Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Council Salaries topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Milpitas council discusses new state allowance for higher mayor and council pay; no ordinance adopted
Summary
City leaders reviewed California—s 2024 change to government code that permits pay increases based on population. Council asked staff to return with a draft ordinance and additional research; no pay changes were adopted Jan. 21.
City officials briefed the Milpitas City Council on Jan. 21, 2025, about a change to the California Government Code effective Jan. 1, 2024, that allows general-law cities in certain population bands to enact ordinances raising councilmember pay up to specified limits.
Assistant City Manager Matt Cano told the council the law permits cities with populations between 75,000 and 150,000 to set a base salary of up to $1,900 per month (about $22,800 a year) for each council member. Cano said the statute also allows an elected mayor to receive an additional increment above the council-member base; the attorney general—s office has opined that the mayoral increment may take effect immediately if adopted by ordinance, while base pay increases for councilmembers would not take effect until the next council term following the next election.
Council did not adopt an ordinance or set amounts on Jan. 21. Instead the council asked staff to return with draft ordinance language and additional research, including text of the referenced government code section and implementation options. Cano and Acting City Attorney Chris Creech said a municipal code amendment and two readings of an ordinance would be required for any change to take effect.
How it would work: Cano said any increase to councilmembers— base pay would need an ordinance amending the municipal code and would take effect after the next election cycle for the council seats; the additional mayoral stipend described in the state code could be phased in immediately if the council adopts it by ordinance, according to council staff and the attorney general opinion cited by staff.
Council reaction: Members voiced differing views. Council Member William Lam called the statute unfair for singling out the mayoral office for a potentially immediate, separate increase. Several members said they wanted more information, including written text of the state code section and example ordinances from comparable cities. Council members did not take a formal vote on a salary increase and gave staff direction to return with an ordinance and more analysis.
Next steps: Staff said it will prepare draft ordinance language and return with more detail on legal implementation, timing and comparable-city practice. Any ordinance altering pay would require a public hearing and two readings before becoming effective; staff said it would present options and timelines at a future meeting.
