Salaries and Emoluments Commission Meeting - October 22, 2025

Okay, I'll call the meeting of the Municipality of Anchorage Salaries and Emoluments Commission to order. It is approximately 11 AM on October 22nd. The first order of business would be to call the roll. Matt, you go do that. Member Hayes.

Present. Member Redmond. Here. Chair Rieger? Here.

Member Norriss-Worthy? Here. Member Jensen is absent. Okay, so we have a quorum. The next item is to approve the agenda for today's meeting.

It's in your packets. Is there a motion to approve the agenda? I move that we approve the agenda as presented.

And this is Kim. I will second that motion. Is there any objection to approval of the agenda? Um, we will deem it approved. Just want to say that although it's not on the agenda and doesn't need to be on the agenda, uh, it's, um, this first meeting of each year is one when we elect officers and reorganize, and I would recommend that we put that in Not as an agenda, not officially on the agenda, but we'll do it under new business, maybe after the items that are listed there.

Um, the next item— I don't think we need a motion. It's, um, I think it's automatic. Um, the next item on the agenda is minutes of the previous meeting. Is there A motion to approve the minutes of the meeting of November 26th, 2024. I move to approve the minutes from November 26th, 2024.

Second. Is there any amendment? Hearing none, and if there is no objection, I'll say, uh, the minutes are approved.

Next, is there any unfinished business? No. Okay, we're down to new business, um, compensation for elected officials. The—. Typically what happens in this meeting is the commission determines whether they want to take anything up.

So really what we would be considering is a motion, if one is introduced, to take up compensation for elected officials.

So do we have to have a motion before we could discuss? That's a good point. You know, I think we can discuss without a motion. It's generally you do need a motion before there's discussion, but I think the way it's working right now, we have to way. And for this one, there would need to be a motion at the end if you want a resolution drafted.

Gotcha. I know it's not going in order, Chair, but, um, school board— just last year we did pass a resolution to increase salaries for them. So on this list, when we're talking about priorities, um, I'd be less concerned with revisiting. I mean, this is—. Yeah, I was thinking of the school board.

And I, I will say right now, I am not in favor of increasing, doing any increase or any changes to their current benefits. Having looked at it, and I know that they think they're underpaid, but given the current budget and the, uh, the current fiscal situation for the whole, the, the city and the state, I just not comfortable increasing any salaries for the elected officials.

This is Karen. Just to clarify, we, we did benefits under the assembly last year. Health benefits. Yeah. Or option to participate.

And also, this is Matt. First, since we're recording, just as you say, try and say your name for the record, just since we're not on video. Okay.

And that— this is Karen— did that go into effect this year for 2025, that they were given the option? I believe so. Yeah, yeah, immediately upon passage. Okay. And we signed it on November 26th, 2024.

Okay, so it would have been open enrollment then for 2025. Okay. All right, thank you. Kim, do you have any—. Um, I don't feel as— this is Kim— I don't feel as fervently as Pat I do feel like it is, um, an interesting discussion in the environment we're talking about with the fiscal issues we're having at the city level as a city.

Um, and we're in a budget cycle right now, right? So we're seeing what's happening there. Um, I do want to hear from folks. I guess it's like, it's not that I have, um, a set opinion on what I think we should do, but I definitely, you know, I'm reading from former assembly members. I remember the process we went through last time.

Refreshed based on this. And I'm kind of open to hearing more. I've not decided either way what I think we should do, because I understand both sides of the issue. You can both be underpaid and we can have a fiscal situation, right? Those things can both be true.

So just, I am interested in hearing from people. I'm not really, really set. That's just where I'm at. This is Karen again. I was just looking, the last time we increased the minimum Mayor sound was in, probably would have been 2021.

Is that the last increase that we've gone? Increase, yeah. And this is Pat, um, and that had been— they had not been increased in a long, long time. Some— but these, they're— while they're elected officials, they're also public servants, and Part of being in public service sometimes is not— you're not there to make a lot of money.

Most of us have had to live within those— all of those make more salary than I would have made, or made, and even my husband in their life. I don't think that their time is any more valuable than my husband's or mine. If there's no other members' comments, I'll chime in. I think coming into this meeting, my leanings were similar to Pat's. And I probably would modify that by the discussion that probably the, the one that would be the closest to worthy of considering is the mayor salary because it's the one that has gone the longest without action.

