[00:00:01]
[Ad Hoc Committee on Judicial Nominations on May 26, 2026. ]
ON TUESDAY, MAY 26TH, AND WE ARE CONVENING THE AD HOC COMMITTEE ON, UH, JUDICIAL, NOMINATING OUR FIRST ITEM OF BUSINESS APPROVAL AT THE MAY 12TH, 2026 AD HOC COMMITTEE MINUTES.IS THERE A MOTION? ANY COMMENTS OR CHANGES? HEARING NONE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
ALL THOSE OPPOSED MOTION PASSES.
UNANIMOUSLY MINUTES ARE APPROVED.
OUR NEXT ITEM IS ACTION ITEM A, CONSIDERING THE JUDICIAL NOMINATING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION ON THE SALARY STRUCTURE FOR A MUNICIPAL JUDGES.
JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, WE ARE NOT HERE TO MAKE THE RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE JUDGES FOR ASSOCIATE AND PRESIDING JUDGE AND REGULAR JUDGE.
THIS IS JUST ABOUT SETTING THE SALARY STRUCTURE FOR MINUTES FOR JUDGES, WHICH WILL BE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE FULL COUNSEL FOR CONSIDERATION WHEN THEY CONSIDER OUR RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE, UH, JUDGES FOR THOSE POSITIONS.
SO WE HAVE A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE JUDICIAL NOMINATING COMMISSION, WHICH IS CONTAINED IN A MAY 26TH, 2026 MEMO FROM DOMINIC ARTIS, CHIEF OF PUBLIC SAFETY.
UH, DO ANY OF THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT? UM, MEMORANDUM OR THE ACTIONS OF THE JNC? YES.
UH, MR. ROTH, UM, JUST, UH, HISTORICALLY, IS IT, IS IT TYPICALLY A PART OF THE, UH, FINANCIAL REQUIREMENT THAT WE AUTOMATICALLY PROVIDE INCREASES IN, IN THE SALARY POSITIONS, OR IS THERE ANY KIND OF A CRITERIA OR A, OR A PROCESS OR A, UM, A BACKGROUND OF ON HOW WE WOULD DETERMINE, UH, THESE INCREASES? SURE.
UH, DO WE HAVE ANYONE FROM STAFF, UM, WHO CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION OR, UM, MR. MCDOUGALL, LET'S SEE HIM.
COULD YOU COME UP TO THE MIC AT THE PODIUM? GIVE YOUR NAME PLEASE FOR THE RECORD.
IS THE MIC ON? CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, THAT'S BETTER.
I'M THE MANAGER OF COMPENSATION.
SO TO ANSWER THE QUESTION, UM, JUDGES, UH, SO THERE IS A SALARY REVIEW EVERY TWO YEARS FOR JUDGES AND, UH, THEY RECEIVE INCREASED PER DECISION OF THE JNC.
UM, AND, UH, IT GOES THROUGH THE PROCESS INCLUDING, UH, HR TEAMS SIGNING, UH, SIGNING THEIR CONTRACTS.
SO THE DECISION IS MADE BY THE JNC AND THEIR SALARIES.
WELL, THEY MAKE A RECOMMENDATION, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT, YES.
SO THIS HAPPENS EVERY TWO YEARS WHEN THE NEW TERM AND NEW JUDGES COME IN.
UM, IS THERE, DO YOU HAVE ANY DATA ON WHAT PREVIOUS RAISES HAVE BEEN LIKE? YES.
SO BASED ON PREVIOUS TIME, UH, OF THE REVIEW, UH, THE INCREASE WAS 3% BLOOD ACROSS ALL JUDGES, INCLUDING MUNICIPAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE.
WHAT YEAR WAS THAT? IT WAS IN, UM, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, IT WAS IN 2024, BUT I CAN DOUBLE CHECK THAT.
SO THAT WOULD'VE BEEN THE LAST TIME THAT SALARIES WERE REVIEWED? CORRECT.
SO THE LAST TIME SALARIES WERE REVIEWED TWO YEARS AGO, RIGHT.
AND THAT THEY GOT A 3% RAISE THEN? THAT'S CORRECT, YES.
