Article

CLOSER ANALYSIS OF O&R PROCEEDINGS PEELS AWAY THE PHONINESS AND FAKERY OF MAYOR’S PAY GRAB

0 0 votes
Article Rating

By DAN VALENTI

PLANET VALENTI News and Commentary

(FORTRESS OF SOLITUDE, WEDNESDAY, MAY 7, 2014) — Much happened on Monday night in council chambers as Ordinance and Rules took up Mayor Dan Bianchi‘s request for a huge pay hike for himself and his managers.

The most convenient way to present this boatload will be to break out the narrative into bite size pieces. O&R tabled the matter, making it premature to pronounce a verdict. In Pittsfield, public policy has unfortunately become a matter of The Suits vs. The Little Guy, with the former taking every chance it has to dump on the latter, all for money and power. Greed, thy name is “bureaucrat.”

This time, though, it was different. Why?

This website, PLANET VALENTI, was able to break through the noise and clutter of the many distractions that keep We The People in the dark, including their own adopted apathy and ignorance. The Suits love it when citizens stay away from government. They hate it when a force comes along such as THE PLANET able to rouse the tireless heart within the oppressed, and they start paying attention. On this site and Facebook, THE PLANET assembled an electronic crowd, packed the house, delivered the stem-winder, and democracy’s clock began ticking. We The People besieged councilors with communication, and it made a difference.

And with that, some observations:

Bianchi Pushes a Pay Raise for Bianchi — After the council removed the mayor’s pay hike from the 50 or so others on the list because it requires a supermajority for approval, the mayor and his team began spinning. Bianchi said he never intended to and doesn’t now seek a pay raise for himself. That’s the mayor’s new spin, that the sinful 40% mayoral pay hike will go into effect during the next political term. THE PLANET doesn’t buy it for a second, and neither should you.

Bianchi’s an incumbent. Until he rules out a re-election bid, we can only assume he’s going to run again in the 2015 election. The mayoral winner of that term will be in office for four years at the new pay scale, if councilors are stupid enough to vote for it. There’s also the confusion of the retroactive nature of the pay increase, which takes all approved pay hikes back to July 1, 2013. Correct us if our astrological charts are wrong, but THE PLANET believes that Dan Bianchi was the mayor on that date. Even if he’s not mayor when the next mayor is sworn in, the retroactive nature of the increase will kick back to 4-1-13, putting a pretty $33,000 or so into Bianchi’s pocket for not doing a thing. Of course, he’s making $87,000 a year for not doing a thing right now.

Connell Shoots! He Scores! — O&R chairman Chris Connell got off the best rounds of the night by placing the proposed pay hikes for about 50 city managers into a wider, more proper, more honest context. In contrast to the deceitful presentation of the city consultant, Connell did his own research and examined cost of living and housing costs in Leominster, Salem, Attleboro, and two other communities that pay their public workers about the same as Pittsfield does. The figures are startling. For example, it costs 21% more to live in Attleboro than Pittsfield. Housing there costs a whopping 52% more.

In other words, even without a raise, Pittsfield public employees make more than their colleagues in a host of other communities. Rachel Brown, the uninspired and uninspiring hired gun brought in to tell Bianchi, Sue Carmel, and the rest of the usual suspects what they wanted to hear, somehow failed to make such comparisons in her twisted analysis of the numbers. Brown admitted performing a geographic cost of labor comparison, not a demographic cost-of-living analysis, as Connell did. It makes all the difference in the world, for it takes the fakery of figures and replaces it with the certainty of data. Connell certainly earned his pay Monday night. Well done, my Right Honorable Good Friend.

 Want More Proof That the Mayor is Conning You? — You can find it in Brown’s study. After presenting “numbers” that allegedly show how “underpaid” Pittsfield public employees are, on page 5, under “Market Survey — Benefits,” we find theses two sentences. Naturally, Brown, Bianchi, and his bag lady, city financial “director” Carmel, skipped over this part of the report. THE PLANET quotes: “[The city of] Pittsfield $462 more per year for individual health coverage than the average [in other Massachusetts cities and towns]; [sic] and $662 more per year for family health coverage than the average. The City’s 85% contribution rate to health care compares favorably to the average of the survey respondents at 75%.” Somehow, Brown failed to calculate these significant Pittsfield advantages into her figures.

