Patriot Ledger article
I was gratified that the Patriot Ledger wrote about our group’s efforts to repeal the salary ordinances.
The Ledger’s Peter Blandino wrote an article about our Petition Referendum.
Quincy group petitioning to repeal mayor's big raise (patriotledger.com)
I encourage everyone to share the article with as many people as possible. We are at a critical junction; we need to reach more people immediately. Most people we talk to agree with us: The mayoral salary should be raised. It’s overdue. But that does not mean a 79% pay increase (from $159,000 to $285,000) makes sense. Here are some of the many points to consider when asking people to sign our petition.
This repeal effort would not mean the mayor and city council could not get a raise, it would ask them to start over with a sincere process.
The 79% is justified using the Dorminson analysis, which has been widely criticized as flawed. It’s methodology seems to have been designed to achieve a desired outcome rather than a sincere analysis.
The mayor’s raise relies on comparisons to town managers; employees who are hired and fired by the relevant legislative body. Town managers are not selected through elections nor is their job political in nature. Being Mayor of a mid-level city is a higher-profile job that affords cachet and opportunity beyond this position. There is value in being the mayor beyond the salary.
The average salary of town managers referenced in the Dorminson report was $169,000. When this is pointed out, the replies point out that Quincy has a larger population. However, when you point out that this salary puts the mayor’s salary above cities exponentially larger and more populated, we are told not to focus on population or size.
The ordinances will immediately cost about $261,000 more per year. Over the next four years, they will cost well over a million dollars. This is real money that will affect property taxes and limit the city’s ability to provide services.
The mayor and city council were just reelected/elected last Fall. The raises were brought up a matter of weeks after having been sworn in. No one ran on the idea of increasing these salaries. The voters have not been given a chance to provide their input.
The repeal referendums will force the city council to either repeal the ordinances granting the new salaries, or put it to the voters in a city or special election.
The current mayor has worked for the city his whole life, he has an encyclopedic knowledge of how it runs. If Quincy’s city plan allowed for a town manager, he would be an excellent candidate. However, the next mayor of Quincy may not have similar experience and know-how each department runs and could need to rely on department heads and possible new hires.
This new salary will make it more difficult for future mayors to hire the staff they may need.
The mayor’s office and city council have expressed concern that they may not be able to attract good candidates without a far larger salary. They do not seem to worry that an overly large salary like this could cause an entrenched incumbent to hold onto power longer than they might otherwise.
Elected positions were not meant to be lifelong careers.
Public service is not meant to be a path to financial prosperity
There are better ways to find a fair number. To name a couple:
Compare the salary with any of the 100+ cities with similar populations and challenges.
Take his salary and apply the raises afforded teachers or city workers since it was last increased. Or simply apply a 3% raise each year, a better deal than the teachers and workers got.
Applying similar raises to the city council ($30,000 x 3% from 2014 - 2023) would net them a salary just below 40k rather than the $44,500 they approved. (City Council is a part-time position)
~Joe Murphy
