John Shay's Salary?

[Eve Alone]

What was Ludington's City Manager John Shay's reported salary, as paid by local taxpayers, in 2008, according to his W-2 for that year?  I know; I just want to see whether anyone else knows, can accurately guess, or think they can find that information. 

Be careful, the total might differ from what clues you can find on the web from the city website or the Daily News.  Here's links to both of those sources:

http://www.ludington.mi.us/

http://www.ludingtondailynews.com/

 

Don't include the hefty amount of fringe benefits he gets, just the salary. Reportedly, he has frozen city worker's salaries the last two years.  Is there any reason he would be so reluctant to show Ludington citizens the W-2s for 2009 and 2010 without placing unlawful fees on an FOIA request?

[XLFD]

Jackie Steckel, who's lived in Ludington for awhile, and served under the previous CM Jim Miller.  Her 2008 wages appear later in this thread.

[Guidothesemipsuedocaptitalistpig]

The local government learns the same political smoke and mirrors that the Federal government uses. Hire a non elected third party to do the job and make the calls that you know would be unpopular to your constituents. If they make things go well you get to take the credit for it. If they do something illegal immoral or otherwise unpopular you have the cover when it comes around to election time to say " hey? I didn't know that or I wouldn't have approved of that personally.

While I completely agree an executive type person like a city manager can sometimes manage things better as that is his training. He should not be able to operate without reporting publicly and gaining a consensus for his/her actions. Is this how the life guards got dropped? was this item even debated in the counsel? Or were they all told this is just simply something we can not afford anymore?

Leadership is not simply telling someone what to do.. but insuring they are educated as to why it is the best thing to do. ( building a consensus).

Management is supposed to be about making the ideas presented by leadership happen. Which part of the puzzle here is not working correctly?

[AQUAMAN]

Simply stated, the City of Ludington hierarchy, whether legal, moral, or just plain common sense, acts. It's a long-been common thang to do "whatever we want, lest they/the sheeple come and object" type attitude. I got that verse for verse from Kaye Holman, Greg Dykstra, and Paul Peterson, to name just a few, add Castonia too now that I think about it. Take it or leave it! Be Johnny on the spot at all CC meetings, make your case, or you're out, final, no other questions need be asked. Guess that means the people really don't count if not in attendance for every single issue that they vote on, eh? Back in the day, the elected officials were supposed to vote the way of their constituents, not by the way of the pulpit bullies in charge. Still would like to know the Exact Figure of the CM nowadays too, anyone got that exact figure?

 

[XLFD]

Exactly, Guido, and quite correct, Aquaman.  The CM is a figurehead that can be blamed for when bad things happen; the councilors and mayor do not have to feel the heat at the next election for what unpopular stuff the CM has done. 

They can even use the CM's unpopularity to their advantage.  Kaye Holman was the only CC to vote against re-hiring Shay this last year.  Guess who is the only incumbent CC running for re-election this year?

A look at the votes of the last two years shows that the CC's main concerns are growing their power and looting the taxpayers-- whose properties are losing value, and many are working more for less 'real' money.

[XLFD]

Here are the figures, according to the Ludington City Council minutes:

The reported salary for the CM was $77,648 for 2005.

A 2% raise was reported in the 11-25-05 meeting for 2006, putting him at the reported $79,201.

On 11-27-2006, a new practice was observed: to not report the CM's salary.  I can only conjecture it was because of certain unreported aspects of his remunerations.  It was reported he got a 2% raise, which put him at a $80,785.02 salary for 2007, which is his 2006 salary multiplied by 1.02.  These are screen shotted below.

 

[XLFD]

In 12-3-2007, the council voted him a 3% raise, which would put him at $83,208.57.  But it also remarked that he was getting a lump sum of $1000 to offset lowering the 'contribution to his retirement fund' to 14.7%. 

A Ludington Daily News article on 12-4-07 clarified this "Engblade said the lump-sum payment was made so the city would pay an amount equal to only 14.5 percent of Shay's salary into a retirement account instead of paying 19.7 percent."  The difference of 14.5 to 14.7 notwithstanding, this was somewhat enlightening. 

