In what may be a coincidence, the Ridgecrest City Council at their meeting Wednesday discussed two items having to do with Joint Powers Authorities.
In one agenda item, council was asked to formulate a response to a Grand Jury Final Report regarding the city concerning “Hidden Governments, Joint Powers Authorities in California.” The report was sent to the city Jan. 21 and released to the public Feb. 2.
“The purpose of the report was to inquire into the operations of Joint Powers Authorities (JPA) within Kern County. As a member of a JPA, the City was included in the inquiry and is required to respond to the report,” according to a staff report.
Council is supposed to respond to the report within 60 days.
The report contained specific recommendations. One asked council to communicate with state representatives to promote reform to the Joint Exercise of Powers Act.
Mayor Peggy Breeden and Councilman Michael Mower both said they were uncomfortable with this request. City Attorney Keith Lemieux said it was likely not actually a hard requirement to essentially “lobby” state representatives.
The second recommendation was that the city identify all JPAs to which it is a party. “We only have one JPA that we’re party to currently and that’s to do with our pooling arrangement for insurance that’s a very public visible JPA that’s well known in the state,” Lemieux said.
The third grand jury recommendation is that public agencies monitor the joint powers authorities in their jurisdiction.
Lemieux earlier in the meeting brought council up to date on the latest plans for the groundwater sustainability agency for the local basin, which is being formed by way of a JPA. (For more on this ongoing story, see upcoming editions of the Daily Independent.)
Lemieux said he took advantage of the grand jury’s report to learn more about how to structure the GSA JPA.
“This comes at an interesting time since we’re considering entering into a joint venture, so I took a close look at this [grand jury] report to see what the comments were and how it would impact what we’re considering doing,” Lemieux said, referring to the GSA.
“There’s a lot of details here and they have a lot of concerns,” he said, adding that his overall impression of the Grand Jury report is that they are concerned with transparency. “Also there’s a concern that many of the existing rules aren’t being followed by some joint powers out there.
“I thought it might make sense to take these comments and make sure the JPA we’re entering into complies with these suggestions.”
Lemieux said that in his opinion, the GSA JPA is on the right track. He said it should be sufficiently transparent by being subject to the Brown Act, and the Political Reform and Public Records Acts. He said he believes the GSA will also have an identifiable office or place of business.
Overall, Lemieux said, the grand jury report was interesting but does not seem particularly relevant to “anything going on now or being contemplated.”
“You did very well, because those were my comments,” Mayor Peggy Breeden agreed. “I kept thinking they’re digging for questions and answers but none of them were terribly applicable to us in this point in time.”
Lemieux said that he would like to note that the report was useful in planning the GSA.
“With your consent [I would like to] go so far as to say that we found their document instructive while we’re currently contemplating the form of a JPA and we’ve taken to heart their comments about transparency and we will assure that that is adhered to, as is required by law.
“A lot of what they’re complaining about is people not following the law, so we’re going to follow the law.”
Ultimately, council decided to decline to pursue the first suggestion, but to respond favorably overall to the report.
Lemieux agreed to draft the response.
“With regard to [recommendation 2], we’ll provide the reference that they’ve made themselves. Regarding [recommendation 1], “I would propose that we agree with their commitment to transparency and that we will take these comments to heart when we are crafting the new joint powers agreement that we are considering.”
The motion was approved unanimously by the four council members present, and by Mayor Pro Tem James Sanders via speaker phone.
March 5, 2016
Ridgecrest Daily Independent
By Deborah Mills
No comments:
Post a Comment