Committee splits over size and fairness of elected‑official raises; multiple proposals considered

During public deliberation, committee members expressed a range of views about how to respond to the treasurer's grievance and the broader set of countywide pay adjustments. Some members argued that large across‑the‑board increases were excessive or premature given a proposed plan to eliminate the treasurer’s office; others said the office exists now and merits compensation adjustments.

Michael Paul moved for a 10% increase (to $153,502); Dudley Terrell seconded. Following discussion and a roll call vote, the 10% motion failed (4 yes, 5 no). The committee then unanimously voted to extend discussion by 10 minutes and considered an alternative motion from Yolanda Perez to set the salary at $200,000. That motion failed 3–6. Finally, Cynthia Tilford moved and Yolanda Perez seconded a motion to raise the salary by 30% to $181,411.36; that motion passed 6–3 and will be forwarded as a recommendation to Commissioners Court.

Members debating the motions cited different rationales: some referenced the treasurer's length of service and oversight responsibilities; others highlighted recent large percentage increases in certain offices, the affordability context raised by public comment, and the administrative transfers that have reduced the treasurer’s duties. Several members requested more transparency about the methodology used for setting proposed salaries before making final recommendations.