Taxes Will Rise to Pay for Ft. St. John City Dismissals

Monday, June 18, 2007 04:02 AM

Three senior managers of the City of Ft. St. John will have an opportunity this week to appeal their termination by the City of Ft. St. John.

The three; City Manager John Locker, City Clerk Carol Susak, and the Director of Recreation Patty Murray , were shown the door last Wednesday shortly after 2 PM.

Locker had just returned to Ft. St John after accompanying City Mayor Jim Eglinski on an out of town trip. The news came as a surprise to all three.

Based on the property tax revenues of the City of Ft St. John in 2006 of $14,135,919, the City will need to increase taxes substantially in order to pay out the trio.

The City could choose one of three options

take the money from reserves to lighten the tax increase,
pay the money out over a period of two years, or
pay it all in one year.

The tax increase (based on the City’s revenues in 2006) would mean that the average home owner would see their taxes rise by about 4.24% if the City opts to pay out the contracts in one year.

It is not known for certain, but the City Manager, John Locker could have his contract paid out over the duration, which would mean a period of about two years, while Susak and Murray would have to be compensated for their contract within the one year period.

It is estimated that the total cost to break the contracts and dismiss the three will be about $600,000 dollars.

In order for the three to win their appeal, the City would now have to have a change of heart and ask the three to remain on the job. That possibility, as indicated by some sources, has little chance of success.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Monday, June 18, 2007 04:02 AM in News by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: owl on June 18 2007 8:12 AM

So do most people in Ft. St. John know why this is happening?

Will there be full disclosure so that the citizens will support this and will pay their additional taxes with understanding and general agreement?

Or will the Council that took this move see the last year+ in their seats?

What was it that did not allow the Council to be tough enough with the manager, who reports to Council, to turn his practices around?

If they were tough enough with him, why would he not take their direction?

And, if he did not take their direction, why was there no cause for dismissal?

Anyone from Ft. St. John who can shed some light on this intrigue?

Posted by: seamutt on June 18 2007 10:26 AM

Hey nice setup if you can get it. If I got fired I would get nothing period! If it got this far to fire those three then I believe the Mayor and council should do the honorable thing and go also. But has anyone ever seen an honorable politician. Honorable people do not gravitate to those positions. Who hired those people in the first place?

Posted by: diplomat on June 18 2007 10:33 AM

The story is not telling us who made the decision and who had the final authority to dismiss/fire these people.

What did the three do wrong?

Posted by: Chadermando on June 18 2007 2:23 PM

I would deduce from this that it involves the ice oval project (recreation department).

Probably a case of politicians that are on a power trip and want their pet project at all costs. Politicians that are willing to bend the rules to make it happen and some honest public servants that tried to hold up some integrity with their positions and got their separation papers as a result. Obviously nothing illegal took place.

IMO politicians got caught playing games and the $600,000 is money to keep people from talking....

Posted by: thereasonableman on June 18 2007 9:38 PM

Is anybody else tired yet, or is it just me ?