The Salt Lake City Council is considering changes to their compensation, including moving to a full-time council model and increasing their pay. This is a bad idea. There are great time demands of the job to be sure, but that’s why we call it public service.
We’re not a large enough city to warrant it.
Salt Lake City has a population of roughly 200,000 people, according to the 2020 U.S. Census. If you look at other cities of our approximate size, many cities that are bigger than us only have a part-time council. Examples include Anchorage, Alaska; Buffalo, New York; Reno, Nevada; and Toledo, Ohio. All of these cities have 50,000 or more citizens than we do. What is so unique about SLC that we need a full-time city council when cities much larger than us don’t?
The incentive structure changes.
We want our city council representatives to act in the best interest of Salt Lake City, not their own personal interest. What happens when that part-time council job turns into your full-time livelihood? Will council members be making decisions that are in the best interest of the city? It is possible that council members change the way they govern because their families’ lives depend on them staying in office. What will keep a council member in office versus what is best for the city might be misaligned.
One potential concession the council is considering is term limits. Although adding term limits could help mitigate the potential downside, a two- or three-term tenure is still eight to 12 years. That’s a lot of time to make a bunch of self-serving decisions.
We don’t need career politicians in Salt Lake City.
Because Salt Lake City is a blue dot in a red ocean, there are only so many places a Democrat with political ambitions can work in this state. By making this a full-time job, there will be an increase in the demand for this position. That will mean campaigns have higher stakes. That is not lowering the barrier for service, it’s simply shifting the barrier higher up in the funnel. This will certainly increase the amount of money required to win a race. More money in municipal elections is probably not a good thing.
We can’t afford it.
Earlier this year, the city council approved a 26% pay raise for themselves. Why is now the right time to start talking about another pay raise? Salt Lake City taxpayers have already seen a 4% increase in utilities cost, as well as a potential $730 million bond for the school board on the ballot in November. Not to mention the planned 0.5% sales tax increase for a proposed downtown sports, entertainment, culture and convention district. All of that, along with another increase in council salary, will be too heavy a burden for the average Salt Lake City taxpayer when stacked together.
I’ve yet to hear a compelling reason why moving the council full-time would be in the best interest of Salt Lake City. Everything I’m reading points to it being beneficial to the council members themselves. It is not lost on me that serving on city council is a big time commitment and a lot of work. That’s why we call it public service, and I am grateful for their sacrifice.
Please contact your city council member and let them know you oppose yet another raise and oppose them giving themselves a full-time job.
(Blake McClary) Blake McClary lives in Salt Lake City and serves on his local community council.
Blake McClary lives in Salt Lake City and serves on his local community council.
The Salt Lake Tribune is committed to creating a space where Utahns can share ideas, perspectives and solutions that move our state forward. We rely on your insight to do this. Find out how to share your opinion here, and email us at voices@sltrib.com.
