Ex-supervisor wants back pay from EDC
By Kathryn Reed
Former El Dorado County Supervisor Ron Briggs believes he is owed nearly $93,000 in back wages.
The claim he filed against the county has been rejected. He expects the formal lawsuit to be processed in the coming months.
Briggs served on the board for eight years, having left in January when the incoming electeds were seated.
He claims that starting in 2000 the Board of Supervisors adopted four resolutions tying the supervisors’ rate of pay to what the unions and other electeds received. It wasn’t until 2013 that Briggs said he became aware of this.
However, there is an ordinance on the books that says supervisors set their own wages, that it must be heard twice in public – as is the norm for all ordinances.
Supervisors receive about $76,000 a year, plus benefits. Briggs contends had the raises occurred, he would have been making – as would the current board – closer to $93,000 annually.
“Ron Briggs was paid the same as every other county supervisor and in accordance with the rules and direction established by the Board of Supervisors before Ron took office,” Joe Harn, county auditor-controller, told Lake Tahoe News. “Ron never complained to my office about his salary while he was in office for eight years.”
The county has hired outside legal counsel to deal with the threat of litigation. Through May, about $12,000 has been spent. That number could skyrocket if a prolonged court case ensues.
“Ron’s threatened litigation against the county is another waste of the public’s money,” Harn said.
State law allows Briggs to seek three year’s worth of wages. That is how the $92,346.84 was derived.
“To tell the county counsel and CAO I need a pay increase … it was uncomfortable. I waited until I got out,” Briggs told Lake Tahoe News.
Briggs said in 2013 he was in favor of reducing how other electeds were paid. So much so that he and other supes cut the pay of the sheriff, auditor and others.
(However, none of the supervisors broached the subject of reducing their own pay.)
In November 2014, after the election, supervisors voted 3-2 to restore the pay. Briggs and Supervisor Shiva Frentzen were it the minority. The majority believed the electeds should make more than the subordinates. Without restoring the pay, this would not have been the case.
Briggs said, “It’s an out of hand pay system the county has for its electeds. The reason why salaries and benefits keep rising and rising is because we keep firing all our department heads. Every time you raise department heads’ pay it affects the entire organizational chart. Every time an elected gets a pay raise, then the second and third (in charge) wants a raise and it gets out of control.”
The potential litigation, he said, is his way to make the point that the pay structure as it relates to elected officials in the county needs revamping.
I think Briggs is telling the truth. Briggs was uncomfortable asking the county staff anything. Briggs was uncomfortable asking the CAO if the county could afford the 15% raise for every county employee. Briggs was uncomfortable asking the CAO if it was necessary to hire all of the CAO’s friends. He was uncomfortable asking the CAO if her friends were qualified. Yes… Briggs was uncomfortable.
He was reported before he left to be in serious financial trouble and to be near bankrupt and in multiple foreclosures. He needed to be removed long ago. Now, after he was termed out, he wants unearned money and his snout back in the public trough to suck up more tax dollars. Pathetic. He should move somewhere far away.
He was just discharged from BK. He was in BK while making financial decisions for the county and running for Treasurer.
But who cares about that or Novasel’s financial holdings when we could talk about Skibumb collecting unemployment?
Another clown bureaucrat that got a taste of the free flowing mother’s milk of government and is now virtually impossible to wean back to reality. And he sure rolled out with the tide when it came to voting to reduce his own pay.
sun, you keep bringing up the fact that I go on unemployment when during the election we should have been concerned about our current supervisor being unable to vote on over 30 items during the next four years. Meyers has no voting power and everything that is going to be done to us we will not have a vote. Neither will she be able to vote for the courthouse project. Sue turned in over 30 items to the BOS she has to recuse herself from back in June and commented in the Mnt Democrat yet we have not heard one peep from any news site up here nor have we had any interaction or response from her in this area. You can keep focusing on my unemployment which by the way I had not been on for 2 years during the election. Yes I do collect unemployment. I am a corporation and I pay about $12,000.00 per year in taxes to EDD and I receive about $12,500.00 back during the winter in unemployment. Happy now? I would be more concerned with why my opponent did not disclose all the information on form 700 before the election then turn in a different form 700 on Feb 2 with 30 pages of items she will have to recuse herself from to the BOS. I would be concerned why they changed all the real estate holdings with the county assessor in Placerville on Feb 24 with the Briggs family. I would be concerned as to why Meyers does not have a vote. We all ran on the premise that Meyers should wait until we got a vote for the new Meyers plan with a new supervisor, we got a new supervisor but still no vote. Can we afford to wait 4 more years for representation? Yes I go on unemployment. I pay into unemployment. Beyond myself I just sent to EDD, IRS and Franchise Tax board almost $10,000.00 for my quarterly’s. Happy now that you know that I pay more in taxes than most people make in a year. These are not just ramblings from me. All this information has been filed and recorded with the BOS.
Hubris abounds.
Kenny regarding your comment: I would be concerned why they changed all the real estate holdings with the county assessor in Placerville on Feb 24 with the Briggs family. Please elaborate. I called Briggs office to offer him help in defeating Raffety. Guess what? He never called me back. His running was just a farce in my opinion. Someone to pony up against Raffety.
Once the snout is stuck in the public trough of what they think is unlimited funds it becomes an addiction. There is an instant ego problem that develops and what the public wants is people serving to better the people in the county if they are running for public office. The pathetic thing is he tries this stunt and didn’t quietly disappear. He wants to now cost the people money to show him the door that was already shown to him.
Robert, it is not something I can do here as it is not my news site. I have sent all the information to the various news sites and what they do with it is up to them. The Mtn Democrat is covering this but no one up here is.I can say that there were two form 700’s sent in and all the recordings for the trust were done on the briggs family trust and they were done on Feb 24 with the county. I will send you the report to an email of your choice. Mine is skibumfamily@sbcglobal.net. Out of respect for Kae and her news site I can only offer opinion here.
Skibum,
I wasn’t part of the group that brought up or criticized the unemployment issue. I was trying to point out how unfair the October surprise was.
sun, no offense taken. Thanks. If by October surprise you mean the Sacramento Bee half page article in October showing Sue and Kevin Brown as the candidates? lol. The editorial staff never bothered to check the results of the June election.