Tulsa Councilor pay

[Kiah]

quote:Originally posted by shadows

Article ll Section 3.1 of the amended charter pf 1989.

..................that the council shall hold not less than two(2) regular meeting each at the City Hall.

"Not less than."  In fact, they hold several public meetings per week.

Do you think all Councilors do is show up to meetings on Thursday nights and say yes or no when prompted?  They get hundreds of constituent calls and emails per week, not to mention district meetings, public events, site visits, etc., etc.

[shadows]

In my haste I omitted the word "MONTH"  
Apologize for my error. The chronicles on the part time councilors dates back years before 1989.   In the original summiting there was a total of 11 part time councilors.  This was turned down by the voters.   For a total  of  $23,000 it was reworked to where 9 part time councilors could be used.  

The commissioners were being paid $25,000 dollars so the installing of part time councilors at $12,000 dollars was to save the working poor money.  It was all patterned after  Albuquerque's city government except our part time councilors pay was set at about double what theirs were being paid.

Parties unknown brought in a person advanced in political science which could only be compared to Bill Gates's development of Windows.   The stage was set for another vote on the previous submitted changes in the charter.   The new master in political science had no trouble getting it past by the electors.

A group gathered and challenged in District Court the submitting of the charter on its wording and it being a complete new charter, calling it amendments to an existing charter.   They did not prevail.

The charter is very vague and its interpretation is liken to a puff of smoke in a windstorm.

I have copies of the charters submitted and many pages of copied case law on charters.   If one wants to know the purpose of the change from commissioners to part time councilors then ask any one who attended the public meetings.   Councilors voted for themselves to be fulltime employees so the city would pay their health insurance.  Now it will be discriminatory by not calling them full time employees of the city.  

[Wrinkle]

There's a built-in conflict of interest between the Council and the Mayors' Office, as there should be. However, the City, as with most city things insurance, has decided to self-insure with respect to Councilors' Professional Liability Insurance, then cover them like Katrina victims when the need arises.

If I were a Councilor, I'd certainly be demanding the City purchase Professional Liability Insurance for each member of the Council as a routine overhead cost.

That will at least prevent anyone from creating a bankruptcy situation for an $18K/yr Councilor trying to defend themselves against frivolous charges, as has happened recently and become a 'tool' of the power structure.

[Wrinkle]

quote: The $12,000 salary was set to discourage professional politicians making it a full time job to control the city.

Councilors are THE PEOPLES' REPRESENTATION, and the only check and balance to professional politicians who do control the city.

Seems to me, the people should decide what their pay and benefits should be.

Shouldn't be hard to add an item to the next election ballot.

[Double A]

I'm down with that.

[shadows]

The part time councilors, due to the failure of the charter to make clear their purpose as representatives of their districts are trying to convert on their own to full time employees of the city.   Being several are drawing pensions and the pool halls of yesterday are nonexistent they want to spend their time holding unnecessary meeting on subjects of little importance.

The agenda of our sister city council meetings (OC) along with their compensation is displayed in the following.
Tabulated Data on City Governments — Infoplease.com

When one considers the greater population and land area of Oklahoma City in comparison with Tulsa, along with the part time pay of their eight councilors, one could believe we are overpaying our councilor members now.  

There is so much revenue that a city can collect from its citizens and one cannot increase city prosperity by increasing taxes to pay for unneeded services.  

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by shadows



There is so much revenue that a city can collect from its citizens and one cannot increase city prosperity by increasing taxes to pay for unneeded services.  

How is it the libs at the federal level have never tapped into that idea?

[shadows]

The cities are the low man on the totem pole and the nation is the top man who can operate on our great-grand-children potential incomes.   Heaven forbid if we could continue our "Field of Dreams" concept and print our own money to say, "Our grand-children" will pick up the money with hard cash or merchandise.  

Oklahoma City has twice the land area and one fifth more population but their part time councilors are paid $12,000 yearly.  

Of course they don't meet to show an non-existing authority to pass the time of day.   Instead they have a city manager with the same authority our mayor is given under the amendments to the existing charter.   Their agenda is prepared for or rejection of the intent of the citizens they represent in the wards of the city.

$18,000 dollars plus expenses ??  The councilors alone can increase our councilors salaries.   These charter changes were to save the city money ??.

[shadows]

Just as a afterthought as I re-file the charter change archives.   It is repeated several times that as part-time councilors, paid accordingly, will eliminate the Ward Politics like KC has endured for many years.   Keep the salaries to where professionals will not be interested was the call to arms.   From the notes of those public meeting and what is being sold to the citizens surely we are all talking about another city rather than Tulsa, Oklahoma.

[Wilbur]

Here we go again!

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=070808_1_A5_spanc21461

Councilor Henderson is proposing a pay raise for Tulsa City Councilors from $18,000 to $52,500.

The City Council was formed in 1990 with a salary of $12,000.  If that salary were to go to $52,500, that would be an increase of 440% over that 17 years.

All the while, the rest of THEIR city employees have received an increase of about 45% over that same time period.

Councilor Henderson says their pay is near the bottom of some list of cities.  At least they aren't AT the bottom, like the rest of THEIR employees.

Want to use a list of cities for salary comparison purposes and come up with an average for a salary target?  Great!  I'm all in favor.  Just as soon as you use the same cities and put the rest of YOUR employees at average.

Thankfully, it looks like Henderson is hanging out on that branch all by himself.  It doesn't look like any other councilors will join his quest.

[TulsaSooner]

It gets old to hear him continually whine about this.

It's too bad everybody can't retire then take up a part time job and later vote yourself a 300% raise to help your nest egg.

Sheesh.

[RecycleMichael]

I do think that 12 grand is too little for the amount of work they do. Only the retired or the wealthy can serve at that rate.

I think they should get paid whatever the average Tulsan gets paid. Exactly the average would be a message that they are average citizens doing public service for their communities.

[TulsaSooner]

They currently make $18,000 a year, I believe.

[cannon_fodder]

RM - I'm not retired nor wealthy.  But I'd take that job.  For most, its ANOTHER source of income.  

Not to mention, its not supposed to be to make money.  Its supposed to be to serve your community.

[RecycleMichael]

Thanks for the correction...

A check of the city of Tulsa website under jobs shows the lowest paid is an entry level labor worker paid $8.67 an hour. That is $18,033 a year.

City councilors, who must represent 45,000 people, approve a $500 million dollar budget and decide zoning disputes are paid less.