Water District Officials Consider Pay Raises

The Santa Clara Valley Water District board of directors will
once again be faced with the question: Should they give themselves
a raise?
Morgan Hill – The Santa Clara Valley Water District board of directors will once again be faced with the question: Should they give themselves a raise?

The vote couldn’t come at a worse time with criticisms over recent rate hikes and that board members go out of their way to spend the public’s money. Board President Tony Estremera and others have been taken to task by water district critics and local media for publicly funded perks such as conference trips to San Diego and Tahoe.

The district employs 824 people, has a $364-million budget and provides services such as flood protection and water service to 1.8 million people in 15 different towns and cities in the county.  

The board will determine whether to give themselves a 5 percent raise following an Oct. 23 public hearing at the district’s San Jose headquarters. Officials are currently paid $236 per meeting, up to 10 meetings a month. That amounts to $28,000 a year. The $12 raise would bump the salary up to $248 a meeting, with the potential to earn $30,000 a year. The process occurs annually, and last year the board approved a 5 percent pay raise on the $225 per meeting salary they earned at the time.

Board member Rosemary Kamei voted against that increase and said she will vote against this one as well.

“One of the things I always say is that I don’t do this for the money, it’s never been my source of income,” she said. “I have a full-time job. I’m very conservative when it comes to the public’s money.”

Board members Estremera, Joe Judge, Richard Santos and Gregory Zlotnick voted for last year’s raise. In addition to Kamei, who represents South County, Sig Sanchez and Larry Wilson voted against it. Patrick Kwok replaced Zlotnick in August after the former member left for a district job that pays $184,000 yearly. Kwok did not participate in last year’s vote.

In addition to serving on the board, Kamei is the vice president of development for Planned Parenthood. Despite having two different employers, she doesn’t think the pay raise would make that much difference in terms of improving the quality of her life.

“It isn’t that much of an increase where you could give up a full-time job. I think that most of us are very dedicated, especially those of us who have full-time jobs because you have to do both to survive,” Kamei said.

That possibility has not gone over well with at least one person in the community.

“As far as I’m concerned, they don’t deserve any more money at all. They have put us in a situation where my children will be paying the debt of the Central Valley water project,” longtime agency critic Bob Cerruti said, referring to the agency-subsidized plan that moves Central Valley’s water supply to Southern California. “They failed to pay that off for the last 20 years. They don’t owe themselves any more money at all. They haven’t earned it.

“There’s no need for any more raises until they get their house in order. There is no one on that board who knows anything about fiscal responsibility.”

Because they are paid by meeting, there is a concern that members label casual get-togethers such as trips to professional baseball games as official meetings. The other concern is travel expenditures. Zlotnick racked up $44,614 in board expenses in 2003 traveling to conferences throughout the country and lobbying in Sacramento and Washington.

Though the board has not yet approved another pay raise, Cerruti is skeptical that enough members will vote it down. 

“They’ll pat each other on the back,” he said. “It’s going to get passed, and they’ll crank out as many meetings as they can to make that money.”