By Arturo Castañares
Publisher
The San Diego County Board of Supervisors will interview 8 applicants for appointment to the vacant position of County Treasurer-Tax Collector on Tuesday, but insiders are suggesting a backroom deal connected to the appointment may lead to a tax measure on the 2026 ballot and endorsements for a replacement to run in next year's election.
Although the rumored deal seems far-fetched, the steps are not unreasonable and the outcome seems like a plausible scenario that may, in fact, play out as explained by inside sources.
Elected Treasurer Dan McAllister resigned last month for undisclosed reasons after having first been elected to the countywide position in 2002 and re-elected five times. His current term ends after the November 2026 election.
The County Treasurer-Tax Collector (TTC) office receives payments from property taxes paid on homes, buildings, land, airplanes, and boats throughout the County, as well as collecting the transient occupancy taxes paid to hotels in unincorporated areas.
The TTC also manages the County’s investment pool, which ranges in value from over $10 billion to more than $18 billion in assets that includes reserves from the County, all 42 school districts in the county, community colleges, fire districts, and various cities.
Although ten individuals applied for the open position, two candidates have withdrawn their names from consideration.
Of the remaining applicants, the most directly experienced for the position is David Baker, who has served as the Chief Deputy Treasurer-Tax Collector for the past seven years and has worked in the Treasurer’s office since 2002.
Other applicants include a Chief Business Officer for a local school district, a Chief of Staff to a local congressman, a local accountant, a financial consultant, a local licensed CPA, the elected Treasurer of a local city, a former Treasurer of another local city, and a Manager in the Treasurer-Tax Collector’s office.
The County Administrative Ordinances outline minimum qualification requirements for the position, including practical experience as a senior financial management position in a county, city, or other public agency; a college degree with in accounting, auditing, or finance; being a licensed CPA; or certification from either the Institute of Chartered Financial Analysts or Treasurer Management Association.
All of the applicants met the minimum qualification for eligibility to serve as Treasurer-Tax Collector.
The Board of Supervisors will conduct interviews of the candidates during its regular meeting on Tuesday, and could make a selection with three or more votes from the Supervisors.
The person appointed to the position will serve the remainder of McAllister’s term, which expires when the winner of the November 2026 election for the position takes the oath of office in January 2027.
The appointed Treasurer-Tax Collector will also be eligible to run for the vacant seat in the 2026 election cycle.
McAllister’s salary in 2023 was $228,000, plus benefits, which totaled more than $358,000 that year, making it one of the highest paid government opposition in the region.
Unlike the positions of Supervisors, Sheriff, and District Attorney, there are no term limits for the position of Treasurer-Tax Collector.
Supervisor Joel Anderson had expressed interest in the open position after McAllister announced his early retirement.
Anderson, who was first elected to the Board of Supervisors in November 2020, is serving his second term, which runs through January 2029.
But, last month, Anderson sought a legal opinion from the County Counsel’s office asking whether a Supervisor could apply for the position after the Board decided to fill the vacancy by appointment instead of calling for a special election.
Although the legal memo concluded that a Supervisor could apply for the position, the County Charter includes language that limits Supervisors “while holding office and for one year after" from "being ineligible for appointment to or employment in any other County position providing compensation.”
Legal experts disagree on whether the language would apply to being appointed to an elected position like Treasurer-Tax Collector, or only applies to “Appointive Officers” defined in the Charter, including the County Chief Administrative Officer, County Counsel, and Probation Chief.
In the end, Anderson did not apply, but he is rumored to be interested in running for the position in next year’s election when he will be halfway through his second term as a Supervisor, which is now the limit after voters passed Measure B in June 2010 to establish term limits.
It would be a free ride for Anderson who could risk running for the Treasurer seat while it’s up for election next year, but still retain his Supervisor seat for two more years if he were to lose.
If elected Treasurer, though, Anderson would resign his seat on the Board of Supervisors and create a vacancy which could be filled by appointment by the remaining Supervisors or they could call a special election as they did when Nathan Fletcher resigned in 2023 and Nora Vargas did in January of this year.
