Clay County CRC votes to put commissioners' pay under state statute for voters to decide
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
The Clay County Charter Review Commission voted to place on a proposed charter amendment language that would remove the chartered $37,000 commissioner salary and instead limit commissioner pay to the level set by Florida statute; the motion passed on a roll-call vote and the commission scheduled the required public hearings and deadlines.
The Clay County Charter Review Commission voted to send a proposed amendment to the voters that would remove the charter-specified $37,000 county commissioner salary and instead limit commissioners’ compensation to the amount set by Florida law. The motion to adopt language tying commissioner pay to Florida statute (cited in discussion as Florida Statute 145.031) carried in a roll-call vote.
The county attorney, Glenn Taylor, told the commission the ballot statement must be “clear and unambiguous” and observed that statutory salary guidelines are formula-driven and updated annually, which is why the draft does not set a fixed dollar amount. As Taylor put it while describing the draft text: “shall the Clay County Charter be amended to remove the Charter specified county commission salary of 37,000.” He warned that unclear ballot language can prompt citizen litigation and recommended precise wording to withstand legal challenge.
The debate centered on whether the charter should be changed to (a) set commissioner pay equal to 70% of the state-set salary, (b) adjust pay incrementally until it matches the state average, or (c) simply adopt the state statute amount. Supporters of following state law argued the simpler wording is more transparent for voters and makes Clay County comparable with neighboring counties; supporters of the 70% formulation said it might be more politically palatable to voters as a compromise. Commissioner Debbie Pascoe suggested gradual percentage increases until parity with state averages; others urged clear ballot language rather than a numeric formula that could be misread.
A recorded roll-call vote, as read at the meeting, recorded the following positions: Rhonda Jett — yes; Dan Bridal — no; Steve Anderson — yes; Ewell McNair — yes; Courtney Connor — no; Brandon Salter — yes; Christy Perry — yes; Matthew Mitchell — no; Kurt Messer — yes; Debbie Pascoe — yes; Susan Callahan — yes; Tim Wynn — no; Sherry Warren — yes. The chair declared the motion carried.
After the vote, the county attorney explained next steps: the commission must finalize and publish the amendment language, hold three public hearings for citizen comment (these hearings are for public comment only, not deliberation or voting), and meet the supervisor of elections’ filing schedule (the attorney noted an effective practical deadline in July to have proposals ready for transfer to the elections office). The commission requested that the county attorney prepare amended language reflecting the vote and bring that language forward under the charter process.
The matter will next be the subject of the CRC’s public education and hearing schedule; the commission also agreed to add related topics — including whether Clay County should remain a charter county and discussion of the utility tax — to the next meeting’s agenda so voters and commissioners can have additional context before finalizing any ballot summary.
The commission’s action authorizes a proposed charter amendment to be presented to voters; it does not itself change salaries until voters approve an amendment through the ballot process.