But I don't believe it's that important to take it up this year for all the reasons mentioned.

And through the chair, doesn't matter. Um, for the mayor particularly, since she was elected last year, the new— uh, it wouldn't affect until the next election. So there's essentially 2 years to decide if you would like to do something.

So if there's not a motion, well, um This is Kim. We do have an addition. Matt provided lists of topics that people have brought up to our commission. So it's not necessarily salaries for all the assembly, but a discussion about Vice Chair additional compensation. Matt, did we receive comments about that specifically, or any information you can provide us about the background of where that comes from, for why that's been brought up?

[SPEAKING CHINESE] I basically just received an email. Not anything particular, like please pass along. Just said the vice chair of the assembly is paid the same as members, and there should be tiers for the chair, vice chair, and then other members. But it wasn't— there are no suggestions. Okay, it's just a topic.

And then same for the parking. It just, it keeps coming up frequently. What's the question about— this is Karen— what's the question about parking? Uh, Matthew shared the parking Assembly members are not entitled to park in the parking garage currently because it is a benefit that the city pays a part of, and same, similar to the, like, parking at this parking lot right here. So this is Karen again.

I have seen that there's bags that you guys— somebody puts over the parking signs for assembly members. Is that not happening anymore? That is the current system that people— that does not work well. So that—. So they're not paying today, but they're being able to park?

Yes. So they put those bags out there so they have somewhere to park since they are not currently allowed to park in the garage as a normal executive employee will. And this is Kim. The bags are going over places that we as the public are supposed to be paying to park, you know what I'm saying? If the seats— those are supposed to be open to the public, but because they're not able to park in the garage, the fix, the unofficial fix has been this system?

Yes. Okay. Only when it's after hours, correct? They do it all throughout the whole day. Yeah, but nobody has to pay during the day.

I, I, I do think that the parking should be— it can be, you know, if we add that to their compensation, that, that would help. Would it go into effect— this is Pat— would that go into effect now, or does it have to wait a cycle? Just like everything else. This is Kim. Just like everything else.

Okay. And this is Karen, and I will say, having been a former employee here, I paid for parking even when I was an executive. So seems to me that they should be able to pay for parking.

Yes, um, we— I'm also executive, so we pay a portion of it, and so the city covers the other portion of it. And that's why it's— we need something to come from the commission. This is technically a benefit that they pay for it because it comes out of the city's budget, not my personal payments. So this— that would be the This is Pat. So that would be, again, the— would the assembly or person be paying just a portion of the parking?

Okay. And then they would be allowed to park over there, and currently they can't, they're not allowed to park over there, is that correct? Correct. No, they can park, but they have to pay, right? Because they have to pay like a normal— the public, the public one.

They don't have a parking pass like a normal executive would.

So the question, you know, would be get part of your parking expense reimbursed to park over at the garage, or to just be able to park here with a hood over the, over the parking space? That's okay. Yeah. This is Pat. I think, I think we should let them park in the parking garage.

I mean, we should pay a portion of it. This is Kim. It seems like a really easy fix with a nominal cost to make it easier to come to work. I mean, and they, as they should. And this is Pat.

And as we know that, as a matter of fact, I called ahead today to make sure there was going to be parking available because I, it's a diff— I didn't want to have to walk 6 blocks to get to work or to get into the meeting. And this is Karen. I think we should do a little bit more information seeking to clarify some information before we make the decision. I'd like to get more information because I have a different understanding from when I worked here, so I just like to make some clarification if any of that has changed.

I think that—. This is Kim— I think that's reasonable because we can't make any decisions in this meeting anyway, so it makes sense to ask for more information for the next meeting that we would potentially have to schedule on that topic. So we're looking at potentially then a motion to take up the issue of parking for assembly chair and members.

Yeah, this is Matt. And possibly the mayor as well. Same situation, same issue. Yeah. Oh, and, and to further extend, uh, the use of a municipal vehicle while in office.

This is Kim. Would you explain the issue of what, what the current practice is and what potentially has been requested for us to discuss on the municipal vehicle usage? Yes, which other— Matt, currently the chair of the assembly and the mayor both have a parking space in the parking lot out front here. And the mayor, while in office, is entitled to use a municipal vehicle for transportation. And it's been like that for a long while.

