A controversial plan to boost council members’ stipends will be revisited again next week in two back-to-back public hearings at 5:30 and 6 p.m. Aug. 17, city officials said.
“The city attorney had to rewrite the ordinance, so instead of their being $25, it has to read those new dollar amounts, so we have to have a first reading and a second reading,” said At-large Councilman Dwayne Ariola, who has voted against two previous attempts to raise compensation along with District 2 Councilman Mitch Drummond in a phone interview. “It’s going to be a packed house next week, trust me.”
At the July 27 meeting, the Taylor City Council voted 3-2 to increase their own stipends from $25 to $1,000 per month and to $1,500 per month for the mayor’s position, effective for the new budget Oct. 1, despite a council– appointed compensation committee recommending a much lower raise to $250 per month for all elected officials, including the mayor, taking effect incrementally over several election cycles.
City spokeswoman Stacey Osborne confirmed that the back-to-back meetings would be held next Thursday.
“The meeting itself is a procedural thing you need to do,” Osborne said. “You have to introduce the ordinance in a meeting and then you have to consider it in a separate one.”
Ariola said he thought having two back-to-back hearings, instead of doing the two readings at the Aug. 10 and Aug. 24 regular City Council meetings respectively, was an unusual move.
“So, instead of doing it last night the first reading and then the second reading on the 24th, in our infinite wisdom, we decided to do two in one night,” Ariola said. “The excuse is so that citizens will have more opportunity to talk. So, I am sure there is going to be a plethora of people wanting to talk in disagreement with their decision.”
Osborne said the decision to hold the hearing at that time was the prerogative of council, but that she could not speak to the specific reason why.
“As far as why (council) chose to put it on a separate agenda, it may have been because the agenda was too full, and they understood that there would be a lot of public comment on it,” Osborne said.
