Steiner Goes ‘on Offensive’ With Recall Rebuttal : Politics: The supervisor says he takes effort seriously and proves it by answering critics’ complaints in a formal statement that will appear on the ballot if it comes to that.

Saying he was taking a recall effort against him seriously, County Supervisor William G. Steiner on Thursday filed an official rebuttal to comments made by an anti-tax group seeking his ouster.

“I’m going on the offensive,” Steiner said. “I think the recall effort is going nowhere, but I think it’s a good insurance policy to be proactive and not sit on my hands.”

Members of the Orange County Recalls Committee, who served recall papers on Steiner last week, could not be reached for comment. At the time they filed their recall notice, committee members said they were upset with Steiner’s role in the county’s bankruptcy crisis.

The group cited several reasons behind the recall, including Steiner’s lack of oversight during former Treasurer-Tax Collector Robert L. Citron’s involvement in risky investments that ultimately led to the county’s $1.7-billion loss and Dec. 6 bankruptcy declaration. The group also criticized Steiner’s support of placing a half-cent sales tax increase on the June ballot, and his refusal to divert Measure M transportation funds as a way of solving the bankruptcy.

In a statement filed with the county registrar of voters’ office, Steiner responded to many of the group’s complaints. Like other board members, Steiner blamed the bankruptcy on Citron, saying the longtime treasurer “lied” and “misled” county residents about the risks of his investments. Furthermore, he said, investment experts failed to warn the board of Citron’s risky strategies.

Steiner, one of two remaining supervisors who were on the board when the county went bankrupt, also stated that he is a fiscal conservative who has never voted to increase taxes. He supported putting the proposed sales tax increase on the ballot because he thought the voters had a right to decide the issue, according to his statement.

Steiner criticized the recall organizers as “carpetbaggers” who don’t live in his 4th District, which includes the cities of Orange, Anaheim, Placentia, Buena Park and La Palma. He said Thursday he was holding a “town meeting” with constituents that night to “answer the group’s charges, gauge support and determine a strategy” to defeat the recall effort.

In order get the recall on the ballot, organizers will have to collect signatures from about 20,000 registered voters in Steiner’s district in 160 days. If the recall does make it to the ballot, Steiner’s written response would be included on the ballot information. Such a recall election could cost taxpayers $150,000, officials said.

Because his statement was limited to 200 words, he was not able to fully refute all of the group’s charges, Steiner said in an interview.

For example, he said he opposed diverting Measure M transportation funds to solve the bankruptcy because it would have jeopardized transportation projects “approved by the voters in 1990.”

Formerly director of the Orangewood Children’s Home for abused and neglected children, Steiner was appointed to the Board of Supervisors in March, 1993, by Gov. Pete Wilson. He was reelected in June, 1994, with nearly 70% of the vote in his district. His term expires in December, 1998.

Steiner is the third supervisor to receive a recall notice since the bankruptcy. A recall attempt against Supervisor Roger R. Stanton failed to gather enough community support. Another against then-Board Chairman Gaddi H. Vasquez was dropped after he announced his resignation from office.