Joe Murphy Letter to the Quincy Sun

Dear Editorial Department, The Quincy Sun,

I am writing to express my strong objection to the mayor’s request for an 80% raise in salary. As an elected public servant, the mayor surely knows that it is essential to strike a balance between fair compensation and responsible stewardship of public funds. Elected public servants should be compensated adequately, but we must avoid creating a financial burden for taxpayers. Allow me to elaborate on my concerns.
While I acknowledge the need to attract qualified candidates, the proposed raise is excessive for an elected official, especially one currently in office. It turns out the Quincy Charter’s Section 17A addresses this: “No increase or reduction in the salaries of mayor or city councillors shall take effect during the term in which such increase or reduction is voted.” Similarly, the Constitution prohibits the chief executive’s salary from being increased or diminished during the affected president’s term in office.

Alexander Hamilton wisely noted in Federalist Paper 73 that adjustments to elected officials’ salaries should “neither weaken his fortitude by operating on his necessities, nor corrupt his integrity by appealing to his avarice.” Simply put, the salary should not be used to push someone out or keep them in office. Adjusting the salary to keep pace with inflation is prudent, but an 80% increase damages the integrity of the office. A raise like this will also impact Quincy’s budget, which the mayor has already said will need to be cut.

Quincy’s ability to attract qualified mayoral candidates is not hindered by low salaries. For example, the mayor’s most recent opponent was qualified enough to be named a town administrator in a nearby municipality. A greater concern lies in overcoming the tyranny of incumbency, which discourages others from running for office. Despite Quincy’s historical trend of long-serving elected officials, we must recognize that public office is meant to be a temporary role, not a lifelong career. An overly generous salary could easily keep an entrenched mayor in power beyond what is best for Quincy.

Furthermore, intertwining the mayor’s salary request with the proposed 58% raise for the city council creates a conflict of interest. As Benjamin Franklin stated at the Federal Convention, “Reasons will never be wanting for proposed augmentations. And there will always be a party for giving more to the rulers, that the rulers may be able in return to give more to them.” Obviously, matters of mayoral and city councilor salaries should not be dealt with simultaneously.
Having said this, I support a modest increase in the mayoral salary. But this is not an area in which I want Quincy to set new precedents. We are the city of presidents, not the city of highly paid elected officials. We do not want to be notable for paying our mayor better than other, larger cities.

Finally, in February, the mayor said we should be prepared for a lean fiscal year with no new programs or positions. An 80% salary increase for anyone does not seem in line with a lean fiscal year. We should be putting taxpayer money into areas that better the lives of Quincy’s residents and protect its future.

Respectfully,

Joe Murphy