$23,000 Raise for Court Officer Opposed : Salary: Judges had hoped to reward an employee for outstanding work. They say they will study the matter more in light of the county’s budget woes.

Ventura County judges are considering giving a $23,000-a-year raise to court executive officer Sheila Gonzalez, despite the county’s looming budget deficit and the threat of widespread layoffs.

A majority of the county’s Superior and Municipal Court judges agreed in a closed meeting Tuesday that Gonzalez’s base salary should be increased to $120,000 annually.

Her total compensation package is expected to exceed $150,000 annually, including about $30,000 in perks.

But after emerging from a luncheon meeting Friday, several of the judges said they were unsure if they would implement the raise. They said they wanted to study the matter more extensively.

Gonzalez could not be reached for comment Friday. But Superior Court Judge Steven Z. Perren said the raise was not solicited by Gonzalez.

He said the judges agreed that Gonzalez had done an outstanding job for the county and should be better paid.

The proposed pay increase has come under heated criticism by county officials, who said the judges have erred in considering such a large raise when the county is facing massive cuts in state funding and layoffs.

County Supervisors John K. Flynn and Maria VanderKolk have vowed to fight the proposed increase--even though they have no control over Gonzalez’s salary.

“Sheila Gonzalez is an outstanding manager and she is probably worth 10 times what we pay her, but the timing couldn’t be worse,” VanderKolk said. “I hope the judges either reconsider or Sheila turns it down.”

“It’s total arrogance on the part of the judges and it spits in the face of the taxpayers,” Flynn said. “We’re going to do everything we can to make this null and void.”

He said if the proposal is implemented, he will ask that the supervisors cut the court’s budget by $23,000.

“It forces Sheila to decide whether to take the raise or to lay off a clerk,” Flynn said. “It puts it in her lap.”

Gonzalez is in charge of the day-to-day administration of both the Superior and Municipal courts.

Since she joined the county six years ago, Gonzalez has transformed the courthouse, streamlining it with projects such as a fully computerized case-filing system and a video network that lets judges in their courtrooms arraign defendants in jail via closed-circuit television.

Officials estimate that Gonzalez has raised thousands of dollars for the county by aggressively collecting court fees, a task that had slipped through the cracks before her arrival.

Yet Gonzalez, who earns $96,600 a year, has not received a raise in four years, judges said.

If the raise is implemented, Gonzalez’s salary and financial benefits would exceed those of the district attorney, sheriff and health care agency director, who are each paid between $139,000 and $147,000 annually. It would also exceed the salaries of Superior Court judges, who earn $99,000 a year.

And the increase would push her salary above those of some court executives in similar-sized counties. In San Mateo County, for example, the Superior Court executive, who is not responsible for also managing the Municipal Court, is paid about $82,000 annually. The Municipal Court executive there is paid about $85,000, according to a salary survey compiled by the Alameda County Taxpayers Assn.

Under state code, judges are allowed to set the pay of the executive officer, despite the fact that Gonzalez’s salary is paid out of the county’s vulnerable General Fund.

“This is not without recognition of the hard economic times,” Perren said. “But we have an extraordinarily talented individual whose skills have served us well and have saved us money. We feel that there is a lot of competition for her out there, and we want to make her stay here.”

The judges said they are especially concerned that Gonzalez could be lured to Los Angeles County, where officials recently advertised for a new executive officer to oversee the Los Angeles Superior Court and five Municipal Courts. The salary there ranges from $99,873 to $149,809, officials said.

“There have been serious, serious demands for Sheila, and there are courts that can pay much more than we could ever pay,” Superior Court Judge Ken W. Riley said.

But one judge expressed concern that the group had failed to fully take into account the county’s bleak budget picture before considering the raise.

The county is facing up to a $60-million deficit next year, prompting officials to seek new taxes to pay for fire services and other programs. Earlier this week, the county’s auditor-controller told supervisors to prepare to cut up to 400 positions to balance the budget.

“It’s just very, very poor timing,” said the judge, who asked not to be named. “You can’t be talking about layoffs in county government, severe budget cuts and closing fire stations and then go out and do something like this.”

Superior Court Judge James M. McNally said he is concerned that the judges violated their own procedures by not placing the item on their Tuesday agenda before voting on it.

“Bringing up a matter of this importance and actually voting upon it in these tough times and without notice to the judges looks like a ‘railroad job,’ ” McNally wrote in a memo to Perren.

On Friday, McNally said he urged his colleagues at the lunch meeting to study the matter before giving Gonzalez the raise.

“The resolution will not be implemented until we receive further information about the plan,” McNally said.

The proposed raise has also come under fire from Supervisor Maggie Kildee, who said the increase would be unfair to other county managers.

“In many ways, you could say her services have been invaluable to the county,” Kildee said. “How can you put a price on that? But there has to be a recognition that there are other peoples’ services that are also invaluable.”

Times correspondent Barbara Murphy contributed to this story.