2016_mrc_remuneration_committee_report

Saskatoon Municipal Review Commission:
Remuneration Committee Report

Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
April 18, 2016

Saskatoon Municipal Review Commission: Remuneration Committee Report

2

Saskatoon Municipal Review Commission Membership:
Paul Jaspar (Chair)
Linda Moulin (Vice-Chair)
Jennifer Lester
Charles Smith
Joan White
Merri-Ellen Wright

Researcher:
Yuzhu Liu


3

Table of Contents
Preface 4
Executive Summary 4
Background 6
Methodology 7
Findings 8
Recommendations 13
List of Appendices 21
Appendix I. Municipal Salary Comparisons - Table and Charts 22
Appendix II. City of Saskatoon – Mayor and Councillors – Benefits and Entitlements 32
Appendix III. Communications and Constituency Relations Allowance (CCRA) 42
Part I: Proposed Communications and Constituency Relations Allowance
(CCRA) 43
Part II: Proposed Communications and Constituency Relations Allowance
(CCRA) Indicating Additions, Deletions, and Amendments 48
Appendix IV. Council Policy on Remuneration (CO1-006) 53
Appendix V. 2016 Survey of Councillors’ Hours of Work 55
Appendix VI. Council Members: Benefit Plan Entitlements 56
Appendix VII. 1980 Nutting Report 57
Appendix VIII. 2005 Veltkamp Report 64
Appendix IX. Other Sources 68
Part I: 2006 Wakabayashi Report, Independent Review Committee on MLA
Indemnity (Province of Saskatchewan)
Part II: CRA Information Bulletin (IT-292)


4
Preface
On February 29, 2016, City Council approved a process for dealing with reports of the Saskatoon
Municipal Review Commission (SMRC).
• The SMRC tables the report with City Council at a regular business meeting.
• Council receives the information and refers the report to a meeting of its Governance and
Priorities Committee for discussion and, at the same time, refers the report of the SMRC to
the Administration for review and written comment to the same meeting of the Governance
and Priorities Committee.
• The report of the SMRC, along with comments of the Administration, are considered
together at a meeting of the Governance and Priorities Committee. The chair of the
SMRC should be in attendance and review the recommendations in detail with the
Committee. Likewise, Administration would present its comments or feedback to the
Committee.
• The Governance and Priorities Committee may defer and refer any aspect of the report to
seek further clarification from either the SMRC and/or the Administration.
Executive Summary
The guiding principles of the SMRC are accountability, transparency, fairness, and predictability.
Bearing in mind these guidelines, the SMRC has identified several areas of Council remuneration
and benefits that will be addressed in the following recommendations:
Tax Treatment of Salaries
Recommendation 1: Request the Government of Saskatchewan to change The Cities Act in
order to permit municipalities to adopt fully taxable remuneration for mayors and
councillors.
Remuneration Policy (C-006)
Recommendation 2: No change should be made in the current linkage and adjustment formulas
for the Mayor’s salary.
Recommendation 3: Change the Deputy Mayor section of the Council Remuneration Policy
document to state that all Councillors shall be deemed to have received remuneration in
recognition of Deputy Mayor duties as part of their annual remuneration as Councillors.
Recommendation 4: Maintain the current method of determining Councillors’ salaries but
increase percentage to 46% of the Mayor’s salary in recognition that compensation for
Deputy Mayor duties would now be incorporated in the Councillor’s base salary.


5
Communications Allowance
Recommendation 5: Change the name of Communications Allowance to Communications and
Constituency Relations Allowance (CCRA).
Recommendation 6: Eliminate (1) the General Entertainment section from the Guidelines and
Parameters of the allowance, (2) the “gift baskets and flowers for constituents for special
occasions” from the Gifts and Promotions section, and (3) “business contacts” from the list
of groups hosted by Councillors that are eligible for reimbursement.
Recommendation 7: Combine the Gifts and Promotions section of the guidelines with the
Hospitality Expenses section and rename Constituency Relations.
Recommendation 8: Change the Responsibility of City Clerk’s Office section to indicate all
expenses will be posted quarterly within 60 days of the end of the quarter.
Recommendation 9: Add to the General Guidelines section a statement that in the year of a civic
election the allowance cannot be used from September 1 through October 31.
Recommendation 10: Add to the General Guidelines section a statement that, in the year of an
election, 8/12 of the allowance will be allocated to the sitting Council, and 2/12 of the
allowance will be allocated to the newly elected Council.
Recommendation 11: Add to the General Guidelines section a statement that no goods or
services purchased with the allowance (including such purchases as a website annual
domain registration or billboard signage) may be used during an election period.
Recommendation 12: Change the wording to indicate that all of the guidelines and policies are
applicable to Council as a whole--that is, to the Mayor as well as Councillors.
Recommendation 13: Approve additional housekeeping changes:
• Clarify under the General Guidelines section that funds cannot be carried forward to
the next fiscal year.
• Add to the Reimbursements section that invoices/receipts must be dated.
• Change references to the Executive Committee to the Governance and Priorities
Committee or the Integrity Commissioner, as appropriate.
Recommendation 14: Adopt revised guidelines as set out in Appendix III and establish them as
Council policy with the understanding that a violation of the policy would be a violation of
the Code of Conduct and any irregularities would be subject to investigation by the
Integrity Commissioner.
Recommendation 15: Once the revised guidelines are established as policy, require that a third
party review of the allowance be conducted at least every two years in order to provide


6
additional guidance and perspective on the appropriate use of this fund. The review
should include:
• usage of funds – by whom, where, and types of expense claims submitted;
• summary of impacts – in an attempt to measure community engagement through
the fund;
• validation of expenditure appropriateness based on policy; and
• validation that the current policy reflects the needs of Council members and their
constituents.
Following each review, Council should be provided the opportunity to revise the policy as
appropriate.
Recommendation 16: Add to the Responsibility of the City Clerk’s Office section of the guidelines
the responsibility for facilitating and coordinating with the Integrity Commissioner the bi-
annual reviews of the fund. This can occur through the engagement of a third party
committee or the issuance of a formal request for proposals from external vendors as
determined by the Integrity Commissioner.
Support for Members of Council
Recommendation 17: That City Council consider adding an additional staff member
(1 FTE) to the City Clerk’s Office. This position would be dedicated to providing support
for Councillors.
Benefit Plan Provisions
Recommendation 18: If a member of Council who is enrolled in the SUMA Extended Health Plan
is no longer eligible to receive benefits because of the benefit limitation placed on older
plan members, that person shall be provided additional compensation equal to the
employer’s premium cost for single coverage in the plan.
Background
In Saskatchewan The Cities Act (s.56.1) specifies that members of city councils are expected to
set their own compensation, benefits, and allowances. Over the years, Saskatoon City Council
has requested and received assistance in this task—notably, in 1980, from an independent
commission headed by Judge J.B.J. Nutting and again, in 2005, from the City Administration as
set out in a report to Council from Mr. B. Veltkamp. The process currently followed allows for
orderly salary progression for both the Mayor and Councillors without requiring the direct
involvement of the members of Council on an annual basis.
In 2014, Council passed Bylaw No. 9242 establishing the Saskatoon Municipal Review
Commission (SMRC) as an independent commission with a mandate to review periodically
certain areas of municipal governance, including matters relating to “the remuneration and
benefits and any reimbursement or allowances for expenses to be paid to members of Council.”


7
The mandate of the SMRC’s Remuneration Committee is set out as follows:
14. (1) The Remuneration Committee shall inquire into and make
recommendations with respect to any or all of the following:
(a) the salaries to be paid to the Mayor and Councillors;
(b) the remuneration to be paid to a Councillor appointed as deputy mayor;
(c) professional allowances;
(d) vacation leave;
(e) health and disability benefits;
(f) pension benefits and additional retirement benefits;
(g) general in-town and out-of-town expenses;
(2) The Remuneration Committee may inquire into and make
recommendations with respect to the following:
(a) the support staff, facilities and equipment for members of Council;
(b) communications allowances.
Methodology
Information about municipal compensation practices for elected officials was gathered and
assessed:
• The current compensation provisions for members of Council were posted on the SMRC
website, and public hearings were held on June 16, 2015 at the Cosmo Civic Centre and
on June 24, 2015 at the Lakewood Civic Centre. Citizens were encouraged to provide
feedback through an online survey and through social media.
• The SMRC reviewed the current Council policy on remuneration of members of City
Council (No. C01-006), the provincial legislative framework set out in The Cities Act, and
Canada Revenue Agency’s provisions for taxation of elected municipal officials (IT-292).
• An historical review was conducted using primarily the Nutting and Veltkamp reports to
Saskatoon Council in 1980 and 2005, respectively, and a 2006 Province of Saskatchewan
report on MLA indemnity prepared by an independent review committee chaired by Mr. A.
Wakabayashi.
• The SMRC undertook an extensive review of the compensation provisions followed by
other Canadian cities. The decision was made to focus on a sample of sixteen cities,
concentrating on larger cities in western Canada (Calgary, Edmonton, and Winnipeg) and
a sample of smaller, non-suburban cities across Canada. Two were eliminated from the


