Two-Percent Pay Increases for New Philadelphia Administrators

Last night’s, July 13, New Philadelphia City Council meeting was interesting to say the least. While most of the business Council conducted was of a routine nature, the matter of pay raises for non-bargaining officials, Resolution 26-2010, was reopened during it’s second reading. It was at this point that the members of City Council displayed their true positions on the fiscal well-being of the city.

The original proposal for those pay raises was brought to the floor by the Chairman of the Salary Committee, Mr. Locker who had been assigned the task of looking into pay raises for non-bargaining city officials. The salary committee brought legislation to the floor of City Council requesting a one-percent increase for elected and appointed city officials. This legislation was changed by an amendment brought to the floor by Mr. Lautenschleger which contained changes, the increase of the raise from one- to two-percent, and the exclusion of Council members from that raise. The amendment was approved by Council by a four to three vote for acceptance, Cox, Espenschied, and Walker voting against.

Last night Councilwoman Cox, chairman of the Finance Committee, proposed an amendment to the pay raise legislation which proposed two amendments, return the raise to one-percent and exclude all elected officials. Cox, in a prepared statement, said that the financial state of the City was becoming progressively worse and the City might not be meet its budget because of the decreases in City income. She further said that elected officials knew what their salaries would be when they ran for office and should be satisfied with those salaries.

A vote on the amendment was taken and by a four to two vote the amendment was defeated. That left the proposed two-percent increase intact as well as giving salary increases to the Clerk of Council and to Joel Day, the President of Council. For the record, voting against the Cox amendment were Espenschied, Lautenschleger, Locker, and Zucal. Voting in favor of the Cox amendment were Cox and Walker. Absent was Mr. Maurer. The third reading on Resolution 26-2010 will be taken on July 26 at which time a vote will probably be taken to pass the pay increases. It’s my bet at this point that the resolution will pass at that time.

There are some interesting sidelights to this scenario, For example, Mr. Jim Zucal, the Service Director, is related to Mr. Lautenschleger by marriage, by blood to Mr. John Zucal, the Councilman. Mr. Locker, Chairman of the Salary Committee, who presented the original wage proposal of one-percent on the recommendation of his committee, whose members are Winnie Walker and John Zucal, voted twice to increase the salaries of those involved to two-percent and to exclude members of Council from the increases. Council President Day, apparently dissatisfied with the Salary Committee’s handling of the wage issue, created an ad hoc committee to look into legislation to set guidelines for non-bargaining city personnel, and in an unprecedented move, appointed himself as chairman of that ad hoc committee. Chairman Day, incidentally, is related by marriage to Mr. Ricklic, the city Water Superintendent. Mrs. Espenschied said after the council meeting that she voted against the Cox Amendment this time as she didn’t like changing things in midstream. It’s all very confusing.

The bottom line is this. Employment in private business is down, unemployment in Ohio at 10.7%, which doesn’t count marginally attached and discouraged workers. These are folks who wanted work and couldn’t find it and are no longer listed on the unemployment rolls. The Bureau of Labor Statistics made the following report:

In June, about 2.6 mil­lion per­sons were mar­gin­ally attached to the labor force, an increase of 415,000 from a year ear­lier. (The data are not sea­son­ally adjusted.) These indi­vid­u­als were not in the labor force, wanted and were avail­able for work, and had looked for a job some­time in the prior 12 months. They were not counted as unem­ployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks pre­ced­ing the survey.
Among the mar­gin­ally attached, there were 1.2 mil­lion dis­cour­aged work­ers in June, up by 414,000 from a year ear­lier. (The data are not sea­son­ally adjusted.) Dis­cour­aged work­ers are per­sons not cur­rently look­ing for work because they believe no jobs are avail­able for them. The remain­ing 1.4 mil­lion per­sons mar­gin­ally attached to the labor force had not searched for work in the 4 weeks pre­ced­ing the sur­vey for rea­sons such as school atten­dance or fam­ily responsibilities.

Things are not well on the employment front. With rising unemployment, decreasing tax revenues, City Council should heed Mrs. Cox’s concerns about the financial state of New Philadelphia. This is not the time for any increases in budgets.

The Administration and City Council, if they do not face up to their responsibilities, can provide the New Philadelphians with only two things in the future, higher taxes or reduced services, or both.

Citizens, wake up. Press your councilmen and mayor to stop pushing the city into insolvency. Get involved.