Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Compensation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

County board raises sheriff pay to 85% of state's attorney after amendment; public defender adjustment also set

Peoria County Committee · July 28, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Peoria County moved to align sheriff and public defender pay with an FY27 state increase to the state's attorney salary. An amendment raised the sheriff's compensation from 80% to 85% for the coming year; the committee approved the measure as amended.

The committee considered a consolidated resolution to adjust county pay scales for the sheriff and the public defender after the State’s FY27 budget raised the state’s attorney salary by 4.1%. County staff explained the county code requires the sheriff’s pay be at least 80% and the public defender’s at least 90% of the state's attorney; staff brought a consolidated resolution to implement corresponding increases following the state action.

During debate, Member Williams and Member Daley urged the board to go above the 80% minimum for the sheriff, citing departmental responsibilities and management of large projects. Member Rick moved an amendment to raise the sheriff's base compensation from 80% to 85% of the state's attorney salary for the coming 12-month interval; the motion was seconded and the committee voted to approve the amendment and then the resolution as amended. County staff said the additional cost would be covered from the sheriff’s budget and noted uncertainty about whether state reimbursement would increase if the county’s base exceeds the statutory minimum.

The committee did not provide a final line-by-line tally in the record; the motion passed as amended. A board member noted the county historically sets wages based on positions rather than individuals and that annual review remains the board’s prerogative.