Pr. Ge­orge’s County pay need not be com­pa­ra­ble to Mont­gomery’s

The Washington Post Sunday - - SUNDAY OPINION - Join the de­bate at wash­ing­ton­­cal-opin­ions

Af­ter all of the abuses, I was pleased to read in the Sept. 13 Metro ar­ti­cle “Pr. Ge­orge’s board sug­gests ending ve­hi­cle ben­e­fits” that the Prince Ge­orge’s County Ve­hi­cle Use Re­view Board rec­om­mended that the county’s gen­er­ous car ben­e­fits to elected of­fi­cials and staff be dis­con­tin­ued.

But I was dis­mayed that some politicians think they have the right to re­tain their stipends to achieve par­ity with the salaries of their coun­ter­parts in Mont­gomery County. I would love to sell my house at a price com­pa­ra­ble to what it might fetch if it were in Bethesda. But such par­ity does not ex­ist for me. Why should our elected of­fi­cials be given an ex­cep­tion to this re­al­ity?

Mont­gomery County has a higher stan­dard of liv­ing. On the other hand, the cost of liv­ing in Prince Ge­orge’s is lower and ser­vices and taxes are less ex­pen­sive.

It is disin­gen­u­ous and self-serv­ing for said politicians to de­mand par­ity. When house­hold in­comes and ex­penses in Prince Ge­orge’s County match those of Mont­gomery County, then we can talk about rais­ing the salaries of our elected of­fi­cials.

I would ex­pect a lit­tle more grat­i­tude from an elected of­fi­cial who re­ceives an an­nual salary of $117,000 for what for some is a part-time job.

Robert E. Jen­ner, Riverdale

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.