Decatur Passes One-Week Pay Period Adjustment for City Staff

At this evening’s Decatur City Commission meeting, the commissioners unanimously approved a “one week pay period adjustment” for the city staff after the city reported better than projected revenues in the recently completed fiscal year.  Unlike the commission meeting a month ago, when some commissioners – in particular Commissioner Fred Boykin – showed reservations in providing a “pay adjustment” during a rough economic period, this time around it passed quickly and with little discussion at all.

At the meeting, one resident spoke in favor of the motion, while no one opposed it.  A couple commissioners mentioned offline conversations they had had with the City Manager about this issue, and it seemed pretty obvious from the general lack of discussion between the commissioners on the topic that they were all aware that this issue had been settled previous to the meeting.

Commissioner Boykin had this to say about the delayed decision. “I was interested in seeing what the [city staff] breakdown was. And when you see the numbers it’s obvious you see the vast majority of our staff are in public safety and public works and Active Living and things like that actually…impact the community directly. I’m not trying to belittle the administration or staff at City Hall, but the folks that people see in the street.  The police officers and the folks who pick up the trash…That’s who this money’s going to.  I’m supportive of it.  I just kind of wanted a little bit more time to think about it.”

If you’re wondering about that breakdown of City Employees, here it is:

  • 99 or 49% – Public Service
  • 59 or 29% – Public Works
  • 16 or 8% – Active Living and Youth Services
  • 29 or 14% – all other departments (courts, planning & zoning, revenue and accounting, community & economic development, general administration)

10 thoughts on “Decatur Passes One-Week Pay Period Adjustment for City Staff”

  1. That was some serious bull#$% that the city council failed to approve the pay adjustment originally. It had been budgeted all along, and the whole reason the city came in under budget was because of the hard work of the employees. Of course, the city council members new this, but felt that they needed to preen and pose for voters. Personally, I hate this kind of fake budget hawk posturing. Maybe the city council members did what they had to politically, but I for one have a lot less respect for them. Isn’t taking a stand opposite to the one that you think is right – for the express opportunity to pander to voters – the definition of political opportunism and a lack of leadership?

    1. I disagree. There was a reasonable case to be made in favor of and against the adjustment, and the commissioners took the time to air and consider a range of perspectives. Seems like pandering to you; seems like leadership to me. (Not that I think they hit the leadership target every time out, but this time they did, IMO.)

      1. I actually agree with you 😉

        A lot of people expressed annoyance with the pay. I agreed they should get it, but I also like the fact that the commission just didn’t rubber stamp what the city manager proposed.

  2. I think it is appalling that the Commission will rubber stamp change order after change order for construction project cost overruns, but they want to posture about a token thank you to the city staff.

    1. You will have your opportunity to express your opinion if/when he runs for re-election, assuming that you do get out and vote (turnout in local elections is historically very low).

    2. Hey, I’ve known Fred for years, and I don’t understand the snide comment about his action. I think approving any kind of pay increase in this economy has to be questioned. I don’t quite know whether you think they should or should not have approved it.

      You can quibble all you like, I’ve always gotten terrific results when I’ve contacted Fred about something. When they redistricted my neighborhood, he got a bike path intersection and helped get crossing guards. He’s very responsive to constituents, and I’m by no means a big fat cat in this town.

      1. When we got a variance for a fence about 100 years ago (I think Fred was new then) he came over and measured the corners, watched the traffic and did all sorts of research. I was actually pretty impressed by that. And I’m not even in his district. The only time I heard from my former commissioner over here was election time.

    3. I actually commend Comm. Boykin. It took courage for him to be the only board member to express concerns over this issue. I was at the meeting and was really amazed at how somber the mood of the commissioners became when he expressed reservations. I appreciate that he took extra time to consider all the options.

      I agree with them passing the measure (although, I was really leaning towards trying to use the money for debt service), and I also think Comm. Boykin’s concerns were valid.

Comments are closed.