Burnet County reins in proposed raises during charged meeting

The Burnet County Commissioners Court scaled down proposed maximum pay increases for elected officials in the 2025 budget after receiving significant pushback from the public and even some county officials.

People packed the Burnet County Courthouse courtroom during the commissioners’ regular meeting on Tuesday, Aug. 13. Many lined up at a podium and some spoke from their seats to express their concerns about the raises, an issue the court has struggled with for weeks. 

The Commissioners Court is legally obligated to advertise any proposed pay increases for elected officials in a newspaper of record at least 10 days before a public hearing and a final vote on the budget. This year’s budget hearing is set for 9:30 a.m. Aug. 27 at the courthouse, 220 S. Pierce St. in Burnet. The deadline to post the ad is Friday, Aug. 16.

The published numbers are the highest possible pay increases elected officials can receive in a fiscal year budget. The amounts can be lowered in the final budget but not raised.

Because the Commissioners Court could not decide on pay increases at its last meeting, and the deadline for advertising was looming, they set the maximum amount per elected official at $20,000 to give them time to come up with the real numbers. The ad never ran, but a news story and word of mouth filled the courtroom meeting with people.

After almost 30 minutes of public comment and around 45 minutes of discussion from the floor, commissioners approved raises of around 6 percent for 13 out of the 18 elected officials. That amount aligns with what has been proposed for county employees in the 2025 budget.

The five exceptions to the 6 percent increase are the Burnet County sheriff and the county’s four constables.

The sheriff’s proposed raise was set at 16.41 percent, with the county funding about 6 percent of that amount. The remaining 10 percent would come from a grant through Texas Senate Bill 22, which provides state funds for rural sheriffs. This would increase the sheriff’s salary from $105,159 to $122,416.

The proposed increase for the four constables is 17.95 percent each.

According to Burnet County Judge James Oakley, that increase is based on a request from the constables to receive a salary closer to that of the county’s justices of the peace, which is currently $89,852 each. A 17.95 percent increase would bring a constable’s salary from $72,642 to $85,688. 

The proposed increases approved Tuesday by the Commissioners Court are similar to an original set of maximum increases pitched by Judge Oakley during the court’s July 23 meeting. Oakley is the county’s chief budget officer and is tasked with developing the annual salary maximums and a draft budget for court approval.

In Oakley’s original proposal, most elected officials were set to receive about a 6 percent raise, but the four county commissioners were looking at 9.67 percent maximums, the constables 17.95 percent maximums, and the JPs 7.7 percent maximums.

Those proposed increases were rescinded during a special meeting of the court on Aug. 7 to accommodate additional funds from SB22 for the sheriff and address the concerns of several elected officials, who felt too much disparity existed between the proposed maximums for different offices.

Oakley produced another set of numbers on Aug. 7, which beefed up the county judge and county attorney’s salaries by 16.29 percent and boosted the pay of the four justices of the peace.

Some elected officials stiffly opposed the Aug. 7 numbers, which led to the decision to advertise the maximum increases while continuing discussions on what the raises should actually be. 

Dozens of people turned out for the Tuesday meeting to express outrage at the prospect of elected officials receiving substantial raises while many residents are tightening their belts.

“My concern is for the property owners of our community that bear the brunt of financing your budget,” Candy Ratliff said during the public comment period. “These property owners have tightened their budgets to afford the increases in gas and food prices. ”

Ratliff added that she and others she spoke to doubted that commissioners would listen to their opinions and did not care about “the plight of the taxpayers.” 

“I’m here to let you know that we are not in agreement with these increases, and you are harming the very people who pay for you to be here today,” she said.

Another resident, Mark McDonald, who regularly criticizes the court during public meetings, also spoke up.

“It would be nice if the county looked for ways to conserve because the rest of us are,” he said. 

Marble Falls resident Jacob Williams agreed.

“I think that we’re all sucking in wherever we can, we’re all making sacrifices wherever we can, and for you guys to use your power in this way, to give yourself raises, we want to know what we’re getting out of it,” he said. “What’s the justification? What’s the performance? The results? What more are you doing to deserve it?”

Following the public comment and court discussion, Precinct 2 Commissioner Damon Beierle moved to reduce all elected official pay increase maximums to 6 percent, with the exception of the sheriff and the four constables, who would maintain their respective 16.41 percent and 17.95 percent increases.

The court voted unanimously in favor of those maximums. The final vote on the pay increases will occur at the Commissioners Court’s Aug. 23 meeting, 10 days after the numbers reported in this story have been published in a newspaper of record. 

dakota@thepicayune.com