While on my layoff, I received an e-mail of an e-mail that had me scratching my head a little. The e-mail seemed innocuous at the time because I lacked context; in fact, when I read it, I wanted to give the Mayor of Flowery Branch a pat on the back for his fiscal conservatism. It wasn’t until my friend sent me a text and I did a little research that the picture came together.
In the e-mail (Click Here to Read), the Mayor of Flowery Branch appears to be a little upset that members of his council are asking for a raise for the Judge and Solicitor. It seems that someone on the council thought that the Judge and Solicitor deserved a raise. Maybe they were doing a great job and there was some thought that they deserved some additional money. According to the Mayor, this would have been a “24% raise for the judge and a 28% raise for the solicitor.”
So, if I understand this correctly, the Mayor didn’t want a raise for his employees, but he did want a 67% raise for himself. Take a look at page 6 of 7 of the Official Minutes of Flowery Branch: “Mayor Miller stated that he has been in favor of the per diem for several years…” Just wow.
As it turns out, the vote was split, 3-2, with two of the three people running for reelection voting against the measure. This brought out the ire of the Mayor who offered “that it would be hypocritical for someone to vote against this ordinance and then collect the money for the per diem”. Evidently, the mayor and Councilwoman Richards believe that members need to be paid to show up to events. I have to agree with a fellow South Hall writer, that is Baloney! (I see you have taken some time off John. I understand. Get your batteries recharged and get back in the game.)
So, the Mayor thinks that voting against a raise for the council is “hypocritical”, but if you vote for a raise for the employees it is “beyond ridiculous”. Mayor, I was wondering why the wife of a county commissioner would run against you, but now I am starting to see why.