Oakley City Council Pay Could Increase by $800 per Month

The Oakley City Council could see a pay increase of $800 per month which would jump them from $456.75 per month to $1,275.

During the Aug. 8 city council meeting,  the council took up the item in an effort to provide staff with direction on how to move forward with an ordinance. If approved, it would take place after the next election.

Oakley is not the only city taking up council pay increases, last week, the City of Concord took up the issue and agreed to a $500 per month increase in a 4-1 vote–taking their pay to $1,900 per month.

Both the City of Oakley and City of Concord are reacting after the passage and signing of Senate Bill 329 by Bill Dodd (D-Napa)—the bill tied council pay to population. Under the bill:

Population / Maximum Monthly Salary

• Up to 35,500 residents = $950
• 35,001 to 50,000 residents = $1,275
• 50,0001 to 75,000 residents = $1,600
• 75,001 to 150,000 residents = $1,900
• 150,001 to 250,000 residents = $2,550
• Over 250,000 residents = $3,200

According to City Attorney Derek Cole, the last time the council salary was updated was for inflation in 2014. It started at the $300 level and began increasing.

“You can go up $800,” said Cole who added, “You can also add $150 for each of your separate items where you are a JPA or substantive committee assignment that requires you to meet.”

Cole said it requires to change the ordinance and the question was how the council wanted to draft staff on whether or not the council wanted the full $1,275 or add $150 kicker for committee assignments.

Vice Mayor Anissa Williams asked about the additional $150 per committee and what was defined as “substantive” committee. Cole said he would like to put some teeth into that definition while drafting the ordinance—take annual committee list and draft language around that.

“You actually have to meet once a month, do genuine work. Some of the assignments might require that,” said Cole. “Its not what any of you are doing, some of your appointments are more robust than others. Some require more work than others so we have to define that. It would definitely be addressed.”

Williams confirmed this did not take effect until the next election. Cole stated yes.

Williams also called for a more detailed line item in the city budget.

“Let’s be honest, $1,275 is not a career path for somebody. But it is compensating them for the level of effort we and our residents should expect. But I do have concerns with our budget,” said Williams.

City Manager Josh McMurray said they do provide a line item but suggested they let the attorney draft the ordinance and based on the range in pay they will present the numbers—but said they could absorb it but do need to look at it.

Councilmember Shannon Shaw said the rate for childcare is $15-$29 an hour for one kid, two meetings a month at three-to-five hours so the monthly daycare cost would be $92 to $290 per month. Then add special meeting (approx. $150) then commissions ($145 per month).

“At the high end, that’s $580 a month in childcare that we have now excluded a complete person or a group of people out of being able to be here if they don’t have means to do that,” said Shaw. “I wasn’t for increasing this all the way to the top, originally because it was a big jump and it has to be looked at in the budget… the workload has increased, that includes us. If you look at the election that Hugh Henderson and I were just in, there were three on the ballot. I think that this could attract different groups.”

Shaw also added while she is fortunate to have a job that is flexible to do city council work, others may not have the same opportunity.

“Up until this morning when I started doing the math I was going to offer a different amount but a smart man told me to rip off a Band-Aid once and go for the whole thing. We can work on the budget and lets get some compensation for the people who are going to come on here and do the work that we all sit up here and do,” said Shaw. “If I just put in those hours for meetings, that doesn’t include going to events and look at a site when it comes on the agenda. The gas alone is insane.”

Shaw added when compared to other cities, even with the raise, Oakley will still be on the lower end because its based on population.

“We are paid pennies on what we should be,” said Shaw.

Councilmember George Fuller said this came out of Cal Cities after an Emeryville councilmember left for a salary somewhere at $200k per year.

“It was somewhat insulting for Cal Cities was saying well we cant get any good people to run because are salaries are not any good,” said Fuller who added its basically saying you need more money to get people to run for office. “I am not big on giving raises for councilmembers, I don’t see a need for it. I’d do this job for free and I think a lot of other people who are dedicated would do the same.”

Shaw responded the five of them were in a position who could serve, but there are people out there who are just as qualified who do not have the ability to serve for various reasons.

“It might give people the ability to pay their childcare so they can come do their civic duty that they would do otherwise,” said Shaw who said childcare was just one example. “It’s not about any of us not being qualified or anybody not wanting to do it for the pay. Its about opening up an opportunity.”

Shaw added the Oakley City Council is paid less than the Ironhouse Sanitary District directors and is within just $10 of the Clayton City Council pay.

“We haven’t had an increase since 2014. Maybe things were a little slower then but they are not now but our population has increased and our obligations to the residents have increased,” stated Shaw.

Williams added that with pay, anybody elected can waive the salary/pay if they want to make their city better.  She said the average age in Oakley is 34—which is not represented at the dais.

“There is a reason for that,” said Williams. “Those are the moms, the working parents, 95% of our folks are communicating. We have made it impossible to get their voices heard because they have to come to this. I feel like we are closing off a whole segment of the population that wants to get involved and make things better but have no option but to complain on social media or send us emails they hope that get answered because we are not meeting their needs.”

The council was then asked to provide direction which the attorney said he could bring back an ordinance with a salary increase to $1,275 per month while better defining what meetings/commissions would qualify for $150.  The item would then come back in the fall.

Fuller stated he didn’t want city staff worrying about their pay, but was unsure how Mayor Aaron Meadows or Councilmember Hugh Henderson had not spoke on the issue.

“I don’t want to take up time on pay,” said Fuller.

Henderson stated he would like staff to bring back several options on pay from the $800 range to the $1,000 range to the full amount.

“We need to do something but I don’t see us going all the way to the top,” said Henderson.

Shaw was willing to explore council pay at $1,275 but not the $150 for other meetings.

An ordinance will be drafted and come back sometime in the fall.

Previous Stories

• July 3: City Council Pay Cap Bill Signed Into Law
• June 14 – Sen. Dodd’s City Council Pay Cap Bill Approved by Legislature
• June 8: Assembly Committee OKs Sen. Dodd’s City Council Pay Cap Bill
• May 2: Senate Approves Sen. Dodd’s City Council Pay Cap Bill
• April 19: Committee Passes City Council Pay Cap Bill
• Feb 8: Sen. Dodd Introduces Bill that Would Allow Increases in City Council Salaries

With Governor Gavin Newsom signing Senate Bill 329 (Bill Dodd), it increases the maximum amount of salary, based upon the population of the city, approved by an ordinance passed by the city council. By ordinance, a city can now pay up to the following:

• In cities up to and including 35,000 in population, up to and including nine hundred fifty dollars ($950) per month.
• In cities over 35,000 up to and including 50,000 in population, up to and including one thousand two hundred seventy-five dollars ($1,275) per month.
• In cities over 50,000 up to and including 75,000 in population, up to and including one thousand six hundred dollars ($1,600) per month.
• In cities over 75,000 up to and including 150,000 in population, up to and including one thousand nine hundred dollars ($1,900) per month.
• In cities over 150,000 up to and including 250,000 in population, up to and including two thousand five hundred fifty dollars ($2,550) per month.
• In cities over 250,000 population, up to and including three thousand two hundred dollars ($3,200) per month.