It just came up when we were reviewing resolutions that it wasn't exactly clear when that was granted, so they wanted to make sure that the current benefits aligned with salaries and alignments resolutions, essentially. So it's been a— this is Kim— it's been a precedent, but we don't know if it's been ever correct. And this is Pat, having been on the commission for a long time, I don't ever remember it coming up before us, so it must have just been either previous, way, way back when George was mayor even, I don't know. But it, um, yeah, I— it seems reasonable though, is something we should just formalize, and we, we would formalize it at the next meeting officially. And this is Karen.

I'd like to get clarification on the vehicle. Is it that the mayor comes and leaves her vehicle here and then uses a municipal, you know, pool vehicle to use throughout the day and come back? Or is this looking at giving her or him a vehicle to a take-home vehicle that they use all the time? Similar— this is similar to an APD officer who gets a vehicle at home and use for use at all times. Uh, this is Matt Ginger.

It would be a take-home vehicle. Yeah. Thank you. Is that, um, uh, this is, uh, this is Steve. The take-home vehicle is the current policy, the current practice?

Uh, it appears to be a current practice. Okay, so the only question is, is that have ever been codified. Okay. Yeah. Okay.

So in the case of the mayor, both the parking and the vehicle are current practice. It's just a matter of codification. And for the chair of the assembly, the practice is that there is a spot reserved. Yes. And so it's only a matter of codification.

So it's really As far as actual compensation effect of anything that's actually different from what's going on now, it's whether to have a policy that contributes to the cost of non-chair assembly members parking in the parking garage. That's what it distills down to. Yes, Matthew, the only financial impact would be would be the portion of parking for assembly members that would come out of this assembly's budget compared to what they would pay out of their paycheck. Yes, same as other executive employees. Question regarding— this is Pat— regarding the chair of the assembly, did you say the chair also has a municipal vehicle they use?

Oh, okay, it's just parking. Okay. Thank you. And this is Kim, um, through the chair to Matt. Uh, then we would also— the, the use of this municipal vehicle would be then expressly in the compensation package for the mayor, right?

Because it is a monetary—. Yes. Yeah, so that would be accounted for, which is good if it's already happening but we're not accounting for that. It seems like something we should— this will make our discussions on compensation in general, uh, more full picture. You know that this is Karen, and having worked here, then it it also becomes a taxable event.

Um, I also have had a take-home vehicle in the past, uh, during one of my pieces. So today, just clarification, that the, the assembly chair and the mayor who have designated parking spots out here currently are not paying anything towards those spots because as an executive, when I had a spot out here, I still paid. So they're— are they not paying today? Correct.

To my best of my knowledge, they are not.

So is there a motion to take up the issue of parking and municipal vehicle for the mayor?

This is Karen. I'll move to take it up at our next meeting.

I'll second that. This is Pat. What direction does that lead? Oh, under discussion. For clarification, before there's a second, do you want to include the assembly in this motion?

So the mayor Yes, I thought that was— that's what that was going to be. Yes, for parking and transportation, I guess, is a good way to work. Transportation. Yeah, well, just to clarify, I don't think we're giving take-home vehicles to assembly members. No, no, no, no, um, got something limited.

And this is Karen again, and the items that we need clarification on, do you want us to send those to you, or can we reach out to people within the municipality to gather that information. You can send them to me. This is Pat. You can send them to me and I can get all the answers to the questions. And then you— this is Pat— and then you'll send that out to us so that we can review it ahead of time?

Yes. And would you like me, based on the research, to prepare a motion for the next meeting? No, no, just research. Ká.

And if— I'm thinking whether or not the announcement, just the public notice of it, should be very clear that it's just that what we're taking up is the codification of current practices with respect to those things which are current practice, plus the consideration of possibly including some kind of provision to assist in the parking for the other Assembly members.

If there's no desire to draft a resolution, then we don't need a motion. I can do the research as directed and then email it out to everybody. So explain to me why we couldn't just draft the resolution and take it up in one meeting. I believe it's for related public noticing. Public notice.

