Group Calls on County to Reduce Perks : Government: Taxpapers association responds after disclosure that top leaders are receiving large benefit packages above base salaries.

By TINA DAUNT

Sept. 30, 1992 12 AM PT

TIMES STAFF WRITER

Members of the Ventura County Taxpayers Assn. are calling on the county to reduce the large financial perks paid to top elected officials and the chief administrative officer.

In the wake of the county’s disclosure that its leaders are receiving large benefit packages on top of their base salaries, group members also said Tuesday that they are seeking the formation of a citizens’ panel to monitor all future salary and benefits increases for top county management.

On Monday, county officials revealed that 11 elected officials and the chief administrative officer received a total of more than $270,000 on top of their regular salaries last year in vacation, longevity and educational benefits and thousands of dollars more in other financial perks.

The disclosure, association members said, prompted a barrage of phone calls to the taxpayers association from angry residents complaining that the benefits package was excessive.

“It hit a nerve,” association President Lindsay Nielson said. “I don’t think people can believe how gracious we are to our officials.”

The association, the county’s leading government watchdog group, was formed 38 years ago. It has 474 members, including prominent business owners and merchants from throughout the area.

Supervisor John K. Flynn on Tuesday said the Board of Supervisors should probably look at further reductions in the officials’ benefits package. The board earlier this month cut the yearly perks by more than $113,000.

“Maybe we have to take another whack at it and cut it down,” Flynn said. “I think that the board also needs to take a look at the complexity of the system. Maybe we should simply wrap the benefits into a salary instead of having individuals receive sums of money for education and other things.”

After a while, the county’s “piecemeal approach” of handing out benefits made it difficult for officials to keep track of what the leaders were being paid, the supervisor said.

Flynn, however, brushed off the suggestion of forming a citizens’ panel to review future pay and benefit increases.

“I don’t know if I buy that idea,” he said. “I think we are much better off just making the salaries more straightforward.”

The amount the county was paying in extra benefits had been withheld until Monday, with the county citing privacy rights of the county’s leaders. But after The Times argued that compensation for the key county leaders should be open for public scrutiny, the officials agreed to release the figures.

The biggest benefit for the supervisors and other elected officials was an annual lump-sum payment called in-lieu-of-vacation pay. Until earlier this month, when it was cut by more than 50%, the benefit added seven weeks pay to officials’ compensation packages. Overall, the county spent nearly $176,579 for the officials’ vacation benefit.

The county also spent $61,641 in longevity pay for all the elected officials and the chief administrative officer. Another $31,860 was spent on education benefits.

Chief Administrative Officer Richard Wittenberg, who is paid a base salary of $123,630, had a pay and benefits total of $183,782.84 when all the extras were included, county officials said.

The benefits were quietly implemented by the Board of Supervisors in the late 1980s in an effort to make sure management was adequately compensated. In some cases, officials said, lower managers had been receiving better pay packages than the top leaders. And without the benefits, officials said the county would be in danger of losing its best employees to other jurisdictions or private industry.

But Ken High, second vice president of the taxpayers’ association, disagreed.

“The private sector has cut back on its executive compensation,” High said. “And when the private sector is put on widespread wage freezes, and corporations all over the county have rolled back management packages . . . it is appropriate for government to respond in the same fashion.”

Steve Wood, a senior county planner and president of the 5,400-member Service Employees Union Local 998, also criticized the county for resisting requests to make the figures public.

“It didn’t look as if they were being upfront with the public,” Wood said. “They were avoiding public scrutiny. That’s my main concern.”

High said that if a citizens’ panel was formed to review any benefit and pay changes, it would open up the process.

“What you’ve got is a mouse guarding the cheese,” he said. “There should be an independent oversight committee.”