HomeMy WebLinkAboutCGHR 2021-01-25 Agenda.pdfCity of Maple Ridge
Corporate Governance and Human Resources Committee
MEETING AGENDA
Monday, January 25, 2021 at 9:00 am -10:30 am
Held virtually including the Blaney Room
Due to COVID-19 we will be holding the meeting via Zoom teleconference.
Participants are asked to join the meeting using the following access information:
https://mapleridge-ca.zoom.us/j/94866089325?pwd=OTZhN1pHOGxjY1JMV305bXpta3M1Zz09
Dial: 778-907-2071 Meeting ID: 948 6608 9325 Passcode: 165933
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
3. ADOPTION OF MINUTES -N/A
4. DELEGATIONS -N/A
5. NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS
5.1. Committee Chair Selection
5.2. Meeting Schedule
5.3. Defining the Committee Vision, Goals and Performance Measurements
• Al Horsman, Chief Administrative Officer; Michelle Lewis, Director of Human
Resources
Attachment 5.3.1: Committee Terms of Reference
5.4. Council Remuneration
• Catherine Nolan, Corporate Controller
Attachment 5.4.1: UBCM Council & Board Remuneration Guide (September, 2019)
Attachment 5.4.2: 2020 Remuneration Survey
Attachment 5.4.3: Council Remuneration Bylaw 7330-2017
5.5. Resolutions (LMLGA, CM and UBCM)
• Stephanie Nichols, Corporate Officer
Attachment 5.5.1: Resolution Process Timeline
6. QUESTION PERIOD
Doc#2661512
Corporate Governance and Human Resources Committee Agenda
January 25, 2021
Page 2 of 2
7. NOTICE OF CLOSED MEETING
The meeting will be closed to the public pursuant to Sections 90 (1) and 90 (2) of the Community
Charter as the subject matter being considered relates to the following:
Section 90(1)(c) Labour relations or other employee relations.
Any other matter that may be brought before the Committee of Council that meets the
requirements for a meeting closed to the public pursuant to Sections 90 (1) and 90 (2) of the
Community Charter or Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
8. ADJOURNMENT
QUESTION PERIOD
Question Period provides the public with the opportunity to ask questions or make comments on items on the
agenda . Each person will be given 2 minutes to speak. Up to ten minutes in total is allotted for Question Period.
Composition
City of Maple Ridge
Corporate Governance and Human Resources Committee
Terms of Reference
• The Corporate Governance and Human Resources Committee will consist of three
members of Council.
• Members will be appointed annually by the Mayor.
• Quorum for the Committee will be two members.
• The Committee Chair will be elected by the Committee members.
• The Chief Administrative Officer, or designate, and the Executive Director of Human
Resources will attend meetings to provide input and answer questions.
Meetings
• The Committee meets on a quarterly basis. Additional meetings may be held as deemed
necessary by the Chair of the Committee or the Chief Administrative Officer/Executive
Director of Human Resources.
• The Chair of the Committee will constitute a meeting as per the requirements of the
Community Charter.
• The Committee Chair will be included in the agenda setting process.
• The person designated by the Committee to act as Secretary will prepare minutes for all
meetings.
• Meetings will follow the procedures outlined in the Council Procedures Bylaw.
Reporting
• Minutes of the meetings of the Committee will be signed by the Chair, submitted to a
regular Council meeting as an Item on Consent, and open for public inspection.
• Supporting schedules and information reviewed by the Committee will be available for
examination by any Council member.
• Recommendations to Council will come in the form of a report.
Responsibilities
• The Corporate Governance and Human Resources Committee will examine issues related
to:
• City Council Governance Policies;
• City Election Policies;
• City Operational Policies; and
• Committees of Council.
• Recommend inter-governmental resolutions for UBCM, FCM, and LGMA.
• Inquire into any matters referred to it by Council .
Rev . 2020
#2641329
5.3 .1
UBC~.
UNION OF BC MUNICIPALITIES
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE
FIRST EDITION
U1 SEPTEMBER, 2019
~ ....
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................................... 1
SECTION 1: IMPORTANCE OF REMUNERATION ..................................................................................................... 5
SECT ION 2: WHO SHOULD CONDUCT REMUNERATION REVIEWS? ...................................................................... 7
SECTION 3: TIMING AND FREQUENCY OF REVIEWS ............................................................................................ 12
SECTION 4: SETTING REMUNERATION ................................................................................................................. 17
Remuneration ............................................................................................................................. 17
Expenses ...................................................................................................................................... 27
Benefits ....................................................................................................................................... 30
SECTION 5: COMMU NICATIONS ........................................................................................................................... 36
SECTION 6: SUMMARY OF BEST PRACTICES ....................................................................................................... .40
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE i UBC~~
INTRODUCTION
In British Columbia, local governments are responsible for providing a broad range of local services to
address infrastructure needs, regulate land use, move people and goods, tackle challenging social
issues, promote active living, protect the natural environment, and deal with a host of other issues.
The elected officials that sit on the municipal councils and regional district boards collectively make,
and accept responsibility for, the funding, policy, and service delivery decisions that are required in
order for local government to work. Local elected officials also have responsibility for ensuring that the
councils and regional district boards themselves function effectively as democratic, representative
governing bodies.
Effective governance requires the elected officials to make decisions regarding the structure and
operation of the governing bodies. One of the more difficult decisions that must be made by the
officials involves the setting of their own remuneration.
Local elected officials in BC endorsed a resolution at the 2018 Union of BC Municipalities (UBCM}
Convention that tasked UBCM with developing a resource to support local decision makers in the
development of remuneration packages that are defensible and fair. This Council & Board
Remuneration Guide presents best practices for local governments to consider.
Development of Guide
The Guide was developed through a five-stage process:
> Stage 1: Background Research -Research was conducted to identify and understand the
challenges faced by local governments in setting remuneration levels for council members and
board directors. Remuneration approaches for elected officials in other orders of government
were briefly explored as part of the research.
> Stage 2: Survey -A survey was sent to every municipality and regional district in the province
to understand elected official remuneration policies and practices in place today, to learn about
approaches that appear to work well, and to understand lessons learned. A total of 75 local
governments responded to the survey, which translates into a response rate of 39%. Included
in the list of respondents were eleven of the twenty largest municipalities (by population), five
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
AUTONOMY
The best practices set out in
the Guide recognize that local
governments have autonomy
to develop approaches to
remuneration that reflect local
needs and circumstances. The
Guide offers practical advice,
based on research findings
and the experiences of
municipalities and regional
districts, for local
governments to consider.
Each local government will
need to determine, based on
its own review of the
information, its preferred
course of action.
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 1 UBCill
.. ··' ,, ' ,,,' •'••·. '
of the smallest municipalities, and twelve regional districts. All regions of the province were
well represented (see sidebar).
> Stage 3: Interviews -Approximately twenty follow-up interviews were conducted with a
subset of the municipalities and regional districts that responded to the survey. Written
materials from these local governments were obtained and reviewed; materials from other
places identified through the research were also reviewed.
> Stage 4: Best Practices -Based ori the background research, survey results, and discussions
with individual local governments, a set of best practices was developed for the Guide.
> Stage 5: Guide -The UBCM Executive approved the scope and approach for the Guide. The
final draft, complete with recommended best practices, was reviewed by UBCM's Presidents
Committee. Input provided by the Presidents Committee was used to finalize the document.
Organization of Guide
The Council & Board Remuneration Guide is organized into six separate sections. Section 1 sets the
stage by exploring why remuneration for elected officials is important, and why local governments
need to review remuneration levels periodically. Sections 2, 3, and 4 then focus on remuneration
reviews themselves. Section 2 begins by considering who sho~ld conduct such reviews. Three options
are identified and assessed. Section 3 addresses the question of 11 when 11 -specifically, when to review
remuneration, and when to implement the results of a review. The distinction between a full review
and an adjustment is explained in this section. Section 4 examines how to conduct a review. The
development of comparison groups, the collection of data, and the use of simple formulas are all topics
that are addressed the text. Advice on expenses and benefits is also provided. Section 5 addresses the
importance of communication. Information to communicate, audiences to reach, and meth9ds of
communication to consider are outlined.
Best practices for local governments to consider in addressing remuneration for elected officials are
presented throughout the Guide. Section 6 brings the practices together into one summary table.
SURVEY OF LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS
In total, 75 municipalities and
regional districts participated
in the survey on elected official
remuneration. As illustrated in
the accompanying chart, all
regions of the province
(identified using UBCM Area
Associations) were
represented.
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 2 UBCfil
Use by Local Governments
It is important to emphasize that the Guide does not prescribe or suggest specific levels of
remuneration or particular expense and benefits packages for local elected officials . The Guide is
focused, instead, on helping local governments develop approaches that can be used by decision-
makers to establish compensation programs that are fair both for elected officials and local taxpayers.
It should be noted, as well, that the Guide recognizes the autonomy of local governments in the
development of approaches that reflect local needs and circumstances. The Guide offers practical
advice for local governments to consider, based on research findings and the experiences of
municipalities and regional districts around the province. Each local government, however, will need to
determine, based on its own review of the information, its preferred course of action.
On a related note, the Guide recognizes that there is significant variability among local governments in
Brit ish Columbia. Considerable differences in population, area, scope of services, size of
administration, location, growth rate, local economy, and other factors mean that local governments
will need to apply the best practices in ways that respond to local needs and are sensitive to local
conditions. To assist local governments in this task, care has been taken to provide advice that can be
applied in a variety of local settings.
