Moments after winning another term as president of the Boston City Council, Stephen J. Murphy pushed through a vote for a longtime political ally.
With no public notice or discussion, Murphy unexpectedly called last week for the reelection of his former colleague, Maureen E. Feeney, as city clerk, extending her tenure until at least 2016. The job has long been criticized because the clerk draws an annual municipal pay of almost $102,000 and is also allowed to collect tens of thousands more in fees for weddings performed during the workday at City Hall.
Comments
in puerto rico and other , brides are required to get married at city hall before going to church. the clerks are exploiting the fact tbat brides think they need to get married at city hall. the city should put up big sign in five languagss explaining its voluntary. in fact the ceremony you pay for is voluntary. the clerk could sign the license for free or for a nominal fee, five or ten dollars
Shills supporting shills. Degenerate liberals stealing from the sheeple.
Nation wide search no doubt.
P. U.
One would think that any jobs paying $80,000 to $100,000 would be VERY significant positions where the persons employed make fairly key decisions and/or have multiple important duties to attend to DAILY. Yet here we have TWO highly compensated "clerks" who get to juice their income by dint of administering a totally PERFUNCTORY process, a process that even the proverbial village idiot could perform. Does this BLATANT misuse of time and resources not perfectly scream out the corrupt attitudes that pervade government today? Marrying people could be done by someone part time at $20,000 and charging half the $75 rate. But, no, its always been a "perk" for the clerks so we can't possibly do anything to save citizens money and rationally structure work tasks. Doesn't anyone realize that it is INSANE to have six figure "administrators" doing such mundane work? Either the clerk's primary job is "important" or demanding enough to deserve a $80-100k, management level salary or it really doesn't and should be HALVED to reflect the fact that "clerk" is a nominal post where routinely doing mundane tasks is EASILY accommodated.
Why isn't "performing weddings" in the actual job description and included within their already bloated salary....just a long time innocent oversight I'm sure. Do love the no heavy lifting short wedding office hours, classic for any phony baloney city hall job....The cherry on top is that this story appears right above the latest billion dollar highway shake down trial ballon story...Stay classy MA Dems!
I iwsh I could earn this much for doing this little. But then, I don't have any city government people in my pocket.
Another reason why I am glad Boston is no longer my home town (after 73 years!).
This is disgusting. But hey, who am I to say anything..I just help pay Feeney's redonkulous salary. Pay me no heed. As usual.
This comment has been removed.
We can complain from now until doomsday but as long as NOTHING is done about it, we're just whistling in the wind. SHE and her ASSOSTANT should not be getting an extra penny for performing marriages. It's part of their job and is a total slap in the face to taxpayers! MENINO where are you on this?
SUPRISED?, is that really what I read in the Daily Democratic Party News (Boston Globe) today? This is Mass., THE most corrupt state in the country after all. How dare we taxpayers question the lathering of six figures to a CLERK of anything. Go back to work you peasants and don't question what we do in government again!
Why on earth does a city clerk get to keep the fees from weddings performed at city hall? Why wouldn't those fees go directly to the city? Tens of thousands of dollars on top of a six figure salary... For doing the job they are paid for, on office hours? This is the bloat in government that needs to be cleaned up. That's disgraceful patronage.