Image: WENY
Last night the Chemung County Legislature passed a resolution by a vote of 10-5 to increase legislative salaries by 3%. Legislators Rick Madl, Marty Chalk, Bill Fairchild, Peggy Woodard and Paul Collins all voted against it.
During the meeting’s public comment period Tony Pucci, a retired English teacher who ran for a seat on the legislature in last November’s election, and I each spoke against the pay raises, arguing they are inappropriate at a time when our community is facing significant fiscal stress coupled with a declining population, and the combination of high salaries and benefits are inconsistent with other similarly situated counties in upstate New York. Prior to the vote, Legislator Madl also spoke against it, while Legislator Ken Miller argued the pay hike is justified.
Embedded below are videos of the remarks along with a copy of the resolution. As a side note, I will do my best to take videos at legislative meetings until such time that they are live-streamed and/or recorded and archived, something that can be done for a very low cost. I intend to strongly push for this kind of digital access after the new legislature is sworn in on January 1, 2019. An excellent article outlining why this issue is so important and how local governments can go about doing it is found here.
Remarks by Tony Pucci are first. My remarks begin at 4:24 preceded by a brief pause as we passed the phone between us.
Remarks by Legislators Madl and Miller followed by the vote on the resolution.
As always, you are encouraged to chime in here or on the Chemung County Matters Facebook page with your thoughts on these issues.
–Christina Sonsire
You would have to be in the State retirement system for at least 20 years to make it worthwhile. Again, I’m not sure you really gave much up there. Congrats on not taking the $1,500 for not taking the insurance though.
Loading...Don’t you already receive health insurance through Chemung County on your husband’s policy? So in declining it you lose nothing.
Loading...You are correct that I am insured under my husband’s policy. But, I am not taking the buyout offered to people who decline county insurance benefits, and I did not enroll in the county pension program.
Loading...According to the 2019 County budget page 4 Dept. 1040 (legislature). Payroll is $427,209. Benefits, health, dental, state retirement is $406,368 of which $59,325 goes to state retirement. Stipend paid out in year 2017 was $3000 which I assume means 13 legislaters took the insurance at that time. A total cost of the legislatures existance…..$923,369.
Loading...Thank you so much for this additional information. I did not appreciate how significant those expenditures are or that they are nearly the same as the cost of salaries. I have already declined both the health insurance and retirement benefits.
Loading...Thank you for bringing this information to the public. If my math is correct the total of the 3% raises amounts to $6,942. My concern is Legislators have the option of full health insurance as well. I am well convinced a single health insurance policy is most likely approaching or greater than double the total that the raises amount to alone. Why in this era of trending health insurance benefit reductions by employers for full time employees would this be justified? The departing County Executive has worked very hard to reduce benefits for its operations employees. I have heard some part time positions in the County are being investigated for being compensated with health insurance. If legislaters are afforded a health insurance option then why not all part time employees? The answer is obvious. If all Legislaters took the health insurance it would amount to approx. $225,000 or more. I do not think the creation of the Legislature was designed to be one’s bread and butter income. On top of that there is the $1,500 opt out stipend. Again I think this is wrong in a public sector position of any kind. I am sure (I hope), that they are required to pay in at least a percentage of the policy, most folks pay 15-30% these days.
Loading...This savings alone. should be plenty of incentive to opt out if one does not need the insurance. Would be interesting to research who made the original motion for the stipend, my guess would be an indiviual that had health insurance elswhere.
thank you for posting this Christina , I voted for you, and I can see all ready I made the right choice
Loading...Whether they vote yes or no for a pay increase isn’t the problem. The problem is they are voting. No political entity should be put into the uncomfortable position of voting for a pay increase for themselves. Rather they should answer to those who they are working for, the taxpayer. I’m not suggesting a countywide vote but rather a representative (volunteer) group from each district who would make the decision for a pay increase based on a number of factors, such as performance and criteria. You know? Like the employees do. If Legislators feel they deserve an increase, they should ask for the increase and offer justification for the raise to this established group. The problem with voting an increase for themselves, the legislators put themselves into a compromised position when in comes to voting on employee contracts. Legislators ultimately vote whether or not to accept what has been negotiated with most county employees. Having just voted for an increase for themselves they will be hard pressed to justify disallowing an employee increase. Moreover, the very arguments used by the Legislators will be used by the unions on behalf of their employees during negotiations; at least that’s what I’d do in the same position. I commend those Legislators who voted against the increase. I would like to see the Legislature work on a more objective process when considering future increases.
Loading...When I was on the Legislature I did vote in some years against the raise knowing that it will still pass. I have always had in mind if my no vote would defeat the raise I would have voted no, & yes in favor of a decrease. Actually voting no becomes ceremonious. How come? Because it is known that the increase is going to pass anyway. The question is then how sincere or honest is one voting no?
Loading...