If you were asked to list jobs that could last for an adult lifetime thanks to the support or disinterest of hundreds of thousands of people, San Diego County Supervisor would probably make your short list. Once elected, supervisors tend to stay in office unless they get too sick to work, die, move on to higher office, or pull an “Eliot Spitzer.” Yes, we had one supervisor who attracted some attention when he was involved in a prostitution scandal, and as a result, lost his seat. He had served two terms (eight years).

This year, three of the five supervisors are up for re-election. They are Greg Cox (1st District – South County), Dianne Jacob (2nd District – East County), and Pam Slater-Price (3rd District – mostly North Coastal plus Escondido). Together, they represent close to half a century in office. And, there’s no sign that any of them wants to leave. Nor is there any sign that the voters are excited about an opportunity to bring in some fresh faces. Slater-Price and Jacob are running for their fifth four-year term which might be a record for the 150-year-old board. I did a fast check and it appeared to me that 16 years was the old record – held by Slater-Price and Jacob, and someone named Austin de Graff from 60 years ago. Cox is a relative newcomer with only 12 years in the county catbird seat.

What accounts for this impressive longevity which translates into impressive pensions upon retirement? (The salary plus benefits and perquisites are handsome as well.)

Well, let’s list the possible answers:

1. The supervisors are doing such a great job that they should stay for a lifetime.

2. Special interests (campaign funders) aren’t well served by changing politicians they’ve cultivated over the years.

3. Supervisors have built up huge war chests and considerable name recognition, both of which are tough for novice candidates to overcome.

4. Community office-holders who have paid their dues (school board members, council members) are reluctant to go head to head with seated, well-heeled supervisors.

5. There are no viable challengers from the general public.

I’m sure the list could be longer.  But let’s pick three of those bullet points and see what we have:  

(2) Certainly those recipients of the $2 million each supervisor is free to spend each year on a favorite project or organization creates friends and campaign supporters. Those folks know which side their bread is buttered on and don’t want to upset the apple cart. (Yes! Mixed metaphors)

(3) As of Dec. 31, 2007, here’s what the campaign treasuries looked like, according to the County Registrar of Voter’s office: Cox – almost $280,000; Jacob – approximately $348,000; Slater-Price – about $412,000. The challengers told me that they are self-funded, although one has raised $15,000. 

(5) So, let’s turn to those challengers. Each supervisor has one person who has qualified to be a challenger having met all the legal requirements including submitting paperwork and signatures. In District 1, Howard Johnson, a retired, disabled Navy veteran, ran for county assessor in the past. This time, his major issue centers on under-served citizens without health insurance and jobs who can’t qualify for public assistance because the threshold is too high. He also criticizes the choices supervisors are making when donating taxpayers money through their “slush funds.” He called me last night to say that the local Democratic Party is not endorsing him and he sunk $20,000 of his own money into the campaign so far.

In District 2, Rudy Reyes, severely burned in the 2003 Cedar fire after helping his family to escape, is passionate about providing fire protection for his county. With a background in teaching and archeology, he’s reached out successfully for support from the Barona Indian tribe where he was raised. Thus far, he’s collected $15,000 in campaign contributions and believes the momentum for his candidacy is growing. He opposes “slush funds.” 

District 3’s new candidate is engineer John Van Doorn whose issue revolves around parental rights and the family court. He contends that the county increases its revenues by aggressively pursuing child support payments in order to get federal matching funds. So far, he’s the lone contributor to his campaign – about $25,000.

All three challengers are in favor of term limits. But for that to happen, a proposition would have to qualify for the ballot which means thousands of signatures would need to be gathered. According to taxpayer-watchdog, blogger, and Libertarian Richard Rider, about $200,000 is the cost of those petition-signature gatherers. Rider tried to raise that kind of money in 2006, but no special interest was found to underwrite the effort. His conclusion: “Why we bother to hold county supervisor elections is a mystery to me.” Agree?