Grand jury: ‘Sloppy’ math, little transparency as Sacramento supervisors OK’d their pay raise

Reality Check is a Bee series holding officials and organizations accountable and shining a light on their decisions. Have a tip? Email realitycheck@sacbee.com .

A Sacramento County grand jury report found that the Board of Supervisors’ process to grant themselves a pay hike in 2023 included a major math mistake and an “astonishing lack of transparency.”

Last year, the board passed a proposal that granted all five supervisors a 36% pay increase. But due to a math miscalculation caused by “sloppy work,” the grand jury found, some supervisors and members of the public thought it was a 20% raise. In reality, it was nearly double that, according to the report released Friday .

In the May 23, 2023, meeting with the reading waived, the raise and vehicle allowance increases were approved 4-1 as part of the board’s consent agenda. Sue Frost, whose term will end in Decembe r, was the lone dissenting vote. Discussion on Item 14 during that meeting lasted a total of 20 seconds, according to The Sacramento Bee’s review of the meeting video, typical of most consent items.

The grand jury’s investigation also discovered that Sacramento County violated a state law that requires a 60-day waiting period before such an ordinance starts. Instead, the county prompted the pay raise to begin 30 days after the vote was taken, giving voters much less time to try and organize and reverse the decision.

The grand jury announced their findings Friday after completing interviews with 16 people, including county elected officials, executives, department leaders and staff. The 19-person watchdog panel also looked at regulations, ordinances and agenda packets from board meetings.

They found the vote for a salary increase came about after a county executive team and a third-party consultant recommended a 20% salary increase for supervisors. But, because of the bad math, the raise was actually 36%.

The public was informed the cost to bump up five supervisors’ salaries would be $173,296 for the 2023-24 fiscal year, but the grand jury discovered the pay increases cost taxpayers a total of $333,069 — a nearly $160,000 blunder.

Supervisors only discovered the math mistake after the raise had been approved, the grand jury report said.

“Even more concerning than the math miscalculation, is the choice by county staff not to update the board with the correct information after the fact,” said Steve Caruso, the grand jury’s foreperson. “Among other things, it raises the question of how many other times mistakes in facts presented at board meetings are never publicly corrected.”

The supervisors initially put the pay hike vote on the consent calendar for April 18 and May 23 board meetings in 2023. This kind of calendar is usually for noncontroversial issues that don’t tend to draw public comment.

The grand jury found that any supervisor at either of the two meetings could have moved the proposal to the more open “timed matters” agenda where the public is encouraged to give comments. However, no supervisor moved to do so.

While the use of the consent calendar was not against the law, the process lacked “transparency to maintain the public’s trust when voting on matters of significant public interest,” the grand jury report said.

“County staff acknowledged that it was a mistake to tuck the salary increase proposal in the middle of the consent calendar,” Caruso said. “But we also hold the supervisors accountable because they had the authority to take the proposal off the consent calendar to encourage more public discussion, but they made a conscious decision not to.”

In their final recommendations, the grand jury listed seven actions the county should take, starting with an open board meeting where the public is informed how the financial errors happened and whether any money should be returned. The report also advised the county to create a citizen-based compensation commission.

In a statement sent to The Sacramento Bee, county officials said they were reviewing the report and recommendations, adding that they “take this matter seriously and are committed to a thorough examination of the issues raised.”

Sacramento County plans to issue a formal response to the grand jury report’s concerns within 90 days.