Board’s Powers Limited, Child Support Chief Said

Only hours after county lawmakers had ordered a report on overhauling the district attorney’s beleaguered child support program, the head of that bureau assured his top staff that the Board of Supervisors was powerless under existing law to take such a dramatic action.

That conclusion, conveyed to officials of the Bureau of Family Support Operations by its director, Wayne Doss, suggests that the agency may not be as open to reforms as Dist. Atty. Gil Garcetti has publicly indicated.

A report to be presented to county supervisors today says that while state law places overall responsibility for child support with the district attorney, Garcetti’s office could shift responsibilities to other county departments or contract out a variety of tasks.

But even as Garcetti has pledged to work with county supervisors to improve his child support program, those who run it have engaged in a furious behind-the-scenes public relations campaign to retain the program by salvaging its image.

Losing control of child support operations has long been an anxiety in the district attorney’s office. A strategic planning session earlier this year identified losing the program as one of management’s top worries. After a recent Times series detailed a host of problems within the $100-million-a-year agency, its leaders issued an interoffice plea for employees to provide testimonials about the program’s merits.

“Please solicit both legal and nonlegal staff for persons who would be willing to testify on our behalf [and who you would believe would be a good speaker] at the public hearing scheduled . . . by the Board of Supervisors to address issues raised by [the] Los Angeles Times,” said an Oct. 21 memo.

As one employee told The Times: “They only want people who have something good to say” about the program.

Then, one week ago today, Doss sent an e-mail message to a dozen top aides about board Chairwoman Yvonne Brathwaite Burke’s request for a report on the possibility of stripping some or all of thEe child support program from the district attorney’s office.

“Clearly, this cannot be done, given the statutory scheme in California,” Doss wrote.

“Burke’s motion was not acted upon by the board, since county counsel wisely suggested that the board ought to know whether they had the authority to do what Supervisor Burke was proposing. As a consequence, the matter was put over for a week to allow county counsel to formally break the bad news in writing,” Doss wrote.

“Gil’s public comment in response to the motion is that he’s open to suggestions to improve our effectiveness [underline ‘our’],” Doss said.

While Doss did not return a call for comment, the district attorney’s spokeswoman said she did not see any conflict between Garcetti’s public comments and the message sent by Doss to his staff.

“The district attorney has said all along that he is open to recommendations in making improvements in the Bureau of Family Support Operations,” said Sandi Gibbons. As such, she added: “I do not feel this is in any conflict with anything the district attorney has been saying.”

Burke, describing Doss as “in a tough situation” because he has been so heavily criticized in recent weeks, suggested that his message to staff was clearly intended to rally his employees.

Even so, Burke said she wished that Doss had told his staff that the board’s recommendation was to make changes without jeopardizing jobs. “We are not trying to undermine the morale of the office,” Burke said.

Once that is understood, Burke said, she believes that the staff would help change the program. “I think that when it comes down to it, the staff will also be interested in improving services whichever way it can,” she said.

Burke, who sought the county counsel’s report, said it found that the district attorney can enter cooperative agreements with other agencies to handle child support. “I think that’s the approach that we’re going to be proceeding with,” she said.

With his findings to be presented to supervisors today, County Counsel Lloyd W. Pellman said Monday that some changes can be made to the child support program with the consent of the district attorney but that wider-ranging changes may require new laws in Sacramento.

Pellman said that other counties have made arrangements with their district attorneys to handle child support differently.

“There are some things that can be done, both within the existing framework and with legislation, that may be successful,” he said.

In addition to working with other county departments, Pellman says in his six-page report, the district attorney’s office could, with justification, contract out services such as accounting, clerical, payment processing, banking, supplemental investigative services and computer programming.

Meantime, Burke, while cautioning that the system will always have some difficulties, said she believed that something must be done.

“As far as I’m concerned,” she said, “I know that some change needs to be made.”