Comments on: Mayor Bunkers resigns

By: SteveL

SteveL — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

@ Just Joan, I did my research, Bunkers signed the contract for the round-a-bout, McEachon was responsible for the quotes, but his signature doesn’t appear on the contracts, nor does it appear on the re-paving, Bunkers does, so who do we blame for that little cash deficit??

By: fixed-income

fixed-income — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

“the unions are not the cause of our problems”

No, they are not the “cause”, but they are a contributing factor.
However, I think that any salary cuts should start at the top, not with the rank and file.

By: Lorraine T.

Lorraine T. — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Uh, I am proud to be a IAM 751 members wife, and daughter of an Operating Engineers union member. I absolutely agree with you, that the unions are not the cause of our problems nation wide, let alone in Ocean Shores! This does not mean I always agree with how unions can operate, or that I was suggesting that we cut pay to workers for the city or for social security, although you can see that they are not going to implement a cola for SS next year. I was speaking from personal experience. In our contracts, we have cola added quarterly to our base pay, but it doesn’t become ‘wrapped in to base pay’ until end of the contract year. So, we have had minus cola at times, not often I grant you, but it has happened. Since we have had no cola in the last eighteen months of this contract period, they have not been able to deduct it, but we have received zero, just as will happen with SS this next year. We were speaking in direct response to the Mayors suggestion that he planned to take a cut in pay after two years to allow for hiring a city manager. That is the only context in which I was speaking. Sorry I wasn’t clear about that.

By: Jerry Wright

Jerry Wright — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Lorraine, can you state when the last time there was negative CPI( and what cpi that was as there are many) other than this year and where your sources are. During my research which encluded the Website that lists all the cpi’s I wasnt able to find one unless you go back around fifty years ago. Even the government isnt taking cpi from the soldiers or from social security even though its negative. The thought you would want these people to have money deducted from their pay is insane. “Sorry Grandma, you know CPI was negative this year, you dont have enough money for your medications” or “its ok hunny, when daddy gets back from IRAQ he will get a second job since CPI was deducted from our check and now we cant buy food” My father was a devoted union member all his life and I was proud to be one aswell before I retired. Quit blaming the cities problems on the unions and high salaries. There are many more mistakes this city has made that have cost them to be in trouble than just the salaries.

By: Lorraine T.

Lorraine T. — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

The code I read in Washington state city mayor/council salaries, suggests that increasing the mayors salary while he is presiding is not allowed, unless he abstains from voting. It says nothing about when or how such salary can be DEcreased. It also lists a much lower rate of compensation for council members and mayors of towns with less than 5,000 population. Where did they come up with the rates of compensation for the present Mayor and Council?
Does anyone have any idea why we are stuck with them? If we truly want to balance the budget, aren’t any salaries paid to any city employees, even elected officials subject to review? Are they protected by unions? Even as a wife of a union member, I know that cola’s for example can be taken away until that amount is wrapped in to the base rate of pay. We have had minus colas in the past, and have had no cola increase in the last 18 months because of the economy. So why would not this same principle apply to city or state employees?

By: fixed-income

fixed-income — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

” what were we going to have those people do? We were stuck paying salaries.”

Can you spell “Layoff”? I don’t think the city is in any position to act as a charity.

Speaking of “layoff”, has it ever been made public exactly how much it cost us to consolidate the Fire Chief position? How much vacation/sick leave and severance did Hodges get? I assume that in the long run it will save money, but in short run can we afford it. (It’s beginning to look like there may not be a long run unless we can get our current expenditures under control.)

By the way, proposing a new ambulance and then dropping the request didn’t “save” us any money any more than me trying to convince my wife that I decided not to buy that new Mercedes and buying a little bass boat instead “saved” us money.

By: CRABBER

CRABBER — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

city manager or mayor but not both. then you take the current mayors salary and split it 3 ways. mayor/manager and two(working) police officers. $30/$30/$30. seems doable. if not now, in two years when allowable. foe the time being we will just have to suck it up and live with what we got. think,think,think NOT bitch,bitch,bitch.

By: CitizensAgainstCrime

CitizensAgainstCrime — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

All the projects the city took on were based on grants. Some did have contributions from the city. However, with the building that is going on now, or the lack of it, what were we going to have those people do? We were stuck paying salaries.
Yes, we are stuck for two years paying someone to be mayor. Yes, they will have to be the administrator too. What we need to do is start preparing how we want the city run in the future. We are committed for many years in our current form. There is no going back for now. That said, maybe we seek a division of labor between a mayor and city administrator. Neither does it all. By contract we can say what the duties of the administrator are. Then we have a mayor who is ulitmately responsible for things. However, that makes him or her a CEO type of position. Something to think about.

By: fixed-income

fixed-income — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

As I understand it, because of State law we have to continue paying a mayor $99,600 per year for the next two years. If so, how are we going to hire a city administrator? What are we going to pay him/her with? Or are we going to appoint him/her “mayor” until the next election. Then we can elect a new “mayor” (at a reduced salary) and “hire” the administrator into his/her actual position.
Of course he/she is going to expect to continue receiving the 99,600 and we will have just added the cost of a titular mayor to the payroll in addition to the bloated administrator pay. Or can we get someone in that will agree to a decrease in salary in two years?
There have been suggestions that we go back to the old “strong council” form of government. Won’t that cost us another bundle to do?
I think Ocean Shores really needs to hunker down and ride out the storm. Cancel all existing projects (Tonquin bridge, sidewalk to the Senior Center, even as far as electricity to the new street lights.) and call a moratorium on anything “new”. It seems that everything that the city comes up as “free” (paid for by grants and such) still cost us money because “we” need to do “prep work” or administer it or something. There seems to be too much “empire building” going on here. We need to cut back on everything, every department, not just the PD, Library and IC .

By: al lizakowski

al lizakowski — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

The bid for the roundabout, the airport enhancements, the water treatment plant, ignoring the County water plan and the fire station were all signed/approved by Bunkers. He had the opportunity to modify each and every one and didn’t. Patrick and company are the ones to blame for the salary issue, but although they had a hand in some of them, they can’t be totally blamed for these other expenditures. His biggest achievement, in my mind, is consolidating the police and fire departments.