Oh gosh. Here we go again.

The thorny, nasty question of extra pay for elected officials who attend meetings of outside boards and commissions is once again rearing its ugly head. It is usually a divisive debate.

The issue, of course, has been around for decades. Centuries? Simply put, if the public pays an elected official to sit on a city council, should that person receive additional pay for attending other meetings?

The issue is most common in large urban regions. These districts often have regional boards or commissions on which the mayor and/or councillor of a city also serves. It could be on a regional council, a police services board, a planning commission, and so on.

The Vancouver region is going through the latest spasms. Media reports have revealed the additional fees are adding a considerable boost to the compensation of certain elected officials.

Toronto goes through a similar debate periodically. And there are a surprising number of small or rural municipalities that face the same issue.

It is a complicated matter. Politicians frequently have been overly concerned with the public's view of their compensation and frightened to bring in market-value salaries or annual increases. Most reasonable people understand that serving in municipal government is difficult. Many people running for public office give up a private sector career. Fair compensation is appropriate.

There are no standard policies for payments for sitting on other boards. Some cities have a policy of no stipends for elected officials who sit on outside boards. Period. Even for part-time elected officials. That means there can be a lack of council 'volunteers' to accept the extra work and sit on those boards. The result is a skewed workload—and often angry council members.

Certainly no one argues about non-elected members receiving compensation for their public service on these boards, but the thorny question is additional compensation for elected members.

The considerations are complex.

Some outside positions are mandated—in other words, the mayor (or an appointed delegate) is legislated to sit on an organization's board. It is important to have elected representatives on regional planning boards, conservation authorities, police services boards, and so on.

One expert in compensation with whom I consulted on this issue raised the question of time and availability. Does the mayor of a large city have the time to read the material and do the proper prep work for the board meeting? For three or four other boards? Is it all done on 'company time'? Fair point.

The media tend to gnaw on this bone for a while. For many voters, people serving on important boards and commissions should receive an appropriate stipend, just as people receive compensation for serving on corporate boards in the private sector.

However, politicians are trapped amongst the revolving rigors of their duties, public perception, and responsible business practices in the public sector. There is no easy answer for them.