There's going to be action, there has to be—. We have to draft resolution, approve the resolution, and then Okay, the resolution has to be drafted prior to any noticing the meeting, and it has to have at least 7 days notice or something.

Anyway, there's a public notice period. Yeah, and it has to be— the resolution has to be posted early enough for public comment. Okay. And that's—. So the historical practices of this committee, from my understanding, is that there'd be a motion made to draft the resolution and schedule the meeting to vote on it.

Just so public records or public meeting notices are correct. Got it. Um, let me ask a different question. We're—. We should— we're supposed to meet at least every other year, but we've in practice met every year.

But given the timing of all the events right here, is it necessary that we wrap this up before the end of the calendar year, or I'm just thinking about in our calendar, in our scheduling, do we have the flexibility if we need to, or if we're to get a quorum, take it up even in January, or Thursday, you know, in November, December, January? I'm just curious what— whether we need to finish this, this calendar year. But this is Matthew Church. So the commission's required to meet once a year to organize, and then they are required to review the salaries and compensation and benefits at least every 2 years, right, for the school board assembly and chair. And so if you want— whatever action the commission takes has to be done 30 days before the end of the fiscal year if they want it— if you all want it to apply to the April election, which would be for 3, I think, new assembly members.

Okay, that brings up another question. This is Pat. If we, if we in fact were to approve compensation for the assembly to park in the, in the parking garage, would that affect only the new elected ones? Correct. Okay.

Any changes the commission made? It is the same, the same as everything else. Okay, only elected or reelected or reelected. So it would behoove us then to take it— I would say take it up as soon as possible.

Just—. This is Kim— it's a much more narrow subject as well. Yeah, we have some research we need, of course, to clarify things and make sure we understand what we're doing. Doing. But after that, I think it's relatively good, right?

30 Days before— so it has to be done in the— wait a minute, when's the fiscal year? December 31st. Yeah, yeah, that's what I— that's what I thought, but I was—. That's why we did it last year on November 26th.

The farthest away from at the end of the year that it worked for everybody. That's what I was asking. Exactly, that's exactly what we were thinking. It's already getting close to the end of the year. But most of these things, if they're— this is Karen— if they're already being done, well, the portion of it, yeah, but like the vehicle's already being done, I think it's more of an IRS issue, frankly, than anything else.

Um, and then with the assembly and the mayor parking, um, for the mayor, that's not going to impact for a couple years, and then for the majority of the assembly members. I mean, I, I mean, I think if we get it done before April, that's fine. It's— you're talking about a relatively small number, 3, correct? I believe it's 3. 31.

How many people are being elected this year? 3, Or in April? That should be—. Well, 6. Every single assembly seat has one race.

Yeah, right, so 3 fresh faces, right, new people. So there'll be 6, 6 of her lecture people who would be affected by anything we pass in 2020, as long as we get it done before April or when they take office. As long as it's—. I thought it had to be December 31st. No, that's the— that's for budget.

Before the end of the— this has to be done 30 days before the end of the fiscal year, so basically December 1st, right? I guess maybe I could paraphrase. Karen's question. Is this material enough that you might not be able to cover it if it weren't enacted before December 31st? I mean, this, this doesn't sound like it's a very big financial item.

Monetarily, it's not a big financial item. It's more of it won't apply to the members when they're elected, right? That's been done before the end of the year. I thought it had to be done before they were elected. Not within the budget year.

Um, the code says it has to be done 30 days before the end of the fiscal year. From any compensation, and that will apply. It says if it's supposed to apply to the next election, it has to be done 30 days before the end. And this is Kim. I feel like we're talking about that, it's not that big of a deal.

So on the flip side, I feel like we should be able to get this piece done before— okay, 30 days before it's—. Yeah, I was mainly thinking about when we can get a quorum. Yeah, you got meetings in 40 days. Well, there's a fair good portion of it. This is Pat.

There's always a Zoom or whatever. Go to—. Well, this is Kim. Clarification on the research part, what we're asking you, does that require us to schedule a meeting, or can we say we want— I guess we'd have to ask you in this meeting to draft, but can we ask you, could we ask him to draft something so vague that we can take the research we're going to get between now and then and, and use that so that we're not having to schedule—. Is there any—.