Key Terms
Certain terms are used repeatedly throughout the Guide . Key terms and their meanings are presented
in Figure 1.1 in alphabetical order.
VARIABILITY AMONG LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS
Considerable differences
among local governments in
population, area, scope of
services, size of
administration, location,
economy, growth rate, and
other factors mean that
jurisdictions will need to apply
the best practices in ways that
respond to local needs and are
sensitive to local conditions.
Care has been taken to
provide advice that can be
applied in a variety of local
settings.
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE. SEPTEMBER, 2019. PAGE 3 uncr?1
Figure 1.1
Key Terms in the Guide
Benefits are the incentives, services and protections provided to local government
• ,j elected officials during their time in office.
Expenses are charges i ncurred by local government officials in the course of their
duties, and are necessary in order to perform their duties.
Local governments include municipalities, governed by councils, and regional
districts, governed by boards of directors .
Local government elected officials include members of municipal councils, and
directors of regional district boards . Members of council i nclude mayors and
councillors. Regional district directors i nclude chairs and vice chairs.
In a narrow sense, the term remunerati on in the Guide refers specifically to money
that is paid to local elected officials as compensation for the duties they perform.
Remuneration in this sense includes base salaries, but also supplemental payments
that typically take the form of per-meeting stipends. Remunerat ion is also used in a
broader sense to include expenses and benefits packages, in addition to money.
The exact usage of the term throughout the text is context-specific.
This term refers to increases that are automatically applied, usually on an annual
basis, to an elected official's base salary. The level of adjustment is determined by
a pre-determined index (e .g., consumer price index), or combination of ind i ces.
A remuneration review is a formal assessment of existing remuneration provided to
elected officials. In most cases, reviews include a consideration of pay, expenses,
and benefits.
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 4 uncfil
SECTION 1
IMPORTANCE OF REMUNERATION
Most people who seek election to a municipal council or regional district board are driven, first and
foremost, by a strong sense of public service and a desire to make their communities better.
Remuneration is not, in most cases, an important motivating factor. Individuals who do make the
commitment to serve as local elected officials, however, should be able to expect fair and reasonable
compensation. This section of the Guide explains why remuneration is both warranted and important.
FACTORS TO CONSIDER
Time Commitment
Local government elected officials are expected to commit considerable time (and energy) to their
roles on municipal councils and regional district boards. In larger municipalities and in some regional
districts, the roles of mayor and chair are full-time positions in which incumbents typically work more
than full-time hours . Even in places where such positions are part-time in nature, the time
requirements can be significant, as they are for councillors and directors. Time must be spent
reviewing comprehensive agenda packages, attending council or board meetings and public hearings,
engaging with residents, participating in civic events, and handling a variety of other tasks. For elected
officials who serve on more than one governing body, on committees and commissions, and as
appointees to external agencies and associations, the time commitment is even greater.
Councils and boards need people who are willing and able to commit the time needed to serve.
Remuneration reflects and compensates individuals for the time they must spend to do the job.
Employment and Financial Impacts
The time required to serve on a municipal council or regional district board will reduce the amount of
time available to spend on other paid work. For individuals who are mid-career, this reality can
negatively impact their current employment situation, as well as their total earned income. In some
cases the impact may extend to affect future career development and earning potential, since time
spent on a council or board translates into less time available to apply to building a career path.
TIME COMMITMENT
"Municipal politics is
different than the rest in that
Council members are always
on the clock. Businesses close
at the end of a day, people go
home from work and
provincial and federal
politicians have staff and
deputies to assist with their
very demanding schedules.
City Council members are on
their own and take ownership
of all issues and concerns
from the community. They are
never off the clock . 11
Remuneration Task Force
City of Kam/oops
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 5 UBC~
Remuneration for local elected officials will not fully offset the employment and financial impacts
experienced in every case. In keeping with the public service motivation of people who choose to run
for local office, there is arguably a tacit acceptance by those in office of some level of sacrifice.
Remuneration should, however, be fair as well as sufficient in order to mitigate any sacrifice required.
Unfair and insufficient remuneration may render elected office off-limits to a variety of prospective
candidates.
Responsibility
Municipal councils and regional district boards are responsible for increasingly broad and complex
portfolios of local government services. The elected officials who sit on these governing bodies
contribute to and accept responsibility for funding, policy, and service delivery decisions that are taken
to meet infrastructure needs, promote land use goals, tackle social issues, provide opportunities for
sport and recreation, protect sensitive environments, regulate activities, and deal with a host of other
issues . These decisions, which even in small jurisdictions can be weighty and contentious, affect the
lives of residents and the long-term prosperity of communities. Fair remuneration for persons who are
willing to accept such responsibility is warranted.
Representative Government
As representative governing bodies, it is important that municipal councils and regional district boards
reflect, to the extent possible, the diversity of the communities they serve. Inadequate remuneration,
either in terms of pay and/or benefits, stands as a potential barrier to participation for people who are
without other sources of income. Fair remuneration is important in helping to reduce barriers, and in
attracting capable people from a variety of backgrounds, demographic groups, socio-economic classes,
and employment types.
IMPORTANCE OF REVIEWS
The factors outlined thus far help to explain why remuneration for local government elected officials is
both warranted and important. The factors also highlight the need for local governments to regularly
review their elected official remuneration programs in order to ensure that they remain fair over time
as expectations and circumstances change. Remuneration levels that are left static in the face of
changing circumstances, including shifts in the cost-of-living, risk becoming barriers to participation.
GOVERNING BODY DIVERSITY
Municipal councils and
regional district boards are
representative governing
bodies. Their legitimacy is
strengthened when they
reflect the diversity of the
communities they serve.
Inadequate remuneration is a
potential barrier to
participation for individuals
who may wish to serve, but
who lack other sources of
income and/or benefits. In
these cases, diversity in the
membership of local
governing bodies may be
difficult to achieve.
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 6 UBC~1
SECTION 2
WHO SHOULD CONDUCT REVIEWS?
In an effort to ensure that remuneration levels for local elected officials remain fair over time, local
governments undertake remuneration reviews. Reviews are the focus of Sections 2, 3, and 4 of the
Guide. Section 2 -this section -begins by exploring who should conduct a review.
OPTIONS TO CONSIDER
In some jurisdictions, elected official remuneration is reviewed by the municipal council or regional
district board itself, or by a committee of the council or board. In most places, however, reviews are
assigned to other parties in order to relieve elected officials from the difficult task of having to develop
their own levels and terms of compensation. The three most common options are local government
staff, an independent task force, and experienced consultants.
> Local Government Staff-According to the survey of local governments that was conducted
for the Guide, the use of local government staff to review elected official remuneration is the
most popular option.1 Most of the jurisdictions that reported using their own staff, it is worth
noting, are small in size.
> Experienced Consultant -This decision to assign a review to an outside, external consultant is
less common, but is used in certain communities. Under the approach, a consultant is hired to
conduct the relevant research, examine options, and recommend remuneration and benefit
levels.
> Independent Task Force -This option of an independent task force, comprised largely or
entirely of local residents, is used by some local governments across the province, including
large cities, small villages and towns, and regional districts.2 The size and composition of the
task force are important points to consider; so, too, is the mandate of the committee, its
methodology, and the support it is provided.
1 In all, 39% of responding local governments reported using local government staff to conduct reviews.
2 The body is referred to as a Working Group, Advisory Group, Panel, Task Force, or Committee.
ASSIGNMENT OF REVIEWS
The accompanying chart
based on the survey results
shows that many jurisdictions
today assign local elected
official remuneration reviews
to local government staff
Consultant
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 7 UBCfil_
Pros & Cons
The choice of option may be informed by past experiences, and by local expectations and views
regarding elected official compensation. The choice will also be influenced, however, by an
assessment of the pros and cons that are associated with each of the alternatives. Figure 2.1 presents
some of the key pros and cons that local governments may wish to consider.
Figure 2.1
Options to Consider
> understand roles, responsibilities,
and workload of elected officials
> understand local context
> easy access to data from other
communities, particularly where
benchmark group exists
> cost effective
> independent from elected officials
> familiar with use of data and
metrics, and with local
government practices
> option enables decision-makers to
point to and rely on expert advice
> independent from elected officials
> places in hands of community
(members from community)
> understands local context
> cost effective
> different perspectives involved
> potential to raise profile of local
government, and importance of
remuneration
> perceived as being less-than-
independent from governing body
> may be perceived or actual conflict of
interest in cases where linkage
(formal or informal) between elected
official and staff remuneration
> may not understand or be sensitive
to local context
> may be costly
> may lack understanding of the roles,
responsibilities, and workload of
elected officials
> relies on credibility of committee
members
> governing body may h.ave difficulty
rejecting recommendations
INDEPENDENT TASK FORCE
The use of an independent t(!sk
force provides for a high
degree of separation for
elected officials from the
development of their own
remuneration packages.
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 8 UBCfil
PREFERRED APPROACH
The independent task force emerges in Figure 2.1 as the preferred option for undertaking elected
official remuneration reviews . The task force's independence from decision-makers, as well as staff,
enables it to operate in a way that is free of local government involvement and -more importantly -
perceived to be free of such involvement. This freedom adds to the credibility of recommendations
that come forward, and protects elected officials and their staff from conflict of interest issues and
other controversies. The independence also allows the task force to speak to the roles, responsibilities
and expectations of elected officials, and the importance of appropriate remuneration, in ways that
the elected officials and staff would find difficult to do.
