No problem, raise taxes some more and give them the raise, they'll get it anyway.

I haven't had a raise for 5 years and I know many others are in the same boat. Why should they get one? QUIT RAISING OUR TAXES!!!!

Every other person in the world gets paid based on whether they fulfil their employment contract, which essentially comes dow to whether they are doing their job based on their expectations, job description, etc.

Since members on council get voted in based on their election platforms (which is essentially what the voters would expect them to do . . . basically their self proclaimed job description), I say make their pay directly linked to their ability to implement their election promises :)

There jobs are up for review too.
Remember this come election.

mr stoltz's who platform for election to council was "fixing our roads"....i say he has failed! if i fail at work i wouldnt get a raise!!!!

This is just dumb. Another committe to see what they should do. How much will this cost us?

Shame, shame, shame.

Do they seriously think they deserve a raise.

Our Mayor is getting paid 92,000 dollars a year, Does he also get paid from the Regional district?

This is Bull$#!7, they keep raising our taxes, and the services goes down, and they want more money. I think its time to have coup. Lets grab our gardening tools and have a tax revolt.

Wow, Danny boy at its finest, lets have a committee to review the salary.

Judging from the make up and initial comments of at least 1 committee member, it might reasonably be concluded that raises are a certainty. The entire matter is an insult to the tax payer.

I see in the citizen they compared PG with Kamloops and Kelowna. Their mayors and council make less salary and have a cap on expenses of $5,000.yet they have larger populations. I do not see where they think they are entitled to increases when they are already taxing us to the poor house. Dan Rogers enjoy your last months of your $92,000 plus expenses and BASSERMAN time for you to leave. Before you are elected you all say your not doing it for the money but to make a difference. You sure have done that.

Why a special committee? It is plainly obvious from these comments that the people of pg dont think it is deserved. Not even one comment justifying a pay raise.

Oh wait, the committe will be made up of "friends of the administration" or people interested in council for the future.

Council meetings are all about letting taxpayers know what the latest project borrowing is for and by how much our taxes are going to go up again!

All meetings are the same and totally predictable - I have yet to watch a council meeting where the mayor announces that there will be a DECREASE in taxes because some previous borrowing item has been PAID OFF!

If nothing ever gets paid off (does anybody know if it ever actually happens?) and the borrowing increases without any pause, where will it all end up?

In November I will get my explanation in the voting booth!

If there are no new candidates I will leave all the boxes unchecked except for one!

Some nerve to ask for a raise!

I think based on the Citizen report showing Kamloops and Kelowna, the committee should meet twice and be done with it. Does anyone on the committee get paid for doing their work, or should we all be sending a letter of thanks to them for their continuing volunteer work?

I would simply say that the mayor does not get a raise, assumning the report is correct (I have always had the understanding that when the mayor's salary was raised before Colin's terms in office, that we had the highest paid mayor of comparable sized cities in BC), unless there is a substantial increase in the salaries of those in Kamloops and Kelowna.

I do believe that our Councillors do not get compensated as much as the othere cities. I like the idea of linking them to the mayor's salary .... 1/3 ....
--------------------------

NMG's notion of paying them for what they have accomplished is not fair, in my point of view. Merit payment is reasonable when people have some reasonable level of control over what they have accepted to do. Having watched Council at work for some time, it is rather obvious that individual counillors have very little controll over anything.

The control rests with Administration. It is up to adminsitration to run the City smoothly. Council sets the direction. I have not heard anyone on Council suggest that we need lousy roads. In the absence of that, roads, the same as all other utilities and services, must meet a reasonable standard.

Is the councillors income connected to attendence?

"This plan would see 41 hectares of property developed to a mix of housing. The neighbourhood plan also calls for 7.25 hectares to be left as greenbelt and 2 hectares to be developed as park land."

More urban sprawl, more snow to plow, more potholes to fix...the "infill" idea seems to have been relegated to the same dustbin where so many other study recommendations ended up.

I hope this is not perceived as simply a naive question, but why should compensation received by councillors from comparable cities be used as a basis for determination of pay?
How many councillors or mayors are in it for the pay cheque? (depends upon who you ask doesn't it?) If altruism is the chief motivator for a person to serve the populace, then any reasonable compensation would be looked at as a welcome bonus, in my opinion. Keeping up with the Jones in terms of councillor and mayoral remuneration is way too similar to the thin excuses we get from government corporations like ICBC and BC Hydro as explanation for the exhorbitant salaries received by upper management, to wit;
"We have to pay competitive salaries to attract and retain the top talent"
Well, that may or not be true (I choose not true) but that concept is hardly comparable at the local level for a group of people who wish to make a difference in and for their community.
They are already making enough money from the taxpayers of PG, and do not deserve a raise, period.
metalman.

Bang on Prince George!!!!! The neighbours are against it!!! ... Two reasons to vote it down and actually put a lid on it. In fact, if planning should do anything, they should come up with a measure for determining the "need" for additional lots.

If we had a Councillors with some guts, I would suggest that would be a great direction for one to make a motion, another to second it, to give Administration a directive to come up with a mesurement of "need" which would signal the go ahead for additional sprawl because it is actually needed.

You know, I bet you no one really knows the true cost to the city of servicing a housing unit in the Seymour subdivision or Millar Addition versus one off Highland Drive or Simon Fraser, or Westgate. We are just going by intuition.

In other words, we are planning a City, without knowing the econnimics of developing one way versus another way.

If we do know, then it would be nice if the citizens were given that information as well. After all, it is our city and it is our money and the City Council and Administration are our "servants".

I know, it is hard sometimes for people to understand that simple concept.

"Is the councillors income connected to attendence?"

Nope. We all hope that they do more than just attend. :-)

NMG is on the right track. Councillors should be measured by output. In other words, if they say they will do all in their power to hold the line on tax increases, then they need to show that they speak up on those issues in Council and they never vote for a measure which would require a tax increase.

Of course, what we would need is for someone to keep track of that record.

So, I think one of the issues for those who put their name forward to be candidates for Council should be to establish a relatively accurate voting record table that is available on the city web site so that we can see who voted for what and that the categories be characterized into several groups such as:

1. will impact homeowner tax level
2. will impact city sprawl
3. will impact road condition
4. will impact snow removal
5. will impact business tax level
6. will impact air quality
7. will inmpact access to sporting facilities
8. will impact access to recreation facilites
9. will impact retail access
10. will impact security of person

etc. etc.

Lead by example Danny boy. freeze the salary, let the other city leaders over pay them selves.

Let that be a public commitment and have the staffers buy into it as well. especially those getting over a 100k to protect their butts.

Ironically, the person living in a recent developement says no more developement.

The article says, "What should City Councillors be paid and should there be changes to their allowable expenses?"


It never says anything about a raise. Perhaps the committee will find that the expenses and pay need to be decreased.

I no longer live in Prince George; however, I do think $92,000 per year for a mayor is a fair wage.

No new developments until all the existing ones are filled or at least 90% utilized. If people want to live where they have no nearby neighbours, buy a lot out of town.