The San Nicolas Double Standard: Protect My Pay, Not Others
TODAY:
– Sen. San Nicolas says senators do not deserve a pay raise
– Sen. San Nicolas says other elected officials should not get a raise until certain performance standards are met, because among other things, the financial condition of our government is very bad
10 MONTHS AGO:
– Sen. San Nicolas says he deserves the senatorial pay raise and, desires for the people to want to give him more pay
– Sen. San Nicolas said our financial condition doesn’t call on senators to give back their pay raise
The revised Hay Plan submitted by Governor Eddie Baza Calvo would propose the first wage adjustment for government workers since 1991. The record shows that Sen. Mike San Nicolas has been the staunchest defender of the recent senatorial pay raise, even though he’s now saying senators should not live with a pay raise and neither should other elected officials.
The Governor’s Office examined legislative records to show the senator’s hypocrisy on the subject of pay raises in the revised Hay Plan.
Interestingly, his bill protects the raise senators gave themselves without the benefit of public debate or discussion — a raise that was not based on the same performance standards he’s pegging to other elected officials and the cabinet. This salary adjustment was the first raise for any elected official in 20 years. Senator San Nicolas’ bill would keep this raise, yet deny hardworking and underpaid cabinet officials from their just compensation.
It was just last year, he made several public statements about protecting his own salary–even stating he hopes he would get paid more as a senator. During debate on a bill by Sen. Mike Limtiaco to rescind the senatorial pay raise, he opposed it. He also voted to not pass the measure in committee. During its public hearing, he mentioned, “that as a formal [sic] financial advisor, often times, people get what they pay for and with a low salary, the Legislature will have a difficult time attracting quality leaders.”
This is exactly the rationale the Governor, Lt. Governor, Mayors, and Vice Mayors use to support this Hay Plan. It corrects inequities in the government where comparable positions get paid differently because autonomous agencies are able to pay their employees what they deserve. The Hay Plan corrects this. Senator San Nicolas feels that pay for senators protect quality work, but won’t apply this logic to other positions, like the cabinet, Mayors, Vice Mayors, Attorney General, or Public Auditor.
During the legislative session on the same measure, he told the lawmaking body and the listening public that he is working to receive a pay raise. The following comment is taken from session on March 25, 2013.
I spoke very clearly when I was interviewed about salary cuts. And I said plainly, that I don’t believe we should be cutting our salary. I believe that we should be working so hardthe people want to give us a raise. That’s what I’ve been doing, Madam Speaker.
During this discussion, Senator San Nicolas plainly admitted that if given the choice to voluntarily reduce his salary, he would not elect to take a pay cut.
Below are excerpts from the public hearing and legislative session mentioned earlier in this release:
From the Committee Report on Bill No. 30-32 detailing the public hearing on the measure (emphasis added):
Senator Michael San Nicolas… said it is very difficult for a public figure to put into perspective the personal and private consequences of issues like these. Senator San Nicolas noted that often times in the media, senators are looked at as a category and are forgotten that they are people with their own livelihoods. He also mentioned that when this bill came up, it was another load to carry and a very difficult thing to consider…He said that as a formal [sic] financial advisor, often times, people get what they pay for and with a low salary, the Legislature will have a difficult time attracting quality leaders.
Senator San Nicolas’ remarks on March 25, 2013 during discussion on Bill No. 30-32 (emphasis added):
The consistent thing for us to do, is to determine whether or not our financial situation merits us taking the steps toward cutting [our salary to $55,307]… It was brought up that none of us campaigned on anything our salaries–but I beg to differ. I spoke very clearly when I was interviewed about salary cuts. And I said plainly, that I don’t believe we should be cutting our salary. I believe that we should be working so hard the people want to give us a raise. That’s what I’ve been doing, Madam Speaker.
