Top

news

Stories

 

L.A. City Council Clings to Stunning Perks and Pay

They can't bear to give up those record-high $178,898 salaries

Is a 10 percent pay cut to the $178,789 salaries of the highest-paid city council in America really such a big deal?

As the budget drama unfolded in City Hall over the past several days, it became clear that the 15 Los Angeles City Council members, who earn 400 percent of local median income — more than members of Congress earn, more than federal judges are paid — are trying hard to avoid taking any personal hits to their growing wealth and freebies.

Instead, most of the 15 are touting a “10 percent cut” merely by tapping their extremely fat office budgets, which have exploded in size to an average of $1.2 million — per council member.

There’s nothing like this City Council in America’s other big cities. Not Chicago, not New York, not San Francisco. Los Angeles City Council is steeped in huge paychecks, gigantic staffs, eight free cars per council member, $100,000 personal slush funds with virtually no strings — even a special clause that lets them get out of their parking tickets.

So when Eric Garcetti and Bernard Parks started talking about accepting a shared sacrifice following Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa’s declaration of a fiscal emergency, the public started demanding that a carving knife indeed be taken to the pork — Exhibit A being the City Council itself.

The roughly $1.8 million in cuts offered up by the council from its office supplies and staffs won’t make a dent in the $530 million budget gap. The council and mayor have until July 1 to reach a deal. The council on May 18 voted to duck several tougher choices by approving some classic fiscal trickery — but it also agreed to back employee furloughs and layoffs, a vote Villaraigosa had hoped for so that he can get tough with the powerful city-government unions if he has to.

Influential City Council President Garcetti wasn’t in town for much of the struggle — he was near San Diego attending to his Naval Reserve duties, and he issued a statement through his media shop: “Personally, I’ve committed to taking a cut that is at least what we are asking of city employees.” Then a few days later he startled the media and City Hall insiders by taking a rare stance against Villaraigosa’s constant demand for 10,000 cops. Garcetti slammed the mayor’s campaign ally, the increasingly politicized Police Chief William J. Bratton, who had threatened to reduce the number of police in the Westside district represented by Councilman Bill Rosendahl —if Rosendahl committed the sin of backing a freeze on police hiring. (Rosendahl held firm.)

Whatever budget Villaraigosa signs, it appears certain that the huge staffs, remarkable perks and record-high salaries enjoyed by the 15 council members will not be seriously reduced without a long struggle.

Meanwhile, in great contrast to L.A., San Francisco has 11 elected city/county representatives who in that very pricey city earn $98,660 per year, compared with L.A City Council’s $179,789. And unlike the vast personal staffs Angelenos are paying to provide to L.A. council members even in this fiscal disaster, San Francisco’s representatives employ just two paid aides, at $77,922 to L.A.’s $94,718 a year each. Each supervisor gets an extremely modest expense account — $5,000 per year.

“That $5,000 is for lawful government expenses of public funds like letterheads, envelopes and cell phones,” said Madeleine Licavoli, deputy director of the clerk to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors.

What a contrast to L.A. Here, politicians like Janice Hahn, Richard Alarcon, Herb Wesson and Ed Reyes employ about 20 full-time aides — and that’s apiece. And the council has fought off efforts to take away its controversial and very unusual slush funds of $100,000 apiece, given to them every year with virtually no strings — and hidden from the public in plain sight under the disingenuous budget title “General City Purposes Fund.” (See accompanying story, “Council Tries to De-Fund Its Critics.”)

Licavoli in San Francisco chuckled when asked if that city’s 11 councilmembers-supervisors enjoy anything like the eight free cars financed by L.A. taxpayers for each council member here.

“No, of course not,” she said. Well, what automotive perks do they get in San Francisco? “They each get a reserved parking space.”

In San Diego and San Jose, also very expensive cities in which to live, city council members earn about half what Greig Smith, Wendy Greuel, Jack Weiss and the others make yet somehow get by.

In San Jose, Mark Gerhardt, administrative manager for the city clerk, said the 10 council members earn $90,000, and each has four or five personal staffers. They get a $600 monthly car allowance — not a small fleet of eight cars.

