Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 7c. 2026 Council Compensation Committee Recommendations Item 7c Department: Administration Cost Center: 1021 For Agenda of: 1/13/2026 Placement: Business Estimated Time: 60 minutes FROM: Greg Hermann, Deputy City Manager Prepared By: Teresa Purrington, City Clerk SUBJECT: 2026 COUNCIL COMPENSATION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDATION As recommended by the Council Compensation Committee: 1. Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, setting new salaries for the Mayor and Council Members and reaffirming compensation for Planning Commission and Architectural Review Commission and amending Council’s Policies and Procedures,” (Attachment A) increasing the monthly compensation for the Mayor from $2,923 to $4,169 per month and Council Member from $2,319 to $2,780 per month, and provide a $160 per month stipend for any Council Member or Mayor who is appointed to a statewide board or policy committee for the duration of their appointed term, effective the first full pay period in January 2027 ; and renaming Professional Development funding to Reimbursable Professional Expenses funding; and 2. Increase the Reimbursable Professional Expenses funding amount for Mayor from $3,600 to $4,400 annually and for Council Members from $2,700 to $3,300 annually. Also, automatically roll over any remaining Reimbursable Professional Expenses funds from the first year of a Financial Plan to the second year; and 3. Establish an annual $1,000 reimbursement allowance for any Council Member or Mayor who is appointed to a statewide board or policy committee for travel expenses related to statewide meetings; and 4. Direct staff to explore the feasibility of an "opt-in" pilot-program to provide $25 per meeting for all City Advisory Bodies, not including the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) and Planning Commission (PC), with a cap of three meetings a month, totaling $75 per month. The ARC and PC compensation would remain at the same amount of $86 per meeting with a cap of $344 per month. POLICY CONTEXT Section 410 of the City’s Charter addresses Council compensation and states: Compensation for Mayor and Council Members shall be reviewed biennially in even numbered years. When warranted, said compensation may be adjusted by Council resolution, to be effective the first full pay period in January of the year following the review. The compensation rate may be revised by the electorate by initiative. Page 513 of 525 Item 7c Chapter 2 of the Council Policies and Procedures further describes the Council Compensation Committee and outlines the membership and review responsibilities. Under this Chapter, Council is to select at least one previously elected official, one Personnel Board member, and one citizen-at-large. In addition, five additional nominees should be appointed to complete the seven-member committee. Resolution No. 10516, adopted May 20, 2014, mandates that compensation for Planning Commission and Architectural Review Commission members be reviewed in conjunction with Council compensation. DISCUSSION Background At the May 20, 2025 Council meeting, the City Council unanimously voted to establish a Council Compensation Committee. The committee was tasked with reviewing the full Council compensation package and Planning Commission and Architectural Review Commission stipends to make recommendations to the City Council no later than May 1, 2026. Council also directed the committee to evaluate and make a recommendation on whether additional Advisory Bodies should receive stipends. On July 15, 2025, Council appointed previously elected official Andy Pease, Personnel Board representative Jill LeMieux, and citizens-at-large Erin Foote, Kari Howell, Trent Johnson, Barry Price, and Joyce Tseng to serve on the committee. Committee Meetings and Review The Committee held five meetings in 2025 on September 4, September 30, October 22, November 13, and December 16. The agenda packets and minutes of the meetings are available online. The Committee reviewed the current Council compensation package, including salary, benefits, expense reimbursement, professional development allowances and other compensation provided. In addition, the Committee compared the Council’s compensation package with that of other Mayors and Council Members in 9 other cities (Charter and General Law). The Committee also requested staff survey current and previous City Council members and Advisory Body members. Completed surveys were received from seven current or previous City Council members and 53 from current or previous Advisory Body members. The survey questions and response summaries (in italics) are provided below: Mayor/Council Member Survey Questions 1. On average how many hours per month did they spend on city business (reading staff reports or background materials, attending Council meetings, liaison assignments or regional board meetings, meeting and communicating with residents, constitue nts r Page 514 of 525 Item 7c organizations, and representing the city in other ways such as attending special city events. The responses regarding average number of hours spent on city business were 39 hours per week for Mayor and 21 hours per week for Council Members. 