Wow, just over a $1,000 a month. For all the crap council members take from the public and the press, and now an income of $1,000 a month is called "quite a chunk of change?" You couldn't get me to do it for $10,000 a month.

The thousand dollars is just the tip of the iceberg. Most also get free health insurance for their whole family for life, a retirement benefit, and additional stipends to serve on various intergovernmental boards (Vector Control, SGV Council of Governments, etc).

I'm looking forward to a SGV Tribune story that looks at the WHOLE package some of these politicians take home.

Most Council members meet twice a month to conduct the city business....all these perks for two days of work per month, heck seems like plenty to me.

Since I'm invoked by name, let me just reference a few points:

1) While regularly scheduled council meetings are twice a month, I personally put in anywhere from 20-30 hours of my personal time towards Council obligations. This includes special meetings, study sessions, unscheduled but necessary meetings with City Staff or members of other agencies, reviewing staff reports, agendas, and other documents and materials, etc.

2) The "stipends" referenced from other boards are anywhere from 50 dollars to 100 dollars per day for other boards. Most, if not all of these meetings are conducted during the work week, and during working hours. These meetings, not including travel time, take anywhere from 2-4 hours each meeting. As an attorney, during the work day, I bill out at nearly 300 dollars an hour. So for every meeting that I get $100 for, I'm missing out on $600-$1200 of compensation from my day job.

3) As a council member I am inundated with requests for donations and contributions to community groups. In an average year, these requests add up to thousands of dollars. I have the means to contribute, and many of them are worthy causes, so I do so willingly.

So, the "chunk of change" for being elected rarely, if ever, comes close to equating the time/money that I spend by nature of the office. And while I'm not complaining or lobbying for a raise, as I indicated above, I do these things willingly, I do find it disconcerting that so many people assume that us councilmembers are raking in the dough. Serving on the Council, from a purely economic standpoint, is normally a losing proposition.

But then again, I'm not doing it for the money.

Since I'm invoked by name, let me just reference a few points:

1) While regularly scheduled council meetings are twice a month, I personally put in anywhere from 20-30 hours of my personal time towards Council obligations. This includes special meetings, study sessions, unscheduled but necessary meetings with City Staff or members of other agencies, reviewing staff reports, agendas, and other documents and materials, etc.

2) The "stipends" referenced from other boards are anywhere from 50 dollars to 100 dollars per day for other boards. Most, if not all of these meetings are conducted during the work week, and during working hours. These meetings, not including travel time, take anywhere from 2-4 hours each meeting. As an attorney, during the work day, I bill out at nearly 300 dollars an hour. So for every meeting that I get $100 for, I'm missing out on $600-$1200 of compensation from my day job.

3) As a council member I am inundated with requests for donations and contributions to community groups. In an average year, these requests add up to thousands of dollars. I have the means to contribute, and many of them are worthy causes, so I do so willingly.

So, the "chunk of change" for being elected rarely, if ever, comes close to equating the time/money that I spend by nature of the office. And while I'm not complaining or lobbying for a raise, as I indicated above, I do these things willingly, I do find it disconcerting that so many people assume that us councilmembers are raking in the dough. Serving on the Council, from a purely economic standpoint, is normally a losing proposition.

But then again, I'm not doing it for the money.

Anthony, Haven't you learned, nothing you can ever say will be good enough for those who feel you are ripping off the public. Hell, you can't even get most people to go vote every couple of years, so why would you suspect they would care about the time and expense of public service. Now you're the bad guy for just doing your job at the rate promised when you ran. Like I said, you couldn't get me to do your job for $10,000 a month. Nothing in life is free, except maybe public service in the eyes of those who sit on the sidelines and complain.

I don't know Anthony from Adam, but:

As an attorney, a lot of the work you do can be done in the evenings and weekends, so you still have plenty of opportunities for billable hours.

You didn't address the retirement or health benefits. About 40 million Americans don't have health care of any kind, but, near as I can tell, zero council members don't have health care.

Being a councilman probably doesn't hurt your other job, either. You get name recognition and make plenty of contacts with potential clients.

I'm not saying you're overpaid, and I'm not saying you're underpaid. I am saying that the job can't be that bad, or there wouldn't be people lining up and spending thousands of their own dollars to do it.

"As an attorney, a lot of the work you do can be done in the evenings and weekends, so you still have plenty of opportunities for billable hours."

Yes, I can put in hours on the weekends and evenings in an attempt to try to "make up" for the time lost going to meetings, but that time spent going to those meetings is still "gone."

Retirement benefits from the City, for me, are a pittance if anything at all because it's based on how money you are paid and time served.

Health benefits are great. My point, however, is not undermined by their existence as compensation for council members. The article clearly references the amount paid.

I'm only clarifying that, at least in my circumstances, I lose far more money and opportunity by being on the council than I gain.

But then again, at least from my perspective, that is why it is called public "service."

For me it's not a "job." It's service. And I'm grateful to be compensated by the City especially since it helps to mitigate the personal economic expense of serving.

Voodoo: Thank you for your words of encouragement.

I'm no fan of my own city council but I think their stipends are less than those of Baldwin Park and I know -- i hate to say it -- those folks' work doesn't start or end at the fall of the gavel at city council meetings. Love them or hate them, they all seem to work pretty hard. What they work hard at, though, is what I like to dig into. Not in Baldwin Park, but in West Covina. I don't know much about BP politics, but I don't blame Anthony for clearing things up. More council members across the SGV should have the nerve and the insight to post comments and read this blog.