22 replies to this topic

[johnfwd]

I applaud voters for approving the bond issues.  I'm not so sure they did the right thing in rejecting pay raises for the Mayor and Council members.  I voted yes on both major proposals.  I suppose an argument can be made if the size of the raises is way out of proportion to the work they perform; however, I support some increase in compensation for these valued public servants.

 

Article about last Saturday's election in FWBP here.  https://fortworthbus...-public-safety/

[Stadtplan]

I applaud voters for approving the bond issues.  I'm not so sure they did the right thing in rejecting pay raises for the Mayor and Council members.  I voted yes on both major proposals.  I suppose an argument can be made if the size of the raises is way out of proportion to the work they perform; however, I support some increase in compensation for these valued public servants.

 

Article about last Saturday's election in FWBP here.  https://fortworthbus...-public-safety/

 

I was never under the impression they were in it for the money to begin with.  If they can afford to take enough time away from their "main gig" (however they can normally afford to pay their bills - win or lose in politics) in order to spend time doing city council stuff, then I would say that's part of the job description.

 

Take newly-elected "businessman" Alan Blaylock....according to his linkedIn page, it appears he has a career.  If he wants to take on the responsibilities of city council on top of his work responsibilities and can somehow keep his career intact juggling all of that, well that's on him.  Why should I as a taxpayer feel like I need to subsidize his decision to try his hand at city politics? If I were his employer, I'd ask the same question..."yeah...that's nice Alan, you won an election.  Now if I could get those TPS reports, that'd be great."

 

[roverone]

I think the whole point is that by not paying a fair wage for all of the work and responsibility, it will self-select candidates who have other means of support, which in most districts would not be representative of the population they are representing.

 

These folks don't just show up to meetings cold and have a spontaneous opinion, they are out and around their districts attending neighborhood meetings and visiting with people and reading up on issues -- not to mention getting all the calls about things that need to be fixed.

 

Although it wouldn't be right to read too much into it, if you look at the map of results for this, it is kind of telling -- the people who worry about money less didn't think they should get a fair wage, the people who do worry thought it should be a fully-paid job.

 

I voted yes for this and was disappointed in the city for undervaluing the effort involved in representing us in city government.

[JBB]

There is an old-school mentality out there that people who are elected to public office should serve as a volunteer.  The people that feel strongly about that come out and vote.  And that severely limits the people who can afford to run for office.

[Stadtplan]

There is an old-school mentality out there that politicians are serving special interest groups and lining their pockets.  The people that feel strongly about that come out and vote.  And that severely limits the people who can't afford not to run for office.

 

(just trying to have some fun here with a play on words.  I just like to give politicians a hard time...I mean they are politicians.)

[Big Frog II]

Our mayor and council do deserve more.  Perhaps the way the amendment was written was the turnoff.  They should set a specific dollar amount instead of a percentage of the average they pay the top management of the city.  

[JBB]

I think the percentage number created uncertainty and gave the impression that it was too much too soon.  

[roverone]

Since this was the second go at trying to make this happen, there might have been the idea that the vote could be about the idea of generalized fair pay for what they put in, rather than a specific number that has to keep coming up for another vote to change, since it would key off of other scrutinized salaries.

 

The Mayor gets paid $29,000 and City Council Members $25,000

 

Here is a list of what the city pays other jobs:

 

https://www.fortwort...ry-schedule.pdf

 

Here are some jobs that in the minimum quartile starting salary we pay about what we pay the Mayor and City Council Members:

 

Arborist I

Code Compliance Technician

Contract Compliance Technician

Courier

Custodian

Customer Service Representative I

Fleet Mechanic I

Food & Beverage Attendant

Golf Shop Attendant

Library Page

Maintenance Worker

Parking Meter Technician I

Sr Golf Shop Attendant

[steave]

I guess the results of the vote just reinforce the idea that we don't expect city leaders to ever be anything less than patrons of powerful donors, which is how state and national politics work. I guess city council and mayor positions should be filled by someone that a Super PAC or a rich person really likes, picking them from a stable of good obedient yes-men and yes-women who pass model legislation they write. This I think this why democracy has come unglued in the US. It's interesting how in the past politics was something that a lot of people actively participated in. Now it's a horse race and the candidates are picked for us and so are the policies and issues.

 

Look at what happened in Grapevine/Southlake area suburban school board races. All the traditional local candidates got absolutely steamrolled by candidates who got massive amounts of money for polished, professional campaigns set up by donors representing nationwide interest groups.

 

The whole thing is rotten. I think Singapore is famous for paying huge salaries to public officials. The logic is if they are paid well you get to attract talent, and there's a much lower motivation for corruption. And it works.

[Stadtplan]

"Fort Worth Mayor Mattie Parker will split time with new job at Cook Children’s"

https://www.star-tel...e276710401.html

[johnfwd]

If the city ordinance governing mayor and city council allows for the mayor to "moonlight," so be it.  My concern is the mayor's position at Cook's Children's Hospital might create for her a conflict of interest.

[JBB]

She can recuse herself.  The S-T article mentions that Jared Williams does that when matters concerning his employer are discussed.  It's common in smaller cities where the council receive no or much less pay.

[Stadtplan]

If the city ordinance governing mayor and city council allows for the mayor to "moonlight," so be it.  My concern is the mayor's position at Cook's Children's Hospital might create for her a conflict of interest.

 

The Chairperson of the DDRB recuses himself from cases involving his firm.  He even gets up and leaves the meeting during those cases.

