wauwatosanow.com
      
Rummage MapseHarmony
weather

53°

Partly Cloudy | 10MPH

NEWSROOM * CIRCULATION * ADVERTISING

Wednesday

March 2010

17

Community Blogs

Tom grew up in Milwaukee, bartended in Wauwatosa in the '70s and moved here in 1984.

Commentary, observations and musings about the outdoors, life in general and maybe Tosa politics and personalities will be the order of the day. He savors a lively debate as much as terrific cooking.

Comments
Tine

I'm shocked, shocked, I tell you, by your misrepresentation of the generosity of the JSOnline managers. I'm pretty sure they used to give us cookies now and then -- and I have a nice mug! Of course, I've been around here since the dinosaurs. . .

community spirit

But back to the discussion at hand. I don't like the negative tone this often takes. Instead of all the negative aspects of paying the mayor fairly (partisanship, buying the position, the huge drain of the budget to add $30-50,000 to the salary, attracting county supervisors ...). The point that we have had qualified candidates, yes we have qualified candidates over the years but the fact that Terry Estness ran unopposed her last term, means we only had one qualified candidate. This leads to the fact that we have ten openings for council seats this term and five seats are going unopposed. Where are all these people you speak of? Or does the lack time and energy in personal and professional life limit the candidates that we draw for council and MAYOR.

My point about the positives, why wouldn't we pay our mayors a salary commensurate with their hours served if we thing they are doing a good job? Even if we finally deem the position part time, why wouldn't at least have a cost of living increase each year? I get this honored to serve thing, but I don't understand how it protected us from partisan politics, county influence or surrounding bigger cities diminishing who we are.

Gas pains

community spirit...

Is it reasonable to presume that all elected positions will have challengers all the time?

I doubt it.

My point is that you can raise the pay to the sky and there is absolutely no demonstrable proof that you will attract more qualified candidates. There is not a shred of evidence to support that notion.

Personally, I'd rather have a professional (and non-partisan) City Administrator in charge of the day-to-day executive decision-making of running the city. Someone like our guy – Archambo – is educated and professionally credentialed to perform this task.

Our Mayors should be setting the correct tone, directing policy and preside over the Council. In a word - Lead. You don’t have to pay big bucks for that.

Don’t you want an elected representative who is doing the job from a sense of purpose or duty? Or would you prefer someone who is in it for the money?

Phooey to automatic increases or cost of living for anyone who is elected to office. I never cared for State Senator Tom Reynolds. But one thing he did that he should get credit for was killing the automatic gas tax increase. Same principle at work with pay raises.

Finally, do you think that one of the reasons this whole discussion has even a whiff of negativity is because of the political naiveté of bringing it up now? For crying out loud the economy is a mess and people have been hammered in this recession by lay-offs, furloughs, pay cuts and job losses. Talk about boneheaded timing.

I would have taken this out of file and put it to a swift death. Instead, the Committee voted to hold this in file to see new light in 2011.

It will be back.

And just before the next election.

Post a Comment

Please login or register to post a comment.

Discussion Guidelines

Send Your Comment Reset
Looking for a used car, a new job or a place to live? Search our interactive online classified ads.

Community Ads: Jobs | Cars | Homes
Rentals | Personals | More

JSOnline Ads: Jobs | Cars | Homes
Rentals | Personals | More