Is a pay raise in the forecast for Santa Clarita City Council members?
Find out Tuesday evening when the council decides on a possible 10-percent salary increase.
The council is authorized to vote themselves a 5-percent raise for calendar-year 2016, plus they could go back and take the 5-percent bump they decided not to collect in calendar 2015.
If the council votes itself the maximum raise, the new pay rate would be $2,015.83 per month.
The item was first presented to the city council on Oct. 27, 2015 when they voted not to increase their monthly salary of $1,832.57, which has not been raised since July 1, 2014.
Councilman Dante Acosta brought the issue back to the council at a meeting on Dec. 8, 2015.
“Members of the Santa Clarita City Council are compensated monthly by the city, under specific provisions of state law, for the substantial amount of time and effort they contribute leading our local government,” according to Tuesday’s agenda.
In addition to participating in regular meetings, members also participate in various community events, meet with constituents on issues of concern to residents and represent the city on regional and statewide boards, commissions and organizations.
At the Oct. 27, 2015 meeting, Councilman TimBen Boydston said he didn’t think it was appropriate for the Santa Clarita City Council to take a raise.
“I know that none of us up here are doing it for the money, at least that’s what I’ve been told,” said Boydston. “This is a problem with a lot of people and I think as council people we need to set a good example.”
Any potential increase approved can not go into effect until after the November 2016 election results are certified by the Los Angeles County Registrar Recorder and the Santa Clarita City Clerk. The increase would take effect on the first full pay period calendar year 2017.
The Santa Clarita City Council meeting will take place at 6 p.m. on Tuesday, Jan. 12 in the City Council Chambers, located at 23920 Valencia Boulevard.
Like this:
Like Loading...
Related
Tweet This
Facebook
Digg This
Bookmark
Stumble
RSS
REAL NAMES ONLY: All posters must use their real individual or business name. This applies equally to Twitter account holders who use a nickname.
7 Comments
Greedy bunch just get a real job
They get paid to name buildings, metro link stations, streets and libraries after themselves. Who else gets to vote on their pay raise ? And reinstate last years raise if you decline it ?
I will be voting no on any pay raise for us. Our seniors got no increase this year in their social security, but many have to pay more for their medicare. We need to lead by example.
-Councilman TimBen Boydston
~ Another Perspective
U.S. employees can expect an average base salary increase of 3.1 percent in 2016 across most major employee categories, up only slightly, if at all, from the raises they received this year, according to WorldatWork survey results released on July 14, 2015. See the SHRM Online article Holding Steady, Expect Base Salary Increases of 3.1% in 2016. – See more at: http://www.shrm.org/hrdisciplines/compensation/articles/pages/salary-budgets-2016.aspx#sthash.dhgpSgOQ.dpuf
Then the question is? Why are they asking so much?
Also, how about their other payments? For attending other meetings such as with the County, State etc etc they get paid on a per meeting basis. This is a “part-time” job, not a full time job. Then their medical insurance is on top of their salary….They make more than $2k a month…..
I don’t want to say “they are greedy” but when the average employee doesn’t see a 3% raise, this is a lot……
If they didn’t take a raise last year, they should be asking for a maxium of 2.7 for last year and this year a maxium of 3%…Do the math, instead of a total of 10% they should be asking 5.7%…That’s more inline……
You know, whether they took a raise or not… This is really just like our federal government where Congress, who party points the finger at each other instead of help the people, gets to vote in their own raises. They also get their own retirement and our insurance much different than WE THE PEOPLE. WHY ON EARTH WOULD THE VOTERS ALLOW THIS? One would think it leads to corruption just like WA. Just a thought you’d think!
???
No!