County Agrees to Appoint Panel on Pay : Supervisors: The board will name a committee, to include at least five area residents, to review salaries and benefits of top officials.

The Ventura County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday agreed to appoint an independent panel to review salaries and financial benefits of the county’s top officials and then recommend a new compensation system.

The committee, which will include at least five members, was approved in the wake of public criticism over the disclosure that top officials are receiving thousands of dollars in perks on top of their base pay.

Supervisors agreed to ask the following people to serve on the committee: Ventura County Bar Assn. President Roger Myers, Ventura County Taxpayers Assn. President Lindsay Nielson, Los Robles Medical Center Administrator Robert Quist, a representative from the Ventura County Economic Development Assn. and a retired or active judge.

The board also decided to include either Bank of A. Levy President Marshall Milligan or Ventura County National Bank President Bradley Wetherell, and a personnel director from either GTE California Corp. or Amgen in Newbury Park.

County officials said they plan to begin contacting the individuals today to learn if they will serve. A final panel list is expected to be reviewed by the supervisors at their meeting on Tuesday.

Initially, the board unanimously passed the measure calling for the formation of the panel. But Supervisor John K. Flynn later changed his vote, saying the board should have tackled the benefits issue itself instead of turning the matter over to an outside group.

He questioned whether committee members would be able to reach an impartial decision, since many of the area’s top business leaders have close dealings with the county.

For example, he said, Nielson is also the attorney representing the proposed Farmont Golf Club in Ojai, which will soon be up for review by the Board of Supervisors.

“That puts him in an awkward position,” Flynn said. “There is the perception that there is a conflict. It creates questions about the committee. I hope it works, but I doubt it will.”

Other supervisors disagreed, saying they thought panel members would be able to render a fair decision on how the county should proceed with the salary and benefits issue.

“I still think it’s the best way,” said Supervisor Vicky Howard, who proposed the independent panel. “From all the discussions I’ve had from people in the general public . . . they indicate that they think it’s the way to go too.”

Since there has been so much public controversy over perks, Supervisor Maggie Kildee said, an outside panel is needed to review the matter.

“Clearly the board’s decision has been questioned. I think we need someone else to validate the amounts. I think there will clearly be a change in the way the benefits are listed.”

Ventura County National Bank President Wetherell said he would be “very happy” to serve on the panel.

“I think it is crucial that we pay the appropriate salaries and attract good people to Ventura County,” he said. “But it is not appropriate to give perks in lieu of a salary increase.”

Myers said he would also agree to serve on the panel, as long as it doesn’t take up too much time.

“Apparently there has been a misunderstanding or misinformation or hiding the ball,” Myers said.

The county disclosed last week that in 1991 the county’s top elected officials and chief administrative officer received more than $270,000 on top of their regular salaries in vacation, longevity and education benefits and thousands of dollars more in financial perks.

While the supervisors receive a base salary of $50,232, their total compensation packages ranged from $64,000 to $97,860 when paid benefits were included.

Although taxpayers’ association officials reported that they had been inundated with phone calls from angry residents in the wake of the disclosure, only a few spoke out against the benefits at the supervisors’ meeting on Tuesday.

Flynn on Tuesday encouraged the supervisors to cut most of their benefits but increase their base pay by $17,778, to a total of $68,010. His plan would have tied the supervisors’ pay to that of Municipal Court judges.

But he backed off on the proposal after receiving a cool reception from other board members, who indicated that they would rather have the independent panel looking into the matter.

The committee is expected to review the salaries and benefits of all the county’s elected officials and department heads. The review is set to be completed by Dec. 15. The supervisors will then decide how to proceed, Howard said.

“If they decide we are doing it right, great,” she said. “If it’s too much pay, then we’ll adjust it.”