If county supervisors vote Tuesday to change the county’s reserve policy, they’ll also trigger bonuses for county employees.
County supervisors in June signed off on then-tentative three-year deals with three county labor unions. The now-finalized deals include raises and call for $1,000 lump-sum payments this year if supervisors approve changes to county reserve policies. The deals also call for $500 bonuses in 2026 and $250 ones in 2027. Supervisors are set to vote Tuesday on two tentative labor contracts with the same terms.
County employees will welcome these likely payouts at a time when county residents, including local government employees, are grappling with the region’s skyrocketing cost of living. Yet the lump-sum payments to roughly 17,000 employees, including some non-union workers, could also leave the county with fewer reserve funds to shield its budget and vulnerable county residents from federal cuts.
In June, officials initially projected one-time costs for the bonuses totaling $23.8 million this year, a number that could rise to nearly $25 million if supervisors memorialize two more tentative contracts Tuesday. One-time costs are projected to fall to roughly half that amount next year and to just under $6 million in 2027. That would add up to $42.8 million over three years.
Meanwhile, Board Chair Terra Lawson-Remer’s team has suggested changing the county’s reserve policy could free up about $90 million annually to help the county weather economic calamities or federal or state cuts in the near future – if board Democrats can get a Republican ally to support dipping into them. Progressives including labor unions have for years urged the county to unleash its massive bank account to invest more in services and staff and more recently to address budget challenges like impending cuts.
The bonuses would lessen the cash available to combat federal cuts at a time when the county has projected it may need to hire hundreds of new workers to help respond to new enrollment responsibilities and vetting. Once all federal cuts take effect, officials have projected an annual budget hit of at least $286 million a year.
In separate statements late last week, County Supervisor Monica Montgomery Steppe and the leader of the county’s largest labor union defended the expected lump-sum payments.
The agreements and negotiations with county workers came during a time the county struggled with a politically divided board and began to confront expected financial storms ahead. Employee bonuses aren’t a new labor deal tactic for the county. Similar payouts were incorporated into past county labor contracts when there were more Republicans on the county board.
“Our community expects services to be delivered at the highest possible level,” Montgomery Steppe wrote. “To meet that expectation, we must also support the employees who provide those services. Our constituents and workforce are not separate groups — they are part of the same community and deserve our equal commitment.”
SEIUI Local 221 President Crystal Irving, whose organization has for years urged county leaders to dig into reserve funds, emphasized the crucial role of county employees in delivering services.
“We strongly support the proposal to unlock a portion of the county’s reserves to minimize community harm, fill funding gaps and honor the agreements in the contract,” Irving wrote. “Retaining and recruiting experienced employees to administer vital safety net services is critical for the most vulnerable San Diegans, including children, seniors, and people with disabilities.”
Interestingly, county staff will ask county supervisors to take another board vote to redirect reserve money toward the employee bonuses – and batting back federal cuts – if the reserve policy is updated. State law requires a four-fifths vote for most appropriations outside the county budget process.
“Staff will bring an appropriation item to the board with recommendations to fund the lump-sum payments in the current fiscal year using unassigned general fund balance, which could be available due to the unlocked reserves,” county spokesperson Tammy Glenn wrote in an email.
Glenn wrote that the lump sums will be incorporated into future county budgets the next couple years “based on available funding sources” if supervisors change the reserve policy, meaning they will be voted on as part of the county’s budget process and will only require three votes to pass.
While supervisors could vote to reject the lump-sum payments, SEIU hinted Monday that it’s likely to challenge the county if it doesn’t cough up the bonuses.
“The current contract includes a legally binding commitment, which is contingent on the reserve clause,” Irving wrote. “We are confident the county will be guided by the law and not by Supervisor Jim Desmond’s social media account.”
The latter is a nod to Desmond’s public criticism of the likely payouts this past weekend.
On Sunday, Desmond sent out an email blast and posted on social media about his frustrations with the Democrats’ reserve proposal and the bonuses. He calculated nearly $41 million in costs over the next few years based on initial estimates that county staff projected with the June compensation ordinance updates.“Now, they want to ‘modernize’ our reserves. Let’s be clear: this is nothing more than a raid on taxpayer emergency reserves,” Desmond wrote in an email newsletter. “And here’s the kicker: the first $40.8 million of this so-called modernization is already gone — spent on government staff bonuses. Not on law enforcement. Not on lowering costs. Not on fixing our roads. Just bonuses.”
Yet Desmond was among the supervisors who unanimously backed the county’s compensation ordinance update incorporating bonuses for three major county labor deals in June.
Desmond, a Republican Congressional candidate, spoke out against the bonus payments before he voted.
“The only thing that I have an opposition to are these one-time payments that are contingent upon change to the county’s reserve policy, which provides the additional onetime funds,” Desmond said during the June 9 meeting. “To me, I’ve been very vocal about not using our reserves for salaries and those type of things, so I’m going to be supporting but voicing my opposition.”
Lawson-Remer and Republican Supervisor Joel Anderson, however, joined Montgomery Steppe in praising the agreements.
Lawson-Remer and Anderson declined to comment on the lump-sum agreements last week.
A spokesperson for Desmond didn’t respond to Voice’s requests for comment last week before speaking out publicly on Sunday.