Where Does Bianchi Find These Stiffs? — One of Brown’s most curious (and troubling) admissions in her syrupy opening statements was saying that she has no clients in the Dreaded Private Sector? Fair enough, but why doesn’t she? Why would a supposedly competent professional eliminate such a large segment of potential business? Could it be the Dreaded Private Sector demands results, real results, because — unlike cities, that can tap taxpayers — the DPS must produce profits, not losses.

Kinnas Asks Questions — During the public comment period, citizen superhero Terry Kinnas asked a few highly relevant questions.

Kinnas: “What productivity gains are the taxpayers going to get? Will the personnel departments of the school department and city be combined? Will the business/accounting functions be combined? What is the real potential cost of each position, including benefits such as health care, Medicare, pension liability, length of work year, length of work day, vacation days, and indemnification?” Kinnas then questioned the confusing presentation of the proposed new pay scale: “What do each of these terms really mean? Where would people be placed on the scale? What professional measurement criteria would be used?”

Bianchi had no answers. Brown had no answers. Dancing Sue Carmel, forever befuddled, had no answers. Carmel especially came off as clueless virtually each time she was called up to the microphone to “enlighten” councilors and the public on various aspects of this mess, a jumble so bad O&R voted unanimously to table the item. When asked for the cost of pay raises to taxpayers, Carmel hemmed two inches too short, hawed a barnful of sawdust, and pulled not a rabbit but a figure of “$300,000” out of the top hat. She provided no explanation for the figure, how that was calculated, or whether it was vetted. Considering the source, if she says $300,000, we’re doubling that to get at the true figure — but that’s just us. At one point, someone used a figure of $400,000. What’s a hundred grand among friends? Oh yeah, and at no time that we heard did Carmel say this was a yearly, recurring cost, not the one and out as she implied.

Foot-in-Mouth Disease — THE PLANET’s guessing that our Right Honorable Good Friend Barry Clairmont, commenting during the public input session, would dearly love to have his statement back about the “pay discrepancies” being the reason so many city employees are stealing on the job. Oh, man, truly? Truly? Where do we being with this?

First, this means there’s NO — ZERO, NIL — accountability within each city department, if theft is that rampant? Is that so? If true, why isn’t Clairmont as councilor demanding something be done about it, like, say, exposing it? Second, the statement accuses every city employee of potential thievery. Third, in a comment made on this website, Clairmont backed off the statement, saying he was only repeating what Scanlon Associates, the city auditor, had said during the exit audit. Did Scanlon say that? PLANET to Barry: People steal or don’t steal because of who they are, not how much they make.

Cram Session — THE PLANET mentioned this yesterday, but it bears repeating. The consultant’s report was 57 pages: 40 pages of “live” content and 17 pages of support material. Bianchi or Carmel (or both) decided to release the document at the meeting, forcing attempts at speed reading with 100% retention on the fly. In a city truly interested in transparency, the report would have been made available on its release date, April 28, and not a week later. That extra week might have given people time to prepare. Bog Forbid.

Who Decides ‘Merit?’ The Mayor, of Course — The one good thing about the new pay scale is that it would eliminate longevity as a criteria for promotion, replacing it with a merit-based system. Looks good on paper, but, as we often say, “This is Pittsfield.” Boil it down, when you eliminate most of Brown’s and Carmel’s B.S., one realizes that the mayor, and the mayor alone, decides if a particular person in one of the affected positions merits a pay raise. No room for politics to enter there, eh??

Lady Light Weight to Get a Pay Hike? — Yes, if the council approves this bad request. Julia Berkowitz Sabourin, key figure in the Scopes Monkey Trial and the mayor’s newly minted gopher at $50,000 a year, would receive a pay hike as an M-2 on the pay scale. What a city!!

——- 000 ——-

In the end, this money grab by the mayor is not only ill-timed, it’s arrogantly timed. It doesn’t give a hoot about you, the taxpayer. It ignores the pleas of seniors and those on fixed incomes. Finally, to all public employees who are so desperate because of the “little” they make, this is still more-or-less a free country. THE PLANET advises you to update your resume and sell your services in Pittsfield Dreaded Private Sector, dominated as it is by minimum-wage “recreation and resort” service jobs.

See how that works out.

 ———————————————————————————

“The world’s an orphan’s home.”Marianne Moore, from the poem “The Mind is an Enchanting Thing.”

“OPEN THE WINDOW, AUNT MILLIE.”

LOVE TO ALL.