Oh, we have to have a public meeting though. That's what I'm saying, is if we instead said out of this meeting we would like you to draft something and notice a public meeting knowing we're going to get this research in time to help us deal with this resolution, is that feasible so that we're not trying to do two meetings, which sounds like it might not be possible for people's schedules? Yes, Matt. So similar to the health benefits for some members last year. Uh, the prior meeting you all made a motion to draft a resolution addressing that issue, and then we did— you all amended it.

And in the meantime, I did a bunch of research for all of you, and I delivered that with the draft of the resolution so it could be amended if needed. And this is Kim. That was a way bigger, right, thing. That's what I'm saying is we don't have to say we're going to pass this resolution, but we could at least prepare for something, some framework, so we don't have to have two meetings knowing we're going to get the research. Could be a way to solve the— yes, the date problem.

And we don't have to pass the resolution. It could be something we ended up not— it's just there to occur. It could be— it'd be a couple years down, but that's all right. But at least we can have one meeting for the end of the fiscal year instead of two. This is Karen.

Can I ask another question? How many assembly members have offices? They all have offices in City Hall? Yes. Correct.

And how, since there's just been a big push for people to work from home, how often are they in there, each assembly member in their office during the week? Uh, this is Matthew Jarrett. It's the main impact is meetings, so committee meetings, meetings, like, there's some members attend a lot of meetings, so they're not necessarily in their office every single day, but most of them are here frequently. And yeah, this is Pat, and I've observed that when they, you know, when I'm watching committee meetings or the different assembly committees when they have meetings that are available online.

Well, if that's doable, that sure sounds like it would make it a lot less complicated of a process. I mean, it sounds like half of what we're doing is just codifying an existing practice, if we pass it, and the other half is— it's half of even what we're talking about. How much time do we have to give notice for meetings? Is it a week? I want to say it's 5 days.

No, I think it's at least 7. I'm not sure, I'm not super caught up on the public noticing, but at least 7 days. The only reason I'm asking is if we could schedule something like for the end of next week.

Oh, oh, that quickly? Yeah, because I'm going to— not November. Okay, I'm out next week, but I'm here the first 10 days of November. First 9 days. Yeah, I'm back on the 24th, so the end of November.

November 26th could be another day. Might be another one. That's not Thanksgiving, is it? Thursday is the next day. So do we need, um, do we need— this is Kim— do we need a motion, or do we amend our previous motion, or do we need a new motion to ask for a resolution.

I don't know, there was— I didn't hear a second on the first one. We were just discussing. Yeah. This is Kim, and you're gonna have to help me, folks. I move to request a draft resolution to deal with the issues of parking for the mayor and the assembly, as well as municipal vehicle usage for the mayor.

Was there another part on the minutes? Okay, and within that, and to schedule said meeting and include research. Yes, all those things. That's my motion. Thank you, Karen.

Um, just to be really safe, is there any objection to the amendment to the original motion? If there isn't, we'll just consider this now the main motion. Okay, there's no objection. This is now the main motion. Um, just to make sure it's clear, you will publish the notice so that we are free to act upon it at the next— the next time we meet?

Yes. Okay, that's, that's part of the motion. Okay. Yeah, the public— this is Matt— the public notice part is what makes you all available to actually vote. And so as long as there's a motion for me to draft a resolution, and then that will be published, you can or take it up or choose not to.

Good. So the options— the instructions to you are part of that motion. Okay, that's, that's all I wanted to make sure of. Everybody here November 26th? I mean, which is— this is Kim.

I will be literally cooking every item for Thanksgiving. Well, there is that. Bring it with me and I'll be making it. There you go. I'm not cooking anything.

I don't think, but I'm planning on being here. November 26th, a Wednesday. Yes, Thursday. And 27th is Thanksgiving. So I believe I will be here.

I don't have my calendar in front of me, but I'm pretty sure you better be. Yeah, the 25th is also— there's available in the 24th, so that will be the 25th. Could as well— I just arrived back on the 24th. This is Kim. I would prefer the 25th so I can have my 26th to be doing all the cooking.

I would be— the 25th Tuesday. Again, I don't have my calendar yet. Let me check. Tentative. Tentative.

Okay, I'll let you know. All right, that's not— that is not binding. So we can schedule another, but okay. Okay, so is there any objection? Well, I think this— maybe we should have a roll call.

