Tulsa Councilor pay

[Wrinkle]

quote:Originally posted by TulsaSooner

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

To put things into perspective, and according to the World's recent published listing of City employees, $40K/yr could still be considered 'part time' pay, if that's the angle some wish to take.

Even the Mayor's newest paid polictical campaigners 'neighborhood liasions' earn $36K/yr

Anyone who suggests the work involved is a couple of meetings is just flat wrong.

And, I'd still demand professional liability insurance.(see above posting)

[Conan71]

Okay, I'll bite.

Average pay in Tulsa was announced today as around $37.5K give or take a little.

Bump it to what the average citizen makes.  I do realize that the job is not just showing up at the meetings and that it realistically would require at a minimum 30 hours per week to do the job effectively and stay on top of the issues.

If they want to bump it to $52,500 make it a compulsory full-time job.

[Double A]

I'll vote for it and campaign for it if it is $40 grand or less with professional liability insurance. I will vote no for $52,000 dollars a year and campaign against, it if that is what is on the ballot. They do not need to make half the Mayor's salary. I really hate to be the one to point this out but the Mayor is responsible and accountable to the whole city, a Councilor is responsible and accountable to their district(1/9 of the city), which roughly calculated from the Mayor's salary is about $12,000 dollars a year. I think double their current pay is plenty and very close to what the average Tulsan makes.

[Rico]

quote:Originally posted by 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.

It is a public embarrassment.....!!

In my opinion this opens the door very wide for persons such as Randy "the suit" Sullivan.....

No interest in the average joe... But looking to help out his cronies.
[}:)]

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by Rico

quote:Originally posted by 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.

It is a public embarrassment.....!!

In my opinion this opens the door very wide for persons such as Randy "the suit" Sullivan.....

No interest in the average joe... But looking to help out his cronies.
[}:)]

Good discussion points by all, here.

I'm amazed actually at how hard-working some of the Tulsa city councilors are and have been on $18K per annum.

Shadows, I have to disagree on the intentionally LOW salary established for the city council positions.

In the face of active litigation over our former City Commission form of Government, the city charter was changed by a vote of the people, becoming effective in 1990.

To remain in control, however, the local power Oligarchy set the salaries intentionally LOW, to PREVENT a motivated, earnest Seeker After the Truth a.k.a Political Activist from seeking the virtually unpaid position.

So, instead you get either retired city employees like Tom Baker or Roscoe Turner, other retired people like Dennis Troyer and Jack Henderson, or you get a Mid-Town elitist like Susan Neal, who is the wife of a local Rain-Maker Attorney.

People who actually need to EARN a simply living cannot afford to seek this elected position.  

Reason being: They CANNOT support their families in a decent manner.

The councilors need to earn much more; maybe 50% of the Mayor's Salary.

Then, you would attract some capable, currently professionally active, recruits.

[^]

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by Double A

quote:Originally posted by pmcalk

What do county commissioners get paid?

$97,387.50. They are obscenely overpaid.

Totally Agree.

The County Commissioners are in fact the most part-time government jobs in the state.

They work at most about 8 hours per month.

Twice that during Vision 2025, 4-to-Fix the County, Jail Tax, or the Kaiser River Tax, to get another COUNTY Sales Tax hike passed.

Otherwise, total sloth.

Besides, they have Terry Simonsez and Paul Wilkening to do the heavy thinking for them.  Both skilled attorneys.

Smaligo-Perry-Miller = Meet the The Corleone Family:  Michael, Sonny and Don Corleone.

It's just business, Sonny,  It's not personal...........POW! POW!

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear

quote:Originally posted by Rico

quote:Originally posted by 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.

It is a public embarrassment.....!!

In my opinion this opens the door very wide for persons such as Randy "the suit" Sullivan.....

No interest in the average joe... But looking to help out his cronies.
[}:)]

Good discussion points by all, here.

I'm amazed actually at how hard-working some of the Tulsa city councilors are and have been on $18K per annum.

