Mayoral and Aldermanic Salaries

Off Topic: Interesting that you continue on this topic, close down the last blog with a blast to this blogger, yet you completely ignore the upcoming council agenda regarding your own former alderman....

On Topic: If the aldermen expense account is of such interest to you, why have you not questioned your own former alderman what he expended his expense account on from mid-May thru August 2009 ($250 x 2.5 = $625) when he was not in attendance at ANY council meetings and was (apparently) residing in a rehab facility?

A New Berlin Voice: I posted my previous blog over a week ago. Before I moved on to this one, I posted a comment in response to the last commenter's remark.
It shouldn't surprise you or anyone else if people speculate or conclude that you are a member of Council, especially given the 31 separate comments you had posted to that previous blog entry, their content, and that you did it anonymously.
It is gratifying that people find my blot interesting. If you prefer to continue visiting my blog very frequently and voice your opinions on it rather than via a NOW blog of your own, that's fine with me.
Once again, I'd like to point out that my blogging is a voluntary activity. I have a life beyond blogging and have neither the time or inclination to blog on every issue or respond to every comment someone makes.
Re: expense accounts. The last unpaid furlough day that city workers took was in 2009 (before Thanksgiving). In January, 2010, I followed up by calling the City Accounting Manager to inquire about "refunds" to the City given by our aldermen. During our conversation, I learned that ALL of our current aldermen chose the "non-accountable" plan regarding their expense accounts and don't have to provide documentation of what they spent it on. That was news to me. I reported it on my blog. I didn't ask about former aldermen, of which New Berlin has many. I live in District 5 which currently has no alderman.
And don't you get it? Aldermen should be accountable and provide the receipts and documentation to the City of what they spent their money on, so it is readily available to all citizens and subject to Open Records laws. It should be the alderman's responsibility. Why should a constitutent have to contact his/her alderman and try to drag such information out of him?

Linda, thank you for doing the research on aldermanic salaries in the Milwaukee Metro area. It is interesting to note that NB's aldermen and superintendent of schools are at the top of their respective salary scales, while the mayor is at the bottom. We certainly are a community of extremes.

Furthermore, I am stunned that the aldermen rejected the mayor's suggestion to reduce their salaries by $1,000/year and cut their expense accounts in half. Even though the proposed reduction in the expense account would have put it at parity with the mayor's. (What is that old saying? What's good for the goose should be good for the gander?)

I was also disappointed to note in reading the minutes that the motion to maintain the aldermen's level of compensation was made by my very own second district representative and former mayor himself, Mr. Wysocki.

I guess it makes more fiscal sense to share the pain of city employees by donating $100 or less instead of actually voting for a reduction in pay...especially if one happens to be a NB alderman.

I will say it again, Mayor Eisenhower does not deserve the pay he is getting now. When he realizes that there are two sides to New Berlin, maybe then I'll give him the credit he is due. Until then, He's just another Political Hack who dosn't care about anybody except his cronies, and keeping his job.

Disappointing to compare Mayor / Aldermen salaries - ONLY - by community. Distorted and apples-to-oranges, but Ms. Richter knows this.

Ever consider comparing Mayor / Aldermen by community, by - Number of Elected Positions; Number of Departments and Department Heads / Staff to Manage, Interface with and be Responsible for; Unions and Contract Needs / Issues; Population; Services; Budget; Responsibilities; Roles; Overall Issues; Urban Issues v. Suburban; Waukesha County v. Milwaukee County v. Osaukee, etc.; Busing / Transportation Issues; Infrastructure; Industry; Tax Base / Tax Revenue % by Source; Taxes v. Fees; TIF's and Development; Split between Residential, Commercial / Industry and Retail Factors; Homeless; Outsourcing / Consolidation Issues; County v. Community Relations; etc.

And addressing when and why a City Administrator should be considered. Compare and contrast the Administrator needs of a "bedroom" community v. a more urban / industrial community, such as Waukesha?

