City Administrator Eastman calls for raises for the City employees.
In this case I agree whole heatedly with that assessment. It has been two or three years since our valued employees had a raise or a bonus at the end of the year, and it would be the right thing to do to give them one this year.
This year we have seen a meager increase in residential and commercial taxes, and if we manage our funds correctly, and cut back where we can I believe it's doable. Now where can we lay our hands on at least $20,000.00 plus to get the ball rolling?
Well one very reasonable place to cut would be the salary of the Public Works Director. You see Mr. Eckrich is receiving a salary of over $93,000.00 per year plus benefits, and he has a "take home car."
Mr. Eckrich himself (when he was the C/A) told the past director in a memo that the job was only worth $67,000.00 per year (no mention of a "take home car" was made either,) and that we could find very qualified persons to take the job at that salary.
I agree, we no longer approve plans in house so we do not need an engineer for the position, and we certainly can find a host of qualified persons to take that job Monday morning.
To that end I am recommending that we take Mr. Eckrich at his word and pick up $26,000.00 (not to mention gas, maintenance, and insurance costs on the "take home car,) thus giving us a leg up on the much needed salary increases for our employees.
Your thoughts please?
Tom Ford
NO. 959
This year we have seen a meager increase in residential and commercial taxes, and if we manage our funds correctly, and cut back where we can I believe it's doable. Now where can we lay our hands on at least $20,000.00 plus to get the ball rolling?
Well one very reasonable place to cut would be the salary of the Public Works Director. You see Mr. Eckrich is receiving a salary of over $93,000.00 per year plus benefits, and he has a "take home car."
Mr. Eckrich himself (when he was the C/A) told the past director in a memo that the job was only worth $67,000.00 per year (no mention of a "take home car" was made either,) and that we could find very qualified persons to take the job at that salary.
I agree, we no longer approve plans in house so we do not need an engineer for the position, and we certainly can find a host of qualified persons to take that job Monday morning.
To that end I am recommending that we take Mr. Eckrich at his word and pick up $26,000.00 (not to mention gas, maintenance, and insurance costs on the "take home car,) thus giving us a leg up on the much needed salary increases for our employees.
Your thoughts please?
Tom Ford
NO. 959
posted by Crestwood Independent at 16:52
15 Comments:
You have my vote. I think we should eliminate the position
The city of Crestwood does not build anything.
The city of Crestwood relies on St. Louis county codes. We have a code inspector in training.
We use outside contractors to build roads and the ocassional bridge to no where.The contractors provide their own engineers.
Now we can add 100k to the pool. Everyone could then enjoy a raise.
What do you think about this suggestion?
please explain why any city employee woud need a take home car. I feel like I don't have enough information to comment. I don't see why any city employee anywhere would need a city owned car. The rest of us drive our own cars and get along just fine.
9:05 PM Blogger: Kerra, There is but one explination for this travisty, and that is the Alderman felt sorry for him!
He does not need a 'take home car" at all for anything! He left the position of City Administrator on his own after we spent the time and money to train him for the job.Now he wants the same pay and perks he got when he had the "more stressful" job, and I for one think it's silly.
The Alderman in a stunning show of lack of judgement gave him all he wanted and then some, why? I will never know! I believe you (and everyone else) should call your Alderman (call Elliott Davis as well) and tell them this is not what any responsible official would do in a time of fiscal crisis and termoil.
Were paying for this travisty and believe me the rest of our valued employees are doing a slow burn over it. When we start loosing good people due to this un-needed greed what will the Alderman say then?
I am calling for Mr. Eckrich to do the right thing and voluntarily cut his salary to the $67,000.00 HE said was the correct number, give up the City vehicle, and return his department to the fiscal responsibility he is charged with maintaining.
Failing that, he can resign and we shall start the job serch right after Thanksgiving.
Tom Ford
Perhaps we should return to America before the entitlement state.
But we won't get rid of the entitlement state until we we get rid of today's widespread entitlement mentality and return to a society in which individual responsibility Is the watchword.
