I must applaud Mr. Palmer's recent comments concerning the City Council expected raises.
“It’s not a full-time job, it’s an honor to serve your ward and it’s public service,” Palmer said.
His viewpoint, in my opinion, is correct in that it is a position to serve the people of your community, paid for by our taxes, and should as such be an honor to serve the people in your ward. I've always believed that to be true.
The differing viewpoints, presented by Ms. Dennis, and apparently some others, as reported: “It allows people to hold office that might not necessarily be able to do so without a livable wage,” she said. [sic]
Dennis says she believes holding office should be treated like any 40 hour/week position.
ADVERTISEMENT
"Any other 40 hour/week job''? I had always hoped my elected official was in that position because of a true belief and passion in being able to serve their constituents, not because it "gives them a livable wage and chance to be in office."
Perhaps then, if it is to be treated as a 40/hour week job, then may I suggest we initiate at least a bi-annual performance/salary adjustment review, performed by a poll of the people in their given ward, to determine if the official is meeting performance expectations and expected standards of their ward.
I never received a raise in my vocation because I felt "it was low for so long."
Perhaps some need to re-read the City of Rochester Core Values again...
Mark Hrubetz, Rochester
