ECONOMIC/OTHER IMPROVEMENTS TOUTED
DURING DISCUSSION OF WHAT TO PAY NEXT MAYOR/COUNCIL
A discussion about what to pay the next Mayor and City Council became a debate about the quality of local media-reporting, the effectiveness of the present council itself; and the stronger role it asserted over the city's administration/finances since the 2008 election.
Councilman Stankoski criticized the media's depiction of only turmoil at city hall (ignoring accomplishments), argued that debate and dissension is a good and healthy sign of democracy in action, and listed positive results to prove his point: " ... emergency funds increased to $6 million ... less long term debt and improved bond ratings, new city-wide computer system, new police dispatch system, new police/fire vehicles, new recreation land, new trees downtown, new sidewalks, road paving projects coming soon, etc."
Stankoski said the council's belt tightening and improving fiances allowed no employees to be laid off (unlike neighboring cities/county) -- and property values had begun to rise again (highest in the state).
Stankoski: "There are no villains ... no victims ... its democracy in action ... not a bad process ... a good one."
In 2007 Bob Gentle and the last City Council complained about the mayor's financial management (click).
FORD CLAIMS CITY "BETTER OFF 3 YEARS AGO"
Councilman Ford, however, said he believed the city was better off 3 years ago; and cited the lack of cost-of-living pay raises for employees as evidence.
Ford: " Don"t see any good happening ... you are tearing the city apart ... brick by brick ... block by block "... except financially ... better off 3 years ago."
Kingrea agreed with Stankoski that none of the good things would have happened without the council's financial guidance: "Would you rather have raises .. or (prevent) layoffs."
Ford added he thought the new sales tax was a mistake: preferring the traditional ways of gaining more revenue: raising utility rates and other fees.
( Note: When later informed that the cost of living has not increased the past 3 years (according to Dept. of Commerce) Ford did not respond. He did not say which utility rates he would have raised in place of the sales tax. He recently proposed increasing the garbage fee.)
FINANCE OFFICIALS RESPOND TO FORD'S CLAIMS
When asked to respond to Ford's criticism, Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Zunk declined saying he was "having trouble understanding Ford's point."
Councilman Kingrea said later: "I'm not surprised about Ford's position. Mike, . . . obviously would want the citizens of Fairhope, specifically the customers of the utilities, to provide funds for city services rather than visitors who pay a large percentage of the tax. Had the City continued on the road Mike wanted, the expenditure line of Fairhope's finances would have crossed the revenue line; many City employees would not have to worry about getting a raise because they would be unemployed; there would be no rainy day fund; and the utilities' personnel would be struggling with old, out of date equipment. "
CITY WAS OVERSPENDING BEFORE 2008
Councilmen Mixon and Kingrea pointed out that when they took office city finances were in poor shape (according to accountants) : the city was in the red (deficit spending) and belt tightening and the new sales tax "saved our hide."
Kingrea said without the tax, "we would have had to, lay people off ... nobody lost their job."
(Publisher's note: According to financial data, Wal Mart is the top contributor to the city sales tax: almost $1.8 million/year. Being outside city limits, it paid no city taxes previously.)
NEXT MAYOR'S SALARY LOWERED TO $30,000
Councilmember Quinn said she thought the city had great management now, and the council could not dictate how much the mayor worked. The current administrator was already employed by the city prior to taking that position -- so the additional up-front costs were minimal she said.
Quinn: "These salaries are for the next Mayor and Council . . . don't know yet who it may be."
Stankoski made clear the current mayor's salary is not affected: "Media reports . . . not true . . . we are not cutting his salary . . . mid term."
The motion passed 4-1, Ford no. The next election is August, 2012.
DURING DISCUSSION OF WHAT TO PAY NEXT MAYOR/COUNCIL
A discussion about what to pay the next Mayor and City Council became a debate about the quality of local media-reporting, the effectiveness of the present council itself; and the stronger role it asserted over the city's administration/finances since the 2008 election.
Councilman Stankoski criticized the media's depiction of only turmoil at city hall (ignoring accomplishments), argued that debate and dissension is a good and healthy sign of democracy in action, and listed positive results to prove his point: " ... emergency funds increased to $6 million ... less long term debt and improved bond ratings, new city-wide computer system, new police dispatch system, new police/fire vehicles, new recreation land, new trees downtown, new sidewalks, road paving projects coming soon, etc."
Stankoski said the council's belt tightening and improving fiances allowed no employees to be laid off (unlike neighboring cities/county) -- and property values had begun to rise again (highest in the state).
Stankoski: "There are no villains ... no victims ... its democracy in action ... not a bad process ... a good one."
In 2007 Bob Gentle and the last City Council complained about the mayor's financial management (click).
FORD CLAIMS CITY "BETTER OFF 3 YEARS AGO"
Councilman Ford, however, said he believed the city was better off 3 years ago; and cited the lack of cost-of-living pay raises for employees as evidence.
Ford: " Don"t see any good happening ... you are tearing the city apart ... brick by brick ... block by block "... except financially ... better off 3 years ago."
Kingrea agreed with Stankoski that none of the good things would have happened without the council's financial guidance: "Would you rather have raises .. or (prevent) layoffs."
Ford added he thought the new sales tax was a mistake: preferring the traditional ways of gaining more revenue: raising utility rates and other fees.
( Note: When later informed that the cost of living has not increased the past 3 years (according to Dept. of Commerce) Ford did not respond. He did not say which utility rates he would have raised in place of the sales tax. He recently proposed increasing the garbage fee.)
FINANCE OFFICIALS RESPOND TO FORD'S CLAIMS
When asked to respond to Ford's criticism, Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Zunk declined saying he was "having trouble understanding Ford's point."
Councilman Kingrea said later: "I'm not surprised about Ford's position. Mike, . . . obviously would want the citizens of Fairhope, specifically the customers of the utilities, to provide funds for city services rather than visitors who pay a large percentage of the tax. Had the City continued on the road Mike wanted, the expenditure line of Fairhope's finances would have crossed the revenue line; many City employees would not have to worry about getting a raise because they would be unemployed; there would be no rainy day fund; and the utilities' personnel would be struggling with old, out of date equipment. "
CITY WAS OVERSPENDING BEFORE 2008
Councilmen Mixon and Kingrea pointed out that when they took office city finances were in poor shape (according to accountants) : the city was in the red (deficit spending) and belt tightening and the new sales tax "saved our hide."
Kingrea said without the tax, "we would have had to, lay people off ... nobody lost their job."
(Publisher's note: According to financial data, Wal Mart is the top contributor to the city sales tax: almost $1.8 million/year. Being outside city limits, it paid no city taxes previously.)
NEXT MAYOR'S SALARY LOWERED TO $30,000
Councilmember Quinn said she thought the city had great management now, and the council could not dictate how much the mayor worked. The current administrator was already employed by the city prior to taking that position -- so the additional up-front costs were minimal she said.
Quinn: "These salaries are for the next Mayor and Council . . . don't know yet who it may be."
Stankoski made clear the current mayor's salary is not affected: "Media reports . . . not true . . . we are not cutting his salary . . . mid term."
The motion passed 4-1, Ford no. The next election is August, 2012.
Comments