City Manager of Burbank Makes Point, but Not Money

When Bud Orvom was appointed Burbank city manager last year, he was ordered by the City Council to find a way to raise the salaries of Burbank officials to levels comparable to those of their counterparts in other cities.

After Ovrom found that officials in five cities similar in size to Burbank were paid as much as 31% more than Burbank’s top employees, the council this year voted “catch-up” raises of 10% to 15% to officials such as Police Chief Glen Bell.

But Ovrom himself did not do as well.

The city manager came before the council for a raise Tuesday with a lower salary than any of his counterparts in the comparison cities: Torrance, Inglewood, Glendale, Pasadena and Santa Monica.

When the council finished arguing over how much money he should get, he was still last.

Ovrom, who received a “B-plus” grade from the council for his job performance, received a 7% raise, increasing his yearly salary from $73,008 to $78,120. Five percent of the raise was a cost-of-living increase, the other 2% a merit raise.

The city manager of Santa Monica, who ranked fifth on a chart prepared by Ovrom, is paid $79,500.

Burbank City Atty. Douglas C. Holland, who also ranked below his counterparts on the salary chart, also was given a 7% raise, lifting his salary from $63,924 to $68,268.

Higher Raises Recommended

Mayor Mary E. Kelsey and Councilman Michael R. Hastings both argued that Ovrom and Holland deserved 10% raises.

“It’s spineless, gutless leadership,” Hastings said Wednesday. “We were trying to catch up, but the council changed the rules and didn’t let the principal players know. When it comes to our No. 1 leader, we turned our back on our policy.”

But the three council members who pushed for 7% raises said 10% raises would cost the city too much. “When you’re dealing with a salary that high, you’re talking megabucks,” Councilman Robert R. Bowne said. “I just can’t go along with that big of a raise at one shot.”

When the council first voted on the raise Tuesday, only three members voted for the 7% raise. Four votes were required to appropriate the funds.

Ovrom then said that he did not want the matter to cause dissension on the council and, after thanking Kelsey and Hastings, asked them to side with the majority. Kelsey and Hastings then voted for the 7% raise.