2. Were you able to continue you occupation in the same capacity after joining Council? More than half of those who responded indicated there was a change in the hours worked in their current occupation after joining Council. 3. On a scale of one to ten is the current compensation package appropriate for the time and expertise necessary to serve on Council. The average response was 4.86. 4. Is there anything you would change in regard to the current compensation package? The Mayor and Council Member roles require significant, often full-time commitment, and current compensation, while generous in benefits, can still limit who is able to serve. The variable and demanding schedule makes it difficult to hold another job unless it is highly flexible. While some view Council service as largely volunteer and do not expect professional level pay, there is concern about equity and accessibility. A modest salary increase could help address the high cost of living in SLO and move compensation closer to a living wage without fully professionalizing the role. 5. Were there events/conferences that you didn’t attend based on the professional development funding provided? The responses were split regarding this question with some indicating that they didn’t attend conferences or trainings that would have been helpful to learn from other communities with the same priorities as San Luis Obispo. 6. Do you have additional comments that you feel the Council Compensation Committee should consider? Council Members can often balance service with full-time work, but the Mayor’s role is far more demanding and inflexible due to required public appearances and obligations. Increasing pay could change the type of candidates and leadership the City attracts, and higher market-rate salaries might discourage some qualified people from running if they assume they must leave their current careers with no job to return to. At the same time, current compensation is not a livable wage for most residents in SLO, limiting service to those with flexible schedules or independent income. While the community expects a great deal from its elected officials in a high-cost city, budget constraints make pay increases difficult to justify now. The key challenge is finding compensation low enough to avoid over-professionalizing the role, yet sufficient to reduce financial barriers and allow a broader range of people to serve. Page 515 of 525 Item 7c Advisory Body Members Survey Questions 1. On average how many hours per month did you spend on attending meetings, reading staff reports or background materials and attending special City events ? While the responses varied widely depending on the Commission or Committee the average was 8.5 hours per month. 2. Do you have additional comments regarding amount of time s pent performing Advisory Body duties? Most respondents reported no major issues or had nothing additional to note. Time demands can range from minimal to intensive especially for chairs, subcommittee members, or during grant review periods. Compensation was generally not a motivating factor, though reimbursement for mileage, public transit and parking were mentioned. 3. Based on your experience do you feel the current stipend or lack of stipend is appropriate for the Advisory Body you serve(d) on. Scale from 1-10, 1 being not appropriate and 10 being very appropriate. The average of all responses was 6.2 out of 10. 4. Please explain your answer to the previous questions. The overall consensus is that Advisory Body service is primarily viewed as volunteer public service, not a job, and most respondents do not personally expect or require compensation. Many emphasize that they serve out of civic duty, enjoyment, or commitment to the community, and several would decline a stipend even if offered. There is also a theme around equity and access. While current volunteers may be financially able to serve without pay, many acknowledge that lack of compensation can exclude students, lower-income residents, professionals, or those who must take time off work to serve. For this reason, respondents generally support modest, carefully designed compensation as a way to broaden participation. With the intent of finding out if compensation would affect whether community members would apply to be on an advisory body, the Committee also approved a three-question survey for Open City Hall. The survey was posted from October 13, 2025, until October 24, 2025, and 305 individuals responded to the following questions: Community Survey 1. Would you consider, or have you considered applying for one of the City’s Advisory Bodies? 