Biane Proposal A Little Less Wrong
Posted by: Vox Berdoo | 07/11/2008 3:17 PM
A state budget needs the approval of two-thirds of the Legislature.
An amendment to the U.S. Constitution has to be ratified by three-fourths of the 50 states.
But for matters to true import, such who is going to be the new receptionist in the 3rd District office, Sup. Paul Biane thinks a four-fifths majority is necessary.
Or at least he did until last week, when he backed off a bit in the face of Supervisor-elect Neil Derry's objections and dialed the threshold down to 2/3rds -- reducing a staff hiring top the importance of a state budget.
So now, instead of being four-fifths wrong, Biane's charter amendment is two-thirds wrong.
Biane professes great concern about how San Bernardino County government is perceived, but his intellectually indefensible charter amendment makes us look like yahoos. Come on -- amending the county charter to prevent one supervisors from hiring Jim Erwin?
Neil Derry may be a wholly-owned subsidiary of SEBA, but he's been elected by the voters of his district and he's entitled to staff his office as he sees fit without interference from his fellow supervisors.
If we're lucky, Baine will keep marching this idea backwards and then drop it altogether.
An amendment to the U.S. Constitution has to be ratified by three-fourths of the 50 states.
But for matters to true import, such who is going to be the new receptionist in the 3rd District office, Sup. Paul Biane thinks a four-fifths majority is necessary.
Or at least he did until last week, when he backed off a bit in the face of Supervisor-elect Neil Derry's objections and dialed the threshold down to 2/3rds -- reducing a staff hiring top the importance of a state budget.
So now, instead of being four-fifths wrong, Biane's charter amendment is two-thirds wrong.Biane professes great concern about how San Bernardino County government is perceived, but his intellectually indefensible charter amendment makes us look like yahoos. Come on -- amending the county charter to prevent one supervisors from hiring Jim Erwin?
Neil Derry may be a wholly-owned subsidiary of SEBA, but he's been elected by the voters of his district and he's entitled to staff his office as he sees fit without interference from his fellow supervisors.
If we're lucky, Baine will keep marching this idea backwards and then drop it altogether.
CATEGORY:
Local SB Issues
While the 3/5 approval proposed by Chairman Biane does equate to 60%, and 60% is close to 66.7%, I think it's a bit silly to complain that Chairman Biane is requiring a 2/3 majority vote. As you know, the Board of Supervisors only has 5 members. The minimum number of votes for passage of anything is 3/5.
Perhaps it would be nice if we had a 7 or 9 member Board of Supervisors. If that were the case, only 57% or 55% of the Board would have to consent for passage of something only requiring a simple majority. But to complain that 3/5 is almost 2/3, and 2/3 is level of approval for state budgets seems to be grasping at straws.
This, of course, sets aside the other issues you discuss. Frankly, I agree with you on those points.
In a prior post of mine I advocated a provision allowing for the removal, with a 4/5 vote of the Board of Supervisors, of any employee under the Exempt Compensation Plan who has been charged with a felony relating to his or her official duties. This wouldn't affect hiring, but would allow the removal by the Board of an employee like Adam Aleman.
Would Vox Berdoo approve of such a plan?
I have to agree with Pietas. Furthermore, you can say that some electeds deserve to hire their own staff, and on one level I agree completely, but on the other hand... This situation would not have happened if the Board had any say. I bet they would have suggested a 30+ year veteran of the Assessor's Office take Adam's position (ie Cameron), to assist Bill... in, quite frankly, a position neither men had any experience in. So yes, on one level, electeds should pick their own staff. But... What about special circumstances such as these where the BOS could have intervened and perhaps prevented this? I don't even know how I feel, but there are both pros and cons either way you look at this.
And why is the BOS so adament on making sure Derry doesn't hire certain people?? That is odd to me...
The 3/5 vote is already in place with a majority of these positions because they are contracted positions. Although not entirely moot, I'm not sure it's worth a ballot measure. However, the minimum education/experience/licensure requirements should be in place as I mentioned in a previous post and which Biane stated almost verbatim last Tuesday.
I don't believe if the board had had any say in Postmus' hiring it would have made a difference back then as he still wielded a great deal of power. If it would have but their hands were tied that starts a whole new list of possibilities as to why Adam seems to be the one being targeted when it would appear there are other shenanigans going on that are being ignored.
"Would Vox Berdoo approve of such a plan?
Yes, Vox Berdoo would approve of such a plan. It's a sensible proposal that address a specific issue in a realistic way.
But you're quibbling about my math misses the point. A supervisor shouldn't have to get the permission of his fellow supes to hire someone.
Biane's charter amendment is a ill-conceived attempt to seem like he's "doing something" about corruption, when all it does is rob supes of their rightful ability to hire their own staff and approach staff hirings like a Supreme Court appointment: "How can I pick up three votes to hire Tim as an assistant?"
Biane should remember the legal truism, "Hard cases make bad law."
Oh, I get your point, Mr. Berdoo. I only quibble about math when it's bad math, whether the point of the example is legitimate or not.
As I said in my initial reply, I support the main points of your post. How you support your ideas, with this bad math, is what I find questionable.