Menin must revise pay raise bill as only a commission can recommend salary increases.

The New York City Council is facing scrutiny as it considers a proposed pay raise for its members, a move that has sparked significant debate regarding its legality and the appropriateness of such an action. The proposal, which is scheduled for discussion in January 2026, seeks to increase the salaries of the Council’s 51 members from 8,500 to 2,500. This initiative was presented during a recent hearing led by Council members Nantasha Williams and Lincoln Restler, who noted that no salary increase has been granted since 2016.

However, the current political landscape complicates this proposal. Williams and Restler are relative newcomers to the Council, having been in office for only four years, and were aware of the current salary when they were elected in 2021 and subsequently reelected in 2025. The impending swearing-in of a new Council class in January, which will include 11 freshman members, raises further questions about the appropriateness of voting on potentially self-serving legislation during a transitional period.

The initial strategy behind this pay raise sought to secure a vote before the end of the current Council session, but such a move would violate the City Charter. According to the charter, the Council is prohibited from voting on its compensation during the lame duck period following the November general election. Consequently, the alternative plan presented in the hearing would involve reintroducing the bill as “preconsidered” once the new Council convenes. However, unpassed legislation automatically dies with the transition to a new session, necessitating a complete restart for any salary increase proposal.

The impetus for the Council’s urgency regarding this pay raise can be traced back to the failure of former Mayors Bill de Blasio and Eric Adams to establish a Quadrennial Advisory Commission to review pay levels as mandated by law in both 2020 and 2024. The City Council’s compensation should be evaluated by such a commission, ensuring that any adjustments are warranted and based on comprehensive analysis rather than immediate self-interest.

Williams’ proposal suggests backdating any approved raises to January 1, 2026, while also calling for the mayor to name a new commission by the end of the year. Critics argue that a more prudent approach would involve establishing the commission first, allowing it to assess pay structures, with any recommendations for adjustment then enacted to take effect well after the next electoral cycle.

To ensure transparency and prevent conflicts of interest in future salary decisions, amendments to the City Charter are essential. These changes should mirror the principles of the U.S. Constitution’s 27th Amendment, stipulating that changes to compensation for elected officials can only take effect following a new election. A proposed amendment could be placed on the ballot next year, potentially gaining wide public support as the governance structure of the City Council continues to evolve.

For the integrity of city governance, any future adjustments to Council pay must come through established review processes, taking into account recommended guidelines by independent panels rather than through expedient legislative maneuvers.