ShareThis Page
West Deer voters say ‘no’ to paid supervisors |
Valley News Dispatch

West Deer voters say ‘no’ to paid supervisors

West Deer Township municipal offices.

The West Deer voters have spoken and they don’t want their supervisors to be paid.

The question appeared as one of four referendum questions on Tuesday’s ballot. The results showed 63 percent of voters were against paying supervisors with nearly 37 percent in favor of it.

The move would have implemented a $50 monthly stipend for supervisors starting in 2020 that would cover their expenses such as gas and printer ink.

Township Manager Daniel Mator said turnout at the polls was “tremendous,” but he worried residents might have been confused about the specifics of the referendum questions and received false information on social media.

“I just don’t think people understood them,” Mator said. “I don’t think they took the time to contact us to receive clarification.”

Supervisor Gerry Vaerewyck said he was happy so many residents came out to voice their opinion. He was against the supervisors being paid because he worried residents would run just for the extra compensation.

“That was not something that people, in general, wanted,” he said. “Just because everyone else does it doesn’t mean that that’s a good future for government.”

Officials have said that West Deer is one of the only townships that doesn’t compensate its supervisors.

Supervisor Shawn Maudhuit was in favor of supervisors getting paid, but said he respects the voters’ decision.

“I’m completely fine with it — I didn’t run for supervisor to get paid,” he said. “Whatever the citizens want, it doesn’t change my agenda to want to help the best I (can).”

Other referendum questions

Residents voted in favor of three other questions on the ballot:

  • To change the gender-specific, time-based and grammatical errors in the home rule charter. This means changing language from “he” to “they” to make it more gender neutral and changing specific times and date for meetings so supervisors have more flexibility to schedule them.
  • Change the part of the home rule charter that says a supervisor can be removed by the board if they miss three or more meetings. This rule was determined to be unconstitutional by the state Supreme Court.
  • Change what decisions require an ordinance before they are voted on. The current charter says the township’s wages, hours and benefits have to be established through an ordinance, but Mator said that’s impossible because the salaries are set through the budget and the budge is set through a resolution, not an ordinance.

Emily Balser is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Emily at 724-226-4680, or via Twitter @emilybalser.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.