It is worth noting that the use of independent task forces and panels to determine elected official
remuneration is widespread at the provincial and federal government levels in Canada . These
jurisdictions recognize the value of the approach in protecting elected officials from challenges related
to conflict of interest that inevitably arise in the development of their own remuneration.
SUCCESS FACTORS
The choice of the independent task force option will not, on its own, guarantee a successful outcome.
Careful attention needs to be given to the appointment of members to the task force, the
development of task force terms of reference, and the provision of support to the task force 's work .
Membership
To the extent possible, diversity in the membership of the task force is important. A common practice
is to include, at a minimum, representation from the local business community, as well as the non-
profit or public sector. Many governments also find the appointment of an individual with past
experience in local government as an elected official or senior staff person to be advantageous. These
individuals bring a local government perspective, and can help ensure a clear understanding on the
task force of the roles and responsibilities of elected officials. Individuals with human resources
experience or a legal background are considered to add value in some places. Citizens-at-large are
included on many task forces .
SUCCESS FACTORS
The choice of the independent
task force option will not, on its
own, guarantee a successful
outcome . Careful attention
needs to be given to the
appointment of members to
the task force, the
development of task force
terms of reference, and the
provision of support to the task
force's work.
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER , 2019 • PAGE 9 UBC~~
Other considerations related to membership are as follows:
> Size -Some places (e .g., Tofino, Metro Vancouver, Alberni-Clayoquot Regional District) limit
the number of members to three; others (e.g ., Abbotsford) allow for a maximum of five; still
others (e.g., Kamloops} appoint seven. Larger bodies allow for greater diversity and a broader
range of perspectives; smaller groups may be more nimble and able to reach consensus more
easily. In relatively small jurisdictions, smaller task forces may be more practical to assemble
given the smaller number of candidates relative to the situation in larger centres.
> Appointment -In most jurisdictions that use independent task forces, members are
appointed by the Chief Administrative Officer of the local government. This approach
reinforces the group's independence from the governing body whose remuneration the task
force is reviewing.
Terms of Reference
As with any advisory body, formal terms of reference for the task force are important. Task force
terms should set out:
> the purpose of the task force
> the task force's membership, including number and qualifications of members, and the
designation of a chair
> the method and term of appointment
> the task force's mandate, or scope of review, including the specific items (e.g., base
remuneration, expenses, benefits, annual adjustments) on which the task force is expected to
provide recommendations
> a methodology to guide the task force, including any specific factors, bases of comparison, and
criteria for the task force to consider in developing its recommendations
> expectations regarding consultation, including consultation with the public
> the expected number of task force meetings, and the meeting procedures to follow
> support resources available to the task force in conducting its work
> the task force's reporting schedule
GUIDANCE TO TASK FORCE
Even when task forces are free
to choose their own
approaches, it is useful for
jurisdictions to provide
guidance on methodology, and
identify specific items for task
forces to consider in their
work.
The terms of reference for
Abbotsford's Council
Remuneration Citizen Task
Force state that "the Task
Force will research and
consider all aspects of
compensation that it believes
are relevant to making its
recommendations, but will
specifically consider [certain]
matters ... "
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 10 UBC~
> policies, bylaws, and other documents of the local government that govern the task force 1s
work and conduct
To underscore the importance of autonomy, some jurisdictions allow their task forces to themselves
choose the data, factors, and criteria to use in developing recommendations. Even in these cases,
however, jurisdictions will provide guidance on methodology or, more commonly, identify specific
items for task forces to consider in addition to any others that the task forces determine to use.
Task Force Support
The primary value of a remuneration task force is its independence from the local government. The
elected officials who receive and who are affected by the task force 1s recommendations benefit from
this independence. The task force is not expected, however, to conduct its work completely on its
own, without assistance from the organization. Indeed, for the task force to succeed, it must be able
to rely on staff to collect and analyze data, organize meetings, conduct research, and draft the task
force 1s report. it is important for local governments to assign a senior manager as a liaison to the task
force, and sufficient staff resources to give the task force the support it needs to fulfill its mandate.
Another form of support for the task force is education. To make meaningful recommendations that
reflect the duties, workload, and expectations of elected officials, task force members need to have a
good understanding of loca l government, and of the roles and responsibilities of mayors/chairs, and
councillors/directors. Local government staff can assist by providing an orientation to task force
members at the beginning of their mandate. Alternatively, or in addition, task force members can be
given reference materials such as the booklet available on line at the Ministry of Municipal Affairs,
titled Thinking About Running for Local Office?
TASK FORCE SUPPORT
"The District Chief
Administrative Officer and
Director of Financial Services
shall serve as non-voting
resources to the [citizen]
Advisory Group."
Council Remuneration
Advisory Group
District of Tofino
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 11 UBCfil_
SECTION 3
TIMING AND FREQUENCY OF REVIEWS
Local governments interviewed for the Guide highlighted the need to consider timing and frequency in
the review of elected official remuneration . These issues are explored i n th is section of the text. Also
explored is the question of timing as it relates to the implementation of the outcomes of reviews.
TIMING OF REVIEWS
Local governments do not follow a single common practice with respect to the timing of remuneration
reviews. An examination of existing approaches over the past decade shows that some councils and
boards (e.g., Vancouver) have conducted reviews early in their terms, whereas others (e .g., Comox
Valley Regional District, Oak Bay, Esquimalt, Prince George) wait until the final year of their mandate .
Some local governments (e .g., Kamloops , Abbotsford, Metr o Vancouver) initiate reviews closer to the
middle of their terms. In general, most councils and boards that undertake reviews i nitiate them i n
the second half of their terms .
The preferred timing for a review will depend on a number of factors, including local economic
cond itions, reliance on established policy, the election cycle, and tax system changes over which local
governments have no control. Each of these points is considered, as follows:
> Local Conditions -In all of their initiatives, remuneration reviews included, councils and
boards need to be sensitive to local econom ic conditions . Elected officials ' compensation and
benefits, it is important to remember, are paid for by local tax payers. In times of economic
growth and optimism, when local employment is strong and consumer confidence is high,
news of a remunerat ion review for elected officials will be greeted much differently than
during periods of economic stress. A council or board would be well-advised, for example, to
postpone a review, no matter how warranted one may be, in a single-industry community that
is dealing with the loss of a major employer.
> Established Policy -The survey conducted for the Guide found that 27% of responding local
governments have a formal policy in place on elected official remuneration, 45% have a •
remuneration bylaw, and 21% have both (see sidebar). Several of these policies and bylaws
ESTABLISHED POLICY
Most local governments that
responded to the survey have
either a formal policy in place
on elected official
remuneration, a bylaw, or
both. Several policies and
some bylaws address the
timing and frequency of
reviews .
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 12 UBCfil
speak to the timing of future remuneration reviews. When such schedules are applied
consistently, local governments are perceived to have less discretion over the question of
when to review. The issue of timing in these cases tends to attract less attention that it would
otherwise.
> Election Cycle -Change to elected officials' remuneration is an item of interest and discussion
in many communities across the province. It is important for local governments to recognize
remuneration as a legitimate issue for scrutiny and discussion, and to allow opportunities for
discussion to occur. It may not be useful, however, for remuneration to dominate public
discourse, particularly in the lead-up to an election when other important issues also deserve
attention. To avoid this situation, local governments should consider conducting reviews, and
reporting results, at least one year before the next election.
> Tax System Changes -Changes to the Federal Income Tax Act were introduced by the federal
government in 2017 to eliminate a long-standing federal tax exemption for local government
elected officials, effective January 1, 2019. This change resulted in substantial changes to the
after-tax income for elected officials, and prompted many local governments to adjust elected
officials' 2019 pre-tax compensation in order to maintain after-tax 2018 remuneration. The
need to review remuneration and change base amounts to maintain after-tax compensation
was driven by changes that were beyond local government control. The timing of the review
to initiate the changes was also driven by events outside of local government.
FREQUENCY OF REVIEWS
Regular reviews of elected official remuneration levels should be undertaken in order to ensure that
remuneration remains fair over time as job conditions, expectations, and circumstances change.
ELECTION CYCLE
Change to elected officials'
remuneration is a legitimate
issue for public scrutiny and
discussion. To avoid having
remuneration dominate public
discourse in the lead-up to
elections, however, at the
expense of other important
issues, local governments
should consider conducting
reviews, and reporting results,
at least one year before the
next election.
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 13 UBC~.1
Failure to do so may undervalue the time spent by elected officials, and the level of responsibility
associated with the job. Failure could also result in remuneration becoming a barrier to participation,
and make it difficult for a diverse range of individuals to stand for election.
As noted earlier, several local governments that responded to the survey have policies or bylaws that
set out schedules for formal reviews of base remuneration levels. In some of these documents the
frequency of reviews is set out -once-per-term appears to be the most commonly prescribed .
schedule in these documents. Regular adherence to these schedules ensures that reviews happen on
a regular basis, and helps to ensure that remuneration does not become a barrier to elected office.
Local governments with policies and/or bylaws that do not identify a specific frequency typically
experience longer intervals between reviews.
Relying on policies and bylaws to automatically trigger a review, in keeping with a prescribed
frequency, is a useful practice to follow. It relieves councils and boards -as well as their individual
members -from having to take the politically-difficult decision to request a review.
Annual Adjustments
Local governments undertake remuneration reviews to assess the fairness of elected officials' pay,
expenses, and benefit packages. When done properly, reviews take time, energy, and other resources
to complete. A best practice, identified earlier, is to conduct a full review once per term -it is neither
necessary nor reasonable to schedule reviews more frequently.
