Newton Mayor Setti Warren
The print editions of the Globe and the Herald have stories about Newton Mayor’s Setti Warren’s decision to include an increase in his salary into his fiscal 2013 budget. I just heard about it on WBUR and no doubt talk radio and Fox 25 will be foaming at the mouth about it today. (It won’t be the first time…or even the second or third time).
The Globe and the Herald both provide some context but the part of the story that will be glossed over as the day goes on is the fact that Warren technically didn’t give himself a raise as much as he included the full mayor’s salary into the budget. (The increase was originally approved seven years ago by Newton aldermen following a recommendation by a special commission). Also sure to be glossed over is the fact that, under our system, only the mayor can add money to the budget. So if he didn’t do it, no one could.
Here’s a few tweets on the subject…
WHAT???RT @GlobeJenPeter: RT @lesliejanderson: Newton Mayor Setti Warren proposes a $27,125 raise for himself. bo.st/HSV7CO
— Adrian Walker (@Adrian_Walker) April 18, 2012
Great idea! Maybe I’ll do the same thing. || “Newton Mayor Setti Warren proposes $27,125 raise for himself” bo.st/JiS9Fg
— Jeff Jacoby (@Jeff_Jacoby) April 18, 2012
Another part that is glossed over is the Mayor donated 30 months ($70k worth) of his pay allowance to one of the wealthiest municipalities in the state.
By contrast, Citibank’s CEO is asking for a $15mm pay increase. Now there’s a story about abuse of enterprise value.
He was making less than 100K, when hundreds of other city employees were making far more. This is such a non-issue, and I’m glad he waited until our finances were more in order before taking the extra money (that he was eligible for in the first place).
Look, he may not be perfect (his ambition for one thing to higher office) but please compare the old regime to this one. It feels like in the midst of very difficult fiscal times we’ve moved forward and we are on much better footing.
Wow ‘Balance’ which is to say honesty in reporting; instead of twisting the story into the most politically useful to fit an existing false narrative. Shame om the MassGOP and Boston Herald.
@Neil: I’m guessing that was a compliment, so thanks. But the objective here isn’t really about “balance” (as in the traditional view that you need to present “all sides” for “balance”). The goal is to be correct.
Hysteria? Slow news week for talk radio and Boston msm. This raise was voted on 7 years ago and should have been non-negotiable. It’s not in the best interest of the city to have several hundred municipal employees receive a higher salary than the mayor.
pay raise not a moment too soon – better to get it down and digested before burping up a debt exclusion. ..
This was a terrific move on the part of th mayor for some very simple reasons. To my knowledge, no one knows whether he is going to run again or not. If he decides not to run he increased the wage for the next Mayor, not himself (he’ll only get 1 year out of it, the next mayor will have the benefit for as long as he/she is Mayor). The increase will hopefully bring out better competition as well. If he does decide to run, this move will bring out better competition for him to have to beat and will take the payraise away from any future political issues during debates, etc. People might remember this increase as a raise with just 1.5 years before the next municipal election, making it more diffcult for him to win again. If he were Mayor Cohen, he would have waited until the day after he won his re-election bid to take the increase:).
@Tom: Not quite. Unless the mayor leaves office before his term is out he would have all of FY 2013 and half of fiscal 2014 at this rate.
This is stupid. The city still has its Aaa bond rating, sustainable employee contracts (at least for the next couple of years) and no one is getting laid off as part of the next fiscal year budget. The Board of Aldermen set the salary for the Mayor (not this Mayor, the office of the Mayor) at $125,000 7 years ago. Given the passage of time, it is probably time to revisit it now. All of this folderol just politicizes reasonable pay raises for elected officials. Hoss is right. If the Mayor’s pay were scaled the same way a CEO at most $350 million companies, he would be getting 400 times what the average public employee gets.
Barney Frank was right about the Herald. They expend all this space and energy on issues like this and on assaults against public servants generally; but hardly any mention about big ticket items like the more than 14 million a year that pliant Boards are giving to Thomas May, CEO of NSTAR, or the more than 40 million that have been given in each of the last 5 years to Ted Kelly, the CEO of Liberty Mutual. Note how these CEO’s often serve on each others Boards.
The action of NSTAR’s Board is particularly irksome. This is supposed to be a regulated public utility that is chartered to serve public consumers. So, part of our monthly electric bill goes to pay a 14 million dollar compensation package for a service that is, in its own way, as public as government. We don’t have any real choice but to pay this each month.
Ted Kelly’s case may seem less onerous because Liberty Mutual is a private company rather than a public utility; but rates for most insurance services are set by government, and it is these decisions that enable Kelly and so many other CEO’s to get paid at astronomical levels and to pass on these costs to consumers, many of whom are in a desperate struggle to make ends meet each month.
And yes, I think the Mayor is more than entitled to this raise.
What Ted Hess-Mahan and Bob Burke said. This is such a non-issue. Even with the raise he’ll be underpaid.