LAFCo missed opportunity to consolidate and save tax payers $274,000/yr
Original post made by Michael G. Stogner, another community, on Jul 20, 2012
With the passage of new legislation in 2000, LAFCOs also were charged with the responsibility to conduct municipal service reviews. A Municipal Service Review (MSR) is a study designed to determine the adequacy of governmental services being provided to the region or sub-region. Developing service reviews for each city and special district within the county may be used by LAFCO, other governmental agencies, and the public to better understand and improve service conditions.
There are so many things wrong with this picture.
1. LAFCo feels dissolution would jeopardize public safety... HOW???, they won't stop providing the service, the management would be shifted to the County Health Department. It would eliminate and stream line a dysfunctional office. Why wouldn't you want to replace the 20 members that did not catch the $650,000 dollar fraud?
2. It is called Mosquito And Vector control district, a special district, not what the local newspapers have been misleading in their title with exchanging wording "Pest Killing Agency"
"Bug District eludes big flyswatter"
3.If the Mosquito and Vector Control district dissolved they have full authority transfer to the county and keep 100% revenue, they only would have to give up their oversight, which they weren't good at anyway (except Betsy who discovered the fraud) they would have to give up their $25,000 fees or benefits. But it would save the tax payers $254,000 in management positions plus the $25,000 paid yearly to the 21 members of the Board of Trustees. I have an idea.. give Betsy a $25,000 finders fee and get rid of the other 20 members WHO DID NOT SEE FRAUD.
4. 2 Supervisors Adrienne Tissier and Don Horsley ARE LAFCo members and voted "No", Tissier is concerned that, "the figures may go up if employees receive salaries and benefits from the county" it is hard to tell if her statement is accurate because we do not know what their salaries are now.
5. Should this vote as LAFCo members been an opportunity for the Supervisors to recuse themselves, since they are also where this special District responsibility would have been moved to. Tissier's public statement was vague and offers no solution.
6. Here are your votes:
YES: Joe Sheridan, Naomi Patridge, Iris Gallagher, Don Horsley, Sepi Richardson,
NO: Chairwoman Linda Craig
Mosquito is a special district, financed by tax payers of the entire county, and are not a county entity.
So what 7 LAFCo members voted on was to stay private and collect the revenue from the county FOR that special Mosquito district, but has not provided solutions or made ANY changes for improvement. Even the General Manager who hired Joanne (guilty of embezzlement from previous employer) with no background check, is still working in the office.
Linda Craig, chairwoman of LAFCo voted in favor of dissolution, several trustees (who's vote does not count) suggested they dissolve the district. Martha Poyatos, Executive Director of LAFCo recommended to dissolve the District AND 21 Board of Trustees, but the 7 LAFCo members voted 6-1.
Who is LAFCo representing? They had a chance to save the tax payers, provide smaller government, with GOOD reason and they voted themselves to stay. "No" vote.
Palo Alto and Bay Area Election Facts and Thoughts on the Implications
By Steve Levy | 18 comments | 1,451 views