The Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday voted to increase their own salaries by 48%, bumping their annual pay to $171,000.
The debate took an unusually personal tone, with the supervisors firing back at conservative activist Andy Caldwell, who came out full force against the proposal two weeks ago. Several of the board members accused Caldwell of deliberately misleading voters with “erroneous information” and encouraging people to send hateful messages to them.
Board chair Laura Capps took exception to Caldwell saying that the job was only part time.
“I find it curious that a man is telling me how little I work,” Capps said, staring directly at Caldwell and then removing her glasses. “I just have to tell you that. You can ask my son how little I work. It’s quite curious.”
Fifth District Supervisor Steve Lavagnino also showed frustration with Caldwell and took a jab at him by saying that the pay raise issue made him relevant again.
“I did get a million emails, Andy. We put you back on the map,” Lavagnino said. “You should be so happy you are relevant again.”
Caldwell, executive director of the Coalition of Labor, Agriculture & Business, claimed the supervisors don’t work full time, that they meet three times a month, and that most of the meetings are “grip-and-grin,” where the supervisors are campaigning for their next election.
The suggestion angered Lavagnino, Capps and Third District Supervisor Joan Hartmann. Even conservative Bob Nelson expressed frustration with Caldwell.
“It has been a difficult couple of weeks here, especially for Supervisor Lavagnino and I,” Nelson said. “We share a base of supporters and residents that COLAB speaks to, so that message has been really unfortunate, unfair, untrue.”
In addition to supervisor salary increases, the proposal included increases for elected department heads: auditor-controller, clerk-recorder-assessor, district attorney, sheriff, and treasurer-tax collector-public administrator.
The vote to approve the proposed salary increases was 3-1-1, with Capps, Lavagnino and Hartmann in support. Nelson voted against it, preferring that an independent commission review the salaries and make a recommendation.
First District Supervisor Roy Lee abstained from the vote. He said he respects all of his colleagues and realizes that the job is full time and constant work, but that he is too new in the role to support the pay increase. Lee took office six weeks ago.
County Human Resources staff have been revising management and executive compensation during the past few years, and as part of that, reviewed data from comparable counties.
The survey compares Santa Barbara County to counties such as Marin, Monterey, Orange, San Diego, San Luis Obispo, Santa Cruz, Sonoma and Ventura. Santa Barbara County’s maximum salary for a supervisor is $115,000, and the only county that was lower based on the survey was San Luis Obispo, which was at $105,560.
Supervisors in Ventura County make $171,300 annually as a maximum. San Diego County was the highest at $219,540.
Caldwell spoke in strong terms on Tuesday and began his comments by reading a letter from former Santa Barbara County Third District Supervisor Brooks Firestone.
“I am opposed to this substantial raise proposed by the supervisors,” the letter read. “The position is a part-time occupation that should be a public service, not a lucrative career.”
However, the supervisors late in the meeting stamped that out. Lavagnino said he respects Firestone greatly, but that he is wrong.
“Going to probably the wealthiest individual who has ever been on our board is probably not the best person to talk to us about what our salary range should be,” Lavagnino said.
The comment prompted a laugh from Capps, who added: “You mean you are not an heir of a global company?”
Lavagnino responded, “No, I am not.”
Firestone was an heir to the Firestone tire company.
Caldwell also said the supervisors should not increase their pay at a time when people are struggling financially.
“Think of the people who are struggling with inflation,” Caldwell said. “What you are doing is a slap in the face.”
Capps also shot down that argument as misplaced.
“People are hurting, so I don’t want to dismiss all of this as misinformation,” Capps said. “People are financially hurting, and that’s why it strikes a chord. We have such a high poverty rate. And when people got a sliver of information that wasn’t the full picture, it strikes a chord internally about how unfair life is for a lot of people right now.”
Capps added that for Caldwell to use people suffering as a reason to deny the supervisors’ salary increases is “really sad.”
She said she wants to help those people by working on affordable housing and providing access to health care.
“I want to be on that side of efforts to make sure we build people up,” Capps said.
Santa Barbara resident Suzanne Cohen said increased pay would create more diversity in public office.
“Competitive pay attracts qualified candidates from diverse backgrounds,” Cohen said. “It allows more residents, not just those who can afford to serve or are independently wealthy to serve. It allows more people to serve in public office.”
The decision ties supervisor salaries to Superior Court judge salaries. Staff recommended, and supervisors approved, setting Board of Supervisors salaries at 70% of Superior Court judge salaries, which currently comes out to $171,309.
Tom Widroe, executive director of the Santa Barbara County Taxpayers Association, said the supervisors’ compensation is “well below-market.” He began his career as a staffer working for former supervisor Willy Chamberlin and has an appreciation for the job.
“I do believe it is a full-time job and it requires expertise, strategic input, it requires judgment, consideration, excellent communication skills and above all an extraordinary amount of patience.”
Widroe said keeping the salary at its $115,000 annual level won’t attract diverse candidates.
“The only people you will attract to run for this office are going to be people on pensions or perhaps people who are not qualified to do the work,” Widroe said.
Department Head Salary Increases
The supervisors also approved salary ranges and increases for elected department heads, going into effect in May:
- Auditor controller, 5.7% (Step 6), for an annual salary of approximately $267,487
- Clerk-recorder-assessor, 6.9% (Step 6), for an annual salary of approximately $267,487
- District attorney, 9.1% (Step 4), for an annual salary of approximately $301,022
- Sheriff, 14.9% (Step 6), for an annual salary of approximately $307,459
- Treasurer-tax collector, 6.9% (Step 6), for an annual salary of approximately $267,487
Top salary ranges also were increased for appointed county counsel and public defender positions: about 2.7% increases for an annual salary of approximately $298,763 for county counsel and about $300,548 for public defender, according to a staff report.