Town Square

Post a New Topic

Supes OK 11% raise for county manager

Original post made on Dec 12, 2012

As of Dec. 23, John Maltbie, the interim county manager for San Mateo County government since November 2011, will take over as the permanent manager, with an immediate 11 percent raise over what the position previously paid.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Wednesday, December 12, 2012, 11:11 AM

Comments (19)

Posted by janet, a resident of Menlo Park: Stanford Weekend Acres
on Dec 12, 2012 at 12:21 pm

This is utterly disgusting, especially given how screwed up the County was during his tenure. The county cries "poor mouth" every time some item of infrastructure is falling apart, yet continues to dole out taxpayers' money to its employees. At the same meeting they were going to approve an ADDITIONAL $50 million for health benefits for already retired employees. Where do you think Prop. A funds are going?

Posted by Joseph E. Davis, a resident of Woodside: Emerald Hills
on Dec 12, 2012 at 12:24 pm

The only thing more astounding than the apparently limitless greed of our so-called public servants is the fact that so many voters elect to shovel more money in their direction.

Posted by Snyders follies, a resident of another community
on Dec 12, 2012 at 12:30 pm

Joseph - look at Snyder in Michigan!

Signing a law to prevent workers from collective bargaining, including most but not all public workers, but he excludes cops and firefighters, the very most expensive public workers!

Just because they cops and firefighters in Michigan vote and donate Republican doesn't seem like a very good reason to exclude them from the new law!

Unless it's all about the politics, not any perceived economic benefit.

Posted by Observer, a resident of Woodside High School
on Dec 12, 2012 at 1:30 pm

With this very public statement of excess county funds, I look forward to the cut in country tax rates ...

... but I'm not holding my breath.

Posted by POGO, a resident of Woodside: other
on Dec 12, 2012 at 1:51 pm

Snyder's Folly -

"Signing a law to prevent workers from collective bargaining..."

Really? Where in the world did you get that?

What did Michigan's right to work law have to do with collective bargaining? The law provides that an employee cannot be made to join the union as a requirement of a job.

How does that "prevent workers from collective bargaining?" or did you just get those talking points from your union boss?

Posted by WhoRUpeople, a resident of another community
on Dec 12, 2012 at 2:22 pm

Pogo, I know your question to Snyder's Folly was rehtorical, of course the talking points came from the union. Another question I would ask--perhaps of the Almanac--what do those comments have to do with the subject of this thread? I live in SM County, could care less about what people in Michigan elect to do or not do. With regard to this package, I'm not so upset with the $300K salary (big job), as I am with the benefits and severance package. Basically if this guy turns out to be a bust, it will cost $300K plus accrued vacation to get rid of him--and I'll bet he doesn't even have a good fast ball. Our sups live on a planet of which I am unfamilair.

Posted by Downtowner, a resident of Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Dec 12, 2012 at 2:37 pm

This is just wrong! Has Maltbie done such a great job that he deserves a big raise? Plus a huge severance package? He can lease a very luxe car for $1000 month, too. Was there a quid-pro-quo so that outgoing supes get more benes?

Posted by Joanna, a resident of Menlo Park: Downtown
on Dec 12, 2012 at 2:38 pm


Shame on the supervisors and shame on those who support them.

Posted by Joseph E. Davis, a resident of Woodside: Emerald Hills
on Dec 12, 2012 at 4:33 pm

I'm afraid to know how much the retirement package for a 300k public "servant" is worth, if I had to buy an annuity for the amount. I'm sure it's multiple millions.

Posted by Peter Carpenter, a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Dec 12, 2012 at 5:04 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

The next time that the supervisors want a tax measure approved for 'schools and other essential services...' we should all simply vote NO.

Posted by Bob, a resident of Menlo Park: Downtown
on Dec 12, 2012 at 5:26 pm

Completely irresponsible spending.

While I doubt the Supervisors care what the electorate thinks, here is a link to their page: Web Link for anyone who wants to voice his/her opinion.

Shame on them and those who support this kind of spending.

Posted by Outside Looking In, a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Dec 13, 2012 at 7:08 am

Unfortunately, Measure A passed by misleading voters!

The good news is that Measure B passed, so there is a great opportunity to elect new people to the board of supervisors, who are not in the "good old boys' network." I hope voters take advantage of this new system and vote out the supervisors they don't feel represent them.

The other good news is that Measure C failed, so that means voters will continue to have a say in who will be the two county financial executives. Maybe, they should be voted out, too, in the next election cycle.

Posted by Huh?, a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Dec 13, 2012 at 12:34 pm

9 weeks of vacation alongside a $300,000 salary. Cushy. I wounder why not one of the elected voted against this? Did anyone on the Board even ask pointed questions about why this is necessary?

Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community
on Dec 13, 2012 at 12:49 pm

The video on the County website doesn't work at this time. From what was reported there was no comment from any of the Supervisors.

Posted by Joseph E. Davis, a resident of Woodside: Emerald Hills
on Dec 13, 2012 at 12:52 pm

> I wounder why not one of the elected voted against this?

The answer is quite simple. They are not spending their own money, and government officials have very low accountability compared to private sector businesses which have to compete for customers on a day to day basis.

Posted by Scholar, a resident of Menlo Park: Sharon Heights
on Dec 13, 2012 at 1:36 pm

They all voted for it, because as one goes so they all go as to salary and benefits by the decision. They and their families all progress financially eventually by this vote because it raises the bar in general for all. They can also be expected to stand firm.

Posted by Joanna, a resident of Menlo Park: Downtown
on Dec 13, 2012 at 3:04 pm

This is the contact information for the supervisors:

Dave Pine, 1st District

Carole Groom, 2nd District

Don Horsley, 3rd District

Rose Jacobs Gibson, 4th District

Adrienne Tissier, 5th District

Posted by SteveC, a resident of Menlo Park: Downtown
on Dec 13, 2012 at 3:16 pm

SteveC is a registered user.

I agree with Peter. Vote no on any addition requests for tax increases. I know i will not vote for any. What a sham

Posted by Menlo Voter, a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Dec 13, 2012 at 6:59 pm


given the past practice of the supervisors vis a vi spending the tax payers money, why would the tax payers vote for a tax increase? Becasue they're unconcious, disconected idiots, that pay no attention to what is going on in their county. And the county supes know it. (Portion removed.) Until the voters in this county wake up and stop voting the politically connected into office this will never stop. As Einstien said, "The universe and human stupidity are infinite, and I'm not sure about the universe.

If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Touring the Southern California “Ivies:” Pomona and Cal Tech
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 5 comments | 2,906 views

Chai Brisket
By Laura Stec | 5 comments | 2,080 views

Couples: Parallel Play or Interactive Play?
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 1,232 views

Getting High in Menlo Park
By Paul Bendix | 3 comments | 781 views

As They Head Back To School, Arm Them With This
By Erin Glanville | 1 comment | 112 views