In San Diego, the eight council members earn even less than in San Jose or San Francisco — $75,836 — and each gets only five to eight personal staffers.

In the real world, where the debate rages over who and what should be cut, critics say the richly rewarded Los Angeles Council is tone deaf and making a potentially serious political mistake.

1 | 2 | Next Page >>
 
  • Coco 05/22/2011 8:12:00 PM

    How about this Igor, all of these idiots from New York to California are overpaid?

  • LAyres 05/19/2010 8:30:00 AM

    Greed and Power = The Office of the Mayor and City Council

  • chu 06/29/2009 10:38:00 PM

    Something needs to be done about these people. Is there any possible way we can recall these people who get paid waaaaaay tooooo muuuuuch, do little if anything for the city or the citizens, and talk, talk, talk, talk about NOTHING of real importance? They want citizens to make sacrifices while they whine like babies to continue to fatten their pockets. 8 free cars, are you kidding me, FOR WHAT, all this at taxpayers expense? How come this information is not on the new. Why do I have to read information like this to be informed? The few times I due tune in to the televised meetings two minutes is NO time to get anything important out. The members are not paying attention, but they know when that 2 MINUTES is up. There needs to be a to total revamp of the LA CITY COUNCIL, salary, perks, anything recieved at taxpayer expense needs to be scutinized to the fullest extent. We the people need to decide what thay make and the perks they get. These people are taking us for jokes,laughing all the way to the bank, manipulating us at every turn, making poor decision, while fattening their pockets and just living it up. THIS MUST STOP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Donna Daniel 06/27/2009 5:17:00 AM

    There are so many thoughts going through my head that it's hard to write. I wonder why we aren't all outside screaming for competence and honesty in our elected officials. I guess the money our mayor, police chief,council members etc. would be worth it if we had a city that works, where everyone that wants a safe place to live can find and afford it. Where everyone who is hungry can have something to eat. Where the roads, streets are maintained. Where are the honest people, man or women, who are willing to become part of the effort to build a city we can be proud -- I guess it's to costly for most to buy their way into office. Makes one wonder if our capitalist form of government is what Jefferson once said that he feared was capitalism run amuck. I say yes it is.

  • Alex S 06/25/2009 5:18:00 AM

    angelenos (myself included) get what we deserve for not being intellectually aware of or engaged with our city politics. salaries like these would NEVER fly in philly! and i don't think i'm idealizing the place. people would've taken to the streets. what are the factors that determine a citizenry's involvement in local politics? quality and quantity of media coverage? or too much money and sun? i'd be interested to know...

  • Igor Kagan 06/06/2009 2:12:00 AM

    This article spends much time comparing the salaries of Los Angeles and San Francisco. However, I would caution against such a straight comparison. City Council's authority varies from city to city, as do issues and scale of problems facing each city. For example, when comparing Los Angeles and San Francisco or San Diego or San Jose it is important to consider that the population of LA is over 3.8 MILLION, compared to San Francisco which has a population of less than 750,000, or San Diego: approx 1.3 million, or San Jose: less than 1 million. New York City pays their Council Members about $112,000, but there are 51 of them. Great job writing an article that would rile people up, but lacks any credible points.

  • yaya 05/31/2009 7:08:00 AM

    I go out of my way to NOT spend money in LA. The thought of contributing tax money to these scammers is nauseating. No more.

  • WB 05/28/2009 8:30:00 PM

    The City is raping taxpayers plain and simple, and the Mayor and City Council laugh about it. Go to a Council meeting, speak up, show your outrage. Soon the libraries will be closing, the parks closing, animal shelters closing, buildings not inspected for safety, audits not being completed, the list goes on and on. So far 1200 layoffs, those will be the front-line service providing people of the city. All so they can have fat salaries, hire "1,000 new officers", and keep the FD and PD unions happy by not touching overtime. But at the end of the day nothing will have changed and next year will be worse. Recall the Mayor and the entire City Council!