In the years between reviews, it is common for councils and boards with policies and/or bylaws in
place to automatically adjust elected official pay to reflect changes in the cost of living. In almost
ANNUAL ADJUSTMENTS
It is common for municipalities
and regional districts with
policies and/or bylaws in place
to automatically adjust
remuneration to reflect
changes in the cost of living.
The year-over-year change to
the consumer price index is the
default adjustment factor.
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 14 UBCfil_
----------------------
every case, the previous year's Consumer Price Index (CPI) for British Columbia, Vancouver, or Victoria
is the adjustment factor applied by local governments, depending on their location within the
province.3 Automatic adjustments, defined and set out in policies and/or bylaws, ensure that the real
value of elected officials' remuneration remains stable between formal reviews, and can help to
reduce the need for more significant increases at the time of review. Failure to make annual
adjustments may place a burden on future councils and boards to address remuneration levels that
have been left to stagnate in the face of regular cost-of-living increases. For these reasons, annual
adjustments using a CPI index is a best practice.
IMPLEMENTATION OF CHANGES
When considering the issue ohiming as it relates to the implementation of changes, it is important to
distinguish among the types of changes being put forward. The three key types include: changes to
base remuneration that emerge from full reviews; changes that are prompted by shifts in the tax
system; and annual adjustments to reflect increases in the cost of living.
> Base Remuneration -Councils and boards have full control over the timing of their
remuneration reviews, even in cases where timing is prescribed by policy and/or bylaw.
Similarly, councils and boards have full authority to choose when to implement any changes
that emerge from reviews. In general, it is preferable to have such changes take effect at the
beginning of the following term. This best practice is particularly important to follow when
reviews conclude the that significant increases to base pay and/or benefit packages are
warranted. A decision to implement changes immediately, or even during the existing term,
can create perceived conflicts of interest.
3 Other indices include annual increases to general wages in BC, and increases to unionized or exempt staff wages.
IMPLEMENTA T/ON
It is preferable for councils and
boards to implement the
outcomes of remuneration
reviews at the beginning of the
following council or board
term. A decision to implement
changes earlier, during the
existing term, can easily create
perceived conflicts of interest.
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 15 UBCill
-'
There will be some cases where implementation during the existing council or board term is
considered necessary, perceptions of conflict notwithstanding. Consider the situation in which
a council or board entered office following an election in which stagnant compensatio ·n was
portrayed as a barrier to participation. The council or board could decide that i mplementation
of changes that emerged from a review conducted early in the new term is necessary.
> Tax System -Councils and boards have no control over changes to the income tax system -
the elimination of the federal tax exemption for local government elected officials that took
effect on January 1, 2019, is an example of one such change. In anticipation of this change -
it was announced in 2017 -some local governments des igned remedies, before the 2018
local general election, to take effect on January 1, 2019, in the new term . Several local
governments, however, delayed taking action until after the federal tax change came into
force. Immediate implementation of changes designed to protect elected officials from
financial loss is considered reasonable and defensible by most.
> Annual Adjustments -As explained earlier, annual adjustments to remuneration are designed
to protect base rates from erosion as a result of inflation . These adjustments, which result in
nominal rather than real increases, are expected to be implemented immediately.
FEDERAL TAX SYSTEM
Local governments have no
control over shifts in the
federal income tax system.
Offsetting changes to base
remuneration levels that are
designed to protect council and
board members from financial
loss are reasonable. Local
governments should consider
implementing such changes
immediately.
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 16 UBCfil_
SECTION 4
SETTING REMUNERATION
On a regular or periodic basis, local governments undertake remuneration reviews to determine the
remuneration, expense payments, and benefits to provide to elected officials. The previous two
sections of the Guide tackled a number of issues related to remuneration reviews, including:
> who should conduct the reviews
> when, during an elected body's term of office, reviews should be initiated
> how frequently reviews should occur
> when changes to remuneration that result from reviews should be implemented
This section of Guide -Section 4 -explores the factors that local governments should consider using
in their reviews to determine remuneration levels that are fair and defensible. The text deals
separately with the three main components of a complete remuneration package, namely
remuneration (i.e., pay), expenses, and benefits.
REMUNERATION
Remuneration consists, first and foremost, of a base amount of pay for mayors, board chairs,
councilors, municipal directors, and electoral area directors . Base amounts are intended to reflect the
expectations and duties associated with the specific roles , and for that reason are expected to differ by
role. Remuneration also includes any payments that are made to elected officials, on top of base pay,
for attending different types of meetings, leading committees, sitting as appointees on external
bodies, preforming the roles of deputy mayor or deputy chair, and undertaking other duties. These
supplemental payments, where offered, recognize differences in workload and responsibility among
elected officials in the same role.
Bases of Comparison
For many jobs in our economy, wages and salaries are set through a process of comparison -that is, a
process that takes into account remuneration associated with other jobs that are deemed to be
comparable. The approach to setting remuneration for local elected officials is no different. The most
common basis of comparison used by local governments across the province is remuneration paid to
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER , 2019 • PAGE 17 unc~.}
elected officials in other, similar local governments. Some councils and boards, however, look to
additional bases for guidance. Four bases to consider, including remuneration paid in similar
jurisdictions, are as follows:
> Similar Jurisdictions -Remuneration levels paid to elected officials across a set of other,
similar local governments can be used to approximate an "industry rate". The use of
comparable remuneration data, as noted, is widespread across municipalities and regional
districts, and is considered a defensible approach. The challenge faced by those who use the
approach, however, comes in choosing jurisdictions that are truly comparable. Population, the
most common factor, goes some way toward establishing similarity, but may not be adequate
on its own. Other factors may need to be combined with population to establish a more valid
comparison group. Such factors could include location, geographic size, scope of services
provided, growth rate, the urban (vs. suburban or rural) nature of a jurisdiction, economic
make-up, tax base, average house price, size of operating budget, and number of staff (full-
time equivalents).
> Local Labour Force -A few jurisdictions in the province determine remuneration for council
and board members using local earnings data collected by Statistics Canada -specifically, the
average employment income earned by individuals aged 15 and over, who work year-round
and full-time.
> Provincial MLAs -Only one of the local governments in the survey pointed to remuneration
paid to Members of the Legislative Assembly as a basis for determining local elected official
pay. A few other jurisdictions, however, believe the comparison may be useful.
> Local Government Staff-Changes to staff pay are used in some jurisdictions as an index to
adjust council and board pay each year. Base pay for staff, however, is not generally used to
help set elected official pay.
Each of the four bases identified here -as well as others not identified -has both strengths and
shortcomings. Figure 4.1 highlights some of the pros and cons.
COLLECTING DATA
It is important to ensure that
data on other local governments
are comparable. Care must be
taken to confirm that data have
been collected using similar
methodologies, and that data
sets measure the same factors.
Sources of data include
CivicStats (accessed through
Civiclnfo), and Statistics Canada.
Direct contact with comparison
group local governments may be
warranted in some cases to
produce "apples to apples"
comparisons.
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 18 unc~i1_
Figure 4.1
Pros and Cons of Alternative Bases
> jobs of local elected officials in
similar jurisdictions, while not
identical, are comparable
("apples to apples")
> large enough comparison set can
neutralize outliers
> attempts to create strong linkage
to local community that pays
elected body's remuneration
> sensitive to local economic
conditions
> remuneration reflects need in
both orders of government to
attract diversity of people to
serve in elected office
> both groups (elected officials and
staff) involved in same
organization
> comparison to staff used in other
orders of government to help set
elected official remuneration
> difficult to establish truly
comparable set of jurisdictions (may
be subject to accusations of "cherry
picking")
> potential for salary escalation if
other places in comparison set
initiate significant increases
> jobs of elected officials not
comparable to majority of other jobs
in the community in terms of time
commitment, duties, responsibility
> not clear that average salary of
entire workforce reflects value of
elected officials' work
> role of MLA considerably different
than roles of mayor and chair (much
different than councillor/director)
> invites linkage to full MLA
remuneration and benefits package
> roles of staff considerably different
than roles of elected officials
> perceived conflict on part of elected
officials who approve staff salaries
> invites linkage to full staff
remuneration and benefits package
Arguably, there may be no single best basis of comparison to use in setting council and board
remuneration . As suggested in Figure 4.1, however, some bases are better than others.
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 19 uncfil
~-~----.....--------------------------
Remuneration levels paid to elected officials in similar local government jurisdictions represents the
preferred basis, and the best practice for local governments.
Comparison Group
In establishing a valid comparison group _of similar jurisdictions, local governments will need to give
careful thought to the most important measures to use. Population is a good starting point in every
case -it is a useful proxy for elected official workload, and is easy to explain. As well, data on
population are easy to obtain. Other measures can be combined with population to make the
comparison set more defensible. Factors that influence elected officials' workload and level of
responsibility are particularly useful to consider. The list of such factors will vary by jurisdiction, but
may include:
> location
> geographic size
> scope of services
> growth rate
> operating budget
Finally, local governments will need to give some thought to the number of jurisdictions to include in
the comparison set. Larger sets will allow for a more robust comparison, and will make it easier to
neutralize the impact of outliers (i.e., jurisdictions that have significantly high or low pay levels, relative
to those of other places). If the set is too large, however, it may be difficult to obtain the necessary
comparative data, especially in cases where a range of measures, in addition to population, are used.