 

 

0 0 votes
Article Rating
61 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
dusty
dusty
9 years ago

When Bianchi lost to Ruberto a few years ago I was very disappointed as I was no fan of Ruberto. Then when Bianchi did get elected I thought the city would take a new direction, one that would be citizen oriented. I thought the taxpayers would be given consideration and that cost cutting measures would be seriously looked at. I thought we would now have a govt of the people..

And now I am just so sad and disappointed in my faith of people who say one thing and then turn out to do the opposite. Just how is a voter supposed to be able to identify the wolf in sheep clothing anyway? Do we just so often misjudge candidates or does the power trip of office change some people?

Wilson
Wilson
Reply to  dusty
9 years ago

There really aren’t going to be decent people running for office, because decent people have productive careers, and can’t or won’t play political games. Only bums are available

Mike R
Mike R
Reply to  Wilson
9 years ago

There is alot of successful good people on this City Council. Get to know them!

Scott
Scott
Reply to  dusty
9 years ago

You’re not alone dusty.

pothole
pothole
9 years ago

The health care addition to the pay scale comparison is vital. The cost of living analysis done by Chris Connell, although not vetted at this point, is very helpful in the determination that Pittsfield does not have to give raises of this size to be competitive. This is a recommendation by one hand picked consulting firm. The council can recommend changes to any or all of it and I hope they do. Retro pay raises are an immoral slap in the face to the tax payers who would be blindsided and should be aware of future pay raises ahead of time as to elect their councilors and mayors after learning their stance on these issues and vote for the appropriate person as it relates to their individual opinion. By the people.
Pay is not the only motivator for an employee. Respect is not traits bestowed instantly after winning an election, they are earned over time and performance. Leadership, vision, and fairness are what earn respect and are key factors in an employees long term happiness and performance in their position. Pay is important and pay in Pittsfield is close to appropriate, maybe cost of living raises should be given to those who deserve the raises based on merit, but self respect for a job well done that is recognized openly by your superiors would be the best job retention solution for most. Money is a motivator for some and we will always lose some people because of it no matter how much they are paid. We can’t chase the few who jump ship nor can we blame them for doing so. Walk a day in my shoes… you know the rest.

amandaWell
amandaWell
9 years ago

Anyone see my anithisamine$?

Spider
Spider
9 years ago

Barry Clairmont’s excuse for stealing from your employer may set a new precedent. I can see it all now….a new defense that attorneys may use in court ….”But Your Honor, this is an honest man….he had no choice but to steal from his employer….his salary is just too meager”.

The day after the mtg. several members of my family, who are retired, were furious over his remarks about social security.
Mr. Clairmont:; Retired citizens are a large block of voters.

B. Clairmont
B. Clairmont
Reply to  Spider
9 years ago

Spider, I understand they are a large block and that they vote.

That doesn’t take away from the fact that what I said is 100% true.

Barry

C. J.
C. J.
Reply to  B. Clairmont
9 years ago

Barry; Perception is Reality. Your personal perception based on your socialized conceptions of integrity and morality make this statement true in your mind only.
A majority of others may view it differently, and like it or not your public’s perception of you has been affected.
Pittsfield voters vote against; rarely for.

B. Clairmont
B. Clairmont
Reply to  C. J.
9 years ago

C.J.

Attached below is a link to the Social Security web-site that shows a 3.6% increase in 2012, a 1.7% increase in 2013 and a 1.5% increase in 2014 for a total of 6.8% over the last 5 years (0% in 2011 and 2010). The managers have received 1.5% since 2009. Social Security has gone up 5.3% more than managers salaries over the past 5 years. FACT.

Care to share where you looked it up?

http://www.socialsecurity.gov/cola/automatic-cola.htm

Spider
Spider
Reply to  B. Clairmont
9 years ago

Keep in mind, Barry, that social security is very low to begin with. Certainly doesn’t even come close to the managers (what you call) low salaries. This, of course, is thanks to our government robbing from social security (that we all pay into) for other programs.

Also, keep in mind, that retirees have lost much of their savings that they were counting on for retirement. And the little savings they may have are gaining little or no interest

Comparing the two is off base…..and you know it.
You’re digging a hole!

winchester 73
winchester 73
Reply to  B. Clairmont
9 years ago

Social Security, councilor Clairmont, pays a mostly meager amount to seniors. Try living on $14,000 a year see how you make out.

To take the increases in SS and use them to justify pay raises for those making $63,312 (city maintenance director) $73,828 (finance director Ms. Carmel) $83,919 (Mr. Collingwood) and more (Chief Wynn $109,157) is foolish and misleading. Surely, sir, you must know it.

