A number of recent actions by the county board prompt serious
questions about motive and begs the question: How do those changes
serve the people of San Benito County?
A number of recent actions by the county board prompt serious questions about motive and begs the question: How do those changes serve the people of San Benito County?
The board has pulled the carpet out from under a number of county officials recently, offering few explanations. Since August, the board has:
n Called for the resignation of County Administrative Officer Dan Vrtis
n Announced it will seek legislation to make the registrar of voters job an appointed position rather than an elected one
n Slashed Marshal Robert Scattini’s budget
Those moves raise some questions. Why take away the elected elections office position and make it a board appointment? Why hamstring Scattini, another elected official, by severely cutting his budget? Why did they asked for Vrtis to resign?
With John Hodges’ elections office, some of the answers seem clear. His office has had a string of stumbles. Most recently, it lost track of an e-mail from the Secretary of State requesting information for an investigation of the March election. That was a big oversight because District Attorney John Sarsfield is awaiting the results to decide where he is going with a probe of the District 5 race, where supervisor-elect Jaime De La Cruz could face charges of voter fraud.
Hodges has explanations and has promised to make improvements, but it’s easy to see why supervisors might be getting frustrated.
Still, we wonder if they are cutting off their nose to spite their face. Does frustration with the man in office mean they should change the nature of the office itself? Why should San Benito County’s head elections official be appointed by the board of supervisors? Supervisors have not provided any information showing it would be more cost effective, cut red tape or result in cleaner elections. That is key information the board should consider – and explain to the public – before deciding to shutter an elected office. Anger with an individual should not be a reason to alter the local government structure. If the structure is flawed, show us why.
The same questions apply to Scattini. During the budget process, the board slashed Scattini’s funding from $175,000 to $48,000, reduced his secretary position to half time and cut his supplies by 52 percent.
Scattini, who was most recently elected by 59 percent of the vote in a three-person race, was understandably angry. He lashed out and said the cuts were politically motivated. We understand that the county had to balance the budget, but supervisors offered little explanation as to why the marshal’s office was the place to save money. Again, if the marshal’s office is not working, show us why, and give us a better alternative. Can Sheriff Curtis Hill provide the services Scattini does for less money? Will he be able to do it with the same personal and responsive approach Scattini has? Is cutting the marshal’s budget a prelude to shutting it down?
Finally, forcing Vrtis out is the most perplexing move the supervisors have made recently. Vrtis took the job as county administrator in June, drafted a budget the board approved and seemed to be working well with county employees. But last week, the board asked him to resign in closed session – and, in what is a disturbing trend, there was no public explanation offered. Vrtis is the third county administrative officer to leave the post in eight months.
San Benito County is in an unprecedented time of turmoil – from Measure G to the District 5 election, to problems in the district attorney’s office. The board has the opportunity to try to steady the ship, but recent moves are adding to the instability – unless, of course, the board thinks these changes are necessary to stabilize the government. But if that’s the case, they have done a poor job of telling the public why.
If the board thinks these changes are what’s best for the county they should present a case and let the people in on the process. To do otherwise strengthens the perception that it is all politically motivated payback.
To respond to this editorial or comment on this issue, please send or bring letters to Editor, The Hollister Free Lance, 350 Sixth St., Hollister, Calif. 95023 or e-mail to ed****@fr***********.com.
