Is the salary ordinance invalid because it sets rates which are so palpably unreasonable and arbitrary as to indicate an abuse of discretion?

The main point made by appellants is this: the salary ordinance is invalid in part because it sets rates which are so palpably unreasonable and arbitrary as to indicate an abuse of discretion as a matter of law. This is an allegation contained in the pleading, and it is a necessary one, because it was held in City and County of San Francisco v. Boyd, 22 Cal.2d 685, 690, 140 P.2d 666, that the courts will not interfere with the rate-making authority in the matter of setting salaries at prevailing rates unless the abuse is as great as that described in the allegation (or unless there is fraud, which is not alleged in the present case).