capping elected officials’ pay, advances discussion to committee of the whole

Whatcom County Charter Review Commission members spent the meeting’s longest block debating a proposal to change how elected officials’ salaries are set and indexed. Commissioner Andrew Redding proposed replacing the current salary-commission system with a formula tied to the state minimum wage and set numeric caps intended to keep the county executive below the governor’s pay and other elected officials below comparable state posts.

Redding said the change was aimed at bringing what he described as “obvious imbalances” into line with local conditions. “We’re a small county, we’re a county with, you know, where, the average wage is, annual wage is $62,000 a year, we’re paying more for part time positions than people get for full time average positions,” Redding said. He told colleagues the proposal was designed “in such a way that it would not be harsh in any way, shape, or form, and would just put a pause, really, on the increases until they fit into that set of criteria.”

Redding offered concrete comparisons and figures during his remarks, saying his draft would place the county executive at about $220,000 under the new baseline and noting an alternative current figure of $244,000 that he said would remain in place under existing rules until the next election. He also said the administration has added several new staff positions that he calculated at roughly $359,000 a year in additional expense.

Supporters and opponents of the change voiced different priorities. Treasurer Steve Oliver, who addressed the commission during public comment and during the meeting, urged attention to local comparables and the salary commission’s deliberations. He said the salary commission’s decisions have used local benchmarks in recent years and cautioned against simplistic comparisons to statewide pay scales. “The treasurer should be paid the same as your highest director. It doesn’t get any more clear than that,” Oliver said.

Other commissioners argued the salary commission — an independent body that has been meeting to set 2026 rates — should remain in place. Commissioner Doug Reynolds told the panel the commission “is currently meeting and has been since January” and said commissioners should consider providing more public input to that body rather than removing it. Several commissioners said the salary commission process can be improved without replacing it.

Concerns raised included budgetary optics and recruitment. Commissioner John Muschler and others said paying local executives above governors or state-level counterparts could create perverse incentives and hurt public trust. Commissioner Mike Morales and others warned about possible workforce effects and urged guardrails so that supervisors are not paid less than those they supervise.

Process notes: the commission moved into a Committee of the Whole to continue debate after a motion and second; the motion passed by voice vote. No final vote on Redding’s amendment was recorded during the meeting.

Why it matters: changing the county’s charter language on compensation would likely require voter approval and could shift how salaries rise over time, affecting county payroll, recruitment and public perceptions of elected service. The commission did not adopt the amendment at this meeting and will continue deliberations in the Committee of the Whole.