Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel Pay topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pasadena council debates, then approves education incentive pay after attempt to table fails
Summary
Councilwoman Bianca Valerio moved to table Ordinance 20‑26‑030, arguing the incentive structure favored higher‑paid employees; the motion to table failed and the council approved the ordinance on first reading as presented.
The Pasadena City Council debated Ordinance 20‑26‑030 — a measure authorizing education and certification incentive pay for full‑time civilian employees — after Councilwoman Bianca Valerio raised procedural and equity concerns and moved to table the item indefinitely.
Valerio said the ordinance’s structure appeared to reward employees already in higher paid classifications rather than directing greater incentives to lower‑paid employees pursuing new education or certifications. “If the goal is to incentivize education, the policy should most strongly encourage new educational achievement,” she said, arguing the ordinance as written would “widen the gap between classifications.”
Valerio moved to table the ordinance indefinitely; Councilman Heredia seconded the motion. Councilmembers who spoke against the tabling urged that the council had already discussed the policy in workshops and that delaying it further would hurt efforts to retain and incentivize city employees. Councilmember Emmanuel Guerrero told colleagues that city employees are a priority and that repeated tabling was “a waste of our time” given prior discussion.
The council held a roll‑call vote on the motion to table. The motion failed and the council then voted to advance the ordinances as presented on first reading. The mayor declared the motion carries.
The debate largely focused on structure rather than opposition to the concept of pay incentives; Valerio said she supported education pay but wanted the program reworked to favor new educational attainment and lower classifications. The council did not adopt any amendment on the floor; Valerio asked for written legal clarification about prior agenda handling and pre‑council rulings, which she said had prevented earlier consideration of a related item.
Outcome and next step: The council advanced Ordinance 20‑26‑030 on first reading after the tabling motion failed; further procedural or substantive changes would require a future motion or revision on a later agenda.
