Running the County : A clear, strong role for the CEO is important

For the first century of its existence, Orange County government functioned with a county administrative officer at the top of the roster of nonelected officials. But then came the bankruptcy and justifiable demands to fix a system that appeared broken.

The supervisors fired the administrative officer and decided to switch to a different form of governing, with a chief executive officer at the top. Now that new structure has been attacked, with at least one supervisor saying perhaps the old CAO method wasn’t too bad after all.

This month, the county’s chief executive officer, Jan Mittermeier, won a vote of confidence from the majority of the five-man Board of Supervisors. The majority said she was doing an “outstanding job,” was “superior” in leading, planning and business skills, and “above average” in relations with the supervisors and communications.

The board majority also cut off an attempt to reduce Mittermeier’s powers. If successful, that reduction could have meant a return to the old CAO form of government. It’s worth remembering that the inquiries into the 1994 bankruptcy made the CAO model appear akin to a lion tamer in the ring without a whip.

No one believed that changing a title, adding new duties, and fixing reporting arrangements alone would improve county government’s workings. Nor was the change designed to relieve the supervisors of responsibility. The buck should stop on the fifth floor of the Hall of Administration, at the supervisors’ desks.

But the old method, with heads of departments and agencies, some of them elected and some appointed, reporting to the supervisors while the CAO tried to coordinate their activities, had flaws that were dramatically underscored by the bankruptcy. With everyone in charge, no one is in charge. The CEO form has department heads reporting to the executive. She can hire and fire most agency heads who are not elected and has a louder voice in how the departments operate.

What sparked the furor over Mittermeier was the use of the El Toro airfield after the Marines leave in 1999. It’s the most important issue in the county and deserves the full attention of everyone, from the supervisors to Mittermeier to county planners.

Supervisor Thomas W. Wilson was upset when Mittermeier refused to provide him with information about trips scheduled by those planning the airport conversion. Wilson and Supervisor Todd Spitzer are opponents of turning El Toro into a commercial airport. The two demanded a closed-session personnel review that could have resulted in disciplining Mittermeier. Instead, she won support from the majority, which so far has supported a commercial airport. Mittermeier since has agreed to biweekly briefings of the supervisors on El Toro reuse developments. That clearly is needed.

But the airport is just one of many issues where it is important to have a clearer and stronger role for the county’s top executive. In the heat of the moment over a particular policy debate, it is perhaps too easy to allow personality clashes and quarrels over specific projects to cloud the larger topic of what form of government is best.

Soon after the bankruptcy, the supervisors--only one of whom is still in office, Chairman William G. Steiner--appointed a 30-person commission to determine what reforms, if any, were needed. The panel came down strongly for change and said the supervisors should set policy and let a strong CEO carry it out.

The supervisors still have the power to fire the CEO if they don’t like the job she or he is doing. The supervisors have staffs large enough to keep them apprised of what is going on in the county. They shouldn’t be micro-managing, but they should be supervising.