 

Question: is it assumed that a mayor is wealthy enough to not hold a job or how is it expected of them to dedicate their time evenly between making a living and running the city?  I've always had a hard time understanding this and it's not meant as a political statement, I just really don't understand it logistically how this works out.  What are the time commitments of a mayor?  Seems like she is expected to be a lot of events and meetings even on weekends, so I don't know how Mayor is not already a fulltime job but I could be wrong.  Seems like she would essentially be taking a pay cut to serve in public office.

[John T Roberts]

Being Mayor is a full time job.  In my opinion, you either have to be wealthy enough to not have another job, your spouse has the job and you do not work, or you are retired and your income from retirement is enough to support you without the Mayor's salary as supplemental income. 

[txbornviking]

The City of Fort Worth (and the Star Telegram editorial board) consider mayor and city council to be part-time positions with our City Manager style of government.

 

I too agree that this is a laughable assumption. Both require full-time hours for council meetings, community meetings, citizen outreach, and the many many many other tasks on their plate

 

but, we'd need to amend the city charter to change this and votes have twice in recent years voted down proposals to boost pay.

 

Right now the mayor received $29k/yr and council members receive $25k.

https://fortworthrep...m-other-cities/

 

 

Our City Manager's salary is a hair over $360k/yr

[TLA]

The optics are strange being a city of (almost) 1 Million people and having a “part-time” Mayor. Of course, we shouldn’t boost pay on optics alone. Still, the Mayor should be incentivized to be involved as much as the City Manager. She has the bully pulpit ultimately and is the lead spokesperson for the city when national media calls.

[Stadtplan]

I was at an event a few weeks ago where the mayor, fire chief, police chief and deputy city manager spoke but the city manager was absent. They said something about his honeymoon Im not sure if that was literal or figurative but this was outside business hours on a Saturday morning and I was impressed at those who showed up.

None of my business what this Cook chief of staff gig pays but I would imagine if its in the hundreds of thousands of dollars per year like $200k - $350k+ just guessing. That is likely a ton of income a young professional person like our mayor is leaving on the table as far as supporting her familys lifestyle, investing, etc. even some of these board of director roles at companies come with sizable compensation or stock options and is completely a side gig.

You could look at Cooks as essentially poaching city elected talent by hiring the mayor away because they probably like her leadership and communication style but it also could result in her eventually just losing interest in mayoral duties altogether esp if it pays really well. I think it is most peoples nature to give more attention to thee who pays the most. Also, is being mayor just a royal pain in the butt or what? I would think the headaches of city politics and events wear you out pretty quickly unless you are just semi-retired, wealthy and have endless time and energy to hobnob. I mean if it was that amazing then why take on a huge role at a major hospital system?

I also lean towards this being really no different than someone working two work from home jobs at the same time. Some would say that it is impossible to serve two roles wholeheartedly at the same time while others would say, if you are getting your work done in each role, then what is the problem?

Years ago a buddy of mine worked a full time job and ran several of his own businesses, like one was actually a full company with a few employees as well as a couple hobby businesses like fishing tours and fish batter sales. When he got promoted to management at his main salaried job, the successful business owner that promoted him told him that was now his time during the day and he needed to choose one or the other but not both. I think in recent years those lines have blurred quite a bit between what is just ambitious vs what is unethical. I am probably more old school but there are so many ways these days to freelance, side hustle, work from home, moonlight etc.

[360texas]

/Thinking outloud/ 

 

She knew the compen$ation rate. She knew the work involved before before running for public office.  Still she accepted the position. 

I suggest she resign if she is now not willing to perform Mayor duties by taking a 2nd job during normal CITY Government business hours.

 

/Not Thinking outloud/ 

[Stadtplan]

If I had an employee go get a second job, I would partly wonder if I am paying them enough. If I had an employee decide to leave, I would wonder if they felt undervalued.

Now that she has had a chance to shine in the spotlight, organizations are stepping up because they see her as a valuable asset and willing to pay for it. That is an extremely powerful force in human nature; to feel valued. What is equally powerful as a motivator is to feel undervalued and decide to do something about it. It is obvious she decided to do something about it. Basically telling the city, put up or shut up.

Perhaps now that she has been in the role as mayor for a while, the honeymoon phase wore off, and she sees responsibilities she is expected to perform for a little money where others who actually get paid a lot of money maybe should be doing some more of those things? I wonder too if she feels undervalued because shes young and a female? Perhaps there is insubordination in the ranks because of this?

[JBB]

That seems like a reach based on very little evidence.  She won reelection less than 2 months ago.  If she was that unhappy in the role, do we really think it came up in the 5 months since that campaign started?  Maybe it's just as simple as she wants something else to do and wants to get paid for it.

 

As for understanding the time commitment, my dad's been on a school board for 25 years and I've heard plenty of other people I know that have held public office say this: you never know the time involved until you're doing the job.

[ramjet]

Perhaps Fort Worth needs to adopt a strong mayor form of government like they have in Houston.  It makes the mayor the chief executive of the city and pays accordingly.  I seriously question the value add that the current city manager of Fort Worth provides at his exorbitant salary.

[elpingüino]

My understanding of our form of government is that the mayor's role is like the chair of the board at a private company, and the city manager is like the chief executive. In Fort Worth, the city manager oversees a $2.3 billion budget and nearly 7,000 employees. Does anyone know what the salary would be for the CEO of a similar size organization in the private sector?

[Stadtplan]

What exactly is the mayors role? Show up at press conferences and city council meetings?