I have argued for years that elected officials should be paid a lot more for various reasons, especially because the jobs would attract better people and allow them to be full time so no conflicts arise. Most talented business folks would be loath to run for office for a City Council salary of $45,410 — and no one with a triple-digit IQ and any thoughtfulness believes the legislative salary of $7,800 (it's in the Constitution!) makes sense anymore.

But in a valley with a G-Sting hangover, what kind of arrogance or disdain would cause a government entity to try to raise elected salaries by 52 percent — and add in a $6,000 annual car allowance for good measure? So to make up for the paltry pay, the council is going to pass increases that almost none of its constituents will ever get and a perk (a car allowance) that almost no other official in the state has?

The measure, sponsored by Mayor Oscar Goodman, would take effect in 2009. It would make council salaries 90 percent of county commissioner pay and the mayoral compensation at 180 percent of the council salary. It's the first time base pay would be adjusted in more than two decades.

Even the math here is bizarre, perhaps worthy of a government whose jewels are Neonopolis, a near-vacant 61 acres and a fantastic downtown arena plan.

Ninety percent of commissioner salaries? Is this suggesting council members do 90 percent of commissioners' workload? The commission has jurisdiction over the Strip, the airport and most overarching regional issues. They need an entire meeting every week just for zoning and one every month for liquor and gaming.

The city gives out proclamations, passes resolutions and occasionally violates the Constitution. Ninety percent? And 90 percent of a car allowance for a county commissioner, who might actually need one because of the vastness of their districts, is zero — they don't have one. That car allowance, too, is a guaranteed albatross for this idea because it will symbolize to many the perks politicians seek.

You have to give Goodman credit for one thing: He put his name on the ordinance, so he's willing to take heat for it. He's not more than doubling the mayor's salary for himself — it would go from $59,657 to $124,644. Not only does he have plenty of money, Goodman is term-limited and will be out by 2011 — unless he can get the Supreme Court to overturn term limits.

And His Honor is correct that the salaries need to be changed. But not this way, to spring it suddenly on an agenda without creating the kind of public dialogue that is needed to bring in community support for the idea. Goodman might be the only one able to persuade the populace that elected officials should be paid more — but he needed to do that before this was simply placed on this week's agenda.

Having staffers craft an analysis to justify the increase is just pathetic — there is no other word for it. News flash: The city has doubled in size and the population has more than tripled since salaries were last adjusted in 1986. And the city's budget — are you listening, oh sympathetic voters? — has gone from $113 million to $1.4 billion. And what's more, folks, there is a "business impact statement" attached to the proposal that shows — prepare yourselves — there is no impact. How convenient.

Don't you agree that a 52 percent raise is almost penurious, considering those numbers? I can see the landslide of support now.

This is the apex of political ineptitude. Unless Goodman has the fortitude to go out and sell this to residents, it is doomed. An ambitious councilman such as Larry Brown, who is an all but declared candidate against County Commissioner Chip Maxfield, surely hopes this never comes to a vote.

And my guess is, considering this is a council known for being all talk and little action, that's exactly what will happen.