Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the State Personnel Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House passes HB430 to adjust pay policy for Department of Financial Institutions, funded by industry fees
Summary
The House approved HB430 to allow the Department of Financial Institutions to use competitive pay surveys tied to federal examiners and to fund pay adjustments from industry fees; the bill passed 71‑1 after debate over pay ranges and potential conflicts of interest.
The Utah House voted to pass House Bill 430, a pay‑plan change for the Department of Financial Institutions intended to help the state retain examiners and other staff by using competitive pay surveys and industry‑funded salary adjustments.
Representative Jeff Alexander, sponsor of the bill, told the floor the department is funded by fees paid by banks, state‑chartered banks, credit unions and industrial banks and argued the state needs to be competitive to keep trained examiners. ‘‘This bill would allow DHRM to use competitive pay surveys and . . . have to use the federal examiners as the people that they are then comparing to so that we could get wages commensurate,’’ he said.
Alexander described the economic context for the change: ‘‘We are the ninth largest in the country for industrial banking. We now have a hundred and $120,000,000,000 of assets in these industrial banks,’’ he said, arguing that experienced leadership and expertise are necessary to meet external scrutiny.
Members questioned ranges and safeguards. Representative Donaldson noted a discrepancy between Alexander’s spoken 10%–20% description and a 10% cap in bill text; Alexander corrected his earlier phrasing, saying the intended range was 10% to 20%. Representative Noel raised conflict‑of‑interest concerns about industry fees funding salaries; Alexander said federal examiners provide external checks and he did not see a conflict.
Representative Hansen moved an amendment to extend the compensation language to members of the legislature and adjust numeric ranges; after discussion Hansen withdrew the amendment. Representative Wallace, speaking in favor, said the funding would come from a ‘‘non state funded’’ category paid by audited institutions and urged support to preserve the state’s capacity to audit financial institutions.
The House voted 71 yes and 1 no to pass HB430; the bill will be referred to the Senate for further consideration. Supporters said the change will be funded by industry fees rather than general appropriation; opponents raised questions about fiscal impact and checks on industry‑funded salaries.
What’s next: The bill goes to the Senate; implementation will require DHRM rulemaking and coordination on fee structures and conflict‑of‑interest safeguards.