Okay, discussion on the motion? Is there any further discussion? Now, would you take the roll on the motion? Yes.

Member Hayes? Yes. Member Redmond? Yes. Member Rieger?

Yes. Member Northwood? Yes. Member Jensen? Yes.

Okay, so the motion carries.

Also, before we move to member comments, we do have reorganization for this year. So is there a motion? This is Pat. I move that Steve Rieger be chair for this year. I'll second.

Are there any other nominations?

Okay, hearing none, I'll deem it approved. How about for Vice Chair? I'll nominate Kim. This is Pat. I'll second that nomination.

Are there any other nominations?

Hearing none, deem that approved. So now we're to member comments. I think there are members of the public here to testify, so if you could please—. I think you were here first. Scoot your chair close to the microphone there, please, and state your name.

You'll have 3 minutes. Okay. Hi everyone. Make sure you're close. Okay, there you go.

You're fine if you're back where you are. Okay. Hi, Mr. Chair. Hi, Vice Chair, and members of the Commission.

My name is Emmi Pivi. I facilitate the Alaska Center's Boards and Commissions Leadership Program, which helps prepare Alaskans, especially those from underrepresented communities, to serve in local government. Through this program, I've had the privilege of working closely with emerging leaders who are deeply passionate about shaping Anchorage's future. Some of them are young professionals, single parents, or people working multiple jobs to make ends meet. They are committed, capable, and community-minded, but for many of them, the idea of serving on the Assembly may feel out of reach simply because of the financial realities.

The Assembly salary, last set at around $60,000 in 2019, no longer reflects what it actually costs to live and work full-time in Anchorage today. If adjusted for inflation, that amount would be about $75,000 in 2025. This difference isn't just a number. It represents whether someone can afford to say yes to public service. For those balancing rent, childcare, student loans, or family responsibilities, the current pay often makes the idea of serving unattainable.

We risk losing out on diverse, qualified candidates, not because they lack passion or skill, but because the economics don't work, and that means our community loses out too. If we want an assembly that truly reflects Anchorage, its diversity, its working families, its younger leaders, and its lived experiences, then we must make the position accessible to people across all income levels. Public service should never be a privilege reserved for those who can afford it. It should be an opportunity open to anyone who feels called to serve. A cost of living adjustment for assembly members is not just a matter of fairness or practicality.

It's an investment in representative leadership. It signals that we as a city value the time, energy, and sacrifice that goes into serving this community. As someone who works with the next generation of civic leaders, I can tell you that this kind of support makes a tangible difference. When people see that serving on the assembly can be a sustainable, respected role It encourages them to step forward and bring their perspectives to the table. An adjustment also reinforces that this is a full-time professional role, not a part-time volunteer position.

Our city deserves leaders who can give this work their full focus, and fair compensation makes that possible. Assembly members put in countless hours beyond meetings researching, responding to constituents, and addressing complex community issues. A salary that reflects that workload supports them in serving effectively without sacrificing their own stability. Thank you for your time and for considering this important step to make local leadership more inclusive, equitable, and sustainable for the future of Anchorage. Thank you.

Thank you. Again, for the record, my name is Emmepavy. E-M-M-E-P-E-A-V-Y. Thank you. Is there any— are there any questions?

What was the name of the organization again? The Alaska Center. Oh yes, the nonprofit. Yes. Okay, any other questions?

Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. Is there anyone else? I think you said you would like to speak. Hello, committee.

My name is Lucien Dyer, L-U-C-I-E-N D-Y-E-R. Good morning. Aloha to all. Thank you for allowing us to be here. My name is Lucian, my pronouns are they/them, and I am pretty honored to be here today to share my testimony. I am currently the communications director of Stand Up Alaska, and I serve as a board member for NAMI Anchorage and for Choosing Our Roots.

I am a transplant from the DC metro area, and I am celebrating my third year in Alaska this January. When I first arrived in Alaska, I had no idea what my future would hold. I thought that I would be a Lone Ranger, I would stay stay for a season and then find myself transient somewhere in South America. But what kept me here was the— in Anchorage, there's a deep-seated need for community connection. I saw potential for a community that was sufficient, fair, and peaceful.

