Nevada lawmakers sort through stacks of pay raise requests every session. Many fall within the realm of reason. Others are so outrageous, so patently offensive, the numbers trigger the gag reflexes of even the staunchest advocates of the regulatory state.

Consider Senate Bill 516 among the latter. The proposal, introduced Monday by the Government Affairs Committee, would award 17 percent boosts in pay to the top elected officials of each county.

In revenue-rich Clark County, the bill would increase District Attorney David Roger's annual salary from $155,745 to $181,994.

Sheriff Doug Gillespie's pay would rise from $134,263 to $156,892 per year. Clerk Shirley Parraguirre, Assessor Mark Schofield, Recorder Debbie Conway, Treasurer Laura Fitzpatrick and Public Administrator John Cahill would see their salaries rise from $91,138 to $106,498 per year.

Additionally, the bill would grant part-time county commissioners the authority to vote themselves 43.5 percent pay raises. If SB516 becomes law, Clark County's commissioners could increase their salaries from $68,390 to more than $98,000 per year.

This has little do to with any increase in the "cost of living." When the price of gasoline goes up 50 cents a gallon for the $34,000-per-year working stiff, does it go up by a dollar per gallon for the sheriff, or $2 for the commissioners? Of course not.

There's no justification for this proposal. Only four years ago, lawmakers passed a bill granting these same offices similarly huge boosts in pay. The Clark County district attorney got a 55 percent raise, the sheriff received a 60 percent bump, and the other elected county officials received 26 percent salary increases.

Clark County commissioners received authorization to vote themselves 27 percent pay raises, which they did.

County government leaders assured lawmakers and taxpayers that these raises were long overdue because fixed salaries had eroded badly after a decade of inflation. Gov. Kenny Guinn signed the pay increases into law even though there was no shortage of qualified candidates each election, and incumbents were eagerly seeking re-election.

Four years later, the state's political landscape is largely unchanged. Office holders are not resigning en masse, taking jobs at the local mall to collect better pay. Qualified candidates are still seeking election to every post on the county ballot. They do so knowing exactly what they'll be paid for the duration of their term.

Indeed, in Clark County, all six of the administrative elected officials mentioned in SB516 and three commissioners won their posts less than five months ago. They advanced through competitive primaries and spirited general election campaigns. Clearly, they believed their current salaries were worth months of fundraising, hand-shaking and public appearances.

No matter. County officials are back before lawmakers seeking ever-bigger portions at the tax revenue trough. And they want their pay raises pronto -- the proposed increases would take effect July 1.

The larger problem with this bill is the fact that county officials must appear before the Legislature, hat in hand, for authorization to change the pay of their elected leaders. Aside from burdening state lawmakers with local administrative matters, it shields county officials from accountability in decisions that affect their governments.

County commissioners should have the authority to grant pay increases, not just for themselves, but for other elected officials who come before them.

Then, if they have the audacity to support the kind of raises detailed in SB516, they can face the political consequences for such a ridiculous money grab.