Councilmember William Go recently brought forth an idea for increasing compensation for members of the Irvine City Council while also cutting council members staffing budgets and it had four options to do so. The item didn’t make it to the agenda stage, but it does need to be brought back for a discussion that is long overdue.

This is not about individual Councilmembers. It is about responsibility, stewardship, and accountability to Irvine taxpayers.

Every member of this Council, including the mayor, has been entrusted by our residents to be a steward for their tax dollars. There’s a debate over whether the city is facing a structural budget problem and projected deficits that would have been unthinkable a decade ago, or if the city’s past fiscal policies can weather short term deficits with minimal risk. No matter which side you take, spending by the Council has increased dramatically and they need to take a closer look at their own spending—not simply asking city departments, employees, and residents to absorb the consequences. No other city council member in OC has a staff like Irvine does. I’d love to see an audit of each council member’s spending to see what our city tax dollars are being used for today.

Today, Irvine has $130 million in rainy-day/contingency reserves along with a huge influx of new revenue from the All American Asphalt/Gateway Village & Preserve deal that should bring in about $50 million per year beginning in 2030-31 through 2036. Irvine is still in the best financial shape of any city with more than 300,000 people in the entire country.

And Irvine has had some stormy tax revenue years, dating back to the 2008-09 Great Recession. The city implemented a-year “Bridge Program” with four “No” pillars: No layoffs, No raises, No cuts (or increases) in municipal services, No new taxes. And a willingness to actually use the city’s reserves to be to be deployed in times of distress. Back then, it took about $10 million annually to balance the budget.

To the extent that we have a “structural” budget problem, it’s this: While our property tax revenues have grown dramatically over the years, the growth has been mainly in residential property tax revenue. which is now about two-thirds of Irvine’s annual in total property taxes (about $100 million); revenue from business property taxes has lagged and the larger point is that businesses in Irvine are undertaxed in a major way. Irvine is at the very bottom among Orange County cities in its rates for three sources of business tax revenue: • TOT — Transient Occupancy (Hotel) Tax; • BUUT — Business Utility Users Tax; and, • BLT — Business License Tax. If these taxes were raised to be at levels of other sizable Orange County cities, the city would gain $30-$40 million per year in revenue.

Where reality meets perception is the dramatic increase in city council members’ spending over the past few years. Today, each Councilmember has about a $325,000 office budget, and the mayor has $350,000. Why should a part-time elected official have access to a quarter-million dollars or more every year for an individual office budget? I am all for increasing the council’s pay, but they must cut their staff budgets considerably. And their hires should be Irvine residents.

The published budgets for each city council member and reports on budget deficits have alarmed enough residents that think it’s time for the Council to establish a new Council office budget system.

First, establish a substantially lower annual base allocation for each Council office. Today, we have council staff that make about 10 times what Irvine council members do. That’s flat out wrong and it’s time to make serious cuts.

Second, we must separate legitimate City business expenses from discretionary staffing and political-style office expenditures, with clear rules governing what taxpayer dollars may be used for.

Third, establish an annual review and accountability process. These budgets should not automatically grow simply because they have existed for years.

And unused funds should not become an incentive to spend. If an office does not need its entire allocation, those savings should remain with the City and help address the City’s financial needs. The rapid expansion under City Manager Oliver Chi cannot be maintained.

The question before this Council should not be, “How much of our existing budget are we willing to give up?”

The question should be:

“What is a reasonable amount of taxpayer money for an individual elected official to spend, and what system best protects the taxpayers?”

I spoke with former Mayor Sukhee Kang about this financial crisis and we’re in agreement the city council needs to make serious changes.

“I urge the Council to adopt meaningful reductions now, establish a transparent and accountable system for Council office expenditures, and demonstrate to Irvine residents that fiscal responsibility starts with the people who are entrusted to manage their money,” said Kang.

The expansion of council staff – which far exceeds any city council in Orange County – never clearly explained how this new headcount would be paid for. It’s high time for the city to cut staff. And the idea that a staffer – Meredith Marquis, who is chief of staff for Council member Kathleen Treseder – earned 10 times as much as Treseder herself is mind-boggling. Marquis is the highest paid council staffer by far. Her total compensation for 2025 was estimated at $212,793.52. Not bad work if you can get it.

So let’s review here:

Yes. Irvine has seven City Council members, and the compensation structure changed substantially in 2025. The City’s own compensation data provides a useful distinction between salary and total employment cost. I dug into the City of Irvine’s 2025 compensation data, the council-office staffing records, current council-office pages, and the reporting on the council’s rapidly expanding office budgets.

2025 Irvine City Council compensation

The City of Irvine reports the following 2025 total employment costs:

Council member	Salary	Auto allowance	Insurance	Pension	Total employment cost
Larry Agran, Mayor	$10,560	$8,580	$9,107.64	$1,590.24	$29,837.88
James Mai, Vice Mayor	$10,560	$8,580	$25,686.72	$1,582.08	$46,408.80
Michael Carroll	$10,560	$8,580	$0	$1,593.24	$20,733.24
William Go	$10,560	$8,580	$23,371.56	$1,513.80	$44,025.36
Melinda Liu	$10,560	$8,580	$14,634.08	$1,565.25	$35,339.33
Betty Franco-Martinez	$7,040	$5,720	$5,312.86	$1,035.59	$19,108.45
Kathleen Treseder	$10,560	$8,580	$0	$1,593.24	$20,733.24

Those figures come directly from Irvine’s official City Compensation page.

The headline number is $10,560 per year in salary, or $880 per month, for most members. Franco-Martinez’s 2025 figure is lower because she joined the council during the year. The City had previously set council compensation at $880 per month, dating back to 2009.

But the compensation package is considerably larger than the salary alone.

For a full-year councilmember, the $10,560 salary + $8,580 automobile allowance already equals $19,140 annually before health insurance and pension costs.

And there’s an interesting wrinkle: health insurance is highly variable. For example, the City’s reported employment cost for James Mai is $46,408.80, while Michael Carroll and Kathleen Treseder are each reported at $20,733.24 because the City lists zero insurance premiums for them.

There’s also the Great Park Board money. So, depending upon the individual and whether you count Great Park compensation, the real public cost can be considerably higher than the oft-quoted “$880 a month.”

There’s another potentially important piece: each Irvine councilmember has a substantial office/staffing budget. A February 2025 council document included public comments referring to a $300,000 council office budget including staffing.

The City itself reports 2025 total employment costs of $29,837.88 for Mayor Agran, $46,408.80 for Vice Mayor Mai, $44,025.36 fo...

The Liberal OC

Message History

Delivery option(s)