In ‘do-over’ meetings, boards hike legislator pay, revise statewide official bumps

Support Journalism

A pair of revamped public bodies tasked with setting Oklahoma politician pay deployed a new tactic — executive session — to keep conversations private and productive before voting to rescind prior actions, increase future legislators’ pay and bump future statewide official pay, with a specific caveat.

With an opening prayer for “wisdom” from new member Bill Kern, the Board on Legislative Compensation met first, jumped into executive session for 50 minutes and ultimately approved changing base lawmaker pay from $47,500 to $54,900. The $7,400 increase will be the first for legislators since 2019, which was the first hike in 20 years.

Charlie Hannema, a public relations professional and a new appointee to the board, made the motion for the increase and explained his reasoning after the meeting.

“Serving as a legislator or any elected official is an incredibly important job, and I believe it’s critical to our state that we are able to attract the best candidates possible,” Hannema said. “Legislative pay hasn’t been increased since before the pandemic despite cost of living increasing significantly, and this was a needed step to ensure their compensation is in line with the amount of work Oklahomans expect from those who represent them at the Capitol.”

The BLC also voted to raise the bonus stipends provided to the House speaker and the Senate president pro tempore to 50 percent of base pay (or $27,450). A slate of other leadership positions in each chamber — majority and minority floor leaders, budget committee chairpersons, House majority whip, House speaker pro tempore, House majority leader and three assistant majority floor leaders in the Senate — all saw their bonus stipends increase to one third of base salary (or $18,117).

The new Statewide Official Compensation Commission, which is statutorily required to have the same membership as the BLC, met second, also spent about an hour in executive session, and eventually voted to raise salaries for all 11 of Oklahoma’s statewide elected officials for the first time since 2009.

The special meetings were called after chaotic gatherings Nov. 12 that appeared to feature invalid votes owing to the board membership of lobbyist James Leewright. State law says registered lobbyists shall not be a member of the Board of Legislative Compensation.

The revelation spurred the boards to meet again, and four of the nine members were replaced by their appointing authorities:

• Gov. Kevin Stitt appointed Hannema to replace Robert DeNegri, who made false claims and confused corporation commissioners with county commissioners on Nov. 12;
• Stitt appointed Kern to replace Brian Jackson, who had served as the board chairman since 2023;
• Senate President Pro Tempore Lonnie Paxton (R-Tuttle) appointed Leslie Walker to replace Gary Unruh, whom Paxton said was unable to attend Tuesday’s meeting; and
• House Speaker Kyle Hilbert (R-Bristow) appointed Krista Ratliff to replace James Leewright, the president and CEO of the Oklahoma Restaurant Association.

Ultimately, the Statewide Official Compensation Commission changed the salaries for Oklahoma’s 11 statewide positions:

• The governor’s salary increased from $147,000 to $185,000 (a $38,000 increase);
• The lieutenant governor’s salary increased from $114,713 to $150,000 (a $35,287 increase);
• The attorney general’s salary increased from $132,825 to $175,000 (a $42,175 increase);
• The state superintendent of public instruction’s salary increased from $124,373 to $175,000 (a $50,627 increase);
• The corporation commissioners’ salaries were increased from $114,713 to $150,000 (a $35,287 increase);
• The state treasurer’s salary was increased from $114,713  to $160,000 (a $45,287 increase);
• The state auditor and inspector’s salary was increased from $114,713 to $150,000 (a $35,287 increase);
• The insurance commissioner’s salary was increased from $114,713 to $150,000 (a $35,287 increase); and
• The labor commissioner’s salary was increased from $105,053 to $130,000 (a $24,947 increase).

With two minor exceptions, the raises passed 7-2, with Chairman Chip Carter, Matt Tilly, Jennifer Miller, Hannema, Walker, Kern and Ratliff voting in favor.

