(Red Oak) At Tuesday’s Montgomery County Board of Supervisors meeting, the supervisors reviewed the compensation board’s salary recommendation for elected officials.
The compensation board met on December 18, 2024. It recommended a five-percent pay increase for the County Auditor, Attorney, Sheriff, and Supervisors, and a ten percent salary increase for the Recorder and Treasurer.
The County Supervisors settled on a 3.5 percent salary increase across the board by a 3-2 vote. Charla Schmid, Mike Olson, and Bryant Amos voted yes. Alex Burton and Mark Peterson voted no. KSOM/KS95 News contacted Burton and Peterson to find out why there was a no vote. The two supervisors provided this statement.
Peterson released this statement to KSOM/KS95 News. “In my estimation, we did not adequately consider the raise differential between offices, presented to us by the compensation board.”
Burton stated, “I do not feel we had adequately reviewed the recommendations brought by the compensation board. I would have appreciated having that information presented today before voting. There was discussion about salaries during budget work sessions, but I don’t recall finishing or arriving at a consensus.”
In response, Montgomery County Auditor Jill Ozuna, Chair Charla Schmid, and Co-chair Bryant Amos released a joint statement.
“The statements released by Supervisors Peterson and Burton are unfortunate and unsubstantiated. The Board of Supervisors held eight budget work sessions with every department head, and some twice. At each session, the percent of change in their budgets was discussed, and at times in great length, when the percent of change specific to wages was higher than the 3.5% increase that was directed. At the last budget session on March 18th, Chair Charla Schmid asked the Supervisors if there was anything further to discuss and if they wanted to hold another budget session: the concession was an overwhelming no.”
Jill Ozuna stated that the January 2 regular meeting minutes show the board directed a cost-of-living increase to department heads for budgeting, which was 3.3 percent. Ozuna said she went back to the board and asked that, for accounting purposes, 3.5 percent would not have an adverse rounding issue that 3.3 percent would. Ozuna said there was no disagreement with that at that time.
