City Council pay up for review

SOUTH PORTLAND — On Monday, the South Portland City Council started the ball rolling on a process that could lead to a revision of how they are compensated, while also taking one giant step away from how that compensation will be decided.

The issue of council pay has percolated for more than a year and stems from a lawsuit-generating debate over a health insurance benefit enjoyed by councilors since 1977 even though no mention of it is made in the city charter, which limits council compensation to a $3,000 stipend.

On Sept. 5, the council 5-2 to end its tax-funded health plan, effective Nov. 30, 2013. Those plans can cost taxpayers nearly $15,000 for councilors who take a family plan.

Many times during debate leading up to the September vote, Mayor Tom Blake, who takes the benefit, suggested the creation of a "blue-ribbon commission" to decide what councilors should be paid. Many residents who spoke out against the health benefit, including Al DiMillo, a Current columnist who sued to end it, suggested that the $3,000 sum, set in 1986, might no longer be enough. DiMillo even said publicly that he was not especially opposed to the health benefit, so long as it was explicitly referenced in the charter.

At a Nov. 14 workshop, the council asked City Manager Jim Gailey to find a “human resources professional” who could lead a commission through the process of researching compensation packages for city councilors and recommending something to South Portland voters. The goal, they said, is to have a potential charter revision ready in time for a referendum vote in November.

On Monday, Gailey said that he had checked with three potential facilitators, settling on one largely because the other two claimed to be full up on work at present. That person, Michael Wing of Harpswell-based Human Resources/Labor Relations Consulting Service, will charge $110 per hour to lead the committee. Because the total fee is expected to be less than $15,000, Gailey is allowed to sign a contract without a council vote, which he announced he had done in a Tuesday email.

Still, Wing will cost a little more than initially anticipated.

At Monday’s meeting, councilors made it clear that, to avoid any appearance of impropriety, they don’t want any part of the process, not even in deciding how the blue-ribbon commission will be staffed.

“I think the reason we went with an outside firm is to remove ourselves and city staff from the process,” said Councilor Patti Smith. “So, to solicit the call out, or to randomly select names, I would put my trust in the professional to do that, to push away kind of closeness in terms of manipulating the process.”

Smith did say the commission to be seated by Wing should consist of “five to seven members.”

The councilors seemed to agree with Smith, both in terms of the ideal commission size, and leaving Wing to figure out who gets to be on it.

“Our intent was to get this monkey off our back and have a citizen-led initiative,” said Blake.

Because selecting commission members was not part of Wing’s original scope of work, Gailey said a new calculation would have to be run on the total number of hours the project might entail.

Details on how residents can apply to be on the commission will be released as soon as they become available, said Gailey.

According to City Clerk Susan Mooney, the commission will have to complete its work in time for a public hearing no later than Sept. 4. That would allow the council to set a ballot order on Sept. 13, the last day that it can send an item to a November referendum and still make deadlines for printing and distributing absentee ballots.

Mooney said that in order for any charter amendment to pass, at least 30 percent of the residents who voted in the most recent gubernatorial election must weigh in, meaning 3,419 votes, and the yes vote must equal a majority of that minimum turnout.