The San Mateo City Council moved forward with a compensation increase for councilmembers from $600 to $1,200 per month, which would go into effect starting 2025.
Since the implementation of Senate Bill 329, numerous cities have revisited salary increases, as the new legislation upped the maximum allowable payments based on population size. San Mateo, which has a population of around 100,000 residents, could increase the amount to $1,900.
Currently, San Mateo councilmembers’ pay runs down the middle compared to other cities’ monthly amounts, such as South San Francisco and Millbrae, which provide $1,000 and $345, respectively. San Carlos also recently updated its compensation in January, with some councilmembers citing child care and primary job responsibilities as barriers to entry, which the additional stipend could help offset.
San Mateo last updated its council compensation more than 20 years ago.
The state law also allows for a 5% annual raise — or increases based on inflation, whichever is higher — which would need to be approved each year by councilmembers and could not be automatically applied for future councils. The law was professed to entice underrepresented pools of candidates, who may otherwise be unable to fulfill council duties with such little compensation.
“There is a strong reason to do this now, because this is an election year, and it could make that difference to potential candidates to get in. It has much more impact this year than it would next year,” Councilmember Amourence Lee said. “It would be wise to actually schedule this to be revisited on an annual basis as part of those standing review items.”
But, despite ultimately voting for the $1,200 increase, others were hesitant on changing the council’s original $1,000 proposal.
“I’m conflicted because we have two people who will be coming on board, potentially younger as well, and $200 [more] a month does make a difference,” Deputy Mayor Rob Newsom said of the upcoming November council election. “But I think what we were weighing on was really the optics of it … we don’t want to look as though we were doubling it.”
Councilmember Rich Hedges echoed Newsom’s concern, although they both voted in favor of the increase, along with Councilmember Lee and Adam Loraine. Mayor Lisa Diaz Nash voted against the proposed ordinance, stating she’d rather move forward with the original proposal.
The ordinance will be voted on again at a second hearing Monday, May 20.
(650) 344-5200 ext. 102
Daily Journal staff
{{description}}
Email notifications are only sent once a day, and only if there are new matching items.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
Only subscribers can view and post comments on articles.
Already a subscriber? Login Here
Murder for Two Read moreMurder For Two
Much Ado About Nothing: A Modern Verse Translation, tells the timeless and hilarious story o… Read moreMills High School Much Ado About Nothing: A Modern Translation
Dirk van Ulden said:
Jay - "all of which are hallmarks of our current ruler(s)." Current and past? Where to draw the line? You fell into your own propaganda trap.
Dirk van Ulden said:
Success! An email has been sent to with a link to confirm list signup.
Error! There was an error processing your request.
Sorry, an error occurred.
Already Subscribed!
Cancel anytime
Thank you .
Your account has been registered, and you are now logged in.
Check your email for details.
Submitting this form below will send a message to your email with a link to change your password.
An email message containing instructions on how to reset your password has been sent to the email address listed on your account.
No promotional rates found.
Secure & Encrypted
Thank you.
Your gift purchase was successful! Your purchase was successful, and you are now logged in.
| Rate: | |
| Begins: | |
| Transaction ID: |
A receipt was sent to your email.
(1) comment
Let’s see… you get to vote on whether you want to increase your pay? It’s not whether you vote for the increase, it’s a matter of how much increase you vote for. I’d recommend that when the increase is approved, we also look into turning the council into a half-time council. What are we getting with a full-time council – seems like every time they meet, we end up with more taxpayer waste and a lighter wallet. Is this yet another case of “you get nothing for something”?
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.