Two seats on the Board of Supervisors are up for election next year; Democratic Supervisor Monica Montgomery Steppe will be up for re-election and Republican Jim Desmond’s seat will be open after he is termed out of office after serving two four-year terms.
Montgomery Steppe is expected to win re-election, but Desmond’s seat could be up for grabs in a hotly contested race that currently included two Republicans in San Marcos Mayor Rebecca Jones and Vista Mayor John Franklin, as well as Democrat Kyle Krahel-Frolander, a staffer for Congressman Mike Levin (D-Dana Point) who resigned his volunteer position as Chairman of the San Diego County Democratic Party last month to run.
If either Republicans wins, the Board majority would remain the same with three Democrats and two Republicans, but Krahel-Frolander winning would provide a crucial fourth vote on the Board which would allow Democrats to make changes to the budget throughout the year and also place measures directly on the ballot without the expensive process of gathering signatures.
If the majority does not change and Anderson runs and wins the position of Treasurer, the Democratic majority could then choose to appoint an interim Supervisor and give themselves a fourth vote at least through the 2028 elections.
Anderson previously served two two-year terms in the California State Assembly from 2006 to 2010, then two four-year terms in the State Senate from 2010 to 2018, before winning his first election to the Board of Supervisors in 2020, but he did not acrue any retirement vesting time because Legislators are excluded from the state retirement system.
Being elected Treasurer would open Anderson up to serve multiple terms and increase his pension which is based on his last year’s salary and the number of years of service, a change potentially worth millions of dollars over his lifetime.
Last week, sources leaked about a backroom deal includes a three-step process which could take months to play out in public.
The rumored deal would involve the Supervisors appointing David Baker as Treasurer, which would be a reasonable decision based on his many years of service and working knowledge of the office.
Baker, who has already worked in the Treasurer’s office for more than 20 years, is not politically connected or well-known enough to be considered a strong candidate to run for the position in next year’s election.
That would set up an easy race for Anderson to run and win the position outright in next year's election.
The main component of the rumored deal then includes Anderson agreeing to be the fourth vote for placing a countywide tax increase measure on the November 2026 ballot to raise revenues needed to close the County’s structural budget deficit.
Anderson has said he would not vote to put a tax increase measure on the ballot, but insiders suspect the staunch Republican could position his vote not as a tax increase, but simply a vote to allow voters to decide if they want to tax themselves.
A similar countywide 1/2-cent sales tax ballot measure failed in last year’s election, as did the City of San Diego’s 1/2-cent sales tax increase.
Labor unions representing County employees have made a tax increase measure a key component of their plans to avoid massive staff layoffs and budget cuts that would be necessary without additional revenues.
Raising signatures to place a countywide measure on the ballot could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, so having the Board place a measure directly on the ballot is their preferred path to save resources for the voter campaign.
But the most controversial component of the rumored deal is that Democrats and labor unions would then support Anderson in his run for Treasurer next year.
With the consolidated support of the major funders in local campaigns, Anderson would be virtually assured to win the race even if the appointed interim decided to seek election.
The rumor also involves Anderson dropping his Republican Party registration, presumably claiming its a better fit to run for the non-partisan financial position, but it would also allow Democratic elected officials to endorse him as a non-partisan candidate and not fear retribution from their Party.
In the end, Anderson has no clear path forward within the Republican Party anyway. There are no partisan seats for him to run for in the next two elections unless he decided to run for Congress against incumbent Darrell Issa in his massive district that spans from the Mexican border to Imperial County and up to the Coachella Valley.
And even if Issa were to retire to open the seat for Anderson, at least two Democrats are already running for that seat and a race for Congress takes raising million of dollars just to be competitive, a huge task for Anderson to start for next year's election cycle.
As unlikely as the alleged deal may be, the reality is that Democrats and labor unions at the County are worried —if not panicked— that they have driven the County into near bankruptcy in just five years of having majority control of what used to be the most fiscally sound agency in our region.
They need a deal, and Anderson may be their best chance at surviving and thriving in the tough financial situation the County is now in.
A deal between Democrats, unions, and Anderson may sound strange, but remember Twain said politics makes for strange bedfellows. And in this case, the stakes are high enough that it may take a strange deal among unlikely fellows to make it all work out for each of them.
Stay tuned...
