Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Judicial Pay topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Committee introduces bill seeking roughly 27%–31% judicial pay increases

2224434 · February 3, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A sponsor asked the Judiciary, Rules and Administration Committee to introduce RS31863, a request from the Idaho courts that would raise judicial salaries by roughly 26.8%–30.8%; the committee agreed to introduce the request by voice vote.

Representative Bruce Scogg, chairman of the Judiciary, Rules and Administration Committee, opened public testimony by describing a courts' request for a substantial pay increase for Idaho judges and justices, saying, "In 6 of the last 16 years, the Idaho judiciary has not received an increase in compensation of any sort."

Scogg said judicial salaries in Idaho are set by the Legislature, not the Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee (JFAC), and that the pay lag is causing some judges to leave the bench: "Once you were a judge, you stayed there until you retired. Now, because of the lag in pay, we're starting to lose good judges, very good judges, back to civil practice because of the pay."

The percentages in RS31863 as presented by Scogg were: Supreme Court justices 26.8%; Court of Appeals 28.2%; district judges 29.3%; and magistrates 30.8%. Scogg asked the committee to introduce the request so it could receive a fuller hearing: "It is my desire that the committee will go ahead and RS this today, and we get a fuller discussion down the road, that you will have a chance to talk to your own judges and your own community members about this."

Committee members asked procedural questions about whether the amount before them was the courts' original request and about next steps if the committee later concluded a different amount was appropriate. Scogg confirmed the percentages were the courts' request and that, if the committee declined the amount at a later hearing, the courts would need to reintroduce the request.

A motion to introduce RS31863 was made and the committee approved introduction by voice vote. The motion carried and the request was formally introduced for further consideration at a later hearing.