Santa Barbara County Supervisors Approve $56,000 Pay Increase for Themselves
Several Supervisors Decry ‘Ugly’ Campaign of ‘Misinformation’ Ahead of Tuesday’s Vote
After unleashing a blistering and heartfelt condemnation of what several supervisors decried as an “ugly” campaign of “misinformation,” the Santa Barbara County supervisors voted 3-1-1 to give themselves a $56,000-a-year pay increase. That’s a jump from $115,000 per year to $171,000.
A recent county salary comparison revealed Santa Barbara County’s supervisors lag seriously behind their peers in other counties. More dramatically, they’re paid 28 percent less than even their own administrative assistants.
The supervisors new pay levels were pegged to 70 percent of what state judges make. By so doing, the board majority argued that candidates otherwise smart, competent, and at the peak of their earning powers — people with families, single mothers, etc. — might look at public service as a viable pathway.
Still, the optics of the raise were worse than merely awkward and cringeworthy. Supervisors Steve Lavagnino and Laura Capps detailed the barrage of angry calls they were bombarded with after Andy Caldwell, a longtime conservative anti-government activist who runs the nonprofit COLAB, voiced his outrage at the proposed pay hike two weeks ago in the Current, a right-wing blog. Among other things, Caldwell argued that being a county supervisor is only a part-time position.
“It’s been a long two weeks,” Supervisor Lavagnino lamented. “I’ve lost friends over this, people I’ve known for 15 years.”
Supervisor Capps noted she’d been called the “C-word,” adding, “I find it curious a man is telling me how little I work. I find it curious.”
She, Lavagnino, and Supervisor Joan Hartmann all delivered passionate descriptions of the long hours they put in and how much of the supervisors’ work has little or nothing to do with their Tuesday meetings. Even the Taxpayers Association, normally fiscally conservative and cost conscious, strongly endorsed the pay increase, arguing that the additional cost was justified by the scale of the county government — a $1.6 billion operation — as well as the complexity of the problems and the difficulty of the choices.
A representative for SEIU Local 620 endorsed the pay increase as well but recalled how he had to fight “tooth and nail” for a simple 5 percent pay increase.
Scott Fina, a progressive activist up in North County, likewise supported the raise while noting that Caldwell himself was reportedly paid $215,673 to do a job that carried with it less responsibility.
Although Lavagnino and Caldwell are both conservatives, there’s little love lost between the two. Lavagnino has taken Caldwell to task in the past for becoming irrelevant.
“Andy, we made you relevant again,” he said with bitter humor, while reading portions of Caldwell’s write-up that caused agitation. “’Gripping and Grinning Costs Taxpayers $1,500,000 for Five Supes,’” he read.
Lavagnino expressed incredulity how Caldwell had urged readers to contact the supervisors by signing off how “In the past 10 years, 576 California politicians have been convicted of federal corruption charges!”
Supervisor Capps noted how many residents live with serious economic pain and uncertainty, acknowledging this high-level economic uncertainty had fueled much of the heat the supervisors had been experiencing since Caldwell’s first missive ran.
Supervisor Bob Nelson cast the only vote against the proposal, and Supervisor Roy Lee, only two months on the job, voted to abstain. “I love a parade,” he joked.
