San Benito County Grand Jury
2024-2025
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
6 findings
F1:
The original text of the 1977 measure is open to many interpretations. The current practice of continuing to collect tax revenue is not reflected in the intention of the measure from 1977. This is an agreement that identifies terms and conditions for the construction of facilities and a payback plan. It’s a loan from USBR to the SBCWD, and essentially, the voter-approved measure allows for the payback of the loan plus ongoing maintenance.
F2:
Stating “40-year repayment period” implies a sunset of part of the tax.
F3:
Attorneys hired by SBCWD interpreted the language on the 1977 ballot as having no end date.
F4:
SBCWD claims tax revenue currently provides for Operations and Maintenance (O&M) costs.
F5:
SBCWD accounting methods do not capture and bill the customers for O&M expenses.
F6:
The original $19,900,000 was paid off in 1995. The USBR said that if the loan was paid off early, there would be a discount down to $19,200,000. The funds to pay off the loan were borrowed through the district with approval from the SBCWD Board of Directors, and the secondary loan was paid off around 2006-2007. Although enough money is collected each tax year to pay off these loans, SBCWD continues to make payments that are due to increase in 2026. The bond measure on the 1977 ballot did not authorize additional loans.
Additional Recommendations
8
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
The SBCWD should cease any further collection of tax revenue based on the 1977 Measure for the loan repayment. A new measure should be written and submitted to the county residents for a vote at the next upcoming election (June 2026).
R2:
Beginning with the 2025-2026 tax year, cancel the tax on the loan repayment. The repayment period of 40 years is over, and the loan has been paid off. According to the County Counsel, the only way to remove the tax collection is to take legal action to have it removed. If a person(s) or group would like to spend the time and funds in doing so, then they may be successful, but there is no guarantee of removal.
R2a:
CES should adhere to the mandates of California Education Code (EC) Section 32281(a), requiring key stakeholder participation in the development of the Comprehensive School Safety Plan. The school should schedule a series of meetings, document participation, and have the plan dated and signed off as evidence of participation and acceptance. This plan should be in place no later than September of each school year. 2024-2025 San Benito County Civil Grand Jury Consolidated Report 42
R2b:
As part of that plan, CES should develop a written major disaster plan and share it with the district office, staff, and parents. Emergency supplies and a safe water supply should be safely stored in each room.
R3:
The SBCWD and the County should jointly hire an independent law firm for an unbiased interpretation of the 1977 ballot measure within the next six months.
R4:
An audit of the budgets from SBCWD should be completed to review the average cost for 2024-2025 San Benito County Civil Grand Jury Consolidated Report 11 O&M within the next 90 days.
R5:
In the next 30-45 days, SBCWD should change its accounting methods to specifically identify loan repayment versus O&M charges.
R6:
The SBCWD should seek voter approval for additional loan encumbrances in the next election cycle of June 2026.