Specific to New Berlin. The author is always selective with the context of numbers. Failure to properly explain the responsibilities, roles and objectives for the Mayor v. Aldermen, voids the message of this blog. Who is responsible for what? With whom (Departments and Committees)? Hours and other required service v. non required? And where does the buck stop?

It is intriguing that these questions are never addressed by Ms. Richter and the Mayor Chiovatero crew. Ms. Richter's blogs (and the crew's responses) suggest that Mayor Chiovatero - and his $100,000 package, plus trappings and expenses - but, not enough - is less responsible for someone who makes $10,000 and has a "day job / career", but logs as many hours?

While Linda seems to critic this blogger for multiple posts these multiple posts are required to provide "the rest of the story" which Linda does not supply. Voice's posts are voluntary also. :D

Intrigued: Your comments are 'right on' in that Linda completely ignores the responsibility required of our aldermen versus other communities.

The following multiple posts are formated to fit posting requirements of this blog. Voice's posts represent 'historical reference', a list of 'some' responsibilities which Linda ignores and benefits aldermen in other communities receive in addition to their pay (which Linda ignores).

Regarding aldermanic salary and expense account: The current salaries were approved in 1998 during the Gatzke regime. Putting this issue into perspective, 1998 council members at that time were: Tom Bullerman, Ted Wysocki, Dave Patzer, Jeffrey Stuckert, Rush Wilkens, Jay Zierhut and Liz Kaminski. City attorney at that time was Atty. Paul Reilly. William Bowers was city clerk.

Comments have been made that council's salary/expense accounts of New Berlin aldermen are too high. While Linda only reports on the salary & expense accounts, that comparison is not complete without further information, i.e. population the aldermen serve.

Population served by community:

Greenfield, population 35,476, has 5 aldermen (1 alderman per 7,095 residents)
West Allis, population 61,254, has 10 aldermen (1 alderman per each 6,125 residents)
New Berlin, population 38,220, has 7 aldermen (1 alderman per each 5,460 residents)
Franklin, population 29,494, has 6 aldermen (1 alderman per 4,915 residents)
Oak Creek, population 28,456, has 6 aldermen (1 alderman per 4,742 residents)
Menomonee Falls, population 32,647,has 7 trustees, (1 trustee per 4,663 residents)
Waukesha, population 64,825, has 15 aldermen (1 alderman per 4,321 residents)
Muskego, population 21,397, 7 aldermen (1 alderman per 3,056 residents)
Wauwatosa, population 47,721, has 16 aldermen (1 alderman per 2,982 residents)
Brookfield, population 38,649, has 13 aldermen (1 alderman per each 2,873 residents)
Hales Corners, population of 7,765, has 6 trustees (1 trustee per 1,294 residents)

(Population amounts from the official 2000 US Census.)

The above list shows New Berlin aldermen serve more constituents that 8 of the 10 physically closest municipalities.

Please note from the above list for comparison:

New Berlin has 7 aldermen. Municipalities with MORE aldermen/trustees are:

West Allis has 10.
Waukesha has 15.
Wauwatosa has 16.
Brookfield has 13.

Benefits: While Linda ONLY reports on expense accounts, she completely ignores any other benefits aldermen/trustees receive:

West Allis pays health insurance for their 10 aldermen*. New Berlin DOES NOT pay health insurance for their aldermen.

Greenfield, Oak Creek, Wauwatosa & West Allis aldermen are eligible for city pensions once they leave office*. New Berlin DOES NOT provide a pension plan for aldermen.

(*source: Milwaukee Journal news archives.)

