Should Councillors Be Paid $100,000?

What compensation really says about who gets to run—and who doesn’t

Across municipalities, one quiet factor shapes local democracy more than most policy debates:

Who can afford to run for council?

It’s not always about ideas or commitment.

Often, it comes down to whether the role is financially viable.

The current reality

In Prince Edward County and similar municipalities:

– Councillors earn roughly $20,000–$25,000 annually
– The Mayor earns approximately $45,000–$50,000

Yet the role increasingly demands:

– full-day meetings
– complex regulatory oversight
– constituent casework
– committee responsibilities
– regional coordination

In practice, many councillors describe the role as part-time in title, near full-time in reality.

How PEC compares

When placed alongside other Ontario municipalities, the gap becomes clearer.

Municipal Council Compensation (Approximate)

Municipality	Population (approx.)	Councillor Salary	Mayor Salary
Prince Edward County	~26,000	$20K–$25K	$45K–$50K
Belleville	~55,000	$30K–$40K	$90K–$110K
Quinte West	~45,000	$30K–$40K	$85K–$100K
Kingston	~135,000	$45K–$55K	$130K–$160K
Peterborough	~85,000	$35K–$45K	$100K–$120K
Cobourg	~20,000	$25K–$35K	$70K–$90K

Ranges reflect publicly reported compensation, council disclosures, and typical Ontario municipal pay structures.

The proposal: a living-wage model

The idea being discussed is:

Councillors at ~$100,000
Mayor at ~$140,000

Not as a raise for its own sake—but as a structural change.

The case for higher pay

1. A broader, more representative pool

At current compensation levels, the role tends to favour:

– retirees
– independently wealthy individuals
– those with flexible income

That creates a barrier.

Working-age residents—especially those with mortgages, families, or careers—often cannot step away from stable income to run.

A higher salary would:

open the door to younger professionals
reflect the real economic profile of the community

2. Stronger competition and deeper talent

Compensation influences who enters the race.

Low pay often results in:

– limited candidate pools
– uncontested races
– reduced competition

Higher pay can lead to:

– more candidates
– stronger qualifications
– more rigorous campaigns

Better competition typically leads to better governance outcomes

3. Aligning pay with responsibility

Even in smaller municipalities, councils oversee:

– tens to hundreds of millions in assets
– major infrastructure decisions
– planning and housing policy
– economic development

Supporters argue:

👉 the responsibility resembles executive oversight
👉 compensation should reflect that reality

The case against higher pay

1. Increased cost to taxpayers

A shift to $100K/$140K compensation would:

– significantly increase council costs
– add pressure to already rising tax bills

For residents facing:

– infrastructure-related tax increases
– affordability challenges

this is a legitimate concern.

2. Risk of changing motivation

Critics raise the concern that higher salaries could:

– attract candidates motivated primarily by income
– shift the role from civic duty toward career politics

This risk is debated—but often mentioned.

3. Public perception and timing

Context matters.

When residents see:

– deteriorating roads
– service gaps
– tax increases

a council pay increase—even if justified—can be perceived as:

Self-serving or poorly timed

The deeper issue

This debate is not really about salaries.

It is about access.

Is local government open to everyone—or only to those who can afford to serve?

Because low compensation creates a silent filter:

– capable people opt out
– only financially flexible candidates remain

A question of balance

There is no perfect number.

But there is a clear tension:

– keeping costs reasonable
– while ensuring council reflects the full community

Other municipalities have moved toward:

– mid-range compensation increases
– hybrid or phased models
– better support structures for councillors

Final thought

There are valid arguments on both sides.

Higher salaries mean higher costs.

But limited access comes with its own cost:

a narrower, less representative council

If the goal is:

– better governance
– stronger candidates
– a broader pool of voices

then the conversation cannot ignore compensation.

Bottom line

At its core, this is about the quality of local democracy.

Paying a living wage is not about rewarding politicians
It’s about ensuring the right people can afford to run

Because who can run ultimately determines who gets elected.

And that determines everything else.

Time to Refocus: What a Leaner, Accountable County Hall Should Look Like

Prince Edward County (PEC) currently employs roughly a dozen senior leaders (directors and the CAO’s office), with director salaries starting near $150,000 and executive assistants typically budgeted around $80,000. Residents reasonably ask: what are we getting for this overhead, and is our structure appropriate for a small municipality facing acute affordability pressures? What the numbers…Read more

The $12 Million Question: What Prince Edward County’s Sunshine List Really Shows

Prince Edward County’s 2025 Sunshine List isn’t just a headline—it’s a signal. Over a decade, the number has grown nearly eightfold. The County disclosed 92 municipal employees earning over $100,000, with total compensation exceeding $12 million annually¹. That’s a sharp increase from 64 employees in 2023, a 43% jump in just two years¹. Read more

Taxes in Prince Edward County

For many residents—especially seniors, working families, and small business owners—the cost of living here has become unsustainable in prince Edward County. The root of the frustration? A mounting combination of taxes and fees that now place PEC among the most heavily taxed communities in Ontario. Which makes the County one of the most unattractive places…Read more