Compensation Board for Elected Officials - Feb. 17, 2026

Minutes

Call to Order

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

Welcome and Introduction of Members

All members present.  Aimee Smith is meeting with us remotely via Zoom.

Classification & Compensation staff present include Nina Smith, Erin Braman, and Danielle Misché.

Recognition of Guests

County Clerk Catherine McMullen is present for the meeting.

County Clerk Presentation

The Clerk’s presentation is available upon request. This is Clerk McMullen’s third year presenting to the Compensation Board. She began her presentation by sharing the mission statement for the Office of the Clerk. The Clerk was one of three original elective positions at the county level. She is responsible for three divisions – Elections, Recording and Records Management.  

The minimum requirements to run for the County Clerk position: US Citizen, at least 18 years of age, an elector, and resident of the county at least one year prior to the election. Clerk McMullen is a Certified County Clerk (CCC) by Oregon Association of County Clerks, and is on their Elections and Recording legislative subcommittees and Equity and Inclusion Workgroup. Clerk McMullen has an Executive Master in Public Administration (EMPA), a Master in Library and Information Science )MLIS), and has more than 20 years of professional experience, including 11 years in Elections Administration and 13 years in Libraries and Information Management.

The Clerk is a department director responsible for three divisions: Recording, Elections, and Records Management.  She supervises 20 regular staff, 2 temporary staff, and 100-150 temporary election workers during each 90-day election cycle. The Clerk is responsible for a budget of $6.16M, of which almost 60% is self-funded. Clackamas County is the largest county with an elected Clerk.

Records Management – Keeper of all public records, retains and preserves county public records, including digitizing large maps, supports county departments in responding to public records requests, and is also an approved passport acceptance facility for the U.S. State Department. Some counties have stopped the passport service.

Improvements for Records Management include completing a classification and compensation study (in process; near completion) for classified Records Management division staff. Maintain and expand passport application acceptance services while neighboring counties are reducing and/or stopping services. The Division has also replaced archive writer and reviewed their technology needs.

Recording – Anytime you buy or sell property it gets recorded through the Clerk’s Office, Recording Division. All Board of County Commissioner’s journal documents and board orders for the county are recorded. All marriages must have a license issued from the Clerk’s Office. Clerk McMullen has officiated 405 weddings to date (2.5 years). Recently, she received approval to deputize her staff to officiate weddings. About 10% of weddings were done in Spanish/ English. The Recording Division generates pass through revenue for Surveyor, Public Land Corners, and Resolution Services as part of recording fees. 273 petitions (typical amount) will be heard this spring through Property Value Appeal Board (PVAB). Division also processes OLCC liquor licenses for unincorporated areas of the County, which is much of the County, and provides notary services.

Some significant improvements include strengthening staffing, completing backlog of indexing from the pandemic, continued focus on quality control, created manuals and procedures, now an emerging leader in the state on best practices. The Office has expanded hours for notary services and officiating weddings.

Elections – Conducts all local, state and federal elections for county citizens. Over 320,000 registered voters in 16 incorporated cities and unincorporated rural and urban communities in Clackamas County. 55% of voters are within a city boundary, 45% are in rural/unincorporated areas.

Since taking office, Clerk McMullen has strengthened staffing, increased access by opening a Vote Center in Happy Valley, focused on safety and security, secured a ballot printing vendor contract in 2023, secured a mail ballot sorter contract in 2024, and secured a tally system contract in 2025.

Election Integrity – means every eligible voter has the resources they need to vote easily and without barriers. Elections are safe, secure, transparent and are confusion and error free.

The Clerk noted she is the lowest paid county Elected Official and is paid lower than all Department Directors and most Deputy Directors. She works an average of 50+hours per week with no paid leave. The Elections Manager top of salary grade is higher than her salary and is one of the few non-represented management employees that accrue overtime (during elections).  They also receive paid leave and other benefits. Clackamas County is the most populous county with an independently elected County Clerk.

