County Urged to Suspend Car Allowances : Benefits: Grand jury says curtailing the practice for supervisors and other top employees could save $445,200 over a two-year trial period. Some officials criticize the panel’s recommendation.

The Ventura County grand jury Thursday recommended that county supervisors suspend monthly car allowances for themselves and 34 other top county employees to save taxpayer dollars and end a practice of double reimbursement.

In a four-page report, the grand jury said the county could save $445,200 by curtailing monthly allowances during a two-year trial period. The report also urged supervisors and top managers to try to use cars from the county motor pool while on county business.

Robert Walker, chairman of the grand jury’s county services committee, said lower-paid county employees interviewed during the investigation thought top-ranking employees had “placed themselves on a pedestal” because they get the double benefit of the monthly car allowance and reimbursement for mileage.

“It’s their wish that they come down off that pedestal and join the little guys for a while,” Walker said. Rank-and-file employees, he said, also suggested that if top officials “forked over a little of their pay” it might save the jobs of workers facing layoffs in upcoming budget-cutting sessions.

The issue of perks for top county officials surfaced last year when The Times disclosed that they were receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars annually in financial benefits that had been kept secret from the public.

After four months of debate, the supervisors voted in December to accept a citizen committee’s proposal to eliminate large financial perks for themselves and other elected leaders. But they softened the financial blow with a major increase in base pay.

Meanwhile, the county grand jury launched an investigation into the compensation packages for elected and high-level appointed county officials. Woodrow Shumate, grand jury foreman, said the panel will issue more recommendations and reports on pay and benefits within the next month.

The grand jury’s recommendation Thursday to suspend car allowances, which range from $350 to $375 a month for most top officials, was not immediately embraced by all county officials. County Personnel Director Ron Komers said the car allowances had been given to the supervisors and top managers as a form of compensation in lieu of a pay raise, and it would be unfair to cut them.

Komers said the grand jury report didn’t make sense. “I don’t believe they considered all the factors involved,” he said.

He said the grand jury’s recommendation for top officials to use cars from the county’s motor pool would force the county to purchase more cars.

The report, in fact, suggests that top officials use their own cars, and be reimbursed for mileage, if county cars are unavailable.

County Public Works Director Arthur Goulet said he would not be “terribly thrilled” if forced to give up his $375 monthly car allowance. “What it is, is a cut in salary--none of us thinks that’s a good idea,” he said.

In private business, Goulet said, top employees usually are given a high-quality company car. His allowance was given to him as part of his compensation package when he was hired 15 years ago, he said.

In its report, the grand jury found that the county spends $200,000 to $300,000 a year on the car allowances and mileage reimbursement at 27.5 cents a mile for the 39 top employees.

In 1991, four supervisors received $8,300 in reimbursement for 26,747 miles submitted on expense accounts, the report says. During that time, the supervisors were also entitled to a monthly allowance of $500--an amount they reduced in December after criticism erupted over the perk.

The fifth supervisor, Maggie Kildee, leases a car and does not receive mileage or the total allowance, according to the grand jury.

The grand jury’s recommendation is similar to a controversial proposal presented last month by Supervisors John K. Flynn and Maria VanderKolk. Both proposed slashing the pay and perks of county employees--including the mileage reimbursement for employees who receive a monthly auto allowance.

Flynn said he would also support cutting the monthly allowance, instead of mileage reimbursement.

“I’m in favor of it--anything that will save money,” he said, though he said he would first want to study the numbers. “I don’t think they should get both mileage and the allowance.”

He also said it seemed like a good idea to make more use of the county’s 61-vehicle central motor pool, adding that he would use it for county business during the day.

Flynn said county employees very likely would resist any move to eliminate the allowance. “Once you give them something, it’s hard to take it away, but we have to make sacrifices,” he said.

The idea was applauded by Jere Robings, president of the Ventura County Alliance of Taxpayers. In his challenge to county benefit packages, Robings said he has argued that it was inappropriate for employees to get both the allowance and the mileage reimbursement.

He suggested that employees use their own cars, instead of pool cars, unless they need a county vehicle with equipment for a specific purpose. He also said the county’s reimbursement rate is adequate to cover expenses.

“There is no need for the allowance, unless they want to fatten their take-home pay,” he said.