Where Was the Oversight? There’s Ample Blame for O.C. Bankruptcy

As a retired banking executive, I find it appalling that one person could have had such control over the investments of such a large pool as in Orange County.

Preservation of principal should be the conservative investment approach for any entity entrusted with public funds.

While I was aware of (Robert) Citron’s repo investments, I presumed they were a very small piece of the county’s funds. I find it somewhat ironic that the various municipality and agency treasurers are now running for cover when they knew what type of investments Mr. Citron was making.

He made no secret of these, as (John) Moorlach touted during his campaign. There was an element of greed connected with these investments that these various treasurers seem to now want to disavow.

I really question the oversight process in our county. The grand jury has the responsibility of investigating the various county agencies. In reviewing the summary of Orange County Grand Jury reports for the past 14 years, I find that the treasurer-tax collector entity has not been examined since 1985! How could this be given the recession we’ve experienced and the notoriety Mr. Citron’s investments drew during his reelection bid?

Where was our Board of Supervisors? Why wouldn’t they have raised the question about the prudence of his investments and had this looked at by an independent body?

BOB REED

Santa Ana

* Advice to the higher-ups hunting for scapegoats in the bankruptcy debacle: Just blame it on the illegal (immigrants). A significant number of Orange County (residents) would buy that.

MONA DAVIS

Cypress

* As Orange County property owners pay $1 billion for the property tax installment this week, it is an especially bitter experience. We are merely replacing a portion of what was lost this year by the county government gambling with our hard-earned money.

The $1.5-billion loss has implications far beyond Orange County, as it raises yet another question about the ability and efficiency of any government bureaucracy. Citron unwittingly provided another reason why many voters want government to do less whenever possible.

WILLIAM L. STRONG

San Clemente

* Our county treasurer-tax collector has to my knowledge been given no mandate to gamble or risk any taxpayer’s money for a potential “higher than average yield.”

Derivatives are guaranteed to make money only for the bank or financial institution that puts it together, the broker that brokers it, and the lawyers that later on will argue the legality of the transaction.

It is a sophisticated and clever way of siphoning money out of the general economy where the payee ultimately becomes the taxpayer.

The pathetic part to the story is that I see no one willing to assume responsibility for this mess.

When a bridge collapsed in Seoul, South Korea, recently, the engineers that designed it were sent to jail. What Robert Citron has done is no less criminal than what former junk bond king Michael Milken did, and will cost the county more than the sum total of all burglaries committed in 1994.

IVAR SCHOENMEYR

Anaheim

* Orange County is down $1.5 billion because our county treasurer, Bob Citron, made risky investments. The ramifications of this disaster are yet to be determined--but it is safe to say we are in big financial trouble. Citron and his staff must accept the blame. But there are others who should be feeling uncomfortable--for instance The L.A. Times.

This might have been avoided if voters would have taken John Moorlach seriously when he ran against Citron in the June elections. Moorlach exposed this problem and predicted the disaster. Why didn’t the voters take Moorlach more seriously?

We trusted The Times! When The Times endorsed Citron, so did its readers. I think you owe the citizens of Orange County an apology.

B. O’NEIL

Newport Beach

* Your editorial, “The Risk of Living in Investment’s Fast Lane (Dec. 3),” made me wonder if there shouldn’t be a law that prevents the state from gambling with the public’s money--ever.

In too many instances the word “investment” is but a euphemism for the word gambling.

If the state wants interest on its money, it should be “investing” in federal bonds or putting the money in federally insured banks. So all we may get is 3%. So what? At least we can all sleep at night.

The worst part is that they invested money they didn’t have. They borrowed money on credit. Now that’s got to be a no-no when dealing with the public’s money.

BENNY WASSERMAN

La Palma