CA’s state supplement discussed

By Melinda L. Lucas

Shackelford County commissioners topped off a month of budget workshops and regular sessions by meeting for the fourth Monday in a row on Aug. 29, working through about 30 minutes of agenda items before tackling an unexpected budget complication that just came to light in the last week.

County judge Robert Skelton explained that the county has been notified by the State Comptroller’s office that the state supplement provided for the county attorney the last two years has been too high, and the state intends to make up the difference by sending almost $19,000 less in 2023.

“When Rollin Rauschl was thinking about running for office, I told him what was in the budget, and I thought that was correct, but the law is different now,” said Skelton. “He closed his private practice and came to work based on that amount (plus the county’s portion of the CA salary).”

The judge explained that legislation passed in 2019 set up a system where county attorneys with one to three years experience receive a state supplement of $35,000, which increases to $38,500 for four to seven years, then $42,000 for eight years and up.

Sworn into office Jan. 1, 2021, Rauschl has received $42,000 for each of his first two years of office instead of the $35,000 amount.

County treasurer Tammy Brown said that the Comptroller’s office clarified last week that the system is “self-reporting,” but she had not seen any correspondence asking for that information and was also under the impression that the $42,000 supplement was correct.

“He made his future plans based on that belief,” said Skelton. “It’s been a gut punch.”

To make up some of the difference, the judge recommended that Rauschl be paid for 94 hours of civil work he has done without charge over the past 20 months. Civil work is not included in the CA’s duties.

There was no action taken because the item was not on the agenda, with plans to revisit the issue at the next meeting on Tuesday, Sept. 6, when the finalized budget and tax rate is expected to be proposed.

In other business, a motion about a part-time LEC employee was restated because it was not previously on the agenda.