Wednesday, December 23, 2015
Ballard Vetoes Council Pay Raise
As one last parting shot at a council he does not like, Mayor Greg Ballard today vetoed a 43% pay raise the lame duck members of the City-County Council passed at its final meeting of the year. Ballard said he vetoed the pay raise because its last-minute approval wasn't subject to sufficient accountability. Well, I would like to believe that's why he really vetoed the pay raise, but he's had no problem signing into law other more substantive, costly measures that lacked sufficient accountability or transparency. It's more probable his veto was made for pure spite. Council members will now have to wait at least another year to get the pay raise they want, and all of the sitting members who will benefit from that pay raise will be forced to vote on it. And that's the way it should be. Ballard also vetoed a proposal requiring gun owners to report lost or stolen guns or face civil penalties, a law most objective observers agree is unenforceable due to state law preemption.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
His motives are not known but give him credit for the action?
I totally approve of the veto. I just don't think his motives for doing so are pure. If the council had approved his costly plan to privatize the criminal justice system, I have little doubt he would have signed this pay raise into law.
Gary, you are so right on with the article and the 7:46 comment.
Every one of the councilors who supported that hog fest pay raise idea should be remembered and voted out next time their Council cake walks are up.
8:47 that's funny. This is exactly why lame duck sessions do stuff like this. Nobody ever remembers next month much less four years from now.
11:42 Anon you do have a valid point. I guess that's why Democrats Maggie Smith and Zach Adamson and RINO Jeff Miller and all the others had ZERO problem hiking their own pay when the neighborhoods deteriorate for lack of funds or political will unmotivated by corporatists like the digital sign board conglomerates and French Billionaire monopolists.
IT'S ALL STILL THERE. AND MARION COUNTY IS STILL PAYING. But.. duplicitous Counselors count on taxpayers' short term memories.
I believe a decent city council paycheck would help attract good talent. It's a lot of work for the current pay.
Neither party is interested in attracting talent, Melyssa. You know that. They erect barriers to keep everyone who won't do as they are ordered to do off the ballot. What do you think the slating process is all about?
There's no need for "talent" where statism or parasitism is being advanced. We have too much government, doing too much; expanding in its intrusiveness, morbidly mannered & proportioned, elbowing their way to center stage of citizen life- where they don't belong.
Melyssa H.: I don't know you, I do not intend any pejorative upon you, I have read your commentaries before, but this particular one at 9:05 is just absurd. Upon what actual facts do you create your "belief"? Based on what past or historical reality do you come to make your proposition? What real proof do you have that "more money attracts good talent"??? None? Oh....I didn't think so.
Have you ever heard of The Peter Principle? Have you studied any accredited Human Resources curriculum or any HR studies published in post secondary literature?
No, I didn't think so. Because if you had you and Maggie Lewis and Zach Adamson, et al., would likely never allege a falsehood to cover up the type of money grubbing action Lewis, Adamson, the out going Mary Moriarty Adams, and Jeff Miller (and other Councilors) panted and ran after. Glad the ex-soldier cast his veto on this...regardless of his "real" reason for doing so.
Gary,
I can't believe this fat f*ck of a mayor has the audacity to use the word accountability! My definition of accountability would be seeing him in shackles. Greatest Christmas gift ever to all Marion County taxpayers.
I assume that the elimination of the four at-large council members by the State Legislature was a cost saving measure rather than a reduction in four Democratic voting seats. Looks like we now have 25 councilors doing the work of 29. If raises come from the CCC's 2016 budget, then taxpayers should have no problem. Of course when we cap CCC raises at 12% of the mayor's salary we arrive at $11,400 with the opportunity to add a maximum of $4,832 for attendance at council and committee meetings. Council members should not have to wait 15 years to receive increased compensation while some eight other Indiana cities, with lesser problems, have higher pay scales. I appreciate the time and effort council members put into trying to run Indiana's largest city where the mayor has the power to create or override any measure he sees fit. "Good riddance Mayor Ballard", from the residents of Marion County.
Oh darn Ballard screwed the Council, Too Bad, Soooo Sad. The Council has sat on their hands doing nothing to stand up for the people so why should they get a pay increase.
Anon. 12:36, the Council funded its budget for next year assuming there would still be 29 council members instead of 25, even though the law had already been changed and they knew they wouldn't need funding for those additional 4 at large positions. That was part of the rub. The council's 2016 budget was intentionally inflated so they could argue there was already enough money in the approved budget to pay for the pay raise. They planned all along to wait until the lame duck session to formalize it rather than be honest with the voters and tell them they planned to raise their pay before the end of the year.
Yes, yes, yes, Gary (throughout and especially at 7:29!). Why voters cannot see the truths smack in front of their noses about their own politician phonies is simply beyond me.
Many of our Democrat and Republican Councilors lie, lie, lie. It's just that simple, it's just that true. Save for Christine Scales, most of these career feather bedders are in it for the payola, the privilege, and the power. Period.
These political class phonies knew damn well they would push for their pay increase AFTER elections. Your commentary shows clearly how ans why that just had to be the case. No doubt about it.
Post a Comment