Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel Compensation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Glenwood Springs council approves $2,000 monthly housing allowance for city manager
Summary
The city council voted Jan. 16 to amend the city manager’s renewed contract to include a $2,000 monthly housing allowance, a change supporters said responds to local housing costs and past practice; the amendment passed 6–1 (one abstention).
Get email alerts on the Personnel Compensation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Glenwood Springs — The Glenwood Springs City Council voted Jan. 16 to amend City Manager Steve Boyd’s renewed employment contract to add a $2,000 monthly housing allowance.
Councilor Jonathan Godes moved the amendment, citing comparable mountain communities and past precedent for a manager housing allowance; Councilor Marco Dame seconded the motion. Godes said the allowance is “simply out of fairness” given the local market and the charter requirement that the manager live within 10 miles of the city. Mayor (recorded in the transcript as “Mayor WUSA”) said the council “is fortunate to have him” and supported the amendment.
Council members debated whether the change would create a problematic precedent. One councilor expressed concern that such an allowance might be abused by successors, while others noted the allowance had been included in prior announcements and therefore reflected an established practice. The council called the question and recorded a roll-call voting sequence; meeting minutes record the amendment as adopted with six affirmative votes and one abstention.
The motion amended the already‑approved extension of Boyd’s contract for two years; council members who addressed Boyd praised his performance and managerial record during the public discussion preceding the vote. The change will appear in the formal contract amendment to be executed by the city and the manager.
Councilors did not tie the allowance to a specific budget line in the meeting discussion; they framed the vote as part of personnel and retention policy for a senior executive position in a high‑cost mountain community.

