Though he intended, when writing the original bill, to have the Legislature vote on whatever increases were recommended by the V.I. Public Officials Compensation Commission, former Sen. Positive Nelson said Thursday it was clear that in the past few months since a final report was submitted, lawmakers opted not to take that step.
Gov. Albert Bryan Jr. told the Source Wednesday that the government is moving forward on paperwork for the increases based on the VIPOCC Report submitted in August 2024, which he said went into effect Jan. 1. Questions surrounding the validity of the raises have persisted since Bryan’s announcement on Jan. 5, driven by the commission’s late submission of the report — two years after the original deadline — and the lack of formal follow-up or transmittal beyond an email sent to the governor, Legislature and chief V.I. Supreme Court justice.
It was at a press conference in March of 2007 that Nelson announced he had received authorization to introduce a bill establishing the commission. At that time, it was nearly four months since the Senate, in December of 2006, had passed the controversial Act 6905, which granted pay raises across the board to the governor, lieutenant governor and senators.
“This kind of thing is the trend throughout America,” Nelson said at the time, adding that the nine-member compensation commission would meet every four years to begin the salary review process. “After a review is conducted, the commission will submit their recommendations to the Legislature, and even if we decide not to act on it, the recommendation will still become law at the end of the four years,” he explained.
Reflecting Thursday on his intent to author the bill — now Act Act No. 7878, amended by Act No. 8384 — Nelson told the Source in an interview that he remembered the widespread distrust that Act No. 6905 had generated within the community.
“It’s okay to discuss a pay raise, but it should be discussed openly before the public,” he explained. “After that, I consulted with my other colleagues, here and in the States about the processes they were using and how they felt about what they had in place, what the best route to go was – thus the creation of the commission, where you have the three branches each select three members.”
“These people were to conduct a study; they hired a consultant, they made the comparisons, they looked at similar jobs here and across the nation. Then they decided if those officials were worthy of the increase, a decrease or if those salaries should stay the same.”
The Legislature, he added, had the opportunity to do the same thing.
“They could reject it, agree with it or amend it, but the biggest issue I see here is that they didn’t have a public hearing where they discussed the recommendations. Senators were to take a vote on it, and they did not do that – they allowed it to become law without any action and this is where I think the big fiasco comes in.”
Nelson’s original bill gave the Legislature 180 days to act, but Nelson said Thursday that the amendment dropping it to 90 was still good, ensuring that the Senate moved quickly.
“You don’t want the Legislature sitting on it, but I think what they did this time was cowardice. They got it, they did nothing quietly and let it become law. It is still a good measure I think, but they were supposed to vote, and if that press release on Sunday hadn’t come out, no one would have known,” Nelson said.
Released publicly Thursday by Senate Minority Leader Kenneth Gittens, who called for it, an opinion from the V.I. Legislature’s legal counsel addresses whether the V.I. government is legally bound to act on recommendations made by the Virgin Islands Compensation Commission. The crux of the matter, it says, revolves around whether the report and recommendations were properly submitted to the Legislature in August 2024, a requirement that would trigger a 90-day deadline for legislative action.
According to the opinion, the Compensation Commission, established under the Virgin Islands Public Officials Compensation Act, is required by law to submit its report and recommendations to the president of the Legislature, the governor, and the chief justice of the Supreme Court. However, Section 544(a) does not specify that the report must be formally submitted to the Legislature itself. Instead, it only requires submission to the president of the Legislature, leaving room for interpretation regarding the method of submission, according to the opinion.
The legal analysis further clarifies that the 90-day period within which the Legislature must act on the recommendations, as outlined in Section 546, does not begin until the report is officially submitted to the president. If this submission did not occur, then the timeline for action by the Legislature is not activated, and the recommendations cannot be deemed approved by default due to inaction.
As reported by the Source Wednesday, according to the email sent to Gov. Albert Bryan Jr, Sen. Novelle Francis and Chief V.I. Supreme Court Justice Rhys S. Hodge on Aug. 9, 2024, the report is described as “final,” with VIPOCC chair Haldane Davis writing, “The commission thanks you, the Chief Justice, and the Senate President for the confidence placed in us to complete this work amidst the challenges along the way. We believe that the territory’s public servants must deliver expert service at the appropriate compensation levels and trust that the results of the study and the recommendations made will help to grow and maintain a resilient public service.”
When asked by the Source by phone on Wednesday about transmitting the report via email without an official follow-up, Davies avoided delving into specifics. Instead, he emphasized that email is a standard and widely accepted form of communication in business. “Within business, you transmit an email – just as today’s statement was sent,” Davies said. “Email is a form of transaction that’s acknowledged.”
And, with the submission of the report, Davies added, the commission has completed what it was tasked to do. Francis, speaking to media over the past week, has maintained he did not receive a copy of the report.
“Even if an email was sent, it should have been accompanied by a signed transmittal,” Francis said in an interview with the Source Tuesday, adding that he had also not been contacted by Government House before the Sunday release was issued. “Something this significant requires formal and documented communication. You can’t just rely on an email and assume it was received.”
As the matter will now lie in the hands of the 36th Legislature, whose members are slated to be sworn in on Jan. 13, Nelson said Thursday he hopes, in light of the opinion, the intent is not to repeal the entire law.
“What I don’t agree with is them now making haste to repeal the original bill,” he said. “What they should do is put a stay on the increases until such further time that a vote is taken and they would still be up against the wire to vote ‘yes’ or ‘no,’ and I’m quite certain, given the current environment, they would vote ‘no’ at this time.”
Procedurally, Nelson said the Senate would have to offer an amendment to remove the implementation date of these increases.
“Or put a stay on them,” he added. “What I don’t want them to do is repeal the bill, as it puts in place some mechanism for public officials to get increases — other than that there nothing, they’re just voting at random and pulling numbers out of the sky. This at least give some sort of science to the method.”
