Blog note: the grand jury report (second part of this article) deals with Proposition 172 funds.
Mendocino County firefighters are still trying to get their hands on Proposition 172 funds, with attorneys appearing in Superior Court Friday as the grand jury also released its report on the matter.
Willits attorney Chris Neary filed an amended complaint that was heard before Judge Jeanine Nadel Friday, nearly three weeks after she ruled against allowing the ballot measure to move forward.
Neary, according to California Supreme Court records, filed a petition asking the court to review Nadel’s initial decision. The Supreme Court subsequently transferred that matter on Feb. 17 to the 1st District Court of Appeals, which according to its case docket, denied the request Feb. 19.
Local firefighters have been seeking public safety funding under state Proposition 172 of 1993, a half-cent sales tax measure designed as a stopgap for dwindling funding opportunities.
Under the proposition, local funding distributions currently go to the sheriff, district attorney and probation departments.
The Board of Supervisors in 1993 voted to exclude local fire departments, deemed as special districts, from receiving any Proposition 172 funds.
In recent years, at least one past state attorney general said excluding fire districts was allowable, after a similar issue occurred in Humboldt County.
Some Southern California counties have also withheld Prop. 172 funds from fire districts.
The latest 2016 election ballot proposal was asking the Board of Supervisors, in part, to consider implementing a more transparent process when it comes to Proposition 172 funding, and to allocate at least 30 percent of its collections to fire districts.
Both the firefighters in court and this year’s seated grand jury said there is no real clarity when it comes to how money is distributed annually to public safety departments in the county.
Nadel, responding to Neary’s filing Friday, said her ruling earlier this month covered his continued objections.
“The issue of whether the firefighters are entitled to Proposition 172 funds is an entirely separate issue,” Nadel said.
Neary, in part, previously challenged Acting County Counsel Katharine Elliott’s suit because she was seeking to stop the proposed ballot measure from moving forward, in her own capacity, and technically not as a member of county staff, which would normally require her to be directed by the Board of Supervisors.
Because Elliott’s job requires her to prepare ballot titles and summaries for elections, Nadel agreed with Elliott that she didn’t need Board of Supervisors direction, even though she is county counsel, and in Nadel’s opinion, could sue as an individual.
Elliott also disputed that with the proposed ballot measure, it would have essentially forced the hand of the Board of Supervisors in its budgeting decisions.
Another hearing was set for 9:30 a.m. March 25 in Superior Court to revisit Neary’s objections.
Grand jury seeking transparency
On Tuesday, grand jury foreperson Kathleen Wylie will update the Board of Supervisors about newly released grand jury reports titled “Proposition 172 Funds: A Need for Transparency,” and “For the Record: Records Management in Mendocino County.”
This year’s grand jury mirrored much of what is being contested by local firefighters in that it isn’t clear how and in what amounts the Proposition 172 funds collected by the county are actually distributed to public safety departments.
During its investigation, the grand jury also reviewed budgets from at least 20 other counties, and found that 70 percent of those counties showed Proposition 172 funds as revenue in budgets, and indicated which county public safety departments were receiving the funding.
Both the Mendocino County CEO and auditor-controller, however, have recently said they were willing to alter the budget to make the allocation of Public Safety Augmentation Funds more transparent to the public, beginning with the 2016-17 budget, according to the grand jury.
The grand jury noted in its report that the auditor-controller was unable to adequately explain the calculation method used for allocations of Prop. 172 funds, and that the calculations have not been updated yearly as required.
“This lack of clarity has led some, both county officials and members of the public, to question whether the county has improperly diverted Proposition 172 funds to purposes other than public safety,” the grand jury report states.
In its report conclusions, the grand jury is recommending that the county change its annual budget format to make clear to the public the distribution of Proposition 172 revenues to county public safety agencies.
The grand jury’s Proposition 172 report can be viewed at http://bit.ly/1TEso73. However, the grand jury’s “For the Record: Records Management in Mendocino County” report will not be released until Tuesday.
February 26, 2016
Ukiah Daily Journal
By Adam Randall
No comments:
Post a Comment