In his widely emailed comments regarding yesterday’s board vote, Supervisor John Moorlach said this about the Register editorial I penned for today’s paper: “It’s a odd read and makes one wonder if he was asleep during the meeting.” He took issue with this particular paragraph: “Most disappointing, Supervisor John Moorlach did not offer an explanation for his decision before he cast his vote for Ms. Hutchens. He doesn’t have to explain his rationale, of course, but the public is best served with open debate – especially when a vote comes out of left field.”
Moorlach retorted: “With that thought, I did give my reasons at the Board meeting. As Chair I allow my colleagues to speak first and then I try to conclude each agenda item. And, when you have the three votes, there’s not much need to do a long, persuasive speech.”
I was not asleep at the meeting. In fact, it was one of the most entertaining board meetings I’ve ever attended. It had drama, games-playing and a healthy dose of buffoonery and humor. My point — and apparently Supervisor Moorlach was asleep when he read the editorial — is that the board chairman and his pro-Hutchens colleagues did not engage in a debate before the vote was taken. The word “before” is a crucial part of the sentence here.
Supervisors Campbell and Norby offered compelling, detailed reasons for their vote for Paul Walters before the vote. The pro-Hutchens folks didn’t want to talk about it, and they even tried to rig a secret ballot so that no one would be influenced by the other supes before the vote was cast. They seemed embarrassed by their decision. Norby kept saying that he was open to being influenced and asked the other supes to make their case.
Moorlach was silent and Nguyen and Bates offered reasons why Hutchens was as good as Walters, but didn’t say what pushed them over the top.
(UPDATE. Here’s a quote from Norby: “Steve wasn’t asleep. I was at the meeting and I saw the same thing.”)
Here I re-print Moorlach’s post-vote explanation:
Why I voted for Sandra Hutchens
By Supervisor John Moorlach
After interviewing both Chief Hutchens and Chief Paul Walters for about an hour and a half each, my staff unanimously felt that Chief Hutchens made an overall stronger impression as a potential Sheriff.
The County would have been well served with either choice. I felt Sandra was the better candidate.
Overall, Sandra is strong and ethical. She will be able to command the respect of the staff of the department and their union representatives. And she will gain the public’s trust.
Sandra strikes a balance between being an insider and an outsider. Her varied career with the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department, the nation’s largest, provides her with the intricate knowledge of the workings of the Orange County Sheriff’s Department, including its jails.
Having a total career in the Sheriff’s Department makes her keenly aware of all the aspects involved in such an operation and allows her to bring true reform to the jails. She came up through the ranks and worked in the jails as a line staff member to a supervisor to a manager. As much as people have touted the need for jail reform, her experience is far greater than operating a much smaller city jail that cannot be compared to the county jail system. She understands the jails from the bottom up. She fully understands contract city relationships and working with the State’s Courts.
She is an expert in Emergency Management and Homeland Security, specialties critical to the position of Sheriff.
By the end of her career she oversaw more employees than Chief Walters does now, which reveals the breadth of her experience.
Sandra is removed from the political machinations in the County.
Although she did not run for the position of Sheriff in an election, she admitted to considering it and applied on the County’s website for the position on her own volition. She was not pushed by any group of individuals. She was not coached by political consultants. And she did not rely on a power base to get her over the top. In fact, her friends and colleagues rallied around her once they discovered she was in the mix.
Sandra is unpretentious, unassuming and hands on. This will be a helpful antidote to “America’s Sheriff” and the related absentee management-style of the past.
She acknowledges the work of her support staff and is more concerned that others receive the praise.
She has a plan with specific goals and objectives that are quantifiable and measurable. She will strike the balance of acquiring proper data and making appropriate assessments and decisions.
She was at ease during a difficult private interview and confident in her responses.
I felt she had a better position on carrying concealed weapons. Her approach more closely mirrored the current policies and legal standards, which are working well.
She was not being crammed down our throats by any Board office or interest group.
Sandra will do a wonderful job in addressing the culture issues within the department and providing the necessary leadership at the top to restore the shine to this award-winning agency.
With her thoughtful demeanor she will act rationally and thoroughly on turning around the Sheriff’s Department. She will not be rash or impetuous.
We have a genuine public safety professional willing to step out of her quiet retirement to address critical issues in the County she calls home.
Once she initiates her action plan and builds a good rapport with the citizens of the County, she will be an incredible candidate for the permanent position.
“Sandra is unpretentious, unassuming and hands on. This will be a helpful antidote to “America’s Sheriff”…”
Ha, now that’s a laugh coming from a pretentious self agrandizing politician like Mr. Moorlach!
I don’t have an interest in this race. The whole process has been interesting to say the least.
I don’t know any of the Supervisors.
But I do know one thing about all five of them. They all put their name on a ballot and campaigned for public office in the court of public ideas. They all bested their respective opponents.
As such they owe an explanation to their constituents. Not an Op Ed writer.
If you had campaigned for a Supervisor seat and won it, you could have voted for Paul Walters based upon what you liked or disliked. But you didn’t. They did.
Given Chief Hutchins position within the LASD she is quite capable at navigating both the internal and external politics of a very Byzantine organization.
Your carpings of her being an “affirmative action” appointment based upon her gender are really nothing but petty. There is nothing stopping you from applying to the sheriffs department and climbing your way through the ranks (like Hutchens and Walters have done in their respective departments) and exacting the changes you deem are necessary to fit your vision of public safety and custodial services.
Moorlach you are a buffoon. You are a joke to the County and you should be off that seat. I have talked to many people who KNOW you are corrupt. The only reason you did not vote for Walters is because he would not be your puppet. Now let’s see how long it takes Hutchens to put YOUR FRIEND MARTIN in a powerful postition within the OC Sheriff’s Department. As far as your comment about there being no back door deals, that is a blatant lie. I happen to know people who were moles within the offices of those back door deals and it is just a matter of time before some of those people come out with proof of your corruption. You will be taken down just like Carona was. Of course, you will plead your innocence just as Carona has. You are 2 peas in a pod! It is just a matter of time until you are out of that Supervisor chair.
I think it took some risk to vote for Ms. Hutchins. It’s difficult for me to understand how Sup. Moorlach can be so confident about her future at the OC Sheriff Dept., but it is refreshing to see a politician stick his own neck out. I think Sup. Moorlachs reasons for voting for Sandra Hutchins have some merit as explained in the above reasons.
I just found out that Steve fully supported the union backed candidate. That being Paul Walters.
The needle on my ironometer is fully pegged.