Questions went to wrong place

To the editor:

This letter is referenced to The Commercial Review’s coverage of the April 15 Common Council of the City of Portland meeting where a representative of the Portland Police Department addressed the turnover problems of that department.

He referenced the key problem was “compensation.” Why he was questioning the common council is beyond me. He should have questioned the following:

•Mayor of the City of Portland

•Clerk-treasurer of the City of Portland

•Chief of the Portland Police Department

The mayor of the City of Portland is the head of the Board of Works and Public Safety. Reference to “Indiana Code 36-8-3-3. Organization of safety boards; appointment, numbers, and compensation of police officers, firefighters, and other officials; division of city into precincts and districts; authority of chiefs.” Refer to subsection (d).

Clerk-treasurer of the City of Portland (Indiana Code 36-4-10-4.5 Third class cities; fiscal officer; duties) subsection (6) Prepare for the legislative body the budget estimates of miscellaneous revenue, financial statements, and the proposed tax rate.

Chief of police department is charged with submitting the upcoming budget for his department with recommendations to the board of public works and submitting his recommendations for his employees of the police department upcoming salary.

Please reference Indiana Code 36-4-7 City Budget Procedures and Compensation of Officers and Employees refer to IC 36-4-7-6 Budget estimates; formulation procedure also IC 36-4-7-7 Report of estimates; ordinance fixing taxation rate; appropriation and IC 36-4-7-10 Preparation of budgets; contents; submission to legislative body.

As stated above, I think that maybe the people concerned about their compensation should address the people that make the recommendations of their salary. The legislative body is limited to approving the budget as presented but only can increase it only on the approval of the city executive.

Longevity pay — The clerk-treasurer in 2022 submitted INPRS (controls the police and firefighters pensions) a longevity pay of $1,080, then in 2023 it was lowered back to $840. Why? Maybe the officers should keep better track of the clerk-treasurer through the local pension board with better control.

Informational report from INPRS for the certified salary report that was published through the Fraternal Order of Police Indiana State Lodge stated the highest longevity was submitted from the Shelbyville Police Department of $21,588.03. Mishawaka Police Department paid no longevity but had a base certified salary of $89,000. Portland’s longevity is $840 this is third from the bottom of INPRS departments. 

Reference to internal issues, this is not a problem, only if you let it be, remember that there is no “I” in team. 

Before I finish this letter I would like to see the fire department brought back in line (salary) with the police department. This is another way that the city keeps everyone divided.

Remember that a lot of the division is from the top down.

Thank you,

Robert E. Moore

Portland