Alderman Wants Gasoline Allowance
Jake Wagman of the Post-Dispatch has reported on a new bill introduced at the Board of Aldermen today:
Even at City Hall, high gas prices have drivers concerned.
That’s why Alderman Charles Q. Troupe has a relief plan — for aldermen, at least.
Troupe plans on introducing a bill at tomorrow’s meeting that would give alderman an “expense account†for their fuel costs.
While “riding the ward†is a staple of aldermanic duty — right up there with returning phone calls and sending birthday wishes — it seems unlikely that Troupe’s colleagues would endorse his plan to charge taxpayers for their gas.
In looking at Board Bill 83 we see how much Troupe is seeking:
Each alderman shall receive a monthly sum equal to four hundred (400) miles multiplied by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) standard mileage rate for business miles driven.
The 2008 IRS rate is 50.5 cents per mile. So that is an extra $202 per alderman per month. That comes to just under $68K per year at the current IRS rate.
Aldermen are not well compensated until you consider the job is part time — $32,000/year plus a $4,200 expense allowance. Many aldermen have full time jobs that give them enough freedom to make day meetings. Do we really think each of the 28 aldermen are driving 400 miles for aldermanic business each and every month? I don’t think so.
Like everyone else the aldermen will need to find more efficient ways of getting around. At least one alderman, Phyllis Young, drives a Toyota Prius Hybrid. Should she get the same allowance as someone that drives a less efficient vehicle? What if an alderman only drives 175 for business in a given month? What if they just buy their own damn gas like everyone else does? If they don’t like it they can seek out alternatives.
Think they could cycle for better health and to be closer to their constituents…and it’s free? Whatever they are currently being compensated for lessons in wisdom amplification techniques should be doubled.
How about a measure to give them each a bus pass?
Oh wait, that would actually require that they have personal contact with their residents. My bad :whoops:
They should all be given skateboards.
Why don’t they full out an expense reports like the rest of the world!
In 2006, state legislators were paid $31,351 + $5700 per diem = ~37,000 + mileage reimbursement. Our alderman are paid about $36,000. And they live within walking distance of most places in their wards and don’t have to stay overnight in hotels or drive long distances, right? I hope this gets squashed in a hurry.
I would be all for Aldermanic compensation to include a metro pass. Even if it gets abused for non-government purposes, at least that’s one less car on the roads.
Do this guy not realize civic center stop (which building is the civic center any way?) is across the street from his place of employment? The 2 hour pass/multi use transfer is quite helpful (purchase 10 for 20) and yes the whole month will only cost you 60.
What a joke! I would might be for this if there wasn’t 28 of those worthless MF’ers. Why cant they ride the bus, metro or walk like their constituents? Why do they have to drive everywhere? Is it because their wards look like Beirut? $68,000 of St. Louisan’s tax dollars! 50 bucks a week to fill up their fat cat tanks! SCREW THEM! This is an insult and another reason we should cut down the number of alderman. What the hell have they done to deserve this?
Alderman are part of the ruling elite. The ironic anti-spam word of this post is “reform”. Steve, your anti-spam words are more psychic than a Magic 8 Ball!
Hey wait, I didn’t have a spam word.
But thats ok, because the 8 above aren’t going to like what I have to say. While I would be against the 400 miles as a rule, I wouldn’t be opposed to, say, 50 miles. Comments about taking the bus are not realistic in that buses do not go up and down every street in a ward. Nor can scooters work in rain, snow, or when it’s 100 out.
Some wards are really spread out, others very compact, like the one I’m in (15th), but still there is a lot of going up and down blocks and countless meetings, most in the evenings.
I know 50 miles seems a lot, but that is only 25 – 1 mile trips. Some alderman work very hard, some not at all. Some do vasts amounts of outreach, others do none. There has to be a balance.
i like to keep it positive, but at this moment i would like to introduce a bill that, if passed, would allow me or any stl resident to back slap any alderman who suggest ridiculous bills such as this.
.
give em a bus pass…geez…
.
slap
Interesting the proposal is from Troupe who at one time was an officer of — your guessed it — The Amalgamated Transit Union Local 788 — who represent the bus and MetroLink riders.
Cars + Poor city planning + Sleaze = da’ Lou, the apex of human innovation.
I’m curious to know what he drives now. I’m guessing something in the Tahoe/Yukon/Suburban range.
Wasnt there an article in the Suburban Journals regarding the sorry state of the city’s budget and that we will be in the hole $16 Million next year? The stipened for gas may not seem like much but in the large scheme of things it’s yet another expenditure that is not needed during these lean times. Sorry Alderman, your gonna just have to suck this one up for the public good or you run the risk of getting whacked hard by your constiuents next election
Take a read about city’s budget shortfall for ’09
http://southsidejournal.stltoday.com/articles/2008/05/23/news/sj2tn20080520-0521ssj-budget0.ii1.txt
Well with the interesting bit of news this morning…you didn’t hear? One of the alderman got nabbed by a red light camera and now wants them abolished as they are just money machines for the city.