This community dream may not be possible long-term without a cost-adjusted transparent salary. For the future leaders of our assembly to thrive, we need our leaders in power now to make an effort to pull up a chair to the table for for us and to guide us with complete honesty. The work that I do now fulfills me in my community but is in no way providing me any financial stability. My current income is only $1,500 per month. That's about the average cost of a mortgage payment for a small single-family home in Anchorage.

I'm lucky enough to have a safe, affordable place to live. Not many other queer people get struck with such luck, but there are some sacrifices I have to make. I may only pay about $800 a month for living expenses, but half of my bedroom has black mold and moisture damage. There's a plastic tarp hole in my ceiling, and my room does not have working heat and is built on concrete. Spending half of your monthly income to get by with these conditions would be enough to make anybody furious.

I am somebody very interested in running for office. I am hoping to run for assembly by the time I'm 30. I turned 28 this weekend. I would not be here testifying if I did not want that for my future. If the integration process had more transparency, I would feel more comfortable jumping in, and I know it would be a life-changing experience for me to have stable housing, food security, and healthcare.

I would without a doubt be running for office now had I had these three basic needs met. I know many community members think the same way. Speak—. And speaking from my experience, I did not know that locally elected officials were paid for their work until I attended the Alaska State Legislature. Centers, boards, and commissions cohort.

If this bias would have been charged, my trajectory of my leadership would have been completely different today. In our democracy, we want more diverse, equitable representation, and transparent processes. It's one thing to change the salary, and it is another thing to tell people about it. Anchorage has an incredible wave of new leaders stepping up, and I urge you committee to please not let this momentum slip. The right people are there waiting for a miracle or a small ethical fortune to magically fall into their lap just to live comfortably.

The right people who want to run are there. They're a lot like me, underpaid, food insecure, and not stable in housing, healthcare, or transportation. Our current political climate is causing a craving for authenticity and radical action. This is exactly what my generation brings to the table. Chair, please.

Committee, please give us an opportunity to show us what we are capable of. Thank you. Great, thank you for your testimony. Are there any questions? Not at this time, thank you.

Okay, thank you. Um, anybody? I have a question for, for the, for us. Uh, this is Pat. Is cost of living include— cost of living increase included in our current setup for any of them?

It isn't. It's something we may want to— that's different than increasing the salary in the sense that we were talking previously, as far as I think. This is Kim. Are you saying, you know, in previous practice was this is the amount we want to move them up to? Over the next 3 years.

And you're saying a different discussion based on percent? Yes. That's something maybe we want to bring up in the future, just to discuss and look at. Because we haven't looked at it that way, I don't think. Well, we did, but not as far as a continuous thing.

It's been hit or miss in the past. Because it's so hard to know the cost of living is going to be, you know, next year and the year after. So it makes it challenging. I think that's why the committee is required to meet every other year to look at wages. It's so hard to project what it's going to be.

But we are lagging a bit behind in some areas. Yeah, this is Kim. According to this letter, and there's some citations on the bottom. Um, we, you know, we did raise the salaries in those years thinking ahead, and we still, you know, missed based on inflation. So I think that's what the consideration was asked for from these individuals.

And this is Karen. In 2019, we did a huge increase, huge for assembly. And then when, you know, this last year when we added the benefits, that is a huge percent I think it's like 28%, you know, because it's wages and benefits. So, I mean, the assembly has really kind of benefited the most from what we've looked at in the recent years. That doesn't mean we shouldn't look at it again, but, but we did address it quite a bit with the assembly.

Okay, that— so we, we do— so is it better to look at it, uh, Let me think about this till the next meeting. Thank you. Yeah, clarification through the chair. Can we continue to talk about this in the next meeting? And it's on our agenda for today.

Do we want to consider— and we started the meeting saying, okay, let's move on to the other things. Um, can we revisit that and just continue to have that conversation if we want more research based on public testimony, based on what we're reading? Looking at our previous practice of how we've done it, is that how we can operate? Well, I think there's two answers. One is technically we probably could announce that we want to take it up anytime that we're meeting, you know, legitimately in a noticed meeting, and but then we'd have to notice it in we'd have to go through the whole process from there.