Linda also ignores the responsibilities of our aldermen. New Berlin aldermen not only are required to attend common council & committee of the whole meetings, their job description also requires them to be appointed to one or more committees, commissions or boards. Following is a partial unofficial list of appointments showing how many aldermen are appointed to the specific committees, commissions or boards:

Board of Public Works (3 aldermen)
Finance Committee (3 aldermen)
4th of July Commission (1 alderman)
Landmarks Commission (2 aldermen)
New Berlin Veterans Recognition Committee, (2 aldermen)
Plan Commission (1 alderman)
Utility Commission (3 aldermen)
Youth Advisory Board (1 alderman)
Alternative Transportation (1 alderman)
Community Development Authority (1 alderman)
Crime Prevention Committee (1 alderman)
Fire Department (1 alderman)
Park & Rec Commission (1 alderman)
Safety Commission (1 alderman)
Water Resource Mgmt. Committee (3 aldermen)

(source: Minutes at www.newberlin.org)

The partial, unofficial list above equals 25 aldermanic positions on 15 committees, commission or boards - appointments which are required by aldermanic job description and serviced by 7 aldermen.

The above list does not include ad hoc committees that are formed from time to time on an as-needed basis.

Some of these committee, commission and boards meet more than once per month.

Perhaps Linda could do further research in other municipalities to compare apple-to-apples before she continues to mis-lead the public by reporting only 1/2 the story.

Regarding the New Berlin mayoral expense account: Chiovatero has also chosen the non-receipt method of accounting for the mayoral expense account just as he chose the non-receipt expense account method when he was aldermen. When comparing apple-to-apples Linda chooses to ignore this issue also.

Voice, your in depth knowledge of compensation for city officials is impressive. In spite of the fact that I have lived in NB for over 30 years, I can't match your expertise.

However, if I understand you correctly, the present compensation package for NB aldermen was established under Mayor Gatzke. At the same time, it was decided to tie the mayor's salary to that of the highest paid NB city employee. In other words, it was not the level of mayoral compensation that presented a problem, it was the decision to tie it to the compensation of a city employee.

If that is true, the City Council could have easily opted to maintain the mayor's salary, but use some other criteria for setting it. For example, the mayor's salary could be based on a study of executive compensation in communties that are demographically and culturally similar to NB.

Instead, it seems that the City Council used the opportunity to correct this "error" to reduce the mayor's salary by 7.5% for no apparent reason. The words "arbitrary" and "capricious" spring to mind.

If the aldermen were acting in good faith, it would be logical that they reduce their own level of compensation by the same 7.5%. That would be $525/year, or $475 less of a cut than the mayor asked of them, but a bigger savings for the city than the proposed $100 donation, which the majority of aldermen have apparently decided to boycott.

One last thought, hence forth, everyone involved in city government who is eligible for any kind of reimbursement of expenses, including the mayor and the aldermen, should be required to submit receipts for payment.

We cannot control what has happened in the past, but we can adjust current practice. Voice, if you are a member of the City Council or know one, you can help make it happen. Trust me. It is a move that would be popular and respected by the common folk of the Shire.

Evie53151 - I like you sense of humor ("common fold of the Shire"). :D

I am working on some more info - hang tight - more coming.

Along with the above list of the partial, unofficial list of 25 aldermanic positions on 15 committees, commission or boards, one alderman is appoint a liasion to each of the following:

Assessor
Building & Grounds / Inspections
Planning
Engineering
Finance/claims/judiciary
Fire Department
Human Resources
Information Systems
Insurance
Legislative
Licenses
Park & Rec
Police
School Board
Streets
Utilities
Youth Board

Again, these liasion positions are mandatory appointments.

(Boy! Spell check failed me - let me repeat:)

Evie53151: I like your sense of humor ("common folk of shire")! :D

In 1998 mayor salary was raised to $48,205.12 with 3.5% increases effective April 15, 2000 through April 14, 2001. Mayoral expense account was set at $100. The 1998 ordinance tied to mayoral salary to Civil Service rates effective in the April 15, 2001.

The same year alderman pay was raised to from $6,100 with $100 expense account to $7,000 and $250 respectively.

