Pontiac compensation panel debates salary for newly full‑time council president, schedules follow‑up

The Local Officers Compensation Commission in Pontiac met in a special session to consider a salary for the newly full‑time council president, heard a status briefing from Council President Mike McGinnis and discussed budget implications before scheduling a follow‑up meeting for Jan. 30 at 6 p.m.

The matter arises from the city charter change that made the council president a full‑time position. "At this week's city council meeting, we did adopt formally a city council president job description," McGinnis said, describing duties including leading the Pontiac City Council and supervising council staff operations. He told the commission the adopted description follows the format used for other city job descriptions and noted the role could require evenings and weekend work and, in some circumstances, could include ascending to mayor if the office were vacated.

Why it matters: The commission must set a compensation level under the charter and has a statutory 45‑day window to complete its business. Commissioners said the number will affect the council budget line and could require an interdepartmental move or a budget amendment if the change is implemented mid‑fiscal year.

Commissioners debated appropriate benchmarks and shared widely different, specific ranges. Commissioner Jones cited a 2024 Michigan livable wage figure of $54,757 (about $25.85 per hour for a 40‑hour week) as a baseline and proposed a range from roughly $53,757 to $70,000. Several commissioners said a living wage should be the lower bound; Commissioner Gross said he would "say at least $80,000"; another commissioner suggested $75,000 to $80,000; Commissioner Spann proposed a low of $60,000 to $65,000 and a high near $75,000; Reverend Jackson said $60,000–$70,000 and might accept up to $75,000. Commissioner Loveland compared the position to existing city leadership pay and noted the mayor's salary listed in the packet at $140,000 and the city clerk at $113,000; she suggested a midpoint around $120,000–$125,000. One commissioner urged caution about setting a pay level above $100,000.

Finance and budget context: City staff explained the City Council is accounted for as a department in the city budget and that the salary line would be recalculated based on whatever compensation the commission sets for council members and the president. Staff said the general fund could absorb a modest increase but that implementing a higher compensation level mid‑year could require an interdepartmental transfer or a formal budget amendment and that final enactment also depends on subsequent City Council action.

Process and timing: Former charter commission vice chair Mr. Williams urged the panel to consider the charter's broader changes before finalizing pay, and recommended that, if the commission sets pay now, the effective start be prorated to align with the charter's phased implementation. Commissioners discussed the legal limit on their deliberations (a 45‑day window) and the practical need to return with a single recommended figure. The panel agreed to reconvene and formally vote on a salary on Jan. 30 at 6 p.m. in the same room.

Votes and procedural actions recorded at the meeting included approval of the meeting agenda and approval of minutes from a prior meeting as entered in the record, several recess votes, a unanimous vote to set the next meeting for Jan. 30, and a unanimous vote to adjourn. No final salary decision was recorded at this session.

Next step: Commissioners said they will review the packet materials, consider the salary ranges discussed and return next week prepared to set a single compensation number for recommendation to City Council.