8
sample because current data were not available or not readily comparable. Components
of remuneration reviewed included: compensation models, bases for setting salaries, and
adjustment mechanisms; salary levels for mayors, councillors, and deputy mayors; travel,
communications, and other allowances available to councillors; health, disability,
pension/retirement, life insurance, death benefits, and vacation provisions; staff, facilities,
equipment, and other support for councillors.
• The City Clerk’s Office very generously compiled and forwarded information it had
available, made enquires requesting additional information, and made the administrative
arrangements for two surveys—one to the cities in the comparison sample and one to city
councillors.
• Mr. Yuzhu Liu, a doctoral student at the Johnson-Shoyama School of Public Policy, was
contracted to provide research services, analyze the data, and assist the Remuneration
Committee in preparing the information for decision-making purposes and for presentation
in this report.
Findings
Public sector compensation can be a controversial subject, and this is especially true for the
members of city councils in Saskatchewan who are expected to set their own remuneration in
accordance with The Cities Act, which states: “56(1) Each member of council is to be paid any
remuneration and benefits and any reimbursement or allowances for expenses that may be fixed
by the council.” To many observers it presents a “no-win” situation for councils.
Salary Model. Over the years, Saskatoon City Council has avoided a measure of
contentiousness by adopting a process recommended in 1980 by an independent commission
headed by Judge J.B.J. Nutting. That process allows for orderly salary progression without
requiring the direct involvement of Council on an annual basis (Nutting Report, Appendix VII).
The Nutting Commission articulated the general principle that “compensation payable should be
sufficient to attract competent and well qualified community-minded persons to the offices of
Mayor and Councillor.” The commission went on to say that the salaries paid to elected officials
need to be balanced with “the fact that other forms of community service within the city are, for
the most part, extended as a matter of civic concern and public duty without any recompense.”
Because considerable time is normally required to carry out the duties of the Mayor of Saskatoon
or a City Councillor, it becomes important to provide realistic compensation in order to allow
citizens to make sufficient time available to perform the duties of these elected offices.


9
The Nutting Commission report recommended that the compensation of the Mayor and City
Councillors be linked to the compensation of a Provincial Cabinet Minister, which is determined
annually by the Provincial Government following careful consideration of comparable market
data. Over the years, the level of the linkage has been adjusted several times. In 2005 the
Mayor’s salary was set at 85% of a Cabinet Minister’s salary following a review and
recommendations to Council by the City Administration. In this review, the office of Mayor was
found to require at least a full-time commitment, but a differential of 15% was established to
account for the difference between the Cabinet Minister’s fully taxable salary and the Mayor’s
partially tax exempt salary. At the same time the salary formula for a City Councillor was raised
from 30% to 45% of the Mayor’s salary in recognition of the increased time commitment required
of Councillors (Veltkamp Report, Appendix VIII).
The SMRC believes that, in general, the current remuneration levels for the Mayor and
Councillors are commensurate with those of other cities of similar size. It is important to note,
however, that there is considerable variation in the compensation profiles of Canadian
municipalities: Variation occurs in the way cities are organized and their scope of responsibility,
what council members are compensated for, how their salaries are taxed, whether members of
council are expected to work full time or part time, what benefits and office support they are
provided, and many other compensation factors. Given the challenges of gathering comparable
data, the SMRC chose to focus on comparisons of base salaries (both actual salaries and their
fully taxable equivalents) and, in the case of councillors, the ward density or average number of
constituents per ward. The table and charts in Appendix I support the observation that the salary
levels for both Mayor and Councillor are appropriate when compared with those of other similar-
sized cities.
Annual Compensation Adjustment. The SMRC believes that the basic architecture of the Nutting
commission formula has provided an adjustment mechanism that is transparent and simple, and
over time it has been fair both to the members of Council and to the citizens of Saskatoon. It has
the additional advantage of avoiding the direct involvement of Council with comparison issues
that can be both complex and contentious.
Other cities use different mechanisms for adjusting salaries. Some of these include averaging
the salaries of a comparison group of cities, incrementing salary levels by changes in the
Consumer Price Index, linking salary increases in some way to the increases received by
municipal workers, and directly tying elected officials’ salaries to the average weekly earnings of
a city or region. Each has merits and weaknesses.
While the Nutting model has served the City well, concern has been expressed that it is too
reliant on the decisions of the Province. In the event of a reduction in the salaries of Cabinet


10
Ministers, for example, the salaries of the Mayor and Councillors would also be adversely
affected. The SMRC acknowledges this could be the case but believes that an extraordinary
event of this kind would warrant special consideration by Council. On balance, the advantages of
the linkage with the salary of a Cabinet Minister outweigh possible disadvantages.
Tax Treatment of Salaries. Another significant feature arising from The Cities Act is set out in
section 56(2), which states: “One-third of the total remuneration paid to a member of council is
deemed to be paid with respect to general expenses incurred that are incidental to the discharge
of the duties of a member of council.” When read in conjunction with a special provision for
elected municipal officials in the federal Income Tax Act (see CRA Interpretation Bulletin IT-292),
this statement is interpreted to mean that one-third of the salary for a member of a municipal
council is considered to be a tax-free, non-accountable expense allowance.
In other words, the salaries of the Mayor and Councillors are one-third tax exempt, as allowed by
the federal Income Tax Act and as required by the provincial Cities Act. The tax exemption
option was introduced federally in 1947 for the purpose of helping to defray incidental expenses
incurred by elected officials in the performance of their duties. In effect, this is a non-accountable
general expense allowance that requires no receipts or other evidence of expenditure. The
rationale for maintaining this tax exemption is to reimburse elected officials who are asked to
support events and organizations by making donations or purchasing tickets that are not
claimable expenses. In effect, the Mayor received $40,475 in 2015 in the form of a tax-exempt
allowance, and each Councillor received $18,214.
Mayor Councillor
Salary (2015) $121,436.10 $54,646.25
1/3 tax-exempt expense allowance $40,474.65 $18,213.60
Net taxable earnings $80,961.45 $36,432.65
Provincial MLAs had a similar arrangement until about ten years ago when the Government of
Saskatchewan eliminated the tax-free allowances for MLAs in order to improve transparency,
accountability, public understanding, and allow for meaningful comparisons of their salaries with
those of other public and private jobs and occupational groups (Wakabayashi Report, 2006).
Part-Time vs. Full-Time Status of Councillors. The SMRC looked at the question of whether a
Councillor in Saskatoon should be considered full time or part time. The SMRC noted that large
cities are more likely to have full-time councillors than medium-sized cities. Among the cities in
our sample, only Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, and Halifax have full-time councillors.


11
Importantly, Calgary, Edmonton, and Winnipeg have significantly higher ward densities, and in
these cities we also see higher level organizational features such as personal office staff for
councillors, one or more offices for each councillor, and ward budgets of significant size.
The SMRC reviewed data from several sources, including responses to a survey, in order to
estimate the amount of time Councillors spend on Council and Council-related duties (See
Appendix V.) . Estimates of the average time spent by each Councillor to prepare for and attend
Council and standing committee meetings, as well as to represent the City or Council on external
bodies, ranged from 585 hours to 768 hours annually. Using the standard of 2,080 hours for
annual, full-time employment, this amounts to a range from 28% to 37% of full time. These
estimates probably represent the minimal time required for a Councillor to have a general
understanding of the matters requiring consideration.
In addition to Councillors’ required duties of office, there are a significant number of hours spent
working with and for their constituents: Councillors’ self-reported range for constituency work was
from 240 to 900 hours annually, which is 12% to 42% of full time; the median was 360 hours per
councillor or 17% of full time. Most Councillors acknowledge they manage their time in different
ways, which makes it difficult to specify a standard number of hours required to perform the job or
even what the parameters of the job are. Based on this review, the SMRC concluded that the
office of Councillor in Saskatoon should continue to be characterized as a part-time commitment.
That said, the committee noted that some Councillors spend considerably more time than the
reported median number of hours attending meetings and functions in their constituencies and
responding to citizen enquiries. This is important work, valued by the community, and citizens
are grateful for this service.
Communications Allowance. In 2013 Council allocated funds to provide communications support
for members of Council. The Mayor was given an annual accountable allowance of $100,000,
each Councillor was allotted $10,000, and another $10,000 was provided to the City Clerk’s
Office to administer the funds.
Minutes of the June 10, 2013 Council meeting record approval of the preliminary parameters and
guidelines for communications support to Councillors, with a further recommendation that this
document “be reviewed after the first year, including a review of allocations in an election year.”
This planned review was deferred in order to include it in the mandate of the SMRC.
The purpose of the Communications Allowance is vague, and the enumerated allowable
expenditures are not, strictly speaking, always related to communications. The preliminary
parameters and guidelines suggest permissible expenditures in diverse areas: advertising and


12
promotion; books and magazines; general entertainment; general office supplies; gifts and
promotions; hospitality expenses; newsletters and flyers; professional and contract services; and
websites, social media tools, software and accessories. (See Appendix II, pp. 36-41.) All
Councillors’ expenses charged to the fund for 2013 and 2014 have been posted in some detail on
the City’s website. The SMRC was impressed with this transparency and the accountability built
into the fund’s purchasing and reimbursement procedures.
The SMRC sees considerable potential for this fund as a resource for Councillors to help them
effectively and efficiently perform the duties of their office. It complements office and travel
supports already provided by the City. (See Appendix II, pp. 32-36.) In addition, it can be drawn
upon to provide additional assistance for constituency services in the form of preparing
newsletters, answering and directing enquiries, coordinating events, and performing basic
research into issues of interest to ward members. That said, the SMRC questioned whether the
fund might be used in some situations to provide an unfair advantage to incumbents seeking re-
election and whether taxpayers should be asked to fund Councillors’ activities that may be
viewed to represent more self-interest than public service.
The SMRC sees a value in renaming the fund and reshaping its use to increase support for the
formal duties of the office and constituency services and provide less support for social and
promotional activities.
According to Council policy, the other significant source of funds available to members of Council
is the non-accountable, general expense allowance arising from one-third of their salary being
“designated as having been paid in respect of general expenses incurred incidental to the
discharge of the duties of the respective office.” (See Appendix IV.)This general expense
allowance is a totally discretionary allowance for which there are no guidelines, no receipts are
required, and no expenses are reported. The SMRC noted there may be considerable overlap
between the areas of support funded by the Communications Allowance and the intended
purpose of the non-accountable, general expense allowance granted to elected officials.
With these observations in mind and in the interest of promoting accountability, transparency,
and fairness for Council members and the citizens of Saskatoon, the SMRC has prepared
recommendations, including a revised name for the fund and revised guidelines and parameters,
for the consideration of Council.
Remuneration of Deputy Mayor. The office of Deputy Mayor rotates among the Councillors on a
monthly schedule, and the current practice is to compensate all Councillors $20 each month, with
an additional $20 per half day for those occasions when a Councillor is required to fulfill the


