It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Texas officials approve a huge pay raise... for themselves.

page: 1
12
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 04:10 PM
link   

County Commissioners Give Themselves Substantial Pay Raises Monday.


LUBBOCK, TX -- Despite negative comments and at least one negative opinion poll, Lubbock County Commissioners approved a pay raise for themselves and certain other elected officials on Monday.

In the case of County Judge Tom Head the raise is 42 percent - taking him from $77,450 to $109,925 yearly. Head was the only 'no' vote Monday.

Commissioners Bubba Sedeno, Mark Heinrich, Bill McCay and Patti Jones voted for themselves to have a base pay increase of more than 30 percent. Head voted against the budget and spoke out against the raises in the budget. The raises passed by a vote of 4 - 1.

“Historically, I’ve been against pay raises,” Head told EverythingLubbock.com by phone late in the day. “I’m especially against this one because it’s so astronomical.”

Yah so errrr, what do we do here?

I mean, are they trying to piss us off or do they simply view us as such scum that they no longer care to hide their out of control behavior?




posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 04:14 PM
link   
wow
42% raise for the only guy to vote no?

Lubbock is pretty crappy place for those who have never had the pleasure.

Pretty much from Lubbock down to El Paso could be vaporized, and it wouldn't be "THAT" big of a deal.
edit on 17-9-2014 by Lysergic because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 04:17 PM
link   
i'd like to think he held his own, as opposed to merely swinging the only 'negative vote' to instill faith in his integrity to others.

HE STILL GOT THE 42% RAISE.... despite and no matter his 'vote'.

dunno.... seems suspect. to me.

???

[ETA]

"you. the one who stands to benefit the most, vote 'no'.... so it's not 'unanimous' and we'll take the heat, if need be, for our yeas, in favor of." - just like congress does each year with the 'cost of inflation raise'..... all the while denying the same to social security recipients.

.... and they care about their constituents. - mah ace.



no. i'm neither on or eligible for another 15 years or so, either.... it'll have been dis/re-solved by then. i'm sure.

???

yeah. right.


edit on 9/17/2014 by 12m8keall2c because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 04:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: 12m8keall2c
i'd like to think he held his own, as opposed to merely swinging the only 'negative vote' to instill faith in his integrity to others.

HE STILL GOT THE 42% RAISE.... despite and no matter his 'vote'.

dunno.... seems suspect. to me.

???



Just so he can't be painted as complicit...nice show?

Perhaps election time will see him as a hero in the public eye..."The 42% was forced on me!"

Peace



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 04:34 PM
link   
Just like in Animal Farm and the Pigs there.

Motto is, "it is good to be the King."

Derek



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 04:35 PM
link   
a reply to: gladtobehere

Libertarians should be happy. Dogs are eating dogs, winners are winning because they deserve to. Life is so simple.

Libertarians should declare their own holiday. And on that day, everyone should burn their garbage on their front lawn to show what true liberty looks like.
edit on 17-9-2014 by InverseLookingGlass because: spelling



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 04:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: jude11

Just so he can't be painted as complicit...nice show?


don't really think it needs any further 'explanation' guy's a dolt.



but prolly closer to right than wrong.

???



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 04:46 PM
link   
He voted no, against raising his pay. That could be taken two ways- he wanted the people to believe he was against it, or wanted the people to see the others for the idiots they are.

I guess time will tell what happens. He could return his 'extra' income to the state, somehow, such as placing it into a trust fund or similar. Last I heard, it is also possible for any employee to deny a raise in pay, much like it's possible to deny a decrease in pay and/or not agree to a demotion.



These little shenanigans are giving me cause to think about possibly entering the political arena where I live. And one thing I would insist is my wages cover my cost of living and nothing more. That should be codified somewhere in the state and nation's Constitutions that none will receive any pay in excess of their cost of living- housing, food, and transportation to and from the 'meeting place', i.e. where they get together to discuss and make laws, and hear court cases in situations where judges are employees of the city / county / state. Profiteering should not be tolerated.



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 05:15 PM
link   
"Go ahead and vote me a raise, and I'll vote no so it looks like I'm against it." ....As the judge probably quietly celebrates after his raise is voted in. What a joke.



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 05:21 PM
link   
a reply to: gladtobehere

Let see the last time I had a 30-40% pay raise.....FREAKIN NEVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
this vote should of came from the tax payer not the ones getting the raises.



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 05:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: WeRpeons
"Go ahead and vote me a raise, and I'll vote no so it looks like I'm against it." ....As the judge probably quietly celebrates after his raise is voted in. What a joke.

Are you going to be here, eating your words and apologizing, if what you apparently see as the unlikely, if not impossible outcome comes to pass?

It's not entirely unheard of for some people to forego wages and return such to the system, is it?

