Orange County’s careless cutbacks

There were disturbing reminders of the old Orange County government -- the one from decades ago that had little interest in providing services to the poor -- when officials announced plans last week to lay off 210 social services workers and require 4,000 more to take unpaid two-week furloughs.

Like most of this state’s municipalities, Orange County faces tremendous declines in funding. Its leaders cannot be blamed for acting quickly to stem the flow of red ink; on the contrary, they and union officials deserve credit for examining the use of furloughs rather than mass layoffs to balance the budget. In hard times, it’s better for county operations, the workforce and the economy if all employees keep their jobs and benefits at somewhat less pay than if some lose them altogether.

But the targeting of social services, and social services only, in the first round of cuts reflects a lack of thoughtful planning and an insensitivity to the county’s growing number of residents in financial distress. Among other things, the cutbacks would immediately result in long waits for public assistance.

County officials’ reasoning is that the Social Services Agency, more than most, is funded mostly through state sources, such as sales taxes, that are rapidly shrinking in the troubled economy. That’s backward reasoning. The county must set its funding priorities, and move dollars around, based on the need for certain services. Demand for social workers and public assistance is increasing as residents lose jobs and housing values plummet; people who are poor enough to qualify for welfare are in no position to wait long periods for help.

The county’s budget problems might be urgent, but officials still had time to do a more thoughtful survey of possible staff reductions. The collapse of the real estate market probably means that construction projects are on hold; could some of the cuts come from the planning department? Could county parks lose a couple of public educators; can the county justify its archives operation in the face of so much public poverty? Could county supervisors and executives make trims in their own operations?

These are questions, not answers; it would take more careful evaluation to determine where the cuts ought to be made. The problem is that county officials don’t seem to have done this kind of evaluation before wielding their budget axes.