RE: EX-MANAGER KNOCKS WAGES
On Sept 13 the PAN printed an article, attached to this blog, based on a letter which I had submitted to the Editor on Sept 2. While the article somewhat captures the sense of the letter it does not truly represent my concerns. To a degree , it comes off as a "sour grapes" kind of rant which was not my intent.
My real concern is that this Council does not appear to know what it is doing and is making decisions without really understanding the ramifications of the decision. This salary discussion was just one example of that.
In the letter, I pointed out that the City Manager was hired in 2006, at an agreed upon rate of $140,000 annually which could be revised at the discretion of Council. For 2007 she received $149,988. In 2008 she received $153,912. For 2009 she jumped way up to $180,917 and jumped again for 2010 to $194,535 (of which some portion was cash in lieu of time off). This represents an increase of $54,535 in annual salary (39%) in just four years.
By way of comparison, the pay for the Surrey City Manager went from $250,334 in 2007, to $252,913 in 2008, and $265,962 in 2009. For some reason it actually dropped in 2010 to $263,085. So over 4 years there was an increase of about $15,600 annually or 6%.
Another , more relevant comparator, would be the City of Port Moody's City Manager. Port Moody is the closest to White Rock in population in Metro Vancouver. In 2007, their CM received $154,272 and in 2008 he got $158,208. By 2009 it had risen to $167,593. For some reason in 2010 he received only $161,807. Over the comparable 4 years (and using the maximum spread) he had an increase of only about $9000 or about 6%.
So, the question has to be asked why would Surrey's City Manager and Port Moody's City Manager receive wage increases of 6% while White Rock's City Manager goes up by nearly 40%? Moreover, why would we pay our City Manager $30,000 more annually than the somewhat larger City of Port Moody pays theirs?
Notwithstanding the City Manager's wages an even more astounding situation exists for the position of Director of Municipal Engineering and Operations.
In February, 2010, the City's Director of Operations left his job to take a job in Langley. Instead of hiring a new Engineer at about $125,000 per year, the City retained a Planner to fill the position on contract until July, 2012. The contract person is paid at the rate of $125/ hr. He doesn't get paid anything if for any reason he is absent. In 10 months in 2010 he was paid $182,883. Nearly $60,000 more than the previous engineer would have been paid for 12 months!
I do not know what he has been paid to date for 2011, but if he takes no vacation and is not sick, he can make about $250,000 - almost what the Surrey City Manager would take home. It could be much higher with overtime which is doled out at the discretion of the City Manager. This is roughly $125,000 more per year than the City would have paid a qualified employee.
So here's the point of the exercise:
- If those two were paid in the range they should be, the City would have saved in the order of $150,000 in taxes in 2011. That is nearly 1% off your taxes !
- The Engineering advice being given to City Council on infrastructure problems and policies is coming from a Planner not an Engineer. That is kind of like getting advice about how to fix your home's shorted out electrical circuit from a landscaper rather than an electrician.
So, as I said it came off sounding a bit like sour grapes or even a National Enquirer expose. In fact, it is all about knowing what you are doing and having a Council that is knowledgeable and spends the money we entrust them with wisely and with care.