What You Pay For


By Star-Telegram Editorial
Fort Worth Star-Telegram

Published 8/25/2004

City jobs were once notorious for not paying well, though that seems to be changing -- so much so that smaller communities sometimes find they can't pay the tab for the level of expertise they need.

At Kennedale, for instance, the City Council couldn't find a single experienced fire chief willing to take the job and manage a 15-firefighter staff for what the city of 6,100 was willing to pay.

That salary was a not-too-shabby $65,000 annually, plus perks. But evidently that's so far below the market standard that no one qualified was interested. Potential candidates already have better deals than that.

Though one example does not a statistic make, a couple of easy conclusions could be made from this example. First: Given the volatility of the private sector in recent years, both the stability and potential earnings with the public sector are gaining in popularity.

Second: The argument that city managers everywhere seem to be making -- that competitive salaries are required to keep or attract quality personnel -- is more than just bureaucratic spin.

One of the constant mantras of modern civilization is that education and training pay, both being integral to the qualification process.

Kennedale's solution, incidentally, worked out as a compromise. The council promoted a promising Fire Department lieutenant to interim chief. If the relationship works out, in a year he'll become fire chief and earn a bigger salary. In this way, the city expands opportunities for its own employees and gives one of them a unique career promotion opportunity.

And maybe this will work out. Then again, there's also the possibility that somewhere during the coming year the "interim" chief will discover that some other city is willing to up the ante and drop that interim business.

In the end, whether it's private sector or public, the cliche is true: You get what you pay for.