New Haven Independent: Mayor's $16G Raise Approved

Mayor’s $16G Raise Approved

by Melissa Bailey | December 18, 2007 7:35 AM | Permalink | Comments (8)

With five dissenting votes (including one from Alderwoman Arlene DePino, pictured), aldermen approved a 14 percent raise for Mayor John DeStefano Jr. Alders ended the year by passing a flurry of other bills, including: sidewalk memorial limits; a Union Station deal; and a new code of ethics that will preserve the ability of Alderman Charles Blango to buy a colleague dinner at Carmen Anthony’s.

The mayor’s raise, which passed by a 22 to 5 vote with one pass at Monday’s Board of Aldermen meeting in City Hall, was his first approved pay hike since 2003.

His salary was upped from $115,000 to $131,010 — a 14 percent increase. The hike is about two-thirds of the 22 percent hike DeStefano had originally asked for in a request rushed onto aldermen’s tables two days after the last election. Aldermen also voted to raise City Clerk Ron Smith’s salary from $42,167 to $48,038.

The raises concern the two-year term starting Jan. 1, 2008.

“I believe that our city is going through very rough financial times,” said East Shore Alderwoman DePino, one of the dissenters and the sole Republican on the board. DePino said she had one question to weigh: “Does the mayor need the taxpayers’ money at this time more than the taxpayers do? The answer is ‘no.’”

Dissenting were Aldermen Mike Smart, Robert Lee, DePino, Gerald Antunes and Alex Rhodeen,

Lee, who represents part of Fair Haven Heights, objected particularly to Clerk Smith’s raise — “to promote that position, period, is definitely ludicrous because he never shows up.” The position is part-time.

Lee also argued the hike should be tied to the raises that ordinary school teachers and city employees get. Rhodeen stood up and pointed out that that was just how the pay hike was calculated: four years of pay raises matching Local 3144 salary increases.

Most of those who voted in favor agreed the position of mayor has risen in value, and should be paid accordingly.

East Rock Alderman Roland Lemar agreed the position of mayor needed a pay hike, but said “I find fault with the process.” The process of setting mayoral raises should be reformed, he argued: the mayor shouldn’t have waited until two days after the November election to ask for a pay raise; and the pay raise shouldn’t be dependent on the city union’s contract.

Aldermen Jorge Perez and Andrea Jackson-Brooks have already started looking into ways of structuring mayors’ raises in the future so that they aren’t based on the political whim of legislators at that time, but on some measurement of the value of the position.

Sidewalk Memorials

A law that stirred many emotions inside city chambers — an ordinance amendment limiting sidewalk memorials put up to honor those who have died to street violence —got unanimous approval Monday. (Read about the law here).

According to the new rule, mourners cannot keep street memorials in public places for longer than 30 days. After a loved one dies, friends or family must apply for a permit to set up a memorial on the street. If a memorial is not taken down within five days after the permit expires, the city’s Livable Cities Initiative will take it down.

The new law was spurred by Hill neighbors who contended that the memorials had become a blight to neighborhoods. Some featured dozens of bottles and graffiti; others became gathering places for loud late-night drinking. The law affects only memorials in public spaces, not on private lawns.

doug%20and%20candles.jpg Family members like Doug Bethea, whose son was fatally shot last year, argued in public hearings against the restriction, saying grieving families had dealt with enough loss to worry about their memorials being taken away.

“We are not trying to tell people how long to grieve,” said Alderman Perez, one of the bill’s original proponents. “But if you choose to do it in a public right of way we are going to limit it through this law.”

Families with existing street memorials can apply for a 30-day permit. After that they will be destroyed.

Union Station Deal

Picture%20797.jpg By a unanimous vote, aldermen agreed to let the state go ahead with a power supply station, in exchange for a verbal promise to help look into the city’s new “transit-oriented development” idea to surround a badly-needed second parking garage by the train station. Aldermen in the Finance Committee had some reservations about giving up leverage to use against the state, but recommended the proposal— see background story here.

Ethics Code Passes; Carmen Anthony’s Dinner Saved

An ethics reform law passed Monday after two years after it was proposed by Alderman Jorge Perez (pictured below), as the state enacted ethics reform in the wake of Rowland-era corruption scandals.