13
Mayor’s duties in the Mayor’s absence. This particular remuneration practice has been criticized
by Councillors who consider it cumbersome and not very meaningful.
Other Components of Compensation. Other elements of compensation including vacation leave,
professional allowances, health and disability benefits, pension benefits and additional retirement
benefits, general in-town and out-of-town expenses, support staff, facilities, and equipment for
members of Council were considered, and two areas were suggested for additional review.
First, there is a concern that the support for Councillors’ administrative needs cannot be met with
current resources available through the City Clerk’s Office. While the Communications
Allowance provides a resource for Councillors to arrange for part-time, contract assistance, it
generally has not been used for this purpose. The SMRC notes that this mode of support may be
most suitable for certain types of tasks such as conducting research, writing newsletters,
arranging events, and performing other types of constituency work. Certain routine administrative
tasks can often be discharged more efficiently and effectively by a person who is familiar with the
procedures and systems of the City such as a person employed in the City Clerk’s Office. To
meet these administrative needs, additional resources may be required for the City Clerk’s Office.
The second area relates to an equity concern raised about a restriction applying to older persons
enrolled in the SUMA Extended Health Plan. This is a cost-shared group benefit plan that is
offered to all members of Council. The plan contains no restrictions on the oveall amount of
benefits that will be paid out, except that plan members who are 65 or older are limited to a total
benefit payment of $10,000. Once that limit has been reached, no more extended health care
benefits will be paid. This type of limitation is not considered to be age discrimination in health
insurance plans because the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code still authorizes such plans to
treat persons over 65 years old differently “for reasonable and bona fide reasons.”
Recommendations
Tax Treatment of Salaries
Recommendation 1: Request the Government of Saskatchewan to change The Cities Act
in order to permit municipalities to adopt fully taxable remuneration for mayors and
councillors.
Current practice:
The salaries of the Mayor and Councillors are currently one-third tax exempt as required
by The Cities Act.


14
Rationale:
Over the years, many cities in Canada have chosen to use formal expense allowances to
pay for expenses incurred by elected officials, and at the same time municipalities have
increasingly adopted fully taxable salaries in the interest of fairness, accountability, and
transparency. The practical consequences of this policy reform are the elimination of a
“hidden” allowance which potentially can generate suspicion and unnecessary confusion
about who should pay for what and what should be considered to be legitimate expenses
of the office.
Calgary, Winnipeg, Sherbrooke, Guelph, and Victoria are the cities in the SMRC’s
comparison sample that have eliminated the tax free allowance. Other Canadian cities
that have made this change include Toronto, Vancouver, Ottawa, and Hamilton. The
SMRC endorses a change to a fully taxable salary model as a means of improving the
accountability, transparency, and fairness of the Mayor’s and Councillors’ salaries, as well
as improving the comparability of salaries and public understanding. Unfortunately, in
Saskatchewan, this option is not available. The Cities Act does not currently permit
municipalities in the province to convert elected officials’ salaries to the fully taxable
model. Following the 2006 Wakabayashi Report, the Saskatchewan government changed
the salaries of its MLAs to a fully taxable model.
Amendments to The Cities Act may not be considered for some time, but the SMRC
recommends that Council request an amendment that would allow municipalities in
Saskatchewan the choice of fully taxable or partially tax exempt salaries. The question of
whether Saskatoon City Council would choose to move to fully taxable salaries could then
be considered by Council at a future date.
Remuneration Policy (C01-006)
Recommendation 2: No change should be made in the current linkage and adjustment
formulas for the Mayor’s salary.
Current practice:
The Mayor’s salary is set at 85% of a provincial Cabinet Minister’s salary.
(See Appendix IV.)
Rationale:
The Mayor’s current remuneration is commensurate with that of mayors of other cities of
similar size. It is important to note, however, that there is considerable variation in
compensation profiles among Canadian municipalities: Variation occurs in the way cities
are organized, how they choose to pay for meeting attendance, how salaries are taxed,
what office support and benefits are provided, and many other compensation factors.
Because of the challenges involved in gathering comparable data, the SMRC has chosen
to rely in large part on comparisons of base salaries (both actual salaries and fully taxable
equivalents), city size, and ward density for an indication of how Saskatoon compares with


15
other cities. The table and charts in Appendix I support the observation that the salary
level of the Mayor is appropriate when compared with the mayors’ salaries of other similar-
sized cities. That said, the SMRC acknowledges that the Mayor and Councillors did not
receive a salary increase in 2015 because of a wage freeze imposed on Saskatchewan
government ministers and senior officials; none the less the salary of the Mayor appears to
be at an appropriate level in comparison with other benchmarked cities. The current
mechanism for determining the Mayor’s salary allows for an understandable and orderly
salary progression without directly involving City Council on an annual basis.
Recommendation 3: Change the Deputy Mayor section of the Council
Remuneration Policy document to state that all Councillors shall be deemed to have
received remuneration in recognition of Deputy Mayor duties as part of their annual
remuneration as Councillors.
Current practice:
The office of Deputy Mayor rotates among the Councillors on a monthly schedule. In
recognition of this, each Councillor receives $20 each month and is eligible for an
additional $20 per half day for those occasions when the Councillor is fulfilling the Mayor’s
duties in the Mayor’s absence.
Rationale:
The SMRC heard suggestions that the current remuneration practice for Deputy Mayor is
not very meaningful. The role of Deputy Mayor is more or less shared by all Councillors.
Each Councillor serves as Deputy Mayor in a monthly rotation schedule. Incorporation of
the compensation for Deputy Mayor duties into Councillors’ base salaries would be
equitable and would simplify the payments.
Recommendation 4: Maintain the current method of determining Councillors’ salaries but
increase percentage to 46% of the Mayor’s salary in recognition that compensation for
Deputy Mayor duties would now be incorporated in the Councillor’s base salary.
Current practice:
Councillors’ salaries are set at 45% of the Mayor’s salary.
Rationale:
The table and charts in Appendix I support the observation that the salary level of the
Councillors is appropriate when compared with those of other similar-sized cities.
Increasing the formula for Councillors’ salaries from 45% of the Mayor’s salary to 46%
would compensate Councillors for Deputy Mayor duties, streamline the payments to
Councillors, increase Councillors’ base salaries by a small amount, and reduce
unnecessary administrative detail. The total cost of this increase, based on 2015 salary
levels, is estimated to be $9,400 to $9,600 annually.


16
The basic compensation framework for Saskatoon Councillors’ salaries is sound. As in
the case with mayors, there is no standardized compensation profile for municipal
councillors. In the public forums, some members of Council indicated they were
comfortable with this type of formula because it is both transparent and predictable.
Communications Allowance
If The Cities Act is changed and Council chooses to adopt fully taxable salaries, there will be an
opportunity to rationalize the various expenditures and needs of both Council members and their
constituents. Until that time, however, the SMRC is recommending a number of interim changes
to the Communications Allowance in the interest of encouraging good governance, improving the
oversight of the fund, and providing better support for Council members so they, in turn, can
provide better services for their constituents. This might involve redirecting a portion of resources
away from strictly promotional activities in order to hire contract assistants who can perform
services needed to support the constituency. Appendix III sets out the proposed changes to the
2013 “Preliminary Parameters and Guidelines – Councillor Communications” as well as a draft of
the revised parameters and guidelines incorporating the proposals contained in this report.
Recommendation 5: Change the name of the Communications Allowance to
Communications and Constituency Relations Allowance (CCRA).
Current practice:
It is currently named the Communications Allowance.
Rationale:
The name change reflects the spirit and purpose for which the allowance should be used.
Recommendation 6: Eliminate (1) the General Entertainment section from the Guidelines
and Parameters, (2) the “gift baskets and flowers for constituents for special occasions”
from the Gifts and Promotions section, and (3) “business contacts” from the list of groups
hosted by Councillors that are eligible for reimbursement.
Current practice:
The current guidelines provide for reimbursement of these expenses.
Rationale:
The cost of these types of expenditures would be more appropriately paid out-of-pocket
from the Council member’s non-accountable, general expense allowance
-- that is, the tax exempt one-third of salary maintained, in part, to reimburse elected
officials who are asked to support events and organizations by making donations and
purchasing tickets.