Rafael
Rafael
Reply to  B. Clairmont
9 years ago

Mr. Clairmont,
COLA has nothing to do with this. Nice try at a lame excuse. Many people in the private sector have not gotten any raises at all, let alone as much as COLA.
Pay is about performance and the value of the position. As others are pointing out, Pittsfield employees are not underpaid and are overbenifitted. And these city jobs are notorious for not demanding alot of work from those who hold the positions – our part time Mayor is a good example.
And your remark about employees stealing because they are underpaid is one of the most ridiculous things I’ve ever heard from a counilor in my life. And completely untrue.

Scott
Scott
Reply to  B. Clairmont
9 years ago

If that’s the case Barry about more money attracting better quality people that explains a lot about the mayor we’re stuck with now.

Spider
Spider
9 years ago

I did check on this….and you are wrong. During those last five years they received meager COLA increases and two of those years (2010 and 2011) they received NOTHING. At that same time, the government had enough money to increase entitlement programs.

B. Clairmont
B. Clairmont
Reply to  Spider
9 years ago

Spider,

See link above. Please share where you looked this up.

B. Clairmont
B. Clairmont
Reply to  B. Clairmont
9 years ago

Spider,

The managers are working. Wouldn’t you expect the base to be lower? I know I do. The fact remains that the buying power of the managers dollars is lower as a percentage.

Again, please post your link where you checked it and said I was wrong. Or, did you not really check and just decided to call me a liar for the fun of it?

If you are going to call me a liar, please back it up.

Spider
Spider
Reply to  B. Clairmont
9 years ago

Barry…..The facts you gave are exactly what I said…example: we both agree on the two years S.S gave nothing. I call those percentages they received in other years as meager. example: a 3.6% increase for S.S is a lower amount than that given to someone working and making considerably more.

To say I am disappointed in you is putting it mildly. I have been a strong supporter of you from day one. I even bullet voted for you in the last election. Why? Because of your financial experience and you weren’t afraid to challenge our administration and ask necessary questions.

In a nutshell, Barry, you’ve changed!

Mike R
Mike R
Reply to  B. Clairmont
9 years ago

Barry

Why do you waste time rationalizing with these people?

Linda
Linda
Reply to  Mike R
9 years ago

Well Mike R, people know lying when they see it and foolishness.
Barry has changed. I think hes been silenced by someone. What a shame to see him crumble like this.

Spider
Spider
Reply to  B. Clairmont
9 years ago

Where did I look this up, Barry?

I got this info from my furious family members who couldn’t wait to show me their S.S statements.

Is that a good enough “link” for you?

ed shepardson
ed shepardson
9 years ago

Estimated median household income in 2011: $39,271

Estimated per capita income in 2011: $25,604

http://www.city-data.com/city/Pittsfield-Massachusetts.html#ixzz3128C8pyI

B
B
Reply to  ed shepardson
9 years ago

I think you’re all forgetting that are Social Security income is basically Textfree unless you have another job on top of it and put your way over the limit. If you want to compare apples to apples not apples to oranges then you have to take the social security amount as the take-home money. Now take the amount of money that people are making from the city of Pittsfield minus all the taxes and see what their take on money is. That is what people should be looking at making the comparison with.

Nota
Nota
9 years ago

I don’t know who is watching the fort but someone better get a handle on the pension obligation’s right quick and stop the nonsense with the tax increases and hefty bonuses.

amandaWell
amandaWell
9 years ago

Is it me or has Clairmont Low and Krol been inaffective as Councilor’s since President Mazzeo’s brow beating months ago. The fact that. None of three are chairs of any of the subcommittees is curious at best, oh well.

Spider
Spider
Reply to  amandaWell
9 years ago

Amanda: I hadn’t thought of that….but I think you hit on something.

winchester 73
winchester 73
Reply to  Spider
9 years ago

It seems true Amanda. They have been invisible. Given that physical threats have been reported, one would have to give serious thought to what you say. They have been acting defeated and whipped.

billy
billy
Reply to  amandaWell
9 years ago

They got separated cause Mazzeo is the mayors lap dog and has to push stuff through

