By VICKI URBANIK

For the second time in as many months, the Porter County Council on Thursday rejected proposed pay increases for employees at the tourism department.

Porter County Convention, Recreation and Visitors Commission Executive Director Lorelei Weimer presented a compromise version of the proposed pay increases, as directed by the council last month. The council rejected the pay increases during budget hearings last year and again last month when Weimer gave it another try.

The latest proposal called for the PCCRVC’s director of finance and administration to go from $33,323 to $40,073, the marketing director from $36,878 to $41,628, the partnership development director from $33,745 to $37,000, and the public relations director from $33,439 to $37,000. The original proposal presented last month called for higher pay hikes for the top two staffers.

As she did last month, Weimer noted that PCCRVC employees are in effect in competition with the private sector, where salaries tend to be much higher. She noted last month that there has been a significant turnover among the positions for that very reason.

Further, Weimer said the director of finance has assumed new responsibilities and will soon be functioning much like an assistant director.

Council member Michael Bucko, D-4th, said that because the PCCRVC employees are competing with the private sector, they are more marketable, and that the PCCRVC needs to stay competitive with its pay. But council member Jim Burge, R-at large, said he’s concerned about the growing cost of the bureaucracy involved.

The request died when the council deadlocked 3-3. Those in support were Bucko, William Carmichael, R-at large, and Robert Poparad, D-1st. Those opposed were Burge, Rita Stevenson, D-2nd, and Dan Whitten, D-at large. Member Karen Conover, R-3rd, was absent.

After the council’s vote took place, a brief but fiery exchange broke out between Bucko and Whitten. Bucko asked his colleagues: “What is the problem?” He said it’s not fair for the council to reject Weimer last month, but and direct her to work on a compromise and then reject her again. “There’s got to be some reasoning here,” he said.

Whitten responded that there are many county government employees who do good work but who didn’t get the same type of pay hike. He also said he doesn’t buy the argument that county employees aren’t as marketable to the private sector as those at the PCCRVC. But Bucko fired back, saying that Whitten doesn’t “have a clue.” Whitten responded that as business owner, he is well aware about salary issues and said that maybe it’s Bucko who doesn’t “have a clue.”

Posted 3/21/2008