49 responded No and 255 responded Yes. Page 516 of 525 Item 7c 2. How would compensation for advisory body members affect your decision to apply? Consensus comments indicate that compensation is not a deciding factor for most, but a minority say it would positively influence participation, especially when it is a cost offset such as parking, gas or meals. Several comments noted compensation could enable participation from those with limited income or work conflicts, increasing diversity and access. 3. Are there any barriers that might prevent you from applying to serve on an Advisory Body? There were 130 responses that there were no barriers to applying to serve . Of the remaining 174 responses, the barriers are summarized as follows:  Time and Scheduling: Many people said that balancing work, family, and other commitments is the biggest challenge. Meeting times —especially evenings—can make participation difficult.  Residency and Eligibility: Some interested individuals live outside City limits but work in SLO or own property here. Current rules often limit eligibility.  Childcare and Family Responsibilities: Parents noted that childcare and family schedules can be a barrier, especially for evening meetings.  Selection Process: A few respondents expressed concerns about the application process feeling slow or exclusive.  Transportation and Parking: Parking availability and public transit schedules were mentioned as practical hurdles.  Financial and Accessibility Considerations: Some said compensation or cost offsets (parking, childcare, transportation) would help. Others noted age, mobility, or vision needs. The Committee used the responses from all three surveys to guide their recommendations. After considering all the information presented, the Committee voted 6-0-1 (Member Price absent) to recommend to the City Council the following: Council Compensation  Compensation for Council Members and Mayor should align with the most current Median Household Income from the U.S. Census for the City of San Luis Obispo of $66,711 prorated to 20 hours per week for Council Members and 30 hours per week for Mayor. The Committee recommended increasing the hours per week for the Mayor to 30 hours from the 25-hour recommendation in 2020 based on survey responses and Committee discussion. As an alternative, the Committee also discussed and recommended a salary for the Mayor prorated to 35 hours a week. Median Household Income was also used by the previous Council Compensation Committee as a means for determining Mayor and Council Member compensation. Page 517 of 525 Item 7c Table 1 – Council Compensation Committee Recommendation Annual Hourly Median Household Income for the City of San Luis Obispo (U.S. Census) - $ 66,711 $ 32.07 Current Monthly Salary Current Annual Salary Est. Weekly Worked Hours Proposed Monthly Salary Proposed Annual Salary Annual Increase from Current Annual Percent Increase Council Member $ 2,319 $ 27,828 20 $ 2,780 $ 33,356 $ 5,528 19.9% Mayor $ 2,923 $ 35,076 30 $ 4,169 $ 50,033 $ 14,957 42.6% Alternative - Mayor $ 2,923 $ 35,076 35 $ 4,864 $ 58,372 $ 23,296 66.4%  Any Council Member or Mayor who is appointed to a statewide board or policy committee shall be provided with a stipend for the duration of their statewide appointed term. The stipend shall be equal to 5 hours per month based on the hourly rate of the Median Household Income. This change is recommended to recognize the additional commitment associated with participation in a statewide board or committee and the value to the City for that involvement. Table 2 – Monthly Stipend for Statewide Board or Policy Committee Appointment Monthly Statewide Seat Stipend Annual Statewide Seat Stipend Council Member or Mayor $ 160.36 $ 1,924.36 Professional Development  “Professional Development” funding be retitled to "Reimbursable Professional Expenses" funding to also include expenses related to representing the City in an official capacity including expenses incurred within the County. Corresponding changes to Section 2.3 of Council Policies and Procedure have been included in the draft Resolution (Attachment A).  Increase annual funding to $3,300 for Council Members and $4,400 for Mayor. Any funds not used in the first year of a Financial Plan will automatically roll over to the second year. This amount was last modified in 2016, and the recommended change is to account for the increased cost of related expenses since that time.  