How much is that mayor in the window?
Waukesha mayoral candidate Jeff Scrima has a promise on his campaign website to only take $35,500 per year in salary. The polite response is that this was clearly an idea not well thought through. Or, to put it another way, it’s just stupid and low pandering unbecoming of a candidate for mayor.
I understand not wanting to support the increase in the mayor’s salary. I understand some politicians might want to promise not to accept the raise. But cut the existing salary in half? What is the justification?
Scrima’s website seems to indicate that because we have a full-time city administrator, we should cut the mayor’s salary. Okay, why?
If it’s because Scrima thinks that the mayor’s job is a part-time position, let him come out and say so. Let him also say that the mayor should be paid a part-time salary, much less than the $35,500 he is promising to take.
He’ll have to scale back his other promises, too. It’s okay to promise to be the city’s #1 ribbon-cutter, only with better shoes and a tie. It’s a legitimate campaign position, and much more honest than pretending the mayor’s job is only part-time but that he can still do everything he wants.
But if Scrima believes the job is a full-time job, and given the number of other promises he’s made he clearly believes that it is, then $35,500 is hardly sufficient salary for the position.
This isn’t bold thinking. This is just pandering, and picking a number that would outbid anyone else wishing to engage in the dumb salary gimmick game. And when voters are treated with such disrespect, they should really wonder about the candidate that would think so low of them.
If, by chance, Scrima is sincere is his belief that the salary should only be $35,500, then voters should wonder about electing a candidate to an office he finds so contemptible.
I have kind of told Scima the same thing, but you worded it much better. I have said I am always suspicious of people who will take less pay than the market rate. The CIty is a large business with hundreds of employees and several divisions. If this was the private sector would you really want someone running your company that was willing to do it at a rate that most people wouldn’t even consider doing it for? No. So why sould we want someone running the City at half the pay? Its a full time job with a lot of responsibility and 50-60 hour weeks. Definitly not a job I’d do for 35,000.
[Reply]
Bluecollar Conservative Reply:
February 11th, 2010 at 11:20 pm
What’s so hard about dressing like everyday is casual Friday and cutting ribbons? Sounds like a great part-time gig!
[Reply]
This kind of reminded me of when Ann Nischke promised to cut the size of Waukesha’s Common Counci because cutting board sizes was the cause du jour 4 years ago. Nobody ever wanted that to happen but she figured voters would love it. Of course she dropped the issue once she realized that it was a non-issue and people were comfortable with their aldermanic representation.
Now if we were like West Allis where they have 2 aldermen per district….
[Reply]
James Wigderson Reply:
February 5th, 2010 at 4:38 pm
Jeff, that’s an excellent comparison, and one I may have to swipe for my own use.
[Reply]
What’s next, a campaign promise of a chicken in every pot and cooked in quarry water? This guy sure has a lot of complaints and not many ideas.
[Reply]
Very well stated Jim! I’m so glad you posted this!
[Reply]
Tough times demand sacrifice. Leadership demands leading by sacrifice. These are not times of economic largess. Moreover, being single, energetic and capable enables Scrima to do the whole job for a lot less — or more specifically what the average teacher makes, who works harder for the public than most people in city hall. This is not a time for executive limos, but working men’s trucks. You can pick your leader based on the sensibility that they represent. There are a whole lot of folks in Waukesha who think $35,000 is enough to get the job done. We can wait on the country club membership until the economic climate changes for the better.
[Reply]
James Wigderson Reply:
February 7th, 2010 at 12:27 pm
That is the most stupid rationale I have ever heard.
[Reply]
Are single people inherently energetic and capable and therefore the ideal local public officials?
[Reply]
Several of you sound like you are wearing the rose colored glasses that the incumbent must be passing out. I wonder if the frames are color coordinated with your crocs?
Jeff could have make a less gimmicky offer like he will not accept the pay increase but rather return it to the city treasury. That approach has worked well for Scott Walker.
The very valid point that Jeff is making is that why should the mayor enjoy such a nice raise when the taxpayers are in great distress? The fact that a raise of this nature was passed by the council just goes to show how out of touch with the realty of today’s economy many of them are. This matter is exacerbated by the fact that this mayor has fed from the public trough for many years in his other life.
[Reply]
Scrima’s approach also reminds me of Steve Jobs. The Apple Inc. Chief Executive Steve Jobs was paid his customary $1 annual salary in 2009. Jobs does not get a bonus or reimbursement for perks many other CEOs accept. Oh, he thinks his work at Apple is critical, yet he wisely ties his pay to his performance. Scrima is being paid for performance, not political security. If and when he delivers, he ought to be five times that amount.
[Reply]
James Wigderson Reply:
February 7th, 2010 at 11:19 pm
Seriously? You think he should be, what, given stock options in Waukesha? Performance bonus pay?
C’mon. I want Scrima to come onto the site to defend the idea himself. I know he reads it. I just received a note to that effect. His defenders are just coming up with weaker and weaker responses.
[Reply]
Scrima is a nice kid. He has energy and like a lot of young folks, he has ideas, particularly on how things could be done better (especially by him). Never mind that he has no experience, never mind that he could really screw up the city, never mind that he has no idea what he is getting himself into.
