The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday agreed to postpone changes to how their salaries are determined, leaving the current system in place until a newly elected supervisor takes office in January.
The board voted 4-1, with Supervisor Manu Koenig dissenting, to table the issue until January, when Tony Nuñez is scheduled to take office as Fourth District supervisor.
The decision means supervisors’ salaries will remain tied to Superior Court judges’ pay, with supervisors receiving 62% of a judge’s salary.
The board on Aug. 11 voted 3-2 to begin moving away from that formula and directed county Human Resources Director Ajita Patel to return Tuesday with recommendations for a new compensation system.
Patel told the board that county supervisors’ compensation is approximately 12% below that of comparable counties. Staff compared Santa Cruz County with Contra Costa, Marin, Monterey, Napa, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano and Sonoma counties.
Staff also looked at the Consumer Price Index, which rose 3.8% from June 2025 to June 2026, and recent county labor agreements. Those contracts generally provide cost-of-living adjustments of 4% in each of the first two years and 3.5% in the third.
Patel recommended eliminating the link to judicial salaries and instead periodically reviewing factors such as salaries in comparable counties, inflation and compensation trends among county employees.
Supervisor Justin Cummings, who originally proposed reconsidering the system, said tying supervisors’ compensation to judges’ salaries—a practice with roots going back decades—does not reflect current economic realities.
“We live in one of the most expensive rental markets in the United States,” Cummings said. “And there are many other factors that impact our cost of living in Santa Cruz. My intent was to see if we could have a different process that would allow for our salaries to reflect the reality that we face living here in this community.”
But Cummings acknowledged the timing was difficult, coming shortly after the board placed a half-cent sales tax on the November ballot to address the county’s financial problems and amid concerns about the economy.
He moved to postpone the discussion until January, allowing Nuñez to participate and giving the board a fresh look at the issue.
By then, the county should also know whether state lawmakers approved an increase for judges. Any corresponding increase for supervisors under the existing formula would still require board approval.
Koenig, who previously opposed separating supervisors’ salaries from judges’ pay, said he favored keeping the existing system without changes.
Supervisor Kim De Serpa, who also opposed the Aug. 11 proposal, reiterated concerns about supervisors approving raises while asking taxpayers for additional revenue.
“We ran for office because we wanted to serve the public,” she said. “This is not a moneymaking situation, and our salary is adequate.”
De Serpa said supervisors work hard but that the county’s financial situation makes considering their own raises problematic.
“We’re in a budget crisis, we’re going out for a half-cent sales tax, we are trying to make a case to the public about why that is so important,” she said. “And sitting up here and voting ourselves a raise—it’s not a good look, it’s not good optics, it’s not a good thing to do.”
