Supervisors split over elevated step placements for top county hires; sheriff appointment continued

Monterey County supervisors spent extended time on June 24 debating whether to authorize above-policy salary step placements for two high-level hires, signaling ongoing board concern about exceptions to the county’s personnel policies.

Deputy chief deputy sheriff appointment (item 46): Supervisor Askew and others objected to a proposed step-7 placement for an appointed deputy chief deputy sheriff, saying human resources had not reviewed the appointment and that the county’s policy (PPNR — Personnel Policies and Procedures Rules) restricts initial appointments above step 4 except under narrowly documented conditions. Sheriff Nieto told the board the appointment was a direct appointment by an elected official and that the appointee, described by the sheriff as highly qualified and taking a substantial pay cut to come to Monterey County, justified the request.

After a lengthy exchange about fairness to existing county employees, recruitment processes, and budget impacts, Supervisor Daniels moved — and the board seconded — to continue the item for one week so the sheriff could provide more information and the board could consider the PPNR criteria. The motion to continue carried.

Assistant CAO appointment (item 63): The board separately considered a request to appoint an assistant CAO at step 6 based on prior compensation and the candidate’s expressed salary requirement. The CEO reported an open recruitment had been conducted and the candidate is a sitting department head in another county. Several supervisors asked for better documentation showing the appointment met PPNR criteria (difficulty of recruitment, unusual qualifications, reduction in pay, budget impacts). The board approved the step-6 appointment but directed the CEO to provide an update and asked Human Resources to report on PPNR application and a plan to ensure consistent implementation countywide.

Why it matters: Supervisors repeatedly said the county needs consistent application of its personnel policies and that routine exceptions erode confidence among long-serving employees. Opponents said ad hoc approvals for high-step placements increase personnel costs in departments with recent budget overruns; supporters said elected officials must be able to staff their leadership teams and that certain recruits would not accept lower offers.

Key quotes: Supervisor Alejo urged adherence to the PPNR: “If we’re going to have PPNRs, and we’re going to have policies and procedures in place, those policies and procedures need to be equally applied to all individuals.” Sheriff Nieto said the hire was a direct appointment and that the candidate was “not going to find anybody more qualified.”

Outcomes: The board continued the deputy chief deputy sheriff appointment (item 46) for one week and instructed staff to return with additional documentation. The assistant CAO step-6 placement (item 63) was approved with board direction for an HR/PPNR update and a report back on consistent application of policies.

Speakers quoted: Sheriff Mary Bixler Nieto: "[The candidate] is taking a six-figure pay cut to come here; you're not going to find anybody more qualified." Supervisor Alejo: "If we're going to have PPNRs, those policies and procedures need to be equally applied." Supervisor Daniels: urged a short continuance to obtain more information.

Votes and next steps: The motion to continue item 46 passed; the board set a one-week continuance for the sheriff to provide requested documentation. The assistant CAO appointment at an elevated step was approved with direction to the CEO and HR to return with further policy clarifications and an update.