Good, Bad Sides of O.C. Government

Often we hear criticism of government, sometimes valid, charging mismanagement, disrespect for taxpayer dollars and myriad other reasons.

Last fall, a group of citizens was appointed to serve on the public protection subcommittee, under the Government Practices Oversight Committee. The task was to study our public safety system, composed of the Sheriff’s Department, district attorney’s office and Probation Department. Committee members were drawn from a broad spectrum of experience and expertise. We all came with a willingness and determination to observe objectively. In the last phase, after meeting with the department heads, we separated into smaller groups to examine our findings and develop a report.

Due to the county’s bankruptcy, and the stress put on these systems and the folks who work within, we felt it imperative that we share our report with the taxpayers.

To understand the Probation Department and the very difficult job of delivering a service to a sector of society is an enlightening experience. The Probation Department is headed by Michael Schumacher, a man of great vision, skill and knowledge. His team is composed of three chief deputies. All are exceptional people.

The budget for the entire Probation Department for 1995-96 is $60 million, compared to $68 million in 1994-95. We reviewed the budget, toured facilities, observed, asked questions and met with employees regarding their work.

Our conclusion: kudos to all. The dedication of employees, fulfillment of the department’s mission, level of cleanliness, attitude, educational programs, and quality of rehabilitation are all “A+.”

The personnel were dedicated and responsive, their programs dynamic.

The use of volunteers and private donations is admirable, freeing up precious time and money for other needs. This department exemplifies what we all want from our government: responsibility and value for the taxpayer’s dollar.

ROBERT E. HILL

KATHERINE H. SMITH

Anaheim

* Re “Orange County Government Given Dismal Review by Panel,” June 21:

When Orange County Board of Supervisors Chairman Roger R. Stanton commented on the panel’s report of unfair contract awarding and patronage, he said, “If anyone has hard evidence, bring it forward and we’ll stamp it out.”

This requires no investigation! It is standard, authorized board practice to always get a list of contractors for each county job. The companies on the list must then hire or use in-house lobbyists to convince or cut the best deal with the supervisor whose district has the project.

If that isn’t patronage, I don’t know what is. Before working for Orange County, I worked for many years as an engineering manager for Los Angeles County Public Works Department. There, professionals carefully examined and weighed each bidder according to experience, caliber of employees, approach to the job, safety record, cost, etc. After scores from all reviewers were evaluated, a single firm was recommended and the Board of Supervisors would approve it (provided no untoward contingencies occurred later).

I was most surprised when going to work in an almost identical post as engineering manager for Orange County, that its Board of Supervisors required a list and consequent patronage of bidders for any jobs with them.

Stanton knows this, so why the hypocritical posturing?

KEN KUAMMEN

Newport Beach