CORNWALL Ontario – Last week CFN sent a query to all those officially running for council regarding the voted upon pay hike for elected officials at the last Council meeting.
The raise was severe and many residents have voted their outrage at having such increases including those union staff asked to show restraint and accept 2% increases.
It was pointed out that the monies spent on a consultants report further inflamed the extravagance of the raises which essentially tried to implement a form of arbitration in raising the honorariums bestowed by rate payers for those offering their services for elected office.
One viewer summed it up best. The consultants were out to lunch because council is not a position and Cornwall is not competing for its elected officials in the same manner that we would for say…police officers or fireman.
Also, the city is currently playing hardball with EMS staff who clearly in good faith can demand more in light of elected official raises.
1. The basic concept underpinning the report or the premise upon which it is based is not appropriate for an analysis of councillor salaries..That is, the report is basically a “market survey” which is typically used when you are doing a compensation study of employee wages..The “market” or the employer’s “comparators/competitors” are surveyed in order to determine if the wages you are paying your emp’ees are competitive – with an eye to both issues of emp’ee retention and recruitment.,In the case of politicians – there is no “marketplace” within which the City of Cornwall has to compete in order to attract/retain political office holders. Therefore, the whole thing seems inappropriate from the get-go. Unless of course, you subscribe to the theory that you need to pay an appropriate salary/honorarium in order to attract good candidates for office..If that is true, which given the amount of pay involved can’t really be driving a person’s decision to seek public office or not – and if it is then we are really in trouble here, then what does all this say about the quality of the current roster of councillors?.2. Further on that point, another basis upon which pay increases are awarded, more in the private than public sectors, is on performance. If that was to be the criteria, what aspects of the performance of the current council could be looked to to justify such a high percentage increase in pay?
IF elected would you rescind the voted for Council & Mayoralty raises?
Hi Jamie:I think, like most people, that a raise would not be a bad thing, but certainly not what they voted for themselves. I would say that if everyone was getting a 2% raise, then that might be reasonable, as long as it’s the same as everyone else. So I guess in answer to your question, yes, I would vote to repeal this atrocity.
Sorry Jamie. I have been so busy this week and I just received this email. If elected, yes I would vote to rescind the vote for Mayor and Council raises.
Hi Jamie,Can you please use firstname.lastname@example.org when corresponding with me about the election.Thank you. Have a great week-end.Kind regards,Alyssa
Hi Jamie.Just got back from camping yesterday, and I am catching up on emails today.You ask a tough question. The easy answer would be to say yes, I would vote to rescind, but that would be dishonest.As I am sure you have researched what the comparable municipalities are being compensated, as I have, I think council has brought their compensation up to those levels.People will hate that answer, but nobody wants to work for less than what others get paid to do the same job. Obviously I haven’t done the job of councillor, and really have nothing to base my response on, other than looking at the comparable cities salary structure for mayors and councils. I feel that it is reasonable to expect to be paid a comparable wage, for every line of work. Now having said that, if I were elected, and it were to be rescinded, I would have no problem working for what is currently being paid. I didn’t look up the salary levels before I put my name on the ballot.My problem with this whole thing, is the use of a consultant when they already had a report form a committee of local business, and community citizens telling them they should have a raise a couple of years ago. They already knew what this report would say, but possibly thought it would be easier to sell with a consultants stamp on it.Now this council has said many times that it has no extra money. So the next council needs to find efficiencies to pay for this increase. Just adding it as an increase to the next budget is to easy to do, but doesn’t show any leadership. Anytime a business increases its payroll, they always look for places to make up that money. Usually finding waste or improvements in operations to offset the increase. The next council will have to do the same.I hope this answers your question. Sorry the response was so late.Cheers,Todd
If a motion came up I would vote to cancel the raise.
I would vote to rescind the raise as voted and passed by the Kilger council.
I would vote to rescind the increase.
(Comments and opinions of Editorials, Letters to the Editor, and comments from readers are purely their own and don’t necessarily reflect those of the owners of this site, their staff, or sponsors.)
Comment policy reminder
CFN suggests you post comments using your real name. If you wish to post with a pseudonym you can register that user id by emailing email@example.com with your name, address, phone number and user id you wish to register.