NOOZHAWK: What specific steps would you take to straighten out Santa Barbara County’s finances and balance the budget?
JANET WOLF: Santa Barbara County is facing extreme budget challenges and we have met those challenges head on. The county has consistently balanced our budget to live within our means.
In my first term as supervisor, it became apparent that the old method of receiving hundreds of pages in a budget document right before budget hearings was horribly inadequate and inappropriate. At my urging, the Board of Supervisors now has early budget workshops, allowing us to hear directly from our department heads and the public to ensure that we make strategic fiscal and policy decisions early in the budget process. We now have an opportunity to see the “estimated” deficit early in the process so that we make the policy decisions that are then directed to our CEO as he compiles the final budget.
We have balanced the budget through specific and strategic budget cuts while continuing to maintain vital services. Instead of “across the board cuts” to every department, we carefully review the department’s budgets to ensure that public safety, health and welfare programs are not decimated. This important task cannot and should not be left to an ineffective “finance committee.” It is the role of each one of the five supervisors.
I led efforts to cut costs in areas that would not affect front-line services. This includes cutting overhead like changing workers compensation carriers, which will save more than $1 million from our budget each year; eliminating employee bonuses and executive perks totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars; moving departments from expensive rental space back to our county buildings; stepping up enforcement on oil spills and collection of fines so that the polluters pay for their cleanup, not the taxpayers; improving energy efficiency in county buildings, saving thousands of dollars in utility bills; consolidating departments and eliminating duplication of services; and facilitating the county emPower SBC program, bringing hundreds of much-needed jobs to our county and allowing property owners to retrofit their property to realize energy savings of their own. And, very significantly, our county employees agreed to renegotiate long-term contracts, resulting in salary and benefit savings of more than $20 million in the last two years alone.
I also continue to make budget decisions on a weekly basis, prudently evaluating proposed expenditures and programs. I am proud of my leadership on the board by asking the tough questions. I am the board’s representative on the Debt Advisory Committee and in that role work closely with the Auditor and Treasurer (both of whom have endorsed me) to make fiscally smart and prudent decisions about the county’s finances. Standard & Poor’s recently raised the county’s credit rating to AA+, the highest rating in California. In raising the credit rating, S&P stated, “Fiscal restraint is the norm for the county, evidenced by high reserve levels and structural balance between revenues and expenditures.”
NOOZHAWK: Are structural budget reforms needed? How would you implement them?
JW: We have been instituting reforms over my entire term. I instituted budget workshops so that the process of adopting a budget before the start of each fiscal year now begins several months before it used to; this allows for greater public input.
County government is an arm of the state, and is therefore more closely tied to the dysfunction in Sacramento than any of us would like, but we must continue to work with our representatives in Sacramento to end raids on local funds and the passing down of unfunded mandates.
Another area of concern is in our pension system. First, we reformed aspects of the retirement board. Fourth District Supervisor Joni Gray and I took the leadership role in ensuring that public members appointed by the Board of Supervisors have financial and investment expertise. (See the pension answer below for additional response.)
NOOZHAWK: Forgive the grammar, but are there any things that Santa Barbara County government should do less of?
JW: I opposed the creation of new departments, such as Information Technology, a top-heavy department that should return to General Services, at substantial cost savings.
I support a careful review to consolidate some departments with similar functions.
I have demanded that “executive bonuses” be eliminated because such perks have no place in a public agency. We must consider negotiating salaries on a yearly rather than multiyear basis. It will take more work at the outset, but it is not appropriate to make funding decisions that will never materialize and end up necessitating resources to renegotiate.
The county, with limited resources, should not be going into the recreation business. We can do less of projects like the Cuyama Pool, which I opposed building, because I knew we did not have the resources to fund its maintenance … and that projection has indeed come true.
NOOZHAWK: Santa Barbara County’s government employee pension levels seem unsustainable? Do you agree? How would you resolve the situation, either as a problem or a perception?
JW: We have seen an increase in the unfunded liability in the last few years, primarily due to the poor performance in the stock market. To make up for that shortfall, the funding must come from two other sources, the employees and the county.