So as I imply above, this could go either way. If anyone deserves a second chance for anything, so does this bloke. So until you have evidence suggesting either outcome, maintaining tight lips is your best option.



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 05:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lysergic
wow
42% raise for the only guy to vote no?

Lubbock is pretty crappy place for those who have never had the pleasure.

Pretty much from Lubbock down to El Paso could be vaporized, and it wouldn't be "THAT" big of a deal.


Whoa there amigo....

I still have a place out by the airport growing cotton and onions. But I don't live there so....

The Lubbock politico have an arrogant streak as big as Texas.

edit on 17-9-2014 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 05:58 PM
link   


Are you going to be here, eating your words and apologizing, if what you apparently see as the unlikely, if not impossible outcome comes to pass?

It's not entirely unheard of for some people to forego wages and return such to the system, is it?

So as I imply above, this could go either way. If anyone deserves a second chance for anything, so does this bloke. So until you have evidence suggesting either outcome, maintaining tight lips is your best option.
a reply to: abecedarian

Sorry, I don't have as much faith as you in the political system of this or any other country. They're all in it to fill their pockets on the back of hard working people. I'm sure if he was that much against his raise he would have put up enough public outcry that his raise would have been removed before coming to a vote.

I've been around a long time to watch as politicians preserve their pensions and raise their salaries well above the private sector, while cutting hardworking government workers pensions and salaries.



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 08:31 PM
link   
Be fair - this is libertarian supply-and-demand in action - if you get the power your get to supply your own demand!!

what else would you expect in Texas - EVERYTHING is bigger in Texas....including corruption!!



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 08:55 PM
link   
If he truly doesn't want the raise, he should donate the extra 42% to other workers in the city/county.



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 09:01 PM
link   
I'm not suggesting anyone have faith; only reserve opinion until opinion is warranted. To pass a premature judgment post-haste, is just as detrimental as a politician acting solely out of self-interest.

I'm sure you'd rather not be shot simply because you and your vehicle match the descriptions from robbery down the street, right?



originally posted by: WeRpeons



Are you going to be here, eating your words and apologizing, if what you apparently see as the unlikely, if not impossible outcome comes to pass?

It's not entirely unheard of for some people to forego wages and return such to the system, is it?

So as I imply above, this could go either way. If anyone deserves a second chance for anything, so does this bloke. So until you have evidence suggesting either outcome, maintaining tight lips is your best option.
a reply to: abecedarian

Sorry, I don't have as much faith as you in the political system of this or any other country. They're all in it to fill their pockets on the back of hard working people. I'm sure if he was that much against his raise he would have put up enough public outcry that his raise would have been removed before coming to a vote.

I've been around a long time to watch as politicians preserve their pensions and raise their salaries well above the private sector, while cutting hardworking government workers pensions and salaries.

And I'm sure you flubbed using "hardworking" and "government workers" in the same sentence.



edit on 9/17/2014 by abecedarian because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 09:08 PM
link   
Don't worry folks..its ok to give yourself a raise while your already doing well, just make sure you don't help those at minimum wage or the whole thing is over



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 09:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: vonclod
Don't worry folks..its ok to give yourself a raise while your already doing well, just make sure you don't help those at minimum wage or the whole thing is over

You need to get out and look around, and look to history.

In 1980, my father brought home around 1100 per month. This covered the $430 house payment- a 4 bedroom house on 1/2 acre mind you; paid for gasoline, utilities and such with about 20% of his earnings applicable to savings accounts.

30 years later, you can't find a 1 bedroom apartment in a decent locale for under $600- 4 bedrooms will fetch well in excess of $1800; gasoline has quadrupled, and one cannot easily live on $14000 annually without government assistance.

What also has quadrupled over the past 25 years? Minimum wage. It doesn't take much more than a 5th grade understanding of math to figure things out.



edit on 9/17/2014 by abecedarian because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2014 @ 10:19 PM
link   
It is ridiculous that any government officials would be allowed to vote to raise their own salaries, at the expense of the public of course. Congress does the same thing. How is this not a conflict of interest? Either the people should vote based on political performance, or government officials not associated with those whose salaries are in jeopardy should make the decision. Or just have a salary that only changes due to inflation. Why would public officials ever feel that they deserve a raise? They should be there for the public good, and should receive a base salary. They are essentially robbing the public in a way, and this is a great insight into political corruption on a small scale. We are supposed to let them police their own ranks, when of course they are going to vote to benefit themselves.
edit on 9/17/14 by JiggyPotamus because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 10:49 AM
link   
I hate Lubbock. My son goes to Tech, so we drive up from time to time. It is the second worst drive in the area (second only to the 5 hour misery that is a drive over to El Paso).

Lubbock is all about pretense. "Fake it till you make it". Pseudo socialites and 50 year old frat boys.




top topics



 
12
<<   2 >>

log in

join