Committee delays Treasury budget after lawmakers press for limits on recent raises

The subcommittee voted to hold consideration of the state treasurer’s budget after multiple members questioned recent salary increases and demanded clearer limits on how additional appropriations could be used.

Lawmakers said they were troubled by pay increases in the treasurer’s office and asked that the treasurer appear or that staff return with proposed special language. A representative for the treasurer’s office told the committee the current request is a continuation of previously approved appropriations and that the administration reduced an earlier salary request to a 10% cap from an initial 19.8% figure, saying the change came through discussions with members. The treasurer’s staff also described maintaining an in‑house investment team that oversees an approximately $11.5 billion portfolio and said that retaining those staff avoided paying private firms roughly $180 million per year in management fees and had delivered about $600 million in returns in recent periods.

Why it matters: Members said large, concentrated raises to senior staff risked undermining pay equity across the office and asked for commitments or special language limiting how additional funds from this appropriation could be allocated. Multiple lawmakers asked that the treasurer himself appear so members could get direct answers before final action.

What was said: Representative Lundstrom asked for clarification about a $10,000,000 line item labeled for 'unemployment insurance modernization'; treasury and Commerce staff said that amount is a continuation of a prior appropriation and not a new spending increase. Several members cited figures compiled from committee staff showing recent raises: examples included investment‑team increases of roughly $43,849 and $48,305 for two managers and aggregate additional salary figures cited for 2025. One lawmaker suggested special language to cap raises or limit who could receive an increase from the appropriation; treasury staff said they were willing to discuss proposed language and meet with members.

What the committee did: Representative Lunschmann moved to hold the treasurer’s budget until the treasurer can attend and provide more information; the motion was seconded and approved by voice vote. The chair said the item will be returned to the committee the next day and invited members to submit special language proposals to staff for consideration.

Background and next steps: Committee members emphasized that they generally fund constitutional officers but that they wanted clearer constraints and documentation when large raises are requested. The committee will reconvene and expects either the treasurer to appear or treasury staff to return with proposed special language limiting the distribution of any additional personnel funds.