A small group connected to the city’s network of volunteer neighborhood boards has issued a call to sister boards across Oahu to voice opposition to 64% pay hikes that Honolulu City Council members are expected to receive by July 1.

Lori Yamada, the retiring chair of the Kaimuki Neighborhood Board, helped draft a resolution to counter the Salary Commission’s April 25 recommendation that an individual Council member’s salary get a 64.4% pay boost to $113,304, up from $68,904, while the Council chair’s salary would rise to $123,288 from $76,968, a 60.2% jump.

Yamada hopes other neighborhood boards heed her group’s call to reject the Council pay hikes.

“We’re sending (our) resolution out so we have support from each community on this island because each of them would be affected by the Council members’ raises, because we all have Council member representation,” Yamada said. “So we figured we all should have a say in how we feel about it.”

In April, under separate actions, the Pearl City and Makiki Neighborhood Boards sent written and vocal opposition to the City Council — namely, to Council Chair Tommy Waters — over what at least one board member called an “unjust” pay increase as many island residents continue to struggle financially.

Yamada said her group’s effort seeks a different path: to advance Resolution 82 — co-introduced by Council members Augie Tulba and Andria Tupola on April 27 — which requests a formal rejection of Council salary hikes because they “are unreasonably high and should not be allowed to take effect.”

But Resolution 82 — along with Tulba and Tupola’s related Resolution 81, which rejects the city’s entire salary schedule for 2024 — is yet to be scheduled for Council review.

Yamada, who has served on the Kaimuki Neighborhood Board since 1995, said she’s concerned about the Council’s willingness to accept a pay raise but a seeming unwillingness to receive greater public comment over that same increase.

“And it seems like it’s being ramrodded or railroaded without a public hearing, without due process,” she said. “So we’re just trying to rattle the cages to say ‘Hey, we want a say in it because this is taxpayers’ money, and it really sounds outrageous with a 60% pay raise.”

On May 24, Yamada, along with retiring Palolo Neighborhood Board Chair Josh Frost, sent an email to Oahu neighborhood board chairs and officers asking for support on a new resolution that calls for accountability on Council pay hikes.

“We are retiring neighborhood board chairs writing to request that a Board resolution relating to Council pay raises be placed on your next board meeting agenda,” the email reads. “The Board resolution asks the Council to conduct a public hearing and vote on Council Resolution 23-82 that seeks to reject the proposed pay increase. A rejection would need seven votes on the nine-member Council, otherwise the pay raise would take effect July 1, 2023.”

According to the group’s resolution, reasons to reject the Council pay raises include:

>> This pay is extra-large for a Council position that is still officially part time, while average wages have increased slowly; accountability is needed with a public hearing and vote on the Council pay raise issue.

>> The Salary Commission did not account for the impact of the pay raise on Council pensions, which would increase the lifetime pension of an individual on the current Council by over $500,000; an annual increase of $22,697.

>> The Salary Commission meets annually and could, next year, address the salary impacts on pensions and the part- or full-time nature of the job and make a new salary recommendation.

Moreover, the group’s resolution requests the Council chair refer Resolution 82 to the Council’s Executive Matters and Legal Affairs Committee for its June 20 meeting for review. If not referred, a majority of the Council is requested to direct the city clerk to place Resolution 82 on the Council’s June 7 meeting agenda for appropriate action, including referral to committee, hearing and decision-­making; and a majority of the Council is requested to schedule a special meeting of the Council for decision-making on Resolution 82 by June 24.

According to Yamada, so far her group’s resolution has gained provisional support from neighborhood boards representing Downtown- Chinatown, Makakilo-Kapolei- Honokai Hale, Mililani-­Waipio, McCully-Moiliili, Nuuanu-­Punchbowl and Waikiki.

Yamada stressed that although some neighborhood boards may support her group’s request, those same boards may not hear it at all, as many are recessed until the month of July — well after the Council’s raises take effect July 1.

“Some of them will not be having a meeting in the month of June,” she said.

Still, according to the city’s website, the Downtown- Chinatown and McCully- Moiliili Neighborhood Boards have placed Yamada’s resolution on their respective June 1 meeting agendas.

On Tuesday, in an emailed response to Honolulu Star-Advertiser questions whether a public hearing will be held over City Council pay raises, Waters said, “I firmly believe that elected officials, including Council members, should not vote on their own salaries.

“Having to vote on their own pay increases is a direct financial conflict of interest, which may raise questions of recusal,” said Waters, adding that governing a city the size of Honolulu requires full-time commitment. “We need individuals who will eat, sleep and wake up thinking about the job. Working part time simply won’t cut it. I want Council members who are fully dedicated and invested in serving the public. And the best way to achieve that is by providing them with a full-time wage that reflects the importance and complexity of this job. By providing adequate compensation for Council members, we can encourage them to give 110% of their time and effort to this position.”

On May 25, Waters, along with Vice Chair Esther Kia‘aina, put forward their own pieces of legislation — Resolution 109 and Bill 33 — that, if approved, would each prohibit any outside employment or financial gain beyond an elective Council seat. Resolution 109, a charter amendment, would require voter approval to take effect, while Bill 33 would commence if it receives Council approval.

Both pieces of legislation are expected to be reviewed at the June 7 Council meeting.

Meanwhile, Yamada’s group is not alone in objecting to the Council’s pending pay hikes.

An entity called We Love Honolulu — with a tagline reading “Tommy Waters — Let the people decide your 64% pay raise!!!”— has posted an online petition to Change.org urging the Council to place Resolutions 81 and 82 on its June 7 meeting agenda for review and possible action.

That petition, posted May 20, had more than 860 signatures as of Wednesday.