Currently, mayoral salary is set at $83,772.82 starting April 15, 2009 with 2% increases through April 14, 2013 (the end of the current mayoral term). Mayoral salary increases are detailed as follows:

April 15, 2009 thru April 14, 2010 = $83,772.82
April 15, 2010 thru April 14, 2011 = $85,448. 28
April 15, 2011 thru April 14, 2012 = $87,157.24
April 15, 2012 thru April 14, 2013 = $88,900.39

Mayoral salary can be increased with an outlined schedule (a set percent) but can not be tied to Civil Service because there is no set percent.

Now, on to other aspects of conversation:

Readers are upset that council did not lower their salary. Look at it this way:

1. Since 1998, mayoral salary HAS increased 73.78%.

2. Since 1998 aldermanic salary HAS NOT increased one cent.

As voice stated previously: Is anyone today working for the same salary they received 12 years ago?

Linda, regarding your comment:

"New Berlin’s mayor receives health benefits..."

The mayor also receives a pension and use of a city vehicle as outlined below:

Municipal Code Section 51-5(A):

A. The following elected officers shall be paid the salaries and allowances for their terms of office as hereinafter provided in full compensation for their services as such officers:
(1) Mayor.
(a) Mayoral salary for 2009 shall be $83,772.82, payable biweekly, and said salary shall be increased annually thereafter by 2% for the balance of the term.
[Amended 1-28-2009 by Ord. No. 2404]
(b) Expense allowance. An expense allowance is awarded in the amount of $100 per month and use of a City vehicle.
(c) The City shall pay for the Mayor the full amount of the employee contribution as set forth in § 40.05(1)(a)2, Wis. Stats, to the Wisconsin Retirement Fund, and health, accident and group life insurance coverage.

Speaking of the mayors use of a city vehicle: On a previous blog entry, someone mentioned the mayor takes his city vehicle to Appleton. Well, well, well (as Linda says).

Voice seems to recall he has children attending college (where? Madison? Oshkosh?) - does the mayor really take this city owned (taxpayer owned) vehicle out of town for personal trips? Well, well, well - that sure doesn't seem right!

Wow Voice. I just asked some questions in a rhetorical manner to highlight the folly of Ms. Richter's attempts at demonizing / distorting, those the Liberal / Socialist Machine wants destroyed.

You bring new meaning to the word answers. Intriguing about the TAX PAYER PAID vehicle for the Mayor and the suspicion of personal use. That is at least $10,000 per year. $100,000 package for the Mayor? Clearly, that is a low ball estimate.

Above are all Questions / Answers the Chiovatero Liberal / Socialist Machine do not dare answer, but are arrogant enough to tee up for discussion, by introducing the subject to destroy others? This arrogance and stupidity is running our city? By the way, is the personal use of a taxpayer vehicle - at this level - for 5 years and counting - legal? Good thing Mayor Chiovatero has a Machine in place, complete with a Communications and Legal team, to help tie up the City for years to combat any kind of review, or investigation.

Well, well, well what happened to Richter? Seems when she is exposed for slanting her stories with half truths and innuendo she stops bloging until Chiovatero, Wilkens, Patzer and Gatzke help her think up another attack.

Well, well, well what happened to Richter? Seems when she is exposed for slanting her stories with half truths and innuendo she stops bloging until Chiovatero, Wilkens, Patzer and Gatzke help her think up another attack.

Voice - I would ask Richter to look into this but I suspect she successfully accomplished the NB mobs election year hit and run sneak attack so they most likely huddling with the gang trying to decide which facts will fit into their next attack. Do you know if Chiovatero, Moore and Poshepny submit receipts for their expenses? Does Chiovatero use his City vehicle to go to Oshkosh, Madison and Appleton? Who pays for the gas and maintenance? Wysocki used a fuel-efficient used Ford Taurus - Chiovatero has a shinny new gas guzzling SUV. How much did us taxpayers pay for the SUV? Who pays for the gas and maintenance? Who pays for the insurance? Does Chiovatero keep a mileage log and does he submit it? Richter said Chiovatero does not get a vacation. That seems strange if he is on a salary! If that is true does the City deduct the time he goes on vacation or goes on one of his all expense paid taxpayer junkets on Global Warming from his pay?
Has Poshepny been honest about living in New Berlin? Did he return the $1250.00 expense money he received while not carrying out his duties between May and October?

