Not only did the three do a 180 on their erstwhile stand on principle, they didn't even wait for the official report from the citizens committee
Send your comments and news tips to online.editor@valleyspringcomm.net
By Bob Ochoa
RoundUp Editor
Three county commissioners who very publicly declined a pay raise back in September when the county's fiscal year 2009 budget was under discussion, have very quietly changed their tune and have each accepted a raise of more than $8,000.
Commissioners Jeff Barton of Pct. 2 (D-Buda/Kyle), Debbie Gonzales Ingalsbe of Pct. 1 (D-San Marcos) and Will Conley of Pct. 3 (R-Wimberley) made headlines when they heroically refused annual pay raises.
The front page banner headline in the Kyle Eagle Sept. 17 edition trumpeted: Barton declines pay raise. The top story of the Wimberley View Sept. 13 edition boldly proclaimed: Commissioners turn down raises for themselvesBarton swore in an affidavit he sent to the county auditor and the county treasurer in September: "I do not feel comfortable accepting such a large increase in my own pay . . . In these economic hard times, in this age of cynicism, I feel compelled to go “above and beyond” if we are to reinvigorate the public trust."
Conley and Ingalsbe – both of whom at the time were in the middle of tough re-election campaigns – followed Barton's lead. Ingalsbe said she too felt uncomfortable accepting a large pay hike. Conley went as far as to vote against one of the pay packages then under discussion. All three refused the larger proposed pay increases but agreed to accept a smaller 'cost of living' increase, and together pushed for formation of a citizen panel to review compensation for county elected officials.
Well, of course, that was then. Conley and Ingalsbe won their re-election bids to 2nd and 4th terms on the court, respectively, no doubt having benefited from the well timed and free publicity. The Citizen Committee to Evaluate Pay of Elected Officials completed its work in December, at a cost to county taxpayers of $10,000.
County Treasurer Michelle Tuttle has confirmed that her office recently received written memos from the three commissioners accepting the new pay schedule – with the same generous increase Barton, Ingalsbe and Conley had turned down as unconscionably too high.
So, their salaries this year will climb $8,290, from $56,757 to $65,048. That's a 14.6 percent pay raise, by my calculation.
"The first increase check started in December (for the three commissioners)," Tuttle told the RoundUp. "They have accepted the budgeted amount."
Not only did the three do a 180 on their erstwhile stand on principle, they did not even wait for the full official report from the citizens committee. "We haven't made a presentation to the court yet," a county official who oversaw the pricey salary study, said on Monday, Jan. 5.
Think we'll be seeing press releases from Barton, Ingalsbe and Conley happily announcing their Christmas pay raises? I won't be holding my breath.
10 comments:
Dude! where's my barf bag? Actually, considering the actions of these three I am not one bit surprised. Thanks for the head's up and keep it coming we out here in Taxpayer Land appreciate you!
I think at the LWV debate Conley said these words: "Believe me, I don't do this for the money" - with a sort of smile that said "Trust me, I'm making much more otherwise." Well, Will, if that is the case couldn't you have done without a 14% raise at my expense?
Thanks for the heads up. I think we know where their heads are and it's not up! You are providing valuable information with your articles.
What about Commissioner Ford and Judge Sumter? Did they also get a raise? Did they accept it or decline it? Can we get some objective journalism please?
Thanks for the question, Jon. Pct. 4 Commissioner Karen Ford indeed accepted the pay raise as it was initially proposed. She was very straight up about it, stating her commissioner's salary was her only income source, and needed the raise. No political showboating. Judge Sumter also accepted a $7,000 raise.
Obviously, this story is about the three who went to great lengths to avoid the public embarrassment of accepting a generous pay raise in the middle of an election campaign. They instead opted to create a "citizens committee" at a cost to county taxpayers of $10,000.
The result of the committee's work was basically to validate the compensation package initially proposed in the new budget by Judge Sumter. Other result: $10,000 wasted, and an expensive political shield for Barton, Igalsbe and Conley.
That is how it works, and I for one am not pleased with this sort of political banditry constantly being perpetrated on the taxpayers, who are almost always in the dark about the inside maneuverings of their elected officials.
Fair enough Roundup. I appreciate a fair answer. It just appeared that the Judge and Commish 4 were left out of the story. That would have been a good way to tie it all together in comparing and contrasting them. You didn't comment about the Judge. Did she also take her raise?
Excellent reporting! The citizens of Hays County need to know the truth about our corrupt, lying local government. We must clean up their act for them as they will continue with their pathological lying. See y'all next Tuesday in Commissioner's Court.
You can't possibly call this responsible journalism. Commissioner Barton never said he was not accepting the raise. What he DID say was that he would not accept the raise until a Citizens Committee met, reviewed and authorized the raise. And he would not take it retroactively. Please report the facts correctly.
To quote from Jeff Barton's "Affidavit Electing To Reduce Paid Compensation" letter sent Sept. 10, 2008 to County Treasurer Michelle Tuttle and County Auditor Bill Herzog:
"Dear Michell and Bill,
(1st paragraph) "This letter is intended to serve as formal notice of my intent to exercise Chapter 152.052 (b) of the Texas Local Government Code. I do not wish to accept the full salary provided for County Commissioners in the Fiscal Year 2009 Budget.
(2nd paragraph) "The budget as presented by the County Judge and voted by the Court establishes a salary for County Commissioners based on benchmarks from comparable counties. This may be a reasonable approach – the final salary amount may be fair – but I do not feel comfortable accepting such a large increase in my own pay without a thorough, public review and authorization by impartial citizens.
(3rd paragraph) "In these economic hard times, in this age of cynicism, I feel compelled to go "above and beyond" if we are to reinvigorate the public trust. I have proposed that the Commissioners Court should establish an independent committee of citizens . . . to review and recommend appropriate salaries for all elected officials in Hays County, including, especially, County Commissioners . . .
(4th graph) "Until then, as provided for in Chapter 152, I elect not to accept the proposed 14.6 percent salary, save only that I will accept a three percent increase for "inflation." Thus, effective Oct. 1, I will voluntarily reduce my pay from $5420.66 per month to 4871.66 per month."
When you peel away all the political tap dancing and BS, this is what you get: A commissioner who very publicly swears he wishes not to accept a pay raise as proposed by the county judge in the new budget, swears he does "not feel comfortable accepting such a large increase," proposes a citizens committee review (at a $10,000 expense to the taxpayers), then (to repeat) turns around and quietly accepts the raise. No announcements from the court's dias, no press releases, no showboating – just a quiet little memo to the county treasurer saying he'll take it, afterall.
When you've been around this sort of stuff long enough, and peel down to the core of it, you begin to call if for it is: A ruse, "a willy subterfuge, a trick." Though I got to hand it to Barton. He is perhaps the best ruse artist on the court. Measured by this standard alone, he certainly deserves his pay raise.
Barton is the best tangled web weaver I have ever seen!
Post a Comment