Joe Pinhead
Joe Pinhead
9 years ago

Mr. Clairmont,
While I am not going to call you a liar nor am I doubting your numbers I will call into question both your methodology and your reasoning. First of all there is a huge difference between Social Security and salary. First as we all know SS is from wages already earned or a job already completed and as is so often used by the politicians a return on an “investment” made while working. Pay raises whether retroactive or not are based upon current performance. Your argument is simply an attempt to distract and is not salient to the discussion I don’t want to think that you don’t have an understanding of the nature of both instruments of compensation.
I implore you to not sink to the level of divisive politics as is demonstrated routinely by some groups in the City. Do not pit one group against another for simple political gain or expediency. The salary of any city worker should be dictated by both the ability and will of the employer to pay measured against the skill set and performance of the employee. These items cannot be considered in a vacuum but the market and cost of living in a certain area must also be balanced into the equation.
Be a Leader not a divider if you believe in a measure, a cause, a petition, a pay raise carry that item forward on its merits not by making excuses for illegal behavior or by contrasting apples and oranges.
Another word of advice for what it’s worth, The elderly currently on social security are from “the greatest generation” they faced and defeated fascism, some spent a Christmas in the Arden, don’t belittle these folks now by using the social security raises as a club or a lever for current employee compensation.
I think you owe an apology and a nod for all they have done to get us here.

Just sayin
just my 2 cents worth let the verbal beating begin

B. Clairmont
B. Clairmont
Reply to  Joe Pinhead
9 years ago

Joe,

Maybe I didn’t verbalize my points as well as I could have or should have, I think we can agree on this.

I agree with you about the elderly on Social Security being from the greatest generation. Many, including myself, believe that they have been under appreciated and under compensated. My point by making the comparison is that the managers are being treated more poorly than them. One can make an argument that they should be treated worse. I however would disagree with that.

Are there some bad managers? I’m sure you could make that argument. It is the Mayor’s job to place them at the proper salary with-in the range, not the Council’s.

I agree 100% that employees should be paid on current performance. This is what is right about this proposed system. No more longevity pay. No more “step” raises just because you have been there 10 years. Performance is what matters!!! This new system establishes that.

The study did compare similar markets. Is it perfect, no. But it is reasonable.

Is more information needed, yes. And, I’m glad my fellow Councilor’s asked for things. Not being a member of O&R, I had limited time to make my points. The Chair told me before the meeting he might limit speakers to three minutes. You cant make all your points well in three minutes.

Maybe my mistake was getting up there at all (I’m sure some of you will have a field day with that statement). I got up there because I believe the managers (as a whole) have been shafted over the last 5 to 10 years. I feel it’s time to make things more equitable, make the salaries competitive to other communities right here in Berkshire County, no less similar sized cities with similar economic conditions.

Sure, anyone here can go on and on about what I said about theft (which has been totally misunderstood, and I will no longer try to clarify). I obviously made a mistake going there.

The point of all of this is….most of the managers and exempt employees ARE UNDERPAID, in my opinion. God forbid I stick up for them and publically state my support and what I believe in.

I promise all of you I will still continue to question line items and waste wherever I see it.

Scott
Scott
Reply to  B. Clairmont
9 years ago

Barry you make valid points but do you as a councilor have a duty to city employees or what’s in the best interest of the city as a whole? Deserving a raise and havering the ability to commit to said expense are two different discussion correct? I’m not calling you out as I’m sure it’s a difficult task to make rulings without personal opinion or emotion. But the facts remain has the economy recovered enough and can we afford it? I think people are too concerned about growth we need to sustain. If the money isn’t enough then it’s still a free country see what else is out there. I commend. You for using your real name and answering to the public. I’m the same scott who emailed you.

B. Clairmont
B. Clairmont
Reply to  Scott
9 years ago

Scott,

Fair enough question. My duty is to the city as a whole. I understand that. I feel that this move, in the long run, will make the city a better place.

I know it is hard for many people to see this and will argue I’m nuts! I get that.

I’ve always prided myself on being a long-term thinker. So far, that has served me well in life. I didn’t get where I did in the business world by thinking in the short term. Many a time I’ve had to suck it up in the short term with long term benefits having been realized as a result of those short term sacrifices.

I’m applying that philosophy here.

This will be my last comment on the subject until it comes back to Council.