Given these points, a practicable and defensible minimum size is five to seven jurisdictions. The
maximum size will depend on the number of factors being considered, and the capacity of the body
conducting the remuneration review. Comparison set sizes vary considerably across local
SIZE OF COMPARISON GROUP
The size of comparison groups
that are used to help determine
elected official remuneration
varies considerably across local
governments. The City of Prince
George uses a peer review group
of ten municipalities for the
purposes of its quadrennial
review. The group includes
cities with similar populations -
Chil/iwack, Kelowna, Saanich,
Langley Township, Delta,
Kam/oops, North Vancouver
District, Nanaimo, Victoria, and
Coquitlam.
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 20 UBCfil_
governments. Kam loops has used 14 municipalities; Comox Valley Regional District recently used nine.
Metro Vancouver bases the salary of its Chair on the median salary of mayors in 21 municipalities (all
Metro municipal jurisdictions).
Using the Data
Once the remuneration data from comparable jurisdictions have been obtained, local governments
need to determine how to best use the data to determine pay levels for the range of elected officials
in place. It is useful at this stage to make the exercise as straightforward as possible so that it can be
undertaken easily (and relatively quickly), and so that it is easy to explain and understand-. Simple
formulas can be effective in meeting these goals.
For municipal councils, the following formula-based approach -or variations of it -is used in a
number of places:
> Set the salary for the mayor as the median value of all mayors' salaries from the comparison
set of municipalities. Calculate the salary for councillors as a percentage (e.g., 40%) of the
mayor's salary to reflect the part-time nature of the councillor position, as well as its lower
workload and level of responsibility relative to those of the mayor.
Figure 4.2 illustrates, using hypothetical data from a comparison set of seven municipalities, how this
formula works in practice. To be clear, all numbers, including the percentage factor, are hypothetical
examples only, presented solely for the purpose of illustration.
SIMPLICITY
When determining how to use
comparison data to calculate
remuneration levels, it is
preferable to apply simple
formulas. Formulas allow the
exercise to be undertaken easily
and relatively quickly.
Approaches based on formulas
are easy to explain, easy to
understand, and defensible.
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 21 uncfil
Figure 4.2
Sample Formula for Municipal Elected Officials
$92,000 40 $36,800
In applying the formula, local governments should consider the following points:
> Percentage Factor -The percentage factor that is applied to identify an appropriate councillor
salary needs to be set after careful consideration of the position's workload, time
commitment, and level of responsibility relative to those of the mayor. In municipalities where
the mayor's role is full-time (or greater), the difference between the positions may be greater,
and the percentage factor may be lower than 40%. Jurisdictions that use this formula (or
variations of it) tend to apply percentages that range from 30% to 50%, depending on local
conditions. Forty percent is a reasonable starting point.
> Median Value -The median value effectively neutralizes low and high outliers, and is
therefore preferable to the average value.
> Applying the Outcome -It is possible, particularly if a new comparison set is used, that the
resulting, recommended salaries for mayor and councillor will be lower than the actual salaries
being paid . If the difference is significant, local governments may choose to "red circle"
existing salaries for a period of time. In the calculated salaries are higher than those being
paid, either a one-time adjustment, or a phased increase may be required.
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 22 UBCfil_
> Alternative Percentile -The median value represents the 50th percentile in the comparison
set. Some local governments may determine, based on local circumstances , that
remunerat ion should be set higher -for example, at the 75 t h percentile . In this situation ,
careful thought would need to be given to the rationale for such an approach.
While less common among regional districts, formulas may be just as useful in providing a relatively
simple, easy to understand, defensible approach . In developing a formu la for regional boards ,
provision needs to be made for a greater number of elected roles. In most cases, four specific roles
should be considered, including the cha i r, vice chair, electoral area director, and municipal director.
The distinction between electoral area and municipal directors is particularly important to recognize.
Regional districts are the local government for electoral areas, responsible for prov iding all basic local
services. Electoral area directors are accountable directly to their local electors, and are expected to
consult directly with electors on local service and other topics . Many electoral area directors
represent vast geographic areas, often with numerous small communities or settlements to serve . The
time commitment required to provide proper contact and representation can be considerable.
Electoral area directors' full local government salary comes from their regional d istricts.
The role of municipal director is also important and can be demanding. Municipal directors, however,
are accountable to their councils and do not face the same expectations as their electoral area
counterparts regarding consultation with residents on regional district matters. Residents of
municipalities rece ive most of their local services from their municipal councils. Mun ici pal directors sit
on these councils, and are paid separately as council members to perform municipal duties.
A reasonable formula that takes into account the differences between electoral area and munic i pal
directors, as well as the unique duties, expectations, and respons i bi li ties of the chair and vice chair, is
as follows:
> Set the salary for municipal director based on the median value of all municipal directors'
salaries from the comparison set of regional districts. Calculate the salary for electoral area
director by applying a multiplier (e .g., 2.0). Calcu late a stipend for the cha i r by applying a
multiplier (e.g ., 2.5) to the municipal director salary. Use a separate multiplier (e.g., 0 .5) to
determine a stipend for v ice chair .
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 23 unc~"il
""'":'"""" .,.,., ...
Figure 4.3 illustrates how this formula works in practice, using hypothetical data for a comparison set
of seven regional districts. All numbers, including the multipliers, are examples only.
Figure 4.3
Sample Formula for Regional District Elected Officials
Subject Regiobal b
$12,500
2.0
2.5
0.5
* These stipends would be paid in addition to the base director pay.
$25,000
$ 31,250
$6,250
The considerations raised for municipal council remuneration formulas regarding percentage factor,
median value, applying the outcome, and alternative percentile apply to the regional board formula as
well. In addition, it is important in the regional district context to consider the need for supplemental
payments, over and above the base salary amounts.
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 24 UBCfil_
___J
Regional District Supplemental Payments
On a municipal council, the expectations on a councillor in terms of workload, time commitment, and
responsibilities, are, in general, the same for all councillors. Almost al l councils, as a consequence, pay
councillors the same base salary without additional payments for committee meetings. Supplemental
fees may be paid in some cases to councillors who participate in external agencies on behalf of
council; however, these payments are the exception rather than the rule. Approximately 25% of
municipalities that responded to the survey pay stipends to council members for time spent as deputy
mayor or acting mayor. In most cases, these stipends tend to be nominal in value.
The situation for regional district directors is different. As noted already, the base remuneration for
role of electoral area director is typ ically greater than the base remuneration paid to the municipal
director role -the gap is intended to reflect the inherent differences in the roles. Differences in
workload, time commitment, and level of responsib i lity, and level of interest also exist, however,
among individual directors. Some directors may represent large jurisdictions that participate in a
broad range of regional district services, some of which may have committees or commissions in place.
These directors may be compelled to play, or be interested in playing, an especial ly active role in
regional d istrict service governance . Other directors w i ll represent jurisdictions that are less involved
in, or reliant on, their regional districts . These directors may not be involved in regional district
matters to the same degree as others.
To account for differences among individual directors, regional districts may choose to provide
supplemental payments, over and above base remuneration levels. Where provided, payments take
the form of per-meeting stipends that are paid to directors who attend specified regional district
meetings, as well as external meetings to wh ich directors are sent to represent their local
governments. The amounts of the supplemental payments vary; most regional districts, however, pay
between $75 and $200 per meeting.4
4 An except ion is Metro Vancouver, which pays $397 to each director for every board, committee and other
approved meeting attended. For all Metro Vancouver di rectors other than the {sole) electoral area director, board
chair, board vice chair, committee chairs, and committee vice-chairs, however, the meeting stipend constitutes the
entire remuneration {i.e., there is no base amount). Central Coast Regional Distr ict and Peace River Regional
District also pay higher per-meeting rates in lieu of base salaries for directors.
SUPPLEMENTAL PAYMENTS
Fifteen of the 24 regional
districts that pay base
remuneration to directors also
provide supplemental payments
for board, committee of the
whole, and all other meetings.
Nine of the regional districts
provide supplemental payments
for non-core meetings only.
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 25 UBC~
The use of supplemental, per-meeting payments is not uniform across regional districts. A review of
the 24 regional districts in the province that pay base remuneration to directors shows that, while
almost all provide payments to attend meetings of external agencies, 15 of the 24 also provide
payments to attend board and committee of the whole meetings. Nine (9) regional districts provide
no supplemental payments for these "core" regional district meetings -remuneration for attendance
at these meetings is included in the directors' base salaries.5
Supplemental payments are intended to reflect workload differences among individual directors. It is
not clear that such payments are also intended, however, to provide additional compensation to
directors for attending core regional district meetings of the board, including committee of the whole
meetings. Indeed, it may be argued that all board members are expected. to attend these meetings as
a basic requirement of their roles as directors.
In setting regional district board remuneration, careful attention needs to be given to the use of
supplemental payments. Regional districts may wish to consider targeting such payments to non-core
meetings, and structuring base levels to include attendance at board, committee of the whole, and
any other core meetings.
Alternate Directors
It is important to note that all regional districts use per-meeting payments to remunerate alternate
directors for attendance at all meetings, including core meetings, that the director would normally
5 Travel expenses for all meetings are paid (see later).
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 26 uncfil
attend. These payments are the only form of remuneration for alternate directors; alternates do not
receive a base salary.
EXPENSES
Local government elected officials regularly incur expenses to travel to meetings, attend conferences
and sanctioned events, communicate with residents and the local government office, and deal with
the broad variety of other duties associated with the job. It is both important and legitimate that
expenses which are incurred by council and board members on the job, and in order to do the job, be
reimbursed by the local government. Policies and bylaws on expenses are used to set out the types of
expenses that are eligible for reimbursement, the conditions under which reimbursements will be
made, and the procedures that must be followed to obtain reimbursement.
