My views of the Rivlin Commission report were not completely represented in Steve Twomey's Dec. 9 Metro section article. As director of personnel for the District, I felt my office was unfairly singled out to represent bloat in D.C. government.

In the article, Twomey used one sentence of mine from a 15-minute interview. This gave the impression that I am not in favor of the commission's findings or recommendations. During the interview, though, I told your reporter that, overall, I did support the accuracy of the report. Many of its recommended changes we had, in fact, already implemented prior to the report's release.

As I told Twomey, the commission recommended that DCOP's position level be reduced by 3.5 percent or 13 positions; eight of those positions, however, we had eliminated before the report was released. This fact is not in Twomey's article.

The article singled out the office that provides personnel services to the Department of Human Services as an example of bloat. I told Twomey that I basically agreed with the commission's findings regarding the consolidation of the four servicing personnel offices into one building. However, my agency does not control allocation of space and has not been given a single building, even though a consolidation would allow us to eliminate some managerial positions. Again this fact was not in the article. Further, the Dec. 14 editorial, "Resisting the Rivlin Report," seemed to show that your paper doesn't realize that an agency of the D.C. government can recover from a traumatic incident and continue to operate in a professional manner.

I and the agency I represent endorse the Rivlin report. It is not, however, the "Holy Book" for solving all of D.C. government's financial and structural problems. -- Calvin C. Tildon The writer is director of Personnel for the District.