Ed McClelland
Ed McClelland
Reply to  B. Clairmont
9 years ago

Mr. Clairmont:

If Pittsfield’s managers are grossly underpaid, please explain why the city’s department heads, who reside in more lucrative areas, choose to apply for Pittsfield vacancies and voluntarily commute to city hall ? John Deangelo from south county (Sheffield) for example, and Gina Armstrong and Doug Clark form New York state and the Capital District for another example.
You also cited retention. Do you not concede that you and the mayor, cherry picked your examples of turn over ? How long has Bruce Collingwood and Maryilan Sheehan been in city hall ? There are others.
Would you support making the compensation of all city employees and the municipalitiy in which they live (not necessarily their home address) available to the taxpayers of Pittsfield ?

dusty
dusty
Reply to  Ed McClelland
9 years ago

Great points. Many of these city managers came to Pittsfield because the pay and total package was better than in their own communities. How long is that list of outside the city managers again?

I would love to have names of people who left Pittsfield city jobs because they felt cheated. Everyone tries to climb the income ladder. But that is quite different than feeling underpaid. No one forced them to take the job or is forcing them keep it. And no one can convince me that super high salaries assures better quality employees. That’s plain horseshit. I would think some homegrown folk invested in the community with family to bring up here might be quite dedicated.

Does anyone in Pittsfield think their child is going to get a better education because we brought in an outside superintendant and inflated the pay level? Not me.

Joe Pinhead
Joe Pinhead
Reply to  B. Clairmont
9 years ago

Mr. Clairmont,
First thanks for responding to my initial post and I do understand your reasoning for ending your responses at that point. I will say I do appreciate the way that you do explain yourself on this forum.
I do agree with you, more information is needed and I will agree with Mike Ward and Dave the roll out of this was horrific. With that being said I do hope that the proposal will be fully vetted by both the public and the administration before it is trotted back out.
I too am concerned with the long term outlook for the city might I refer you to the BRPC presentation and the population numbers expected around 2030 in Berkshire County. Needless to say down dramatically.
I will say overall I think you do a good job for the City and I think your reasoning is typically in line with mine. On this issue we differ, and that’s ok hell I don’t agree with my wife more than 75% of the time im not looking for a 100% in any area. I would much rather support someone that stands for something than a feller that stands for nothing.
You have articulated your position and have demonstrated that you stand for something and principles are important.

just sayin
your milage might vary

Linda
Linda
Reply to  B. Clairmont
9 years ago

Barry you shouldn’t have gone up there in the first place. That was your 1st mistake. 2nd one, disrespecting the elderly on SS. 3rd, trying to say mgrs are underpaid.
Youve seen the list. One of the posters on this chain mentioned some mgr salaries in the $60s 70s 80s, to topping $100,000 a yr. How DARE you tell us they are underpaid when so many of us are underemployed at $9 an hour.
Sounds like you are trying to win political pts from mgrs and exempt to win their votes. This will back fire on you big time.

I’m sorry for that. I thought you were one of the ones who cared about us.

ed shepardson
ed shepardson
Reply to  Joe Pinhead
9 years ago

Anyone who served in WW II would be at least 88 years old. I’m guessing that the bulk of SS recipients belong to the Pepsi generation, not the Greatest Generation.

Dave
Dave
9 years ago

Maybe we could get away with giving all managers and exempt employees bats with their initials on them. Maybe that would solve the theft problem also.

Scott
Scott
9 years ago

I think ultimately this is a victory because it causes citizen involvement in our local govt. We need to take this and run with it! It’s our govt!

DowagerHat
DowagerHat
Reply to  Scott
9 years ago

You have got that right Scott. We the People need to come up from the underground. I will be putting more proposals on this site It is time for We the People to speak out. It has been done before and We the People will be doing this again. Leadership in this matter is what We the People are needing and I will be leading the forefront of this initiative. Gods
Speed.

Scott
Scott
Reply to  DowagerHat
9 years ago

I feel for the people on fixed incomes. The elderly, disabled, single moms and woman (as your handle states widowed) these are the people that suffer while people like Bianchi get fat. Shame on him. I feel like he’s p dity in get him to the Greek f a recession.

B
B
Reply to  DowagerHat
9 years ago

DowagerHat, does that mean that you’re going to start on the recall of the mayor? Get going on that somebody has to do it and it seems like you’re volunteering.

observation deck
observation deck
9 years ago

Barry,
Do you realize that standing behind that statement that you mimicked makes you look moronic?

You need to apologize for it and have some damage control.

It will get you voted out.

Standing on principle and losing your seat for something right is one thing, but you could not be more wrong on this one.

Honest city employees will not “pay themselves one way or another”.
Only dshonest ones will do such a thing.
Your statement is off the charts, idiotic.

Whenever you take a job, you agree to work for the rate of pay.
Not a base pay and then added to dishonestly.

