4/23/02  Response to Phil Levin:

After reading Mr. Levin's opinions on the pay referendum, I felt compelled to offer a little historical information to consider regarding our pay in hopes it would clear up some of the reservations he has in voting for the referendum.

First,17%, why? This 17% was not arbitrarily picked by the associations (all of the different associations are united in this for the first time).  This 17% was decided upon to make us COMPETITIVE with the local agencies, not at the top of the list, just up to average.

Secondly, as Sharon states,, it's the law.  We have no choice about it being across the board.  See www.undergroundcop.com for details regarding the pay parity lawsuit for clarification.  We do not like it that our incompetent command staff will receive a hefty raise as a result, but this is more for the rank and file than it is for the chiefs.  Chiefs come and go.  The rest of us will be here for many years to come doing our best to serve the citizens to the best of our ability.

Third, Mr. Levin asks "what if we had been allowed to think about this instead of having it shoved down our throats?".  We are not attempting to shove it down the throats of the citizens, we are simply ASKING for your approval.  We are going to the citizens because when your elected officials were preparing this year's budget back late last year, they decided to give us ZERO.  

City hall did decide to give us a small raise last year, I believe it was a divided 5% -- half in October, half in April.  They also they raised our health insurance rates, all but zeroing out the so called raise.

Regarding different amounts for different shifts or more risky duties, that is already in place.  We currently get a small percentage for working evening and grave yard shifts, and for working in more risky assignments such as patrol.  Those shift and assignment percentages would also be adjusted by any raise the citizens approve.

As for "hamstringing the Mayor", Laura and other council members signed our petition for the referendum when she was running for election.  Not for her current 5/5/5 proposal, but for the 17% referendum.  Yes, the reps of the associations refused the offer of 5/5/5.  Not because we are greedy, but for many other reasons.  One -- the council is not obligated to uphold the 2nd and 3rd years of the 5/5/5 proposal.  The Mayor cannot obligate future city councils. 

We have learned the hard way that downtown cannot be trusted to uphold their promises (i.e. the Arena fiasco, tax abatements, etc. etc. etc....).  The unions are not setting policy, we are simply asking the voters to decide instead of Our Downtown Betters who cannot be trusted to do what is right for the citizens instead of looking out for the wealthy billionaires.

Mr. Levin says "benchmarking" compensation against others who do the same job is standard practice in corporate America.  That is all we are asking the citizens to do.  Mr. Levin says "if Dallas pay is out of whack compared to other cities in the area, it should be adjusted".  That is all we are ASKING -- to be adjusted so that we are competitive with other cities in the area.

I hope others do not feel we are "demanding" your money or backing taxpayers against the wall.  We simply feel like a "necessary evil" in the eyes of the politicians, who say they are for improving public safety when running for election, then claim to be bankrupt when it comes time to put up the money.

Finally, I'll ask you these questions. 

How can how can the Mayor and city council claim a pay raise for public safety personnel will raise taxes dramatically on one hand, then be willing to spend $46 million in tax money on another arts center for the rich who live in other cities to enjoy? 

Why are the Mayor and city council willing to propose a huge bond election, which they admit would raise taxes, to fund other pet projects but won't do the same to improve public safety? 

We aren't demanding anything.  We are ASKING for the citizens to set the priorities straight since the elected officials don't seem willing to do so.

Do the citizens want another arts center and fancy bridges that may or may not come to be?  Or, do they want basic services improved? 

Laura promised to improve the basics and was elected on those promises.  I hope that she and the citizens are truly dedicated to that.

Thank you and the other citizens in advance for your support on this issue.