CODE BLUE
♦ The math in the city’s officer pay raise proposal is curious. Assuming City Manager Bailey’s police vacancies are 12 (We hear on March 8th there’s actually 20 vacancies with more openings on the way). It would cost between $410,685.96 to $440,685,86 to fill these 12 alleged spots. The lower figure is base pay, with no educational incentive. The higher figure assumes a) ALL new hires have master’s degrees and b) the educational incentive actually goes through. This educational incentive is old baloney that has yet to materialize since the 1980’s. Perhaps this time it’s “for real”. As we’ve observed Salisbury’s city hall seldom sticks to their promises.
Since the city deliberately evades providing specific numbers, let’s assume 70 current sworn officers. This seems higher than the actual number and errs on the city’s favor. Submit a FOIA request for the names of all sworn officers to experience the city’s “transparency’. It’s a fact the city plugged Fibrant employees into vacant spots throughout the city to “turn the corner” via “magic math” by subtracting their salary from the “new” department. This may explain the evasiveness on answering public information requests.
Using the lowest figure for hiring twelve officers – base pay, no educational incentive – allows for a pay increase of $5,866 per officer. Naturally, when we use candidates with a master’s degree hiring costs increase – allowing $6,295 per officer if divided among the assumed 70 current officers.
The city is offering $1,600 (But are City Hall’s sleazes then going to subtract our merit pay from the $1,600 like they’ve done in the past?) Officers might receive this “pay adjustment” but no merit raises for the year. Essentially this chump change $1,600 would replace merit raises – resulting in no real gain. The city, however, gets a nice fluff piece in the local newsletter about “fixing” the problem”. It also offers a meaningless excuse for the dangerously understaffed department (Oh we spent all the hiring funds on this pay increase.)
The total cost for the raises would be between $112,000 (no educational incentive) and $287,000 (assuming every officer gets a master’s degree and incentive for it) The cost of filling the “12 vacancies” is between $410,685 and $440,685 under the same terms. An approx. difference of between $158,000 and $298.00.
Where is the rest of the money going? Will this raise actually address attrition – or are other factors also influencing the sky-high turnover rate? Does anyone believe a $1600 raise will “fix” the chronic officer shortage? Does it address the damage Collins did to relationships with some parts of the community? Fix the evidence room? Address the “leadership” style Collins created and left behind? This is a short term maneuver, intended to calm complaints while allowing the city to operate in exactly the same irresponsible manner.
Finally, exactly how many raises/bonuses could the city give to underpaid officers if Collins weren’t collecting “advisory” fees through June of this year? Is he still collecting city benefits and insurance too? If so, why? Wouldn’t the taxpayers be better served by retaining officers instead of paying a “medical” user of synthetic heroin for his “advice”? Collins was (and apparently still IS) making approx. $90,000 per year, more than twice the cost of a new officer. Wouldn’t two new officers be more helpful than the advice of a synthetic heroin user?
Chump change $1,600 raises are going to get most officers putting in elsewhere.
