⚠️ Translation Notice:
This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations
3 findings
All these Districts [apparently referring to DD 200, DD 100, Butte Creek Drainage District, Reclamation District 833] have similar expenses that could be shared. DD 100 Response. DD100 does not believe any cost saving or "economy of scale" would be achieved through a consolidation with other Districts. Herbicides and other operating materials are currently obtained at cost without markup. The District is staffed to operate and maintain its current system, and does not have additional flexibility or bandwidth to assume additional duties. The District currently has two employees, whose full-time employment is devoted exclusively to DD 100 matters. Increasing the acreage and facilities under management would necessarily require increasing the size of staff, equipment, and materials. The additional complexities of a bigger District with more landowners, more revenues, and expenditures may in fact require more administrative oversight. These additional costs would have to be passed on to the landowners. Grand Jury Report
No recommendations for this finding
A few drainage districts have administrative costs that outweigh the benefit to the community. DD 100 Response. It is difficult to meaningfully respond to such a broad, and unrefined statement. Most, if not all of the acreage located within DD 100 boundaries is farmed to rice. Drainage is a necessary element of farming and harvesting rice. The District currently has only two full-time staff, and employs accountancy and legal services on a contracted, as-needed basis. In exchange, landowners within the District receive a reliable drainage service, which is of the utmost importance to the growing and harvesting of rice. The District incurs administrative expenses because the State of California imposes strict accounting, regulatory, and public meeting requirements on public agencies. For example, every year, the District is required to submit a Financial Activity and Compensation Report to the State Auditor's Office. Likewise, the District's financial statements must be audited by a certified public accountant. The District must also meet the requirements of the Brown Act and public meeting and Public Records Act requests. The District keeps these costs to an absolute minimum while meeting all legal requirements. In short, the District disagrees with any implied Finding that the District's meagre administrative costs "outweigh" the benefit to the Community. Grand Jury Report
No recommendations for this finding
Many of these Districts have difficulty finding candidates for their governing boards. DD 100 Response. This finding does not apply to DD 100. The District has had a fully formed three-member Board of Directors for its entire history. Any vacancies on the Board are promptly filled by appointment. Grand Jury Report
No recommendations for this finding
Agency Responses
1
Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations.
Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
No Responses Found
2
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
