Feb 3, 2003 By Janet Galla 3 min read

Perry Township has lain stagnate for years resulting in outrageous debt along with some of the worse roads and equipment in the county. Supervisors made some very hard decisions this year that helped in paying down the debt. Regardless of how the debt accumulated, we cannot undo what was done, and elected officials must keep promises to make decisions based on the best interest of the township. The recent reorganization meeting of the newly elected auditors is a perfect example of how to put numbers together with a specific goal in mind. It is so far removed from reality that it is ludicrous.

Supervisors scrutinized the 2003 budget and decided no salary increases would occur until the debt is paid off. Supervisors also reduced excessive overtime by allowing for compensatory time.

This would save thousands that were allocated to reduce debt and repair deplorable roads.

At the annual auditor reorganization meeting, the supervisors’ decision was nullified. Auditors granted a 6 percent increase for only one position and continued the overtime compensation. A salary increase was not included nor asked for in our recommendation to the auditors. Did the auditors review the current budget or the current financial records prior to making that decision? What happened to their public pledge?

The auditors’ rationale was the average wage across the state is higher and comparable townships, such as South Union and Dunbar, pay their workers more than Perry. Get real. Perry Township will never be on par with these two townships. Perry’s tax revenue is not comparable, nor is its population, roads and businesses. Why would wealthier townships be used? Assessed valuation of property prior to the recent reassessment in Perry Township was $13.7 million, compared to South Union at $117.5 million and Dunbar at $42.9 million.

The board agreed to reduce the salary of the newly appointed secretary by nearly 20 percent and held off giving raises to the part-time employee.

So how can the auditors justify a salary increase for one position when the township is not back to a fully-staffed, three-persons road crew?

How can the auditors justify another salary increase (the third in four years) for only one position during his first term in office? How can they base a decision on the state’s average salary?

If it were that simple, all rural townships would use that reason to pay their workers. When you can’t afford the state average, you don’t pay it.

Why not be realistic and compare Perry Township to Franklin, Jefferson, Springfield, Springhill and Henry Clay who are similar in size and resources?

These townships, as well as many others, have proven what can be done with good fiscal management by concentrating on getting the roads repaired, purchasing equipment and then repaying those that have worked so hard to improve their communities.

The taxpayers deserve a better explanation. How did this decision help a distressed community by reallocating tax revenue for personal gain rather than for road improvements?

For years citizens stood by and did nothing as the financial condition and roads worsened. We need community involvement. Ask the auditors – Mark French, Fred Kohler and Pam Newmeyer – to rethink their position and help Perry get out of debt, fix their roads, buy some equipment that isn’t constantly breaking down and get back to full staff.

Janet Galla is a Perry Township supervisor.