In 1997, Nolan COunty voted to participate in the judicial supplement under 51.702, Gov Code. Being country tightwads, we opted to pay under subsection e - that is, the salary for the CCL judge would be no less than the sum of the $28,000, the base salary in 1997, and 1/2 of the annual "excess" payment. The alternative was to raise the salary to within $1000 of the District Judge.

The minutes of the Court do not reflect their election on this matter. However, the salaries from 1997 to date are well in line with subsection e, and have never been within $1000 of the district judge. The commissioners and county judge from 1997 have very clear memories of their intent; the CCL judge from '97 is now the District Judge - and can't seem to remember.

THe current CCL judge is threatening suit, claiming that the failure to specifically and formally elect to pay under subsection e makes the county responsible to pay the larger amount.

How do the rest of you see this?

[This message was edited by Lisa Peterson on 10-14-03 at .]