Same old routine on pay raise

So much for my good ideas.

Last fall, after the Cedar Rapids City Council voted to give City Manager Jeff Pomeranz a pay raise, I suggested that it was bad form to take that action as part of the council's 'consent agenda.” For those of you unfamiliar with council-ease, that's the long list of 'routine” agenda items the council passes with a single vote and no discussion.

I argued that any raise for Iowa's highest-paid city manager deserved at least some form of public justification or explanation. I didn't suggest that Pomeranz had done a lousy job or didn't deserve a raise. I simply argued that the occasion called for some public comment on his performance.

But on Tuesday, yet again, Pomeranz's 4.5 percent pay increase was tucked in among five-and-a-quarter pages of routine items on the council's consent agenda. There it was, nestled between a resolution authorizing a 'Task Force 1” member to attend structural collapse training in Texas and a list of 29 contracts.

You might also be glad to know that, along with the manager's raise, the council renewed Chili's liquor license. They both received the same amount of discussion.

Pomeranz's 4.5 percent raise is worth $11,350, increasing his annual base salary to $267,762. He also gets 32 percent of his salary in deferred compensation for retirement and a $3,600 car allowance. Although his pay is the state's highest, The Gazette's Rick Smith reports that his car allowance trails Des Moines, Davenport, Dubuque and Iowa City managers. I doubt this means Pomeranz is tooling around on public transit.

Last year, Pomeranz got a 4.8 percent raise after 5.8 percent in 2012 and 3 percent in 2011. His pay has been raised roughly $42,000 since he arrived in 2010.

And every raise was approved without council comment.

Mayor Ron Corbett told me that the council recently met in closed session to review the city manager's job performance, which it's allowed to do under Iowa law. He said Pomeranz received high marks.

For instance, Corbett said last year, the council expressed concerns about the city's communication functions and strategy. Since then, Pomeranz has made new hires and reorganized communication functions. The council, Corbett says, likes the changes.

That's the sort of stuff I think the council should be explaining to the public when it raises Pomeranz's salary. And I think it can do so in a way that doesn't compromise confidential personnel records. If the council gives the manager goals and objectives, we ought to know if he's meeting them. By all accounts, Pomeranz is doing a great job. I'm not sure why the council wouldn't want to take this opportunity to underscore that.

I suppose it's mainly because city leaders are worried such a public discussion would shine a light on Pomeranz's paycheck. Last fall's spate of stories and columns on the subject weren't well-received at City Hall.

But, actually, I'm far more likely to write about Pomeranz's raise if it's tucked into the consent agenda. Nothing stokes curiosity quite like someone claiming 'nothing to see here.”

l Comments: (319) 398-8452; todd.dorman@thegazette.com