Today’s Press reports that Tony Berns will get a 3% raise because, the LCDC board said, “We all agree that Tony Berns has done an excellent job…”
Tony Berns is the Exec. Director of the LCDC, our town’s urban renewal agency. Tony already makes more than $120,000 base salary, not counting his golden benefits and a fat retirement package of almost $20,000 per year. But poor Tony has not had a raise in the last two years!…oh, unless you consider the 3% raises in his retirement package each year a raise, which of course they were.
This morning’s Press buried the story on page 6, but at least they created a side section highlighting Tony’s raise, though that section does not appear in the Press online.
What was the rationale of the LCDC board? That Tony deserves a raise this year since, they said, according to the Press, that Tony didn’t get a raise the past two years because “the timing for a raise wouldn’t be appropriate given the economic conditions.” The Press went on to report that “Both years it did increase his 401k package by roughly 3 percent.”
What craziness is this? Tony is paid with TAXPAYER DOLLARS!” Local unemployment is WORSE now than it was last year or the year before. Unemployment is at 12% in the City of CdA, which is higher than the County average and much higher than the state and national average.
Your thoughts?
CCDC! Another cesspool of pretty people and GOB’s!
Comment by Pariah — August 25, 2011 @ 1:17 pm
And this is how we end up with “more laws”, “new laws” and “amended laws”. There is ALWAYS someone that will twist a law to suit themselves or twist morals and ethics due to LACK of law to suit themselves. The very reason, though I dont agree with it, the claim of needing a “TEXTING” law for driving. There is always a lawyer that will claim “Well the inattentive driving law doesn’t exactly spell out texting.”
This is what these self serving public servants look for.
Comment by concerned citizen — August 25, 2011 @ 2:39 pm
Accurate. Redundant – “self serving public servants” – but accurate.
Comment by justinian — August 25, 2011 @ 6:06 pm
‘John Austin go(es) to the little towns in North Idaho to spread (his) knowledge.’
That’s correct, Mary. From Riggins to Bonners Ferry small cities are counting on developers to provide their infrastructure improvements, like wastewater plant upgrades, and I’m happy to help. Small cities in southeast Idaho can only dream of such an arrangement, where no one is developing anything.
Comment by JohnA — August 26, 2011 @ 9:23 am
JohnA wrote “where no one is developing anything.”
So why not build a city in the middle of the panhandle forest, Faragut State park? Why not build a city in Yosemite or how ahout Cascades national forest? Build build build.
Why not let it naturally progress by bringing in industry and let the natural progression take over and pay for itself? What you do JohnA is RAPE the land. You do not live on it or within its means.
Comment by concerned citizen — August 26, 2011 @ 10:41 am
I happen to live in the forest, CC, above a lake, and I manage our acreage of timber and creekside pasture with care and attention. The horses, turkeys, elk and deer appreciate it even if you do not.
And, I’ve never had sex with any land. Thanks.
Comment by JohnA — August 26, 2011 @ 11:35 am
Rape is not sex; it’s violence.
Comment by Bill — August 26, 2011 @ 11:51 am
And what the GOB’s and Pretty People have done, and plan on doing to the taxpayers of North Idaho is VIOLENCE, pure and simple.
Comment by Pariah — August 26, 2011 @ 11:53 am
“So, I’m done.”
LOL, another example of what a liberal does. Thanks John – you make the near perfect archetype.
Comment by Pariah — August 26, 2011 @ 11:55 am
So its ok to rape the land as long as you have yours? Again, IF our leaders (cough cough) would bring in industry and let the natural progression occur everything else would fall into place on its own and we would have no need for the LCDC or highly paid twist masters. What you do is rob from Peter to pay Paul at taxpayers expense. All in the name of broadening the tax base.
Comment by concerned citizen — August 26, 2011 @ 12:04 pm
Let’s reel in the language, people! If you have issues with John’s ideas on what constitutes good government, by all means express them. But please use respectable words to describe why you don’t agree, and stay away from any personal inferences.
Comment by mary — August 26, 2011 @ 1:11 pm
There’s no doubt that urban renewal was established to provide avenues of civic improvement that otherwise might not occur. John A. has invested himself in many worthy and equitable relationships. But in so doing he has lost perspective on the real world. In CdA the fiscal issues are not so clearly defined but John A. is inherently resigned to his personal crucible. It would be understandable if the man were at least open to rationale interventions. But he is a stagnant log, entrenched and arcane. On his side it is ‘hear no evil, see no evil’ when evil abounds. He is entirely unapproachable.
Comment by Wallypog — August 26, 2011 @ 1:28 pm
You’re wrong, Pariah. Bye.
Comment by JohnA — August 26, 2011 @ 3:04 pm
And again he said “Bye.” Well, maybe. But then what matters here is John Austin is on record supporting the overpaid, under-skilled Mr. Berns. Truly representative of the modern government aristocrat in action – Pariah is right – John is the perfect archetype liberal. Iconic.
Comment by justinian — August 26, 2011 @ 5:03 pm
See http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/08/25/us-cities-strangled-by-cost-ballooning-pensions/
This is what the Aristocrats of America do NOT want the plebian class to see, and yet we are getting the word and the Pretty People are getting worried. And they should. Abusing the public trust (how much did Tinker Bell get in her recent raise?) with violence – and yes, taxes are extracted with the threat of violence – is wrong. It is evil.
Comment by justinian — August 26, 2011 @ 6:50 pm