A push to increase the mayor’s pay has split Naracoorte Lucindale Council, with councillors clashing over rising demands of the role – and whether ratepayers should foot the bill.

At the March council meeting, chaired by deputy mayor Cr Abigail Goodman in the absence of mayor Patrick Ross, elected members voted to formally lobby the Remuneration Tribunal of South Australia to review and potentially increase mayoral allowance – and to “delink” the mayor’s allowance from the councillors.

The motion, moved by Cr Trevor Rayner and seconded by Cr Andrew Downward, was carried after a split vote.

Cr Rayner said the issue was already affecting who was willing to stand for mayor.

“The mayor’s position really worries me,” he said.

“We always have plenty of nominations for councillors, and we don’t get many for mayor… one of the main reasons is the fact that if you nominate for mayor and get wiped out, you don’t go on council either.

“The first thing they (potential mayoral candidates) want to know is how much the allowance is… most probably, they got to pay somebody to fill in the time they are off.”

He warned that without change, councils risked struggling to attract suitable candidates – particularly those balancing businesses and family commitments.

Legally, under current 2025/26 settings for a Group 3 council like Naracoorte Lucindale, the mayor receives $68,653 annually, alongside a council vehicle for official use and office support, while councillors receive $17,012.

But two councillors pushed back strongly, arguing the role is about service – not salary.

Cr Craig McGuire said he had “no issue with current pricing, or allowances”, pointing to additional benefits already available.

“The mayor gets a car, petrol, phone, internet, travel… as elected members, we can claim telephone, power, childcare,” he said.

“I will hang my head on – we are not in this for a job, we are for the community… I would be selfish to even be looking at this.”

Cr Tom Dennis echoed the sentiment, warning against financial motivations while acknowledging the need to attract capable leaders.

“We are not here for the money, but we are here to represent the community,” Cr Dennis said. “But… we need to encourage the best possible representatives… the word reasonable is where I would come from.”

The debate also highlighted a growing concern: that the mayor’s role is evolving into what some see as a near full-time commitment.

Cr Goodman said expectations on mayors had changed significantly.

“It’s not a job you can do alongside other paid employment if you are going to meet the demands,” she said.

“From my perspective, worth reviewing.”

Cr Downward agreed but drew a line between the mayor and councillors.

“As far as the councillor’s remuneration is concerned, I have a problem with that,” he said.

“I would like to acknowledge the mayor… the amount of time and work that goes into that position, that’s certainly something that could be looked at.”

However, Cr Monique Crossling questioned whether there was enough evidence to justify any increase. She warned previous submissions from other councils to the tribunal had failed due to a lack of proof.

“The tribunal… are not satisfied without evidentiary case for such an increase,” she said.

“My issue is if we do put submission forward, what evidentiary basis are we actually putting with it…”

Council CEO Kelly Westell confirmed that evidence would be difficult to produce.

“Unfortunately, in this case, it’s all anecdotal, unless there is a survey done… (on) why they (potential candidates) are not running for mayor,” she said.

Cr Peter Ireland questioned how much control council actually had over the structure of mayoral pay.

“Following on from Cr Rayner… as far as the mayor’s remuneration goes… that is going to however we move, would be linked to the multiple for our renumeration… we’ve got no leniency to alter that at all,” he said.

Ms Westell clarified council was not restricted in what it could propose.

“We can actually put in any submission we want about this matter,” she said.

“Full disclosure… we, Cr Rayner and I have discussed that concept…can we make a submission of them not linked together.

“You can make a submission on anything.”

Cr Cameron Grundy suggested slowing the process to allow further consideration.

“Look, it won’t hurt to go on the path of seeking a report… it also gives us more time to consider it,” Cr Grundy said.

“We probably want to reflect on what’s been discussed… a report that is relatively short and succinct would be appropriate.”

But Ms Westell warned time was not on the council’s side.

“The closing date for submissions is 20 of April, so we will miss the deadline,” she said.

“Happy to bring back a report, but that’s the deadline.”

The final vote saw Crs Rayner, Ireland, Downward, Turner, Dennis and Grundy in favour, with Crs McGuire, Damien Ross and Crossling against.

Cr McGuire called for a division, but the outcome remained unchanged.

The motion authorises the CEO to work with the mayor to prepare a submission seeking:

• The opportunity to delink mayoral and councillor allowances, and
• Increased allowances for mayors in line with growing responsibilities.

The tribunal’s review is routine and conducted every four years.

This article appeared in The Naracoorte News, 1 April 2026.