Establish an annual $1,000 per person reimbursement allowance for any Council Member or Mayor who is appointed to a statewide board or policy committee for travel expenses related to attendance at a statewide board or policy committee meeting. Participation in these meetings is often in person and out of the area which incurs associated travel expenses. Page 518 of 525 Item 7c Table 3 – Professional Development (Renamed to Reimbursable Professional Expenses) Current Annual Professional Development Recommended Reimbursable Professional Expenses % Increase from Current Annual Total Increase from Current Council Member $ 2,700 $ 3,300 22% $600 Mayor $ 3,600 $ 4,400 22% $ 800 Travel Expense Allowance for Board or Policy meetings $1,000 Advisory Body Member Stipend The Committee recommends that Council direct staff to explore the feasibility of, and provide a report back to Council on, an "opt-in" pilot program that would provide $25 per meeting for all Advisory Body members, not including the ARC and PC, not to exceed $75 per month. The ARC and PRC compensation would remain the same amount of $86 per meeting with a cap of $344 per month. This change is recommended to improve accessibility of Advisory Body participation to co mmunity members and offset potential costs associated with attendance. The table below shows the estimated cost at scenarios of 100% or 80% of the Advisory Body members choosing to opt-in. Table 4 – Estimated Cost of Providing Stipend to Advisory Body Members Average Number of Meetings Per Year1 Number of Advisory Body Members Recommended Amount Paid Annually (100% participation) Recommended Amount Paid Annually (80% participation) Active Transportation Committee 7 7 $ 1,225 $ 1050 Administrative Review Board 2 3 $ 150 $ 100 Construction Board of Appeals 3 7 $ 525 $ 450 Cultural Heritage Committee 6 7 $ 1,050 $ 900 Human Relations Commission 11 7 $ 1,925 $ 1,540 Investment Oversight Committee 4 1 $100 n/a Mass Transportation Committee 5 8 $ 1,000 $ 750 Parks & Recreation Commission 9 7 $ 1,575 $ 1,350 Personnel Board 3 5 $ 375 $ 300 Promotional Coordinating Committee 11 7 $ 1,925 $ 1,650 Revenue Enhancement Oversight Committee 3 5 $ 375 $ 300 Tourism Business Improvement District 14 7 $ 2,450 $ 2,100 Tree Committee 9 7 $ 1,575 $ 1,350 Total $ 14,250 $11,840 1 The figure represents the average number of meetings per year based on the total meetings held in 2023, 2024 and 2025. Page 519 of 525 Item 7c Should Council direct staff to move forward with this recommendation, staff would return to Council with the adoption of the Supplemental Budget with additional information on the feasibility of a pilot program, including the associated administrative impacts on payroll, management of trainings required for those receiving compensation, and other potential impacts to those who decide to opt-in to the pilot program. Public Engagement All the meetings of the Council Compensation Committee were published per the Council adopted noticing guidelines. The Open City Hall survey was available for a three -week period. Public comment on this item can be provided to the City Council through written correspondence prior to the meeting and through public testimony at the meeting. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to the recommended action in this report, because the action does not constitut e a “Project” under CEQA Guidelines sec. 15378. FISCAL IMPACT Budgeted: No Budget Year: 2026-27 Funding Identified: Fiscal Analysis: Should Council move forward with all of the Committee’s recommendations, the additional cost for the 2026-27 Fiscal Year would be $28,690 as increases would begin in January 2027 and $57,381 annually ongoing. Any increases would be included as a part of the development of the 2026-27 budget and future budgets. This does not include the costs of a potential “opt-in” pilot program for Advisory Body members which would continue to be developed if staff is directed to explore the feasibility of a program . Funding Sources Total Budget Available Current Funding Request Remaining Balance Annual Ongoing Cost General Fund $ $28,690 $ $57,381 State Federal Fees Other: Total $ $28,690 $ $57,381 The monthly salaries of the Mayor and Council Members would be increased from $2 ,923 to $4,169 and $2,319 to $2,780 per month, respectively, beginning in January 2027. The amounts for reimbursable professional expenses Mayor and Council Members would increase from $3,600 to $4,400 and $2,700 to $3,300, respectively. Council’s other Page 520 of 525 Item 7c benefits would remain unchanged. This increase to salaries and reimbursable professional expenses would increase as follows: Current Annual Salary Proposed Annual Salary Annual Increase from Current FY 26-27 (6 months) FY27-28 (ongoing) City Member $ 27,828 $ 33,356 $ 5,528 $ 11,056 $ 22,112 Mayor $ 35,076 $ 50,033 $ 14,957 $ 7,479 $ 14,957 Alternative - Mayor $ 35,076 $ 58,372 $ 23,296 $11,648 $ 23,296 Monthly Stipend for Statewide Board or Policy Committee Appointment (assumption Mayor and 2 Council Members) $ 2,886 $ 5,773 Reimbursable Professional Expenses Current Annual Amount Proposed Annual Amount Annual Increase FY 26-27 (6 months) FY27-28 (ongoing) Council Member $ 2,700 $ 3,300 $ 600 $ 1,200 $ 2,400 Mayor $ 3,600 $ 4,400 $ 800 $ 400 $ 800 Board or Policy Committee Travel Reimbursement $ 1,500 $ 3,000 ALTERNATIVES 1. The Council could decide not to approve the salary increase for Mayor and Council Members as recommended by the Council Compensation Committee. Should Council pursue this option, Council could decide to increase the salaries of Mayor and Council Members by the Consumer Price Index (CPI) amount for the last two years; this would be a 5.8% increase, increasing Mayor to $3,093 and Council Members to $2,454 per month. 