The Citizens' Report
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 16, 2019, 06:45:25 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
25279 Posts in 4029 Topics by 320 Members
Latest Member: SMW
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  The Citizens' Report
|-+  South Carolina
| |-+  Georgetown County SC
| | |-+  Politics and Current Events
| | | |-+  Question I think Tom Rubillo can answer?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Question I think Tom Rubillo can answer?  (Read 205 times)
PBSIAT
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 312


« on: September 20, 2019, 03:38:06 PM »

Now that Tupelo Humes has turned his vote to block the city council raises does the council have to wait 12 months to try that again? This was a hot topic at lunch today at the table because a county councilman was telling everyone that they cannot go back and revote that for 12 months. If that is so then Tupelo's tantrum about letting the steel mill be rezoned is going to back fire on him big time.
Logged
Tupelo Humes
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 381



« Reply #1 on: September 20, 2019, 07:43:07 PM »

Tantrum? Backfire?? Lol My reasoning for not supporting an increase in pay has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the mill. I am not in favor of rezoning anything until Liberty proves there's great reason to do so. Amending? Maybe, but not a total rezone. I've worked there for many years, and I can assure all of you that if it had to shut down again for economic reasons beyond 365days, then so be it. Enough is enough! Ok? You heard it from me! But I will support amending the current zoning if Liberty desires to make upgrades!!!
Everyone have a great day!!!
Logged
Tom Rubillo
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 72


« Reply #2 on: September 21, 2019, 02:05:47 PM »

More than a year has to pass before the issue of raises can come up again.  One way to approach the subject is to recognize that no elected official can or should vote for a raise in their own salary.  Any raise in salary can only go into effect after the term of anyone voting on the issue ==for or against==expires.  Under those circumstances, those who voted on the issue could only benefit from a raise if they are reelected.  Things can get a little confusing when the legislative body involved fills seats on a staggered basis.  City and county councils typically do this, where is term of office is 4 years, wiith half of the seats being up for grabs every four years.  Georgetown elects council members in this way, with the mayor being elected (or reelected) every four years under ordinary circumstances.   

The problem involved here are that the stipend received by the mayor and council are stagnant.  So far as I can tell, they haven't be raised since I was in office a quarter of a century ago.  That's not particularly fair.  These offices can be very demanding, both in time, patience and effort.  Not infrequently, the unrecoverable expenses or costs incurred by elected officials exceed (sometimes by quite a lot) the amount they are paid by the city.  These losses include the loss of time that could be devoted to other gainful work, whether in time off from their jobs or business or missed opportunities for overtime or other gainful work.  Under these circumstances it is only reasonable to expect that, from time to time, compensation will be adjusted and elected members will receive "a fair day's pay for a fair day's work."    Given that local elected officials haven't received an increase in the weekly stipend they receive for a very long time now, I believe that corrective action needs to be taken.  Elected officials are only human and should not feel like they are being taken advantage of or that their efforts are undervalued.  Indeed, those sorts of feelings can, over time, erode their enthusiasm for doing the work involved or, much worse, look for other opportunities to feather their own nests.

I have a suggestion here.  Next year at this time the council should take up this matter again.  They should, at that point, vote to double the amount paid to each council member and the mayor, effective in January, 2024.  Thereafter, the compensation of each elected official would be adjusted each year in an amount equal to any increases (or decreases) in the federal consumer price index.  Addressing the issue in this way would be, in my view, fair to future members of council and fair to taxpayers.  It would also immunize current members from any accusation that they are voting on the issue of compensation solely out of self interest.  Indeed, under these circumstances, if they have any desire to benefit from the increase in compensation, they will have to perform the duties of their offices in a way that is sufficiently satisfactory to voters to get reelected and, by January, 2024, still be in office.

Lastly, I commend Tupelo for his changing his mind on this issue.  That, and I commend him for his careful thought and consideration on the issue of rezoning.  Whether, in the end, any one of us agrees or disagrees with the final judgment of an elected official on any issue, so long as they, in good faith, give careful consideration to all sides before deciding, they deserve our respect.
Logged
PBSIAT
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 312


« Reply #3 on: September 22, 2019, 02:15:59 PM »

Spin it any way you want Tupelo. The union boss told you to change your vote to show the others they had better rezone the mill. Upgrades? Come on man. They want to sell the mill not upgrade. Everyone knows that. How much money will the union boss and you make with the profit sharing plan if it sells?
Logged
Tupelo Humes
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 381



« Reply #4 on: September 22, 2019, 04:36:34 PM »

Change my vote in order to force others to rezone??? Lol How is that even possible if I'm not in favor of rezoning?Huh Smh lol
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!