The Orange County Board of Supervisors has developed a reputation for governmental secrecy over the past few years, so we shouldn’t be surprised the board recently approved a $78-million health campus with virtually no public discussion. That’s a large expenditure – and the board owes residents a thorough discussion about its rationale.

The board last month approved a contract with a Canadian construction firm to build a facility on an Irvine site near the Great Park. It will be a new campus for the OC Health Care Agency that includes administrative offices, pharmacy, lab and emergency operation center. The staff report focuses on its technical details and its compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

But it does not explain the overarching need for the facility. As VoiceofOC reported, “supervisors had no public discussion” when awarding the contract and county CEO Frank Kim “had no answers” about how it will improve the current set up. The county information officer offered boilerplate, noting the public health lab “will be relocated, expanded and upgraded at this location.”

There may be a strong case for building a campus, but the board of supervisors certainly needs to make a more detailed presentation to taxpayers. Why are the current digs insufficient? How will the new campus improve healthcare outcomes? Are there less-costly alternatives to upgrade the current facilities?

Related Articles

Are there private alternatives? The publication noted that the county is spending $40 million from federal pandemic funds to support a non-profit mental health facility at a nearby location.

In January, the Register reported that the agency was struggling to fill key positions – and faced a vacancy rate of 20 percent following COVID. The agency’s director told the newspaper that he expected staffing problems for the coming years, as healthcare workers with specialized training pursue more lucrative positions in the private sector.

Wouldn’t the agency be better off focusing its limited dollars on that problem? These are reasonable albeit unanswered questions. At the very least, the board should hold wide-ranging hearings as it prepares to make such a large expenditure.