This article has been updated to include an official statement on Harville’s veto from Councilman Jeremiah Chancey.
The Mayor of Guyton has vetoed a retirement plan approved by the city council at a special-called meeting Monday night.
Council voted Monday night in a 3-2 vote to institute a retirement plan for City of Guyton elected officials. Councilmembers Joseph Lee, Michael Johnson, and Theodore Hamby voted in favor. Councilman Jeremiah Chancey and Mayor Andy Harville opposed.
The plan sought to offer a defined benefit retirement plan, which guarantees a certain amount of money to each elected official, after serving just one term in office. You can read the complete document here.
The initiative is one that has been pushed by Lee and Johnson since at least 2021. The third vote in favor, Councilman Theodore Hamby, was a flipped vote.
While running for public office and, Hamby lambasted elected officials for their support of a retirement plan, saying “The pension plan being proposed by the Guyton city council is another example of how out of touch they are with their constituents. Being a public servant was never intended to be a career with career benefits.”
He also Johnson and Lee as “The Cousins of Destruction” for pushing a retirement plan.
You can see more of his statements in opposition of the retirement plan below.
Ahead of Monday’s special-called meeting, Councilman Jeremiah Chancey expressed his opposition, as he has done previously, and shared the fiscal impacts of approving such a measure. Monday he posted:
“Council retirement vote is tonight. There is nothing about this that makes the City of Guyton better. At present council members make $3,600/year, $300/month (which is more than council members in Rincon, Springfield, and Bloomingdale). With this retirement plan 2 current sitting council members would be eligible for a benefit more than their current salary. One could retire at 55 and be eligible for $375/month with that benefit growing to $750/month if they waited till age 65. The other is eligible for $350/month the minute this passes. It would take a regular city employee 63 years of employment to earn a benefit equivalent to 100% of their salary, yet a council members could do it in 6 years. No retirement pays more than 100% of an individuals salary, except this one.“
The explanation was a continuation of his previous public opposition in which he posted:
“The vote for council retirement is on the agenda. Apparently, this could not wait for a regular meeting it had to have a special called meeting for it to be voted on. This does nothing to make the City of Guyton better. The sad reality is short of the public showing up and speaking out in great numbers it’s set to pass. Why it’s a bad idea:
• There is no opt out and council members are automatically enrolled.
• Every newly elected official would be entitled to a retirement benefit equivalent to 2/3 of their monthly salary at the end of a single term. By the end of their second term their benefit would be greater than their council salary.
• There is no cap on benefits and two council members who support this could retire immediately after its passage and get a retirement benefit that is greater than their current council salary.
• There are a million better things the city could spend $12,447 on: employee benefits/salaries/bonuses, committees, disaster cleanup/aid/relief, recreation, etc, in other words things that would actually make the city better.
• The $12,447 is just the starting cost, every time someone new is elected to council that cost will increase.
• There is no plan for how it will be paid for. Since this is unbudgeted it will have to be paid for through either higher taxes or spending cuts. I don’t support ideas that simply enrich council members and certainly not ones that would require a tax increase.
Wednesday’s veto announcement from Harville is not unexpected as the retirement plan was an initiative he opposed since discussion began more than three years ago.
Released to the public Wednesday was a memo sent from Harville to council members on October 23:
Councilman Jeremiah Chancey released the following statement Wednesday after the veto:
“I applaud the mayor’s decision to veto Ordinance 2024-08 also known as the council retirement plan. Both he and I have consistently opposed this idea every time it has been brought before council. I ran for public office to serve the public and help improve this city. There is nothing in this ordinance that meets those goals. I weigh the items that come before council against two questions:
- How does this make the City of Guyton better?
- How will it be paid for?
One of the tenants I ran on was being fiscally conservative and working to ensure that every city dollar spent would benefit the city. On Monday I attempted to compromise on numerous items within the ordinance in hopes of mitigating the costs to the taxpayers. I was rebuffed on every attempt. Those in favor of retirement showed a complete unwillingness to compromise on anything that did not provide the maximum benefit possible. I believe that the public’s money should be used for the good of the city and not personal profit. This retirement plan is nothing more than a handout for government officials.
At present there is no plan on how the city will pay for this expense and the only idea offered was that taxes would pay for it. I do not support raising taxes especially when this ordinance would do nothing else but enrich those in office. In order to pay for it, council is asking the public for more money to spend on an item that only benefits themselves. There is nothing about this ordinance that makes the City of Guyton better.
In order to ensure that this ordinance goes through those in favor have called a meeting on a date they knew I would not be able to attend due to work. There is no timeline or date that requires this to be rushed through. This ordinance could have been addressed at the regular November meeting, but there appears to be a sense of urgency in its passage. Working for the betterment of this community should not include things like this, but nevertheless here we are. At the end of the day this position isn’t about me its about the community and doing what is in it’s best interest, hopefully someday they will realize that.
I will continue to stand up for the citizens of this community and work towards ideas that benefit them.
Sincerely,
Jeremiah Chancey
Council Post 1”
The veto power is one vested to the mayor in the revised charter approved under the previous administration, which included Russ Deen, Marshall Reiser, Hersula Pelote, Michael Johnson, and Joseph Lee.