While an ethics board and ethics code do exist, this new law sets some extra limits.

The new code of ethics applies not only to aldermen and department heads, but also to contractors doing business with the city (such as the former budget director Frank Altieri), as well as those who sit on boards or commissions. The proposal poses new rules for accepting gifts and revolving-door lobbying. Click here for background.

The new law also gives the city ethics board more teeth by making its decisions “binding”—before they were only “advisory.”

Monday, some aldermen were still concerned about accepting food. Under the Perez’s proposal, public officials can’t accept gifts, except for food under $25. Some wondered if $25 was enough to cover the cost of a meal — especially one at Carmen Anthony’s.

“If I take Jorge Perez out for lunch for his birthday,” said Newhallville Alderman Charles A. Blango on the aldermanic floor, “I don’t want to be caught up in an ethics scandal over five bucks.”

For the record: The ordinance does not limit alder-to-alder lunch prices.

Alders agreed, with two dissenting votes, to up the limit from $25 to $50. That means aldermen can accept a meal worth $50, only once every 30 days from the same entity.

West River Alderman Yusuf I. Shah, who at first expressed reservations about the proposal, said it would provide good guidance for the “gray areas” of decisions like when to accept gifts. “Just in case something happens, and what if something happens, we have rules in place.”

A Fallen Soldier Honored

Andre%20Craig%2C%20Jr.0001.jpg The corner of Rosette and Wilson Streets will be named after Specialist Andre Craig, New Haven’s first person to die in the Iraq War. Click here to read his impressive life story.

Goodbyes

Outgoing Dwight Alderwoman Joyce Chen, who’s stepping down to pursue a clerkship with a judge as part of a law degree, kicked off a round of thanks and remembrances with a quick farewell speech. Also ending their terms were: Downtown Alderman Nick Shalek; East Rock Alderman Ed Mattison; and Fair Haven Alderwoman Maria Reyes-Rivera.

Share this story: digg / newsvine / facebook

Comments

Posted by: concrenedwestvilleres | December 18, 2007 9:43 AM

I was at last night's meeting and am impressed with those who stood to make comments. Alderwoman DePino deserves credit as she voted against the raise in committee and at last night's meeting. Alderman Rhodeen apparently had a change of heart as he voted for the raise in committee and against it at last night's meeting.

That said, the issue is how to reform the process. The process is actually a part of the City Charter so the only reform is to change the charter. The Aldermen need to appoint a charter revision commission to change this and other areas in the charter that need revision. The mayor's salary should be set and then raises formally tied into a scale so that he doesn't have to do what is required now.

As for the ethics issue, it was rather silly. $35 or $50 for a meal and the change to once per month was ridiculous. I believe someone said you can spend $25 on a burger, fries, and soda (which is ludicrous). What is wrong with the Alderman paying for their own meals when meeting with people who have business before the city?

Last, I would like to say that I am unimpressed with some of the Aldermen on the board. There were a few who made comments that were difficult to understand and kind of went on and on. The people of New Haven need to elect people who can be cohesive and knowledgeable and not people who just like to make statements. There are many members who seem smart and knowledgeable about what is before the board. It is the ones who appear to be less knowledgeable and appear not to put in the effort to research and understand the issues that will ruin this city.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | December 18, 2007 10:41 AM

I watched from home..I wanted to go but was not going to do the battle for parking last night.

concrenedwestvilleres
Some may be less knowledgeable, but it does not mean that they are not good rep's for there community's. Alderman position does not require a degree in law. It requires a knowledge of your area..it's needs and wants. The heart to make change and the willingness to work with others to make the changes happen.

I just want to say a BIG CONGRATE's to Perez for the great work and all those who helped.

I was shocked to see the ones that voted against the raise.. I have to say WOW to those five!! Good for you guys for standing up!

Anyone else read that East Haven Mayor has turned down her 10,000 raise and her pay will remain at 75,000 a year. BRAVO to the new East Haven mayor for not taking her raise!

Posted by: Gary Doyens | December 18, 2007 10:48 AM

Property taxpayers were handed a lump of coal last night and the mayor ran off with all the presents, thanks to the many Santas found on the NH BOA.

