Councilman Joe Krier changes his mind a lot.

For instance: In 2013, while angling for an interim appointment to replace Elisa Chan in District 9, Krier told the City Council he didn’t intend to run for the seat.

He won the appointment. Then he ran for the seat. He changed his mind, I guess.

He did it again this summer — opting to accept a salary as a council member after pledging that he wouldn’t.

On Feb. 18, the council met to discuss a report in which the Charter Review Commission recommended amendments to the City Charter. One of them: Give salaries to the mayor and council members.

District 10 Councilman Mike Gallagher, who led the commission, advocated for the amendment.

“I thought this was very important,” he said Monday. “Ever since I came on council, I realized it’s a full-time job and there’s no way to do the job right unless you give your full time to it.”

At the time, the mayor was making $4,040, and council members just $1,040 a year. The proposal: Let voters decide whether to pay the mayor $61,725 and council members $45,722 a year.

Joe Krier's comments on Feb. 18 regarding putting council pay on a ballot.

Krier, 69, was the only council member opposed even to putting the proposal on a ballot. It would be “awkward,” he said, for council members to seek compensation at the same time the city was negotiating a contract with the police union to determine pay and benefits for uniformed officers.

At the February meeting, Krier pledged not to accept a salary even if the proposal appeared on a ballot and voters approved it, according to the city’s minutes of the meeting.

“Councilmember Krier expressed concern that there had not been more citizen input and stated that he would not accept the salary if approved by the voters,” the minutes state.

The council later voted to put the proposal on the May 9 ballot. (Krier was the lone dissenting vote.)

In May, voters approved the measure.

Less than a month later, on June 2, Krier took the money, checking a box on a city form to “voluntarily accept gross annual salary for the current term.”

When I called the councilman Monday to ask why he had changed his mind, he knew why I was calling.

“Yes, I do take the pay,” Krier said cordially, by way of a greeting, as opposed to “hello.”

When I asked him why he opted to take the money after pledging that he wouldn’t, he denied the pledge.

“I never said any such thing,” Krier said. “Gallagher was the only guy that said that.”

I noted the meeting’s minutes. Krier said the minutes were inaccurate.

I asked the councilman if he had voted to approve the minutes.

He said, “I’m sure I did.”

I asked him if he had read the minutes before approving them.

He said, “I rarely do.”

Later, I tracked down an audio recording of the meeting.

Here’s what Krier said at the meeting:

“We find ourselves at a time, Mayor, when we are all hoping and doing our best to achieve a new police and fire contract that we hope will provide fair and equitable pay and benefits for both sides along with a sustainable city budget. It is awkward, at the same time we’re trying to do that, to be proposing putting on the ballot compensation for ourselves.

“Whether or not we would take it — and I’m kind of with Councilman Gallagher,” he continued. “If it did get on the ballot and it passed, I would not take it during the time I am here.”

Gallagher was the only council member to reject the salary. As architect of the ballot proposal and the only council member who served on the charter commission, Gallagher wanted to avoid a conflict of interest.

Krier, though, accepted the salary after campaigning to kill it, promising not to take it and voting against it.

I called the councilman back to ask, once again, why he had changed his mind.

“I have no recollection of that,” Krier said. “I do have a recollection of sitting through a number of campaign events and homeowners association meetings, and I am very sure it was never asked of me there.

“I have no recollection,” he continued, “of, quote, changing my mind, end quote.”

Nonetheless, from now on, whenever Krier pledges not to do something, I propose that he should be required to answer a follow-up question.

“Councilman, are you sure?”

bchasnoff@express-news.net