Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Compensation Methodology topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sedona pay work group debates benchmarks, phased raises and option to decline pay
Summary
Sedona’s compensation work group discussed multiple methods for setting council pay — including tying it to median income, budget size, or CPI — and considered phased increases, donation/decline language and limits on benefits; staff will compile comparables and survey former councilors before the group reconvenes.
Members of the Sedona Council Compensation Work Group spent the bulk of the May 18 meeting debating how to set future mayor and council pay and which benchmarks would be defensible.
The presenter walking members through comparables said population alone was “too muddy” as a single benchmark and proposed instead comparing budget size, number of capital projects and local duties. The presenter cited a Red Rock News comp list and ZipRecruiter figures as starting points but recommended staff verification. "When you look at just nearest population, the picture is...it's not a guiding light," the presenter said.
Residents and members advanced multiple philosophies. One participant, Brock (who identified himself as a resident), framed the issue as livability: "A person needs $2,000 roughly a month for rent...you need roughly $80,000 a year," he said, arguing that compensation should enable ordinary residents to serve. Other members favored tying pay to median household income so increases would automatically follow local economic conditions; proponents said that approach is defensible and transparent, while opponents warned it could create perverse incentives.
The group also discussed implementation mechanics: phasing increases over several years or linking compensation to an external index such as CPI or a percentage of judicial pay; adding language to delay an increase so it takes effect only after the next election; and building an ordinance option allowing members to decline or donate their pay. City Attorney Christensen said members may decline pay and could donate it, but the city would still have payroll records and the check would be issued; he cautioned that public‑records requests could reveal who accepted pay.
On benefits, staff and counsel said medical insurance and retirement contributions are largely unavailable for elected officials under rules tied to the Arizona State Retirement System; the city already covers elected officials with liability insurance and a performance bond. Members asked staff to pull budget data and past ordinance history, and to prepare a short survey of 12 questions to solicit input from 15–20 former mayors and councilors.
The work group agreed those materials will be compiled before the next meeting and scheduled June 15 at 10:00 a.m. for continued discussion.