17
Recommendation 7: Combine the Gifts and Promotions section of the guidelines with the
Hospitality Expenses section and rename Constituency Relations.
Rationale:
The general purpose of both categories of expenses should be to support good
constituency relations. Combining these sections would simplify the document.
Recommendation 8: Change the Responsibility of City Clerk’s Office section to indicate
all expenses will be posted quarterly within 60 days of the end of the quarter.
Current practice:
The guidelines require annual posting.
Rationale:
More frequent expense postings would allow for better oversight and improved
transparency.
Recommendation 9: Add to the General Guidelines section a statement that in the year of
a civic election the allowance cannot be used from September 1 through October 31.
Current practice:
There are currently no stipulations with respect to the use of the fund during an election
year.
Rationale:
In the interest of fairness, Council should prohibit any use of the allowance that would
provide an advantage to sitting members of Council.
Recommendation 10: Add to the General Guidelines section a statement that, in the year
of an election, 8/12 of the allowance will be allocated to the sitting Council, and 2/12 of the
allowance will be allocated to the newly elected Council.
Current practice:
There are currently no stipulations with respect to the use of the fund during an election
year.
Rationale:
Proration of the funds for the period from January through August and then from
November through December will allow fair distribution among the pre-election period, the
election period (during which the fund may not be used), and the post-election portion of
the year.


18
Recommendation 11: Add to the General Guidelines section a statement that no goods or
services purchased with the allowance (including such purchases as a website annual
domain registration or billboard signage) may be used during an election period.
Current practice:
There are currently no stipulations with respect to the use during an election of goods and
services purchased with the allowance.
Rationale:
In the interest of fairness, Council should prohibit any use of the allowance that would
provide an advantage to sitting members of Council.
Recommendation 12: Change the wording to indicate that all of the guidelines and
policies are applicable to Council as a whole--that is, to the Mayor as well as Councillors.
Current practice:
The current document specifies that the parameters and guidelines pertain to Councillors’
use of the Communications Allowance. It is silent with respect to the parameters and
guidelines expected of the Mayor.
Rationale:
There is a need to ensure that these funds are used for the purpose of supporting
members of Council in the performance of their duties. The Mayor is a member of
Council, and it would be unfair and inappropriate to permit the funds to be used to provide
an advantage to any incumbent member of Council over other candidates for office.
Recommendation 13: Approve additional housekeeping changes:
• Clarify under the General Guidelines section that funds cannot be carried
forward to the next fiscal year.
• Add to the Reimbursements section that invoices/receipts must be dated.
• Change references to the Executive Committee to the Governance and Priorities
Committee or the Integrity Commissioner, as appropriate.
Recommendation 14: Adopt revised guidelines as set out in Appendix III and establish
them as Council policy with the understanding that a violation of the policy would be a
violation of the Code of Conduct and any irregularities would be subject to investigation
by the Integrity Commissioner.
Current practice:
The current guidelines are only preliminary and have not yet been adopted as policy.


19
Rationale:
A policy linked to the Code of Conduct would provide a clear process for addressing any
concerns about inappropriate use of the allowance. This would enhance fairness and
accountability.
Recommendation 15: Once the revised guidelines are established as policy, require that a
third party review of the allowance be conducted at least every two years in order to
provide additional guidance and perspective on the appropriate use of this fund. The
review should include:
• usage of funds – by whom, where, and types of expense claims submitted;
• summary of impacts – in an attempt to measure community engagement through
the fund;
• validation of expenditure appropriateness based on policy; and
• validation that the current policy reflects the needs of Council members and their
constituents.
Following each review, Council should be provided the opportunity to revise the policy as
appropriate.
Current practice:
The current guidelines do not specify periodic reviews.
Rationale:
The SMRC has not had the opportunity to perform a full review of the usage of the
allowance and the adequacy of the guidelines. Periodic reviews will ensure adequate
oversight of the allowance and provide opportunities for continuous improvement based on
experience.
Recommendation 16: Add to the Responsibility of the City Clerk’s Office section of the
guidelines the responsibility for facilitating and coordinating with the Integrity
Commissioner the bi-annual reviews of the fund. This can occur through the engagement
of a third party committee or the issuance of a formal request for proposals from external
vendors as determined by the Integrity Commissioner.
Current practice:
The current guidelines do not specify periodic reviews.
Rationale:
In the interest of accountability and role clarification, it is important to identify the
administrative office responsible for facilitating and coordinating the periodic reviews. The
City Clerk’s Office is in the best position to perform these tasks.


20
Support for Members of Council
Recommendation 17: That City Council consider adding an additional staff member (1
FTE) to the City Clerk’s Office. This position would be dedicated to providing support for
Councillors.
Current practice:
Staff support for Councillors in the City Clerk’s office is nominally set at 0.25 FTE, but the
actual time spent on Councillor support is estimated to be 0.50 FTE or more.
Rationale:
The SMRC heard at the public forums that Councillors need additional administrative
support and that many of the tasks required can best be provided by an employee familiar
the systems and procedures of the City. To help meet Councillors’ administrative needs
and address the current shortfall in resources, the SMRC recommends increasing the staff
complement of the City Clerk’s Office by one full-time position with the understanding that
this position would be dedicated to Councillor support.
Benefit Plan Provisions
Recommendation 18: If a member of Council who is enrolled in the SUMA Extended
Health Plan is no longer eligible to receive benefits because of the benefit limitation
placed on older plan members, that person shall be provided additional compensation
equal to the employer’s premium cost for single coverage in the plan.
Current practice:
A person who is age 65 or older and has reached the $10,000 limit on benefits will receive
no further benefits from the plan. The premium deduction for single coverage amounts to
$22.86 per month per elected official.
Rationale:
Payments made to the Council member could be used to pay for health costs or to
mitigate the cost of private health insurance.


21
List of Appendices
Appendix I. Municipal Salary Comparisons - Table and Charts 22
Appendix II. City of Saskatoon – Mayor and Councillors – Benefits and Entitlements 32
Appendix III. Communications and Constituency Relations Allowance (CCRA) 42
Part I: Proposed Communications and Constituency Relations Allowance
(CCRA) 43
Part II: Proposed Communications and Constituency Relations Allowance
(CCRA) Indicating Additions, Deletions, and Amendments 48
Appendix IV. Council Policy on Remuneration (CO1-006) 53
Appendix V. 2016 Survey of Councillors’ Hours of Work 55
Appendix VI. Council Members: Benefit Plan Entitlements 56
Appendix VII. 1980 Nutting Report 57
Appendix VIII. 2005 Veltkamp Report 64
Appendix IX. Other Sources 68
Part I: 2006 Wakabayashi Report, Independent Review Committee on MLA
Indemnity (Province of Saskatchewan)

22

Appendix I.
2016.04.15
Municipal Salary Comparison

Table

Market Comparison of Municipal Salary Levels
City
City
Population
1

(2011)
Year
Mayor's
Salary
Tax exempt
Fully Taxable
Salary Equivalent
2

Councillor's
Salary
Tax exempt
Fully Taxable
Salary Equivalent
2
Ward Density
34

(2011)
Full-time or
Part-time
Calgary 1096833 2015 $216,402.00 All taxable $216,402.00 $115,298.00 All taxable $115,298.00 76731 Full-time
Edmonton 812201 2015 $176,145.00 1/3 tax exempt $198,515.00 $99,994.00 1/3 tax exempt $111,083.00 66431 Full-time
Winnipeg 663617 2015 $166,304.00 All taxable $166,304.00 $95,040.00 All taxable $95,040.00 45187 Full-time
Halifax 390096 2014 $168,449.50 1/3 tax exempt $194485.50 $80,849.80 1/3 tax exempt $91180.80 24395 Full-time
London 366151 2013 $104,258.00 1/3 tax exempt $117,927.00 $32,969.76 1/3 tax exempt $35,353.76 26154 Part-time
Saskatoon 222189 2015 $121,436.00 1/3 tax exempt $136,885.00 $54,646.00 1/3 tax exempt $60,291.00 22928 Part-time
Kitchener 219153 2014 $84,976.00 1/3 tax exempt $94,396.00 $49,652.00 1/3 tax exempt $54,060.00 21915 Part-time
Windsor 210891 2015 $86,895.23 1/3 tax exempt $96,390.00 $28,770.48 1/3 tax exempt $30,992.48 20536 Part-time
Regina 193100 2015 $110,435.00 1/3 tax exempt $124,161.00 $36,812.00 1/3 tax exempt $40,003.00 19310 Part-time
Sherbrooke 154601 2010 $139,081.00 All taxable $139,081.00 $30,200.00 All taxable $30,200.00 25767 Part-time
Guelph 121688 2015 $109,004.00 All taxable $109,004.00 $33,433.00 All taxable $33,433.00 20281 Part-time
St. John's 106172 2013 $108,743.00 1/3 tax exempt $122,404.00 $50,411.00 1/3 tax exempt $55,505.00 10617 Part-time
Victoria 80017 2013 $99,715.00 All taxable $99,715.00 $39,886.00 All taxable $39,886.00 10002 Part-time
Saint John 70063 2012 $38,000.00 1/3 tax exempt $41,124.00 $12,666.67 1/3 tax exempt $13,242.67 17516 Part-time

1 City populations similar to Saskatoon’s are highlighted
2 All calculations for fully taxable salary equivalents are generated with the Thompson Reuters tax calculator at http://support.drtax.ca/dtmax/eng/calculator
using the salary year and province applicable in each case: The difference between the calculated tax payable for the full nominal salary and the tax payable for ⅔ of the nominal salary is
added to the nominal salary to provide a grossed-up salary. The assumptions used include: no income from other sources; no allowable deductions; no CPP or EI contributions; and only the
basic personal exemption tax credit
3 Ward density is defined as average number of residents per councillor
4 Ward densities similar to Saskatoon’s are highlighted

Market Comparison Among Selected Municipalities
Graphs

1. Bar chart: Nominal income and fully taxable income
1.1 Mayor’s nominal salary and fully taxable salary (sort on mayor’s fully taxable salary)

When sorting on nominal salary, the descending order among St. John’s, London and Guelph is Guelph, St.
John’s and London. However, St. John’s and London both rank higher than Guelph (fully taxable) when
sorting on Mayor’s fully taxable salary. Saskatoon’s rank among the municipalities sampled does not
change with this conversion.

