Pacific Grove Council Unanimously Sends Stipend-Increase Measure to June Ballot

The Pacific Grove City Council voted unanimously Wednesday to place a proposed increase to council stipends on the June ballot, with the mayor saying the change would let candidates know what pay would apply at the start of the next term.

Supporters on the council said the pay adjustment — the first in decades — is intended to broaden the pool of candidates, help working residents run for office under the city’s new district elections and reduce the financial barrier to service. "Serving on city council shouldn't cost you," Councilmember Garfield said during deliberations.

Why it matters: Council members debated timing and cost. Supporters argued that a June ballot helps recruit candidates for the upcoming district-based elections; opponents and several members of the public urged waiting for a November election to reduce per-voter cost. Multiple members of the public and commenters said they worried the council was approving raises for itself and asked for clearer estimates of election costs.

What the council heard: Public comment included calls both for and against sending the measure to voters. One speaker, identified in the transcript as Bill (transcript: "Bill camp"), urged the council to place the measure on the ballot to expand candidate diversity. Other speakers questioned placement on a lower-turnout primary and asked for cost transparency; a commenter online said the city clerk had not provided a clear early estimate of how much the measure would cost to administer.

Staff and legal clarifications: City Attorney Lorca said the measure reflects a long background and had been updated for one year of CPI; he confirmed that the electorate would decide the measure. Staff told council members that the stipend change would create only modest additional payroll-related costs — staff said Medicare and workers' compensation would add roughly $11.88 annually (as described in the meeting record) and estimated about $2,200 annually across all seven council members for those payroll items. Staff also noted that PERS/PARS retirement contributions remain councilmember-paid and would not increase the city's retirement liabilities.

Process and restrictions: Council members discussed and were reminded that an automatic escalator provision could be legally problematic and that the ordinance includes a five-year period (Section 9, as read in the meeting) during which the change could not be revisited. Several council members said they want public outreach before elections and recognized county election billing is subject to per-voter variability.

Vote and next steps: Mayor Smith moved to adopt the staff recommendations and send the measure to the ballot; the motion passed by roll call 7-0. The council recorded the action as placing the stipend increase measure on the June ballot; the measure will proceed through the county elections process and the city will provide voters with required materials. The council did not adopt an automatic escalator in the ordinance and noted potential legal risk for such language.