Whenever elected officials vote to give themselves a raise, they are bound to face criticism. The race the Board of Supervisors confirmed today is more generous and more of a long-term boost than usual. Joining us is reporter Alison St. John. Welcome. I'm glad to be here. Why is this raise different from an ordinary boost and pay? This is not actually a pay raise, this is effectively it is but it's a raise in the formula by which it gets decided how much their pay is raised. For many years they have had their pay raises attached to Superior Court judges in California, which is based on a complex formula based on the pay of state employees. Now, the plan is to change the formula so instead of getting 80% of what is Superior Court judge would get. They would get 90%. That amounts to 12.5% increase in nine months in terms of a dollar amount to much is that? $19,000 each per year going up from $153,000 a year to $172,000 per year. The biggest boost may be to the supervisors pensions. Taxpayers Association is making this point, you have compensation which is one thing but you have to look at the longer-term implications. Obviously your pension is based on your salary and in the case of public employees it's based on your final salary. Before supervisors who voted for it are coming to the end of their terms due to nearly unplaced term limits. They will retire in several years. This raise will benefit them over the next four years but it will give them more benefit in the long term with their pensions. You are listening to speakers at today's hearing what did they say? There were two dozen people, a coalition from local coalition and those making a point that poverty is higher now and are very much shared there has not been enough funding to deal with poverty and if indeed there motive on the shield, the medalist motive is the public good. They should be raising services for the general public rather than their own salaries. Somebody mentioned that this could amount to being more than a 12% pay raise if the Superior Court judges get a raise this year. With the pensions it could amount to hundreds of thousands of dollars per supervisor. What does this raises supervisor salary two? $172,000 is the amount it would be raised. One thing that's interesting to mention, about the hearing, it is possible to watch and monitor the supervisors meetings remotely. The webcast conveniently lost audio during this meeting, even though the swearing-in ceremony had a audio just fine. There were various technical problems with the audio in the visual feed right as this item was coming up for a vote. Again, that emphasizes the point made by the taxpayers, when an elected official rages their own salary which is always a touchy subject, it should be transparent and fair. That this vote taken over Christmas and new year, when many people's attention was diverted may not have been as transparent as one would hope. Supervisor Ron Roberts said he felt that was fair and reasonable because supervisors have only seen less than 1% raise over the last nine years under the existing formula. Many people who came before them and spoke said this was not fair and reasonable at all. They felt if it was the supervisors being fair they would be looking at raising some of the benefits that they have control over in their budget. That was one comment that supervisor Dianne Jacob made at the end of the whole item. She said keep an eye on the budgets this year, we will be adjusting priorities appropriately. It's hard to know what that means but maybe she means they plan to be more generous this year. You said the salary structure change got four votes who voted for it in a voted against it? All four of the incumbents, Dianne Jacob, Ron Roberts, Bill Cox voted for it in the new supervisor just elected in November Kristin Gaspar for district 3. This was one of her first votes in she made a statement afterwards saying she takes the responsibility very seriously and one of the first question she asked herself is is it appropriate for the work performed and she said said she was just sworn in she didn't know how to get past the first question so she did not support the motion on the floor. I've been speaking with KPBS North County reporter Alison St. John. Allison, thank you. Thank you, Maureen.
On Tuesday, item #7 on the San Diego County Supervisors’ agenda is the final reading of an ordinance that effectively increases their pay by about 12 percent within the next year.
This is not simply a pay raise; this is a step-up in the formula by which their pay is raised. In other words, it increases the size of San Diego County supervisors' pay and benefit increases indefinitely into the future.
The supervisors let the agenda item pass on consent when it came up for a first reading at their meeting in December before Christmas.
Haney Hong, head of the San Diego County Taxpayers Association, said if elected officials vote to raise their own salaries, it should be done in a way that is transparent, methodical and accountable.
“I think it would be fair to say that the timing might have actually reduced the amount of public conversation around this,” he said, “because there was the first reading just before the holidays. Now here we are at the very beginning of the year and we have our second reading.”
The city of San Diego has a Salary Setting Commission that recommends pay increases, which the council can then approve or ignore. But, like several other Southern California counties, San Diego County Supervisors adopted a formula in the 1970s that tied their salaries to that of Superior Court Judges. The formula was 80 percent.
The new ordinance will boost that to 90 percent. In a brief board letter on the item, Supervisor Ron Roberts calculates the change will cost taxpayers almost $90,000 in 2017.
Hong said the Taxpayers Association is more concerned about the longer-term costs.
“Because that pension is based on the highest salary earned, it’s not just the immediate bottom line for the year, but there’s also future implications with respect to pension benefits,” he said. “Right now, here in San Diego County, it’s almost $800 per man, woman and child that’s responsible for unfunded pension benefits.”
San Diego County’s pension fund has more than $2 billion dollars of unfunded liability; the exact amount changes depending on market returns each year.
The letter from Supervisor Roberts contains the following statement:
“There will be no impact on the retirement system fund because the budgeted appropriations for these increases all will include appropriate contributions to the retirement system to cover these increased costs.”
Roberts’ spokesman Tim McClain clarified.
“We were trying to articulate that the retirement fund itself will be made whole by future increased contributions as a result of the pay increase. The fiscal impact noted for FY 2016-17 and FY 2017-18 already reflects increased costs related to retirement contributions in addition to the actual pay increase itself.”
Hong reiterated that since salaries and pensions are paid with taxpayer dollars, the net effect is an increase in taxpayer liability.
“In the future, the County will have to contribute whatever is required for the ARC (Actuarial Required Contribution), which would get calculated based on expected benefits. That ARC will be a little bit higher if the salary is higher.”
When asked what justification he saw for a change in the formula for increasing supervisors' salary and benefits at this point, Hong did not have an answer.
In the letter from Roberts, he states that under the existing formula, supervisors’ salaries have increased 7.17 percent since 2008.
Under the ordinance, supervisor’s regular compensation will go from $153,289.60 to $162,870.20 and then $172,450.80 next year.
With the elections past, the supervisors have little to lose. They are all, except newly elected supervisor Kristin Gaspar, termed out and due to retire in either 2018 or 2020. Their pensions are based on their final year’s salary.
Gaspar, who is sworn in on Monday, did not respond to a question about her position on the salary ordinance, which will be on the agenda of her first board meeting this week.