I would suspect your "gang" is quite pleased with you Miss Richter! You have managed to ignore the fact that alot of the Alderman put forth above and beyond the effort put forth by your 2. While the Mayor sits in the office and takes credit for the Councils work. Again I am not quite sure why I read this as most of it is twisted distorted lies. However it is your right to blog about whatever you think or are told to blog about.

Taxed too much: "Do you know if Chiovatero, Moore and Poshepny submit receipts for their expenses?" Answer: No one submits receipts.

"Does Chiovatero use his City vehicle to go to Oshkosh, Madison and Appleton?" Answer: Someone on a very recent blog of Linda's reported this.

"Who pays for the gas and maintenance?" Answer: Well, it is (emphasis on is) a city car - owned by the taxpayers.

"How much did us taxpayers pay for the SUV?" Answer: Voice does not have a dollar amount but is aware this is the first mayor to have an SUV.

"Who pays for the insurance? Does Chiovatero keep a mileage log and does he submit it?" Voice is looking for the city policy on this issue from some years ago. Assuming Voice can find this information it will be posted here. In the meantime, if anyone reading this blog would like to file an Open Records request with the city clerk they can get this information and post the results here. The policy is called something like "City Vehicle Policy". Oh, yes, there is a required mileage report. It would also be VERY interesting for someone to file a Open Records request with the clerk for the mayors mileage reports.

Taxed too much: regarding salary/vacation/sick days

The word is called s-a-l-a-r-y (Voice is spelling that for Linda, no offense meant to taxed too much).

Employees on salary do not get a paid vacation - they get a s-a-l-a-r-y. Employees on salary do not get paid sick days - they get a s-a-l-a-r-y. Employees on salary do not get paid overtime, they get a s-a-l-a-r-y.

(sorry, hit 'send' too quick)

re: s-a-l-a-r-y

Employees on salary get what ever length of vacation is agreed upon at hire, and get paid their s-a-l-a-r-y while on vacation.

Employees on salary get paid sick days because they are paid a s-a-l-a-r-y.

FYI:
Don't expect me to be at my computer 24/7. My life is much too full and busy for that. For example, I spent much of today babysitting an infant and toddler. Spending time with one's grandkids (all of mine are age 2 or under) is one of life's joys.
Blogging is fun, too. But I am not going to devote ALL of my time to it. Time is valuable and I refuse to spend it posting volumes of comments on other people's blogs. Nor do I have the time or inclination to respond to every remark or question from a blog commenter. I try to post a new blog article each week whenever possible. Apparently, people find them of interest. I understand that my blog is one of the more popular MyCommunityNOW blogs. My blog reflects my willingness to openly stand up for what I think & feel and communicate factual information regularly to the public. My identity is not hidden. My name and picture are featured on the blog. I am glad that I have better things to do with my time than click onto someone's blog to make numerous anonymous criticisms of the blog content/and or personal attacks.

Brookfield has 7 aldermanic districts, each with 2 aldermen. That means each alderman represents 1/7 of the city's 40,000 residents, or about 5,700 people each. Having two aldermen per district has some advantages, such as increasing the chance of at least one on every major committee, improving vacation coverage, etc.

As for pay, the aldermen used to have a medium paycheck plus an expense account. The problem was that they were always paid the full expense money monthly but rarely submitted expense vouchers (cell phone, mileage, etc.), as per IRS requirements. That was tax free money and was begging for a scandal. By merging the expense money into their taxable salary in 2002, the issue was eliminated. I assume New Berlin, etc. requires the documentation which must be made available as public records.

Brookfield aldermen also have access to city medical, dental insurance, at their 100% expense, until April, 2012 when all insurance access will be cut off.

Scott A. Berg
Alderman, 5th District
City of Brookfield