Home / News / Viewpoints / Editorial

Council shouldn't even think of raises

Posted: Monday, November 23, 2009 11:30 pm | (2) Comments

Font Size:: Default font size; Larger font size

Nathan Pallace Nathan Pallace npallace@poststar.com Glens Falls Councilman-at-Large Jack Diamond, seen here during a May 13th common council meeting, will serve as acting mayor of the city while the current mayor, Roy Akins, recovers from an unexpected abdominal surgery performed on Tuesday May 20th.

Bad timing.

Bad judgment.

Any politicians who propose pay raises for themselves while laying off workers and denying raises to others is simply just ... what's the word? ... unbelievable.

Yet some members of the Glens Falls Common Council are tentatively testing the waters for such a pay raise.

We know that the pay for serving on the council, or virtually any government board, is paltry compared to the work and long hours involved. And we know that perhaps that discourages some qualified people from seeking the positions. But when school districts are being asked to deny raises for their teachers and the county is eliminating jobs and reconsidering funding entire programs, a politician simply can't be given a raise in this atmosphere - no matter how well deserved or overdue.

How do you look a clerical worker in the face and say, "I'm eliminating your job, but I'm giving myself a pay raise?"

How do you look a highway worker in the face and say, "I'm freezing your salary, but I'm giving myself a pay raise?"

How do you say to any of the hard-working public employees, "You don't deserve a raise this year, but I do."

And how to you say to taxpayers, "I'm voting to cut back on the services the city provides because of a lack of money, but I'm giving myself a pay raise?"

Can't do it.

We have a couple of other issues here.

First, where was this talk of pay raises for the council during the recently concluded political campaign? Politically, no candidate in their right mind would bring up a pay-raise issue while seeking election against an opponent, even though they should have the courage to raise it if they believe it.

But some members of the council this year ran unopposed, and therefore weren't at risk of losing their seats. Yet they didn't bring it up either. It's disingenuous to seek a pay raise for yourself three weeks after the election without having bothered to mention it before the election.

The other questionable justification is that the salary discourages qualified people from running. Raising a councilman's $10,000 compensation by $300, as a 3 percent raise would do, isn't going to get any better candidates. If you want a better class of candidates to consider running, you'd have to double that pay, not bump it up by a couple hundred dollars.

One council member compared the council salaries to the pay of county supervisors representing the city on the Warren County Board of Supervisors, which are significantly higher. But it's unfair to compare the pay to the supervisor's job, since they're completely different jobs. And anyway, the pay of supervisors is an issue for citizens to take up with the Warren County Board of Supervisors. If a candidate wants to represent the city at the city level rather than the county level, they should be willing to accept the pay.

We don't begrudge public officials from being compensated for their time.

But in an economic climate in which public employees and citizens are being called on to make sacrifices, elected officials should be taking the lead, not taking the money.

Local editorials represent the opinion of The Post-Star editorial board, which consists of Publisher Rick Emanuel, Editor Ken Tingley, Editorial Page Editor Mark Mahoney and citizen representative Bill Reynolds.

Posted in Editorial on Monday, November 23, 2009 11:30 pm

Print Email