A Call for Ethical Standards: Corruption in Orange County.*

Public officials are stewards of the public trust and maintain it by placing the civic interest ahead of their own. Even the appearance of impropriety damages public faith in government. Citizens expect its officials to conduct business in a lawful and ethical manner. COUNTY OF ORANGE Responses to Findings and Recommendations 2012-13 Grand Jury Report entitled "A Call for Ethical Standards: Corruption in Orange County Response: Agrees with the finding. The County government has the same expectations of both elected and non-elected officials.

The unparalleled development of Orange County from an agrarian to world-class economy in the post-World War II era led to the creation of a "power elite" of land developers and public officials. The influence of "development dollars" in the form of contributions to public officials resulted in a series of public cases over a forty-year period. Other ethics scandals involved the abuse of power. Response: Disagrees wholly with the finding. This conclusion is completely subjective and the evidence presented in this report does not support such a sweeping assessment. Although individual historical events referenced in the report are not disputed, the Grand Jury's synopsis is selective, one- sided and clearly tailored to reach a predetermined conclusion.

Orange County reacted to the 1994 bankruptcy scandal by creating a patchwork of oversight offices to audit financial, performance, and professional standards. These offices have varying levels of independence, jurisdiction and legislative support. They need to be accountable as well. Response: Disagrees partially with the finding. The County of Orange has established a number of oversight bodies and functions over time in order to provide adequate levels of review. The County does not agree with the characterization of these entities as a "patchwork." Rather, the County views these entities as a network of oversight functions with specialized expertise in financial, operational, and legal oversight. These bodies include the Internal Audit Department, the Performance Audit Department, the District Attorney's Office, the Office of Independent Review, the Audit Oversight Committee, the Treasurer's Oversight Committee, the Auditor-Controller, and the Compliance Oversight Committee. Also included in this list of oversight functions is the Grand Jury itself. The County is also scrutinized by a variety of oversight bodies at the state and federal level for compliance with a litany of rules and regulations. The County agrees that these entities need to be accountable and believes that their accountability lies with the electorate. COUNTY OF ORANGE Responses to Findings and Recommendations 2012-13 Grand Jury Report entitled "A Call for Ethical Standards: Corruption in Orange County

Unethical behavior at the local government level is not something that "simply fixes itself." The County needs an independent Ethics Program that provides training, advice and guidance to public officials and private persons seeking to do business with government. Response: Disagrees partially with the finding. The County concurs that unethical behavior will not "simply fix itself." Moreover, the statement that "the County needs an independent Ethics Program" is not a finding, but a recommendation, and the imperative to create such a Program was not established in the report. The Grand Jury report did not demonstrate that the existing network of oversight functions has failed to catch and correct unethical behavior once it occurs. Lastly, the County does have an ethics training program that complies with the provisions of Assembly Bill 1234, as well as a lobbyist registration to inform the citizenry of who is doing business with the County.

Citizens need a clearinghouse to voice complaints about actual and perceived incidents of corruption and unethical behavior by public officials. Response: Agrees with the finding. Again, this "finding" is actually a generic recommendation. There are several avenues already in existence for citizens to voice such concerns, including the District Attorney's Office, the Internal Audit Fraud Hotline, the California Attorney General, the Office of Independent Review, the Fair Political Practices Commission, as well as the Grand Jury itself.

In California, the Cities of San Diego, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Oakland have ethics commissions that address similar ethics issues. Response: Agrees with the finding. It should be noted, however, that with the exception of San Francisco, these examples are cities, not counties. COUNTY OF ORANGE Responses to Findings and Recommendations 2012-13 Grand Jury Report entitled "A Call for Ethical Standards: Corruption in Orange County

Orange County lacks effective ethics oversight of its public officials. Response: Disagrees wholly with the finding. This statement is irresponsibly broad, vague, and not substantiated in the report. Only a few idiosyncratic examples from recent years are mentioned. As discussed in several previous answers, there is already a network of oversight functions that provide adequate review of Orange County elected official behavior.