Clerk McMullen explained differences among the current comparables that the CB uses. One significant difference between the Clerk and other jurisdictions is the number of voters and number of staff. # of voters in Clackamas County is 320,000.

Deschutes County does not have a vote center or ballot tracking, and do not officiate weddings. # of voters is 163,001.

Lane County Clerk does not have a vote center or ballot tracking, and they do not process passport applications. # of voters is 278,912.

Marion County Clerk does not have a vote center, does not officiate weddings, nor processes passport applications. # of voters is 225,595.

The Clerk suggested using Benton County as a comparable. She also noted the Clerk matches are not within the Portland metro market and Clackamas County is the third largest county in the state and the largest county with an elected Clerk. Other Metro counties (Multnomah and Washington) break up the Clerk responsibilities into different departments with higher paid Department Directors.

Jennifer asked Clerk McMullen to explain further the Certified County Clerk certification. The Clerk responded that the certification is a professional development effort through the Association of County Clerks and requires a certain number of years of experience as well as continuing education. There are two conferences per year, and they meet every two weeks that include trainings. The CCC is a preferred (not required) qualification and she is starting to see it called out in job descriptions and noticed it in the new Benton County recruitment.

Jennifer asked how the Elections Manager is eligible for overtime. Nina responded that there are a few non-represented County management classifications that have that exception.

Aimee asked when the classification and compensation study will be completed for Records Management staff.  Nina responded that within the next month or two.

Aimee asked how much of Clerk McMullen’s time is spent overseeing the recording functions. Clerk McMullen responded that she oversees 100% of recording functions, but generally Elections takes up majority of her time, around 70% and the other two divisions split the 30%.

Jennifer asked about non-represented staff receiving overtime and Nina noted that Elections Manager is an exception, and we have a few positions within the county similar that receive overtime.

Nina asked that since 45% of Clackamas County residents are rural, what does that mean for her work. Clerk McMullen noted that those rural residents don’t have a mayor, so their most responsible and direct form of government is the county positions. The County has 120 distinct districts (mix of urban, suburban, rural), and is the largest number in the state which adds to the complexity of conducting elections.

Nina asked about the vote centers and tracking. Clerk McMullen explained there is a vote center in Happy Valley that provides access to voters. Two weeks prior to Election Day, the vote center is staffed with elections workers, voters can get their ballot if it is too late to have it mailed or if someone wants to vote in person or if they have a disability and want assistance. We are one of two counties with a vote center (vote center in Gresham for Multnomah County).
Nina asked about the comparable duties with Benton County as they are currently going through a recruitment. Clerk McMullen stated they have similar responsibilities; they also do dog licensing.

Clerk McMullen left the meeting at 9:43 a.m.

Elect Chair

Action: Jennifer volunteered to be the Chair and Aimee seconded the motion.

Review and Approve Meeting Discussion

Action: Meeting discussion highlights (minutes) from February 10, 2026, were reviewed and approved without any changes. 

Distribute and Discuss Updates    

The CB requested to see a different view of each EO position, their responsibilities, minimum qualifications of the position, and what the current matches are. Danielle delivered a new document and explained the format.

As the CB reviews each EO, Jennifer suggested they make a decision on the match philosophy as well.

Assessor – Current matches are Clark County, Deschutes County, Lane County and Marion County.  Multnomah and Washington were removed in FY 2021/2022. Nina explained that the current Assessor as well as previous Assessors believe Clark County is very different than what the Clackamas County Assessor does. Clark County does not do tax collection and mapping. Jennifer noted that Washington County has a lot of overlapping of duties and does not look like a match. Washington County looks like our Assessor and Clerk roles combined. Multnomah County looks like Assessor plus a few extra responsibilities. For Benton County, tax collection is under their Financial Services Department.

Jennifer stated Deschutes, Lane and Marion County look like matches. Two that don’t look like strong matches are Clark and Washington County. Two that Jennifer is on the fence about are Multnomah and Benton.

