Let us start with Betteridge’s Law of Headlines. A couple weeks ago, The Columbian published a story under the headline, “Does Vancouver need a $100,000 mayor?” Betteridge’s Law — kind of the newspaper equivalent of Murphy’s Law rather than an immutable rule of science — states that any headline ending in a question mark can be answered with “no.”
So, no, Vancouver does not need a mayor with a salary of $100,000 a year. But how much should city leaders be paid? That is the question facing a five-member review commission as it considers salaries for 2017-18 for Vancouver’s mayor and six other city council members.
The $100,000 is an arbitrary number, of course, one that was thrust into the spotlight when Mayor Tim Leavitt suggested that the leader of Washington’s fourth-largest city should earn a hundred grand. “The demands and obligations as mayor are full-time and beyond,” said Leavitt, who has indicated he is unlikely to run for re-election in 2017. Currently, the mayoral position pays $27,600 a year, while the mayor pro-tem earns $24,000 and councilors earn $21,600.
Through all of this, the salary discussion has proved to be unexpectedly difficult for the five-person salary commission. Last week, members rejected one proposal that would have provided a 2 percent salary increase, and rejected another that would have provided a 40 percent increase for councilors and a 63 percent raise for the mayor. It was the fifth time the commission has met this year, and another meeting has been scheduled for 10 a.m. April 15 at Vancouver City Hall.
When commission members gather again, they would be wise to eschew a couple points designed to argue in favor of large raises. One is the notion that “you get what you pay for,” which suggests that a significant salary is required to attract the best candidates. We’ll simply point to Clark County’s governing board, where six-figure salaries (before implementation of a county charter) did not prevent mismanagement and poor governance.
Another is the idea that current salaries limit the city council to retirees or those who are wealthy enough to not worry about the pay scale. But of the seven current council members, including the mayor, four of them are professionals younger than 50 who also hold down full-time jobs. Certainly, not every would-be candidate has the flexibility in their schedule to serve on the city council, but running for office is hardly limited to those who are retired.
Also, it should be remembered that being mayor or serving on the council comes with numerous benefits in addition to salary, enhancing the financial reward of being elected.
A review by the salary commission earlier this year compared Vancouver with similar Washington cities that have a city manager form of government, finding that pay here is 163 percent above average for mayors and 123 percent above average for councilors. This is instructive, but should not be the deciding factor in light of all the other variables that go into determining salaries.
No, the only question is how much salary would best benefit Vancouver. Because the city manager oversees most day-to-day duties, Vancouver pays City Manager Eric Holmes $210,000 a year — an increase of 24 percent over the past three years.
With all of that in mind, should Vancouver’s mayor and city councilors receive a raise much larger than a cost-of-living increase? Put it in a headline and you will have your answer.
