The Orange County Grand Jury spent months investigating the Board of Supervisors decision to quietly give themselves a 25% pay raise last year. Their conclusion was stark: This decision was not only tone-deaf. It reflected a deeper disconnect from the Board duty to serve the public with transparency and fiscal responsibility.
The board response this week was to formally disagree and move on.
On Tuesday, supervisors voted 3-1-1 to reject the grand jury December report, which had called on them to rescind the raise and return the money by the end of March. Supervisors Don Wagner, Doug Chaffee, and Janet Nguyen voted to approve the board written rebuttal without discussion. Supervisor Katrina Foley, the only supervisor who voted against the raise last year, voted no on the rebuttal. Supervisor Vicente Sarmiento abstained, saying he regretted his original vote in favor of the raise but feared a lawsuit if the board tried to reverse it.
The board official response dismissed nearly every finding. The County disagrees that there was a lack of transparency, it reads. The Board actions were taken in accordance with applicable Government Code requirements which provided two opportunities for public review and comment.
The grand jury had a different read on those two opportunities.
Who Voted For This Raise
What is not disputed: Nguyen voted for the raise. According to reporting by Voice of OC, she was also among those who allegedly helped advance the proposal that changed the compensation formula from 80% of California Superior Court judges salaries to 100%, pushing base pay from roughly $195,000 to $244,000, a jump of nearly $50,000 per year.
On the same day the raise passed, the board also voted to increase each supervisor departmental budget by $143,000, with the stated rationale of offsetting the financial impact of the raise on their offices.
Total annual compensation for Nguyen now stands at approximately $304,880, including a benefits package and a $7,200 car allowance.
What That Looks Like in Westminster
Nguyen represents Orange County First Supervisorial District, which includes Westminster, the heart of Little Saigon and one of the communities she was elected to serve. The median household income in Westminster is approximately $85,000 a year.
Nguyen base salary alone is nearly three times that figure. Her total compensation package is more than 3.5 times the typical income of a Westminster family.
The grand jury did not frame its report in those terms. It did not need to. Its language was pointed enough: Following a corruption scandal, elected bodies typically respond with transparency, humility, and a renewed commitment to ethical governance. They engage the public, restore fiscal integrity, and demonstrate that they understand the gravity of their responsibilities. Regrettably, in this instance, the Board chose a different path.
The Defense
The board legal counsel, Leon Page, acknowledged the raise cannot easily be reversed mid-term without inviting litigation. It is just very difficult to reduce compensation provided to an elected official during his or her term, Page said.
Sarmiento, who expressed regret over his vote, stopped short of moving to rescind the raise. He plans to ask the county CEO to develop a more transparent public notice process for future salary adjustments tied to judicial pay scales. Both Sarmiento and Chaffee have donated their raise amounts to local charities.
Nguyen has not announced any similar gesture.
What the Grand Jury Asked For
Beyond rescinding the raise, the grand jury made three recommendations: return the money by the end of March, commission an independent compensation review, and create a more transparent public process for future salary changes. The board approved response disagreed with all three in substance, confirming only the basic facts of the vote.
The full grand jury report, titled A Breach of Public Trust in Orange County, is available at the OC Grand Jury website. The board official response is posted on the county document archive.
The deadline the grand jury set for returning the raise money is the end of March. The board has given no indication it intends to meet it.