0 50,000 100000 150000 200000
Saint John
Kitchener
Windsor
Victoria
Guelph
London
St. John's
Regina
Saskatoon
Sherbrooke
Winnipeg
Halifax
Edmonton
Calgary
Mayor's salary Mayor's fully taxable salary
23

24
1.2 Councillor’s nominal salary and fully taxable salary (sort on council’s fully taxable salary)

When sorting on councillor's fully taxable salary, only the order among Regina, Victoria, London, Guelph,
Windsor and Sherbrooke changes. Notably, in the first group the salary for councillors in Victoria and
Guelph is always fully taxable, whereas councillors' salary is one third tax exempt in Regina and London.
Thus, when converting tax exempt to all taxable, the ranks of Regina, London, and Windsor increase.
Saskatoon’s rank among the municipalities sampled does not change with this conversion.

0 50,000 100000 150000
Saint John
Sherbrooke
Windsor
Guelph
London
Victoria
Regina
Kitchener
St. John's
Saskatoon
Halifax
Winnipeg
Edmonton
Calgary
Councillor's salary Councillor's fully taxable salary

25
2. Scatterplots: Mayor’s salary and city population
2.1 Mayor’s nominal salary and city population

Saint John
Victoria
St. John'sGuelph
Sherbrooke
Regina
WindsorKitchener
Saskatoon
London
Halifax Winnipeg
Edmonton
Calgary
50000100000150000200000250000
Mayor'ssalary
0 200000 400000 600000 800000 1000000 1200000
City population
Fitted values Mayor's salary

26
2.2 Mayor’s fully taxable salary and city population

Saint John
Victoria
St. John's
Guelph
Sherbrooke
Regina
WindsorKitchener
Saskatoon
London
Halifax
Winnipeg
Edmonton
Calgary
50000100000150000200000250000
Mayor'sfullytaxablesalary
0 200000 400000 600000 800000 1000000 1200000
City population
Fitted values Mayor's fully taxable salary

27
3. Scatterplot: Councillor income and city population
3.1 Councillor’s nominal salary and city population

Saint John
Victoria
St. John's
Guelph
Sherbrooke
Regina
Windsor
Kitchener
Saskatoon
London
Halifax
Winnipeg
Edmonton
Calgary
20000400006000080000100000120000
Councillor'ssalary
0 200000 400000 600000 800000 1000000 1200000
City population
Fitted values Councillor's salary

28
3.2 Councillors' fully taxable salary and city population

Saint John
Victoria
St. John's
Guelph
Sherbrooke
Regina
Windsor
Kitchener
Saskatoon
London
Halifax
Winnipeg
Edmonton
Calgary
20000400006000080000100000120000
Councillor'sfullytaxablesalary
0 200000 400000 600000 800000 1000000 1200000
City population
Fitted values Councillor's fully taxable salary

29
4. Scatterplot: Councillor’s salary and ward density
4.1 Councillor’s nominal salary and ward density
Ward density is referred as average number of residents per ward (councillor).

Victoria
St. John's
Saint John
Regina
Guelph
Windsor
Kitchener
Saskatoon
Halifax
Sherbrooke
London
Winnipeg
Edmonton
Calgary
20000400006000080000100000120000
Councillor'ssalary
0 20000 40000 60000 80000
Ward density
Fitted values Councillor's salary

30
4.2 Councillor fully taxable salary and ward density

Victoria
St. John's
Saint John
Regina
Guelph
Windsor
Kitchener
Saskatoon
Halifax
Sherbrooke
London
Winnipeg
Edmonton
Calgary
20000400006000080000100000120000
0 20000 40000 60000 80000
Ward density

31
4.3 Councillor fully taxable salary and ward density with 95% confidence interval

Conclusion and policy implications:
For most municipalities, tax-exemption tends to increase both mayor and councillor’s actual income
substantially when converting their nominal salary to a fully taxable salary. However, this policy does not
have substantial impact on Saskatoon’s remuneration ranking. No matter what measure is adopted,
Saskatoon’s ranking of both the mayor’s and councillor’s nominal and fully taxable salaries remains the
same among the municipalities sampled. When comparing Saskatoon to cities such as Regina, Kitchener,
and Windsor with similar city populations and ward densities, Saskatoon’s remuneration level always
ranks higher than the others. This suggests that the remuneration level for both mayor and councillors is
relatively higher than comparable cities.

Victoria
St. John's
Saint John
Regina
GuelphWindsor
Kitchener
Saskatoon
Halifax
Sherbrooke
London
Winnipeg
Edmonton
Calgary
050000100000150000
0 20000 40000 60000 80000
Ward density
95% CI Fitted values

42
Appendix III

Communications and Constituency Relations Allowance
(CCRA)
Part I: Proposed Communications and Constituency Relations Allowance (CCRA)
Part II: Proposed Communications and Constituency Relations Allowance (CCRA)
Indicating Additions, Deletions and Amendments

43
Part I: Proposed Communications and Constituency Relations Allowance (CCRA)

The recommended changes to the “Communications Allowance” have been developed to maintain and
promote accountability, transparency, fairness and predictability for Council and the citizens of Saskatoon.
The recommendations are based on the spirit and intention that the allowance was first established to
reflect. The recommended changes also considered the appropriateness of a civic fund compensating
Council for expenses that previously would have been expended by Council’s 1/3 portion of remuneration.

The SMRC recommends that Council adopt the revised guidelines into policy and that it is understood that a
violation of the policy would be a violation of the Code of Conduct and any irregularities would be reported
to the Integrity Commissioner for investigation.

Following the entrenchment of these guidelines into policy a third party review of the allowance should
occur at a minimum every term. The review is not intended to imply that wrongdoing or incorrect usage of
funds would be allowed by the City Clerk’s office who approves the funds, but rather to provide additional
guidance and perspective on future requests. This review should include:
• Usage of funds – by whom, where, types of expenses submitted.
• Summary of impacts – in an attempt to measure community engagement through the fund.
• Validation of expenditures appropriateness based on policy.
• Validation that the current policy reflects needs of the allowance and provides for an opportunity to
revise policy as required.

Renamed “Communications and Constituency Relations Allowance (CCRA)”

1. General Guidelines

• The guidelines and policies contained here are applicable to Council as a whole, including Mayor
and Council members.
• In the year of an election 8/12th of the allowance will be allocated to the sitting Council, 2/12th of
the allowance will be allocated to the newly elected Council
• In the year of a civic election the allowance cannot be used from September 1 through October 31.
• No goods or services purchased by the Mayor or Councillors that have be reimbursed by this fund
may be used during the election period. This would include items such as a website’s annual
domain registration or billboard signage.
• Funding must be used within the fiscal year and cannot be carried forward.
• Council must adhere to the requirements of the Code of Conduct dealing with “Actions During Civic
Election Periods”.
• No councillor may use funds allocated to engage the services of a member of their family, as defined
in Section 114 (c) of The Cities Act.
• Nothing in the guidelines and parameters should be used for the purposes of fundraising for a
Councillor or for raising election funds.
• Assistance will be provided by the City’s Communication Branch by preparing and distributing the
Agenda in Brief and the Decisions in Brief, prior to and following City Council meetings, and
providing background information on civic programs and services to be used for responding to
enquiries or for preparing speeches as a Member of Council or as Deputy Mayor.

44
2. Allowable Expenses

This section summarizes alphabetically the categories and examples of the types of allowable expenses that
could be charged to the Communication and Constituency Relations Allowance (CCRA) for Council.

Administrative Staff Support
• The fund can be used individually or pooled together with other Council members for the
hiring/engagement of support staff to assist with constituency related tasks
• These tasks may include:
o Research related to constituency issues
o Support for the development of constituency communications
o Rent of office space to base staff support
Advertising & Promotion

• Paid advertising that is related to the business of the City in all types of media.
• Advertising that supplements City departments’ advertisements that are placed to promote specific
programs or specific events.
• Messages in Community Association Newsletters, Newspapers, and Magazines (e.g. introductory
messages, congratulatory messages, event announcements).

Books & Magazines

• Books, magazines, and periodicals that are related to the business of the City. Name of the book or
magazines must be included on the invoice.

General Entertainment –

• Up to two tickets to:
o functions or business/community events (banquets, theatres, shows) when the Councillor
has been invited to attend in their official capacity or when the Councillor is performing
their duties as Councillor;
o charitable events or fund-raising events such as golf tournaments, walkathons, organized by
non-profit organizations.

Conditions

• Event tickets for family members not attending as the Councillor’s spouse or guest are
ineligible.
• Tickets can be used by the Councillor and their spouse or guest.
• Council member must provide a copy of the event notice or flyer as well as any accompanying
request for attendance.
• Raffle tickets, silent auctions, table prize tickets at events, alcohol, unless included in the price
of the ticket are ineligible.

General Office Supplies

• General office supplies not provided by the City Clerk’s Office
• Personalized stationery, greeting cards, holiday cards, including envelopes and stamps and Canada
Post regular mail services

45
• Photocopy charges
• Photographic supplies and services
• Courier delivery costs

Constituency Relations (Combined Gifts and Promotions and Hospitality Expense)

• Promotional items such as fridge magnets, t-shirts, pens.
• Gift baskets/flowers for constituents for special occasions
• Table prizes for local community groups
• Facility rental for hosting an event
• Council members’ expenses for food and non-alcoholic beverages related to community events,
meals or receptions when hosting constituents, business contacts, representatives of other levels of
government

Conditions

• Ineligible expenses include gifts for staff or other employees of the City, boards and committees.
• Council member must provide an original invoice or receipt detailing gift items, quantity, cost
and purpose of the items.
• Reimbursement for flowers and gifts to specific constituents must include an explanation.
• Council member must provide the date, purpose and details of the expense, and where
applicable or feasible, original itemized receipt showing items consumed and names of
participants attending.