Your credibility has dropped to zero.
You need to stop defending yourself and apologize.

Opportunity Knox
Opportunity Knox
9 years ago

Looks like Barry can easily be defeated and the public is now painfully aware of the incompetency of the current mayor:

Suggestion;

Terry Kinnas. You should take out papers against Clairmont.
Get an apartment in his district if thats what it takes.

With Dan Valenti overtaking Dan Bianchi for the corner office and Terry Kinnas sitting in Barry’s seat, the city of Pittsfield would have a fighting chance of survival.

B
B
Reply to  Opportunity Knox
9 years ago

Terry doesn’t need to get an apartment in Barry’s District, Barry is a councilman at large the entire city that’s what at-large means

Rafael
Rafael
9 years ago

If I were a councilor, and another councilor’s husband threatened me with physical violence, I would do 2 things:
1) Invite them out to the parking lot and settle it mano a mano.
2) Do the exact opposite they told me to do.

Scott
Scott
Reply to  Rafael
9 years ago

For real and I would assume mr Mazzeo would feel uncomfortable and be a big cry baby if the roles were reversed and he was the one threatened and intimidated. I’m not saying someone should as it would be wrong but the man isn’t unreachable.

thomas more
thomas more
Reply to  Rafael
9 years ago

He’s only about 5’3″ Raf. A big guy like you could use him as a punching bag. Then again I know a guy whose 5’3″ who dressed down Carmen Basillio.

Ron Kitterman
Ron Kitterman
9 years ago

I found it interesting that the consultant came up with 15 cities of similar size to Pittsfield in population, geography and other factors. I did a check and could only come with 10 but then again I’m not on the city dime to come up with figures either.
Arlington – 42,844 Representative town government
Attleboro 43,593 Mayor City Council
Barnstable 45,193 City Mayor
Beverly 59,503 Mayor Council
Billerica 40,243 Town
Everett 46,663 Mayor Alderman
Fitchburg 40,318 Mayor Council
Leominster 40,759 Mayor Council
Methuen 47,355 Mayor Council
Salem 41,340 Mayor Council
Pittsfield 45,793 Mayor council

I didn’t check the salaries but I’m sure the consultant will find that the Pittsfield is on starvation rations, but average price of a home should be a good guide also. Let’s remember that most of these communities are in the Eastern end of the state. Other than Barnstable we could always ask School Committee member Tony Riello how lucrative his pay was there compared to the Berkshires.

Arlington , Ma Average Listing Price $248,706 -3.3% w-o-w Median Sales Price $204,467 -17.7% y-o-y
Attleboro, Ma Average Listing Price $248,706 -3.3% w-o-w Median Sales Price $204,467 -17.7% y-o-y
Barnstable, Ma The median sales price for homes in Hyannis MA for Jan 14 to Apr 14 was $240,000. This represents an increase of 20.6%, or $41,000, compared to the prior quarter and an increase of 23.7% compared to the prior year. Sales prices have appreciated 49.5% over the last 5 years in Hyannis. The average listing price for Hyannis homes for sale on Trulia was $365,815 for the week ending Apr 30, which represents a decline of 2.9%, or $10,997, compared to the prior week and a decline of 0.3%, or $1,008, compared to the week ending Apr 09. Average price per square foot for Hyannis MA was $168, a decrease of 1.8% compared to the same period last year.
Beverly , Ma Average Listing Price $793,067 for week ending Apr 30 ⬆ +$50,716 +6.8% w-o-w Median Sales Price $339,000Jan ’14 – Apr ’14⬆ +$39,000 +13.0% y-o-
Billerica, Ma Average Listing Price $374,230 for week ending Apr 30 ⬇ -$82 -0.0% w-o-w Median Sales Price $314,900 Jan ’14 – Apr ’14 ⬆ +$15,000 +5.0% y-o-y
Everett, Ma Average Listing Price $338,484 for week ending Apr 30 ⬆ +$44,987 +15.3% w-o-w Median Sales Price $217,000 Jan ’14 – Apr ’14 ⬇ $32,000 -12.9% y-o-y
Fitchburg, Ma Average Listing Price $178,612 Q92:Q93for week ending Apr 30 ⬇ -$3,115 -1.7% w-o-w Median Sales Price $155,000 Jan ’14 – Apr ’14 ⬆ +$7,250 +4.9% yo- Leominster, Ma Average Listing Price $231,035 for week ending Apr 30 ⬆ +$14,437 +6.7% w-o-w Median Sales Price $132,000 Jan ’14 – Apr ’14 ⬇ $42,500 -24.4% y-o-y
Methuen, Ma Average Listing Price $314,650 for week ending Apr 30⬇ -$10,391 -3.2% w-o-w Median Sales Price $448,422 Jan ’14 – Apr ’14 ⬆ +$208,422 +86.8% y-o-y
Salem, Ma Average Listing Price $329,866 R:Rfor week ending Apr 30 ⬇ -$4,683 -1.4% w-o-w Median Sales Price $267,500 Jan ’14 – Apr ’14 ⬆ +$28,500 +11.9% y-o-y
Pittsfield, Ma Average Listing Price $236,840 for week ending Apr 30 ⬇ -$7,083 -2.9% w-o-w Median Sales Price $154,500 Jan ’14 – Apr ’14 ⬆ +$23,500 +17.9% y-o-y

