|
|
||
Date published: 3/3/2009
Supervisor pay should be tied to performance
It is to ensure that Stafford County government's actions are tied to the interests of the people that on Feb. 17, we put forward a resolution that would tie the compensation of the Board of Supervisors to the advancement The resolution would require 30 percent of the compensation of each board member be tied to goals focused on fiscal responsibility, school excellence, and improved public safety. Achieving each goal would allow board members to collect portions of their pay held in reserve. Failure on each would mean those funds would be available to help advance the areas where goals were not achieved. The resolution failed, with Supervisors Schwartz, Brito, Woodson, and Crisp voting in opposition. Mr. Schwartz said the board was "not responsible" for public safety and should not be held accountable. We respect the right of Mr. Schwartz and the other three to vote their beliefs, but we fundamentally disagree with those beliefs. We can achieve these goals, and we are responsible. While the School Board bears primary responsibility for education, the Board of Supervisors certainly is a partner. Supervisors also bear responsibility for community safety. We are responsible for allocating funds, approving positions, and overseeing Sheriff's Office and Fire Department operations. Furthermore, fiscal responsibility falls on our shoulders. We are responsible for balancing the budget, setting tax policies, and making sure our capital plans remain on time and target. We hope that the four who voted against this measure will change their position and vote to hold the Board Cord A. Sterling, The writers are
". . . compensation of the Board of Supervisors to the advancement of the interest of residents." Wasn't the anti-BPOL vote by Supervisors Sterling, Dudenhefer, Milde against the interests of the RESIDENTS and for the interests of BUSINESSES? BPOL may be the only source of additional revenue Stafford County will have next year to help fund some of these stated goals.
This is the first positive action I have actually seen come out of the BOS. Pay for performance is a great idea as long as it does not increase their salary above what it is today. Unfortunately, as usual, if it is a good idea, George Schwartz will vote AGAINST it. Isn't he up for re-election soon??? I for one will cast my vote for someone that SUPPORTS this accountability.
Really? This is a great idea since we only get to hold politicians accountable every 4 years at the polls. Why wouldn't citizens want their elected officials to be held to annual performance measures? Ploy? Conflict of Interest? Absurd! Sounds like something Joe Brito would say. Wait, he did say that.The only people who don't like this approach are from the far left including the 4 Board members who want no accountability for their actions. Dr. D, you should be all over this idea like a cheap suit.
...a not so clever political ploy. That's how Republicans govern you, by politics!
Tying a cash bonus to votes cast by the Board of Supervisors is a conflict of interest. The Board voted at the last meeting to return FY08 surplus money to the schools for this years budget. The County Administrator recommended keeping that money to balance this years budget. The Board could have decided to keep the money to balance the budget, with the criteria outlined in the proposal the Board would received a $1,250 bonus for balancing the budget.
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