In the spirit of the season, it is nice the mayor's standard of living will now dramtically increase along with his pension -- about $320,000 worth - while my standard of living and the other taxpayers will now decrease. Merry Christmas.

To Arlene, Alex and the others who stood against it on principle, thank you. To those who want to reform the system of how we pay the mayor, Lemar and others, I support those thoughts and Concerned Westvillers who correctly notes we need a charter revision and sooner rather than later to address the mayor's pay issue as well as a number of other important areas.

We are at a crossroads in New Haven - we can continue where we're going to almost certain ruin; or we can save ourselves by voting for change not just in who represents us, but what these representatives on the NH BOA and the mayor's position actually propose and approve. We have been promised that the new year will bring a new vigor to the board. I certainly hope so.

Posted by: concerned taxpayer | December 18, 2007 11:42 AM

does anyone know who are the 3 that did not vote?

Posted by: NLG | December 18, 2007 12:16 PM

Like it or not, Mayor Destefano was elected to office for his 8th term by the voters of the City of New Haven, and it seems that maybe $131,000 is reasonable amount of money to pay - regardless of the person in office and his/her perceived success or failure - to run a small city. (That's what a bonus is for...) Mayor Destefano is not a dictator-for-life; the Board is not voting on his salary alone, but rather how much the city values the office itself. Perhaps the position was underpaid for the responsibility, and City Hall can now start attracting some new talent at this higher pay grade. Not to mention, Superintendent of Schools Mayo earns nearly $200,000 to run the school system; is anyone crying out to tie his pay to test scores results or dropout rates?

And frankly, with the rising cost of living: gas, food, housing, education, etc., a 3 -4% annual adjustment seems fair for any working person, civil servant or not.

Finally, to clarify, East Haven Mayor April Capone Almon was obligated to turn down her raise in order to maintain any political credibility: She voted against the raise when former Mayor Joe Maturo was still in office. Let's not turn her into some Peoples' hero yet.

Posted by: ROBN | December 18, 2007 1:11 PM

Its very dissapointing that the mayor suspended his pay raises, appearing to share the burden of budget duress, and then retroactively reinstated the entirety of the cumulative annual raises. No its not back pay, but its a bit disingenuous.

Posted by: Gary Doyens | December 18, 2007 3:58 PM

NLG: I may be inclined to agree with you, but that's not how it was pitched, not how it was calculated and was not what the decision to grant a 14% payraise was based upon. Alder Goldfield with the mayor's agreement calculated the increase based on a union contract - not the value of the position. This was also done with City Hall managers. This is one of the areas that I hope the board will address in the future - none of these executive positions should be tied to anything but performance and competencies for the job.

As for the BOE Super Mayo - who earns nearly $200K plus benefits and a car, I support tying pay for performance like student test scores and graduation rates. It is easier to do with an appointed position than an elected one like the mayor. What are the deliverables, and more importantly, what are the consequences for not achieving them?

Posted by: concrenedwestvilleres | December 18, 2007 4:28 PM

Concerned taxpayer:
The three who didn't vote were Matteson and Rivera (both were not at their "final" meeting) and I believe Chen passed (at ther "final" meeting)

CedarHill Resident: I am not saying being an Alderman requires a Law Degree or being a genius. It does require a knowledge of the area and what is best for your neighborhood and the city. It just appeared to me that some of the Aldermen were not prepared to discuss the issues at hand. They seemed to say things that left me a little dumbfounded and wondering if they came to the meeting and read what they were voting on without carefully considering it.

For those of us concerned about the way this happened, we need to push for a charter revision commission to change the ordinance and instead tie the raise into a standard (i.e. union raises, CPI, or some other factor) and allow the mayor to decline the raise but not be able to make it up in the next term. The only problem with a charter revision commission is that the Board of Aldermen are the ones who are required to appoint a commission and I doubt they really have the guts and desire to do so.

New Haven Independent

Mayor’s $16G Raise Approved

Comments

Sorry, Comments are closed for this entry

Sections

Neighborhood News

Special Sections

Legal Notices

Some Favorite Sites

Government/ Community Links

Legal Notices

Flyerboard

Sponsors

N.H.I. Site Design & Development

NHI Store

News Feed