Public hearing in Vernal draws strong opposition to proposed pay increases for Uintah County elected officials

The Uintah County Commission held a public hearing Sept. 16 in Vernal to hear comments on a request that would allow pay increases of up to 15% for full‑time elected officials and appointed executive officers, county staff said. The hearing, convened in the commission chambers and recorded under Utah law, was explicitly framed as a listening session; commissioners said no decisions would be made at the meeting.

County Human Resources staff described benchmarking work that used TechNet and salary data from the Utah Association of Counties (UAC) to establish market ranges. The HR director said elected officials have not been included on a salary schedule update since February 2015 and that the office had prepared a timeline of salary changes from January 2015 through January 2025. The clerk auditor provided clarifying corrections during the presentation and staff told attendees that an explanation of past increases — including previously granted raises to the county attorney and sheriff — would be made available.

The request and staff presentation prompted lengthy public comment. Many speakers opposed immediate, large increases and urged alternatives, including multi‑year plans, reallocating funds, or prioritizing public safety and infrastructure spending over raises. Scott Bingham said, “It seems like a lot of elected officials ... know what the job pays when they go in,” and urged that public service not be treated primarily as a wage. Katie Gregory asked, “What have any of those done ... to deserve that raise?” and called for clear justification because the money comes from taxpayers.

Other residents cited local income figures and the effect on property taxes. Several speakers noted the county’s median household income (roughly $69,000, as discussed during the hearing) and warned that higher salaries for officials would translate into higher taxes for many households. A number of speakers urged the commission to produce a long‑range plan rather than authorize a one‑time increase; one suggested incremental raises tied to clearly defined performance goals.

Former elected official Jeff Merrill described the workload of elected law‑enforcement and public‑safety officials, saying, “I was on salary, but I worked 24 hours a day ... I had a staff of 80,” and urged the public to consider the responsibilities and hours that some offices require. Other speakers raised different concerns: allegations of past misuse of funds that they said should be accounted for before awarding raises; the transparency and interpretation of statewide salary reporting sites (one attendee cautioned that transparent.utah.gov sometimes aggregates payout data in ways that distort annual salaries); and whether training budgets and sheriff staffing had been fully funded.

Staff and some attendees also pressed for additional information the public said it needed to judge the proposal. Questions raised at the hearing included: the dollar cost of a proposed percentage increase when applied to elected officials’ current pay; which comparator counties used by HR employ full‑time versus part‑time commissioners; and a public request for a job‑duty summary and estimates of hours typically worked by each elected office. The HR director told attendees that printed documents in the back contained summary data and invited anyone with questions to visit the HR office for the actual salary records.

No motion or vote took place at the Sept. 16 hearing. Commissioners repeated that the meeting was informational and that any decision would occur later, after staff provided requested clarifications. The record and a recording of the hearing will be made available on the county’s website, staff said.