CITY HALL WAGES QUESTION

The Mayor Wasn’t Asked The Right Question

High wages, staff vacancies, high unemployment — what is wrong with this picture?

Mayor Leonard Krog’s defence of Nanaimo City Hall wages in the News Bulletin may have answered one question.

But it was not the right question.

The issue is not whether City staff work hard. Many do. The issue is not whether snowplow crews, firefighters, public works employees, clerks, planners, inspectors, or finance staff provide useful service. Of course they do.

The real question is this:

What are Nanaimo taxpayers getting for the growing City Hall wage bill?

Continue reading the full article...

According to the Bulletin’s coverage of the City’s 2025 financial information, Nanaimo paid almost $80 million in remuneration to staff and council. Seven employees received more than $200,000 in total compensation. Another 47 employees received more than $150,000.

The mayor’s response was that some salaries may seem high, but the City has vacancies and difficulty finding qualified people.

That answer should have prompted an immediate follow-up.

Why?

Nanaimo has had one of the higher unemployment rates in British Columbia. City Hall offers some of the strongest employment packages in the local economy: good wages, benefits, pensions, job security, paid leave, and, in many cases, union protection.

So if premium public-sector compensation is not enough to attract and keep qualified people, taxpayers deserve to know what else is going on.

Is the problem wages?

Or is it hiring?

Is it the labour pool?

Is it management?

Is it workplace culture?

Is it too much bureaucracy?

Is it too many non-core priorities loaded onto staff by council?

Is City Hall short of employees — or short of focus?

The mayor also defended unionized workers by pointing to those who clear streets on snowy Christmas Eves so emergency vehicles can get through. Fair enough. Nobody serious disputes the value of that work.

But that example does not answer the larger wage question.

It does not explain the growth of the senior compensation tier. It does not explain why City staffing has grown faster than population. It does not explain whether taxpayers are receiving better service, faster permits, cleaner streets, safer neighbourhoods, better roads, stronger financial discipline, or more accountable government.

That is the question City Hall should be answering.

Not: Do employees work hard?
But: Is the organization productive, focused, efficient, and affordable?

There is a difference.

A growing city may need more staff. That is understood. More people may mean more garbage collection, more sewer and water demand, more road maintenance, more inspections, more fire calls, and more pressure on parks and public safety.

But population growth does not automatically justify a larger bureaucracy.

For every new position added, taxpayers deserve a clear answer:

• What core service does this support?
• What public problem does it solve?
• What measurable result will taxpayers see?
• Can Nanaimo households afford it?

This is why a serious Core Services Review is no longer optional. It is essential.

Nanaimo taxpayers are not being unreasonable when they ask whether City Hall is focused on the basics: roads, water, sewer, public safety, garbage, parks, permitting, and infrastructure at a cost taxpayers can afford.

They are being responsible.

The mayor answered the comfortable question: why some city wages may be high.

But the uncomfortable question remains unanswered:

Is Nanaimo paying more for better service — or simply funding a larger, more expensive City Hall machine?

Points To Ponder

• If City Hall wages and benefits are among the best employment packages in Nanaimo, why is the City still struggling to find qualified people?
• Are vacancies proof that wages must rise, or proof that management, hiring, productivity, and workplace culture need a closer look?
• If staffing has grown faster than population, what new services, programs, bylaws, reports, or administrative duties account for the difference?
• Are taxpayers funding better service — or more process?
• Should Nanaimo conduct a full Core Services Review before approving more permanent spending growth?

The wage story is not just about what City staff are paid.
It is about what taxpayers are getting in return.