JAMES NOONAN | Posted: Monday, July 11, 2011 12:00 am |
The boards of directors for two troubled sewage districts on the shores of Lake Berryessa have been existing illegally and creating public confusion for decades, the county’s grand jury concluded in a report released last month.
In two separate probes, the grand jury investigated the operations of the Napa Berryessa Resort Improvement District and the Lake Berryessa Resort Improvement District, both of which have encountered struggles with finances, state water violations and crumbing infrastructure over the past few decades.
While the grand jury’s reports touch upon problems with the districts’ infrastructure and funding, the major finding blasts the way the entities have been governed over the past four decades.
Since 1965, the districts — two of only seven “resort improvement districts” left in California — have held a somewhat ambiguous relationship with Napa County.
Day-to-day maintenance is overseen by the county Public Works Department, while managerial decisions are made by the county Board of Supervisors.
When conducting business at the lake, however, supervisors act as the board of directors for the respective district, an entity which in the past has been treated as legally separate from the body that governs the county of Napa.
The distinction was made evident earlier this year, when both districts were forced to request loans from Napa County in order to balance their books before the close of the fiscal year.
In meetings of both districts, the Board of Supervisors — acting as district directors — approved a loan request that would be sent to Napa County. At a later meeting, the board — this time acting as county supervisors — received and approved the request, loaning the districts a combined $550,000.
While the two districts are, in fact, legally distinct entities from the county of Napa, simply swapping out the title of “supervisor” for “director” when conducting district business fails to pass legal muster, the grand jury claims.
According to the California Public Resources Code, a county’s board of supervisors will serve as the governing body for any resort improvement district within the county’s jurisdiction unless they opt to create a board of directors.
Under state law, the district’s board of directors must be made up of four elected district residents and the county supervisor, who represents the resort improvement district. The four district residents may then, by unanimous vote, replace the supervisor with a fifth member of the district, the report states.
When establishing boards for the Napa Berryessa and Lake Berryessa districts, no election was held, leaving generations of county supervisors to act as district directors without questioning the legitimacy of their board.
“This confusing situation is the result of the fact that a succession of Napa County Boards of Supervisors acted as if they had formed a (board of directors) but did not need to hold an election,” the report states. “If these supervisors meant to function as (the districts’) governing body and not delegate any powers to an independent board elected by (district) residents, then they should have never acted in the name of the (district’s board of directors).”
Janice Killian, an attorney with the Napa County Counsel’s Office who handles district affairs, said that the grand jury’s concerns boil down to a misunderstanding of state law.
California Public Resources Code states that a board of supervisors is always the governing body of a resort improvement district, Killian said, noting that Napa’s board has retained that authority by never forming a board made up of district residents.
The distinction between “supervisor” and “director” is made to limit public confusion when overseeing operations at the lake, not create it, she said.
“I think it was just to distinguish which hat they were wearing,” Killian said.
At several points in the district’s history — most recently in 2006 — county staff approached residents about taking over as district directors. Due to the challenges of managing a small wastewater district riddled with infrastructure and financial problems, there was never enough interest to make the transition, Killian said.
Recently, however, members of the Napa Berryessa Resort Improvement District have made a push to be reorganized as a community service district, which would be governed by an elected board consisting of district residents. Last month, five district members were appointed to a “transition committee” that will work with the board as the district begins to sever ties with the county.
The same appetite for independence hasn’t developed at the Lake Berryessa Resort Improvement District, meaning the Board of Supervisors will continue to oversee operations for the foreseeable future.
Public agencies are required to respond to grand jury reports within 60 days. The county is currently working to respond to the jury’s findings, Killian said.
http://napavalleyregister.com/news/local/grand-jury-questions-berryessa-s-leadership/article_31849134-ab6a-11e0-9a0c-001cc4c002e0.html
No comments:
Post a Comment