Clerk – Deschutes, Lane and Marion County are current matches. Nina noted Multnomah County has not been a match since FY 2008/2009 because they only oversee the Elections function. Aimee noted Washington County looks like it could be a match. Aimee asked Jennifer if Lane County looks like a match and Jennifer said if they were to look at it, she sees it as a light match.

Jennifer thinks Deschutes, Marion and Benton look like matches. Lane County looks like a light match. Washington County feels flipflopped between Assessor and Clerk duties with our EO positions. Benton County looks like a solid match.

Nina noted there is almost a $3,000 per month difference between the Clackamas County Clerk and Assessor positions. Jennifer noted that although the Oregon Equal Pay Act does not apply to Elected Officials, she would like to look at responsibilities.

Danielle asked if the CB would consider using Washington County Assessor as a match for both our Assessor and Clerk. The CB decided to explore using Washington County for both Assessor and Clerk.

Commissioner – The current matches are Lane, Marion Multnomah, and Washington County, as well as City of Portland and Metro.

Jennifer suggested that Deschutes County might be added as a match since their type of responsibilities are similar.

Action: Aimee motioned to add Deschutes County as a match.  Jennifer seconded the motion.

Aimee asked about thoughts on Metro being a match.  Danielle noted that she split out Commissioner and Chair because currently we match the Commissioner’s salary to Metro’s Councilor President.

Action: Aimee voted to remove Metro as a match.  Jennifer seconded the motion due to the Metro’s salaries for Councilors’ and Council President’s being tied to the Circuit Court Judges’. Councilors are at 1/3 Circuit Court Judge salary; Council President is equal to Circuit Court Judge salary.

Follow-up: Nina noted HR staff will update the data sheet for Commissioner to include Deschutes County, remove Metro, and not include Benton County.

Commissioner - Chair – Jennifer suggested waiting until the end of the conversation to discuss the differential/add-to-pay, currently 2% for our Chair.

District Attorney – Nina confirmed that the District Attorney must be a member of the Oregon State Bar. Current matches are Clark (required to be member of WA State Bar), Deschutes, Lane, Marion and Washington Counties.  

Action: Jennifer does not want to discount a jurisdiction strictly due to its size, so Jennifer motioned to add Multnomah County as a match to the District Attorney.  Aimee seconded the motion.

Justice of the Peace – Current matches are Deschutes, Multnomah and Washington County.  

Action: Jennifer stated Marion County requires their Justice of the Peace to be a member of the Oregon State Bar. Aimee motioned to add Marion County as a match. Jennifer seconded the motion.

Nina said Judge Rastetter noted Circuit Court Judges as a match, although they hear different types of cases.  

Sheriff – Current matches are Lane, Marion and Washington County.

Action: Jennifer motioned adding Deschutes County back as a match due to responsibilities being similar minus the work release. Aimee seconded the motion.

Treasurer – Current matches are Marion County, City of Portland, and City of Vancouver.

Nina noted our current Treasurer Brian Nava told her that Marion County has reorganized their department. Marion County does not do cash reconciliations nor cash recording. They also contract out their investment portfolios. Brian does not believe Marion County is a match at this time.  He also reached out to other jurisdictions and confirmed our matches and the roles of each position.

Action: Aimee motioned to add Deschutes County as a match. Jennifer seconded the motion. Jennifer noted while there are some differences it still appears to be a match.

Action: Given the new information the CB received from Brian Nava, Marion County does not look like a match and Jennifer motioned to remove it. Aimee seconded the motion.

CB went off the record for a break at 10:41 a.m.

CB returned to on the record at 10:50 a.m.

The CB revisited Assessor, Clerk and Commissioner-Chair.

Assessor – The CB confirmed they are not going to use Clark County and need to make a decision on Multnomah, Washington and Benton County.

