Facebook
Twitter
RSS![[Masthead]](http://www.marshallnews.com/images/nameplate.png)
RSS
Print
Email link
Respond to editor
Read comments (20)
![[Order this photo]](http://marshallnews.mycapture.com/mycapture/remoteimage.asp?backtext=Return%20to%20site&backurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.marshallnews.com%2Fstory%2F1585129.html&thumbpath=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.marshallnews.com%2Fphotos%2F12%2F87%2F70%2F1287701-S.jpg&previewpath=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.marshallnews.com%2Fphotos%2F12%2F87%2F70%2F1287701-L.jpg&pricingsheetid=1511){kind=link}
After Northern District Commissioner Norvelle "Brownie" Brown was elected chairman of the committee, County Auditor Tara Vogelsmeier was the first to speak.
"In our economic crisis, our decreased revenues, unemployment rate, people at risk for losing their jobs, I mean, I think we need to be thankful for the job we have and continue as we are," said Vogelsmeier.
Saline County Coroner William Harlow said, "I think every employee, including elected officials, should always have a cost-of-living adjustment in their salaries," adding that he made the same statement in 2005, the last time the salary commission met.
"Like Tara said, insurance premiums are going up, the price of food has gone up, just living has gone up. And I realize we're in an economic crisis, but I still feel everybody's entitled to that cost-of-living adjustment," he continued.
Vogelsmeier responded by voicing her concern that an increase in officials' salaries could necessitate layoffs for county employees.
County Clerk Ken Bryant said he agreed with Vogelsmeier.
"I think it's not right for elected officials or anyone to get a salary increase at the expense of someone else, especially where we are elected to ... do the will of the people."
He continued, saying he sees the possibility that lower salaries will "deter some good people from wanting to seek public positions."
Vogelsmeier made a motion to make no change to county officials' salaries until a change in the county's assessed valuation would alter the amounts of those salaries.
Currently, the county's assessed valuation is $264,391,944, up more than $9 million from the 2008 assessed valuation.
At this level, the county's prosecuting attorney's base salary is $53,000, the sheriff's base salary is $48,000, the coroner's base salary is $15,000, commissioners' base salary is $28,380 and all other elected officials' base salaries is $43,000.
In order for officials' salaries to change, the county's assessed valuation must rise to $300 million or drop below $250 million.
Vogelsmeier, Southern District Commissioner Richard "Dick" Hassler, County Assessor Margaret Pond, County Collector Grace Miles, County Treasurer Sam Jones, Saline County Sheriff Wally George and County Recorder Jamie Nichols all voted to pass the motion.
Harlow voted against the motion.
Bryant and Saline County Public Administrator Mary Toliver abstained from the vote.
The next salary commission meeting will be in 2011.
Contact Geoff Rands at marshallreporter@socket.net
Comments
I still beleive that 50-333 paragraph 4 doesn't allow a salary commissiom member to abstain. It clearly states a vote of yeas or nays must be taken, nothing in the statute states a vote of abstention is allowed!
Eric,
I do feel that a make up assessment is a farce. No one will ever say anything about the assessments lowering when property values tank?? Wonder why that is?
Kathy,
If Don says so, then I concede. I must have been misinformed by other attorney's?? I have been told it was law for years, sorry I miss spoke. I still think an elected official has the duty to state why they abstain, it seems only appropriate to do so! I have no idea how voting on a salary issue could possibly warrant an abstaining vote?? I'd still like to know the reason if you hear why please let me know..Thanks
Am I Abbott or Costello??
intrigued: Thanks for your comments. I believe you're right, it's time to end the discussion. It's begun to feel a lot like an Abbott and Costello routine.
Gumby, you stated "by law, they must give a reason." That statement was with your comment that if the person voting abstained, they are required by law to state why and there is no law that states that. It doesn't matter to me if it's Kathy, Eric, you, or anyone...if you make a statement that says "by law", you better be able to back that up and you can't. No one is picking on anyone, just stating the fact that you're mistaken in that line of thinking. I'll agree with you that I don't think anyone on that commission should be allowed to abstain, because they are charged with a purpose, but, just because we think it doesn't make it law. I think this issue should be dropped and everyone give an internet kiss and make up :) :) Just my opinion.
