Major Reforms of O.C. Contract Policies Urged

A blue-ribbon panel recommends that the Board of Supervisors drastically reform Orange County’s procedure for awarding government contracts by eliminating much of the discretionary power that supervisors now wield.

In a report finalized this week, members of the group are also critical of the role and perceived influence peddling of county lobbyists but stop short of proposing an outright ban on contact between lobbyists and supervisors.

“If we don’t reform the system, the taxpayers are going to pay,” committee chairman Victor Opincar said Friday. “They’ll pay with more money and poorer services.”

The committee was formed in the wake of the county’s December bankruptcy filing to find potential savings in the cost of county government. Appointed by the Board of Supervisors and composed of community and business leaders, the panel will present its report to the supervisors in two weeks.

Though the 42-page report does identify a number of county departments in which services could be privatized, it focuses primarily on policy issues.

“The task force feels that there are cost savings to be achieved by contracting out a variety of county operations. However, any cost savings will not solve the county’s bankruptcy crisis,” the report states. “To make any larger privatization effort work, the county must adopt some systematic and uniform guidelines.”

*

Among the two strongest recommendations the panel makes are ending the practice of “district prerogative,” by which the board defers decisions on a particular contract to the supervisor whose district is affected; and eliminating the practice of giving supervisors the discretion to award contracts from a list of unprioritized bidders.

The committee recommends that the process be “depoliticized” so all supervisors would be involved in awarding contracts after thorough reviews and recommendations from county staff, private-sector experts and the county executive officer.

Opincar cited the current effort by Supervisor Roger R. Stanton to privatize the entire Environmental Management Agency as an example of the county’s approach to privatization.

“We think they should abandon what they have done and start over,” Opincar said, that the county should avoid wholesale privatization efforts and take a more focused approach.

The task force was also critical of the EMA proposal because it would mean abdicating the county’s control over land use and land planning.

Brea City Manager Frank Benest, a member of the privatization panel, said the reforms recommended in the report would represent a departure from current policies but still would leave “the power to approve contracts solely with the board.”

He said the recommendations would bring the county, which now contracts out $1 billion a year in services, more in line “with the procedures that are followed in most city governments and many county governments.”

Even so, some committee members said, the panel’s report may not go far enough.

“It falls short of making some really serious reforms in terms of lobbying activities and creating regulations that would prevent unfair influence between contractors and county officials,” said member Nick Berardino, a spokesman for the Orange County Employees Assn. “The public’s interests won’t be served unless it takes lobbyists out of the loop.”

*

Berardino was not the only committee member to voice such views, but the committee ultimately decided that such a recommendation would not be appropriate in the report. Others argued that lobbyists help to educate policy makers on the pros and cons of proposals.

“I never thought of what I do as evil,” said lobbyist Reed Royalty, who is a member of the task force.

But Chairman Opincar said that the panel, which held its final scheduled meeting Thursday, was adamant that the county’s privatization and contracting should allow all bidders to compete “on a level playing field.”

None of the county supervisors have seen the committee’s report, but some have already concerns about it.

Supervisor Marian Bergeson said district prerogative, for example, should not be eliminated because it provides accountability between supervisors and their constituents. Furthermore, she said, supervisors generally know what is best for their own districts.

“I’m not certain every member of the board wants to come down to my district so they can look around and become thoroughly acquainted with the issues,” she said.

Supervisor William G. Steiner also said supervisors should have discretion in awarding contracts because they are the most accountable to the electorate. And lobbyists, he said, can be a valuable source of information and do not unduly influence the process as long as supervisors open to hearing from all bidders.

Steiner and Bergeson both agreed, though, that steps should be taken to ensure fair and open competition for county contracts.

Supervisors Gaddi H. Vasquez said he could not comment until he had reviewed the report. Stanton and Supervisor Jim Silva were not available for comment.

Among the report’s specific recommendations are creating a permanent committee of private and public sector volunteers to review all proposals, encouraging county employees to compete with private-sector bids for government contracts, doing background checks of vendors and contractors, and setting up a complaint procedure.

*

Brea’s Benest said the task force was ultimately more concerned with fair and open competition than with privatization.

Nonetheless, the report lists further services that lend themselves to privatization: the Sheriff’s Department’s food, medical, transportation and administrative services at county jails; the General Services Agency’s internal mail delivery, security and fire-alarm installations; the Health Care Agency’s pregnancy, family planning and dental health services; and the Social Services Agency’s foster parent recruiting and training, children’s legal services and laundry services at Orangewood Children’s Home.