Limited Time Offer. Become a Founder Member Now!

Conference committee approves $90,000 attorney equity adjustment, removes one FTE

April 24, 2025 | House of Representatives, Legislative, North Dakota


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Conference committee approves $90,000 attorney equity adjustment, removes one FTE
The conference committee on House Bill 10 10 voted unanimously to adopt a package of budget changes that includes a $90,000 attorney pay-equity allocation, $25,000 for fire marshal equity, a $30,000 accrued-leave payout allocation and the removal of one proposed attorney FTE.

Committee members said they were under time pressure to finish negotiations and worked through alternative dollar amounts before settling on the package. "So for the fire marshal equity 25. And for the accrued leave payout 30,000. And then we would leave the comp time at 20,000. For the attorney equity, we'd be looking at 90,000. And then we would remove the 1 FTE position," Chair Meyer said while summarizing the agreement.

The nut graf: The changes reconcile differing House and Senate budget proposals for attorney pay and several insurance-related positions and funding lines tied to a securities/insurance merger and fire marshal workload. Committee members framed the package as a compromise to limit near-term spending and preserve a healthier ending fund balance while keeping most proposed positions intact.

Members debated several alternatives before the vote. Senate members and House members discussed earlier proposals that ranged from $50,000 to $125,000 for attorney-equity funding; some advocated higher amounts to help junior attorneys while others worried about pay compression and the surcharge on fringe benefits. Senator Sickler noted that fringe and benefit costs mean a headline dollar amount does not translate dollar-for-dollar to take-home pay and referenced an initial request of $250,000 on the Senate side. Representative Pyle and others also raised that the equity increase would come in addition to a 3% across-the-board increase already planned.

Committee discussion also focused on FTE positions in the insurance and securities areas. The conference kept all 10 proposed FTEs for the securities function but agreed to remove one additional attorney FTE the House had proposed. Committee members told the panel they had checked vacancy details with agency contacts: two of the 10 securities FTEs remained vacant at the time of the committee's review. "We did call and talk to Tim Karski... he said he's hired 2 of those vacant ones and there's still 2 vacant ones left," a committee member said when explaining why the committee felt the extra attorney FTE could be deferred.

Representative Heil asked whether the securities attorney moving to the insurance side would be able to cover backlog work for the fire marshal division and fraud prosecutions. The insurance commissioner (who addressed the committee) said the securities attorney position has substantial work inside securities and that the additional attorney the department requested was independent of the securities move. The commissioner characterized it as unlikely that the securities attorney alone would resolve the insurance-side backlog.

On accrued leave and other line items, members said they were attempting to find modest sums to cover unique payouts without increasing overall spending. Senators and representatives exchanged specific dollar proposals before settling on $30,000 for accrued-leave payouts and leaving $20,000 in the comp-time line for fire marshals.

The motion to adopt the package "in place of number 02001" was moved by Senator Dwyer and seconded by Representative Munson. The committee recorded the roll-call approval with the following votes: Chair Meyer — yes; Representative Munson — yes; Representative Pyle — yes; Senator Sickler — yes; Senator Dwyer — yes; Senator Burkhart — yes. The motion passed and the committee adjourned.

The committee did not set an implementation timeline in the recorded discussion. Members indicated they would revisit staffing needs if vacancies persist or workloads increase in future biennia.

View full meeting

This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.

View full meeting

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep North Dakota articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI