October 7, 2009

Secret pay hike draws criticism for BHA

A secret 5 percent pay hike awarded to the Bristol Housing Authority’s director in June drew harsh criticism Wednesday.
Mayor Art Ward said he was upset and bewildered that housing commissioners would give Mitzy Rowe a 5 percent pay hike in the middle of a recession.
“I don’t see how they could not have realized” the need for them “to demonstrate the severity of the conditions” in Bristol’s economy by keeping any salary hikes minimal, the mayor said.
“Everybody around us is not getting raises,” said Ward, who voted this year to slash the mayor’s pay by 5 percent in the coming term to ensure the city’s leader sets the right tone.
Rowe received her pay hike to $100,000 annually in a closed-door executive session in June after the board reached a consensus to hike her salary by 5 percent. The decision was never ratified in public until Tuesday night, after city Councilor Ken Cockayne and reporters began asking questions about it.
“It was really an oversight,” said Brian Wolverton, the chairman of the housing commission. “There was never any intent to keep it out of the public forum.”
Wolverton said that Rowe, who declined to comment, got a raise starting July 1 because of her outstanding performance in the job and because the authority could afford to pay her. He said nobody talked about whether it was appropriate to hike the salary so much during hard times.
‘Honestly, if someone brought it to the table that evening and said maybe this wouldn’t look so good, I would have given it consideration, but honestly it just didn’t come up that night,” Wolverton said.
Cockayne said that in “this tough economy,” when the city and state governments are asking workers for concessions and “the federal government is up to its eyeballs in debt,” he questions whether it is “morally right to take a 5 percent increase.”
Cockayne said that Rowe should not have received more than the 3 percent pay hike that BHA workers got this year.
“A fair raise would have been what the workers below her received,” Cockayne said. “If they’re good for a 3 percent raise, then why wouldn’t the director be good for a 3 percent raise?”
Wolverton said the panel wanted to give Rowe an increase over and above the norm to reward her for a solid performance in a difficult job.
Though housing commissioners said the failure to record in the minutes that Rowe received a raise was an oversight, several officials said privately it was done deliberately to avoid letting the BHA workers’ union know how much more the director would receive.
The commission didn’t want to complicate negotiations, the officials said.
Wolverton said it’s possible they meant to keep it secret.”We may have been glibly instructed” to keep it quiet until negotiations were over with the union, he said, but he doesn’t remember it.
“That would be true for the management increases” generally, he added.
The housing panel was told this week by its attorney it did not have to vote in public because there was no dissent about the pay hike, but opted to do it anyway, Wolverton said.
“We decided it was just a matter of good form to officiate it in the form of a vote,” Wolverton said.
The Connecticut Freedom of Information Commission’s Valicia Hamon said Wednesday she urged Vitrano to push the commissioners to vote in public because it would ratify the solid performance review done behind closed doors.
She said, though, that it doesn’t appear an improper vote was taken in executive session in June because it was “really a performance review” more than a discussion about pay levels.
“The executive session wasn’t about how much. It was about how great,” Hamon said.
It did, however, result in a pay hike that Rowe began receiving in July without public notice.
Wolverton said the commission is establishing new procedures to make sure it evaluates managers in the right way and awards raises in public in the future. Transparency is crucial, Wolverton said.
Wolverton said he regrets the way this was handled.
“It was a very regrettable chain of events, I think,” Wolverton said.
Ward said the housing authority operates separately from the city government, but because the mayor appoints commissioners, he felt “a moral obligation” to speak out against the raise that Rowe received.
He said that his own decision to support a 5 percent pay cut for whoever is elected mayor next month shows the magnitude of the fiscal crisis that’s hit the community.
Taking a 5 percent salary increase in such times, Ward said is wrong.
“They really need to be cognizant of the effect on the community” that so large a pay hike can create, the mayor said.

*******
Copyright 2009. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com

34 comments:

Anonymous said...

Steve, you may recall that I called BHA unethical and shady a LONG time ago in a post on your blog where I talked about how they had 10+ units in the dutton heights project open for over a year and weren't filling them...meanwhile tons of people are in desperate need of affordable housing. This BHA needs some new leadership and the City or State or HUD should step in. This doesn't surprise me one bit. Det.Brian Suchinski is the only person whos on the up and up on the BHA commission if you ask me....he should be elected director

Tim Gamache said...

Keeping pay increases secret until negotiations with the union are complete "would be true for management increases generally."Can't say I'm comfortable with that proceedure.IF the Authority TRULY wants transparency,ALL negotiations for wages,be it management or rank and file should be done in a public forum.Certainly NOT in a closed door executive session.My gut tells me this was by no means ,an OVERSIGHT.Given the sacrifice, concessions and hardships the present economy has caused most citizens to endure,I find it incredulous the Director would even consider taking such a significant raise in good consceous(sp?)

Anonymous said...

Why do we have a liasion to the BHA, and other boards, if they don't keep the Mayor and the Council informed?

Isn't Cockayne the liasion?
Does he attend meetings?
Why didn't he speak out?
Or he he still under Schaffricks tutelege and control?

Anonymous said...

Good leadership from Mayor Draw, as usual.

Anonymous said...

The mayor has to take a pay cut because the City finances are in the tank... not because they want to display solidarity with the rest of the economy.

Anonymous said...

It's nice for once to see Councilman Cockayne supporting some local union members.

That being said, it's very clear here what was done was an intentional deception. If I were Ward I would replace the whole damned board.

Between Schraffik's "deregulation" of administraion, the leaving of multiple family units vacant, trying to sell off neighborhoods off to private companies, and now this it's time for some change at BHA.

Anonymous said...

Inmates running the Asylum!

Anonymous said...

This is a non issues. My work gave me a 4% raise, because they are making money! Some business are still making money - and it seems the BHA is as well. So drop it already. Lets ask everyone in Bristol that got a raise and if its over 3% we put them on this blog and embarrass them, sound like a plan? I understand the issue of not having a public vote, but it seems there was no law broken, so what the hell is the issue?

Ken Cockayne loves to see his name in the paper I think especially around election time!

Anonymous said...

12:59- nobody does labor negotiations in public. The final outcome becomes public, but not the negotiations themselves, and that's true at all levels of government and business. Get real.

Anonymous said...

@ 2:39- misery loves company!

Anonymous said...

1:35 poster,

if you knew anything you'd know that being a liason Cockayne isn't allowed into executive sessions. READ the article it will tell you that no votes where taken when they came out. That being said HOW would Cockayne know about the raise? Again if you read it was Cockayne who was questioning this! Also, how do you know Ward wasn't informed as to what was going on.

Anonymous said...

In this economy many businesses have frozen wages, are not paying bonuses, cutting salaries and are even asking employees to take unpaid 1 - 2 week leaves. Business are doing this to stay in business. So this issue should draw criticism. Government is funded by tax payers and when times are difficult then Government should adjust accordingly and just raising taxes isn't the answer.

Anonymous said...

Steve,

Isn't the fact that they didn't vote on this in public a FOIA violation?

If they just approved it by vote this week then I believe that it could not become legally in force until then which means Ms. Rowe should payback the raise from 7/1/09 to the date it was officially approved.

This whole thing is intentional and criminal.

Anonymous said...

So wait a second... when times were good and businesses were handing out bonuses like candy, were public employees given any kind of equity? Or is 3% the unofficial cap for anyone in public office?

And people complain that public employees aren't motivated... why in the world would you want to work hard in government if the public won't even allow your employers to reward you?!?!?! You'd be nuts NOT to just sit back and collect the check, since you can't get fired for not working and you can't get a bonus for working hard!

Man, what a lousy sector to work in! Vox populi...

Anonymous said...

4:13- nope. Most cities and towns approve raises simply as part of the budget, without any specific discussion of who's getting what. Raises are personnel actions and they're subject to some level of confidentiality. Any of it is FOI-able, but a lot of it doesn't have to take place in public session. Same with labor negotiations, same with real estate negotiations.

And retro-active pay raises are given all the time. Any time a union contract is approved following the expiration date of its predecessor, that's a retro-active increase. No law against that.

So to call it criminal is bogus.

Anonymous said...

4:30: You forget that all public employee contracts (which contain the raises) MUST be approved by a vote. Yes, the negotiations are not public but the vote and contract most certainly is.

Anonymous said...

1:35 PM

i think you RIGHT...how come he was investigating if he is the city liason....i heard he is a -no show- at the BHA meetings....now that the elections are aproaching he is questioning things??? Steve check his attendance records...let's see

Anonymous said...

Bring back Storts

Anonymous said...

i got a 4% increase at work and i am NOT giving it back. i have to take care of my family.

the bha people are not running for City Council or the Mayor's office. they are tax paying working people!

enough said!

Anonymous said...

What exactly did Ward and Cockayne do wrong? This board does not answer to the City. Yes Ward appoints it's members and Cockayne is the liaison, but I'm still confused at the connection people on here are trying to make. Sounds like regardless of Cockayne's attendance he has no power. Also, it appears regardless of attendance he caught wind of something not right and questioned it. Ward caught wind of it and made a good statement about it. What am I missing? Where is the story other then the BHA kept the raise hush?

Anonymous said...

Ken,

Where were you when you were supposed to be watching things?

Or did you think that there wasn't enough publicity?

Or were you protecting your good buddy Schafrick?

Anonymous said...

I would have respected Mayor Ward's if he had the courage to recognize the great things you do for the poor people in this town. The seniors like you and we are glad you take the time to help us with our issues. First I would like to say tha Mrs. Rowe is an outstanding resident in our community. She gets involved in causes that no one wants to be bother with. She shows that she cares for the less fortunate. She takes the time and gets involved with our issues and get them resolved.
I do not know if you check this blog but i want you to know that we do appreciate what you do in our community. If not, I hope someone here lets you know. and Mayor Ward she deserves every penny she gets.it's not her doing that got us in the mess we are in. it make no sense to me why you want her to pay for it. If you knew better, you know that your pay cut will not help us neither. shame on you.

god bless Mrs. Rowe.

Anonymous said...

7:24

If, If, Cockayne did his job and attended meetings, he would have been aware of this sooner and prevented this from being such a controversial issue.

Why doesn;t he attend meetings?

Anonymous said...

LOL @ 9:19! Must be Mr. Rowe that made the comment. Oh and by the way, there are still a ton of apartments vacant and not being filled. In fact, I know someone that applied for a place over 18 months ago and just recently received a letter saying that they are on a waiting list. How nice of them to help.

Anonymous said...

9:01pm: What does cockayne need to protect his buddy Schaffrick?

Gary didn't vote for the raise, he wasn't at the meeting.

Anonymous said...

11:16

And why wasn't he at such a critical meeting?

Anonymous said...

If you all knew anything before you spoke, you'd know that empty units DON'T work in favor of housing. They do not receive the federal stipend for a unit unless it is filled. So empty units HURT them, not help them. Have you SEEN some of the people that live in housing? Some units are in such bad shape they are in desperate need of lots of repairs before they can be rented again. Stop talking out of your back ends and know your facts first.

Anonymous said...

October 7, 2009 11:16 PM:
Cockayne doesn't gibe two s___s about Schaffrick, rightly.

Ward is right on this. Five per cent is appalling.

Anonymous said...

cockayne and schaffirck..two time loosers...
go and get a real job! do something...you are not fooling anyone...

Anonymous said...

don`t let ward fool you.

Anonymous said...

If you all knew anything before you spoke, you'd know that empty units DON'T work in favor of housing. They do not receive the federal stipend for a unit unless it is filled. So empty units HURT them, not help them. Have you SEEN some of the people that live in housing? Some units are in such bad shape they are in desperate need of lots of repairs before they can be rented again. Stop talking out of your back ends and know your facts first.




Have you seen some of the people that live in housing? Seriously? That is such a loaded, God-awful thing to say. Who the hell do you think you are.

And for the record the BHA has been making up for the loss in not renting units that ARE up for rental by raising the remaining tenants rents. How do I know they're up to be used. B/C BHA sends in people to fix them up AFTER they determine if they have to refund the deposit.

Anonymous said...

Cockayne

If you did your job, this might have been prevented.

Anonymous said...

7:01- yeah, such a disaster. Someone got a raise. I'm sorry, but does the City publish every raise it gives out? The State certainly doesn't. Find me a set of minutes that states what the Secretary of DCF makes, or if or when she got a raise. No, it's easier to pick on the little guys next door because they're within reach and more likely to say "sorry" when they slip up. I think the treatment of this issue as some kind of monstrous fiasco is what's disgusting. 3-5% raises are standard for companies that acknowledge performance. If you don't work for a company that acknowledges performance, I'm willing to bet you don't have a lot of star performers.

Anonymous said...

6:46


You missed the point!
If the raise was justified, why wasn't it done properly?
Since it wasn't done properly, why didn't Cockayne point it out then?

Maybe he should take a cut in pay!!!

IF he is reelected.