Meeting Expenses

• Facility rental
• Catering order for meetings including non-alcoholic beverages, snacks and light foods
• Venue set-up fees, including audio-visual equipment, flip charts, cleaning charges.

Conditions

• Council member must provide date and purpose for meeting, original itemized receipt, names of
participants or group name with number of participants attending.

Newsletters and Flyers

• Design, writing, copy-editing, printing costs
• Distribution costs through Canada Post , Admail, by private distribution firms or by other means
• Clip art or stock photo fees
• Electronic newsletter distribution costs
• Translation fees

Conditions

• Council are permitted to use the City Crest and care must be taken in the appropriate use of the
Crest.
• All CCRA funded communications must cease from September 1 through October 31 in the year
of a civic election

46

Professional and Contract Services

• Firms or individuals whom Council retain for specific business purposes with clear deliverables, fee
structures and timelines.
• The engagement of a business or person(s) as a contractor and/or the cost of supplies, rental of
facilities and equipment relative to production, presentation and/or distribution of information to
residents relevant to City Council business.
• The engagement of a professional or consulting service for the purposes of preparing speeches,
conducting research, etc.

Websites, Social Media Tools, Software & Accessories

• Costs associated with the creation of twitter accounts, Facebook accounts, web pages, or other
social media tools for communicating as a member of Council.
• Additional communications management tools such as database management tools and software
accessories.

Conditions

• Tools or software accessories not supported or not integrated with the City systems or
connected to the corporate network are not supported by the City’s Corporate Information
Services Branch.
• Council are responsible for the protection of any personal information collected or used
for City Council business in accordance with The Local Authority Freedom of Information
and Protection of Privacy Act (LAFOIPP).
• Council must adhere to the requirements of the Code of Conduct dealing with “Actions During
Civic Election Periods”, including conversion of any city-funded websites and social media tools
to an election campaign site.

3. Purchasing Procedures

Purchases of goods, services and work from outside parties are to be made in accordance with Policy C02-
030 – Purchase of Goods, Services and Work. Information and advice on purchasing procedures, vendor
lists, obtaining quotations and preparation of purchasing documents can be obtained from Manager of the
Materials Management Branch.

Regardless of the value, it is recommended that competitive prices be obtained.

• Purchases up to $250 attained locally allows for payment by Automatic Payment Voucher
(administered by City Clerk’s Office)

• Purchases up to $5000 (including taxes and freight) may be made through a Departmental
Purchase Order (administered by City Clerk’s Office). It is recommended that competitive prices
are attained; however, this is to be balanced off with the value of the purchase, the time required to
get competitive prices, and the potential (or lack of) savings that can be achieved.

• Consulting Services must follow standard procedures (consult with the City Clerk’s Office).

47

4. Reimbursements

Council must provide the City Clerk’s Office with proper documentation, including detailed original receipts
for claims. Credit card receipts or statements alone are not sufficient and will not be accepted. In the case
of any on-line purchases, a copy of the confirmation must be attached to the claim.

Dated invoices/receipts must include a description of the goods purchased or services rendered, the cost,
and any applicable taxes.

Expenses must be charged to the year in which they occurred. Expenses cannot be carried forward to
future years. Charges for goods against the current year must be received by Council and/or services from
the vendor before December 31st of that year.

5. Responsibility of City Clerk’s Office

The responsibility of the City Clerk’s Office in administering communications CCRA support to Council
includes, but is not limited to:

• Reviewing usage requirements and parameters with a view to bringing forward recommendations
to Governance and Priorities for amendments;

• Providing support to Council by processing payments for expenditures;

• Ensuring that Review supporting documentation for expenditures is in place, and to bring forward
to Executive Committee Integrity Commissioner any expenditures where supporting
documentation is not place, and expenditures which may not fit within the parameters and
guidelines of the support for Councillor Communications document CCRA expenditures;

• Advising Council on the status of their communications allowance and expenditures;

• Annually Within 60 days of the end of the quarterly posting all expenses, individually and in detail,
on the City’s website and providing Governance and Priorities with monthly usage updates.

• Redacting all personal and other exempted information governed by The Local Authority Freedom of
Information and Protection of Privacy Act from the detailed Councillor expenses prior to the
disclosure of Councillor expenses on the City’s website.

• Facilitating / coordinate with the Integrity Commissioner the review of the CCRA. This can occur
through an independent body or through a third party, to be determined by the Integrity
Commissioner.

48
Part II: Proposed Communications and Constituency Relations Allowance (CCRA)
Indicating Additions, Deletions, and Amendments

The recommended changes to the “Communications Allowance” have been developed to maintain and
promote accountability, transparency, fairness and predictability for Council and the citizens of Saskatoon.
The recommendations are based on the spirit and intention that the allowance was first established to
reflect. The recommended changes also considered the appropriateness of a civic fund compensating
Council for expenses that previously would have been expended by Council’s 1/3 portion of remuneration.

The SMRC recommends that Council adopt the revised guidelines into policy and that it is understood that a
violation of the policy would be a violation of the Code of Conduct and any irregularities would be reported
to the Integrity Commissioner for investigation.

Following the entrenchment of these guidelines into policy a third party review of the allowance should
occur at a minimum every term. The review is not intended to imply that wrongdoing or incorrect usage of
funds would be allowed by the City Clerk’s office who approves the funds, but rather to provide additional
guidance and perspective on future requests. This review should include:
• Usage of funds – by whom, where, types of expenses submitted.
• Summary of impacts – in an attempt to measure community engagement through the fund.
• Validation of expenditures appropriateness based on policy.
• Validation that the current policy reflects needs of the allowance and provides for an opportunity to
revise policy as required.

Renamed “Communications and Constituency Relations Allowance (CCRA)”

6. General Guidelines

• The guidelines and policies contained here are applicable to Council as a whole, including Mayor
and Council members.
• In the year of an election 8/12th of the allowance will be allocated to the sitting Council, 2/12th of
the allowance will be allocated to the newly elected Council
• In the year of a civic election the allowance cannot be used from September 1 through October 31.
• No goods or services purchased by the Mayor or Councillors that have be reimbursed by this fund
may be used during the election period. This would include items such as a website’s annual
domain registration or billboard signage.
• Funding must be used within the fiscal year and cannot be carried forward.
• Council must adhere to the requirements of the Code of Conduct dealing with “Actions During Civic
Election Periods”.
• No councillor may use funds allocated to engage the services of a member of their family, as defined
in Section 114 (c) of The Cities Act.
• Nothing in the guidelines and parameters should be used for the purposes of fundraising for a
Councillor or for raising election funds.
• Assistance will be provided by the City’s Communication Branch by preparing and distributing the
Agenda in Brief and the Decisions in Brief, prior to and following City Council meetings, and
providing background information on civic programs and services to be used for responding to
enquiries or for preparing speeches as a Member of Council or as Deputy Mayor.

49
7. Allowable Expenses

This section summarizes alphabetically the categories and examples of the types of allowable expenses that
could be charged to the Communications and Constituency Relations Allowance (CCRA) for Council.

Administrative Staff Support
• The fund can be used individually or pooled together with other Council members for the
hiring/engagement of support staff to assist with constituency related tasks
• These tasks may include:
o Research related to constituency issues
o Support for the development of constituency communications
o Rent of office space to base staff support
Advertising & Promotion

• Paid advertising that is related to the business of the City in all types of media.
• Advertising that supplements City departments’ advertisements that are placed to promote specific
programs or specific events.
• Messages in Community Association Newsletters, Newspapers, and Magazines (e.g. introductory
messages, congratulatory messages, event announcements).

Books & Magazines

• Books, magazines, and periodicals that are related to the business of the City. Name of the book or
magazines must be included on the invoice.

General Entertainment –

• Up to two tickets to:
o functions or business/community events (banquets, theatres, shows) when the Councillor
has been invited to attend in their official capacity or when the Councillor is performing
their duties as Councillor;
o charitable events or fund-raising events such as golf tournaments, walkathons, organized by
non-profit organizations.

Conditions

• Event tickets for family members not attending as the Councillor’s spouse or guest are
ineligible.
• Tickets can be used by the Councillor and their spouse or guest.
• Council member must provide a copy of the event notice or flyer as well as any accompanying
request for attendance.
• Raffle tickets, silent auctions, table prize tickets at events, alcohol, unless included in the price
of the ticket are ineligible.

General Office Supplies

• General office supplies not provided by the City Clerk’s Office
• Personalized stationery, greeting cards, holiday cards, including envelopes and stamps and Canada
Post regular mail services

50
• Photocopy charges
• Photographic supplies and services
• Courier delivery costs

Constituency Relations (Combined Gifts and Promotions and Hospitality Expense)

• Promotional items such as fridge magnets, t-shirts, pens.
• Gift baskets/flowers for constituents for special occasions
• Table prizes for local community groups
• Facility rental for hosting an event
• Council members’ expenses for food and non-alcoholic beverages related to community events,
meals or receptions when hosting constituents, business contacts, representatives of other levels of
government

Conditions

• Ineligible expenses include gifts for staff or other employees of the City, boards and committees.
• Council member must provide an original invoice or receipt detailing gift items, quantity, cost
and purpose of the items.
• Reimbursement for flowers and gifts to specific constituents must include an explanation.
• Council member must provide the date, purpose and details of the expense, and where
applicable or feasible, original itemized receipt showing items consumed and names of
participants attending.

