The Boston City Council rejected a resolution Wednesday that would rescind the approved salary increase package for elected officials. The resolution’s sponsors, Councilors Ed Flynn and Erin Murphy, urged the council to redirect those funds to departments facing cuts by the FY ‘27 budget.

In 2022, the Boston City Council, including Flynn and Murphy, unanimously approved a pay raise for themselves and the mayor, increasing their salaries by 20% over three years. The bump was vetoed by Mayor Michelle Wu but ultimately passed after the council overruled her, nine votes to two. As of 2026, city councilors are paid $120,000, with the mayor receiving $250,000.

“These salary increases are now fully in effect while the City of Boston is facing difficult budgetary decisions, impacting essential city services, frontline workers, and vulnerable residents,” Murphy said. “The residents should not be asked to accept reductions to essential services while elected officials’ salaries increase.”

Flynn called the cuts made to certain city services and departments “an embarrassment” and said that if leaving behind our shared values is how a budget is balanced, then the city has lost its way.

“I know this funding would not close our budget gap,” he said. “But what it does is send a message to our constituents that we put the people of the city of Boston before ourselves. The city must come first.”

Councilor Julia Mejia said she is willing to reduce her salary if the funds went toward preserving youth jobs. The resolution says the funds saved would be redirected toward, “preserving essential city services and programs that directly support Boston residents, frontline workers, and vulnerable communities.” A wide next for a relatively small sum.

“If we’re asking working families and vulnerable communities to absorb cuts, then elected leaders must be prepared to make meaningful sacrifices too,” Mejia said. “Any reduction in our pay should not become something that is symbolic and or theatrical political poetry.”

Instead, Mejia said any action the council takes should be a direct investment in Boston’s young people. She added that if the council is serious about standing up for the city’s most vulnerable then they should be willing to explore reallocating at least $20-million from public safety spending.

“If we’re really serious about making these decisions, then we need to go a little bit harder than just filing resolutions. We need to be honest about the political courage it takes to say ‘we’re going to take from this, to give to that,’” Mejia said.

Councilor Sharon Durkan called the rescission anti-family. As a single adult who lives alone, she said she is confident she could cut back on spending, but acknowledged that other councilors had families to provide for who may be more impacted.

She also recognized the corrupt actions of a former council colleague. Former District 7 Representative Tania Fernandes Anderson plead guilty to one count of wire fraud for pocketing $7,000 in a kickback scheme and was sentenced to one month in prison and $13,000 in restitution last September. Federal prosecutors Fernandes Anderson was struggling financially, including missed rent and car payments, bank overdraft fees, and a $5,000 fine from the state ethics committee.

“I do not want anyone who serves in this body to not be able to afford their life and go toward something that’s really dark and negative,” Durkan said.

Council President Liz Breadon added that a single adult needs to earn $125,000 annually to live in sustainable comfort.

“We live in a very high-cost city,” she said. “Many of us are heads of households with dependents. Obviously, I respect people’s sentiments on this, but one size does not fit all when it comes to thinking about the salary of a city councilor.”

Flynn rose again to share that residents of Roxbury had asked him why the council was giving itself a pay raise while the city was cutting $724,000 from veterans services.

“My point here is, can we demonstrate and can we show residents that we care about them. We care about what is happening in their lives. Will this $5,000 pay decrease make a meaningful impact? Probably not. But it sets an example that we are willing to do everything we possibly can to support people in need,” Flynn said.

The council ultimately voted against passing the resolution eight to three, with Flynn, Murphy, and Councilor Miniard Culpepper dissenting.

Even if the resolution had passed, it’s dubious how the funds could be directed to cut programs. The resolution itself recognizes that there may be legal, legislative, contractual, administrative, or budgetary hurdles to implement the rescission.

Councilor Ben Webber said he did not think the money could so easily be taken from one place and put toward another, instead speculating it would go toward the general fund.

“Just like amendments, it’s a suggestion,” Murphy said. “The amendments we put forward often times don’t ever do the impact we hope for.”