Santa Maria Valley Water Conservation District Aspects of Governance*

Conclusions 9

• CL1
  The vacancies on the Santa Maria Valley Water Conservation District Board of Directors reduce the efficacy of the Board and impede good governance by limiting procedural actions. Since the Board has only four District Directors for the seven total divisions, the Board is often deadlocked, so motions fail to pass.
• CL2
  The training received by the Directors of the Santa Maria Valley Water Conservation District is insufficient for the requirements of their role.
• CL3
  The Santa Maria Valley Water Conservation District is short-staffed and the one employee who works in the District Office is overburdened.
• CL4
  The Santa Maria Valley Water Conservation District's financial management practices do not satisfy public expectations for transparency and fiscal accountability from a governing body, where information is created and freely available to the public in a timely manner, in open data formats, and without restrictions on use and reuse. <b>Recommendation 4a</b> That the Santa Maria Valley Water Conservation District's independent audits of financial reports, including opinions on internal controls, be completed no later than 180 days after the fiscal year's end. <b>Recommendation 4b</b> That the Directors of the Santa Maria Valley Water Conservation District establish written policies and procedures for expenditures made by District Directors and employees using District credit cards, which include the requirement that a receipt and other supporting documents be submitted monthly. <b>Recommendation 4c</b> That the Directors of the Santa Maria Valley Water Conservation District establish written policies and protocols within three months for the use of District-owned vehicles and equipment, including that personal use of District-owned vehicles and equipment be strictly prohibited. . . . . <b>REQUEST FOR RESPONSE</b> Pursuant to California Penal Code Section 933 and 933.05, the Santa Barbara County Grand Jury requests each entity or individual named below to respond to the enumerated findings and recommendations within the specified statutory time limit: Responses to Findings shall be either: Agree • Disagree wholly • Disagree partially with an explanation Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: Has been implemented with a summary of implementation actions taken • Will be implemented, with an implementation schedule • Requires further analysis, with an analysis completion date of no more • than six months after the issuance of the report Will not be implemented, with an explanation of why Santa Maria Valley Water Conservation District – 90 days Findings 1, 2, 3, and 4
• CL5
  Ethics Training as required by Assembly Bill 1234, Chapter 700; and Leadership and Best Practices Training offered by the State of California and the California Special Districts Association. Finding 3 The Santa Maria Valley Water Conservation District is short-staffed and the one employee who works in the District Office is overburdened.
• CL6
  Disagree partially with an explanation
• CL7
  Will be implemented, with an implementation schedule
• CL8
  Requires further analysis, with an analysis completion date of no more
• CL9
  than six months after the issuance of the report Will not be implemented, with an explanation of why Santa Maria Valley Water Conservation District – 90 days Findings 1, 2, 3, and 4

Observations 1

• OB1
  Alleged California Water Code Violations The complaint alleged three District Directors were not electors of the division for which they were elected because they did not reside in the division. During its investigation, the Jury learned that two of the three District Directors referenced in the complaint were no longer serving on the District's Board. In addition, the third District Director was only temporarily displaced from his primary residence. Therefore, these allegations of California Water Code 1 violations cannot be upheld. Hiring and Personnel Evaluation Practices The Jury learned that the District has one paid administrative office person working part- time at its headquarters. This same person is also employed as a part-time Dam Tender at Twitchell Reservoir and is married to a District Director. While the Jury was assured that this person was hired as a Dam Tender before her husband became a District Director, her additional work as office secretary became necessary due to recent staff turnover and staff shortages the Board of Directors has been unable to fill. Nonetheless, the fact that this employee's husband is Board Treasurer, Chair of the Finance Committee, and Chair of the Twitchell Operations Committee was noted in the complaint. The District does not prohibit family members of District Directors from working for the District. However, the circumstances are such that a person with knowledge of these facts might question the District Director's impartiality in managing said employee. The District should have policies in place to ensure that no one can supervise, discipline, work with, or influence a close relative's recruitment, salary, or promotion. Board Shortages, Staff Shortages, and Lack of Training 1 Water Code - Division 21. Water Conservation Districts (74000-76501) Added by Stats. 1965, Ch. 75 74200 - The Board of Directors shall consist of three, five, or seven members, depending on the number of divisions in the District. Each Director shall be an elector of the division for which he is elected. 74091 - One Director, who shall be an elector of the division, shall be elected from each division by vote of the electors of the division in which such Director resides. The District has seven divisions, but there are only four Directors, so the Board is often deadlocked and motions fail to pass. To fill this void there needs to be more public outreach to connect with, inform, and generate community interest in serving on the District Board of Directors. The existing District Directors should also take advantage of the County Board of Supervisors' authority to fill vacant District Director seats by appointment. The Jury learned that three or more staff are necessary to support District operations. Currently, there is one part-time staff member who also works part-time as the Dam Tender at Twitchell Reservoir. Therefore, agendas are often distributed late, meetings are sometimes conducted without proper public notice, and the District had two years' worth of meeting minutes that were never approved and subsequently never posted to its website. It should be noted that during the Jury's investigation, minutes have been sporadically approved and added to the website. In short, administrative support needs to be improved for a District of this size and scope. At present, District Directors lack sufficient and timely information and are pulling double duty performing administrative work in addition to their legislative work. The District Directors need to add qualified staff to improve District operations. Lastly, to achieve effective leadership, all District Directors need training in and a thorough understanding of the Brown Act2 and basic parliamentary procedures as in 2 The Brown Act was enacted in 1953 to guarantee the public's right to attend and participate in meetings of local legislative bodies and as a response to growing concerns about local government officials' practice of holding secret meetings that did not comply with advance public notice requirements. Robert's Rules of Order is a tool used by representative bodies of all kinds to bring order to meetings and allow the group to take care of business efficiently and predictably. Robert's Rules of Order and other parliamentary types of procedures are proven ways of conducting meetings. . . Robert's Rules of Order. The District Directors would also benefit from Ethics, Leadership, and Best Practices Training offered by the State of California and the California Special Districts Association. Financial Reporting The Jury learned that the District's annual budget is approximately $1 million. Detailed financial statements are prepared on a routine basis by the District's Certified Public Accountant (CPA); however, the annual audit by an outside independent accountant (typically completed within 180 days) is consistently behind. For example, the annual audit for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021, was not issued until more than a year later. The audit for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2022, still needs to be completed. This lack of timeliness diminishes the usefulness of the audit. Use of District Resources The Jury learned there are no policies or procedures in place for using District-owned vehicles, equipment, and other resources.

Agency Responses 1

Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.