The Race for the 1st Supervisorial District

Three of the five seats on the Ventura County Board of Supervisors will be on the March 7 ballot. The Times Ventura County Edition editorial board has interviewed all of the candidates and is publishing excerpts from those interviews.

In the 1st District, three candidates are competing for the seat to be vacated by retiring Supervisor Susan Lacey.

They are former Ventura City Council members Steve Bennett and Rosa Lee Measures and current City Councilman Jim Monahan.

The 1st District includes Ventura, Montalvo, Saticoy, Oxnard Shores, Mandalay Bay, northwest Oxnard, Meiners Oaks, Mira Monte, Oak View, Casitas Springs, Foster Park, North Ventura Avenue, Eastern Ojai Valley and Upper Ojai.

Rosa Lee Measures

Rosa Lee Measures, 62, a former bank executive and Ventura city councilwoman, is supported by county government’s conservative establishment.

For three decades she has been an advocate for numerous civic and government organizations benefiting the arts, children and the homeless. During her four years on the City Council, she was part of the majority that approved spending $15 million to refurbish the city’s downtown corridor and update its aging mall.

Measures’ blend of conservative politics and attention to business has won endorsements from Sheriff Bob Brooks, Dist. Atty. Michael D. Bradbury and the Ventura Chamber of Commerce.

Question: Tell us why you are in this race and what you would bring to the seat that would be different from your two opponents and different from what we’ve grown accustomed to with the incumbent.

Answer: My [former] constituents insisted that I join in on this race. I am quite distinctively different from my two opponents and that’s exactly why I said yes. I believe that my strengths come from real-world experience--from my 25 years of banking, not only in the trenches and working up from a corporate officership in my first year but on into a senior vice president position with ICA Corp., responsible for the administration of all the branches in three counties under the name of Imperial Savings, which has now evolved into Washington Mutual.

My constituents have watched me at work; my endorsements reflect that. They know that I bring real-world financial budgetary experience and understand that balancing a budget is critically important and essential to any healthy organization. They also have watched me work in a leadership role in nonprofit organizations.

Neither of the other candidates has that experience. This is not high-school economics and this is not just governmental experience. You need both sides. And I bring that aspect as well from my four years on the council, two of them as deputy mayor.

As a council member I was elected by my colleagues to serve in two significant capacities countywide. I was an elected delegate to the [Air Pollution Control Board], which I chaired for two years.

The other board that I served on was a two-county, five-city board concerned with beaches and erosion, BEACON [Beach Erosion Authority for Control, Operations and Nourishment]. I also was elected by my colleagues on that board to serve as chair.

I believe that I bring the talent and expertise of leadership in its full form and understanding that you must be willing to serve in order to lead. My honors also reflect that. In my 25 years in banking I received the honor of citizen of the year, businesswoman of the year and also state vice president banker of the year.

I am in this race because I believe we need to really reestablish trust among our constituents. There’s an apathy about voting; our younger population isn’t voting. I’ve done quite a bit of research on that. I’m the only candidate who has an interactive Web site. It was a donation to my campaign, and I felt it was essentially important if I wanted to really include my entire constituency, then I really needed to make it user-friendly.

I’m a person who brings stakeholders together to build consensus, to hopefully come out with the best solutions to the challenges that we have.

Q: Your financial background is certainly to the point in this election. I’m sure you’re familiar with David Baker’s analysis of the county’s fiscal and organizational flaws and the county’s crisis mentality. In your view, what did Mr. Baker get right, or wrong? And what steps would you take to put the county on a more stable fiscal footing?

A: He certainly gave all of us a wake-up call. He certainly pointed to the areas of real concern. His six-page letter does have some deficiencies in it. But I would say 95% of his analysis was pretty accurate. It was mainly focusing on the fact that, if we continue to do business as we presently are, then budgets will not balance in the future, we will continue to be hurt on these shortfall situations and all will pay the price. It’s time that we realize that county challenges affect every aspect of our life.

I don’t have all the answers, I don’t believe anyone does. Tough decisions have to be made, and many times they’re unfavorable or politically incorrect.

The No. 1 hard call is to balance the budget, and that will occur. And I do believe that we need to be certain, with the departure of [interim administrator] Harry Hufford, that we are on course of bringing in a very strong individual who will head up the office of the CAO or CEO. The Board of Supervisors is in charge of setting policy and mandating a balanced budget. Beyond that the door should be wide open to listen to constituents, but to, day to day, handle the budget process is totally out of the realm of the role a supervisor should hold. I would recommend that we transfer some of the responsibility from [Auditor-Controller Tom Mahon] over to the CAO.

Q: Should auditor-controller continue to be an elective position?

A: Whether that person is elected or not, [what is more important is] defining the role and responsibilities within the realm of administration, and that is part of the Board of Supervisors’ decision. That could easily be done, even if it’s an elected spot. We need to put more responsibility and accountability in the role of the chief executive. That has not been the case--and I believe that our auditor is not auditing but estimating budgets, projecting budgets, and I believe that role needs to be moved over to the chief officer, who in fact hires and is responsible for department heads.

Q: On the mental health merger vote, all through it there was a subplot that some of the supervisors didn’t like Health Care Director Pierre Durand, a controversial department head. Is that the sort of thing you want to remove from the role of supervisors and leave to the CAO / CEO?

A: I think it’s valid to be able to listen to conceptually what needs to be accomplished. When you start putting dollars to it then you need to bring in the CAO. We can have desire of great things in total grandeur, but if the money isn’t there and we don’t have creative solutions to provide the money for it, then it’s a no-go.

This debacle with the failed merger: I think the intent was good because there is a great demand to provide a service for mental health, and if you could legally combine certain services I’m all for that. But when you are told specifically, through policy and procedure, that that is inappropriate and you go ahead and do that--in the banking world you’re out of there. You simply are removed and you would be penalized.

Q: Where do you stand on a regional airport for Ventura County?

A: I would like to see a public-private partnership with the Navy at the Point Mugu base, that’s a natural. We’ve sort of come up to a barrier on that but I think we can open up those discussions again. That’s the ideal setting.

Q: Do you favor revisiting the ordinance that allots all income from the Proposition 172 sales-tax to public safety agencies?

A: No. I believe the public has spoken and said, “We want public safety.” I believe to violate the public’s trust would be wrong. I think if we delve into Proposition 172 and see how that money is being spent and give the public an understanding of its value, I believe it will prove that it has been well, well spent. We would not have a Todd Road jail if the money had not been directed to that, and we’d have the criminals out on the street.

We’re now faced with the value of a $65-million project in the juvenile justice complex, which is greatly needed. We’ve been looking into that for several decades. We won’t get that unless we have the funding to manage that, and the entities that are receiving Proposition 172 funds say that’s definitely their focus, to work through those funds to make sure that staffing can be provided.