If this were my daughter (who is also 32 yrs. old), I would suggest that she attend a few city meetings to see if she can handle the mundane aspects of the job. I would get her a few books on management and organizational behavior. I think that Scrima means well and can see that there are many really angry, frustrated constituents out there who want to see change in this city. He wants to make a difference, not just for himself but for everyone. His goals are admirable but he would be so much better off if he would get behind and help a candidate who has the maturity and experience to pull this off.
[Reply]
Scrima realizes he doesn’t know it all, and that’s what makes him great!
He’s a local successful business owner (for the last 7 years) with hands on experience in personal management and accounting. He played a principal role in redeveloping three blighted areas of Waukesha into new condominiums (Endfield, Tara Hill, and Garden Prairie), which are a beautiful picture of restoration and brought new people into the community.
Scrima also loves to learn and is still learning. He completed the ICSC University “School of Retailing” (2008) and ICSC/ IEDC “School of Economic Development” (2009) held at the Wharton Business School. How many other people in Waukesha have done that?
He’s opened minded and passionate about this city. He created two facebook discussion groups (“Renaissance of Downtown Waukesha” and “A New Day for Waukesha”) to listen to and learn from people in the community. He also serves on the Business Improvement District Development Committee.
Seems to me, after reviewing all the candidates, that Scrima has the most practical experience, freshest ideas, and the most energy to move Waukesha into the future.
Surely you guys are not close minded.
[Reply]
James Wigderson Reply:
February 9th, 2010 at 8:27 am
“He completed the ICSC University “School of Retailing” (2008) and ICSC/ IEDC “School of Economic Development” (2009) held at the Wharton Business School. How many other people in Waukesha have done that?”
BFD. I know all the lyrics to “Lola.” Does Jeff?
[Reply]
I’m close-minded to regurgitated talking points.
I’m sure Scrima is a nice enough guy, but he is generally unimpressive as a candidate; his solutions on water puts him squarely at odds with reality and alligns him with the environmentalists who would rather see Waukesha stagnate than to grow and thrive.
He cannot simultaneous say he wants to conserve water and grow business – once cannot subsist on the other.
[Reply]
Scrima’s solution on water: Further water conservation, combined with the resources of the Fox River, quarry reservoirs, shallow wells, and a few of deep wells with radium removal facilities, would provide the adequate supply (totaling 18.5 million gallons-per-day maximum-day-demand) for Waukesha’s future growth. This balanced-approach would not drawdown any one of these sources, instead allow each of these sources to naturally recharge, and allow them to balance each other out in various weather conditions.
Those who have a bias towards “regional cooperation” or a vested interest in the previous studies, like this most recent Draft Application for Lake Michigan Water Supply, will find a multi-faceted water solution extremely hard to grasp. As Einstein said “you can’t solve a problem with the same minds that created it.”
The question is simply who controls Waukesha’s future? Does Waukesha want to be rewarded for dependency or innovation? Some day the world could be coming to Waukesha, as the model and experts of multi-faceted water solutions. Can you imagine Waukesha, the historic Spring City, as the future home of state-of-the-art multi-faceted water solution businesses?
[Reply]
If it’s a Scrima or Nelson April election, are you supporting Nelson, James?
[Reply]
James Wigderson Reply:
February 9th, 2010 at 8:38 pm
Heh. There is something to be said for voting for the candidate who will supply me with the most copy for the next four years, and I’ll let it go at that for now.
[Reply]
Your bias against 1 candidate is over the top and could paint you in a very akward position as a moral and fiscal conservative. Perhaps it’s best to stick to the major issues and support the best ideas?
[Reply]
James Wigderson Reply:
February 10th, 2010 at 7:56 pm
Since I assume you mean Scrima, I think you need to understand a couple of things:
1) I never worry about being in an “akward” position regarding anything.
2) I’ll support the best ideas. Have Jeff show them to me.
3) If this mild criticism has you upset now, you better hope Scrima doesn’t get through the primary. Or you better grow a thicker skin.
[Reply]
So it’s Lake Michigan water or else? What’s your alternate plan of choice if the GLGC rejects the diversion, which it will. Two candidates support local water as Plan A and neither is your guy. If your guy wins the Mayoral position and the GLGC rejects the diversion, and they will, are you going to rip him if he has to go to local water as the other alternative, just like you do to someone who doesn’t want more government control (SEWRC & Milwaukee oversight), higher taxes, and support of the KRMM (the second M is for Madison) line?
Publius, how do you intend to “grow business” in Waukesha if Milwaukee has a “no compete” clause written into their resolution as a requirement to obtain water fro them? Growing business is not a realistic assumption because the fees associated with the construction costs for any system are going to make any business dependent on water looking elsewhere. Perhaps you mean growing businesses in Waukesha County? That makes sense for nobody in the city of Waukesha. The intentions of SEWRPC are not in the interests of the city of Waukesha residents.
SEWRPC will not be paying my water bill, or my property taxes. If I want Lake Michigan water, I’ll need to move on the otherside of the divide. The sooner supporters of the Lake Michigan water proposal wake-up, the more money all of us are going to save. The GRGC is going to just say “NO”.
[Reply]