Mendocino County Grand Jury
• 2012-2013
• Agency Response
Forming and Reforming a Community*
⚠️ Aviso de traducción: Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 2 findings
F3
Agency Formation Commission ("LAFCO") is statutorily authorized to address water and sewer service issues only in the context of the statutorily authorized actions and applications placed before it. These actions and applications include municipal service reviews ("MSRs"), spheres of influence establishments and amendments ("SOIs"), consolidation proposals brought by local agencies, annexations and the like. LAFCO will address water and sewer service issues through the considerations of these applications as needed. The Board of Supervisors disagrees with this finding. The Board first
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
on specific applications and carry out specified actions such as SOIs and MSRs. In addition, LAFCO is authorized to identify opportunities for changes in the structure of local government agencies and the delivery of services. The Board also notes, in the context of LAFCO's powers, that there are two districts (Redwood Valley County Water District and the Russian River Flood and Water Conservation Control District) that are discussing actual and formal consolidation on their own. Discussions regarding "functional consolidation" of district resources and shared administration, short of formal LAFCO-approved consolidation, have been, and continue to occur, between Redwood Valley County Water District, Millview County Water District, Willow County Water District, Hopland Public Utility District, Calpella County Water District and the Russian River Estates. These actions and discussions are intended to share administration costs, create savings for the districts and increase district efficiency. The Board of Supervisors agrees that LAFCO should be more
F4
disagrees with the use of the term "proliferation" as a descriptive term for the current circumstances of existing local government agencies. There have been no additional formations of agencies since 1990. It is a matter of opinion in the view of the Board, whether or not there are too many local agencies. The number of local agencies providing services to local residents reflects an existing and historical policy regarding district creation and delivery of services. The Board also notes for the record, the 1990 Valley Wide Task Force Report, containing policy recommendations which were not carried out by local government agencies at that time.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
visibly consistent with the statutory mandates and powers given to it by the State Legislature. Please see the specific measures cited by LAFCO in its response to the Grand Jury regarding Recommendation 4. GJLAFCOReportResponse
* This report's PDF did not contain easily extractable text and required Optical Character Recognition (OCR) for analysis. There may be minor errors in the extracted findings and recommendations due to OCR limitations with scanned documents.