A guiding principle for councils and boards on the matter of expenses is as follows:
> Local elected officials should not themselves be expected to pay expenses that are incurred in
order to perform their roles.
A related principle, however, is that compensation paid to elected officials for expenses incurred on
the job should not be viewed as an additional source of remuneration. This point requires local
governments, first, to identify the specific types of expenses for which elected officials can expect
reimbursement.
Eligible Expenses
Local governments have similar, but not identical, lists of expenses that are eligible for reimbursement.
In the case of municipalities, expenses that are reimbursed by councils tend to be limited to those that
are incurred by members on out-of-town business. Such expenses include:
> travel by personal automobile (paid as a rate per kilometre) to out-of-town meetings
> travel by taxi, bus, train, ferry, rental car, or air to out-of-town meetings
> accommodation
> conference fees
> per diem payments for meals and incidentals
GUIDING PRINCIPLES
(EXPENSES)
Local elected officials should not
themselves be expected to pay
expenses that are incurred in
order to perform their roles.
Compensation paid to elected
officials for expenses incurred on
the job should not, however, be
considered or pursued as an
additional source of
remuneration.
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 27 UBC~~
Some councils also provide funding for a smartphone, tablet, and/or computer (or provide the
hardware itself), and the associated communications plan. Some will provide transportation costs
within the municipality, including a mileage rate for personal car use, taxi and/or transit fees, and
parking. Monthly car allowances for mayors are common; similar allowances for councillors are less
common but do exist in some centres.
Regional district boards, similar to councils, reimburse members for smartphones and for attendance
at out-of-town meetings. Most regional distri .cts also, however, pay for travel, travel time, meals, and
accommodation for attendance regional district board and committee meetings. These additional
items reflect the large geographic size of many regional districts, and the need for directors to spend
considerable time to travel to core meetings. Monthly transportation allowances provided by some
regional districts to electoral area directors also reflect geographic realities.
Most local governments provide additional expense amounts for their mayors or chairs. A monthly car
allowance, noted earlier, is standard for mayors and is becoming common for chairs. Hosting
allowances are also recognized by several jurisdictions.
Regional district expense policies should anticipate and provide special direction to municipal directors
to avoid instance of "double dipping". In some cases, expenses that are incurred by municipal
directors can and should be reimbursed by the directors' municipal councils, not charged to the
regional district. An example of such an expense is attendance at the UBCM annual conference.
Council members who serve as municipal directors attend the annual conference, first and foremost,
as representatives of their municipalities.
Local Considerations
Lists of eligible expenses are common across most jurisdictions, as noted earlier. When developing
expense policies and bylaws for a specific local government, however, it may be important to explore
particular types of expenses that, while less widespread, are appropriate given the local context.
Some regional districts (e.g., Squamish Lillooet) provide differential mileage rates to account for travel
on unpaved roads. Others (e.g., Cari boo) provide reimbursement to replace car windshields that are
damaged during regional district travel on winter roads. Parking in many urban centres is expensive.
FEDERAL TAX SYSTEM
Changes to the Federal Income
Tax Act were introduced by the
federal government in 2017 to
eliminate a long-standing
federal tax exemption for local
government elected officials,
effective January 1, 2019. The
exemption was in place to
recognize that, in the course of
their duties, elected officials
incur various expenses for which
they may not be reimbursed
(e.g., home office costs, meals
while meeting with constituents,
etc.). This change resulted in
substantial changes to the after-
tax income for elected officials,
and prompted many local
governments to adjust elected
officials' 2019 pre-tax
compensation in order to
maintain after-tax 2018
remuneration.
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 28 lJBC;1! l_\
Municipalities and regional districts in these centres may feel it necessary to reimburse parking costs
to elected officials.
Evolving Lists
Finally, local governments should not view eligible expense lists as static documents. Indeed, in order
to ensure that costs do not become barriers to participation, it is incumbent on local governments to
periodically consult elected officials and review eligibility considerations . One potential expense that
stands out is childcare. Councils and boards that have, or that seek to attract, young parents as
members may find it both fair and necessary to reimburse child care expenses that are incurred to
attend council and board meetings.
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 29 UBCfil
BENEFITS
Medical services plan premiums, extended health and dental plans, employee and family assistance
programs, and life and accidental death insurance are common examples of benefits that local
governments may choose to make available to all or some of their elected officials. Current practices
across the province vary with respect to the provision of benefits. Some local governments provide
full benefits to all elected officials at no cost to the members. In a number of places, benefits are
made available only to the mayor, since this position is the only one considered full-time. Councillors
and directors in some of these places may opt-in to packages, but only at their own cost, or on a cost-
share basis with the municipality. Certain regional districts provide benefit packages at the local
government's cost to electoral area directors, but require municipal directors to pay all premiums.
Other regional districts pay 50% of the cost of packages for all directors who opt-in. Family members
of elected officials are entitled to join benefit programs in some jurisdictions, but must pay the full
cost. Almost all local governments provide personal accident insurance to elected officials who are
traveling on local government business.
Provision of Benefits
The provision of benefits to elected officials is becoming an increasingly important topic of
consideration in local governments, particularly because of the potential barriers -real or perceived
-that a lack of benefits pose for some. In an effort to avoid this situation, local governments may
wish to consider making benefits available. Eligibility and responsibility for cost are two factors to
include in any such consideration.
> Eligibility -There is a strong rationale for providing benefits to mayors, and to other elected
officials who occupy what are considered to be full-time positions. Many individuals who may
wish to put their names forward for these positions would need, upon election to office, to
leave other full-time employment in which they may receive benefits coverage. The prospect
of giving up such coverage, and facing four or more years without replacement benefits, would
prevent some from running.
The argument for benefits may not be as strong for elected positions that are structured and
paid as part-time roles. In these cases, there is an assumption that individuals with access to
benefits through their employment will be able to retain at least some access to those benefits
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 30 UBC~~
simply because they will not be need to leave their existing employment entirely. This
reasoning fails in cases where existing benefits would be lost as a result of an individual being
converted to part-time status with their employer after being elected to office.
An additional point in the discussion on eligibility concerns the position of municipal d i rector
on regional district boards. Municipal directors are , first and foremost, municipal councillors .
The municipalities, as the loca l governments to which the councillors are elected to serve ,
should be responsible for address i ng the benefits issue with t hese elected officials . Electoral
area directors, by contrast, are directly elected to the regional distr ict boards . Electoral area
directors should look to these bod ies for benefits.
> Responsibility for Cost -Local governments shou ld cons ider pay i ng for elected official benefits
on a pro -rated basis . Using th is approach, municipalities wou ld pay 100% of the benefit
premiums for mayors, and 50% of the premiums for councilors. Regional districts would pay
50 % of the cost of benefits for electoral area directors. Reg ional districts could also choose to
pay 100% of the cost of premiums for regional district chairs who are deemed to occupy fu l l-
time roles, i rrespective of whether the chairs are also electoral area or municipal directors .
In all, the principle governing the provision of benefits is that, in an effort to reduce barr iers to
participation , local governments should make benefits available to the i r elected officials, and should
contribute t o the cost of associated premiums on a pro-rated basis , in accordance w i l l the full-or part-
time na t ure of the positions.
Smaller Jurisdictions
Smaller local governmen t s who wish to provide some leve l of benefits coverage for their elected
officials may have concerns regarding the cost of prem i ums. In an effort to minimize costs, local
governments may cons ider extending existing staff programs to include elected officials, or joining
with other local governments to create larger beneficiary pools . To that end , UBCM offers
comprehensive group insurance coverage to all local government elected officials in the province. To
jo i n the plan , however, at least three officia ls from a loca l government must opt-i n t o the coverage.
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER , 2019 • PAGE 31 UBC~.1
Evolving Range of Benefits
Finally, as with expenses, the list of benefits provided to local elected officials will change over time in
response to local needs, societal trends, and other forces. In many jurisdictions today, standard
benefits such as extended health and dental coverage, counselling services, and accidental death and
dismemberment insurance will address needs. Some other local governments, however, may be
under pressure to provide some form of parental leave, RRSP contributions, education allowances, and
other benefits that prospective candidates for election receive in their existing careers. In the coming
years, the number of local governments that will need to consider these types of benefits is likely to
increase. And, to the extent that failure to provide them creates barriers to participation, local
governments may need to consider taking action.
► Transition Payments
One specific benefit that may receive greater attention in the coming years is a transition
allowance for local elected officials who leave office at the end of a term, either through their own
choice, or as the result of an unsuccessful re-election bid. This benefit, which may be referred to
as a retirement allowance, a separation payment, a pension, deferred remuneration, or a
retraining and adjustment payout, is not offered in many jurisdictions today in the province -
indeed, there are only eight municipalities that provide the benefit, and all of them are within
Metro Vancouver. The benefit is provided to local elected officials on a broader basis, however, in
other parts of Canada, namely Quebec and Ontario.
In some of the BC jurisdictions that offer a transition allowance, the benefit is intended as a bridge
to help individuals re-enter the workforce, either in a new occupation, or back into a career that
may have been placed on hold. In other cases, the benefit is presented in lieu of pension
contributions that would have been paid by an employer if the elected officials had been
considered employees and eligible for the existing municipal pension plan. Some transition
allowances are intended to achieve both purposes. Consider some current examples:
> The City of Vancouver provides one week of salary for every year of office served (provided
that the departing council member served his or her full term). This benefit translates to
1.9% of the member's annual salary, and is intended to help facilitate the member's return
to the workforce.
