Sheriff, D.A. May Take Over More Services

Struggling to erase a $38-million deficit, Ventura County supervisors have approached the sheriff and district attorney about the possibility of taking over some county agencies and services as a cost-saving measure.

Their proposal would give control of certain programs to Sheriff Larry Carpenter and Dist. Atty. Michael D. Bradbury. They in turn would pay the cost of providing the services out of their own budgets and would not receive any extra county funding.

Members of the County Board of Supervisors have turned to the two law enforcement officials for help partly because their departments are in the best financial shape in the county. The supervisors already have promised to exclude them from future budget cuts facing virtually all other county departments.

“Those discussions are taking place,” Bradbury said. “The sheriff and I are exploring ways we can help alleviate the county’s economic plight.”

Carpenter is also willing to consider consolidating some programs under his department to help ease the county’s financial bind, Undersheriff Richard Bryce said.

“We’re not the bad guy, even though we’ve been painted that way,” Bryce said. “We want to do whatever we can to help the county with its budget problems.”

Bradbury and Bryce declined to discuss what county programs or services might be affected by a possible merger.

During last year’s budget session, however, the sheriff and district attorney offered to assume responsibility for $2.5 million worth of county services. This included taking over entire programs such as the medical examiner’s office, legal services for children, welfare fraud investigations and prosecution of code enforcement cases.

The board declined the offer, choosing instead to transfer some funding from the sheriff and district attorney’s budgets to pay for those services.

But that is not likely to happen this year.

Angered by the board’s action, Bradbury and Carpenter launched a petition drive to ensure that all sales tax revenues generated from voter-approved Proposition 172 would be spent solely on public safety. The petition defines public safety as the sheriff, district attorney, public defender, probation and fire services.

Armed with more than 50,000 signatures--enough to force a special election--Carpenter, Bradbury and other organizers of the campaign plan to deliver the petition to election officials Tuesday. Supervisors Frank Schillo and Judy Mikels, both elected in November, and John Flynn, who opposed last year’s transfer of Proposition 172 funds, have all signed the petition.

By exempting public safety from future budget cuts, however, the board has limited its options to reduce a mounting deficit without devastating county departments and services.

Some cost-cutting measures proposed so far call for eliminating 300 county jobs, using $14 million in reserves and reducing financial support for county health and welfare services over the next two years.

Last week, Schillo and Mikels asked the board to delay further discussions about potential program cuts for two weeks to give them more time to talk to department heads about consolidating some services.

Schillo and Mikels declined to say whether Bradbury or Carpenter would be included in those talks.

“We don’t want to paint anybody into a corner,” Mikels said. “We’re trying to bring people together, not drive them apart.”

Meanwhile, some county officials criticized the prospect of consolidating some services under the sheriff and district attorney’s wing. Doing this, they warned, would mean that the board would have to give up more control over services.

But Bradbury said reducing government spending should be the supervisors’ primary concern.

“I don’t think the board is so much interested in control as it is in the efficiency and effectiveness of those services,” he said.

Both Bradbury and sheriff’s officials said one thing is certain: They are not willing to give up any Proposition 172 funding to pay for programs outside their jurisdiction.

“The sheriff doesn’t feel comfortable funding something he doesn’t have control over,” Bryce said.

Still, consolidating some services could prove to be difficult.

Dr. Ronald L. O’Halloran, the county’s medical examiner, said he opposed consolidating his office under the Sheriff’s Department last year and would do so again.

“I think we serve the public better by being an independent agency,” he said. “I don’t support it.”

O’Halloran said it is important for him to maintain his autonomy for a number of reasons. For example, he said, there could be a conflict of interest if an inmate were to die under suspicious circumstances while in the sheriff’s custody.

But Bryce and others said that several California county sheriff’s departments operate their own medical examiner’s office, and that there have been no major problems.