Two simple steps to cure newbies stricken with pay hike disease
By HOWARD TROXLER
Published October 6, 2003
TAMPA - You know, we all would be better off if we made two simple changes to the city charters of Tampa, St. Petersburg and, for that matter, every place else:
(1) No first-term member of a city council should be able to propose, or vote upon, a pay raise for that council.
(2) No raise or new benefit approved by a city council for itself should take effect until every seat has been through the next election.
Think about how much trouble this would save.
First, it would prevent the regular and ridiculous spectacle of a brand-new schmo getting elected, then immediately expressing amazement at how hard the job is and how much more money he or she needs.
Second, it would force all city council members to face the voters before they rake in the new bucks. If they jacked up their pay and the voters saw fit to re-elect them anyway, well, more power to them.
I'm not saying that hard-working public officials shouldn't be compensated, especially in bigger places. You can make a fine argument that the pay for office should be high enough for all citizens to be able to hold the job.
But lots of times, those newly elected officials who clamor for more dough are just so smarmy about it.
The latest example comes from Tampa. Soon after a new council member named Kevin White got elected in the spring, he was egged on by his colleagues to come out for a 23 percent pay raise, from $28,900 to $35,600.
Twenty-three percent! It certainly was a bigger pay raise than the city had in mind for its secretaries, police officers, firefighters, sewer workers or anybody else.
"Until I got here," White explained, "I did not understand what an awesome responsibility this would be."
Maybe the whole time White was running, he thought the job was honorary or something, like maybe you got to wear a little hat and that was about it.
But it is wrong to blame the whole thing on White. The record clearly shows that some of his colleagues on the council goaded him on and then, when the lights of publicity came on, scattered like cockroaches across the kitchen floor.
It sounded for all the world like older brothers and sisters getting their kid brother to do something that would get him in trouble. Linda Saul-Sena, in particular, was the worst of these.
"I don't think you're the only one," she assured White when he brought up pay raises. She recommended seeking the raise "in a self-protective way, so we are not criticized." Then in public, she voted no.
Twice now, the Tampa City Council has split 3-3 on the pay raise. Each time, the seventh and deciding member has been absent (a different member each time). Besides Saul-Sena, council member Rose Ferlita has changed her position from yes to no, saying she has heard the wishes of the people.
Tampa is hardly alone. Largo recently deadlocked on whether to grant city commissioners a 5 percent pay hike (down from the original proposal of 7 percent). Another vote is scheduled for Tuesday on increasing the Largo mayor's salary from $17,672 to $18,556, and commissioners' from $11,781 to $12,370.
St. Petersburg went through a hilarious episode after its 2001 city elections, when several new members almost immediately discovered how deserving they were of something beyond their $25,000 salaries. They also wanted a fatter automobile allowance and, by the way, more money in the budget for snacks in their luxury box at Tropicana Field.
Public outrage shamed the St. Petersburg City Council into backing off. It waited a while for the dust to settle, then voted itself the option of collecting retirement benefits.
As I said, it is perfectly defensible to argue that big-city council members are really full-time employees with demanding duties and that paying a good full-time salary makes the office more open to all.
However, enough of the whiny, self-serving stuff. My two proposals stand: No pay-raise votes or even motions allowed from first-termers. No pay raises taking effect until after the next election. Simple, elegant, effective. Heck, I'll sign that petition.
