Reorganization Needs Rethinking

* I am concerned, but not surprised, to learn (“Supervisors OK Mittermeier’s Reorganization,” Nov. 20) that the Board of Supervisors approved the county chief executive officer’s plan to reorganize county government.

Of particular interest is the reconstruction of the Harbors, Beaches and Parks Department into a new superagency called the Public Facilities and Resources Department that includes public works, flood control and maintenance services.

I can understand and appreciate the opposition expressed by supporters of parks and recreation, such as the hiking and trails groups, regional park volunteers and the members of the county Parks and Recreation Commission. The opposition at the board meeting is only the tip of the iceberg. Wait until the full spectrum of the parks and recreation lobby reacts to the unprecedented and premature decision that was submitted by a new CEO, and approved by a lame duck Board of Supervisors.

What concerns me most is the poor timing of the decision. This major decision should have waited for the two newly elected and one appointed board members. It’s evident that our CEO, Jan Mittermeier, took the opportunity to hurriedly run her reorganization plan past [a board] that has been continually gunshy in its decision-making ever since the bankruptcy. That’s not a very courteous or smart way to treat three incoming board members.

Case histories that relate to public or government organization verify that super-departments such as the one in the new reorganization structure are very unmanageable. They basically de-emphasize and reduce the size and service levels of the sections within the department. For Mittermeier to advise the Board of Supervisors that service levels will not be reduced under the new reorganization is either wishful thinking or [a mistake] by an overzealous or inexperienced staff.

I share the realities of the Orange County bankruptcy. I also understand that the size of county government and the budget must be reduced. Forming superagencies and drastically cutting positions is not necessarily the best answer. There are numerous other methods to generate revenue and reduce the budget, which should be carefully and continually explored.

Orange County is a good place to live and raise a family. Its harbors and beaches, along with its regional parks, give Orange County one of the most beautiful systems in the nation. Parks have different goals than those of public works, flood control or general maintenance. Let’s be big enough to correct a mistake and not risk the possibility of shortchanging the current and future recreational and leisure needs of the citizens of Orange County.

WILLIAM DE LA GARZA

Westminster

* At the Nov. 19 Board of Supervisors meeting (held for supervisors’ convenience in the morning), Chairman Roger Stanton capped a lackluster career with his unfortunate remarks when approving CEO Jan Mittermeier’s county restructure plan: “ . . . our job isn’t management, it’s setting policy guidelines. . . .” No one on the board took issue with him. He and they still don’t get it.

After helping Orange County blow $1.6 billion, Stanton and the rest of the supervisors need to be reminded again just what their jobs are: to supervise.

Let’s refer to the Supervisors’ Deskbook, put out this July by the county counsel in a desperate attempt to spell it out for Chairman Stanton and others. The taxpayer-funded Deskbook lays out the powers of the board. First among the 26 powers is to “supervise the official conduct of county officers and officers of all districts and other subdivisions of the county.”

Stanton and three other supervisors have handed over most of the powers to an unelected bureaucrat, the chief executive officer. Based on Stanton’s comment, he doesn’t want to be bothered to manage her.

Now we have the CEO running the county, a boss who does not need to face the voters in an election. A lame duck chairman and the rest of the board want to spin policy, not supervise. This is not performance or accountability, this is an early retirement stance and not even close to what we need and expect from elected supervisors who get paid the big bucks to supervise.

It’s too late for lame duck Stanton, but one solution to our lack of accountable Orange County governance is for the supervisors to do what they were elected to do--supervise. With his kind of laissez faire attitude at our supervisorial helm, I only wish his impending retirement would come retroactively, like mid-1994.

ROBERT GEISS

Lake Forest