We've all read the fine reporting by Sam Taylor on how our County Executive, Pete Kremen, managed to quietly get himself a huge - $22,000 - pay raise on July 1. In brief, the council thought they had limited the pay raise for Pete but had not and did not find out till over three months later in October. They cried foul and had two hearings with Pete and County Prosecutor Dave McEachran testifying that gee, the council should have paid more attention to what it was doing.

The council wanted to know why Pete and Dave, who knew last January about the excessive pay raises, had not informed the council. Answer: the council did not ask them. Pete flourished a piece of paper at the first hearing and said the council had been given the information in June and therefore had no complaint. Council shot back that they were only allowed to look at that pay schedule for 10 minutes and then it was taken away from them because it was confidential. They had no chance to study it and use it in their deliberations.

I have obtained those confidential documents through a Public Disclosure Request. State law says that if a confidential document is used at a public meeting it automatically becomes available to anyone at that moment. Pete flourishing that document made it available to all of us. At the bottom of this post are links to PDF files of the two parts - three pages - and you can download and print for yourself. A few days ago this was something even council members were not allowed to have in closed door executive session. Today we all have it.

While we unwashed citizens may need some guidance on making sense of these pages, it is plain they list various choices for salaries and dates they apply. This was critical information that Kremen and McEachran conspired to prevent the council from properly studying and using in their deliberations. I say that based on sitting through the two meetings - almost 3 hours of testimony and discussion - the council has held over the past couple weeks. There is really no reason for the council to deliberate in private over these public issues and these documents should have been public from the very beginning.

McEachran was delightfully ingenious in how he responded to the council members questions on why they were not informed when McEachran knew from January that the council had to act before July 1 in order to control the sizes of pay raises. He and his staff do not have the obligation nor time to think of everything the council might need to know. They are happy to answer questions. That is it.

Two things emerge from this, in my opinion.

One, the council should move two or three positions from the Executive and Prosecutors offices to their own Council office. This will not cost us taxpayers anything extra. It will simply give the council their own paid staff which will then properly advise the council on legislation. This whole charade made that very clear.

Second, the Council should appoint a Special Investigator to look into the role McEachran played in this whole mess. This may involve help from the state Attorney General. The council has this power and also has the power to hold hearings and take testimony and decide if further legal action is merited.