After drawing widespread attention in recent weeks, the Folsom City Council approved a motion Tuesday night to increase compensation for future elected officials, adopting the ordinance on its final reading in a 3-2 vote following continued public comment and extended council discussion focused on timing and the city’s financial position.
The action finalizes Ordinance No. 1366, which amends the Folsom Municipal Code to allow council compensation to increase to a maximum of $1,900 per month, or $22,800 annually, with an additional $100 per month for the mayor. The council also adopted a resolution setting the salary at that level.
As required by the City Charter, the approved increase will not take effect immediately and will instead apply beginning with the next council terms following the November 2026 municipal election, with an effective date of December 2026.
The vote mirrored the council’s earlier action on the first reading of the ordinance, with Councilmembers Anna Rohrbough and Mike Kozlowski and Mayor Justin Raithel voting in favor, while Councilmembers Barbara Leary and Sarah Aquino voted in opposition. No changes were made to the ordinance between its introduction in March and Tuesday’s final adoption.
Discussion among councilmembers Tuesday night reflected clear divisions over the timing of the increase and how it aligns with the city’s current financial outlook.
Councilmember Sarah Aquino reiterated her opposition during deliberations.
“As I said at the last meeting, I don’t support an increase at this time,” Aquino said. “I think it is remarkably tone deaf. I’m disappointed.”
Councilmember Barbara Leary also opposed the motion, pointing to ongoing financial concerns and competing priorities within the city’s budget.
“We did have a report on the budget in March that showed some better performance,” Leary said. “However, I anticipate deficits still exceed available funds.”The fire chief spoke again tonight about additional needs,” she said. “I stand opposed to making this move at this time. I don’t object to looking at it again in the future in a transitional manner,” Leary said, “but I don’t agree that this is the time.”
Vice Mayor Anna Rohrbough, speaking in support of the motion, pointed to the city’s financial position and the delayed implementation timeline as factors that allow for planning.
“At mid-year we exceeded our financial policy reserve threshold,” Rohrbough said. “This would be about $70,000 in impact — and not until December, so half in the next budget. I think there’s time to plan for this.”
Mayor Justin Raithel, who also supported the motion, framed the discussion around the long-term structure of the council and who is able to serve in elected office.
“There is never a right time,” Raithel said. “The question is what do we want in the future? I want people to be able to run — not only independently wealthy or retired people,” he said. “We want diverse candidates.” Raithel added in recent days two different people told him they would now consider running for a council seat with an increase in compensation.
The motion stems from a broader effort to align Folsom’s council compensation with updated statewide benchmarks and regional comparisons, following changes enacted under California Senate Bill 329, which increased allowable pay levels for city council members in general law cities based on population tiers.
Under SB 329, maximum monthly compensation is tiered by population, ranging from $950 per month for cities under 35,000 residents to $3,200 per month for cities with more than 250,000 residents, with Folsom’s population placing it in the $1,900 per month category.
While Folsom is a charter city and not bound by SB 329, the staff report notes that many cities have used the law as a benchmark when updating compensation structures.
Under the adopted ordinance, the maximum compensation level increases from the current $600 per month — a rate established in 2018 — to $1,900 per month, reflecting the tier for cities with populations between 75,001 and 150,000 residents.
According to the staff report, council compensation has remained relatively unchanged over more than three decades, despite significant growth in the city’s population and the scope of responsibilities associated with the role. Folsom’s population has increased from approximately 29,800 residents in 1990 to more than 92,000 today.
The report also outlines the responsibilities of councilmembers, describing the position as comparable to a part-time role that includes preparing for and attending meetings, participating in regional assignments, engaging with stakeholders, and maintaining ongoing communication with constituents.
Financially, the change represents an increase in total council compensation from approximately $37,200 annually to $115,200 annually for all five councilmembers combined — a net increase of about $78,000 per year — which will be absorbed within the city’s general fund budget.
The ordinance will take effect in December 2026 following the next municipal election, applying only to councilmembers elected to new terms, consistent with City Charter requirements.
As the final vote was put into motion, Aquino shared additional displeasure with the increase, citing she won’t take the pay.
“If I am on the council when this goes into effect, I will not accept the additional salary,” Aquino said. “I will stay at $600 per month, and it will not affect the amount of time and work I put in.”
Like Aquino, Leary also cited she will not accept the additional pay come December.
“I am not willing to accept the money either,”I will put that into programs that help residents.”I agree with Council member Aquino, I see this as very tone deaf,” Leary said. “Headlines have read that council adopts raise for themselves. Not all of us agree on this and that perception hurts public trust.”
Last month during the initial reading, council member Kozlowski had shared that he supported the proposal, but also noted during the March 24 vote that if it passes he would personally decline the increase.
Copyright © 2025, Folsom Times, a digital product of All Town Media LLC. All rights reserved. No portion of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, without the prior written permission of the publisher.