  • Pat Barker 05/27/2009 10:19:00 PM

    Are you aware that the City of Los Angeles employs 50 Deputy Mayors, all appointed by the mayor and all of whom earn $198,000.00 annually. that's an average annual salary of $9,900,000.00! That does not include their staffs, car allotments and slush funds. Even the President of the United States only gets one Vice President, so what does the mayor of this city need with 50 deputy mayors? Getting rid of 49 of them would put a nice cash influx into this so-called financial crisis. Getting elected to the positions of Mayor and City Council used to be considered an honor, not a money grab. I say it should be returned to the status of "honorary" Stop making the civilian workers, those who really make this City run, the scapegoats! Until the City is no longer in financial crisis, the Mayor and the City Council should renounce their salaries and receive only a token $1.00 per month. They should be forced to relinquish their slush funds and at least 6 or the 8 vehicles they have. They should also reduce their staff (as have all the other departments have been forced to) by at least 1/2. Yeah, like that will ever happen . . .

  • Nick Antonicello 05/24/2009 7:09:00 AM

    As if the council pay wasn't criminal enough, you didn't mention the fact that Bernard Parks is also receving 90% of his LAPD salary in the form of a lifetime pension that has now swelled to an incredible $265,000 or $22,083 on top of his $178,000 council stipend! Congratulations Councilman Parks, you now earn $443,000 a year courtesy of the taxpayers of Los Angeles! If Mr. Parks were to run for president of the United States, that would be a pay cut (Obama earns $400,000 as POTUS). But make sure we cut those dastardly neighborhood council budgets! Amazing.

  • YASMIN 05/23/2009 9:42:00 AM

    REVEALING THEM IS WHAT YOU DO BEST PAUL! JUST LIKE THE HERBIE STORY REVEAL THEM COPS. LET THE LIGHT SHINE ON THE TRUTH! THESE PEOPLE GET PAID WAY TO MUCH WOW

  • JAY 05/23/2009 9:40:00 AM

    WITH THIS AMOUNTS OF MONEY YOU COULD FIX A FEW THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES. POEPLE IN OTHER PLACES AROUND THE WORLD SURVIVE WITH MUCH LESS BUT NOT THESE SPOILED GOOD FOR NOTHING THIEVES.

  • Letti herbies fan 05/23/2009 9:32:00 AM

    Villaraigosa needs to take a big pay cut too along with all those money hungry pigs. Villaraigosa wants more money for pigs cops what ever you want to call them them have him pay them. Take a pay cut Villaraigosa you suck just like all you snakes. get paid lots of money but what do you do? where is the productivity? if these poeple in office were not stealing we would not have problems!

  • YASMIN 05/23/2009 9:26:00 AM

    THEY GET PAID SO MUCH AND THEY CAN SOLVE THIS PROBLEM THEY CREATED? WE DONT NEED MORE COPS TRYING TO INCARCERATE INOCCENT PEOPLE. ITS ALL MONEY WHAT HAPPEN TO HELPING ONE ANOTHER WHY DESTROY AND KEEP THE POOR POOR?

  • mickey 05/23/2009 1:51:00 AM

    A propos Monica and Susan's comments: Celeste Fremon at witnessla.com has a whole thread about how biased this paper has become against Bratton and therefore his ally Bratton, about all the *hit pieces being run on them. (AND Weiss.) And then over at street-hassle.blogspot.com, Joe Mailander -- someone not inclined to give the mayor an easy pass -- wrote on 5/20-Wed. that with the disastrous election of Trutanich, "the City Staggers Towards Tribal Implosion -- Again." About how this death penalty advocate -- and his other baggage -- who "looks more like a Vegas pit boss than a savvy sang-froid Angeleno (Weiss's crime I guess, given the Zines and Cooleys who can't stand Weiss for NOT being more like them) has started off confrontationally and showing his lack of class towards Weiss and his former opponents, will make Bradley-Gates look like the good old days. And notes that both the L A Times and Daily News were so biased in favor of Trutanich (maybe to belatedly get at the Mayor) that "these two papers can't fold up their tends soon enough; we'll be so much better off when they go bye-bye at last." So we have ALL THREE papers writing hit pieces against anyone associated with Antonio: Weiss, Bratton, while acting as lobbies for their opponents.