Edconnect
Edconnect
Reply to  Ron Kitterman
9 years ago

Thanks ron.

Dave
Dave
9 years ago

Councilor Lothrup made a great point that the study had 1999 data plugged into part of it, and from what I heard was never given a reasonable explanation why- 1 vote no

Councilor Connell made a great point(not so according to the lobbyist..I mean consultant) that the cost of living in the comparative cities were much higher that Pittsfield and was ever given a response to refute that he bought( hey it wouldn’t have been good for the study so they used a different formula)-2 votes no

Councilor Clairmont, while insulting the senior citizens with his apples to oranges comparison(and I guarantee I can find instances when he has made the apples to oranges argument on other issues) has obviously realized with his narrow victory last election which he attributed to his not supporting the new charter, realizes he needs to put a notch in his “back the mayor” column if he wants to be reelected. 1 vote yes
P.S. Barry, I don’t think enough seniors took part in your tax break program to make up for the ones you just pissed off, but you can make that argument next election season.

President Mazzeo- Got a nice shout out by Mayor Bianchi of being the only councilor that knows what the “Hygiene factor” of a city was. Sort of creepy how he was almost blushing, but walk down North St and tell me how we rate in “hygiene factor” 2 votes yes

Those were my initial impressions, I will watch again and see if anything else strikes me-like anyone cares lol, we are just a few haters and can’t make a difference.

C. Trzcinka
C. Trzcinka
9 years ago

The consultant’s report should have been publicly available weeks before the meeting. The meeting never should have taken place without time to look at the key data. The committee did the right thing by tabling it but the reason should be time to view the report, not based on the discussion.

Bianchi is irresponsible and those who enable him are doing the city a disservice.

Mark
Mark
9 years ago

As Howard Cosell would put it “down goes Clairmont! down goes Clairmont!”

Mark
Mark
9 years ago

Seriously BC, how can you justify these raises during these obvious tough times? The 0%, 0% 1.5% 0% 0% raises for these peeps over the last 5 years is very similar to what police and fire have gotten, or not gotten. Why not give them the raise instead?

C. J.
C. J.
9 years ago

The city of Pittsfield should consider instituting a flexible merit system in its hiring, ie; ex number of points for required education, experience, objective interview process, testing, military training, and Points for Pittsfield Residency, etc.

Mike Ward
Mike Ward
9 years ago

The rollout of this thing was worse than the Obamacare website, almost as if the mayor doesn’t want it to pass. And yet the proposal contains some worthwhile reforms. Who will step in and clean up this mess (and then sell it to an understandably dubious public)?

Dave
Dave
Reply to  Mike Ward
9 years ago

Mike, I agree, which is why in my opinion the retroactive pay was in the proposal. The council rejects the retroactive pay playing the hero, but backs the pay raises as necessary to attract and retain “the most qualified” applicants. Sounds eerily similar to the $2 million increase in school budget funding that was reduced to $1 million that is considered a cut! The retroactive pay had a purpose- everyone will be so happy that the council rejects it, they will feel like they won, not even realizing what they lost.

dusty
dusty
9 years ago

Does this mean the mayor is not an idiot? But really just a very sly fox?

It could go either way.

Or both.

Scott
Scott
Reply to  dusty
9 years ago

He’s not an idiot he’s calculating narcissist.

Scott
Scott
Reply to  danvalenti
9 years ago

My comment was my opinion of the mayor not Barry. Just to be clear I think Barry really does care about the city even though I do disagree that higher pay will attract better quality people. We should be rewarding quality people and getting rid if the hacks.