Cape Coral voters won’t get the chance to vote in November on whether the mayor and City Council can establish their salaries and compensation through ordinance.
After being presented with four proposals at an April 24 committee of the whole meeting, Council couldn’t come to a legitimate consensus for City Attorney Aleksandr Boksner to formulate a referendum for the November ballot.
The first proposal allowed the mayor and Council to establish their total annual salary and compensation.
The second proposal set the annual salary and compensation for the mayor at $80,000 and council members at $65,000, with a 10% maximum increase yearly.
The third proposal based total compensation of those in similarly sized cities in Florida, adjusting the compensation to the 75th percentile of pay in those cities.
The fourth proposal established the total annual salary and compensation based on population.
Each proposal would eliminate the stipend that established the mayor would receive $5,000 monthly, and each council member would receive $3,333 monthly.
Boksner needed Council to have a five-vote majority to move forward with one of the options for the ballot in November. However, Council could not agree on any of the proposals.
Council member Bill Steinke said the way compensation is established in the city is archaic and that there should be an updated process. However, he still could not get behind any of the four proposals as presented.
“If there was a way to use proposal No. 2 but include those travel expenses being reimbursable, that would be the magic combination for me,” Steinke said.
Council member Jessica Cosden also favored Option 2 with modifications to the language. However, other council members and Mayor John Gunter weren’t set on any one option.
“If you look at all four options, I think each one of them are flawed in some fashion,” Gunter said. “If I had to pick one particular option that we have available, and it’s based solely on how it’s written, I wouldn’t be in favor of any of them.”
Council member Tom Hayden said he doesn’t think any of the options are even close to being ready for this election cycle.
After 40 minutes of discussion, Boksner said he does not have any legitimate consensus to formulate a referendum that represents what council members are asking for. “Therefore, I’m not going to be able to move forward with anything and thus it will end as of today,” he said.
Gunter then suggested going in a different route entirely. He suggested in January the city create a citizen’s advisory committee together to research the issue and provide a recommendation to bring to the new Council for 2026.
“I almost feel that we’ve got our backs up against a wall, and we just want to do something to say we did something,” Gunter said. “To me, that’s not the right way to approach it.”
