Page 4-Saturday, May 26, 1979-The Michigan Daily I THE WEEK IN REVIFW A2 adopts budget After nearly a month of highly politicized deliberations, City Council Thursday night adopted a $43.8 million operation budget for 1979-80. Included in the document was a Republican- proposed half mill reduction in proper- ty taxes. The Republican-dominated body also hiked sewer and water rates by 12 and 18 per cent respectively. A homeowner with property assessed at $30,000 stands to pay $15 less in taxes next year, while the water bill for that home inceases by about $17. Due to the offset effect of those adjustments, Democrats criticized the tax cut as a "sham" to make voters think they had done them a favor. First Ward Republican Coun- cilman Edward Hood responded to the charge by saying the Democrats' comments confused him, and he asked incredulously if they would rather have raised taxes. Council also decided to conduct property assessment on an annual in- stead of biannual basis, hereafter. It also moved to eliminate high-paying clerical positions at City Hall by at- trition. Council also directed City Ad- ministrator Sylvester Murray to examine the cost-effectiveness and feasibility of contracting out City refuse collection. And Murray is also supposed to look at the cost of alternate health in- surance programs to the present Blue Cross/Blue Shield coverage city em- ployees now receive. Council Republicans rejected eight proposals sponsored by Democrat Councilwoman Leslie Morris to eliminate several administrative positions. She said the motions did not reflect Democratic priorities or her personal priorities, but merely illustrated Republican disinclination to save our citizens money wasted on un- necessary administrative positions. The positions she wanted to cut were: assistant planning director, manager of park planning, deputy fire marshall, manager of field services in the parks department', the chief assistant city at- torney, and the communications super- visor in the radio shop. The other two motions dealt with use of funds saved by eliminating those positions. The other Democrats did not support most of those proposals, nor did they vote for the amended budget which the seven Republicans voted to adopt. The operating budget includes a 6Sper cent increase in wages for city em- ployees which may change through ar- bitration later this year. Death penalty imposed After five appeals to the Supreme Court and several delays, John Spenke- link lost his life in Florida's electric chair yesterday. He was the first death row prisoner to be executed since a firing squad killed Gary Gillmore on Jan. 17, 1977. Spenkelink's death and court actions leading to it brought capital punish- ment back into the public's eye, and has aroused renewed interest in gover- nment-ordered executions. But even though the entire affair shocked the nation, a recent poll showed nearly two- thirds of Americans support the death penalty. Few of the other 522 members of the nation's death row population have execution dates set, Spenkelink's death has obvious implications for their futures. Spenkelink's attorney Margie Pitts Hames commented on the state's determination to kill her former client, and said the state's overwhelming power "is coming down on everybody's head." On Tuesday, U.S. Supreme Court Justices William Rehnquist and John Paul Stevens turned down defense at- torney attempts to save Spenkelink, before Justice Thurgood Marshall, who morally opposes the death penalty, stayed the execution. In 1977, a last minute court order saved the convicted murderer, whose sentence was imposed for the 1973 mur- der of Joseph Syzmankiewicz. Delays caused by repeated attempts to save Spenkelink's life have evoked questions See DEATH, Page 5 Week-in-Review was written by Editor-in- Chief Elizabeth Slowik and Editorial Direc- tor Judy Rakowsky. ... Eighty-nine Years of Editorial Freedom 420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, MI. 48109 Vol. LXXXIX, No. 19-S News Phone: 764-0552 Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan 'U' rmust reveal salaries by name W IEN THE State Appropriations Committee requested that the University reveal a comlete list of staff salaries by name this week, they put pressure on University officials to break a long-standing tradition of keeping such personal information confidential. But that tradition has few redeeming qualities and must be broken. Many University administrators and faculty members have said that it is an infringement on personal privacy for the Univer- sity to make public the individual salaries of all personnel. However, many public officials are required to disclose their salaries and other universities in the state have released staff salaries by name for many years. "We have no reason not to comply with a state-request," said an official from Western Michigan University. "We've released salaries by name for a number of years:". The release of such information is invaluable in assessing discrepancies within and between departments and colleges. It might also show salary relationships at the University by sex and ethnic background-depending on the manner in which the infor- mation is compiled. It is imperative that this data be disclosed, for without it, there is danger the University may be able to conceal unfair or unethical payment practices. It is unclear what powers the committee has to coerce the University -into revealing salaries by name. Its members have said they hope the University will supply the information requested without incident. This University is admittedly more powerful and prestigious than WMU and some of the other in- stitutions which have already complied. It is hoped that Univer- sity officials will not take advantage of that fact by stubbornly refusing to comply. A good example of the way in which such information would.be used was demonstrated recently when the Grand Rapids Free Press asked Grand Valley State College to release personal wage information so that a comparison could be made between the salaries of male and female professors at the college. When the college refused to make such a disclosure, the newspaper asked the Senate Appropriations Committee to demand the release of that information. That college has now complied with the com- mittee's demands, and it is only fair that other universities in the state also make comparable lists available. Michigan taxpayers and members of the University community are entitled to know how their dollars are being spent. Tuition costs are rising at an incredible rate, and the legislature under- standably is becoming concerned with the manner in which the public schools spend state money. It is apparent the University can no longer keep such salary in- formation confidential any longer, and it is in the best interests of students and citizens in the state of Michigan that such data be, released'as soon as possible.