The Selma City Council voted at its regularly scheduled meeting Tuesday to double the monthly salaries of Selma Water and Sewer board members.

The board members will now make $400 a month, the maximum allowed under state law, something board member Rod West said he and other board members “deserved,” when the idea was first proposed because “it’s a lot of work.”

It may be a lot of work, but West, and the other board members, should have known what they were agreeing to when they accepted positions on the board. If West, and other board members feel it’s too much work for the compensation they receive, they can certainly move on to other endeavors and clear the way for others to serve.

What makes the 100 percent increase in monthly compensation even harder to swallow is in 2006 the water board approved a bond for upgrades to the system meaning Selma residents will see their water rates increase 2.5 percent annually for 30 years. To break that down, a resident with a $40 a month water bill today will see their bill increase to more than $80 by the time the bond is paid back. Add into that the additional $12,000 per year citizens of Selma will pay water board members and it further exasperates the burden residents have to shoulder.

Dallas County was the poorest county in Alabama in 2014 with more than 40 percent of our families, and 67 percent of our children, living in poverty. Regardless of income, though, access to clean drinking water is a basic necessity of life.

Providing residents with clean and affordable water should be one of the city of Selma’s main priorities. It should be the water board’s only priority.

Selma City Councilperson Angela Benjamin, who voted for the maximum increase, said the current board isn’t the one that voted to saddle residents with ever increasing water rates, but what does that matter? It doesn’t absolve the current board from being fiscally responsible, and even more important, morally responsible to the people they represent.

And that sense of responsibility should have prevailed when the current board refinanced the bond eight years after approving it, leading to smaller principal and interest payments, but chose to keep the annual rate spikes in place. A rational person could assume they kept the rate increases in place so they could finance their own raises and line their pockets at resident’s expense.

Lastly, this measure was pushed through at a meeting where two councilpersons, B.L. Tucker and Susan Keith, were absent. The measure was also not listed on the official council agenda that was released to the public prior to the meeting.

We’re left to assume those who voted to approve the measure [Benjamin, Sam Randolph, Bennie Ruth Crenshaw and Michael Johnson] conspired before the meeting to approve the measure at a time where all council members were not present.

We’re left shaking our heads at the city council’s actions Tuesday night, saddling residents with yet another financial burden at a time when its citizenry is least able to afford it. It’s disappointing and downright immoral and should be overturned.

We urge the city council to revisit the measure, when all board members are present, and the measure is included on the official agenda released to the public before the meeting, and let common sense prevail in reversing what was done Tuesday night.