Compensation Board for Elected Officials - Feb. 10, 2026

Minutes

Members Present

• Aimee Smith
• Jennifer Justus

Guests Present

• Evelyn Minor-Lawrence, HR Director
• Judge Kathleen Rastetter

Staff Present

• Nina Monroe Smith 
• Erin Braman
• Danielle Misché

Call to Order

Nina Monroe Smith, Interim Classification & Compensation Manager, called the Compensation Board for Elected Officials (CB) meeting to order at 9:00 a.m.

Welcome and Introduction of Members

Aimee is returning for the last year of her first term. Jennifer is in the process of being approved as a member. She has been recommended to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) and is pending official confirmation which we should know during this meeting.

Recognition of Guests

Evelyn Minor-Lawrence attended the first hour of the meeting. The Justice of the Peace, Judge Kathleen Rastetter, is also in attendance and will present to the CB.

Classification & Compensation (C&C) staff present include Nina Monroe Smith Smith; Erin Braman; and Danielle Misché.

Review Board Code of Conduct

All board members have previously signed the Code of Conduct and agreed to continue to comply.

Roles Defined

Nina noted the ORS defines the role of the CB and briefly summarized the CB’s role in making recommendations to the Budget Committee.

Erin and Danielle collected data for the CB’s reference during this meeting.

Judge Rastetter Presentation

Judge Rastetter has been in the position of Justice of the Peace for the Justice Court for just over a month.  Justice Courts are a state court run by the county. She was appointed by the Governor and will run for elected office (May election and November general election).  For Clackamas County, the Justice of the Peace must be a lawyer and member of the Oregon State Bar. This is not the case for all Justice Courts. Judge Rastetter has been a member of the bar since 1993. She has been a Pro Tem Judge (substituting Judge) for Justice Court for two years prior to her appointment as Justice of the Peace.

Responsibilities include being the decision maker for all trials – traffic and other violations, small claims (under $10,000), and evictions. This court was created to relieve Clackamas County Circuit Court of their workload. Judge Rastetter also shared her responsibilities include acting as the Director of the Justice Court department – she manages six employees, oversees budget, and oversees operations.

The number of cases handled in 2025: 
•    20,899 traffic and other violations
•    494 small claims
•    2,244 evictions

Clackamas County Justice Court has the highest volume and is the biggest one in Oregon. The court provides revenue via traffic violations to the general fund.

Last year, the Justice Court increased FTE from 3 to 6. An efficiency made in the last year includes Troopers and Officers can now testify remotely via Microsoft Teams to save time and expense.

The Judge shared the Justice of the Peace is not paid commensurate with other Clackamas County State Court Judges. Judge Rastetter brought comparables for the position, which include:
Clackamas County Circuit Court Judge
County Counsel 1 (entry level)
County Counsel, Senior
Deputy District Attorney 1 (entry level)
Deputy District Attorney, Senior

Jennifer asked what other jurisdictions use if they don’t have a Justice of the Peace. Judge Rastetter responded that Multnomah County uses Hearing Referees.

Aimee asked what the biggest differences are between the Circuit Court Judges and her role. Judge Rastetter responded that management and operation responsibilities are performed by the Justice of the Peace, but not Circuit Court Judges (e.g. budget, Human Resources issues, supervision). Also, Circuit Court Judges handle felony cases where Justice of the Peace cannot. Justice Court can, in theory, have jury trials but they don’t do this.

Evelyn asked who would cover for her if the Judge was absent or unable to work.  Judge Rastetter responded they would hire a Pro Tem Judge to cover or the Justice Court would have to reschedule everyone.

Danielle asked about municipal courts and how that compares. Judge Rastetter said they are city judges and don’t do the volume the Justice Court does.

Review and Discussion of 2025 CB Process

Nina reviewed the recommendations made by the Compensation Board for FY 25/26. She also discussed that the only increases approved by the Clackamas County Budget Committee (BC) was 2.8% COLA for all EO positions.  

Significant concerns raised by the BC last year were regarding aligning recommendations to the minimum of NRP salary grade 38, and having the 10% spread between the Elected Official (EO) and their second in command.

Evelyn Minor-Lawrence Presentation

Evelyn is the Director of Clackamas County’s Human Resources Department. She noted internal services departments have been instructed to include a maximum of a budgeted 3% increase (at the direction of the County Administrator).

Evelyn thanked Judge Rastetter for presenting and acknowledged her role. This year the Compensation Board is looking at matches closely and Evelyn feels it is okay to look outside the box. Evelyn stated considerations could be given to how the EO positions are filled (e.g. Judge is appointed by the Governor); the requirements and credentials for EO positions as they are not the same across all EO’s; what makes EO position unique; who acts as the subject matter experts – EO or department staff; and what is the appropriate market for EOs.

Jennifer asked which EO positions serve as a head of a department. Evelyn responded Treasurer, Assessor, Clerk, District Attorney, Sheriff, and Justice of the Peace (all but the Commissioners).

