From the Archive: Konopnicki Attempts to Raise County Officials Salaries

 

 

 

Calculating how much he can spend

According to his campaign brochure, “Konopnicki opposes bigger government and party politics at taxpayer expenses” … Bill has “listened to your concerns … represented YOU and your issues…”  And finally, Bill Supports “… solving the budget problem.” [that he helped create]

The following oldie but goodie from the vault clearly illustrates where this term limited House member’s heart is – and just when Arizona’s economy was beginning to show signs of what was to come.

No wonder your county officials love him, they’re underpaid.

Az House-Senate panel clears way for county officials’ pay
Arizona Capitol Times, May 18, 2007 | by Luige del Puerto

A group of Arizona lawmakers stripped off an amendment to a proposal that would have required elected county officials to vote to accept a pay hike.

The current version of H2102, sponsored by Rep. William Konopnicki, R-5, seeks to raise the annual salary of seven county officials by approximately 13 percent. Affected officials include the county
attorney, assessor, recorder, sheriff, superintendent of schools, supervisors and treasurer.

In the original bill, the county attorney, for example, is guaranteed an increase to $123,678 from $109,450, and the sheriff, an increase to $100,824 from $89,225, beginning January 2009.
On May 15, six lawmakers – three members from each chamber – met in a conference committee and
adopted the House version of H2102. That version, which contains the sponsor’s original intent, now

goes back to the Senate and the House for final votes.
Konopnicki was opposed to the Senate amendment, offered by Sen. Ron Gould, R-3. His intent was to
remove the amendment in the conference.

Gould, who represented the Senate side together with Senators Jake Flake, R-5, and Rebecca Rios, D-23, anticipated the move.  Immediately after the House side voted to adopt the House version, Gould offered a verbal amendment to the Senate version of the bill.  The gist of his verbal motion was to require the county board of supervisors to take a majority vote to accept all or part of the proposed pay raise.


Comments

  1. This is puzzling. We are going to the polls on May 18 to vote on increasing sales tax because state officials overspend on social programs and leave law enforcement and roads bleeding in order to justify the tax hike. My mind just can’t grasp the mired political motive behind hiking salaries for elected officials in this economy. Especially when friends in state & county government just escaped losing their jobs. This is the same idiocy behind Prop 100–the pay raise for school administrators and their special interest contractors.

  2. The story and the bill are from 2007, not the current budget crisis.

  3. Thanks for the clarification.

  4. Veritas Vincit says

    James, true … but what happened beginning in 2005 through 2008 are the spending events that led us to where Arizona finds itself today. In fact, it was a hand-full of liberal or moderate Republican members of the House who pledged to support Speaker Flake’s balanced budget and then bolted to vote for Napolitano’s $1B over spending budget.

  5. It was 16 gop lawmakers, which is substantially more than a handful. To say they pledged their vote is disingenuous… they were largely frozen out by Eddie Farnsworth, the majority leader, so they worked with Democrats and Senate Republicans on a budget.

  6. Veritas Vincit says

    The man in the picture with this story pledged his vote and support to his “friend and district co-legislator” Speaker Flake. That is an irrefutable fact for which Jake never forgave him. The Az Capitol Times reported this House member as the leader of the basement revolt.

    And the number you cite is incorrect.

Leave a Reply