A member of Gov. Doug Burgum’s cabinet has doubled his nearly $250,000 salary

MINOT — The North Dakota Industrial Commission is a powerful triumvirate composed of North Dakota’s three highest elected officials — the governor, attorney general and agriculture commissioner. It does everything from regulating oil and gas production to overseeing the state-owned bank and grain mill.

When longtime NDIC Director Karlene Fine retired, the Commission appointed Securities Commissioner Karen Tyler to fill the position on an interim basis. While it’s not unusual for the head of a state agency to carry two hats for a period of time to fill a vacancy, in June committee members — Gov. Doug Burgum, Attorney General Drew Wrigley and Agriculture Commissioner Doug Goehring — voted unanimously to remove the “interim ” of Tyler’s title as “interim director” of the NDIC.

Just a few days ago, at the September 30 NDIC meeting, these three voted for Tyler’s $46,000 per year raise. As interim director, she earned $60,000 a year. Her new salary is $106,144 on top of the $140,808 she makes as securities commissioner, a cabinet-level position under Burgum.

Here’s how Tyler explained the raise when I reached out to her for comment: “When the Industry Committee appointed me as interim executive director in August 2022, my salary for the position was set at $60,000,” she said.

“In June of this year, the Industry Committee voted to appoint me as executive director, but a more comprehensive review of compensation at the agency was conducted before making salary adjustments,” she continued. “The $40,000 raise approved by the Commission at its September 30 meeting was retroactive to July 1 because the permanent appointment date was June 26. My salary as executive director will now be $106,144.”

This is a bit confusing, but Tyler describes two raises. She was hired as interim director at $60,000 a year. On September 30, she received a raise retroactive to July 1 (the beginning of the state’s fiscal year), bringing her salary to $100,000 a year. That amount increased to $106,144 thanks to a 4% raise approved by the Legislature for state employees. She also confirmed that her remuneration at the Securities Department had not been reduced.

Tyler pointed out that her current executive salary is still significantly lower than what her predecessor, Fine, earned. When I asked Burgum for comment, his spokesman Mike Nowatzki was similarly defensive about the raise.

“Karen began serving as interim director of the NDIC in August 2022 and held the position for approximately 22 months at an annual salary of $60,000 – less than half of what the previous director of the NDIC earned when she retired.” he told me, going to It should be emphasized that the position of director also involves new responsibilities. “The $106,144 salary you mentioned is approximately $30,000 less than the previous director’s salary, with additional responsibilities including document digitization and executive search (some examples of BND, DMR) and new programs (i.e. Office of Employment Services grants). Clean Sustainable Energy).”

BND is the Bank of North Dakota; DMR is the Department of Mineral Resources of the NDIC. Both had leadership vacancies that the NDIC worked to fill during Tyler’s tenure.

Nowatzki emphasized that he spoke only on behalf of the voivode’s office. “The official NDIC announcements need to be agreed by the three elected officials who make up the Commission,” he told me.

Tyler also provided me with a report from the NDIC Compensation Committee – composed of representatives from the Governor’s Office, the Attorney General’s Office, and the Agriculture Commissioner’s Office – which made the same point as Nowatzki regarding the increasing responsibility of the director position. The commission, which included Gov. Tammy Miller, found that “the level of compensation for the executive director position may not have kept pace with the increasing demands and responsibilities of the position.”

While I do not dispute that the demands on both the NDIC and its director are increasing and will no doubt continue to increase in the future, does this not undermine the wisdom of hiring someone as a director who already has a full-time job?

According to its website, the North Dakota Department of Securities Act, under Tyler’s direction, is responsible for administering the North Dakota Securities Act, the North Dakota Commodities Act, the Franchise Investment Act and the Pre-Need Funeral Services Act. “The Department regulates the activities of companies and specialists in the investment industry, and also regulates accumulation in the offer and sale of securities. We strive to appropriately balance support for efficient, lawful capital raising with appropriate protection for investors who commit capital to businesses,” we read on the website. .

It’s not like the committee hasn’t been busy lately. They were just part of a massive settlement against a North Dakota ranching company that turned a beef marketing company into a Ponzi scheme. Securities and Exchange Department investigators are also looking into the collapse of Epic Companies, a large conglomerate of real estate development, construction and entertainment companies founded by West Fargo businessman Todd Berning, which was the latest to make headlines for failing to serve a civil lawsuit.

Is it credible that Tyler can adequately discharge the responsibilities of both the full-time cabinet-level position he has held since 2001 – under three governors – and, as NDIC members point out, the growing responsibilities of executive director?

When I spoke with him, Attorney General Drew Wrigley was emphatic that he was. Stressing that state law prohibits him and other commission members from discussing commission business outside public meetings, he said Tyler is “simply a remarkable woman.”

“She’s worth it and even more,” he said of her raise, and then argued that a director should be paid much more. Perhaps as much as $240,000 to $250,000 a year.

But when I asked Wrigley how one person could fill two such important, full-time jobs, he denied it. “I’m not the governor. I cannot comment on whether it is possible for it to remain in securities.”

“He works hard at both jobs,” Wrigley continued, adding that he spends long hours at the Capitol and often sees Tyler’s car in the parking lot in the evenings and on weekends. “I am watching her work on the Industrial Commission,” he said. – She balances it out.

Neither Nowatzki nor Tyler herself has given any indication that her time as securities commissioner might be coming to an end, though that brings us to another, somewhat sensitive topic. Burgum is on the clock. A new governor will be sworn in in North Dakota in mid-December. From all information available, this will likely be Kelly Armstrong, our current core member of the US House of Representatives.

Theoretically, it could also be NPL Democratic Party candidate Merrill Piepkorn or even independent candidate Michael Coachman, but regardless of who voters choose, is it inappropriate for a lame-duck governor to take on these kinds of personnel consequences?

There is some intrigue surrounding nominations to the State Board of Higher Education. There are two holes to fill. Applications for nominations submitted by the governor and approved by the state Senate can be submitted until November 12, immediately after the election. Would Burgum have made these appointments weeks before the new governor took office?

Let’s not forget that earlier this year, Burgum’s hand-picked successor, Miller, ran an absolutely brutal campaign against Armstrong in the Republican primary, accusing him of “insider trading” and of being sympathetic to a sex offender.

Armstrong won that race in a landslide in the June election, taking nearly 73% of the vote, and while there have been no public signs of lingering hard feelings, it’s not hard to imagine that such feelings could exist.

Ultimately, the issue at hand is not (and should not be) rooted in political intrigue, but in what best serves taxpayers. Does it make sense to employ one person in two consecutive full-time positions, even if their total compensation for those positions is slightly less than we would pay two people to fill them?