Aimee asked how the CB can better explain and detail the positions and the recommendations to the Budget Committee.  

Evelyn stated we need to look at education, credentials, impact of their work, uniqueness of the job, and autonomy, and will need to explain this to the Budget Committee and educate them.  Evelyn stated the market is mostly external and not just internal.

Nina noted that the CB presented the recommendations as a whole package last year instead of separate items.  The combination of the compression with the Sheriff and Undersheriff and the fact the Sheriff is already so far above market, perhaps the BC didn’t hear the rest of the presentation due to the compression piece. Last year the CB didn’t want to add a fourth prong to their recommendation, so they combined the external market and internal alignment together and the BC didn’t see them as separate points. Perhaps recommendations could be in groupings or somehow organized differently.

Historically, the County Administrator has asked the BC to look at the positions and the recommendations separately. However, this was not requested of the BC last year.  

Evelyn left the meeting.

Review and Discussion of 2026 Data and Information    

The following documents were reviewed and discussed:

Compensation Board for Elected Officials: ORS.112 language: Describes guidelines and responsibilities of Compensation Board for Elected Officials.

2026 Elected Officials Roster: Outlines term information for each Elected Official. Nina noted that seven of our EO’s have their current terms ending December 31, 2026.

History of Compensation Board Recommendations/Budget Committee Approvals: Illustrates the history of Compensation Board recommendations vs. Budget Committee approvals over the last 10 years, with a 2.8% COLA being approved by BC for EO’s last year.

History of Clackamas County COLA Sheet: Shows COLA amounts for the various employee groups over the last 10 years. There is one collective bargaining agreement that expired on June 30, 2025 and remains in negotiations (FOPPO). There are two collective bargaining agreements expiring on June 30, 2026 (POA and AFSCME-CCOM). COLA amounts for these groups are noted as “TBD”.

Nina noted the CPI-W: West Urban Annual Average indicator used for all employee groups came in at 2.7%.  This is what the non-represented group will receive on 7/1/2026. This will be re-evaluated if something different is negotiated during collective bargaining.

Second in Command Information Sheet: Compares each Elected Official’s monthly salary (including deferred compensation) to the monthly salary of the highest paid position(s) reporting to them and/or the second-in-command(s) and their monthly salary including deferred compensation (if applicable) and longevity.  The document notes the spread between the Elected Official‘s salary and the second-in-command’s actual salary as well as the spread between the Elected Official’s salary and the top of the second-in-command salary grade maximum. Nina noted that the two Deputy District Attorney Chief incumbents are retired rehires which is why no longevity pay is included as they are no longer eligible for it .

Working Guidelines – Documents the history of practices and working guidelines developed and followed by Compensation Boards. The “Order of Process” was adopted by the 2022/2023 Compensation Board and updated in 2025/2026.

2025 Population Estimates and Demographic Information: Outlines demographic information for all Oregon Counties and for the Portland-Metro region (including Clark County and City of Vancouver). The highlighted Cities and Counties are the current matches for elected positions: Multnomah, Washington, Lane, Marion, Deschutes, Clark, Portland, Vancouver, and Metro.

Map of Oregon: Shows geographic location of all Oregon Counties.

Department Director Salaries – Shows department, director title, department budget, director salary and deputy director’s title (if applicable) and salary.

The CB went off the record at 10:11 a.m. for a break.

The CB went back on the record at 10:22 a.m.

Match Comparable Sheets    

Nina noted the match sheet reflects the current matches.  This year the CB will review all matches and make determinations.  Nina discussed each EO position and the CB looked at all jurisdictions and why they are currently matches or not.

Jennifer wanted to know why some matches were removed and if it was because they are appointed positions rather than elected.  Nina noted removal has historically been based on scope of duties/responsibilities, not because of appointed or elected status.  Danielle pointed out some Compensation Boards wanted more matches and were willing to broaden the matches.  Aimee asked how the CB’s decision making for these matches is in alignment with C&C’s decision making used for all other positions in Clackamas County.  Nina noted C&C uses “component” matches in our own county market matches and can also indicate “light” matches where the other jurisdiction’s classification may not do as much or have as many responsibilities as our job or could use “heavy” match where the other jurisdiction has more responsibilities. This broadens the ability to use those comparables as matches.  C&C also prefers to have at least three matches to consider the data a “healthy” market.  The other difference is Clackamas County does not use Deschutes County, Lane County, and Marion County as our typical market area due to their populations.  Since not all jurisdictions have Elected Officials the CB has historically had to expand our market area to include other jurisdictions.

Jennifer asked if there are any additional qualifications for Elected Official positions.  Nina noted only the DA, Justice of the Peace, and Sheriff have specific requirements.

Follow-up: Jennifer asked if any of the Clackamas County EO roles do something that no other jurisdiction does.  Nina responded that staff would investigate that.

