County Board of Supervisors Under fire for fostering a culture of secrecy, Los Angeles County supervisors split Tuesday over whether a growing number of county documents and meetings should be labeled confidential and closed to the public. As the board voted to approve a $390,000 settlement in a foster-child sexual-abuse case, Supervisor Gloria Molina broke ranks with the majority and questioned why the five-member county governing board had ended a long-standing practice of disclosing settlement details. A decision to keep details of settlements secret was recently made by the county counsel without input from the supervisors or the public.
"I'd like a written report to find out what the heck is going on," Molina said. "By providing this information to the public, we have held ourselves, our departments and our institutions to a higher standard of scrutiny and accountability. This has forced us to work harder to correct errors and to avoid repeating costly mistakes.
" The county counsel's policy is the latest to restrict public access to county government information. Last month, the supervisors themselves voted to prohibit board deputies and the public from attending meetings of department heads with representatives of the newly created Chief Executive Office. The supervisors also voted to withhold from the public the list of candidates to replace CEO David Janssen.
"I'm really taken aback to see this series of actions where they seem to be jawboning in favor of sunshine, but their actions show they actually favor secrecy," said open-government advocate Karen Ocamb, who has spent years fighting for more openness in county government. "I think we have a right to know how the county is spending taxpayer dollars." In the past, the atmosphere in L.
A. County government had been characterized as Kremlin-like, with a preference to closely control the flow of information about activities. But the board opted for a new era of openness earlier this decade after questions surfaced about whether it had violated open-meeting laws by voting behind closed doors to close the trauma center at then-King-Drew Medical Center and to block an initiative that would have raised the salaries of home-care workers.
Bob Stern, president of the Center for Governmental Studies in Los Angeles, said county government is following a trend toward more government secrecy nationwide. "They want to proceed in secret, and it's a disturbing trend," Stern said. "My concern is we won't be able to discover what they are doing.
The more private government becomes, the more it becomes like a private business. Private businesses don't have to disclose what they are doing, but public government should." But Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky defended the decision not to release the list of candidates for the CEO post, saying applicants were concerned about confidentiality.
"I guess, in a nutshell, applying for a job with the county of Los Angeles, especially the top job, shouldn't put your current job in jeopardy," Yaroslavsky said. "That's why we kept it confidential. Most employers don't release a list of candidates that are interviewing, and neither should we.
" In voicing her concerns, Molina joined Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich, who had questioned the closed-door CEO meetings. "This is a step backward toward the old days of backroom deals and catering to an all-powerful bureaucrat," Antonovich said.
Molina asked the County Counsel's Office to provide a formal justification for why the county's legal settlement data ceased to be made public. The decision came after a controversy late last year in which a manager who had helped cut the county's litigation costs was abruptly fired. After he was fired by County Counsel Ray Fortner, the former litigation-cost manager, Robert E.
Nagle, wrote the board accusing Fortner's office of manipulating reports to hide deteriorating litigation and trial results. But Chief Deputy County Counsel Donovan Main said the decision to stop making the information public came after attorneys suing the county discovered the Claims Board documents and began using the information against the county during settlement negotiations. "These memos contain legal analysis, rationale and the view of experts," Main said.
"There are no other public or private law offices that make these things public. "It was serving as a road map for opposing counsel. It really handicapped the work of the county's lawyers, the defense of the county and its fiscal interest.
" One of the first cases on which Fortner's office did not release details involved a foster child who was repeatedly sexually molested by her foster father, according to the lawsuit settled for $390,000. Manhattan Beach attorney Sanford Jossen, who represents the girl, declined to comment about the specifics of the case because of a confidentiality agreement, but said government agencies should be accountable to the people they serve. "I think the issue goes to the very heart of transparency in government and government accountability," Jossen said.
"I guess the real question is: Why the secrecy? Who is being protected? And what interests are being protected?
" Molina also directed Fortner's office to work with the newly created Chief Executive Office on a policy detailing when and how legal-settlement data should be made public. "It is important that we strike an appropriate balance between our responsibility to open government and our fiduciary duty to the public," Molina said. "But how we strike this balance is important.
"This decision must be made with public input - in a public setting and in the light of day.
News RSS