Council needs higher salary, staff
In the coming weeks and months, the Pensacola City Council will make several important decisions that will shape our City government under our new Charter — among those, the salary of the executive mayor and Council members, and what if any independent staff the Council will have.
Put simply, if our new mayor-council government and its checks and balances are to work properly, it is of utmost importance that we have a strong City Council to balance the “strong” executive mayor. This requires City Council members to earn a living wage, and to have access to an independent staff in order to research issues and analyse legislation.
Council compensation
Currently, sitting on Council is viewed as a “part-time” job, and those on Council are accordingly paid a meager, “part-time” salary of $13,998. The job, though, is not part-time, and shouldn’t be.
Council members have to digest tons of information on the various issues to be considered, handle communications and requests from constituents, and attend various meetings and functions, all of which requires more time and attention than I would expect anyone to give to a “part-time” job. This isn’t a side business we’re running; it’s our City government, and it should be the top priority of the folks that run it — not merely a part-time concern.
The real effect of the low salary is that it effectively excludes the working-class from Council service. Ask yourself: Could you find the time to research issues, respond to constituents, and attend meetings on Monday afternoons and Thursday evenings all while keeping your current job? If not, could you afford to live on $13,998/year?
Most can’t. That means that the low Council salaries usually ensure that Council members are either independently wealthy, retired, self-employed, or otherwise government-employed. We’ve seen the effects of this for years. Until last year, the City Council was comprised mostly of older white men. Our Councils for years lacked diversity in perspective.
Let’s abandon the fallacy of “part-time” Council service and pay Council members a salary similar to that paid to members of other boards, like the Escambia County School Board or the ECUA Board — both around $35,000/year. Alternately, we could simply “peg” the Council salary to one-half the salary of Escambia County Commissioners, which would be about $37,200, and would adjust automatically in the same way that the County Commissioner salaries do currently. Sure, it’s an additional expense — but it’s a small price to pay to open the system up to a wider base of participation. Participation in local government shouldn’t be relegated to those who can afford it.
An independent Council staff
One other thing is clear: In order to function properly, our City Council needs access to some sort of independent staff. If Council members are forced to rely on the Mayor’s staff for information and research, they won’t be able to function as an independent legislative branch within the government.
This wouldn’t require additional jobs, but rather simply the reallocation of existing resources.
City Councilwoman Megan Pratt wrote very articulately about this subject last month:
If the City Council is to function effectively, however, the council needs access to reliable information. And this information needs to be independent of the mayor. With a separation of powers, the council should function autonomously.
This autonomy will require the council to employ an independent staff to provide information and efficient running of the legislative branch of the city government.
What would be the role of the council staff?
- Setting council agendas
- Researching issues
- Staffing boards and commissions
We need to be careful to avoid unnecessary bureaucracy. The council staff would assume some duties currently performed by the city administration. Therefore, the staff should be created by reallocation of resources in the existing organization rather than building bureaucracy.
Subscribe to our feed
Get updates via email
Follow us on Twitter
Is this what a vote for a strong mayor meant? More layers of staff — one for the city council & one for the mayor — higher salaries all around, including for city council members? Is that why the majority of council members supported the change in government? Do you really think that existing staff can be reallocated? Have you noticed the reduction in city staff? From what I recall, the city used to have over 1000 employees and now they have around 850 — or maybe fewer. Given the size of our city, I always thought that a strong mayor form of government was not right for our community. I’m going to check on some other strong mayor cities in Florida & will post what I find.
No, I don’t think it meant that. The salary change for Council is something that needed to happen regardless of whether the new charter passed or not. As was said, the low salary is exclusionary and limits participation to those who can afford to work a full-time job at part-time pay. It’s why the previous Council was 90% male, 60% white, and had an average age of 61.
I do think that the Council staff can be reallocated from existing resources. We’re not talking about giving each Council member and office and staff etc. Simply a pool of 2-3 individuals to do secretarial/research work for Council members would be sufficient.
It’s true that a low salary is exclusionary, but that isn’t necessarily a bad thing. The founding fathers didn’t intend for political positions to be careers. One should make a temporary sacrifice to serve the public and then return to the private sector.
With that said, the low salaries are obviously not enough of a deterrent as we had the same council members for years until the more recent changes…
I completely agree that one should make a temporary sacrifice to serve the public and then return to the private sector. The problem is, the current salary doesn’t allow that. Let’s say you’re a working-class guy or a young professional making $50,000/year. You support a wife and child on that salary. You can’t make it work on $13,998/year. You could probably sacrifice and make ends meet, though, for something like a School Board salary of $35,000.
The reason we ended up with the same Council members for years is because the low salary severely limits our talent pool to only those who were independently wealthy or retired. This is why we had Councils for years that were so out of touch.
Why would a “working-class guy or a young professional” have to quit their day job? Granted, they would need a somewhat flexible schedule. However, do we really want civic leaders that can’t put themselves into positions of sufficient latitude to make it to afternoon council meetings?
I don’t want to be represented by individuals who can’t get a job beyond flipping burgers! So, aside from tolerance and inclusion, what is the point of lowering the bar for entry?
