Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Workforce Compensation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public defenders and IHSS providers press Solano supervisors to raise pay and stop attrition
Summary
Public comment at the April 7 meeting focused on staffing and pay: public defenders warned of high turnover and an at-risk justice system; IHSS providers and union representatives urged the board to negotiate higher wages to address a caregiver shortage and cited neighboring counties' higher pay.
Multiple speakers used the board’s public‑comment period on April 7 to press Solano County supervisors for higher wages and improved retention for public defenders, in‑home supportive services (IHSS) providers and other county staff.
Nick Foy of the public defender’s office described months of strike activity and high attrition, warning that the office is increasingly a training ground for other counties. "When you lose institutional memory and experience over time, you just become a place that people are passing through," Foy said, urging the board to consider retention strategies.
Attorney Mari Buouie, a third‑generation Solano resident and public defender, said she nearly left for higher pay elsewhere and urged supervisors to make it feasible for staff to live and continue serving local clients. "I'm a single mom of two... I can easily make more money" elsewhere, she told the board, saying the office needs pay and conditions that allow staff to stay.
Speakers representing IHSS providers and SEIU Local 2015 described a growing care crisis in the county driven by low wages. A union speaker—identified in the record as speaking on behalf of a provider—said the county's current offers are insufficient and cited comparable pay in neighboring counties: "Yolo $19.95, Napa $20.90 and Contra Costa $20.30," urging the board to bargain in good faith and to close the gap so caregivers are not lost to other counties.
Speakers asked supervisors to prioritize budget choices that sustain county services by investing in the workforce. The comments were taken under advisement; no board vote followed directly from the public‑comment period.
