Weighty plan to change state government: More questions than answers Weighty plan to change state government: More questions than answers (August 11, 2004)

By Andrea Gemmet
Almanac Staff Writer

Got complaints about how the state is run? Nearly everyone does, but this may be the most sweeping plan to solve so many trouble spots in state government.

Last week, the California Performance Review, an ambitious proposal to restructure California state government, hit the desks of legislators.

Commissioned by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in February, the 2,500-page report contains more than 1,000 recommendations that could transform the way the state does everything from buying computers to enrolling needy residents in Medi-Cal.

If implemented, it would eliminate 118 of the roughly 300 state boards or commissions, and consolidate 79 state departments and 11 state agencies, including Caltrans and the High Speed Rail Authority, into 11 big departments.

The proposals offer possible solutions to any number of complaints about the way state government is organized and run, and promise an estimated $32 billion in savings and additional revenue over five years.

So far, the proposals are mostly just generating more questions.

"The bottom line is, the devil's in the details," said San Mateo County Supervisor Rich Gordon. "There are some fairly sweeping proposals that would impact the county, but the question is, how is the state proposing to implement these changes, and what does it mean for us?"

A key area of concern for him is the plan to change how needy Californians are enrolled in benefits program such as Medi-Cal, CalWORKS and food stamps. As outlined in the proposal, eligibility requirements for state aid programs would be combined and enrollment could be done over the Internet, for an estimated savings of $4 billion. It's expected to eliminate the jobs of almost 1,700 county workers statewide who process the claims.

Mr. Gordon said it's not yet clear what the proposal would mean for county employees and, more importantly, how it would affect service.

"Currently, we've got a fairly model program for enrollment, using a fairly simplified electronic application form as relates to health care, because we're performing a centralized function of enrollment," he said. "If somebody comes in who isn't qualified for Medi-Cal, particularly children, we have a couple of programs locally that they can enroll in. If it shifts to the state, will they also have that capacity for enrollment, or will they only be looking at state-funded programs?"

If that's the case, he said, the county may still have to employ people to process applications for the local programs.

"I'm not in the position where I'm saying that I reject these proposals, but I need to understand how the state intends to implement them," Mr. Gordon said.

Simitian's views

State Assemblyman Joe Simitian (D-Palo Alto), calling from his Sacramento office, said he had not yet had a chance to read through the 2,500-page document sitting on his desk because he's still in the midst of a busy legislative session. He said he found it useful to break down the proposals into two categories.

"Some of what we've got is a fundamental reorganization of state government, and some are changes to the way we deliver services. Those are two very different kinds of debates," Mr. Simitian said.

In the second category, he said he was pleased to see a proposal to allow people to renew their car registration online without facing an additional fee, because it's something he has talked about.

"Is it a small thing? Yes, but at a bare minimum we should be taking advantage of available technology to make government more efficient," Mr. Simitian said.

The conversation about the government-restructuring proposals is clearly going to be the more contentious one.

Some proposals are rooted in genuine reform, and others represent a shift giving greater power to the governor's office, he said. While he's open to having the conversation, he's worried about its potential to become too polarized too quickly, he said.

"There's a lot the state can do to run in a more business-like way that can benefit the public. That being said, state government is not designed to be a profit-making enterprise," Mr. Simitian said. "It's not a business operation. It's supposed to be a democratic process, and democracy is sometimes messy and inefficient."

The trick is to strike the right balance between the inherent trade-offs of efficiency and the democratic process, he said.

"There's a reason we have three branches of government; there's a reason we have this system of checks and balances."

The CPR report can be viewed online at http://cpr.ca.gov.

E-mail a friend a link to this story.