UM, DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? UH, 3.2 IS, IS JUST, AND LOOK, I'M NOT TRYING TO ARGUE ABOUT 0.2%, BUT I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, ARE YOU TRYING TO, TO LEVEL OUT WITH SOME OF THE COMPARABLE POSITIONS OR TO, AND AGAIN, UH, THIS IS A BUDGET ITEM, IT'S NOT A REFLECTION AT ALL ON THE QUALITY OR THE,
[00:05:01]
OR THE PERFORMANCE OF ANY OF THE, OF THE JUDGES.I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW Y'ALL ESTABLISH, UH, SALARY INCREASES.
WELL, UH, I CAN TALK ABOUT THE RECOMMENDATION FROM HR.
UH, SO WE HAVE COMPLETED THE MARKET SURVEY AND THE RECOMMENDATION WAS BASED FULLY ON MARKET SURVEY ACROSS COMPARABLE SPELLINGS.
UM, WAS ONE OF THE FINDINGS OF THAT SURVEY THAT THE CURRENT SALARY WAS 3.2% BELOW THE MARKET AVERAGE? THAT THAT'S CORRECT.
APPROXIMATELY 3.2, BUT I CAN CHECK THE PRECISE NUMBER.
UM, WELL THAT, THAT'S CONTAINED IN YOUR POWERPOINT PRESENTATION? YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
CURRENT SALARIES FOR, UM, MUNICIPAL JUDGES ARE 3.2% BELOW THE MARKET.
I'M SORRY, DID YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER? OKAY.
AND, UH, MR. MCDOUGALL, UM, COULD YOU FILL US IN ON THE ACTIONS OF THE JUDICIAL NOMINATING COMMISSION AS TO, UM, THE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE 3.2% PAY RAISE? HOW THAT NUMBER WAS ARRIVED AT? YES, MR. CHAIRMAN, MATTHEW MCDOUGAL, CHAIR OF THE JNC, SO THE BOARD REACHED THAT NUMBER BASED OFF CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATE, KEEPING IN MIND CURRENT DISCUSSIONS REGARDING BUDGET RESTRAINTS WITH THE CITY.
SO THE BOARD JUST WANTED TO HAVE A CONSERVATIVE APPROACH IN TERMS OF THE NUMBER GIVEN.
SO THAT'S WHY THAT NUMBER IS A LITTLE LOWER THAN WHAT THE, UH, HR STAFF PROVIDED.
I THINK HR HAD A 4% RAISE WITH THE CURRENT MUNICIPAL JUDGES AND A LITTLE BIT HIGHER FOR THE ADMINISTRATIVE JUSTICE DIG.
SO, SO WAS THE 3.2%, UH, TO CORRECT THE FACT THAT THEY ARE 3.2% BELOW THE MARKET AVERAGE NOW? YES, IT WAS TO GET THEM AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE TO THE CURRENT MARKET RATES AND ALLOWING THIS BODY IS THAT OUR COMMITTEE TO MAKE, MAKE A FURTHER RECOMMENDATION ON WHETHER THEY THOUGHT THAT WAS APPROPRIATE OR NEEDS TO BE HIGHER, LOWER, ET CETERA, BASED OFF CURRENT BUDGET DISCUSSION.
UM, MR. WEST, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? NO.
AND, UM, OH, UH, MR. GRACIE, UM, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR THE COMMISSION CHAIR? NO, THANK YOU MR. CHAIR.
UM, SO AT THIS POINT I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
SO I MOVE TO RECOMMEND TO, UM, CITY COUNCIL AN INCREASE OF 3.2% FOR BOTH THE MUNICIPAL JUDGES AND THE, UH, NO, IT'S JUST THE, UM, MUNICIPAL JUDGE AND THE ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE.
SO TO, UM, RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF A 3.2% INCREASE IN SALARY FOR THE, UM, ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE AND THE MUNICIPAL JUDGES.
ANY DISCUSSION OF THAT MOTION? I HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR STAFF.
UH, DMITRI, DO WE ALSO NEED TO SET THE HOURLY RATE OF PAY FOR ASSOCIATE JUDGES? TURN YOUR MIC ON AGAIN.
UM, NO, THE REVIEW WAS ONLY FOR FULL-TIME JUDGES POSITIONS.
SO, UH, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
UH, ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, PLEASE SAY AYE.
ALL THOSE OPPOSED MOTION PASSES AND THAT DISPOSES OF ACTION ITEM A THAT'S THE ONLY REMAINING ITEM ON OUR AGENDA.
AND SO AT 11:46 AM ON MAY 26TH, THIS MEETING OF THE AD HOC JUDICIAL NOMINATING COMMITTEE IS ADJOURNED.