Monday, February 21, 2000
Officials stuck on pay raises
Salary low, timing tricky in Springdale
BY SARA J. BENNETT
The Cincinnati Enquirer
When it comes to raising pay for elected Springdale officials, some council members say they're in an awkward spot.
The $4,500 salary most of them earn is unchanged since 1986 and Springdale's charter makes council responsible for setting elected officials' salaries. Yet elected officials draw fire any time they mention pay raises.
Now, council members are considering a 50 percent raise for themselves, the mayor, the clerk of council, and their successors. The timing of the raise has come under question as a possible violation of Ohio's ethics law.
“It's a precarious situation,” Springdale Councilman Tom Vanover said. “We all wish we could determine our own pay raises. The problem's exacerbated because we haven't looked at it in so long because it is a touchy subject.”
Springdale illustrates a pre dicament faced by many elected officials around the state. Fearing voter backlash, council members and mayors often avoid raising salaries so long that they lag behind those of similar communities nearby. When councils do tackle the issue, they follow ethics guidelines to the letter or risk tough questions from constituents.
Some communities try to avoid awkwardness by taking pay out of the hands of elected officials.
In Sharonville and Cincinnati, elected officials automatically get raises when Hamilton County commissioners do.
In Hamilton, council members' salaries increase only if residents vote to change the city's charter. That system has different problems. Hamilton voters haven't changed the charter since 1928 and council members get $300 a year.
They are among the lowest-paid among cities with a 50,000-plus population.
Most people seeking elected office say money isn't their motive. In Indian Hill, the mayor and council members make nothing.
But serving on a council or working as mayor can mean more than long meetings several nights a month.
It means getting stopped in grocery stores by folks griping about snow removal. It means getting up from dinner to answer angry phone calls. And it means missing children's soccer games to sit on special committees.
Springdale's council and mayor make less than those in surrounding cities. They haven't had a raise since 1986. The new raises represent a tiny part of the city's $14 million general fund budget. If approved, they won't require new taxes.
Few question the need for Springdale raises. It's the timing that's at issue.
Council members want the raises to start 30 days after they cast final votes in March.
The Ohio Ethics Commission warns that such in-term pay increases could be conflicts of interest that cloud officials' ability to make good decisions. The commission recommends that raises take effect with the start of each new term.
However, Springdale has staggered elections, so some would make more money than others for a while, and officials say they've waited long enough. They cite a 1998 court case from Canton that allowed post-election, pre-term pay raises to prove that in-term raises are OK.
That bothers Springdale resident Earl Phillips. “I think they probably should get a pay raise, but vote for the next set of guys — don't just be selfish and thinking about yourself.”
Elected officials take heat no matter how they go about giving raises, said John Mahoney, deputy director of the Ohio Municipal League.
“It's always tough,” he said. “You hear about it either way, because at any point in time in any city you're going to have people who have some bone to pick with local government, and if that complaint is not particularly legitimate, there's always friction about pay.”
That's why Sharonville took the burden away from elected officials. In 1997, council voted to tie the salaries of the mayor, council members and others to the Hamilton County commissioners. When the commissioners get a raise from the Legislature, Sharonville does, too.
“Salaries for elected officials always could be a sensitive area with people, and I think it's getting more so as the years go by,” said Sharonville Councilman Gene Martin. “This does remove the awkwardness, and it makes it a fair adjustment.”
Springdale's mayor and several council members say they aren't worried that giving themselves raises will damage them politically.
The first reading of their pay-increase ordinance went quietly last week with no citizen comment, save a supportive e-mail from resident Phyllis Hedger and her husband.
“They haven't had a raise in so many years,” Mrs. Hedger said. “Why should they vote a raise for someone else when they themselves deserve it?”
If Springdale passes its in-term pay increase, Mayor Doyle Webster predicts other cities will follow suit. In the meantime, he said he plans to suggest an ordinance providing a pay increase for elected officials four years from now so they won't face future awkwardness.
“But right now,” he said, “some sitting officer has to belly up to the issue here and do this. It takes a little bit of courage.”
Licking recedes at Falmouth, but the Ohio's still rising
Flood-seasoned Falmouth relieved
Bush fund skirts cap on election donations
McCain banking on independents
School change proves victory for democracy
Census stresses effect of count on area's coffers
Nurse recruiting effort launched
Officials stuck on pay raises
Police probe pair of killings
City thinks high-tech in 2000
Gordeeva skating more smoothly through life
8 schools targeting substance abusers
Bill would give parity to mental disorders
Boone County to open second office for clerks
Forum goes beyond Mass
Street work in Norwood planned in two phases
Volunteers needed to help playland blossom
Wellness paired with health care
GET TO IT
TRISTATE DIGEST
