Panel Urges Fewer Perks for Supervisors : Government: The citizens committee recommends eliminating longevity, education and vacation pay and reducing the car allowance.

Ventura County government should eliminate most of the controversial financial benefits now being paid to the five members of the Board of Supervisors, a special citizens panel recommended Tuesday.

The nine-member panel, taking what one panelist described as a “major step” in an ongoing review of the pay of top county officials, voted unanimously in favor of totally cutting the large sums of longevity pay, education pay, vacation pay and several other perks now offered to board members.

The committee also recommended that the supervisors reduce their annual car allowances from $6,000 to $4,500--which would bring the stipends more in line with automobile allowances in counties of similar size. However, the committee agreed, board members should still be able to collect 27 cents for each mile they drive on county business.

Panel members, who will meet again Friday morning, said they hope to decide by next week whether supervisors’ base salaries should be increased to make up for the proposed cuts or remain at or near their current levels.

“This is a major step for simplification of the benefits,” said panel member Stacy Roscoe, president of the Ventura County Economic Development Assn. “Some of the confusing or controversial benefits have been eliminated. The type of benefits that are left are ones the everyday person on the street can understand.”

The panelists said they plan to make similar recommendations on benefit cuts for the county’s remaining six elected officials after receiving salary and benefits information on officials in counties of comparable size elsewhere in California.

Although the committee was set up by the supervisors to conduct an extensive study of the perks, it has no authority over the salary and benefits of public officials. When the group completes its work later this month, the board may accept or reject any of its suggestions.

Supervisor John K. Flynn, who has called for a reduction in the total pay and benefits for himself and fellow supervisors, said Tuesday that the panel appears to be on the right track.

“I think that doing away with the perks is a good idea,” Flynn said.

Supervisor Maria E. VanderKolk agreed.

“We expected that we would establish some kind of a base salary and that would be it,” she said. “I have been supportive of full disclosure since this started. It seems like the best way to go.”

The controversy over the benefits paid to top county officials surfaced after a series of articles were published in The Times, leading to the county’s disclosure in September that its 11 elected officials and chief administrative officer had received a combined total of more than $270,000 in perks on top of their regular salaries last year.

The benefits, crafted into a complex pay package, pushed the top officials’ income significantly over their base salaries in nearly all cases. Supervisor Maggie Kildee, for example, earned more than $97,000 last year in base pay and benefits. Flynn’s total topped $91,000 and Supervisor Susan K. Lacey accrued more than $85,000. The current base salary for supervisors is $50,232.

The benefits package was adopted in the late 1980s as a way of better compensating county leaders without risking public criticism by openly increasing their base pay, county sources said.

Until Sept. 28, the amount the county was paying in extra benefits had been withheld, with officials citing privacy rights for county leaders. But after The Times argued that compensation for key county leaders should be open to public scrutiny, the officials agreed to release the figures.

The supervisors voted a week later to form the citizens committee in the wake of public outrage over the compensation packages.

In addition to cutting longevity, education and vacation pay, the perks panel Tuesday recommended that the county eliminate textbook and tuition reimbursements and cut reimbursement for professional license fees.

The panel also urged that the county should stop paying for the supervisors’ portion of Social Security and Medicare--a perk that amounts to about $4,365 annually for each board member.

Overall, the benefits the panel wants to cut from supervisors’ compensation are expected to total about $66,000 for next year.

“I would rather see a flat (salary) because it is easier,” said panel member Robert Quist, president of Los Robles Regional Medical Center. “There’s less game playing. . . . There is less bookkeeping.”

Supervisors would receive between $60,000 and $73,000 if all the proposed cuts are made. Under the committee’s proposal, the county would continue matching 401K retirement fund contributions and paying the supervisors’ portion of their pensions. The supervisors would also retain the option of receiving cash instead of medical benefits.

The panel has yet to determine whether supervisors should be allowed to continue to collect pay for serving on panels and commissions--a perk that cost the county about $11,000 last year.

Panel members said they hope to review salary and benefits of government officials in Kern, Contra Costa, Fresno, San Joaquin and San Mateo counties at their meeting next Tuesday before determining the base salary for the supervisors.

“It would appear that some on the higher end are going to take a pay cut,” said panelist Lindsay Nielson, president of the Ventura County Taxpayers Assn. “We are certainly bringing the salaries in line with counties of comparable size. I think this is a beginning.”

Committee member Bradley Wetherell, president of Ventura County National Bank, added:

“What we are saying is we want to be fair and yet we are eliminating any possible abuse. . . . This is a forthright method.”

At the Friday meeting, committee members said they want to find a way to relieve supervisors of the task of setting their own salary. Panel members said they might consider tying the base salary of the board to that of Municipal Court judges, whose pay is determined by the state Legislature. That proposal was originally advanced by Flynn.

Said panelist Roger Myers, president of the Ventura County Bar Assn.: “It gets them out of the unpopular position of being accused of being the fox in the henhouse.”