But I, as far as maybe the more immediate question is, is there a change from what our view was an hour ago? Right now, this wasn't what we wanted to take up this year. That's, you know, this is Pat, that's true. And at this point, point, I'm still— what I said an hour ago is still in place at the current time. I know that it is expensive to live here.

However, it's always been expensive to live here, and we've always had to part— I know that it's a full-time, almost a full— it is a full-time stop being an assembly person, or, or— but it is also a public service, and people who work for the public should not expect compensation equal to an executive of a corporation or someone who works for private industry. This is Kim. My, my feelings also don't change from the beginning, but what I said at the beginning was I want more information. I'm not closing the book on it. I'm compelled to, you know, to ask for more information.

Looking at these numbers, you know, I work in workforce development. What we're paying them now and even what they would be asking for are nowhere near even— I mean, I make much, much more than this, and I am not an executive. And so I think looking at— it would be a good idea to look at it. It's not that I say this is the resolution I want, but I feel like I don't want to close that door knowing there are people in the world that are paying attention to this and have interest. And so I guess I'm interested in continuing the conversation, not closing the door, not saying we got to take action, you know, before the fiscal year if that's not the will of the body, but just the last increase was 4 years ago, and so that's a good— there's 4 years of data we can look at, according, you know, And they're using inflation since 2019, which is when we changed it, right?

So now we can see what our work did and what it didn't do. So I would like to continue the conversation is all I'm asking for. This is Karen. I would agree with that, but I think if we could take that up at the beginning of the year potentially to take a look at that.

Yeah, my—. Because I think that will give us more information information on— we can look at how many of the Assembly members opted— well, I guess it's not going to impact them— who joined up on benefits, the new folks. It's almost like we kind of need to see, you know, what that impact has, because what if nobody signed up? You know, then we may need to adjust them, but if Everybody did that was eligible, and we're going to have that next group coming on too. So I think we need a little bit more data.

Just administratively, we've kind of drifted into member comments. I just— and it was fine, except I just want to make sure, is there any other member of the public who wishes to testify? I'm just watching. Okay, okay, so we'll keep going then.

I guess my view is that I'm always open to new information.

My leaning is probably something that, Karen, you said earlier. It's really only been 1 year since we've adjusted the compensation of Assembly members, not 4, even though the letter says that. And it was, as you say, fairly hefty adjustment. So I'm guessing my priorities would probably start with what we're doing on the school board or the mayor at this point, if we were to take something up again. But new information is always new information, so that's fine.

And perhaps—. This is Pat— perhaps we should meet earlier in the year and gives us more more time to be— so because one, anything we do, we have to consider budget and, you know, and the earlier we meet, it would be better to start a discussion. And whether or not we continue that discussion is something else, but at least we could continue looking at it. Okay. This Karen always seemed to be doing everything at the end of the year, and then it's rushing to try and mean everything.

So yeah, I agree, if we can do more upfront, I think that'd be better. Yeah, we used to meet sometimes in April or May.

Matt, you can refresh my memory, but I think last year we went through quite an extended process from where we started just because of the difficulties in getting quorum. So we, you know, I mean, we may have met in April and said we can't get everybody together again until July, and then it's never— not again until November, whatever it was. It's not that we didn't start early, it was just— it just took an awful long time to get to the finish line. Last year, this year, there was 5 meetings. There was the first one to review our thing, then one to vote for the school board compensation, and then at that meeting you all asked to have, uh, basically a work session Yes, with HR on assembly member health benefits.

And then at that meeting we scheduled another one because we needed a motion. So there's actually 6 meetings. Yes. Yeah, yeah. So that's why it's important if you want to actually vote to make a motion, it's a prior meeting.

Yes. So we could have— one of those meetings could have been avoided. This is Kim. It sounds like for the 2024 fiscal year, the interest isn't there to revisit the cost of living increase on the assembly. So I would just hope, yeah, doing earlier meetings, um, for that so we can feel like we're getting the information we want, feeling satisfied with whatever we, you know, move forward with, and getting a little bit more data, um, and feedback.

Yeah. Okay, great. Any other member comments? Comments or audience participation? And hearing none, we're ready for a motion to adjourn.

This is Pat. I move we adjourn. This is Karen. I'll second. Hearing no objection, we're adjourned.