The Port Townsend City Council took another step toward re-evaluating compensation for councilmembers by voting unanimously to give its initial approval to establishing a salary commission.

Once established, the commission would have a 120-day review period during which it would evaluate council pay and make a determination if councilmembers should be paid more or less for their work.

Under the draft resolution under consideration by the council, any increase or decrease in salary established by the commission would become effective and incorporated into the city’s budget without any further action by the city council or the commission.

If the commission decides to increase council’s salary, the bump would take effect for all councilmembers regardless of their term of office.

However, if the commission votes to decrease council salaries, the reduction would start during the next term for incumbent and incoming councilmembers.

The commission can also make the decision that no salary change is merited.

The resolution also provides for a referendum by the public, so long as one is filed within 30 days of the filing of a new salary schedule by the commission.

If a referendum is filed, salary changes for councilmembers will not go into effect until approved by a vote of the people.

Councilmember Owen Rowe said he saw the establishment of a salary commission as a prime opportunity for the public to weigh in on how much councilmembers should be paid.

“I think this is a great idea. And this lets the residents of Port Townsend have a say in the council compensation, and their say is binding,” Rowe said.

“I think it’s entirely appropriate,” he added. “I also like the timeline, with the hopes that this will be done and decided before the election in November, when there will be three new councilmembers, so they’ll know what they’re getting into.”

A common refrain among councilmembers has been the notion that increasing the salary for city councilmembers will attract a more diverse array of candidates, instead of just those who can financially afford to dedicate the time required for serving the city.

Councilmember David Faber said the council had options available to address the issue of compensation, but he called doing nothing a “non-starter.”   

“Equity problems, if they don’t already exist — which, I think they do exist with council — will definitely start to exist in the future,” Faber said.

He added councilmembers could just vote to increase their salaries, but such a vote would likely sow distrust with the public.

“While that [salary increase] wouldn’t come into effect until each seat had been overturned … nevertheless the public may not necessarily understand that,” he said. “All they’d hear is ‘We voted to give ourselves a pay raise.’”

“In an era of governmental mistrust or general decline of public trust in general … I think that’s also a bad idea.”

A salary commission, Faber said, threaded the needle most effectively in tackling the issue of compensation equity.

“With that referendum aspect in place, there could be the response of the community if the salary commission comes back and gives us too much, then the community can always weigh in and address that,” Faber added.

The commission, he noted, could also decide that councilmembers should not be compensated for their work at all. It’s an outcome he regarded as a potential “disaster” for equity.

“I think as long as we put smart, responsible people on this commission, they’re going to come up with a reasonable answer to this question,” Faber said.