What's wrong with this picture?
Ketchum Mayor Ed Simon broke a tie vote to approve a budget that increased $1.2 million. Nearly half is earmarked for pay raises, higher benefits and more staff.
Capital—the nuts and bolts side of the city that includes equipment, sidewalks and lighting, bike paths, buildings and the like, got a measly $62,678 or just 5.2 percent of the increase in the general fund.
Should anyone care?
Yes, because the course of any government is set by its budget.
The wallowing stance set out yet again by the city of Ketchum is that it can't do much about the city's tourist infrastructure—the bells and whistles that make the town a nice place to visit and do business--except pay city staff-. Its reason? Not enough money.
What this means is that getting relatively inexpensive basics done, like sidewalks and lighting, will take years and years and years. And through those years, children and their parents will compete with SUVs for space in the street and will stumble in the dark after sundown.
It means that in order to get anything major built—like a new visitor's center—taxpayers will have to agree to pay more taxes in the form of improvement districts, general obligation bonds and impact fees. Otherwise, nothing will happen.
Yet, the City Council approved salary packages that far exceed what local businesses pay. The packages give new meaning to the phrase, "Of the people, by the people, for the people."
On their face, city salaries are somewhat higher than the local private sector and are set to increase by 5.5 percent. But that's not the whole story.
Health insurance is where things get really great. The city pays the insurance bill for an employee's or elected official's entire family—no matter how large. This means that the average health benefit per city employee is about $14,000 instead of an estimated $4,000 per employee more commonly paid by local businesses that provide health insurance.
This means that in Ketchum, a $32,000 clerical salary is really $46,000. It means that the average salary of $45,517 is really $59,517—or 30 percent more than it appears to be. In addition, employees get a substantial retirement benefit.
Not bad by any measure.
Ketchum argues that great salaries are necessary to recruit and retain skilled city staff in the face of a sky-high cost of living. Unfortunately for the city—and every local business—it will never be able to pay salaries high enough for most individuals to buy into the local real estate market.
Better, the city should get a solid comprehensive program of affordable community housing in place. That would help the city and its businesses. Unwisely, housing is not included anywhere in the city's budget. That would be a capital expense, to which the city is apparently allergic.
