Salary Freeze


We are all focusing on the pay cuts and the budget, but how many of you took the time to look beyond the print on the paper to see that those numbers are connected to individuals and their families. The aldermen want us to think that the cuts were so hard and that it was a necessary evil, but no one is willing to explain why everyone's salary was cut, but our city clerk's salary remains the same. At the suggestion of Alderman Johnson, I will submit that question in writing and see if I finally get an answer. I have been accused of having a personal vendetta against Stephanie Mullins and that is not true. I, like many others, am curious as to how she was able to prepare a budget that left her without any reduction in pay? How do we expect the deputy court clerk to provide for her family when the aldermen are proposing to cut her salary to $7.25/hr @ 20/week? There are also cuts/increases throughout the police department. One alderman stated that we were hoping to provide the citizens with their basic services while standardizing the pay in the police department. How do you expect to have our officers continue to risk their lives, knowing that the cuts were not across the board? If the aldermen really wanted to standardize the pay in the police department, then start with their current pay and work from there. I think the highest pay is $14.50/hr. Set a cap, and give cost of living increases, when possible. Some people suggest that the aldermen overrride the veto and get on with the business of the city, but to override these vetos will put the citizens of Lumberton at risk. What officer will continue to work at reduced salaries, when everyone did not get the same cut in salary? Hattiesburg American stated that there will be a budget workshop to try and fix the budget before the November board meeting. If you have any ideas or suggestions, now would be the time to submit/present them to your alderman.

For my next post, I will be addressing a comment made by Rebecca Hale. When asked about the termination of Betty Speights, she said that "we voted to terminate Betty because she gave you [Tina] a $200.00 adjustment on your water bill and we can't have a clerk like that in city hall."

Comments

  1. Andreas (Tresa) ArnoldOctober 12, 2010 at 9:11 AM

    Most of these aldermen don't give a damn how others make it. This is not how they make their living so they are not concerned with what is going on. Knowing that prayer is a powerful thing, I sure wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of whatever comes from people praying that God will deal with all the evil and all the evil-doers of this city. I know that life isn't fair, but I also know that you should try to be as fair to people as you possibly can. I don't believe that took place here. I try to refrain from being so judgmental against people, but the more I look, the more hypocrites I see. I will be praying for this city. I hope you do the same.

    ReplyDelete
  2. what about the man who tried to present a balanced budget to the board. Why didn't they give him a chance? Probably because they don't want to balance the budget or don't have a clue. I think they like all this fighting cause it takes attention away from real problems, problems that they don't have a clue as how to begin to solve them.
    Come next election we all will correct this problem. Vote every last one of them out, except Alderman Rogers. We need to elect Stanley Raybourn and Curtis Merritt again. And Nell Busby, Terry Canady too. Hell, and think about Olen Bounds and Hank Vann. We can't let these people on the board continue for any longer than we have too or our city will be gone.

    ReplyDelete
  3. But you can have a clerk like the other one. Why don't we see what one clerk is doing compared to the other clerk. See who goes to jail and who keeps their job.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

FY Budget 2015: Pills and Potions

Stealing Elections: Lumberton Style

Kim Rogers: A Phenomenal Woman