Georgia House backs plan for big pay raises for top state judges

The Georgia House voted 154-13 to approve House Bill 947, which would set up a pay system for top state judges that would be linked to the salaries of federal judges. The bill could result in raises for state Supreme Court justices, judges on the state Court of Appeals and superior court judges from $27,000 to almost $60,000. (Miguel Martinez/The Atlanta Journal-Constitution/TNS)

Credit: TNS

Credit: TNS

The Georgia House voted 154-13 to approve House Bill 947, which would set up a pay system for top state judges that would be linked to the salaries of federal judges. The bill could result in raises for state Supreme Court justices, judges on the state Court of Appeals and superior court judges from $27,000 to almost $60,000. (Miguel Martinez/The Atlanta Journal-Constitution/TNS)

The Georgia House backed a bill Thursday to tie the pay of top state judges to that of their federal colleagues, giving them the possibility of a big salary boost.

The judges say the salaries of members of the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals and superior courts often can’t compete with what big Atlanta law firms pay, and that prevents some qualified candidates from applying for the jobs when they are open.

The House voted 154-13 to approve House Bill 947 by Rep. Rob Leverett, a Republican from Elberton and a lawyer, that would set up a system for top judges that could see raises from $27,000 to almost $60,000. Funding for the raises would still have to be approved by the General Assembly in the separate budget bill, so lawmakers could back smaller raises.

“This is just a guideline to follow, and this chamber still holds the purse strings,” said House Appropriations Chairman Matt Hatchett, R-Dublin.

The legislation aims to both raise the salaries of judges and fix the current system, which allows lawmakers to approve local supplements for superior court judges. Because of that, some superior court judges are paid more than $200,000 a year, some $150,000, depending on the supplements local lawmakers have gotten through the General Assembly.

While judges have received cost-of-living raises in recent years like other state employees, the last big push for substantially changing the pay structure came in 2015, when lawmakers gave top judges raises of up to $12,000.

The House bill would take the Supreme Court justices’ current pay of $186,112 a year and set a maximum salary of $223,400 by tying it to federal pay. Court of Appeals justices would go from $184,990 to $212,230, and superior court judges from $141,970 to $201,060.

The superior court pay is somewhat misleading because $141,970 is what the state pays, and counties supplement those salaries.

In making his case for higher pay before budget writers last fall, Supreme Court Presiding Justice Nels S.D. Peterson said that in 2016, the starting salary for first-year associates at big Atlanta law firms was about $155,000. He said it’s $215,000 a year now.

Pay for Georgia Supreme Court justices ranks 32nd nationally, Appeals Court judges come in at 23rd nationally and superior court judges at 45th nationally in terms of state salaries, he said. If the pay plan is funded, those rankings would be 15th, 12th and 14th, respectively.

The bill — which would cost the state $21 million a year initially if funded — would set the maximum Supreme Court pay at a base rate comparable to what federal judges made two years earlier. Appeals Court justices would be paid about 95% of what a federal judge made, and superior court judges 90%.

Instead of the current county supplement system — which is based on whatever the local legislative delegation generally gets passed — superior court judges could receive up to 10% “locality pay,” a kind of cost-of-living differential that could boost their salaries over $220,000 a year.

Superior court judges who already earn more than the state base rate could opt out of the pay plan. And while the salaries are tied to federal judicial pay — which rises every year — the General Assembly could decide not to fund the increases.