Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District attorney warns commissioners about pay disparities from SB22 allocations during Marion County budget workshop
Summary
At a July 31 Marion County budget workshop the district attorney urged the court not to alter his submitted SB22 budget and asked that any raises be funded by the county or distributed equally, saying recent allocations produced unequal raises and could force costly recruitment if a long‑time investigator leaves.
The Marion County Commissioners Court met July 31 for a budget workshop in which the district attorney said recent SB22 allocations and across‑the‑board raises have resulted in unequal pay increases within his office and asked the county to prevent further disparity.
The district attorney told the court that 2023 SB22 funding was split between the sheriff and the district attorney’s office to support victim assistance coordinators, supplement a prosecutor’s salary and to create an investigator position. He said subsequent county raises in 2024 and adjustments to supplements left some staff with larger net increases than others and that one long‑time prosecutor, Bill Gleason, has indicated he may leave, which would force the office to recruit at higher market wages.
"Please do not adjust my SB22 budget that I submitted," the district attorney said. He urged commissioners either to have the county pick up any new raises or to allocate increases so they can be divided equally among all employees in his office so "nobody's treated different." He added, "they're not being treated equal," summarizing the net effect of the prior adjustments.
The district attorney also presented a salary survey comparing investigator pay in nearby counties, citing figures the office had collected: Harrison County investigators around $50,000–$51,000; Penova County about $45,000; Chass County about $58,000; Morris County about $53,000; and his office's investigator at about $54,000. He warned that replacing an investigator at current market rates would cost the county more than past hires.
Commissioners and staff then turned to other budget issues discussed during the workshop. County staff reviewed options for retiree adjustments under the Texas County & District Retirement System (TCDRS), recommending a flat 3% raise for retirees so every beneficiary would receive an increase. Staff warned that CPI‑linked options of 20% or 30% could leave long‑retired beneficiaries with no change and would materially increase employer contribution rates, reducing the county's ability to preserve fund balance.
Officials also recorded a request by an office for an additional $300 auto allowance for travel around the county and discussed shared software problems affecting the sheriff and other agencies; staff said the sheriff would receive his current special tax money this year but would have no special tax allocation next year unless commissioners act at a future meeting. Health insurance rates were flagged for full discussion at the next budget meeting, with staff noting an approximate 11% rate increase had been reported.
Staff presented an initial no‑new‑revenue budget scenario that would reduce the general fund by roughly $88,000 under current assumptions and, by the figures staff presented in the binder, move toward a larger shortfall (staff described a path that could approach about $300,000 compared with current targets if no changes are made).
The budget workshop portion of the meeting concluded with staff and commissioners agreeing to return to the remaining items at a subsequent meeting and to place the sheriff’s tax allocation on the next regular meeting agenda for formal action.