Why would a working class guy need to quit their day job? For starters, how many employers do you know that let out at 3PM every other Monday? Many employers may not be willing to accommodate with a “flexible schedule.” Secondly, with a strong mayor, do we really want our Council to be run by people who aren’t giving it their full attention?
It’s not “lowering the bar,” it’s about equal access. This problem is reflected in the lack of diversity of past Councils. If you’re fine having your Council seats reserved for the wealthy, elite, and retired, then there’s no problem.
I don’t think “equal access” in this context is necessarily a good thing. Although we may disagree on that point, increasing the salary for political position has other side-effects. You end up with questionable guys like George Touart running for office because they need a job or want a pension.
Agreed, that’s why we should only increase it to a “living wage” … like I’ve said, something in line with School Board or ECUA would be most appropriate. That opens up the pool without becoming a target for money-seekers.
The BOCC, ECUA and School Board only have 5 members each. The council will have 9, so thereforecouncil members pay should be lower. The big qustion is why do we need 9 council members? Each member has less than 6,000 residents electing them, whereas the other board represent 60,000 residents each. Maybe the council should make less than the 13,000 they are currently paid. Base pay on number of residents sxerved.
The Charter Review Commission felt that the size of the Council should be reduced but felt that due to political considerations it was necessary to leave it at 9. The concern was that residents would feel as if their vote was being diluted.
It wouldn’t matter if the pay was reduced, it’s already low enough that it reserves Council seats for primarily the wealthy or retired.
More reorganized government for the less than 53,000.00 residents.
I wonder if council will voice concern about paying for staff and more salaries as they do when speaking about services. They had no problem cutting code enforcement and leisure services which directly affect us all.
The city and county should cut the expenditures for all the so called improvements to reduce man hours if it is never going to result in less employees.
Each time they upgrade or add computers it’s the same claim of efficiency but just as when ECUA hired plumbers to compete with locals, when that was challenged by independent plumbers, council announced those plumbers would be reallocated to other positions.
The only threatened reductions continue to be services while at the same time suggestions of giving free fire services to the county.
It seems most of our elected officials are more concerned about popularity among staff than the taxpayers.
I checked with the Florida League of Cities and found out the following. First, all cities in Florida that are our size have council/manager forms of government. The closest population cities with strong mayor forms of government are as follows:
Plantation — 84,725
West Palm Beach — 103,150
Hialeah — 226,605
Orlando — 233,115
St Petersburg –248,729
Tampa — 339,480
Miami — 417,451
Jacksonville (consolicated city/county government) — 855,067
After getting this information, I sent inquiries to these cities and have received one response so far and that response is from Hialeah.
Mayor’s salary — $155,250
Mayor’s expenses — $75,019
Mayor’s travel & per diem $41,616
Total annual salary — $271,885
The mayor’s office consists of 1 chief of staff, 2 administrative assistants, 1 administrative aide, 1 program manager, 1 social services/family assistance coordinator, 1 field aide, 1 clerk typist, 1 receptionist & 1 part-time field aide. That’s right — an additional 10 employees when Al Coby manages without any assistant city managers & only 3 executive assistants — one who primarily takes care of requests, etc. from the mayor & city council members.
Hialeah’s city council has 7 members with 7 part-time council aides. Council salaries are $3257.14 per council member ($22,800 per year). The part-time council aides receive $9286,86 per employee or $65,008 for all 7. Each council member has an expense fund of $41,685,71 for a total of $291,800 per year. The council budget also includes an additional $2000 for other charges.
Total budget for the mayor’s office is $673,516. Total budgeted for mayor’s expenses & travel/per diem is $116,635.
The city attorney is the highest paid city employee. He makes $165,566.66.
I’ll let you know when I hear from the other cities, but this is scary.
I think something more in line with Mobile would be appropriate. There, the Mayor makes $89K/year and Council salary depends on attendance. A Council member that attends all meetings would make $32,800.
So our city council members need to make more than those in Hialeah? By what standard? Hialeah has 7 council members, we have 9. In Hialeah they make $3257 a year. So we should pay our 9 council members 10 times what they make in Hialeah? I just don’t get it.
James: If you are comfortable with the disproportionately older wealthy white male Councils (present Council excepted) that we’ve have for years, then we don’t need to change anything.
are you trying to break the bank because that is what will happen. taxes fees all to raise revenue and now salary increases…it is the economy…wth
get over the white old male thing and just change it already.
Did they not know, when seeking office, what the job paid??
of course they did and some are there initially for the right reasons but some are there for power and others are there for money and then there is the prestige…to me what matters if your desire and goals are to create a better city for everyone and it shouldn’t matter the pay and the work required.
If we got the current city council members with the lower salary — and I believe they all plan to run for another term — why do we need to double their salary?
that i agree with…public service is just that a service. i have heard that city personnel are told that if you do not like the pay for the job then find another job. ditto for council.
lead by example i say…the council expects all existing staff to sacrifice they should too. i think that what they make is suffice.