Ombudsmen idea is a hair-brained one

Bob Polkow

I tried, but could not resist commenting on the article by Tim

Geddes in the “Sounding Off” section of the Independent, Nov. 28.

He states that his conclusions are based on complaints heard from

citizens during the recent campaign for the City Council. Ordinarily,

I only have to read a thesis once to understand the author’s

argument. But it took many reviews to come to the conclusion that

Geddes is completely out of touch with reality.

After the usual drivel about our leaders taking more time to

listen to their constituents, he proposes another bureaucratic fence

between the people and their elected representatives called

“ombudsmen.” He uses an example, “taking a page from the system

developed in Scandinavian countries” that are monarchies, such as

Norway and Sweden.

Our ancestors went to great pains to assure that the monarchy’s

way of controlling the populace would be trashed. If Geddes would do

a little research, he would find that his proposed “ombudsmen”

appointed at the king’s will assured that any discontent of the

people was quickly subdued. If they failed, their position was soon

abolished by the king, and a more effective “ombudsman” was

appointed.

He tells us that “this new service could be implemented without

being a budget buster if the new City Council chooses to adapt new

personnel policies that eliminate some positions and add others” and

that the “so-called hiring freeze should be scrapped in favor of

(please listen to this) adding and subtracting of positions.”

I cannot help it. This is not only gobbledygook, but completely

asinine. These new positions, according to Geddes, a small group of

full-time city ombudsmen, would act as “middle men” between city

staff and local government on one side and community or small

business interests on the other side. How far from the democratic

process does he want our city to go?

Geddes closes his proposition as a solution to all our political

problems by stating, “We need a local government that is less

preoccupied with organizational effectiveness and more concerned

about service effectiveness.” Doesn’t organizational effectiveness

cure ineffectiveness? I would like Geddes to elaborate on that last

punch line.

Finally, as we do not have a monarch to appoint these miracle

worker “middle men,” how are they appointed? Again, do we discard our

democratic, elective process completely?

Does Geddes see a chance in his proposed system to find a niche

for himself so he can start up the political ladder unopposed? Until

he came up with his hair-brained scheme, “taking a page out of the

Scandinavian monarchies,” I was unaware that we in Huntington Beach

could not contact city staff or their elected representative

personally. In that vein, I would advise Geddes to contact our city

administrator and explain the process of adding and subtracting

positions in order to avoid the hiring freeze.

I am sure Ray Silver would appreciate the infinite knowledge of

government service Geddes proposes to have in his repertoire. He does

not apparently realize it, but his double talk does more to promote

the FAIR districting initiative than all the rhetoric on this subject

that has gone on before and explains why experienced legislators such

as Dana Rohrabacher and Scott Baugh see the districting initiative as

a quantum leap forward to assure equal representation in our city.

For this, we all owe him a vote of thanks, and sorrowful as it may

seem to Geddes, I do not think his chances of becoming an “ombudsman”

or “middle man” in our democratic system will gestate, for him, or

any other political aspirant.

* BOB POLKOW is a Huntington Beach resident. To contribute to

“Sounding Off,” please e-mail us at hbindy@latimes.com or fax us at

(714) 965-7174.