Meeting Expenses

• Facility rental
• Catering order for meetings including non-alcoholic beverages, snacks and light foods
• Venue set-up fees, including audio-visual equipment, flip charts, cleaning charges.

Conditions

• Council member must provide date and purpose for meeting, original itemized receipt, names of
participants or group name with number of participants attending.

Newsletters and Flyers

• Design, writing, copy-editing, printing costs
• Distribution costs through Canada Post , Admail, by private distribution firms or by other means
• Clip art or stock photo fees
• Electronic newsletter distribution costs
• Translation fees

Conditions

• Council are permitted to use the City Crest and care must be taken in the appropriate use of the
Crest.
• All CCRA funded communications must cease from September 1 through October 31 in the year
of a civic election

51

Professional and Contract Services

• Firms or individuals whom Council retain for specific business purposes with clear deliverables, fee
structures and timelines.
• The engagement of a business or person(s) as a contractor and/or the cost of supplies, rental of
facilities and equipment relative to production, presentation and/or distribution of information to
residents relevant to City Council business.
• The engagement of a professional or consulting service for the purposes of preparing speeches,
conducting research, etc.

Websites, Social Media Tools, Software & Accessories

• Costs associated with the creation of twitter accounts, Facebook accounts, web pages, or other
social media tools for communicating as a member of Council.
• Additional communications management tools such as database management tools and software
accessories.

Conditions

• Tools or software accessories not supported or not integrated with the City systems or
connected to the corporate network are not supported by the City’s Corporate Information
Services Branch.
• Council are responsible for the protection of any personal information collected or used for City
Council business in accordance with The Local Authority Freedom of Information and
Protection of Privacy Act (LAFOIPP).
• Council must adhere to the requirements of the Code of Conduct dealing with “Actions During
Civic Election Periods”, including conversion of any city-funded websites and social media tools
to an election campaign site.

8. Purchasing Procedures

Purchases of goods, services and work from outside parties are to be made in accordance with Policy C02-
030 – Purchase of Goods, Services and Work. Information and advice on purchasing procedures, vendor
lists, obtaining quotations and preparation of purchasing documents can be obtained from Manager of the
Materials Management Branch.

Regardless of the value, it is recommended that competitive prices be obtained.

• Purchases up to $250 attained locally allows for payment by Automatic Payment Voucher
(administered by City Clerk’s Office)

• Purchases up to $5000 (including taxes and freight) may be made through a Departmental
Purchase Order (administered by City Clerk’s Office). It is recommended that competitive prices
are attained; however, this is to be balanced off with the value of the purchase, the time required to
get competitive prices, and the potential (or lack of) savings that can be achieved.

• Consulting Services must follow standard procedures (consult with the City Clerk’s Office).

52

9. Reimbursements

Council must provide the City Clerk’s Office with proper documentation, including detailed original receipts
for claims. Credit card receipts or statements alone are not sufficient and will not be accepted. In the case
of any on-line purchases, a copy of the confirmation must be attached to the claim.

Dated invoices/receipts must include a description of the goods purchased or services rendered, the cost,
and any applicable taxes.

Expenses must be charged to the year in which they occurred. Expenses cannot be carried forward to
future years. Charges for goods against the current year must be received by Council and/or services from
the vendor before December 31st of that year.

10. Responsibility of City Clerk’s Office

The responsibility of the City Clerk’s Office in administering communications CCRA support to Council
includes, but is not limited to:

• Reviewing usage requirements and parameters with a view to bringing forward recommendations
to Governance and Priorities for amendments;

• Providing support to Council by processing payments for expenditures;

• Ensuring that Review supporting documentation for expenditures is in place, and to bring forward
to Executive Committee Integrity Commissioner any expenditures where supporting
documentation is not place, and expenditures which may not fit within the parameters and
guidelines of the support for Councillor Communications document CCRA expenditures;

• Advising Council on the status of their communications allowance and expenditures;

• Annually Within 60 days of the end of the quarterly posting all expenses, individually and in detail,
on the City’s website and providing Governance and Priorities with monthly usage updates.

• Redacting all personal and other exempted information governed by The Local Authority Freedom of
Information and Protection of Privacy Act from the detailed Councillor expenses prior to the
disclosure of Councillor expenses on the City’s website.

• Facilitating / coordinate with the Integrity Commissioner the review of the CCRA. This can occur
through an independent body or through a third party, to be determined by the Integrity
Commissioner.

53
CITY OF SASKATOON
COUNCIL POLICY
NUMBER
C01-006

POLICY TITLE
Remuneration – Members of City Council
ADOPTED BY:
City Council
EFFECTIVE DATE
January 1, 1980
UPDATED TO
September 12, 2011
ORIGIN/AUTHORITY
Personnel and Organization Committee Reports 6-1980,
6-1992 and 7-1985; City Commissioner Reports 38-1985
and 4-1987; A Committee of the Whole Council Report No.
4-1986; Executive Committee Reports 12-1996, and 14-2005
and City Council Resolutions of June 13, 2005 and
September 12, 2011
CITY FILE NO.
CK. 4670-5
PAGE NUMBER
1 of 2

1. PURPOSE

To provide compensation sufficient to attract and retain competent and well qualified
community-minded persons for the offices of Mayor and Councillor and to provide for
a death benefit to assist the family of a member of Council who dies while in office.

2. POLICY

2.1 General

a) The Mayor and Councillors shall be compensated for services rendered
on behalf of the City of Saskatoon.

b) The remuneration shall be consistent with provisions of The Cities Act
and shall be subject to approval of City Council.

2.2 Annual Remuneration

a) Mayor – Effective July 1, 2005, the Mayor’s annual remuneration shall
be 85% of a Cabinet Minister’s salary and adjusted annually based on
increments made to a Cabinet Minister’s salary.

b) Councillors – Councillors’ annual remuneration shall be increased by
$3,000 effective July 1, 2005, and increased by $3,500 on November 1
of each year, starting in 2006, until such time that the annual
remuneration equals 45% of the Mayor’s salary.

Appendix IV.

54
c) Deputy Mayor - All Councillors shall, in addition to the annual
remuneration for Councillor, received $20 each month in recognition
of Deputy Mayor duties plus $20.00 for each half day that he/she is
required to fulfill the duties of Mayor in the Mayor’s absence.

d) Effective July 1, 1980, no remuneration shall be paid to a member of
Council appointed to a Board that is under the jurisdiction of Council.

e) Upon the death of a member of Council while in office, a payment will
be made to the member’s designated beneficiary of an amount equal to
one month’s salary for each period of twelve months of service to a
cumulative lifetime maximum of twelve months.

2.3 Expenses

a) General Expenses - One-third of the annual remuneration paid to a
member of Council shall be designated as having been paid in respect
of general expenses incurred incidental to the discharge of the duties of
the respective office.

b) Out-of-town Expenses - A member of Council, absent from the City on
business of Council or attending a convention, shall, pursuant to
authorization of Council, receive $100.00 per day plus reimbursement
for actual expenses incurred.

c) In-town Expenses - A member of Council attending in-town business
on behalf of Council, shall be reimbursed for all actual expenses
incidental to such business, to a maximum of $100.00 per day.

d) Effective July 1, 2005, Councillors shall be reimbursed for use of their
personal vehicle for City business, based on a per kilometre
reimbursement equal to the limits set by the Canada Revenue Agency
for tax-exempt allowances for the use of personal vehicles.

e) All Councillors’ expenses require authorization by His Worship the
Mayor.

3. RESPONSIBILITY

3.1 Executive Committee - shall be responsible for any updates to this policy.

55
Appendix V.

2016 Survey of Saskatoon City Councillors

Compilation of Councillors’ Estimates:
Hours Spent in an Average Month

Number
Range Responding Median

Q1 All councillor duties 100 – 193 7 120

Q2 Council and standing policy cttes 30 – 60 7 40
(meetings and preparation)

Q3 Other Council business 14 – 96 7 33

Q4 Representing City or Council on 12 – 36 7 24
external boards, assns., etc.

Q5 Constituency business 20 – 75 7 30

Q6 Other duties not included above ? 4 ?

Q7 Comments and suggestions --- 3 ---

2016.04.15

56
Appendix VI.
Council Members: Benefit Plan Entitlements

Group Plan Benefit

Councillors

Mayor
Pension: SUMA Group
RRSP (6% contribution
Matched by City)*

Life Insurance:
$10,000 policy*
Extended Health
Care Insurance*
Dental Care
Insurance*
Vision Care
Insurance*
Accidental Death and
Dismemberment Insurance*
Short-term
Disability Insurance

Long-term
Disability Insurance

Other Benefit**

Death Benefit

*SUMA benefit plans effective July 1, 2015.
** Provided by the City of Saskatoon effective July 1, 2011.

2016.04.15

64
Appendix VIII.

B ) Remuneration – Members of City Council
Policy No. C01-006
(File No. 4670-5)

RECOMMENDATION: 1) that the information be received; and,
2) that, should Council wish to consider changes to the compensation
for the Mayor and City Councillors, the appropriate Public Notice
under The Cities Act must be given.