2. The Council could decide not to approve the recommendations regarding Professional Development funding. Should Council pursue this option, Council could apply a CPI catch up from 2016, which was the last time professional development amounts had been adjusted. This would be a 35% increase to the Professional Development amounts; City Council would increase to $3,645 and Mayor would increase to $4,860 annually. 3. The Council could decide not to direct staff to explore the feasibility of providing a stipend of $25 per meeting for all Advisory Body members. Should Council pursue this option, the PC and ARC would remain the only Advisory Bodies who se members receive a stipend. ATTACHMENT A – Draft Resolution 2026 setting new salaries for Council Page 521 of 525 Page 522 of 525 R RESOLUTION NO. XXXX (2026 SERIES) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, SETTING NEW SALARIES FOR THE MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS, PLANNING COMMISSIONERS, AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSIONERS AND AMENDING COUNCIL’S POLICIES AND PROCEDURES WHEREAS, Charter Section 410 provides for compensation and reimbursement of expenses for the Mayor and Council Members and establishes a procedure for a biennial review by a Council Compensation Committee; and WHEREAS, on April 19, 2022, Council amended their Policies & Procedures Manual to add Section 2.1.1, Consumer Price Index Increases, which allows biennial Consumer Price Index increases to be applied to Council, Planning Commission, and Architectural Review Commission salaries, effective the first full pay period in January, without convening a Council Compensation Committee; and WHEREAS, on May 20, 2025, Council unanimously voted to begin the formation of a Council Compensation Committee to review the full Council compensation package and Planning Commission and Architectural Review Commission stipends in lieu of the CPI increases; and WHEREAS, Council also directed the Committee to evaluate and make a recommendation on whether additional Advisory Bodies should receive stipends; and WHEREAS, on July 15, 2025, Council appointed a seven-member Committee made up of one previously elected official, one Personnel Board Member and five at large community members. The Committee has met and reviewed Mayor and Council Member compensation in accordance with the procedures provided by the Charter; and WHEREAS, the Council Compensation Committee has determined that the present criteria for compensation remain valid. However, an adjustment is now appropriate particularly in light of the increase in the Area Median Income and the official duties of the Mayor and Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Section 2.1 of the Council Policies and Procedures shall be amended to read as follows: Effective the first full pay period in January 2027, compensation for services rendered in an official capacity shall be provided as follows: Page 523 of 525 Resolution No. XXXXX (2026 Series) Page 2 R  The Mayor shall receive a monthly salary of $4,169 and each City Council Member shall receive a monthly salary of $2,780.  Any Council Member or Mayor who is appointed to a statewide board or policy committee shall receive an additional five hours per month stipend for the duration of the term of their appointment. SECTION 2. Section 2.3 of Council Policies and Procedures shall be amended to read as follows: 2.3 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT REIMBURSABLE PROFESSIONAL EXPENSES Allowances shall be budgeted for the Mayor and each Council Member as follows: 2.3.1 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT REIMBURSABLE PROFESSIONAL EXPENSES - INCLUDING TRIPS AND MEETINGS For expenses related to representing the City and costs of professional development and educational conferences designed to improve understanding of and proficiency in municipal affairs. Said allowance shall be used for out-of-county expenses only and shall be reimbursed in accordance with accepted City Travel Guidelines. Establish an annual travel allowance of $1000 per Council Member and/or Mayor who is appointed to a statewide board or policy committee to be used for travel expenses related to statewide attending policy meetings. SECTION 3. Stipend of Planning Commission and Architectural Review Commission will remain at $86 per meeting not to exceed $344 per month. Page 524 of 525 Resolution No. XXXXX (2026 Series) Page 3 R SECTION 42. Resolution Number 11482 (2024 Series) is hereby repealed and superseded to the extent inconsistent herewith. Upon motion of XXXX, seconded by XXXXX, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was adopted this XX day of January 2026. ___________________________ Mayor Erica A. Stewart ATTEST: ______________________ Teresa Purrington City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ______________________ J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, on ______________________. ___________________________ Teresa Purrington City Clerk Page 525 of 525