Shadows, I have to disagree on the intentionally LOW salary established for the city council positions.

In the face of active litigation over our former City Commission form of Government, the city charter was changed by a vote of the people, becoming effective in 1990.

To remain in control, however, the local power Oligarchy set the salaries intentionally LOW, to PREVENT a motivated, earnest Seeker After the Truth a.k.a Political Activist from seeking the virtually unpaid position.

So, instead you get either retired city employees like Tom Baker or Roscoe Turner, other retired people like Dennis Troyer and Jack Henderson, or you get a Mid-Town elitist like Susan Neal, who is the wife of a local Rain-Maker Attorney.

People who actually need to EARN a simply living cannot afford to seek this elected position.  

Reason being: They CANNOT support their families in a decent manner.

The councilors need to earn much more; maybe 50% of the Mayor's Salary.

Then, you would attract some capable, currently professionally active, recruits.

[^]

Gotta disagree with you on one point:

$52,500 won't bring out the true brain trust.  People who have the guts or sense to buck a lot of the crap which is crammed down the throats of the present and past councils would consider that slave wage for all the BS and stress that comes with the job.

Look what we get for $100K or so in the DA's office.  He should be the most competent attorney in town or at least the pay should be enough to draw quality opposition in the election.  People who can make it in elected  public service with more than part-time wage  largely either don't need the money, or lack the skills or ambition to make it in the civilian world and the pay is attractive to them.

At least at the present council salary, it has brought out some passionate, earnest, though sometimes mis-guided, and easily kowtowed citizens.

I believe that many councilors start out as well-intentioned idealists wanting to make changes.  Then they realize who really controls city government in Tulsa along with an un-accountable un-elected beaurocracy that actually runs the operations of the city and county, and that unless you are willing to give in to arm-bending your council district will go largely ignored.

I say pay 'em what the average citizen makes.  Any pay raise should be for the next class of councilors, not the sitting class.  I think it's crass for a politician to vote for a raise while they are in office.  They knew what the job paid when they were sworn in.

[shadows]

Those of the society that were involved in amending the charter, under the threat that you change or big brother will do it for you, have now left the stage.  The attendance at some of the public meeting could have been counted on ones fingers.   A new generation for change occupies the stage.  In the wings is another generation awaiting their turn? They also will find fault in the dreams of those who are on the stage at present and cry tear it away.

Having attended the meetings for the changes that were anticipated, when the citizens went to the polls, was like the changing of the guard against professional politicians.   The purpose of the wording was presented as the councilors or district representatives would call district meeting and get from the voters of their districts their opinions and meet some where at lease twice a month to discuss the strong mayor's acts and concept of city government.   This happened during the first term and meeting were held in districts by their councilor, and the council did meet outside of the city hall but it has now slowly changed where the council assumes, possibly because of its city retires, (that are double dipping) has joined the city government, with an authority that was not granted in the strong mayor charter amendment change.

Albuquerque NM was the pilot city who's representatives were brought to Tulsa to help make the changes and duties in the nine representative districts in the final meeting.   In the meanwhile the city and the council both have taken on an identity of their own as two conflicting governing bodies, separate from the intent of what the voters were told.   Check what the councilors pay is at the city(Albuquerque) we used as a pattern in amending our state charter.

The 18K councilor pay, if they would follow the intent of the charter, they being an "after work representative", would furnish district representation that was implied.  It is a strong mayor city government with a weak council that is not at present operative.  The voters should be the ones to amend the charter to change it to a strong council system of government that would lay their duties out.   In the meanwhile the silent government in control of the city will not relinquish their control through the strong mayor system.  So the next generation waits in the wings for their turn on the stage to start their changes.

It is only my intent to point out the rights of the some 25K or more voting citizens who do not use or have access to these forms.          

[RecycleMichael]

quote:Originally posted by shadows
This happened during the first term and meeting were held in districts by their councilor, and the council did meet outside of the city hall but it has now slowly changed where the council assumes, possibly because of its city retires, (that are double dipping) has joined the city government, with an authority that was not granted in the strong mayor charter amendment change.