REPORT

Your Administration has had a considerable amount of discussion regarding the appropriateness of the
level of compensation that is provided to members of City Council. An independent Commission, headed by
Judge Nutting, in 1980, established the current compensation levels. In their report, Judge Nutting noted
that the Commission “took it as a general principle that any compensation payable should be sufficient to
attract competent and well qualified community-minded persons to the offices of Mayor and Councillor.
Salaries should be adequate to make it possible for such citizens to participate in elected offices without the
sacrifices being financially prohibitive.” However, the Commission also recognized that “the salaries paid
must be balanced (by) the fact that other forms of community service are …………extended as a matter of civic
concern and public duty without any recompense”.

During the past eighteen months (the accumulated term of the existing Council), your Administration has
received comments from a number of Councillors about the amount of time that needs to be committed to
City work, time that was not clearly understood before these members first chose to seek a seat on Council.
These Councillors have adjusted their employment commitments, as well as their personal lives, to
accommodate the requirements of being a Council member. However, it is your Administration’s opinion
that “post election” is not the time for the City to reveal to candidates for the Office of City Councillor of the
actual time commitment that is required.

To prepare a somewhat unbiased account of the time required by a Councillor, an analysis was prepared
(Appendix 1) using data comprised from actual meetings that took place in 2004 (Council, Executive,
Budget, Planning and Operations, and Administration and Finance). Times spent at the P & O and A & F
meetings were averaged since Councillors only sit on one of these committees. The attachment also
includes an estimate of the time spent on Advisory Committees and Boards, with some (e.g. Police
Commission) having spent eighty-four hours in meetings in 2004, and others with differing levels of time
commitment. An average of fifty hours was applied. For each actual hour of meeting time, it has been
estimated that a minimum of one hour of time would be required to adequately prepare for participation in
the meeting. Finally, an annual estimate of 250 hours has been added to account for work that each
Councillor does within their constituency by attending various meetings, functions, and responding to
citizen enquiries.

The accumulated time, based on the above, is 936 hours per year. It is your Administration’s opinion that
this is the very minimum time required for a Councillor to have a general understanding of the issues that
are brought to their attention. However, in order to have an in-depth knowledge of the issues impacting
the City and each Ward, and respond to all of the enquiries made by citizens, it is estimated that
Councillors, in fact, spend in the range of 1,200 to 1,400 hours on City business. However, the purpose of

65
this report is not to acknowledge the work done by the present Council, but to prepare future candidates
for the challenges they may face, and to ensure that an appropriate remuneration is in place. As quoted
previously from the 1980 Commission, there is a certain expectation that Councillors participate, to some
level, in this form of community service, along with other civic-minded citizens, “without any recompense”.
Administratively, we believe that the time spent by Councillors, in excess of the minimum of 936 hours
calculated as being required, follows the spirit of that statement.

In order to ensure that future candidates for Council have an awareness of the commitment that they are
making when they seek public support to be elected as a Ward representative, it would be beneficial if the
City Clerk’s information summary (provided to prospective Councillors prior to each election) includes an
estimate of the time that could be expended as a member of Council. This summary would provide
information on Council and standing Committee meetings (meeting times, expectation of special meetings,
etc.), as well as the expectation of participation on a number of Advisory Committees, Boards and
Associations. This summary would also clearly identify any remuneration that is in place at the time of an
election. All citizens registering as a candidate could automatically be provided with a copy of this
statement, as could anyone seeking information prior to considering running for office.

Based on our research, it is your Administration’s opinion that the compensation level is not commensurate
with the minimum time commitment that needs to be given to this position. The Commission’s
recommendations were made twenty-five years ago. Since that time, Saskatoon’s population has increased
from 148,450 to 205,000, without increasing the number of Wards that represent these citizens. That
means that each Councillor is now responsible to address the concerns of approximately 20,000 citizens. In
addition to the increase in the number of citizens needing representation, a growing City brings with it
increasingly complex decision requirements, whether that be in planning, protection of persons and
property, infrastructure requirements or the provision of recreational and cultural opportunities. The City
needs Councillors that have the combined expertise, energy, and time commitment to ensure that
appropriate decisions are being made. To ensure that we continue to attract those individuals, the level of
compensation must be appropriate.

Your Administration continues to support the basis of conclusion of the Nutting Commission. For that
reason, it is not being recommended that a new commission be created. The relationship for compensation
to that of a Cabinet Minister is not wrong, but the recognition of the time required to be an effective City
Councillor needs to be updated. That is the premise of this report.

The 1980 Commission recommended, and City Council of the day adopted, a compensation package that
related directly to that of a Provincial Cabinet Minister. It was acknowledged at that time that “the Mayor’s
duties are certainly no less onerous than that of a cabinet officer”. As a result, the Commission set the
Mayor’s salary at 90% of a Cabinet Minister. Certainly, the role of the Mayor has changed significantly since
1980. Undoubtedly, the demands of this position far exceed that of what would normally be considered a
full time position and, very likely, the demands and responsibilities of most Cabinet Minister positions.

Councillors’ salaries were set, by the 1980 Commission, at 25% of the Mayor’s salary. In 1981, this was
amended to 30%. Even if the time credited to the Mayor’s position was limited to the recognition of a
forty-hour workweek (in fact, his appointment calendar supports a weekly schedule exceeding sixty hours),
our analysis of minimum required hours would suggest that a Councillor’s compensation should be closer
to 45% of the Mayor’s salary. Again, it should be reiterated that this represents the absolute minimum
required commitment, with actual time, much like that of the Mayor, far exceeding those estimates.

Historically, the Mayor’s salary has been derived as a percentage of three provincially-recognized areas of
compensation for Cabinet Ministers. For 2005, the following compensation has been approved:

66

MLA salary $ 64,175
Cabinet Minister – additional compensation 40,578
Expense Allowance 5,372

Total $110,125

The Commission’s recommendations were applied to all three levels of compensation. In addition, the
Mayor was provided with a car allowance based on actual travel done on city business. In 1996, the
Commission’s recommended compensation of 90% of a Cabinet Minister’s salary was adjusted to 77.27%
to recognize the different income tax treatment between the salaries of a Mayor and/or Councillor (1/3 of
their compensation is tax exempt), and the change in tax treatment applied after 1996 for Cabinet Ministers
(where only the expense allowance is not subject to income tax).

In the spirit of the Nutting Commission report, and acknowledging that the position of Mayor is full time
(without acknowledging that full time exceeds a normal work week), it would be appropriate that the
Mayor’s salary be based on 85% of a Cabinet Minister’s salary (but excluding the expense allowance). This
would equate, after taking into account the difference in income tax treatment, to the Mayor receiving
recognition equal to that of a Cabinet Minister (i.e. 100%). It would follow, using the estimated minimum
hours of annual service, but not acknowledging any time in excess of that service, that a Councillor’s salary
be 45% of the Mayor’s salary and that Councillor’s be reimbursed for their travel on City business in the
same manner as the Mayor (based on a per kilometer reimbursement equal to the limits set by the Canada
Revenue Agency for tax-exempt allowances for the use of personal vehicles). This would mean that the
Mayor’s salary would increase to $89,040 (from $85,000), and a Councillor’s salary would increase to
$40,068 (from $25,500). The cost of added car allowances for all Councillors is estimated to total $24,000
annually. In light of the narrowing of the gap between the Mayor’s salary and that of each Councillor,
changes to the monthly compensation or the per diem rate (for acting as Mayor in the Mayor’s absence)
would not be a major issue, so this has not been addressed in this report.

Information was obtained in order to compare the proposed remuneration to that provided by other
municipal governments. Direct comparisons became difficult because population figures could not be used
to confirm that the comparisons were appropriate (e.g. cities with larger populations may have more
wards, thereby reducing the number of residences represented by each Councillor). Recent independent
studies in Oshawa (prepared by AON) and Halifax Regional Municipality (report from a Citizens’ Advisory
Committee) were influenced by the impact of the regional governments for each municipality. However,
with few exceptions, the compensation in these municipalities exceeded those being proposed in this
report. Regina’s compensation is similar to that currently paid by the City of Saskatoon, whereas
Councillors in Calgary and Edmonton are paid 50% more than the proposed rates in this report.

If Council wished to consider a change in compensation, a number of options could be chosen. The
following demonstrates the impact of several options:

a) Implement effective June 1:
- 2005 Budget Impact - Salaries $ 96,000
- Car Allowance $ 14,000

- 2006 End-load - Salaries $ 54,000
- Car Allowance $ 10,000

b) Implement for last year of current 3 year term:

67
- 2005 Budget Impact -Salaries $ 25,000
-Car Allowance $ 4,000

- 2006 End-load -Salaries $125,000

c) Phase-in over last year of current term and next 3 year term (but initiate car allowance
immediately at the start of the last year of current term):
- 2005 Budget Impact -Salaries $ 6,250

-2006 End-load -Salaries $ 37,500




PUBLIC NOTICE

Public Notice for a change in Councillors’ or Mayor’s compensation is required pursuant to Section 3 of
Policy No. C01-021, Public Notice Policy.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Appendix 1 – Councillors - Estimate of Minimum Hours Required.

Written and
approved by:
Bernie Veltkamp, General Manager
Corporate Services Department
Dated:

Remuneration-members of City Council
copy: City Manager

68
Appendix IX

Other Sources
Part I: 2006 Wakabayashi Report, Independent Review Committee on MLA Indemnity
(Province of Saskatchewan)
Retrieved from http://www.legassembly.sk.ca/mlas/board-of-internal-
economy/reports/report-of-the-mla-indemnity-committee
Retrieved from http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pub/tp/it292/it292-e.html

2016_mrc_remuneration_committee_report

More Related Content

Viewers also liked (9)

Similar to 2016_mrc_remuneration_committee_report (20)

2016_mrc_remuneration_committee_report