One month after voting itself a pay hike, Metro Vancouver’s board has scrapped the plan

Metro Vancouver’s governing board voted Friday to scrap a controversial pay increase in the wake of a public outcry.

The one-time pay increase of 15 per cent, along with a retirement benefit retroactive to 2007, was initially approved at the board’s March meeting.

The package would have come with about a $500,000 cost to taxpayers.

The board’s 40 members voted unanimously to rescind the compensation package, but approved a new plan to have a third party panel revisit the way the board is paid and come back with recommendations.

That panel would be made of representatives from the public and private sector.

“I hope the independent panel brings back not just best practices on how you calculate remuneration, but actually how you get to that point of the decision as well,” said board chair and Port Coquitlam Mayor Greg Moore.

“I can use my own experience in Port Coquitlam. We brought a third party independent group in and they consulted with different groups and made recommendations.”

Moore said he still believes members’ pay packages need a second look, but admitted the board had made a misstep in not advertising the planned change.

“I think the retroactive portion part of it was a mistake,” he added.

The vote, which was heated at times, saw some members scrutinizing the process because there was no public consultation and because the bylaw was quietly passed.

Others argued the public shouldn’t look at the percentage increase, and should instead consider the extra work put in as a board member.

The now-rescinded pay increases were meant to offset a recent Canada Revenue Agency change, which eliminated a tax exemption politicians had qualified for on a portion of their income.

Under the defeated plan, the average director would also have been in line for a retirement benefit of about $15,000, but Greg Moore, who has chaired the Metro Vancouver board for six years, would have seen close to $45,000.

Public outrage over the pay package increase was further fueled when it emerged that while a number of members had voted against it, just four had opted to have their opposition marked on the record, meaning it was unclear exactly who had supported the plan.

—With files from Ted Chernecki and Jon Azpiri