Scott Douglas voted against each raise, and Jeff Bauman voted against all except commissioner of labor and insurance commissioner, for which he was asked to leave the room owing to his profession as an insurance agent.

The adjustments stand in stark contrast to the commission’s Nov. 12 votes, which made seven positions more highly paid than the governor and doubled the state superintendent of public instruction’s salary to $250,000. That figure drew particular pushback from Oklahomans, including former lieutenant governor candidate Chris Powell, who spoke during the commission’s public comment period.

“We have too much power over education at the Capitol to begin with, and that should be decentralized back out to the districts and our local schools. To me, elevating the state superintendent above everybody else sends the wrong message in regard to that. I would also say that if it were to be the case that somebody were elected to be state superintendent and they were getting this salary and over the course of their time in office they became more and more and more unpopular, I would not want to be the person who voted to give them that higher salary.”

Powell, who ran for lieutenant governor in 2022 on a platform of abolishing what he called the “superfluous” office, also reminded the commission of some unusual facts about Oklahoma’s statewide positions.

“Some of our statewide elected officials have requirements for their office beyond what others do,” Powell reminded the commission. “The state auditor and the insurance commissioner both have additional credentials they are required to have to be able to run for those offices. However, the attorney general, there is not additional qualification for them. You don’t have to be an attorney. Or a general.”

The commission attempted to minimize what could have been unintended consequences of the statewide official pay raises. Article 5, Section 23 of the Oklahoma Constitution prohibits legislators from being “elected” to “any office” that saw its salary increased “during his term of office.”

“No member of the Legislature shall, during the term for which he was elected, be appointed or elected to any office or commission in the state, which shall have been created, or the emoluments of which shall have been increased, during his term of office,” the constitutional provision states.

That provision posed a complication for the 2026 campaign of Sen. Adam Pugh, who announced his campaign for state superintendent of public instruction Oct. 2. Pugh (R-Edmond) would not see his current four-year term representing Senate District 41 end until 2028.

In an effort to avoid inadvertently making a sitting legislator ineligible for statewide office, commissioners prefaced each of their motions by saying that any legislator deemed to be mid-term during their election to statewide office would receive the prior salary and not Tuesday’s increased amounts.

After the meeting, Carter said the commission tried not to discuss any specific candidate during its executive session and did not receive legal advice about whether other lawmakers concluding their two-year or four-year terms in November 2026 would be affected by the constitutional caveat. With several current House and Senate members running for statewide posts in 2026, the confusing situation is somewhat defined by a 1930 Oklahoma Supreme Court decision that held a November statewide election does not conclude until the Legislature meets and declares the results in January (at which point a subsequent Legislature has been seated).

Nonetheless, Carter said Tuesday’s redone meeting went well.

“We tried to have a more thoughtful discussion than we really had before. It was kind herky jerky at the last meeting, and we felt like we needed to be a little more thoughtful. But it was definitely consensus that the governor, as the chief executive officer of the state, needed to have the highest pay. It was just an opportunity to try to set a more reasoned approach to the salaries.”

Carter emphasized that it had been 17 years since Oklahoma’s statewide elected official salaries were raised. However, he acknowledged that the major increases to the state superintendent salary on Nov. 12 drew some frustration from the public.

“The number that we had at the last meeting was really a bit of a crazy number. It felt like these were more in line and more reasonable and rational compared to other statewide officials,” Carter said. “We were able to sit down and have a good conversation and have a chance to just reflect on what happened. I think everybody kind of wanted a do-over after the last meeting.”

During the meeting, Hannema — who has worked for a public school district and for Stitt — spoke to the public perception about the state superintendent pay raise figure as well.

“I know this isn’t a discussion of superintendents vs. teachers. It’s not apples vs. oranges. I know some people can make that comparison,” Hannema said. “Our job is not to set salaries for teachers. If I had that authority, I absolutely would. But just because I don’t have that authority doesn’t mean I don’t feel an obligation to do something for the state superintendent.”

Support Journalism