TRANSITION ALLOWANCES
Elected official transition
allowances -referred to in
some places as retirement
allowances, separation
payments, pensions, deferred
remuneration, or adjustment
payouts -are not common in
British Columbia's local
government system today.
Experiences in other provinces
and in the Metro Vancouver
area, however, suggest that the
benefit may become a matter
for greater attention, at least for
larger cities, in the coming
years. The lack of transition and
pension-like benefits could be a
barrier to participation for
different groups of individuals
(e.g., mid-career professionals}.
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 32 UBC~~
> The City of Port Coquitlam provides one month of salary for every year in office to the
departing mayor (persons who served as councillors are not eligible). The benefit payment
is capped at six months.
> The City of New Westm i nster provides the equ ivalent of 10% of the annual indemnity for
each year of service, to a maximum of 12 years of service. This benefit is a form of pension.
> The City of Burnaby structures its benefits as an ongoing, annual payment to service council
members. The payments reflect the employer contributions to the municipal pens ion plan
that would be made if the council members were eligible for the plan . Payments can be
invested by members as annual RRSP contri butions .
Transition allowances may be most relevant and defensible in local governments with elected
officials in roles that require a de facto full-time commitment (even though some roles may be
paid at part-time rates). Individuals in these positions place their existing careers and jobs on hold
while in office, and may not, as a consequence, be able to participate in a work-related pension or
savings program. Individuals in full-time elected positions may also have more difficulty than
others in transitioning back into the workforce following their time in elected office.
Experience in Ontario and Quebec supports the view that such benefits may be of most interest to
positions that require significant time commitments . In Ontario, the majority of municipalities
with populations over 100,000 offer pensions to elected offic ials , whereas only 7% of centres
with populations under 10,000 provide the benefit.6 It is generally the case that elected positions
in larger centres are more demanding in terms of time than the same positions in smaller centres.
In Quebec, the municipal pension plan is made available to all municipalities; however, local
governments in centres with populations under 20,000 may choose to provide the benefit to the
position of mayor only -the one position that typically requires a greater time commitment than
others.
6 Metro Vancouver, Board Remuneration Review Findings and Recommendations, Board Remuneration Independent
Review Panel , April 17, 2019, Page 9.
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER , 2019 • PAGE 33 UBC~
This Guide does not provide advice to local governments on whether or not to provide a transition
allowance to departing, or serving, elected officials. The Guide recognizes, however, that the lack
of such a benefit may discourage some individuals from considering public office, and may
become more of a barrier in future years, at least in some centres. Local governments that wish
to explore the development of a transition allowance, may want to consider the following
questions:
> Does the lack of a transition benefit stand as a significant barrier to participation? Which
groups of individuals may view the benefit as being particularly important?
> What is the primary purpose of the benefit? Is it to provide a bridge for departing elected
officials to re-enter the workforce? Or is it to provide pension contributions in lieu of
contributions that elected officials could earn outside of office?
> What is a reasonable cap on the benefit, expressed either in terms of benefit paid, or
eligible service time?
> Is there any rationale for regional districts to provide the benefit to municipal directors, or
should the issue of transition allowance to municipal elected officials be addressed directly
by the local governments (i.e., the municipalities) to which the officials are elected?
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 34 UBCfil_
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 35 UBCfil
,,,,!,
SECTION 5
COMMUNICATION
Local governments in British Columbia .have long recognized the importance of strong communication
in local governance. Municipalities and regional districts regularly communicate in proactive ways with
their communities on a broad range of public policy, service, and governance matters. Remuneration
for elected officials is one additional item on which clear communication is necessary. This section of
the Guide highlights information that is important to communicate, identifies audiences with which to
communicate, and provides advice on how to communicate.
As in all communication efforts, information on elected official remuneration is provided, in part, as a
way to report on actions and decisions that are underway or that have been taken. Communication is
also undertaken, however, to explain why initiatives are important to take, and to promote
transparency in local government.
INFORMATION TO COMMUNICATE
The pieces of information that are important to communicate have been identified in the earlier
sections of the Guide. In all, the key pieces are as follows:
> Nature of Elected Official Roles -The level of knowledge in communities on the roles of local
elected officials is not uniformly high across the province. Information to help residents
understand the duties and responsibilities of the roles, the expectations on council members
and regional board directors, and the time required to perform the jobs properly may provide
important context for reviews of remuneration, and may help to pave the way for broad
acceptance of their outcomes.
> Purpose of Remuneration -The reasons for providing remuneration to elected officials, and
the factors that inform the setting of remuneration levels, are important to communicate.
Residents and prospective candidates, in particular, may find it helpful to understand the
importance of representative decision-making bodies, and the need to identify and reduce
barriers to participation that some groups in the community may encounter.
EXPLAINING IMPORTANCE
The Cariboo Regional District
opens its Directors'
Remuneration and Expenses
Bylaw with a statement of
principles. The statement
begins as follows:
"It is important for local
governments to ensure their
elected official positions are
compensated fairly and
equitably to attract and
encourage a variety of
citizens from different
economic and demographic
backgrounds ... to run for
office and represent their
communities ... "
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 36 UBCfil_
> Guiding Principles -The communication of principles to guide council and board decisions on
remuneration can help to speak to the purpose of remuneration, and can also minimize any
suggestion of arbitrariness in the remuneration levels selected.
> Remuneration Details -Clear and complete listings of base remuneration levels, supplemental
payments, the situations in which supplemental payments are made, annual adjustments,
eligible expenses and the process for claiming them, and benefit programs are important to
communicate. Such details bolster transparency .
> Remuneration Reviews -Where determined, the process and timing of remuneration reviews,
along with any guiding principles for reviews to follow, can help to de-politicize the efforts.
Details on reviews underway, as well as the results of such reviews, are also important.
> Expenditures Made -Finally, efforts above and beyond basic statutory reporting
requirements to make available information on remuneration -received and expenses claimed
can enhance transparency and build trust.
AUDIENCES TO REACH
Residents in the community constitute the primary audience for communication efforts on elected
official remuneration. Other audiences that may be targeted in communication strategies include
ratepayer associations, business associations, and any other defined group that has expressed, or that
may express, strong views on remuneration. An additional audience is the pool of prospective
candidates for upcoming local government elections. This group should clearly understand the nature
and level of the work involved, and the remuneration that is provided for the work.
COMMUNICATION TOOLS
Many local governments regularly make use of a range of different tools to connect with different
audiences. For information on remuneration, councils and boards may find a combination of written
materials, presentations, and information meetings to be most effective. Consider the following
points:
UNDERSTANDING ROLES
Prospective candidates for
local government elected
office should clearly
understand the nature and
level of the work involved, and
the remuneration that is
provided for the work.
Resources such as "Thinking
About Running for Local
Office?" can help.
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 37 UBCfil_
> Written Materials -Providing information in writing is a useful way to ensure accuracy of
message, and to promote transparency. Written materials can also be made available in a
number of formats in order to allow for distribution to various audiences. Examples of written
materials to provide include:
remuneration policies and bylaws, complete with user-friendly introductions to explain
the purpose and contents of the documents
information pamphlets on the reasons for, importance of, and principles in place to
guide elected official remuneration
education booklets on the duties and responsibilities of local elected officials, as well as
the time commitment involved
terms of reference to guide remuneration reviews
reports on the outcomes of remuneration reviews
regular disclosure of remuneration and expenses paid
Public surveys represent an additional written item that can be used not only to solicit public
views on remuneration, but also to communicate the reasons for remuneration, and the
existing remuneration, expense, and benefit programs in place.
> Presentations -Public presentations (i.e., at open council and board meetings) of the results
of remuneration reviews are effective communication methods, particularly when reviews
have been completed by an independent panel, and presentations are made by the panel
chair.
> Information Meetings -Information meetings are used in several local governments to help
prospective candidates understand the duties and responsibilities of the elected official jobs.
Where not already the case, these meetings could include a component on remuneration. The
reasons for remuneration, and the principles guiding remuneration, would be important to
communicate in addition to the remuneration levels.
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
Kam/oops' Council
Remuneration Task Force
solicited input from the public
through a carefully-
constructed and -implemented
engagement program. Five
community events were
attended by Task Force
members. A survey was also
provided for all interested
residents.
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 38 unc~"il
Information meetings can also be used as part of remuneration reviews. Such meetings are
held in some centres to educate audiences on elected official remuneration, and to solicit
views on appropriate packages to provide.
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 39 uncfil
SECTION 6
BEST PRACTICES SUMMARY
This Guide has presented a series of best practices to assist local governments in setting elected official
remuneration . Figure 6.1 pulls the best practices together into one table.
Timing of
Frequency of
Implementation
of Changes
Figure 6.1
Remuneration Best Practices
Local governments should consider establishing an independent
task force to conduct reviews of elected official remuneration.
> Local governments should consider conducting remuneration
reviews, and reporting the results, at least one year before the
next election.
> Local governments should consider conducting remuneration
reviews once per term.
> Local governments should consider setting out the timing for
subsequent reviews in remuneration policies or bylaws.
> Local governments should consider including in their policies or
bylaws provision for an automatic cost-of-living adjustment, using
the CPI, to elected officials' base remuneration.
> Local governments should consider having changes to base levels,
determined through remuneration reviews, take effect at the
beginning of the following term.
> Local governments should consider allowing for immediate
implementation of changes to remuneration that are designed to
protect elected officials from financial loss that would otherwise
occur as a result of tax system shifts .
