A look back
During the June, 2012 meeting of the Alexander city council, aldermen voted to give former mayor Shirley Johnson an $800 a month pension. This despite a vote in 2011 that she wasn't entitled to the pension.In the November, 2010 election Mayor Johnson was ousted and Paul Mitchell was elected mayor. Along with some new aldermen all took office January 1, 2011.
Soon after, the council received a request by Johnson for her pension. She said as a city employee she was due a monthly pension.
An Arkansas Municipal League (AML) attorney advised council members that elected officials are not employees of the city, and therefore are not automatically due a pension. In order for Johnson to get a pension a previous council would have had to pass an ordinance giving mayors that benefit.
An ordinance was never presented to the council proving the requirement that a pension be paid. Based on that and the advice of the AML attorney, the request was denied.
Normally, in order for elected officials in Arkansas to get a pension the governmental body they represent would be a member of the Arkansas Public Employee Retirement System (APERS). The city or county (etc.) would pay monthly into the system for each elected official designated as being eligible for the benefit. Full-time employees of the state, counties and cities of the First Class automatically qualify for the APERS program. Alexander never joined APERS.
OPINION
With all that past history how were previous council members convinced to give Johnson a pension she was not legally entitled to? What strings were pulled?
I can account for one vote, her cousin Dortheria Smith (who did not run for re-election in 2012). But, what about the rest? Especially, those who were constantly pointing out the city doesn't have enough income to keep the general fund and police department afloat. And, those of you who were always saying the budget needed to be cut but, would never propose any cuts; where were you?
Of course, should we really be surprised. Some of the members of the 2012 council were the same ones while complaining about a lack of revenue is passing out raises to the city clerk.
Topic based on comment made by yard-dog following the story After passing population threshold to become a Class-1 city, Alexander returned to Class-2.
the council was just where they always were, trying to make Mayor Mitchell look bad, not about doing their elected (and appointed) jobs for the citizens of the city, and this is why they were all replaced, except for 1, who was unnopposed, because no one seemed to care in his ward,that he was not doing his job, for all of the residents. Is this not politics at its very worst in a small place?
ReplyDeleteI am Louella, Anon # 1: I attended that meeting. There was never a question about budget or 'can we' much less 'should we' just Ms Hammil saying, give it to her, make it $800.00. Please note they sat with their backs to the public. They always sat that way.
ReplyDeleteI notice the new council is turning around, like they might care what we think. We'll see.
Does anyone know what policy we do use for retirements? You say we don't belong to the state program, what is our own city policy?
WOW!! I have lived here for over 25 years, do I qualify for a pension? That is rediculous on the former council, shame on them!!! But what is more rediculous is the fact that the Mayor let Walters RANT on the ethnic background/religious practices of the Native American heratige!! This is appauling and should not be tolarated by anyone. I am open to prayer of any kind, and from what I have seen/heard so should she. Wake up people if the only thing Walters can say about Jack Shoemaker is that he prays wrong, is he the one that died on the cross? REALLY!!! I am so upset!
ReplyDeleteI'm with you mscewcew, I've lived here 32 yrs. and I could use a pension for doing much of nothing. As for Jack, he deserves an apology. From what I were taught we are a FREE country and able to practice the choice of religion we opted for. Common sense should tell anyone what Jack was doing.....REALLY the mental capacity of some people.
ReplyDeleteWhat have we gained since we were Annexed into the City
ReplyDeletein 2006. A BIG FAT NOTHING! Heck we can't even have a
wennie-roast or roast marshmellows at night without being
TICKETED and PAYING A FINE! What has the city done for us?
They take our TAX DOLLARS and give it to an UNDESERVING
EX-MAYOR at the sum of 800.00 DOLLARS per MONTH. I think its TIME
that WE THE PEOPLE take steps to DE-ANNEX from the so called CITY.
YARD DOG SOUNDS LIKE A GREAT IDEA! SOMEONE HELP US FIND OUT HOW!!
ReplyDeleteWe have to get enough property owners interested to begin a petition. In the ARML Namdbook, look under 'Separation'
ReplyDeleteTwo points;
ReplyDelete1-If someone would actually read the open burning ordinance (like the firefighters or police) I think it exempts cooking food, as long as you are not burning building materials.
2-assuming separation (de-annexation) results in returning to the county that would send us back to having our streets maintained by the county (something we in the higher altitudes never got a lot of) and we would again be under the occasional watchful eye of the sheriff's department. The worse part would be the loss of a fire department. How do we compensate for that?
1. Not familiar with cooking or not, but I think it is pretty useless to have a burn permit and not be able to burn debris.
Delete2. de-annexation or detachment is a viable alternative. Sheriff usually responds first anyway, and at least they are legally trained. The fire department has to respond as well..
Personally, I really like hte sound of "The City of Woodland Hills."