Fleischman: OC Sups Should Reveal Cost of Ethics Plan

Orange County Supervisors vote to put a measure on the ballot that, if approved, would require the Auditor-Controller to put a fiscal analysis before the voters for any ballot measures upon which they will be voting.

Great idea.

On statewide ballot measures the Legislative Counsel’s office puts their own independent analysis of measures in the voter pamphlet.

That said, at the same time that they did this, Supervisor voted (with Steel and Do dissenting) to NOT require such a fiscal analysis for the upcoming measure they voted to put on the ballot creating a County ethics commission.

This is a total cop out.

Of course there should be a fiscal analysis for voters on this measure. The absence of one leaves an important piece of information unavailable to voters. It also means the absence of an important check and balance — the Supervisors placed this item on the ballot – presumably they will sign the argument in support of it. The Supervisors are not objective — they are biased in support of the measure. Having the independent Auditor-Controller give a fiscal analysis makes a lot of sense. Last I checked an informed electorate is a desirable thing.

Some concerns were expressed that the proposed ethics commission measure lacks the specificity within it to really allow the Auditor-Controller to give an accurate financial analysis. My response to that is that perhaps the proposed measure needs to be tightened up and made more specific. If not, shouldn’t voters know that this is the case?

Supervisors should reconsider their decision to deprive voters of an independent fiscal analysis of the proposed ethics commission measure.

Jon Fleischman is publisher of the Flash Report.

Voice of OC is interested in hearing different perspectives and voices. If you want to weigh in on this issue please contact Voice of OC Publisher Norberto Santana, Jr. at nsantana@voiceofoc.org

  • aristotle

    It’s the people stupid! Why do we elect unethical people to office and then have to pay money to people to yell about their unethical behavior. We are nuts!

    • David Zenger

      “Why do we elect unethical people to office”
      Good question. The better question: why do we keep re-electing them?

      • LFOldTimer

        Because the way the political and electoral systems work hand in hand, we’re consistently given a choice between Frankenstein and Dracula. Plus, politicians are given free rein to openly lie to us during their campaigns with no threat of criminal or civil punishment. We keep reelecting them because voters are forced to vote for the lesser of 2 evils. But we still end up with an ‘evil’ in the end.

  • Jacki Livingston

    The BoS copping out on something? Not wanting to disclose information to the public? What a shocking bit of news!! And in other groundbreaking discoveries, today, it has been found that water is wet.

  • LFOldTimer

    Any rational person would say it’s crazy for the Supervisors to forego disclosing a cost analysis on the ballot measure. The voters are left completely in the dark on the amount they’re going to get billed if they approve the measure. What happened to consumer protection? Disclosure is the #1 cardinal rule.
    Red flags should pop up everywhere here. Why are they hiding the costs from the taxpayers? This would be like showing someone the pricetag on a new car after they’ve made the purchase and then holding them to the deal.
    This county has really jumped the shark. It’s being run Obama style.

  • David Zenger

    How about this for the anti argument on the ballot:

    “This proposal is so lame and so poorly conceived, and so hazy that the Supervisors couldn’t, or wouldn’t tell you how much it is going to cost. They either don’t know or they don’t want you to know.”