Kathy Fairchild,
See that's my point Kathy, I never said they couldn't abstain. I said they are suppose to state the reason they abstain. See how my comments are twisted! And no you don't ask that of everyone else. You have went as far as to ask if I had ever been on probation or parole, what an insulting question to be asked by this paper just for making a comment on the light sentences handed out by our courts. I asked you the question back and it was obvious it didn't set right with you either.
What is so wrong with an official stating why they abstain from voting on something they have a duty to vote on. I know of no reason why an elected official would abstain on a vote about the next pay raise for their office?? It doesn't make any sense! I have worked most of my life in the publics eye and I have never once had a problem with anyone asking me why I have done something or why I voted one way or the other on an issue on any boards I have served on. I believe it's a citizens right to ask me questions. I don't choose to bring my work into this issue, but I have been around courts and the law for a long time in one capacity or another. I believe I have as much knowledge of courthouse and judicial workings as any person on your staff!
I will attempt to find the statute I was talking about. I have served on several boards and all of our attorney's present, stated we had to state why we abstain from a vote. So I will attempt to locate the statute they were quoting us.
But frankly no one cares if their local officials do right or wrong. By the next election no one ever remembers anything done in their 4 year term anyway. People are to complacent and just allow their officials to govern without checks and balances or question anything that is done. It is a citizens duty to question their officials actions. If that official doesn't like being questioned, then they are in the wrong line of work. Government should be open and responsive to the citizens that they are suppose to serve. Just my opinion though...
Gumby: You said "It gets a little old to have the staff chastise a comment because it might make a local elected official upset"
Let's get one thing straight. It doesn't matter one bit to me who gets upset and who doesn't. That is not the issue.
The issue is that YOU said that county officials, "by law" cannot abstain. I asked you what law that is. I would ask the same of anyone else.
intrigued,
I knew if that one, but it's not the one I was trying to find.
RsMO 610.015. Votes, how taken.
Except as provided in section 610.021, rules authorized pursuant to Article III of the Missouri Constitution and as otherwise provided by law, all votes shall be recorded, and if a roll call is taken, as to attribute each "yea" and "nay" vote, or abstinence if not voting, to the name of the individual member of the public governmental body. Any votes taken during a closed meeting shall be taken by roll call. All public meetings shall be open to the public and public votes and public records shall be open to the public for inspection and duplication. All votes taken by roll call in meetings of a public governmental body consisting of members who are all elected, except for the Missouri general assembly and any committee established by a public governmental body, shall be cast by members of the public governmental body who are physically present and in attendance at the meeting. When it is necessary to take votes by roll call in a meeting of the public governmental body, due to an emergency of the public body, with a quorum of the members of the public body physically present and in attendance and less than a quorum of the members of the public governmental body participating via telephone, facsimile, Internet, or any other voice or electronic means, the nature of the emergency of the public body justifying that departure from the normal requirements shall be stated in the minutes. Where such emergency exists, the votes taken shall be regarded as if all members were physically present and in attendance at the meeting.
Kathy Fairchild,
Okay, I will just go ahead and say you are right and I am wrong. I'm tired of having the editors attempt to tear anyone apart for questioning our government officials. I know the paper wants to stay in the social graces of the elected officials, but come on this is being very over protective of them isn't it. I ask why elected officials in a salary meeting refuse to vote on an issue they are bound by law to vote on. If the official's don't like what I say, then I challenge them to comment back in their own words, not hide behind the papers staff and have their battles fought for them.
So you know what, I will just say that you are always correct and I won't waste my time proving you wrong. It gets a little old to have the staff chastise a comment because it might make a local elected official upset. It's not worth my time. You can now move on to someone else to chastise.
I have never seen a paper that attacks people like this. Holding me to standards? Funny, who's standards am I to be held up to?
I support Kathy's previous comment. No one is attacking you -- only asking you to back up your claims. Public officials tend to be "fair game" for criticism, but when you claim they have broken the law, you need to provide evidence of that. We, too, try to verify claims we make and often try to find evidence for claims made by others, but you so consistently and persistently find fault with elected officials that the burden falls to you to back up your accusations. Thank you for posting the excerpt of the rules for salary commissions. That was pertinent and useful information, helping to educate us all. Kathy posted more information. We may not have arrived at a definitive answer yet, but with you and Kathy on the case, I have no doubt we will!