Are the citizens of Crestwood prepared to change to individual responsibility by replacing the liberal (Duncan, Beezley, Foote, Pickle, and Knarr) board members with conservative individuals?
I believe that the top few (like two each) in the Fire, and Police departments should have "take home cars" if they are required to respond directly to a scene of an emergency from home. These cars would have equipment needed by them at the scene of an incident.
I can't think of any others who would need a "company car" for personal use. For city business during work hours, there should be a few cars available.
Apparently, Mr. Eckrich out negotiated the BOA and the things mentioned were approved. So I guess we are stuck with it until something legally changes.
"It has been two or three years since our valued employees had a raise or a bonus at the end of the year, and it would be the right thing to do to give them one this year.
I AGREE!
John said...
"Apparently, Mr. Eckrich out negotiated the BOA and the things mentioned were approved. So I guess we are stuck with it until something legally changes."
Well John there is a very important budget session at the next BOA meeting. That is one place to start.
I believe we must let our Alderman know that we the Citizens are not at all happy with their decision to reward anyone for doing less!
Tom Ford
Tom,
Should I present a little history lesson or just let it drop? In other words:
Rainy Day Fund, who and when first purposed this?
Who opposed it, in some cases calling it a "slush fund"?
Who and when put into place an employee pay raise plan based on merit, who and when removed it?
Who and when straighten out the mess of having no records or requirements for inter department fund transfers with a irrevocable inter department trust fund?
Who and when removed it?
Who and when proposed a bond plan that would have put all City dept in to one sum and would have been paid off by now?
Who opposed it saying he couldn't trust any one with that large amount of money including himself?
Who promised to if elected regain the trust of the people if elected and failed to do so?
There's more, so much more Tom, but as I said in an earlier post, I am really becoming tired of repeating the factual history of the last 15 years of Crestwood.
What's that bit about not knowing the past, condemns us to repeat the pasts failures?
John,
Before you make the blanket statement (as Tom did) that all the employees deserve a raise, you may want to consider the following:
1. Does the city have enough money to support these raises/bonuses?
2. Is it fair to reward all employees equally when some may actually merit a bigger increase than others? This affects morale.
3. Is it proper to make pay adjustments without first having a pay plan to guide the decisions on how much, and whether, to reward employees?
4. Has any analysis been done to determine whether city salaries are already fair according to current market conditions?
5. Has any consideration been given to those who will be funding these increases (taxpayers)? Many in Crestwood are facing the same challenges in private sector jobs, while still others have lost their jobs.
Martha Duchild
II am in complete agreement with your assessment of history repeating.
The attitude toward spending is still
SPEND TILL IT'S GONE AND THEN ASK FOR MORE!
You forget about the police department raises that where not budgeted. First act of Jim Eckrich after he assumed the role of city adminiistrator. Then the raises for the existing department heads as Jim redefined the jobs to justify the increase. A shell game played on the tax payers again.
We already know that the structure is out balance. Director of public works compensation is 98k plus a take home auto.
City administrator compensation is 98k and no take home auto.
I vote to begin with these two before proceeding with further analysis.
12:01 PM Blogger: Tim, I think a bit of a history lesson is in order for sure.
"You may fire when ready Gridley!"
Tom Ford
1:22 PM Blogger: I agree completly. To that end I have filed a FOIA form for more information reference that, and tomorrow I will be filing one for the total cost of gasoline, insurance, and up keep on the "take home car," year to date.
When I get the results they will be posted here for ALL to review, maybe then we tax payers can get this stopped.
Tom Ford
I made a more lengthy comment last night, but Tom's blog seems to have eaten it. So I'll be more brief.
Martha,
I heard Ms. Eastman speak at the BOA meeting, and I read a number of articles about her on line.
Based on that, I don't think she will take any action on raises until she has researched all five of your items, and more. So I will allow my comments to stand unless future events prove me wrong.
Post a Comment
<< Home