SB214, a bill raising Constitutional officer salaries up Friday in the Senate

By -
I see that SB 214 an act to increase the compensation of the secretary of state, the state treasurer, the state auditor, and the commissioner of school and public lands is in appropriations on Friday.

Sponsored by Senators Greenfield, Bartling, and Maher and Representatives Dennert, Burg, Carson, Davis, Rausch, and Tidemann, the measure might correct the disparity these officials have with the salaries of the members of the Public Utilities Commission - also elected, but not a constitutional office.

Coming after a bill to increase legislative salaries went down, I'll be curious to see how they handle the debate.

Frankly, I think they all deserve an increase, or at least the potential for it placed into law.

Comments

Anonymous said…
The reason Public Utilities Commissioners should be (and are) paid more than the other officials mentioned is that, through their job, they gain marketable skills which can make them attractive targets for the private sector. Witness how quickly Bob Sahr was able to find a job. The same is true of the AG - that is why he is paid more.

In comparison, the SoS, Auditor, Treasurer, and Cmsr of S&PL fill bureaucratic jobs that don't require any particular knowledge or make one marketable in the private sector (beyond whatever political contacts or skills one may develop).

I think the real conversation should be combining those four jobs into two - perhaps if they had more oversight responsibility, it would be easier to justify higher pay.
2:30 PM
Anonymous said…
So shouldn't they be getting paid less because they are learning skills in this public office that will benefit them when they leave. I'm sorry, but your argument makes no sense. Maybe if they had gained all of this experience in their private sector jobs and brought that experience with them to the public office could you make an arguement that they should get paid more. But, they are using this as a learning experience to make themselves more marketable, just as you stated in your comment. Therefore, the PUC should get paid next to nothing like a majority of the other employees of the State of South Dakota.

My guess is anon 2:30 is Dusty's mother.
4:17 PM
Anonymous said…
NO Increases in pay!
4:34 PM
Anonymous said…
Since the legislature, in it's infinite wisdom, refuses to increase the minimum wage, AND refuses to adequate compensate the rank and file state employees (some of whom are below the Federal Poverty Level)it would be a travesty for them to vote in raises for anyone else.
6:58 PM
Anonymous said…
And no, I can with absolute confidence say that anon 2:30 was NOT Dusty's mother.
6:59 PM
Anonymous said…
If they don't increase the minimum wage, there is NO WAY they should increase the salary for those people.
7:32 PM
Anonymous said…
imrFirst Off 2:30 is WRONG. In order to run for the positions the officials need to know and have skills in the area they seek.
As for the legislators they do not really make enough money. Their elected official positons are worked the full term the are elected. There are meetings, phone calls from citizens all year long and at just about anytime of the day or evening. They put in more hours than most people know.
Yes, they learn other items while holding a position but they had to have knowledge to get there.
7:46 PM
Anonymous said…
Anon 7:46 doesn't understand what little these officials actually do. I'm not saying the employees in those offices don't do work, but wasn't it the previous State Treasurer that was infamous for not even coming into the office for weeks at a time?

Holding down the little guy and giving these high paid and high profile politicians a raise makes no sense.

Shame.
8:20 PM
Anonymous said…
I didn't say it in my earlier post, but I agree totally with the need for a legislative pay raise. They are way underpaid for the work they put in.

On the other hand, the auditor, treasurer, and cmsr S&PL are antiquated anachronisms that should be consolodated into one job or (better yet) absorbed into the executive branch.
8:21 PM
Anonymous said…
I wonder who was the lone opponent to speak against SJR 4 the legislative pay raise bill?
9:20 PM
Anonymous said…
I wonder who had a bill to conslidate the state auditor and treasurers offices with huge savings to taxpayer.SJR14 Answer same as above.
9:22 PM
Anonymous said…
Consolidate! same as above
9:23 PM
Anonymous said…
8:20 best re-read i was talking about the "Legislators" and the work they/some of them do year round.
If i remember correctly the State Treas. has a larger load now, didn't that office take over the lost propoerty and surplus property? I hope I am phrasing this correctly.
10:18 PM
Anonymous said…
I think 2:30's comments make sense about gaining marketable skills. Once a commissioner has been on for 1 year, they could easily take a job with higher pay. Like most jobs that get criticized for high salaries, this is a case of paying market value, whether or not they were worth it when they were originally elected.

On the contrary, I don't believe Kolbeck got much of a raise from his old job.
10:28 PM
Anonymous said…
10:18 Legislators getting paid more might not be out of line. But this thread is about the Constitutional Officers getting a huge, 15+ percent raise. (look on the state website for the current salaries)

The unclaimed property function was with the state treasurer back in the day when the previous office holder was frequently AWOL, yet the office must have carried on. I recall that officeholder fighting in the MSP a lot with the then Governor, and a bill to strip the then Democratic Treasurer of his unclaimed property duties which failed.

So no. That's been there for a while. And other than reap a little free press when publishing lists of people who have money coming in the paper I seriously doubt the actual office holder performs many of those duties except to be a virtual figurehead. I suspect he has employees who handle them.

So no raise.
10:36 PM
Anonymous said…
To 9:20, the pay raise bill is SB4, not SJR 4. And the answer is Sen. Kloucek.
11:52 PM
Anonymous said…
The one legislator who probably needs the raise the most.
1:14 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A note from Benedict Ar... Sorry. A note from Stan Adelstein why he thinks you should vote Democrat this year.

By -
Image
(Click on letter to enlarge) And while it may not be printed at taxpayer expense, I don't see a disclaimer, either. When they hold the special session (supposedly at the end of November) , since he's left them already, I think his colleagues should expel him from the caucus. Sure. At that point it's only going to be symbolic. But since he's already said he's running again in the near future, sometimes symbolism is enough.
Read more

Corson County information on Klaudt Rape Charges

By -
Here's some of the information on the Corson County Charges: COUNT I That on or about December of 2005, in the County of Corson, State of South Dakota, Ted Alvin Klaudt did commit the public offense of SECOND DEGREE RAPE (SDCL 22-22-1(2)) in that he did accomplish an act of sexual penetration with his foster daughter, A.M., through the use of force or coercion; and as to COUNT II That on or about July or August of 2006, in the County of Corson, State of South Dakota, Ted Alvin Klaudt did commit the public offense of SECOND DEGREE RAPE (SDCL 22-22-1(2)) in that he did accomplish an act of sexual penetration with his foster daughter, A.M., through the use of force or coercion; and as to COUNT III That on or about July or August of 2006, in the County of Corson, State of South Dakota, Ted Alvin Klaudt did commit the public offense of SECOND DEGREE RAPE (SDCL 22-22-1(2)) in that he did accomplish an act of sexual penetration, separate and distinct from the act alleged in Count II, with...
Read more

It's about health, not potential promiscuity.

By -
As the only South Dakota blogger out with 5 daughters, I feel I need to weigh in on the whole discussion that's occurring with regards to the HPV vaccine, and Governor Rounds' proposal to make it available. My family (including my three oldest girls) watched my mom, their grandmother, succumb slowly and painfully to cancer which spread throughout her body. If a similar fate from a different type of cancer was preventable through a simple shot, why wouldn't anyone advocate for it? At the age most of my kids are going to be getting it, they're still playing with barbies, and negative influences such as most of the programming on MTV, and other assorted trashy television is verboten in my house. All they're going to know about this vaccination is that it's a shot, just like for teatnus or measles. They'll go "Ow, I don't want a shot," and that will be it. Just another mark on their vaccination record. One check box for DPT, one for HPV, and so on...
Read more