Horsley says rising economy led him to end his $1 salary

By Dave Boyce
Almanac Staff Writer

In explaining his decision to end his two-year stint of working for $1 a year as a San Mateo County supervisor and begin accepting his $120,000 annual salary, Supervisor Don Horsley cited the county's improved economic circumstances, including sales tax revenues and home prices. "The overall economy of San Mateo County is not what it was three years ago," Mr. Horsley told the Almanac. "People are bidding on houses again."

Mr. Horsley retired in 2007 after 35 years in law enforcement, including 14 years as county sheriff, for which he receives an annual county pension benefit of $215,000.

"I don't know if I said it. I don't remember," Mr. Horsley said when asked about the $1 a year pledge. The decision was based on the county's structural deficit, which "put us in an austerity position," he said.

In a Jan. 19, 2009, press release, 18 months before the June 2010 primary election, San Bruno-based political consultant Ed McGovern leads with this statement attributed to Mr. Horsley: "As a former San Mateo County Sheriff and county employee, I am fortunate that I receive an excellent package of benefits, and believe the compensation I would be awarded as a County Supervisor would be better spent elsewhere. Therefore, if elected, I will forgo my salary and benefits so that the money may be used for other County needs."

Asked if he wanted to comment, Mr. Horsley said "No, not really. It definitely was a press release."

In other news stories, Mr. Horsley cited medical bills for his mother-in-law as a reason to start collecting his salary. Asked to confirm that, Mr. Horsley said he considered the topic personal. "I do have a mother-in-law. I do pay for her medications," he added. "It's just different circumstances now than in 2009."

Asked if his no-salary pledge might have influenced voters in the run-off election with small business owner April Vargas, Mr. Horsley said, "No." The key to his victory was his track record, he said, adding, "I think I ran a superior campaign."

"I think most people didn't know about not taking the salary," he added. "I just think that it doesn't really strike home. I didn't find that the average voter knew that I wasn't taking a salary."

In November, voters approved Measure A, boosting sales taxes by a half cent and county revenues by a projected $60 million annually for the next 10 years. Measure A's passage was not a major factor in his decision, Mr. Horsley said.

Does he have a message to voters about deciding to take his salary? "Anyone who works six days a week, 10 hours a day, should be paid just like anyone else who works six days a week, 10 hours a day," he said. And his concurrent pension income? "I was in public service," he said. "I don't think that should be held against me."

Read more...

Submitted by Lionel Emde