(Posted June 20, 2011, 02:15 pm)
The City Manager's proposed 3% pay raise is out of line
Dear City Manager Johnson:
I find your proposal of a 3% raise for City Council members and City employees in the FRS out of line.
Anytime you single out a group or class of people and treat them differently than the the entire group or class of people, in this case City of Lake City employees, elected or non elected, you have created a Discriminatory Act covered under Federal Statues.
The State of Florida State Legislators passed Bill SB 2100 and Gov. Scott signed the Bill into Law. This mandates that anyone participating in the State Retirement System contribute 3% of their pay into the Fund. This was done to help achieve fiscal management.
Mr. Johnson, as the City Manager of Lake City, it is part of your responsibility to maintain fiscal management, not raid the City Bank Account.
There are many people in the Lake City area that are employed in the private sector and contribute to either a business or their own retirement accounts. If the company they work for cuts back hours, or scales back compensation by a percentage, they still contribute their hard earned reduced dollars into a retirement account, while bearing the hardship of lost income.
As the City Manager of Lake City, your proposal sends a clear message that you feel that the City employees and elected officials are better than those you serve, which communicates arrogance that is just plain unacceptable.
If any City of Lake City employee, or elected official is unhappy about the mandated 3% contribution into the Florida Retirement System and the consequential 3% reduction in take home pay, I urge that they tender their resignation immediately and return to employment in the private sector - if they can find any.
Any City Council member that votes to implement your proposed 3% pay raise needs to be immediately recalled for failing to uphold their obligation of fiscal management.
Finely, in lieu of your proposal of traffic light cameras and now this insane proposal for a 3% discriminatory pay raise, I believe you do not have the best interests of the tax-payer in mind.