That news has jaded me about the request for transport funds. So I’m changing my mind (am I allowed to do that?) I wouldn’t be opposed to a red light camera in every ward. They can use that money for transportation “issues” that arise.
And I don’t want to hear about the evils of red light cameras. If you can’t do the time (pay the fine), then don’t break the law.
Fat cat in a top hat/Thinks he’s an aristocrat.
How about driver/bodyguards to drive them around their wards? Maybe with an accompanying brass band (to go with the brass balls) to herald the appearance of the empero- uh, er, alderman, as (s)he comes down the avenue? A muscular advance man, flamboyantly attired in the heighth of Roman fashion, could proceed with a megaphone: Hear ye, rabble! Clear ye the sidewalks, urchins! Off with your hat or your head, ye slinking knaves! Know ye not that thine alderman passes nearby?
Looks like it is time to make some phone calls to kill this stupid proposal.
Phone number for the Aldermen: (314) 622-3287
Phone number for the President’s Office: (314) 622-4114
At least the sheriff deputy/bodyguard thing seemed like it had a legitimate security purpose. This gas allowance is just a perk which is undeserved considering how much we are all paying at the pump.
I think Steve offers the most sensible response to this aldermanic chutzpah (that’s Yiddish for cojones): Let them cope, like everybody else.
If our current economic/political/environmental situation shows us anything, it’s that we can’t just keep on doin’ what we’re doin’ and expect somebody else to pay the cost. What this proposal is about, really, is aldermanic refusal to change behavior in the face of changed realities. Why should citizens pay for their preference not to have to rethink their transportation choices, just like everybody else?
Some solutions are obvious: Since we’re all going to the same meeting/luncheon/conference, why not go together and split the cost–or take turns driving/paying? Surely many trips could be planned more efficiently, so that, for example, an alderman–if s/he took the trouble–might find that the bus or rail route was not substantially less direct than taking the car. (I find that in my own community, it’s invariably those who never use public transit are the most vocal in their condemnation of it.) And surely some trips of fewer than five or six blocks, say, don’t have to involve a vehicle at all, for most people, much of the time.
More generally, though, in my opinion public servants should not be shielded from the economic facts of life their constituents confront daily.
^Exactly, why should they be compensated for the problems they helped to create? To do so only incentivizes them to make more of the same mistakes. Car pooling, etc. is a step in the right direction but not enough to break the mode. The choices: mass transit, shoe leather or bicycle. Only then can they be enlighten to how our sidewalks and walkable environments have been ignored by their car culture mentality.
Denver perspective – their city council members receive either mileage or a leased vehicle (their choice), many times now either a Prius or an Escape Hybrid. Then, again, they have 15 people representing 500,000, not 28 representing 350,000, in what’s considered to be a full-time position. I’m neutral on whether they “deserve” it (in either city) – 400 miles a month may sound like a lot, but it works out to 100 miles a week or 20 5-mile (average) trips, which isn’t too far from reality, whether you count their home, place of employment or city hall as their base of operations and the number of meetings they’re expected to attend.
.
The two issues that do bother me are voting for one’s own pay raise (which this essentially is) and the lower-profile use of city resources and vehicles that is already occuring. Spin it however you want, but another $200 a month is a pay raise, no different than calling something a fee instead of a tax increase. The rule in Colorado was/is that elected politicians could vote to increase their salaries, but they could not receive any increase until they were successfully reelected to a second term (no third terms – term limits).
.
The other issue is the number of city employees that already have the use of take-home vehicles, “in case they need to respond to an emergency”. Since I live in SW city, aka the blue ghetto, I know where more than a few live. I also regularly follow someone from Lambert Airport who’s taking their city SUV to (I assume home in) SW City every afternoon. The reality is that very few emergencies require an off-duty response (critical city agencies, like the airport and the police and fire departments, are staffed 24/7), so what we’re doing is just providing “free” commutes to agency managers 99%+ of the time. The good news is that the IRS is now requiring this to be documented as income; the bad news is that this “free” benefit is costing us taxpayers a lot more as gas prices ratchet up. The bottom line, just like the Board of Aldermen, is that city workers are receiving (or wanting to receive) a hidden pay raise on top of the 3%+ annual scost-of-living raise they’re already receiving. In my mind, we should just say no . . .
I’ll add my voice to the howls of derision. Give them a monthly Metro Pass and take away the parking for ALL city employees except Police, Fire and other “fisrt responders”. If the speed and convenience of driving an auto is important enough to them, they should pay for the convenience. I know I had to when I lived/worked downtown. On the matter of “driving your ward”: isn’t it much friendlier to walk your ward? We have 28 of these alderpersons. None of the wards are that large that they can’t walk to most events. The salary for the position is intended to cover such personal sacrifices and expenses. I know many people on the local neighborhood assn and even dog park board who expend considerable personal time and no compensation is ever given. It’s just “giving back”.