Regular Folks Add Value at Regular Jobs; Not on City Council
At the turn of the century, Mayor Ed Garza wanted to raise city council pay to a full salary from just a few bucks per meeting. Tacking on increased terms in office was too much for voters to stomach at the time.
They came around on the salary a decade later, and now Mayor Ron Nirenberg wants to bump it up some more. The commission he appointed to make recommendations however, may have missed the Garza lesson.
They recently suggested raising it by anywhere from two-thirds to almost tripling it. Opposition has been swift and widespread, from District 8 Councilman Manny Pelaez, to District 10’s Marc Whyte, to progressive activists as well, judging by the March 21st public hearing.
Though the latter oppose the steepness of the hike, they support some sort of raise on one condition: that serving on the council officially be a full-time job.
That would be unfortunate.
In the play-like world of our childhood, that might have made sense. Council would put in a normal day’s work just like a builder, shop owner, accountant, etc.
In real life however, the entities the latter people work for produce value for society. They create genuine opportunity and abundance. Government does not. Those folks compete with rivals to produce better and/or less expensive goods or services for the community. Government does not.
Not only should council salaries not be raised, but more council business should take place in the evenings.
For one, it should be as easy as possible for them to maintain one of those aforementioned jobs outside of city hall. There are many of us who have purpose-driven volunteer responsibilities, or part-time gigs outside of our main one, by choice.
Elected representation, especially on the local level, is one such gig, is it not?
Many ‘regular’ folks, despite the lockdowns, still work ‘regular’, face-to-face 8-5 jobs. If the goal is to entice more of them to run for council, pushing the most important business after hours is the most optimal way to lower “barriers to participation.”
Council sets the tone for policy, and government operations run by city staff. If that job is so massive that this shift isn’t possible, it’s arguably an indicator that the city is too involved in our lives.
Moreover, concerned citizens would be more able to witness, and take part in council proceedings. There is a very real perception that this isn’t current practice because it makes it easier for them to do things citizens might object to.
Being more accessible to the public while voting for higher taxes, justifying the subsequent spending, and answering for the mistakes and shortcomings that are inevitable in government, should be a bigger part of the gig.
More-handsomely rewarding council isn’t what should be on the agenda. Compelling them to spend more time on our side of the dais and experiencing what we experience should.