During today's Board of Supervisors meeting, County Counsel Ruth Stringer made a presentation regarding what disciplinary action can be taken against a countywide elected official. Stringer's presentation provided a great insight into what may be in store for San Bernardino County government.

It seems San Bernardino County is the only county in California that allows the Board of Supervisors to remove an elected county officer, although other counties are able to implement such a provision under state law. Because of this arrangement, the Board of Supervisors in San Bernardino County has significantly more power than other Boards of Supervisors throughout the state.

We saw a situation with similar themes in Orange County following the arrest and indictment of former Sheriff Mike Carona. Since Orange County is a Charter County, as San Bernardino County is, it, too, has the ability under state law to remove a countywide elected official from office. However, that ability must be written into the county's charter.

OC Supervisor John Moorlach attempted to place a Charter amendment on February's ballot last November, as a response to the Carona situation. It did not pass, leaving San Bernardino County as the only county in California with such a provision.

But this power possessed by the Board of Supervisors is not as simple as it may seem. The basic idea of the provision is laid out in San Bernardino County Code Section 13.0404(a):

The Charter of the County of San Bernardino provides that the Board of Supervisors may remove any County officer other than a Supervisor by a 4/5th vote, for cause. The Board of Supervisors' responsibility in this regard is to insure that all County officers faithfully perform their duties and that the conduct of these officers meets the high standards required by state law, County ordinance, and County policies.

While at first it seems that the provision requires only a four-fifths vote of the Board (and it also seems that whoever wrote this section of County Code doesn't know the difference between "insure" and "ensure"), according to Stringer some due process is required as well. There must be a written complaint made to the elected official in question, followed by a chance for the elected official to respond. In addition, a 4/5 vote for removal can be appealed to the courts.

Also, a very specific definition of the "cause" for removal from office is provided in section 13.0404(c):

(1) Flagrant or repeated neglect of duties.
(2) Misappropriation of public property.
(3) Violation of any law related to the performance of the officer's duties.
(4) Willful falsification of a relevant official statement or document.

Frankly, as I read the definition of valid "cause" for removal from office of an elected official, I don't see how Assessor Bill Postmus could legitimately be subject to that provision. No evidence of Assessor Postmus' involvement in any activities that would make him subject to removal has been made public.

I don't see how Assessor Postmus can execute his duties as the elected County Assessor, but I also fail to see how he can be removed under County Code.

Also, no lesser disciplinary actions can be taken against an elected county officer. Stringer mentioned the typical disciplinary actions against an employee, which include suspension or reduction in pay. These sorts of things can't be done with regard to an elected official. However, the Board could request the official's presence before the Board (though not require it), as well as issue a statement critical of his behavior.

As Supervisor Ovitt mentioned, though, none of these simpler measures have any teeth. He related an instance when, as Mayor of Ontario, the City Council spent a significant sum in order to formally censure a councilmember. Following that censure, nothing changed on the part of the councilmember.

County Counsel Ruth Stringer recommended against proceeding toward the goal of removing Assessor Postmus from office, considering the lengthy process involved and high cost--she estimated that it could take as long as two years to see a resolution to the matter, and could cost upwards of $1 million.

The other options to produce a vacancy in a countywide elected office include recall and resignation. A recall effort has already begun, and perennial activist E.T. Snell appeared to speak on its behalf. There has been no word on what, if any, circumstances might make Assessor Postmus resign his position.