DATE: Monday, August 4, 1997                TAG: 9708040178

SECTION: LOCAL                   PAGE: B1   EDITION: NORTH CAROLINA 

TYPE: Letter 

                                            LENGTH:   79 lines

LETTERS TO EDITOR -- THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT -- NORTH CAROLINA

Some issues debated by the N.C. General Assembly in our budget negotiations have received a great deal of coverage by the media; others have received little attention, yet they represent major philosophical differences between the Senate and House.

A good example is pay raises for legislators. The House voted to give members of the General Assembly a 4 percent pay raise.

Senate members think this is wrong.

The people of this state have spoken loudly in the last two elections - and many individuals running for office have repeated their cry in campaign rhetoric - that they do not want to see the salaries for legislators raised. The General Assembly has not voted itself a pay raise since 1994 (effective in the 1994 Session), and the Senate does not believe that we should do so now.

The Senate will not agree to a legislative pay raise in this budget bill and we will oppose the House's efforts to do this.

Another example of this difference is a House provision that could give special benefits to legislators.

The House created a special retirement benefit for a select group of former, and possibly future, legislators who become members of the judicial branch of government. For example, under the House provision legislators who become judges or clerks of court could double or even triple their retirement.

The Senate does not believe that legislators, particularly small, select groups of them, should be given any special privileges or benefits beyond what is appropriate for the service of all members of the General Assembly to this state. We oppose the House provision as it benefits legislators.

This provision was not contained in the Senate budget, which is under consideration in conference along with other items contained in the House budget bill. We are still reviewing other parts of this provision as they relate to clerks of court and other court system officials.

But we can say today that we will not agree with creating any special retirement benefit that could greatly enrich a small group of legislators.

We oppose the House's efforts to create special benefits for ourselves. We are here to serve the people of our state and to address their needs, not our own. We should be focusing on education, teacher salaries, cleaning up our rivers, and fully funding Smart Start, and not spending time and effort creating our own sweet retirement pots and increasing our own paychecks.

We can do better. The people deserve better. The Senate will do better.

Sen. Marc Basnight

President Pro Tempore Backs water proposal:

As a business owner in Currituck County since 1987 and in Dare County since 1979, I would like to commend the Dare County Commissioners for having the foresight, and just plain common sense, to work with developers of the northern Outer Banks on an emergency water situation. With literally thousands of jobs involved, many for Dare County residents, I would hope that Kill Devil Hills and Nags Head quickly join this emergency water agreement.

Thank goodness for Ernie Bowden's support on the Currituck side. Instead of squabbling over Dare County's wisdom, Currituck County should be doing everything possible to work on a permanent and secure water source for the northern Outer Banks. With the tremendous tax base being provided, as well as the amount of revenue at stake for Currituck County, let us keep one thing in mind: Without water, there will be no cash cow.

Let me also remind the Currituck Commissioners that it is not the northern Outer Banks that is causing the vast growth problem in schools, etc., for it has been an important link in addressing those problems and working toward a solution.

Greg Honeycutt

President, Ocean Atlantic Rentals Salary of educator:

In regard to a recent article in your newspaper, relative to the salary and installment of the president of the University of North Carolina, I would like to know the reason why any state government-employed administrator, having responsibility primarily to just a relatively small segment of the population of the state, should be paid more than the governor of the state, since the governor has a responsibility to every person in the state, and not just a relatively few persons.

Royce Kirby

Elizabeth City

Send Suggestions or Comments to webmaster@scholar.lib.vt.edu