Reaction Mixed to Call for Study

A proposal to hire a consultant to make recommendations on how the county’s leadership can perform more efficiently got a mixed reaction from the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday.

Supervisors Kathy Long and John K. Flynn offered initial support for the plan proposed by a Ventura County taxpayers group.

But two other supervisors, Frank Schillo and Judy Mikels, said a formal and potentially costly assessment of the county’s management structure is not needed.

What is needed is to hire a tough administrator to clean up the budget mess the county is facing, Schillo said.

“It’s time for action, not for consultants,” he said after Tuesday’s board meeting. “I’m not keen about spending more time on studies. We need to give leeway to our interim CAO to make recommendations first.”

A recruiting process to find a temporary chief administrative officer to replace David L. Baker, who resigned last month after four days, is underway.

Board Chairwoman Susan Lacey didn’t take a position on the consultant, but Long asked interim county manager Bert Bigler to investigate the feasibility.

The proposal was brought to the board by Mike Saliba, president of the Ventura County Taxpayers Assn. The consultant would review the relationships among the board, chief administrative officer, auditor-controller and department heads, recommending changes to bring fiscal stability and efficiency to county governance, Saliba told supervisors.

Baker’s six-page resignation letter detailing “near financial chaos” and “overwhelming problems” in the county’s management structure has alarmed his group’s membership, Saliba said.

Intense media coverage that followed Baker’s abrupt resignation has focused on a cash-flow crisis this year and other problems that have quietly simmered in county government for years.

“A lot of people are calling to ask what the heck is going on in the County Government Center,” Saliba said. “This has been the biggest issue in local government for many years.”

It has been two decades since supervisors closely examined the county’s power structure, Saliba said, referring to a mid-1980s board action that diluted the authority of the chief administrative officer.

In his resignation letter, Baker cited the weakness of the position as a primary reason the county is facing organizational and financial problems: For instance, department heads cut side deals with the Board of Supervisors.

*

“The management study proposed here today would . . . make recommendations regarding the long-term organizational management structure of the county at the highest level,” Saliba said.

Also Tuesday, the board sparred again, briefly, over who is to blame for the current fiscal mess.

Flynn said he would “accept as much blame as anyone” for more than $11 million that the county will pay out this year alone as the result of lawsuits and audits triggered by last year’s 3-2 board decision to merge the county’s mental health and social service departments.

But Lacey, who also voted for the reorganization and was its main proponent, argued that most of the costs did not stem directly from the merger but from a whistle-blower’s lawsuit filed by county psychiatrist Jerome Lance.

“I certainly didn’t tell Dr. Lance to go out and file a lawsuit against the county,” Lacey shot back.

The board’s resolve not to approve any additional spending as it looks to erase a projected $5-million deficit was also tested when Behavioral Health Director David Gudeman asked for $385,000 to hire extra nurses to scour billing records for accuracy. The request was approved, but he was told to make up the expense by cutting elsewhere.

“I know by the stricken look on Dr. Gudeman’s face that this is a difficult thing,” Mikels said. “But we can’t just waive our policy . . . or our intentions” will be questioned, she said.

Schillo suggested that some of the money could be transferred from the Human Services Agency. The supervisors agreed to consider that proposal, and others, at a budget-cutting workshop set for January.

*

Meanwhile, Standard & Poor’s announced Tuesday that it would not change the county’s fiscal rating. It had been feared that the budget problems could lead the Wall Street bond-rating company to lower its assessment of the county’s credit worthiness, making it more expensive to borrow money.

In keeping the rating at A-, the firm cited the county’s “large and diverse economic base,” its above-average wealth and income, and low debt level.