Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the State Board Compensation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances bill tying State Board of Education daily pay to legislative rate
Summary
The Committee on K-12 Education Budget advanced House Bill 23-82, which would set State Board of Education membersdaily compensation to match the daily portion of legislators' pay; committee approved the bill on a voice vote with a technical amendment and sent it to the House floor.
Get email alerts on the State Board Compensation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Committee on K-12 Education Budget on Monday advanced House Bill 23-82, a measure that would change state law so the daily rate of compensation for members of the State Board of Education corresponds to the daily amount legislators are paid while in session.
The bill would use the legislative compensation formula to compute a daily rate for board members, applying the session portion of the legislative base salary (60.03 percent) divided by 90 to arrive at a per-day figure. "This bill would establish the daily rate of compensation to an amount that corresponds to the daily amount that you all are paid, as members of the legislature, session, essentially," said Nick, committee staff, during the bill briefing.
The change responds to a 2023 statutory reorganization of legislative pay. The 2023 law creating the Legislative Compensation Commission set a new legislative base salary of $43,000 (effective in 2025) and a schedule that front-loads pay to the session months; that base salary is then indexed annually to changes in wages as measured by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics beginning in January 2026. Using the commission's approach, committee staff calculated a daily rate of $286.81 for State Board members under the bill.
Fiscal estimates presented in committee differed depending on how many board days are counted. Representative Hill noted the fiscal note used 59 days and reported that calculation yields about $16,900 per board member for the year. "The fiscal note is ... based off 59 days for the year, so, and which amounts to a total amount per state board member of $16,900," Representative Hill said. State Board representative Dr. Hartwood said the board's historical average is 78 days and that applying that average to the increased daily rate produces a larger cost figure: "If you apply it by day, 78 days times the increase in daily rate, you actually get over 200,000. Some of that is actually fringe benefits costs, which are already covered. So when you look at the daily rate, what it costs the agency to pay that is 170,000," Hartwood said.
Committee members discussed timing and budget procedure. Staff said the bill would take effect July 1, 2025, and is not retroactive. The committee was advised that if the bill passes the House floor its costs likely would be handled in a trailer bill during the appropriations process; members also noted a floor amendment adding the change into other vehicles would be subject to PAYGo rules.
After brief discussion, Representative Vestas moved to suspend the rules and work the bill the same day. The committee approved that motion by voice vote. Representative Johnson then moved that the committee "pass out 23-82 as written," seconded by Representative Estes. Committee staff requested a narrow technical amendment to add the phrase "and amendments thereto" at two statutory references; Representative Johnson offered the technical amendment with the approval of his seconder. The committee approved the bill as amended by voice vote, and the measure will proceed toward the House floor.
The amendment and committee discussion do not change the bill's core intent: to tie State Board member daily pay to the portion of legislative pay allocated to session days and to carry forward future legislative salary adjustments via indexing. The bill specifies an effective date of July 1, 2025 and contains no retroactivity provision.
Next steps: with committee approval, HB 23-82 will be scheduled for floor consideration; fiscal impacts may be addressed in a later appropriations trailer bill or via floor action, and any floor amendment that changes appropriations could trigger PAYGo review.