Aimee motioned to adding Washington County for Assessor and Clerk. Core essential functions are matches and that would give the positions a match within the metro area. Jennifer stated the Clerk is not a match but there are some similarities. Both Multnomah and Washington are heavier matches.  Jennifer noted for the same reason she would add Multnomah County as a match for Assessor. Aimee asked if there is weighting involved if there are heavy or light matches and Nina noted that when dealing with salary grades they usually have a 5% spread so you can note a 5% reduction if it’s a heavy match, but with flat rates it is harder to do.

Action: Jennifer seconded the motion to add Washington County for both Assessor and Clerk positions.

Follow-up: Aimee asked if they would want to add Multnomah County as a match. The CB agreed they would like to see the data sheets with and without Multnomah County as a match for Assessor and will decide if they want to add it or not.

Action: Clerk – Nina asked if the CB would like to look at Benton County.  Jennifer motioned to add Benton County for Clerk because the responsibilities are very similar. Aimee seconded.

Commissioner-Chair – Nina asked the CB if they are still comfortable with the 2% add to pay. The past few years the Budget Committee did not discuss the CB’s recommendation to increase the add-to-pay to 3%. The CB would like to see the data sheet for Commissioner without Metro before they determine an increase to the add-to-pay.

Nina noted that internal alignment is another facet the CB typically reviews, and asked if there is anything they would like to review regarding requirements for positions.  

Aimee suggested looking at any of the specialized requirements and the ones who oversee a department.

Aimee asked if the CB wants to continue using the current philosophy with the three-pronged approach. Jennifer said looking at compression with the second in command is an outlier and does not want to consider it an absolute. Some of the second in commands are not actually a second in command but the highest second paid supervisor/manager in the department which is not an equal comparison.

Nina discussed COLA. The CB agreed to continue to look at COLA.

In the current order of operations for the methodology, compression is the second consideration. The CB discussed that while compression is a consideration for the positions that have a second in command, it is not the driving consideration. Jennifer would like to look at market second. Jennifer asked Aimee if they would like to hold to the 10% compression standard. Aimee asked if the county has a standard and Nina noted the county does not have a rule on compression. Jennifer noted she would like to use a 5%-10% range for second in command compression. Aimee asked how they would explain the reasoning and Jennifer responded as long as the compression fell within the range they would find it acceptable.

Nina asked if the CB would like to restructure the process to:

1. COLA
2. Market
3. Internal Alignment

Jennifer noted internal alignment could include compression, additional responsibilities which could include managing a department, or alignment with other positions.  Aimee agreed framing internal alignment this way may be better received. Nina noted that educating the Budget Committee and highlighting the managerial responsibilities will help.  Danielle noted that Evelyn called the EO’s Department Executives.

Aimee asked if there were any positions they did not change any matches on.  Nina noted all EO positions were impacted by a change.

The CB wanted to run through an example. After updating the Justice of the Peace data sheet by adding Marion County, the CB determined that bringing EO’s up to market first and then adding in COLA was the best methodology. The data sheets do not forecast COLA increases for the County and other jurisdictions.

The CB’s updated/revised three-pronged approach is:

1. Market Comparators
2. COLA
3. Internal Alignment 

General Discussion    

Nina asked if there is anything the CB needs besides updated data sheet and updated working guidelines.

Follow-up: Aimee asked if there are other leadership positions eligible for overtime similar to the County Clerk with the Elections Manager. HR staff will collect that information and provide it at next meeting.

Adjourn

Meeting adjourned at 11:51 am.

Upcoming meetings/events 

• Comp Board Meetings (all In-person):
  • February 24, 2026 – 9:00am-12:00pm
  • March 12, 2026 – 9am-12pm

Compensation Board Recommendations presented to Budget Committee: Tuesday, April 14, 2026 (in-person)

Comp Board Handouts

• Agenda
• Meeting Discussion Highlights from February 10, 2026
• Elected Official requirements

Audio recording is available upon request.