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 40 uncfil
Comparison
Using the Data
Regional District
Supplemental
Payments
Local governments should consider allowing for immediate
implementation of annual cost-of-living adjustments.
> Local governments should consider using remuneration paid to
elected offic ials in similar local government jurisdictions as the
preferred basis for determining remuneration.
> Local governments should consider establishing comparison
groups using population, combined -as deemed necessary -
with other factors that influence elected official workload and
level of responsibility.
> Local governments should consider including at least five
jurisdictions (preferably more) in the comparison groups .
> Local governments should consider using simple formulas that
make the calculation of remuneration levels as straightforward as
possible, easy to explain, and easy to understand.
> Local governments should consider targeting supplemental
payments to non-core meetings, and structuring base
remuneration levels to include attendance at board and
committee of the whole meetings.
> Local governments should consider including in their expense
policies and/or bylaws the principle that elected officials should
not themselves be expected to pay expenses that are incurred in
order to perform their roles.
> Local governments should recognize that the range of legitimate
expenses incurred to perform the roles of mayor and board chair
will be greater than that incurred to perform the roles of
councillor and board director.
couNc1L & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE. sEPTEMBER, 2019. PAGE 41 uBcfil
Communicate
Communication
Local governments should provide clarity i n regional district
expense policies/bylaws to ensure that municipal expenses
incurred by municipal directors are reimbursed by the
appropriate municipal governments. ,
> • Local governments should ensure that lists of eligible expenses
reflect unique local conditions.
> Local governments should periodically re-examine decisions on
eligibility to ensure that lists of eligible expenses evolve to reflect
changing needs and to reduce barriers to participation.
> Local governments should consider providing access to extended
health, dental, vision and insurance to all local elected officials.
> Local governments should consider contributing to the cost of
benefit premiums on a pro-rated basis, in accordance will the
full-or part-time nature of elected positions.
> Local governments should consider extending benefits to family
members of elected officials, provided that the elected officia ls
themselves pay the full incremental cost of such coverage.
> Local governments should periodically re-examine the range of
benefits provided to ensure that benefits programs reflect
changing needs, and reduce barriers to participation.
> Local governments should consider including in their
communications programs information on the nature of elected
official roles, the purposes of remuneration, principles to guide
the setting of remuneration, details on remuneration levels,
remuneration reviews, and expenditures made.
> Local governments should consider using a range of tools to
communicate information, including written materials,
presentations, and information meetings .
COUNCIL & BOARD REMUNERATION GUIDE· SEPTEMBER, 2019 • PAGE 42 UBCfil_
U1
"" i-J
Municipality
Pitt Meadows
Port Coquitlam
Surrey
Coquitlam
Langley City
Doc#2588305
Do you
have the
role of
Deputy
Mayor?
No
No
No
No
Yes
Do all of
your
members
of council
take a turn
atthe .
acting role?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes, as
Deputy. We
have a
definition •
for Acting
that is
separate
from
Deputy
What is the Does your
cycle of acting Mayor
acting chair any
mayor? meetings when
the Mayor is in
attendance?
2 months/ Yes
year
2 months/ No
year
The No
schedule is
set out for
the term and
they serve
for2 months
at a time
Year is Yes, Council -i n-
divided into Committee
8 equal
terms
Deputy No
Mayor
rotates every
2 months
If yes, is What is your
this acting mayor
embedded remuneration?
in your
Council
Procedure
Bylaw?
Yes 10% of the
mayor's monthly
salary, in addition
to their regular
pay
N/A $3,923
per annum
$103.44/day
CiC isa • Acting Mayor pay
standing is incorporated
committee into the annual
with its own salary for each
terms of Councillor
reference
n/a Deputy Mayor is
prorated and
works out to
approximately
$2193.28 for 2
months
Deputy Mayor
based on 10% of
Mayor's
remuneration
Is a council member Do you pay
paid for acting even a stipend
though the Mayor is for
in attendance and attending
able to be present at committee
community events? meetings?
Yes No
Yes No
Yes .No
Yes No
Yes No
How often to you review your
remuneration bylaw?
Every term
Annually, via policy (not bylaw)
Every 4 years
Remuneration for members of
Council is set annually and
automatically by formula (ie,
equivalent to the annual
CUPE increase).
At Councils request
, ..
' '
Municipality Do you Do all of What is the Does your If yes, is What is your Is a council member Do you pay How often to you review your
have the your cycle of acting Mayor this acting mayor paid for acting even a stipend remuneration bylaw?
role. of members acting chair any embedded remuneration? though the Mayor is for
Deputy of council mayor? meetings when in your in attendance and attending
Mayor? take a turn the Mayor is in Council able to be present at committee
at the attendance? Procedure community events? meetings?
acting role? Bylaw?
Langley Yes Yes Each term is Yes The Acting The Acting Mayor Yes No The remuneration is a Policy
Townsh i p 3 months, Mayor chairs receives an scheduled for review 10 years
and we work the Counc il additional 10% of after adoption
through the Priorities the Mayor's
Councillors Committee remuneration
twice each meeting (our
term version of
COW). It is
embedded in
the Council
Advisory
Committee
Bylaw
Dist. West Van No Yes 2 No Not provided Not provided Yes No Updated only when changes
months/year are warranted
Doc#2588305
THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRODUCED FOR CONVENIENCE ONLY and is a
consolidation of the following:
1. Maple Ridge Council Remuneration Bylaw No. 7330-2017
2. Maple Ridge Council Remuneration Amending Bylaw No. 7 448-2018
Individual copies of any of the above by-laws can be obtained by contacting the Clerk's Department.
CllYOF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 7330-2017
A bylaw for establishing Council Remuneration
The Municipal Council of the City of Maple Ridge enacts as follows:
1.
-2.
3.
4.
5.
7448--2018
6.
7448--2018
7.
8.
9.
10.
This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as "Maple Ridge Council Remuneration
Bylaw No. 7330-2017".
The Mayor's annual remuneration is established at a base salary of $92,310 plus a
car allowance of $7,125. The base salary must be adjusted annually thereafter in
accordance with section 5 of this Bylaw.
Councillors' annual remuneration is established at a base salary of $37,285 plus a
car allowance of $2,423. The base salary must be adjusted annually thereafter in
accordance with section 5 of this Bylaw. ___ ____
The Acting Mayor's remuneration is established annually at the Councillor rate plus
20% of the Mayor's base salary rate and m _ust be adjusted annually in accordance
with section 5 of this Bylaw. Acting Mayor's remuneration will be available to the
Councillor who is assigned to that role for the duration of the assignment.
Commencing June 1, 2017, base salary will be adjusted annually, on June 1st of each
year, by a percentage equivalent to the percentage increase in · the Vancouver
Consumer Price Index increase for the previous calendar year. In years where there
is no change, or a decrease, in the Consumer Price Index, base salary will remain the
same as the previous year.
On January 1, 2019. the Mayor's annual remuneration will be increased to a base
salary of $114,250 plus a car allowance of $7,125. The base salary must be
adjusted annually thereafter in accordance with section 5 of this Bylaw.
On January 1, 2019, Councillors' annual remuneration will be increased to a base
salary of $45,700 plus a car allowance of $2,423. The base salary must be adjusted
annually thereafter in accordance with section 5 of this Bylaw.
Members of Council, and their dependents, will be eligible for medical, dental,
extended health, group life and AD&D benefits with the premiums paid by the City.
Bylaw No. 6018-2002 is hereby repealed in its entirety.
If any section, subsection, clause or other part of this Bylaw is for any reason held to
be invalid by the decision of a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision will not
affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Bylaw.
5.4.3
READ a first time on the 23rd day of May, 2017.
READ a second time on the 23rd day of May, 2017.
READ a third time on the 23rd day of May, 2017.
ADOPTED on the 13th day of June, 2017.
PRESIDING MEMBER
CORPORATE OFFICER
Resolutions addressing Local or Provincial Issues
Resolution Timeline -Prov incial Issues thru LMLGA
•Staff EMAIL to
Council reminding
to develop
resolution ideas
• Council members
to IDENTIFY
resolution ideas to
Corporate Officer
• Council report and
discussion to
EVALUATE and
ENDORSE ideas
• Council member(s)
and Clerks REFINE
resolution fonnat
and wording
Resolution Timeline -Provincial Issues thru UBCM
•Staff EMAIL to
Council reminding
to develop
resolution ideas
• Council members
to IDENTIFY
resolution ideas to
Corporate Officer
• Council report and
discussion to
EVALUATE and
ENDORSE ideas
• Council member(s)
and Clerks REFINE
resolution fonnat
and wording
• Staff report
requesting Council
APPROVAL of
resolutions
• Staff report
requ esting Council
APPROVAL of
resolutions
• LMLGA RESULTS
announced.in early
May
• Council decision
may be required to
direct any
unsupported
resolutions directly
toUBCM by
• June30
• Staff to SUBMIT
resolutions to
UBCM by June 30
Note: LMLGA process is reco mmended / LMLGA approval carries more weight when forwarded to UBCM
Resolutions addressing National Issues -Federation of Canadian
Municipalities (FCM)
•Staff EMAIL to
Council reminding
to develop
resolution ideas
Do c#2196251
• Council members
to IDENTIFY
resolution ideas to
Corporate Officer
• Council report and
discussion to
EVALUATE and
ENDORSE ideas
• Council member(s)
and Clerks REFI NE
resolution fonnat
and wording
• Staff report
requesting Council
APPROVAL of
resolutions
• Staff to SUBMIT
resoluti ons to FCM
by 2"" Monday in
January and July
5.5.1