O.C. Board Expansion Gets Warm Response at Forum

Proposals to expand the Orange County Board of Supervisors received widespread support Thursday during a public hearing aimed at restructuring the county’s government in the wake of the bankruptcy.

But county, business and community leaders were sharply divided over whether board members should be part-time posts and whether centralized power should be given to a county “mayor” or chief executive officer.

“Part-time supervisors means part-time representation,” said Supervisor Jim Silva, adding that Orange County voters demand and deserve supervisors who work full time on their behalf.

The debate over how Orange County should be governed came during a meeting of the Orange County Charter Commission, which is collecting public input on the governance issue that is expected to ultimately go before the voters in March. The measure would ask voters if Orange County should become a general law county, a change that supporters say would mean greater local governing control and accountability.

Recommendations presented Thursday included a draft proposal by the Orange County division of the League of California Cities to increase the size of the board to make supervisorial districts smaller and increase representation. But the proposal would limit their authority to policy-making decisions and appoint a chief executive officer to handle administration.

Recommendations presented by the Orange County Business Council also advocated increasing the board’s size but exploring the idea of making members part-timers and giving broad powers to a chief executive officer, similar to a proposal Supervisor Marian Bergeson made months ago.

Other suggestions from the public included: a county board made up of city representatives, term limits, and citizen oversight committees for every department and agency.

More than 60 people attended Thursday’s meeting at Chapman University, the largest turnout ever for the Charter Commission, formed earlier this year by the Board of Supervisors. But Silva said he was still disappointed more people didn’t show, given the significance of the commission’s task.

The commission will begin working on a final recommendation, expected in the coming weeks.

The Board of Supervisors endorsed the concept of making this a general law county, in response to frustrated cries for restructuring the government that lost nearly $2 billion in county investment funds and declared bankruptcy on Dec. 6.

Currently, Orange County is a general law county, meaning it abides by state laws for local governance. For example, the state requires counties to elect a treasurer-tax collector, and limits what services can be privatized.

The most dramatic change that comes with charter status is breaking away from such rules. The board of supervisors in charter counties can convert elected positions to appointed posts, giving the board absolute hiring and firing power.

This key difference has been highlighted locally. Because former Treasurer-Tax Collector Robert L. Citron and other elected officials blamed for playing a role in the bankruptcy were elected, they could not be fired. Citron ultimately resigned under pressure.

But critics, distrustful of the Board of Supervisors, are not eager to support any move that grants them greater authority. With elected officials, they say, the public can always launch a recall.

Steve White of the Committees of Correspondence, and a Charter Commission member, said he is worried about giving too much power to a CEO and instead wants a business manager who would be responsible for carrying out the board’s orders.

“We really don’t favor creating a county czar,” he said.

The ballot measure must have the approval of the Board of Supervisors before it goes before the voters.