This makes it sound as if Shay was getting paid his salary, plus up to 19.7% of that salary into his retirement.  But could that be?  Isn't that public money getting paid into the generous retirement account part of what City Hall should be reporting as his salary? 

On 12-22-08, when our representatives decided to vote a 2% raise for him despite a weak economy and a $250,000 burden on the city from the Jack Byers' lawsuit, we have someone explaining to a councilor saying the new raise would be "just over $1600".  Two percent of $80,000 would be $1600.  So even at the end of 2008, City Hall was considering a salary just a little over $80,000.

So was his salary $84,208.57 as stated in late 2007, or that plus a generous retirement package (but not as generous as before) of 14.7% of that?

[XLFD]

Here is John Shay's and Jackie Steckel's (the Asst. City Manager) salaries as reported on their 2008 W-2s.  I do not see where the $87, 798 figure comes from.  If we look at the salary of $84, 208.57 there is a $3500 difference.  If City Hall is adding the 14.5 or 14.7% into his retirement extra, that would be over $12,000, putting him up to $96,000+, not the reported social security/medicare wage of over $100,000 noted on his w-2.  The numbers from the budget below, seem to indicate the 14.7% paid into Shay's retirement from his salary is figured separately from his salary, as the salary figure is close to the added non-retirement salaries of Shay and Steckel.  This is odd, since it does show up as SS/ Medicare wages. 

Nevertheless, when we get past all the faceless 'fringe benefits' in the budget, the City Manager office's two officers get $200,000 in wages and fringes that year.  

Does it seem ethical to report and indicate that the CM's wages are $84,208.57 when the actual IRS-reported wages are $100,095.27-- a $15,886,70 difference-- more than a citizen who works full-time at minimum wage earns per year? 

 

[Eve Alone]

No fair!  Your scanner took the original shots of the W-2s.

The amount of money that the City underreports the City Managers salary could pay the annual wages of four and a half City firefighters or for over two months of having 3 lifeguards patrolling the beaches eight hours a day. 

No wonder they don't report the CMs salary anymore.  With the fringes, hes well over $130K per year.

[AQUAMAN]

$100K + fringe benefits, cell phone, reimbursement for health insurance, city car?, dry cleaning exp.?, fuel reimbursement/DPW fill-up?, and what else? Not bad for a berg of 8,000 people. Some have told me this is about the going rate for the big city CM's, we're talking about populations exceeding 100,000 people +. Methinks Jackie could and would do the CM job for just what she's salaried at now, and take a $25K/yr. or less p-t assistant if necessary, thus reducing and saving the City about $150K. That's not really chickenfeed like the Lifeguards all summer at $22K. Quite revealing X, good research.

[XLFD]

When the City Council meetings and the up-to-date City Code both underreport the wages of the Mayor (by $7800), the City Council members (by $3550), and the City Manager (by $15,900) you gotta believe you're in Copenhagen and somethings just plain rotten.  Bell, California may be just around the corner; all we need is a little more apathy.

[Edie Lindsey]

I know too many families living on less money than his under-reportage difference is. 

I wonder if our resident Councilor, Miss Wanda Marrison, is outraged by this. 

Oh yeah, she's part of the scam too. 

Could you show the CC's and Mayor's W-2 information too?  And could any of those trolls we have that come here unapologetically defending the City by attacking its concerned citizens, explain the differences, as X and Eve has explained the problems?

[XLFD]

In Wanda's defense, she is being paid exactly what has been paid out to City Councilors for several years prior.  The councilor 'scam' was pulled off before 2006.  But as per your request, here's the reported income from all Councilors and the mayor in 2008.  Note that $3600 multiplied by 7 equals $25,200 and when you add the Mayor's salary, of $8150 onto this you get $33,350.  The actual reported wages paid to these people in 2008 according to the 2010 and 2011 Budgets was $30,000.  While this may appear to be a problem-- it isn't-- does anybody know why?