Based upon the recent publicity regarding the bonus awarded by the Board of Education to the Superintendent of Schools in the amount of $10,000, and my reaction to his bonus, I find it necessary to respond to the allegations and comments voiced by the media and my opponents.
The Constitution of the State of Connecticut, Article XI, Section 2 prohibits any elected official from receiving a raise and or bonus during his term in office for which he was elected.
Section 7.17.1 of the Charter of the City of Shelton provides that the Board of Aldermen shall not increase the compensation or benefits of any elected official during his term in office.
These principals are the rule of law by which elected officials must abide. My knowledge and understanding of these laws and requirements have been with me since I took office in 1991. My sole purpose and intent in raising the issue of a $10,000 bonus was to bring attention to the absurdity of the Board of Education’s action of granting the Superintendent of Schools a $10,000 bonus in this economic climate when at the same time the Board of Education is laying off employees and requiring students to pay in order to participate in extra-curricular activities.
When questioned, the Board of Education responded that the Superintendent had met certain performance standards and it was “in his contract.” My reaction to this absurdity was to try to draw attention to the fact that every employee in the city is doing his or her job and therefore, using the Board of Education’s logic, why should the superintendent receive a bonus and not every other employee, including myself? This was not a request for an increase in pay but simply an attempt to draw attention to the fact that the Board of Education has granted this bonus when at the same time indicating that they do not have sufficient funds or need additional funds.
I should have understood, after 20 years in office, that my political opponents and, in some cases, the media, would not address the issue of the bonus received by the Superintendent of Schools but would again attack me personally. I know my political opponents and the media were well aware of the prohibition of increasing an elected official’s salary during his term as are the members of the Board of Aldermen. Therefore, they understood that the sole purpose of raising this issue was to bring to light how ridicules the action of the Board of Education was in granting the $10,000 bonus to the Superintendent.
However, that issue has taken a back seat to the personal attacks against me. I suppose the mistake I made was in the manner the question was phrased “if the Superintendent got a $10,000 bonus, why not me too?”
I should have said, “We are all required to do our jobs to the best of our ability. Why should the Superintendent get a bonus for doing what he was hired to do?”
Editor’s Note: Video from the Jan. 25 Shelton Aldermen meeting.
The Mayor’s sarcasm aimed toward bringing attention to the Superintendent’s contract with BOE, was not readily apparent to the general public or reporters present. Even the BOA was duped into forwarding the concept onward for consideration by the Finance Committee, which the Mayor didn’t put a halt to. But attention it did bring to the contract, so let’s delve into those details.
The Supt was hired in 2009. While negotiations for contract are subject to exec session, motions to finally engage the employee are not.
BOE minutes from 2009Jun17, last pg and action: “Thomas Minotti moved in accordance with Section 10-157 of the Connecticut General
Statutes, and subject to the finalization of contract terms by the Board Chair, that the
Board appoint Freeman Burr as Superintendent of Schools, effective on or about
August 1, 2009, and further that the Board Chair be authorized to enter into a contract
of employment with Freeman Burr, on behalf of the Board; seconded by Timothy
Walsh; unanimous vote cast by the Board; motion carried.”
This is referring to the Supt original contract where the “bonus” terms would have been defined (unless his contract was modified in the past 2yrs). It’s thus documented that the BOE ceded negotiation of final terms to the Chairman.
The Chairman was Win Oppel, registered Republican.
So, to give clarity: The Mayor is raising concern on the concept of awarding bonus for aspects of performance that should be part of the employee’s basic job description.
To specifically answer the Mayor’s “Why should the Supt get a bonus for doing what he was hired to do?”
Because the Republican Chairman negotiated such final terms.
BOE minutes: http://bit.ly/gdhaul
Forget the raise,lets talk about how poorly streets in shelton have been plowed. I have called the mayors office to complain cars haven’t been towed since the first snowfall of the winter and they are still there. They haven’t done anything. His parking space at city hall is clear to the blacktop but you cant drive down prospect ave or hill st. There is a truck owned by construction company and 3 other cars near 90 Hill St. that haven’t moved since before the first snow. What is he waiting for? You cant get ambulance or fire truck down either street.Every other town has parking bans and are towing except Shelton…must be because we aren’t in the red.I was told two storms ago that they are trying to locate owners rather than tow…how when you can’t see the plates?If Prospect doesn’t get cleared soon,I’m parking in his space at city hall and will walk home! Next I’m calling news channel 8 to come take pictures of cars on Hill ST and Howe Ave.
@Kristie I agree snow in Shelton is embarrassing
2. fire hydrant in front of city hall is still buried in the snow
and this does not include the life safety issues if an ambulance has to go down Prospect Av