HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/4/2020 Item 9, Pinard
Wilbanks, Megan
From:Peg <
AM
To:E-mail Council Website
Subject:Fwd: Meeting 2/4/20 Agenda Item 9
Re: Agenda Item 9
City Council:
In response to the proposed council members and mayor’s salary
increases, I think some things need to be said.
The League of California Cites recommended that an increase be no
more than 5% a year from the last increase. I understand that this
council had already given themselves an increse just a year or two
ago. I agree with John Grady when he said: “…the 7 member committee
assigned with the task of evaluating the need for a salary increase
consists of 5 member appointed by yourselves. this sure make the
committee’s proposal for a 63% city council pay increase (and a 46%
mayoral salary increase) appear like a fait accompli.” Participating in
this service to their city by serving on the city council or as mayor also
did not give anyone an excuse to give up their regular job!
Regarding the nature of the job, most communities do not want career
politicians. As far back as I can remember, men and women have held
down jobs, owned businesses, raised young children, helped coach
athletic teams and led Camp Fire or 4-H groups, etc.…all while serving as
city council members and mayors. It would be extremely presumptuous
for someone to say they are entitled to such an excessively huge salary
increase and that they are entiteled to be treated differently than all the
hard working people who came before them.
The nature of the job has not changed. For anyone to claim that they do
more than those who came before them is arrogant. Former council
members not only had their day jobs but also made the effort to be very
visible and participate in this community. They also initiated many of
the reforms and ideas that staff helped implement and that we have
1
enjoyed for all these years. Those policies, created by former council
members, is what got this community designated as such a "happy
place.”
I would be remiss if I didn’t also point out that, in prior years, there
were greater opportunities for participation by residents when there
were many official meetings in the neighborhoods as is called for in our
General Plan. Prior city councils did not take the easy road of having a
community meeting where the largest number of participants were
either the developers or the city staff themselves. That original policy of
having meetings in the neighborhoods was abandoned by this city - so,
if we can deduce anything, it would be that the current council now
does less than its predecessors!
As for carrying out our community’s values - well, after paying
thousands and thousands of dollars to multiple consultants to find out
what our community cared about most, this council totally ignored
rsidents’ overwhelming mandate. "Protection of our open space”
(natural reserves) has always been a top priority of residents. But, for
the first and second time in decades this council did not even list
protection of open space as one of their “major city goals or other
important objectives”. So much for listening to the residents' values
who elected them.
Lately, the mayor’s personal solitciation letter targeting selected non
city residents/city residents whom the mayor has “collaborated with
over these last several years” kind of makes this our own local edition of
a "quid pro quo.”
We have had a history of residents willing to do their part to make San
Luis Obispo a liveable city. They have come from all kinds of
backgrounds - from Cal Poly students, to hard working Moms and Dads,
and retired seniors. They have come from all perspectives and
contributed to the overall benefit of this city. For anyone to claim that
they do so much more than those who came before them is just plain
self-serving.
Sincerely,
Peg Pinard
Former City Council Member
Former Mayor, City of San Luis Obispo
2
Remember these signs?
3