Port Hope Council Supports Remuneration Increase Starting Next Term

Pete Fisher
2 hours ago
• Categories: City Hall, Editor Choice, Local

The salaries for the next term of Port Hope council could rise significantly following October’s municipal election, if ratified by the current members at their next regular meeting.

Port Hope council voted unanimously in favour of the raise at this week’s committee-of-the-whole meeting, following a presentation by Gallagher Benefit Services Group.

Adopting a 60th percentile pay policy, up from 50th, would increase the mayor’s annual salary from $73,907 to $115,559, the deputy mayor’s from $38,227 to $54,886 and councillors from $32,227 to $46,514 starting the 2026-2030 term.

The comparators used were Peterborough (75th percentile), Cobourg (60th percentile), Orangeville (65th percentile), Pickering (not identified), Innisfil (50th percentile), Whitby (60th percentile), Clarington (65th percentile), New Tecumseth (60th percentile), Hamilton Township (not identified) and Ajax (60th percentile).

CAO Mike Melinyshyn said new comparators were used this time.

“The comparators that were used in the past are not necessarily representative of current Port Hope or future Port Hope,” he said, noting considerations included the nuclear corridor and high-growth communities around the Greater Toronto Area.

Melinyshyn also noted it’s a way to potentially increase the number of candidates in the next municipal election.

“It’s difficult to speak to potentially a raise you may get if you get re-elected, but assuming that some or all of us do, I think that we can all say that the job when we first walked into it four years ago and the expectations and the issues we’re dealing with are somewhat different than the ones we have today on our plate and they’re going to be a heck of a lot different tomorrow when we start negotiating through all the bits and pieces of OPG,” said councillor Les Andrews. “We have an aging infrastructure that is costing us more and more money and those decisions are becoming more and more difficult to try and balance what has to be done against what we should be putting in reserves for the future so it’s not a cakewalk anymore, not that it ever was, but it just takes a little more, maybe talent, and a little more moxy.”

Councillor Claire Holloway Wadhwani wondered if the increase was necessary for the deputy mayor role which has been shared by interested councillors this term one year at a time, also noting there is less likelihood of needing to be an alternate for the mayor at County council which adopted an electronic participation last year.

“I just wanted to raise that and to maybe consider whether that 18 per cent differential (salary from councillor to deputy mayor) is based on an old model that maybe isn’t reflective of the experience today,” she said.

Melinyshyn said as the mayor’s role becomes more time demanding, especially around nuclear, the deputy mayor’s role could evolve as well.

Councillor Vicki Mink suggested “the difference of whether they get a different pay or not could actually take out that competitiveness and bring forward those that truly want to be (deputy mayor) for the leadership point and not for the compensation.”

Adam Pearson, the deputy mayor for the final year of the term, said he thought when first elected that he would oppose any future council remuneration increase “because I did not run to make money.

“That being said three years later realizing the workload and the difference of workload from day one to right now is significant and I know that we may need to make this decision, not for this council, for the next council,” Pearson added, noting he felt it was appropriate.

Councillor Darrell Toms asked about the impact to the taxpayers and was told a remuneration increase is already factored into the 2026 budget for the portion of the year following the October election.

Holloway Wadhwani said she appreciates there was a time when it was expected that council members would have a full-time job and do council work in the evenings.

“That has been nowhere near, I think, my experience sitting at this council table,” he said. “This is a hugely demanding job and it takes real discipline and guardrails to prevent it from being all-consuming as a full-time job and this is certainly not full-time remuneration.

“I think every single one of us has experienced a degree of opportunity cost, that we’re scaling back on other paid work, which is likely more lucrative to be honest, and we still have mortgages to pay and families to support. It’s just the reality that this is not a job you can do in a meaningful way while maintaining your prior full-time, full-compensation employment. It’s just not the reality today.”

Jane Mizanski, of the Gallagher group, said the “compensation should be respectful of the role that you’re performing and the time that you have to put into it.”

The raises still need to be approved at the Feb. 17 regular council meeting.