  • susan 05/22/2009 11:44:00 PM

    Monica is absolutely right and said what I would have. But while it's true that constant Bratton critic Zine earns some $80K/ year and as his kids are long grown could well afford to take the cut, you neglect to add that other retired cop Parks, who's getting a whopping $250,000/year or so from his police pension. The Times is reporting he gets $22,000/ month! But interestingly, they omit Zine's pension, maybe since he seems to be their reporter David Zahniser's chief source of "inside info" and new BFF. That paper and this one now seem to not only selectively omit or add info to suit the political foregone conclusion of the writer and editor, but selectively choose topics and subjects to write hit pieces on and slant the articles accordingly. This eliminates the best argument in favor of trying to preserve money-losing MSMs.

  • Julian B Duron 05/22/2009 3:14:00 AM

    This is the height of audacity, by this Mayor and most of the City Council. Lead by example, yeah right! Where is they�re shared pain in the cuts?

  • Monica 05/22/2009 3:03:00 AM

    Its amazing how you reporters continue to misinterpret what the Chief actually said. We all understood he meant if police hiring was stopped every station would lose officers due to the 520 veteran officers who are retiring. You make city council members look as if they did the residents a service. Why aren't you reporting where all the trash fee hike money is going? "In an analysis released last summer, Controller Laura Chick found the city raised $137 million from the trash fee hikes - nearly three times more than it needed to pay the costs associated with the 405 cops it had hired during that period." So where is the rest of the money? That's the story you should be reporting. Ask Rosendahl where it is since he's on the Budget & Finance Committee.

  • Morrison 05/21/2009 10:08:00 PM

    The Los Angeles Times is partially responsible for the outrageous behavior at Los Angeles City Hall. The Times has been asleep at the switch for sometime now. Actually, it's even worse than that. Los Angeles Times reporters have been informed of appalling giveaways to real estate developers, bungled management of pension funds, disastrous funneling of City funds to a few favored non-profits controlled by friends of the Mayor. If people are upset by these revelations, it is time for a People's charter reform conference. Expand the Council, shrink the pay and perks, open the City Hall to greater transparency. In the 1950's, it was a series of articles by the San Francisco Chronicle about open government that led to the Legislature's passage of the Brown Act. We need a similar series about the arrogance of City Hall, and it needs to be done by the Los Angeles Times, the Daily News, and the LA Weekly. People are waking up after the years of real estate developer domination of our City Hall. It is time for the press in this town to get off their collective asses.

  • Louweegie272 05/21/2009 7:33:00 PM

    Each member of the LA City Council earns $178,000 per year, each has 8 assistants that earn $90,000 per year and 8 cars paid for by the City? Maybe there is some wiggle room here for some cuts? Are you kidding me? This is an outrage. They should not be called "public servants" because it seems like we're the ones doing them a favor. I wish the LA Times did it's job and was an advocate for the people, more people might be aware of this.

 

Most Popular Stories

Browse Voice Nation
  • Voice Places

    Voice Places

    Discover restaurants, nightlife, travel, shopping...

  • VOICE Daily Deals

    VOICE Daily Deals

    Get 50 to 90% off every day on restaurants, movies, massages...

  • Best Of

    Best Of...

    More than 10,000 of the BEST things to eat, drink, and experience

  • My Voice Nation

    My Voice Nation

    Join the Village Voice community and get exclusive deals and info

  • Happy Hour

    Happy Hour

    Your local Happy Hour guide at your fingertips

or

Log in or Sign up

Social Connect:

Use your favorite account to access My Voice Nation.


Use your My Voice Nation account to log in:





Forgot password?
or

Sign Up or Log in

Social Connect:

Sign up for My Voice Nation with your preferred network.


Sign up for a My Voice Nation account:



Privacy policy