At the last council meeting, the
following Fact Sheet was discussed:
Everyone seemed to agree that for “longevity” pay to
be included as part of an employee’s annual base salary at the time of
retirement, it had to be included throughout the entire career.
This administration claimed this took place with
regard to the Chief’s reported numbers.
I asked: if that were the case and you look at his reported base
salaries within the last ten years, shouldn’t you see a pattern of maybe a 2%
increase each year? The spokesperson for
this administration seemed to agree.
The Asbury Park database reported the Chief’s 2009
base salary to be $154, 252. It reports
his 2013 base salary to be $ 183, 736.
That is a $ 29, 484 base salary increase (19.1% raise in just 4 years). Even if his longevity award grew from 10% in
2009 to 12% in 2013, it still would not add up to a 19% base salary increase.
The longevity pay was included with the base salary
in 2013 (when the Chief was first mentioned to retire). It was included in 2014 because this
administration listed his base salary at $ 187, 410.72 at the time of
retirement. From 2013 to 2014, there was
a 2% increase.
The public will have to see more reported base
salaries to determine if there was a retirement spike (which isn’t allowed) and
if longevity pay was being reported throughout the entire career (which is
required).
