It was with great frustration that I listened to the City Council’s decision to not allow citizens to determine the level of compensation for the council and to continue the coverage of health insurance. First, there is a huge inequity that exists on the council at present. Some councilors receive an extraordinary benefit while others receive very little. If the argument is that we need to attract good candidates, I argue that we then need to equalize the compensation so that all candidates who choose to run would know that, if elected, everyone would receive the same. That is not the case at present. Again, some are rewarded handsomely for their efforts; others are not. Where is the attraction in that model?
The City Council is not a union. It is not bargaining benefits for its employees where the model used is “what is for the good of the whole.” In this scenario, there are seven part-time elected officials who all have the same job and should receive the same level of compensation. Then, if one so desires, he or she can use his or her compensation to buy the health insurance, if so desired.
In these economic times, let’s at least be fair and treat all our councilors equally. Access to the plan is reasonable; inequitable compensation is not.
Rosemarie De Angelis