I have joined with my colleagues in exploring pension changes, such as increasing the employee contribution, increasing the vesting time, etc. to help our pension system be sustainable. Many of these changes would need to be negotiated with employee groups, others would require state legislation. I recently supported the creation of a Retirement Advisory Board to assist us in seeking solutions to what is a state and nationwide challenge.
NOOZHAWK: What kind of relationship should the Board of Supervisors have with the county’s chief executive officer? Is the board too influential or not influential enough? Why or why not?
JW: As in any organization, but especially a public agency, the CEO must carry out the policies of the elected officials. In 2005, prior to my election, the Board of Supervisors surrendered much of its responsibility and accountability to the CEO. In 2009, I led the effort to restore the role of the Board of Supervisors in affirming the selection of department heads and this has led to open communication in conjunction with the CEO, leading to greater accountability. As board chairwoman, I am leading the recruitment effort for a new CEO and look forward to the selection of that individual.
NOOZHAWK: How are you improving communication between county agencies, the Board of Supervisors and the public?
JW: I am proud that communication has greatly improved between the Board of Supervisors, county agencies and the public during my time in office. In leading the effort to amend the CEO ordinance, I included an explicit provision in the ordinance that ensures that department heads feel free to communicate with the Supervisors. I’ve also insisted that our CEO ensure that departmental representatives respond to media inquiries.
During the many wildfires that occurred during my term in office, I led efforts to improve communication with the public, whether with live news conferences, simultaneous broadcast on the Web, and ensured that call centers were staffed with people informed about local issues and geography.
In addition, to communicate with my constituents, I have instituted “card-table office hours” throughout my district, an e-letter, and various community events celebrating public-private partnerships, such as Green Gardening Day and the Watershed Resource Center open house.
NOOZHAWK: The county Department of Alcohol, Drug and Mental Health Services is under severe distress. What’s the answer?
JW: The severe fiscal problems with the Department of Alcohol, Drug and Mental Health Services were the result of decisions and lack of oversight that date back almost a decade. When these issues came to light during my first year in office, the board directed our CEO and county counsel to begin negotiations and audits with the state, and those are ongoing. We hired a new ADMHS director during my second year in office and I have supported her efforts to make significant organizational and personnel changes that also are ongoing. The number of indigent clients continues to grow as state and federal funds are diminishing, so those challenges remain. Of highest priority is that those most in need get the services they need in the most cost-effective, efficient manner.
NOOZHAWK: Do you support offshore oil drilling in California? Why or why not? How about the Paredon project (Measure J) in Carpinteria? And the PXP Tranquillon Ridge Project?
JW: I have long opposed offshore drilling in California. As we have recently seen with the Gulf of Mexico spill, it continues to be risky and dangerous. Too much of our local economy, from fishing to tourism, is dependent on the ocean. I oppose the Paredon project (Measure J). I voted to deny the appeal of the PXP project in 2008 because I believed that the “end date,” which was part of that agreement, would succeed in shutting down existing oil production; the State Lands Commission and the attorney general disagreed. I have not reviewed the latest PXP proposal, but with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger removing his support for it and saying the project is too risky for California, I doubt it will come before the Board of Supervisors.
NOOZHAWK: Should the county’s revenue-neutrality agreement with the city of Goleta be renegotiated? How will a renegotiation benefit county residents?
JW: There are provisions in the existing revenue-neutrality agreement that allow for ongoing discussions. I was part of the ad hoc committee that engaged in these discussions. Any final agreement must be in the best interests of my constituents.
NOOZHAWK: Which current or former supervisor do you admire most, and why?
JW: I admire all current and former supervisors for the courage and commitment they have demonstrated in running for office, representing their constituencies, and investing the inordinate amount of time and energy required to do this job well.
NOOZHAWK: There’s a big, blank wall behind the dais in the Board Hearing Room — an ideal location for a Noozhawk sign. The county could use the money. Would you support a Noozhawk sponsorship there?
[Noozhawk’s note: Candidate did not respond.]
Additional Resources
Click here for Janet Wolf’s campaign Web site
Click here for 2nd District supervisorial candidate Dan Secord’s answers.