Aimee asked if the CB could ever adjust due to geographical location or for lighter/heavier matches.  Nina noted that has been done in the past and the CB could implement that in their recommendations.

Action: A Classification and Compensation Analyst informed the Compensation Board that the Board of County Commissioners approved Jennifer Justus as an official CB member.

Follow-up: Aimee asked for bullets of main tasks from each EO.

Aimee asked if we knew how many hours the Commissioners worked.  Nina responded it is not monitored and we wouldn’t know.

Follow-up: Jennifer asked if the requirement for DA must be an active member of the Oregon State Bar.  Staff will find out and follow-up next week.

Judge Rastetter noted that the Hearings Referees in Multnomah County are not required to be attorneys, although they could be. The Justice of the Peace does not have to be a lawyer, but they would have to go through extra training if they are not.

The Treasurer couldn’t make it to today’s meeting but will meet with Nina tomorrow, February 11, 2026.  Nina will report back next week with any information the Treasurer provides.

Follow-up: Aimee would like to know basic qualifications to run as an Elected Official and any specific requirements for EO positions. C&C staff said they will document for all positions and follow-up next week.

Data Sheets

Discussion regarding the Data Sheets for each elected position. Nina noted the data sheets reflect the averages of the market comparables as determined by the previous CB. If matches are changed this year through the CB process, this could adjust the average.

Washington State changed their PERS pickup amount from 6.36% to 5.38%.

Deschutes County across the board did not have any increases for the EO’s.

Assessor – Last year, a 2.8% COLA was recommended by the CB and approved by the BC. Based on current matches, Assessor is now 3.2% higher than the market average (was 5.7% above average last year).

Nina noted the Assessor’s matches are on the lighter side with less responsibilities than the Clackamas County Assessor and are outside of the metro regional area. Multnomah and Washington County have been considered the last few years as possible matches but the FY 25/26 Compensation Board reaffirmed they were not according to the methodology used in that year.

Clerk – Last year, a 2.8% COLA was recommended by the CB and approved by the BC. A market adjustment of 11.3% was also recommended but not approved. Based on current matches, Clerk is 9.8% lower than the market average (7.8% below average last year).

Aimee asked if the large increase for Marion County’s Clerk was due to the incumbent in the position and if they were just elected/appointed. Erin found that the Marion County Clerk was sworn in January 2025.

Commissioners – Last year, a 2.8% COLA was recommended by the CB and approved by the BC.  Based on current matches, Commissioner is now 5.2% lower than market average (2.9% below average last year).

Nina noted the Board Chair receives an additional 2% add-to-pay (in effect July 1, 2013). Last year an additional 1.0% increase to that add-to-pay was recommended by the CB which was not approved by the BC.

District Attorney – Last year, a 2.8% COLA was recommended by the CB and approved by the BC. Based on current matches, District Attorney is 13.6% higher than market average (14.3% above average last year).

The State of Oregon had a 2.5% COLA effective 2/1/2026 which increased the state paid portion of the District Attorney’s salary.

Justice of the Peace – Last year, a 2.8% COLA was recommended by the CB and approved by the BC. An adjustment of 6.18% was also recommended, but not approved by the BC. Based on current matches, Justice of the Peace is 3.5% lower than market average (4.5% below average last year).

Sheriff – Last year, a 2.8% COLA and a 2% compression adjustment were recommended by the CB.  The BC only approved the 2.8% COLA. Based on current matches, Sheriff is 11.8% higher than market average (12.6% above average last year).

Treasurer – Last year a 2.8% COLA was recommended by the CB and approved by the BC. This year, the Treasurer is 5.7% lower than market average (0.2% above average last year).

Nina asked if there is any additional information the CB would like to see for the next meeting. CB noted nothing at this time.

Aimee asked about the health of the budget.  Judge Rastetter noted there are no total cuts across the board.  Nina stated that any departments that receive federal funding may have cuts.

Schedule for Meetings 

Compensation Board (CB) recommendations will be provided to the Budget Committee on April 14, 2026.

Elect CB Chair

The members asked if they could vote and decide next week.  Nina agreed they could make that decision at the February 17, 2026 meeting.

Adjourn

Meeting adjourned at 11:56 a.m.

Upcoming meetings/events

• Comp Board Meetings (all In-person):
  • February 17, 2026 – 9am-12pm
  • February 24, 2026 – 9am-12pm
  • March 3, 2026 – 9am-12pm

Comp Board handouts

• Agenda
• Meeting Schedule
• Compensation Board Responsibilities
• Elected Officials Roster
• History of Compensation Board Recommendations and Budget Committee Approvals
• History of COLA’s
• Current Incumbent and Second in Command’s Current Salary
• Working Guidelines 
• Population Information
• Map of Oregon Counties
• Department Director Salaries
• Data Sheets for all Elected positions
• All Jurisdiction Comparables

Audio recording is available upon request.