So, this is a slam against Councilor Roscoe Turner and vice-mayor Tom Baker?

They put in their years, retired, and then found a second job in government where there knowledge is an asset.  

Lots of people get a job after retirement. Your crazy ramblings about this not being granted in the charter is further proof that you have no clue.

Albuquerque councilor pay doesn't compute with Tulsa. The job is completely different with four year terms with half elected every two years. They each have complete staffs, including an admistrative assistant with real power to solve problems in the district.

[pmcalk]

^One MAJOR difference between Albuquerque and Tulsa is that their City Council doesn't make zoning decisions.  The Planning Commission in Albuquerque is the final word (then court).  That Tulsa's City Council has to make final zoning decisions entitles them $20,000-$40,000 more a year, IMO.  That's the most difficult part of the job.

[Wilbur]

quote:Originally posted by recyclemichael

quote:Originally posted by shadows
This happened during the first term and meeting were held in districts by their councilor, and the council did meet outside of the city hall but it has now slowly changed where the council assumes, possibly because of its city retires, (that are double dipping) has joined the city government, with an authority that was not granted in the strong mayor charter amendment change.

So, this is a slam against Councilor Roscoe Turner and vice-mayor Tom Baker?

They put in their years, retired, and then found a second job in government where there knowledge is an asset.  

Lots of people get a job after retirement. Your crazy ramblings about this not being granted in the charter is further proof that you have no clue.

Albuquerque councilor pay doesn't compute with Tulsa. The job is completely different with four year terms with half elected every two years. They each have complete staffs, including an admistrative assistant with real power to solve problems in the district.

Tell us one thing that is wrong with 'double-dipping'.  If you dislike double-dippers, are you saying anyone who retires or leaves a job is never allowed to get another job?  Are you saying that, somehow, because of their 2nd employment, they are somehow costing the taxpayer more?  

I'll agree with Michael here.  These people put in their time, retired, then found gainful employment.  What is wrong with that?

[shadows]

If one is in public employment, that is able to maintain another job and retires in order to double dip, becomes a burden on the taxpayers, using it for a second resource of income, paid from the taxpayer, places them in a salary higher that they earned while a public employee.  If one is paid as a public servant and retires to take another job,  then the public looses the experience they have paid for.  The public should reconsider the age of retirement and not make it a goal to achieve or place a reasonable limit on the age of the employee before the pension applies.  

The double dipping has begin to alarm the legislators as many governmental persons are retiring on two government pension which are more that the salaries they received while working.

I am sure that in a city of some 380,000 persons there are quite a few who would jump at the chance to serve the public that had not been preprogrammed in the ways of the city bureaucracies.  They could represent the majority of the people.

[RecycleMichael]

I believe you just dislike government workers on this one.

A police officer puts in his twenty years, then goes to work for the FBI, a school district or a different community and that is "double-dipping"?

A public works supervisor retires from the city, but is offered a management job with the county...is that double-dipping"?

Any public employee at any level decides to run for public office...and you call them double-dippers"?

Most of my family worked or works in public service for most of their life. They range from soldiers, to policemen, to secretaries, to teachers. Making stupid statements about how you believe they should retire or where they should work insults them all.

[shadows]

quote:Originally posted by pmcalk

^One MAJOR difference between Albuquerque and Tulsa is that their City Council doesn't make zoning decisions.  The Planning Commission in Albuquerque is the final word (then court).  That Tulsa's City Council has to make final zoning decisions entitles them $20,000-$40,000 more a year, IMO.  That's the most difficult part of the job.

The decisions on zoning, in the real world are made by a former city attorney who instructs the city council what their decision is on the zoning matters.  

Haven't you watch the zoning applications brought before the council?

[Wilbur]

You pay the same amount to a person, whether that person had a previous government job or not.  Taxpayers aren't out anything.  You either pay an amount to two people or the same amount to one person.  What is the difference?  Neal Bortz thinks you're crazy.