Full or part time?

Jan. 23, 2007

SHARON G. McBRIDE

Frontiersman

PALMER - The mayor's full-time position and salary are on the chopping block, with two new ordinances set to be introduced at the Palmer City Council meeting at 7 p.m. tonight.

Ordinances 07-004 and 07-005 call for a reduction in Combs' salary, complete removal of health benefits and a reduction in compensated work hours.

Council member Tony Pippel said in a telephone interview Friday that the measures were brought forward strictly based on much-needed budget considerations and cuts. The mayor's position was made full-time last year as an experiment, he said.

&#8220It has not worked out as we expected, so we are looking to change it back,” Pippel said. &#8220We thought having a full-time mayor would improve communication with the administration.

&#8220In the past, communication from the administration was not being passed through to the council. We hoped to remedy that, it didn't work. In fact, communications have gotten worse. We feel that the mayor has become part of the

administration.”

Cutting the mayor's hours and benefits would save the city $50,000, he said.

&#8220That's no small amount when it comes to our budget.”

Mayor John Combs doesn't agree with the proposed change.

&#8220I think cutting the mayor's position back to part-time is unwarranted,” he said Friday by telephone.

Combs said a full-time mayor is needed and justified, because it's an opportunity to establish relationships with key Alaska lawmakers in Juneau, and with the governor. Those relationships could make a difference in getting legislation passed in favor of Palmer, and money made available for much-needed capital improvements, he said.

&#8220When they talk to the mayor of Palmer, it's not just a voice on the line or e-mail,” Combs said. &#8220They have actually met the person on the line and have met the person who wrote the e-mail. I think working full-time really has made a difference for Palmer.”

Combs cited an increase in capital improvements projects to $13.7 million last year, up from $300,000 in years past.

&#8220And I hope to continue with that work,” he said.

Council member Ken Erbey said in a telephone interview Monday that the city hasn't had a full-time mayor long enough to make a decision on whether the position should be cut back.

&#8220What bang we are getting for our buck is really the issue,” Erbey said.

Since the city found out it has a $10 million deficit through the state-mandated public employee retirement system, otherwise known as PERS, the council has been making a lot of &#8220painful cuts” to the budget, he said.

&#8220It's not pleasant to trim under those circumstances,” Erbey said. &#8220So can we even afford a full-time mayor? Is his lobbying efforts worth the additional expense? My personal opinion is that we need to give it a full year to see.

&#8220We've only had a full time mayor for six months now. I think in a full year we should be able to see if we are indeed getting the full bang for our buck, and then make a decision then.”

Council member Jim Wood, who proposed the first ordinance after a Jan. 9 executive session, declined to comment, citing a death in the family.

&#8220It's just not a good time,” he said.

The council will vote on whether to introduce the ordinances tonight, and if they pass, a public hearing on them will be set for the next meeting.

Contact Sharon G. McBride at 352-2252.