West Side aldermen keep pay raises

February 6, 2012
By |

A recent report by The Chicago Tribune found many aldermen have chosen to keep optional annual raises, and some haven’t taken furlough days along with rank-and-file workers who’ve had no choice but to take the unpaid days off amid the city’s budget woes.

On the West Side, Ald. Jason C. Ervin (28th), Michael D. Chandler (24th) and Deborah L. Graham (29th) each took a pay increase of $4,259 last year, raising their annual salaries from $108,086 in 2011 to $112,345 in 2012.

While the city’s furlough requirement was in place until June 30, 2011, not one of the three aldermen took a single unpaid day in 2011.

Ald. Emma M. Mitts (37th) also took her pay increase this year. Up $4,357 from 2011, Mitts’ 2012 salary is $114,913, according to the Tribune report.

But Mitts did take four furlough days in 2011, a decrease from the 24 unpaid days she took in 2010, among the greatest number of days taken by all Chicago aldermen that year.

While Mitts has the highest salary of the four West Side aldermen, she hasn’t taken a pay raise since 2009.

To read the complete story by the Chicago Tribune, click here.

2 thoughts on “West Side aldermen keep pay raises

  1. All alderman should be require to perform as they are, city employees, and take all furlough days that are mandated of them. They’re no exceptions to the rule. If other city employees are stipulated to fulfill this requirement, so should they. Where’s the equality in this. Politicians should re-evaluate their moral and value systems (if they have any), especially the new aldermen. How can they justify receiving a pay raise during this economic climate? How selfish and greedy can they be? This behavior is indicative of why it’s difficult to vote and support politicians when they make these type of dumb decisions. What credentials do they bring to the table to warrant these salaries?

  2. AustinTalks received this comment from local resident Serethea Reid: “In the 29th ward the alderman took 100% of the optional pay increase. However, of the $1.3 million available for improvements to the 29th ward through the alderman’s menu fund, only 87% of the money was taken and applied for improvements to the ward. Over $163,000, more than 13% of the money, was turned back and not spent. Why would an alderman take 100% for personal gain but only 87% for their constituents? I certainly can look out my window or drive down the street and see plenty of places where that money could have been spent.”

Leave a Reply