The Powers That Be

Dist. Atty. Michael D. Bradbury was off riding his horse when the latest county government crisis broke, but he managed to fire off a few quick shots at anybody who might be thinking of trying to touch Ventura County’s law enforcement budget.

Sheriff Bob Brooks, cool and poised as always, politely made the same point. And he added the suggestion that the next time a stranger rides into town to take the chief administrative job, he might want to talk to the people who count.

Publicly silent, Health Services Chief Pierre Durand wasn’t talking about another set of charges--that he runs a department “commonly known for withholding information, unresponsiveness, untimeliness” and other sins. Behind the scenes, however, he remained the busiest of choreographers.

Make no mistake about it, when it comes to who counts the most in Ventura County government, the list begins with Bradbury, Brooks and Durand. Collectively, their power is unmatched. They are the Big Three of county government, more powerful than the Board of Supervisors, more powerful than the chief county executive.

The official spin last week was that David L. Baker had raised a lot of good points during his brief term as county chief administrative officer, but that he exaggerated the overall problems a bit and was kind of a wimp to just quit instead of hanging around to fix things.

Baker had stayed just long enough to see a county with financial management problems that horrified him. And, correctly assessing the political realities of county government, he decided he would never be able to muster the political clout needed to either rally the board or impose his will on his most powerful department chiefs.

So now it’s up to the Board of Supervisors. As a short-term answer to the thousand and one issues raised by Baker before his departure last week, the board is speaking pointedly of committing to a new unity on solving this particular crisis and quickly finding a “strong executive” to take the CAO job for a year or so to get the county’s money problems back in some kind of decent shape.

“Strong executive” in this case is a bit of a euphemism. The board is looking for a hired gun to come in and do whatever has to be done. A hatchet man, if you will. Just how long board unity will last as the hatchet man starts chopping heads remains a very open question.

There is little doubt that the short-term problems faced by the county are serious. When the county auditor starts talking about the county’s ability to meet its next payroll, you know it’s time for some fast action.

But the long-term problems are the truly difficult issues raised by Baker, and there is no indication yet that anybody in county government intends to truly focus on them.

The supervisors themselves are part of the problem. They are typically split on many issues, with Frank Schillo and Judy Mikels leaning one way and Susan Lacey and Kathy Long inclined another, all of them too often at the mercy of John Flynn’s unpredictable swing vote. They have too many pet issues, too many pet department heads, and they have been too inclined in the past to keep their eyes shut to mounting problems.

*

In the vacuum that has been created by the board’s lack of unity, the county’s truly powerful department heads have been too free to pursue their own interests at the expense of everybody else in county government. That has to change for any meaningful reform to occur, but there’s no guarantee that it will.

Let’s take Baker’s suggestions that this county needs a much stronger top manager--a chief executive officer instead of a chief administrative officer. In other words, somebody with more power than a Bradbury or a Brooks or a Durand. Is something like that even possible politically when law enforcement support is often critical to the election chances of any county supervisor?

Or let’s look at the Proposition 172 funding issue. Ventura County is the only county in the state that locks in Proposition 172 funds for law enforcement, and reasonable people might conclude there could be just a teensy bit of give in that when times are tight. Maybe even an amendment to the law the supervisors hastily passed a few years ago.

But is that possible? We will find out in coming months. Bradbury and Brooks have incredible public support. They are quick to argue that Proposition 172 helps keep Ventura County the safest county in the West, and the voters who elect supervisors love that. The fact that it was the safest county before Proposition 172 isn’t ever mentioned. The bottom line: It should not depend on the goodwill of Bradbury and Brooks.

*

The great irony in this whole topsy-turvy world is that the Big Three of county government wield their power because of a combination of traits that are to be admired, not denigrated. Mike Bradbury is not only a great district attorney, he is a kind of living symbol of the county itself. Bob Brooks, though relatively new in his job, long ago established himself as a thoroughly decent and thoughtful man. And Pierre Durand may be the smartest administrator in the county.

It’s tempting to suggest that since they clearly possess many of the skills needed for the county’s top job, maybe one of them should step forward to fill David Baker’s vacancy.

But why would anybody voluntarily give up that much power?