City Council has approved their own pay raise.
Coun. Mac Bain's motion for increased compensation finally came to a head on Monday night, passing with a 7-4 majority. Some councillors were convicted in their decision, while others said they were undecided until the last moment, but ultimately the only dissenting votes came from Jeff Serran, Chris Mayne, Mark King and Mike Anthony.
Prior to the vote, councillors Mayne and Tanya Vrebosch tried to push the pay raise back until the beginning of the next term of council in 2019, but their efforts were defeated by those who feel the change needs to take place now.
Beginning in 2016 then, the mayor will receive an annual salary of $65,157, the deputy mayor will garner $26,956 and the remaining nine councillors will earn $23,691.
On top of that, they will all be given a payment in lieu of benefits at a rate of eight per cent of their annual city salaries come January 2017.
Until now, the mayor received $59,574, the deputy mayor $20,970 and all other councillors $19,065 annually. Unlike some other municipal politicians, none of their expenses or benefits are paid for either.
The new salaries were determined by calculating the average compensation of 22 comparable communities based on population size, number of households and tax levy total, among other criteria.
Mayne estimated the total increase of the all-around raise will result in approximately $80,000 added to the city budget, starting next year.
Councillor George Maroosis also included an amendment to the motion calling for those appointed to the agencies, boards and commissions to receive a stipend for attending meetings, but that the payment be directed to the City of North Bay.
Currently, councillors cannot be paid or pay the money back to the city in accordance with a 2003 resolution, despite some of those bigger boards, such as District of Nipissing Social Services Administration Board, North Bay Parry Sound District Health Unit, and Police Services Board, being funded through a municipal and provincial-subsidy formula.
“The amendment is a new revenue stream for us […] and I’m always open to new revenue streams for the city, but I believed that council needed to be compensated a larger amount, so I’m glad this passed this evening," Bain said after the meeting.
DNSSAB board members, for example, receive $304 for a regular board meeting, Cassellholme board members receive $125 per meeting plus gas mileage, while the provincial appointees for the Health Unit and Police Services Board receive $140 per day and $300 per year, respectively.
Using the example of DNSSAB, Maroosis estimated that, depending on the attendance levels, the city leaves anywhere from $35,000-$40,000 on the table each year, approximately 70 per cent of which comes from the province.
“I cant tell you that, in those last 13 years, the taxpayers of this city have been out hundreds of thousands of dollars," said Maroosis. "Not the City of North Bay and the Mayor, but the taxpayers of provincial money, and you know […] we’re always crying about how the province cuts us back.
"It will also assist us in helping us pay for the raise," he later added. "I'm estimating that with full cooperation, we can get halfway there or better."
Reintroducing the stipends will mean the agencies, boards and commissions that are provincially-subsidized will have to account for the payments in their respective budgets as well.
Meanwhile, Coun. Mark King said claiming the cash could help address his main concern and boost attendance levels at those meetings, in which other municipal and provincially-appointed members are compensated individually.
“I think the biggest issue revolved around the fact that there was a lack of attendance at DNSSAB meeting and I felt the regional attendees were controlling the agenda,” he said.
He also called attention to council receiving an 11.6 per cent pay increase since 2009, while city staff, he estimated, garnered an average 33 per cent increase over the same period of time. Regardless though, he voted against the politicians' pay raise.
“Obviously by setting an example as a council over the years, it certainly didn’t cause the net effect with respect to salary increases," he said during the meeting. "But it’s obvious that because of the situation we find ourselves in, I find it absolutely imperative that we not, at this particular time, support an increase to council pay.”
The report also ensures that no public input is necessary in the process. However, council was urged by presenter Nicole Peltier prior to the vote to consider the message their decision sends to the community, arguing that voting themselves the raise should be considered a conflict of interest.
“Voting yourself a raise is a conflict of interest because you seek to benefit in the same term that you agreed to, and not running on an election promise of giving yourself a raise," she said. “I’m not saying that [they] don’t deserve a raise; I’m saying that the optics of this and perception is [...] in my professional opinion a conflict of interest.”
But Maroosis called attention to the fact that nobody else can adjust City Council compensation, therefore leaving it up to them to do it.
"I’ve been here since the Fall of 1982, and there’s been numerous times where remuneration has been adjusted - it has to be adjusted by the council, we have to do it," he explained.
Since the last review of remuneration was in 2000, when councillor pay increased to $16,000 from $9,000, the only change in compensation has been the annual increases in accordance with the consumer price index.
