Upon Further Review, Supes Fumbled

They played a college football game in Oregon last Saturday that would seem to have nothing in common with Orange County government.

That’s what I’m here for.

The Oklahoma Sooners lost the game in the final minute when the Oregon Ducks were awarded possession of an onside kick that everyone now concedes should have gone to Oklahoma. The Pac-10 Conference has suspended for one game the entire officiating crew on the field, as well as two instant replay officials in the booth who reviewed the play and still blew it.

The Pac-10 commissioner apologized to Oklahoma and, with the suspensions, attached accountability for the mistake.

Here in Orange County, an important public official made at least a couple of significant mistakes in a contentious recall election and didn’t even draw a five-minute detention in the corner.

Instead, the Board of Supervisors this week basically conceded that Registrar of Voters Neal Kelley misread state law but told him to be more diligent in the future.

That doesn’t even qualify as the proverbial slap on the wrist. More like giving Kelley a pat on the head, followed by some cookies and hot chocolate.

I’m not trying to play the phony tough guy. I don’t like to see people lose their jobs, and I won’t lose sleep over Kelley keeping his.

But would a little censure from the supes be out of the question? A bit of lamenting that the county’s top election official didn’t know the law that governs his own office? An apology to recall proponents who justifiably are aggrieved by Kelley’s mistakes?

Kelley’s most egregious blunder was letting Capistrano Unified School District officials spend quality time reviewing the names of people signing petitions to recall all seven trustees. If you were a teacher who signed a petition, for example, you wouldn’t want your boss reading your name. That’s why state law prohibits it -- something Kelley says he didn’t know.

Kelley also was wrong in telling the district it would have to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to verify signatures. Not knowing the information was erroneous, the district used it to dissuade potential district taxpayers from signing.

As cover, the board used a review conducted over a 19-day period by two former California county registrars, who concluded that Kelley didn’t knowingly violate the law. Some recall leaders dispute that, but it’s a moot point because the reviewers didn’t conduct what anyone would consider a classic investigation -- a point they acknowledged in their report.

The reviewers concluded that Kelley’s mistakes didn’t affect the outcome of the recall.

OK, but don’t misreads of state law from a county’s top election official warrant some punishment?

I put that to Board of Supervisors Chairman Bill Campbell, who conceded it was a legitimate question. Campbell said he considered Kelley’s previous good record (he was named acting registrar in August 2005 and given the job in April 2006).

“If Neal had a fault on this,” Campbell said, “it was that he tried to be too service-oriented without taking the time to make sure everything was being done exactly right,” adding that election laws are complicated and that he thought Kelley’s instincts were pure.

Campbell said California Secretary of State Bruce McPherson had told him on previous occasions that he considered Kelley “one of the best registrars in the state. I respect that from someone who gets a chance to look at all 56 registrars,” Campbell said.

All fair arguments. But if the reviewers were able to conclude that Kelley violated the law, why couldn’t he? Besides, recall proponents aren’t convinced to this day that Kelley wasn’t aware of the law.

Campbell believes that Kelley’s office will make good on the reviewers’ recommendations.

That’s called a free pass.

I’m prepared to get on with my life, but I wondered how recall supporter Tom Russell felt about Kelley’s reprieve. I confessed to Russell about grappling with the crime vs. punishment scenario.

“I’ve wrestled with the same question myself, repeatedly,” Russell said.

He isn’t adamant that Kelley receive stiff punishment -- partly, he said, because the “investigation” wasn’t deep enough to answer all of the questions he and his group had.

“The supervisors could have gone further in dealing a little more severely with Mr. Kelley,” Russell said, “as he did admit he exercised his own judgment [in letting unauthorized people review petitions]. It’s not his job to second-guess the Legislature. That’s what he did. In his position as top dog, registrar of voters, he shouldn’t be doing that.”

Agreed. The instant replay officials have concluded Kelley blew it. Now, what’s the football equivalent of misreading the law?

Dana Parsons’ column appears Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays. He can be reached at (714) 966-7821 or at dana.parsons@latimes.com. An archive of his recent columns is at www.latimes.com/parsons.