A pay raise package for elected officials in Massachusetts is expected to be finalized this week on Beacon Hill. While pay raises for public officials are always controversial, this plan has drawn just token opposition.
The House and Senate both have formal sessions scheduled on Thursday when lawmakers could vote on Governor Charlie Baker’s veto of the pay raise measure that would cost the state about $18 million in its first full year.
Baker said the bill is “fiscally irresponsible.”
"Given the Commonwealth's fiscal outlook as we continue to rightsize our budget, close the structural deficit, and reduce the reliance on one-time revenues without raising taxes, we felt it was important to veto this fiscally irresponsible legislation," Baker said.
He formally vetoed the bill after issuing a statement that said it did not serve the best interests of the taxpayers.
"We are still dealing with relatively modest revenue growth and as a result have to make some pretty tough decisions about what to support and what not to support," said Baker.
The bill passed the House 116-44 and the Senate 31-9. The margins are more than sufficient to override the governor’s veto.
The Republican governor, who enjoys a good working relationship with the legislature’s Democratic leadership, has avoided rhetoric excoriating lawmakers over the pay raise bill. Despite Baker’s suggestion on a Boston radio program this week that people call their legislators to complain, there is no evidence of a groundswell of opposition.
The conservative-leaning Citizens for Limited Taxation and the Massachusetts Republican Party have both issued several caustic press releases critical of the pay raise measure and in some cases calling out individual legislators for supporting it. But CLT’s and the state GOP’s frequent allies -- business groups that wield considerable influence on Beacon Hill -- have kept silent.
State Senate President Stan Rosenberg of Amherst has rejected suggestions that the pay raise bill is being rushed through while the public is caught up in the uproar over the new Trump administration and distracted by the Patriots playing in the Super Bowl.
" That is totally cynical," said Rosenberg. " You make these adjustments at the beginning of the term before they get their assignments so they are not voting on their own raises."
The bill does not change the $62,547 base salary for legislators, but it increases the additional stipends that go to committee chairpersons and legislative leaders. Just about every member of the legislature receives a stipend. For Rosenberg and House Speaker Robert DeLeo, the annual stipend would increase by $45,000 bringing their pay to $142,000.
" It ( the stipends) has not been adjusted in 33 years. It has half of inflation. Most people's pay keeps up with inflation and this ( the pay raise) is half of inflation," said Rosenberg.
He said the rationale for the proposed level of compensation is laid out in a 2014 report from an advisory commission. Chaired by former state revenue commissioner Ira Jackson, the commission made its recommendations based on a review of the responsibilities of the elected officials along with comparisons with other states and with executive pay in the private sector.
" We found the compensation for the governor, in particular, is inadequate," said Jackson.
Under the proposal, the governor’s annual salary would go from $151,800 to $185,000. There would also be a $65,000 annual housing allowance. Baker has said he won’t accept the raise or the housing stipend.
Lt. Gov. Karyn Polito said she will not take the pay raise.
Of the other elected state officials whose salaries would increase to $165,000 or $175,000, only State Auditor Suzanne Bump has said she’ll take the raise.
Spokespeople for Attorney General Maura Healey, Treasurer Deborah Goldberg, and Secretary of State Bill Galvin, say they have not decided what they’ll do.
