Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Council Salaries topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council sends proposed salary change for city council to April ballot after 6-1 vote
Summary
Council voted 6-1 on Feb. 5 to refer Ordinance 5,247 to the April ballot asking voters to amend the charter to change city council salaries and establish a method to increase them by ordinance; debate focused on timing, use of Area Median Income (AMI) as a reference and whether current members would benefit.
The Grand Junction City Council voted 6-1 on Feb. 5 to place Ordinance 5,247 on the April 8, 2025 municipal ballot, a citizen-facing question that would amend the city charter to change city council salaries and provide a method to adjust those salaries by ordinance in future years.
City Attorney John Shaver said the ordinance as drafted incorporated council direction from first reading, including a staff-provided reference to 2024 Area Median Income (AMI) as an informational point of comparison. Shaver and staff also explained that the ballot question cannot include fixed future-dollar figures because AMI values for 2027 or 2028 are unknown.
Council discussion addressed outreach and optics; one council member said citizens’ feedback will be expressed at the ballot box. Several council members said the proposal is intended to make council service more accessible to a broader cross-section of residents by offsetting the heavy time commitment required of officeholders.
Councilmember Jason Wynne moved the ordinance; Councilmember Kennedy seconded. The motion passed on final passage with a recorded vote of 6 in favor and 1 opposed (Councilmember Simpson).
Council and staff clarified the proposed salary changes would apply prospectively, not to members who remain in office without standing for re-election; any current council member who seeks and wins reelection in 2027 could be subject to the new salary schedule. Shaver said staff included 2024 AMI figures in the ordinance as a point of reference but that those numbers could not be written into the ballot question because the AMI applicable in 2027–28 is not yet known.
The council also discussed that the proposal does not include employment benefits such as insurance. Staff provided a comparison of peer Colorado municipalities that use AMI-based approaches for council compensation.
The ordinance was referred to the April ballot and staff will prepare the final ballot language for Mesa County’s certification process.