Kathy Fairchild.
I guess the salary commission statute that I presented doesn't mean anything to you either. It's appears that the staff works overtime to pick away at my statements a little more than average? Just my opinion though, not that it means much!
So what you neglected to comment on was 50-333 paragaph 4 that states a yea or nay vote will be taken, nothing said there about abstaining???
I will find the statute if it takes me a week. If I'm wrong, I will be a man and own up to it. At least I give you all something to pick apart everyweek. Keeps your mind sharp working so hard to prove me wrong doesn't it!! I love it.. Makes my day...lol
Gumby: I've checked the Sunshine Laws and there is no mention of a requirement for stating a reason for abstaining from a vote, only that the minutes must identify who abstained.
I'm not picking on you any more than I would anyone else who posts a comment and says, in essence, "it's the law." When you do that, you should be prepared to quote the law you're referring to.
I've checked Robert's Rules of Order and it says nothing about a requirement to state a reason for absention.
Please go right ahead and post what you find. Don't think of it as being "chastised" when you're questioned. We're just holding you to the same standard we're held to - seems only fair.
Kathy,
50-333 Salary Commission
4. Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 610.021 and 610.022, RSMo, all meetings of a county salary commission shall be open meetings and all votes taken at such meetings shall be open records. Any vote taken at any meeting of the salary commission shall be taken by recorded yeas and nays.
This is not the Statute I'm looking for, but in the meantime here is the salary commission Statute. 50-333, pay attention to paragraph 4. It says any vote taken at any meeting of the salary commission shall be taken by recorded yeas or nays. No where does it allow or mention abstaining in voting. Yeas or nays mean just that.
I didn't have the time to locate the Statute and quote it right now, but I will..... I think if you check with attorney's familiar with government, they will advise the same?
I believe roberts rules of order, which governments follow also, makes reference to abstaining from voting and giving the reason??
Muffin,
Don't forget the partime commissioners either in the mix. They are paid very weel for partime hours a couple days a week.
Kathy,
Somehow I knew you were going to question my comment, as it seems to happen every comment I make now. I will look up the statue on public meetings and find it for you. I'm sure I will still be chastised by the paper when I post it, but oh well I live for it.
"and all other elected officials' base salaries is $43,000.
Drop it to $30,000. Save money. They can live on 30K. I live on less, with a wife, and 2 kids.
For those questioning the low coroners salary, have you thought about his work hours compared to other county officials? Yes, he may be called out at odd hours, but does he work a 20, 30 or 40 hour work week? Seems fair compensation for a part time position he chose to run for.
Gumby: You said "By law they must give a reason" for abstention. What law requires that?
I would like to know why in a "economic crisis" our counties assesed valuation increased $9 million dollars over last year?? Someone please explain how that is possible? Houses are selling next to nothing and their assessed valuation keeps going up? Someone somewhere is working the numbers! How can property be on every market for less value, but the assessment rise, makes no sense. I believe it is inflated valuations at best...
These elected officials know very well that if they took a pay increase while the unemployment rate is so high and wages are so low, they would be looking for other jobs come election time! I will qoute an elected official in saying "you knew what the job paid when you took it"!
I would like to know what reason was recorded for Ken Bryant and Mary Toliver to abstain from voting? By law they must give a reason, I'd just like to know what it was?
www.marshallnews.com/story/1553814.html
Never a good time for something like that, but I guess in this case the timing was especially lousy.
The commissioner's salaries double that of the coroner???
I'm curious though. They keep referring to "base" salary. Are there other pay incentives?
So why is the county coroners salary so low? I'm pretty sure i remember ready in the MDN that he received great thanks for catching the fact that something was not right with the shepards murder and I'm also pretty sure I dont see the county commissioners out at all times of the day and night working like Mr Harlow does....
It looks like the coroner's base salary is a lot lower than the other salaries. I sure that the Coroner works just as hard, or harder than the rest of the group.