Findings and Recommendations |
Response |
Actions Completed |
Actions Pending |
| 1. In July 1991, the Mayor and Director of Public Works acted as city "negotiators" in a meeting with ID #1 and decided to take 1500 AF with no authorization from the City Council. The 1991 City Council and staff failed to perform a study or hire an independent analyst to help in making an informed decision on taking state water. As a result, they were not prepared when the council voted. | |||
| 1a. The Solvang electorate should decide whether there should be a recall and subsequent Special Election for the two present members of the City Council who served in 1991 when the decision was made to purchase State water. | A recall is not viable as there are only two members who were on the Council in 1991 and one of those is not seeking reelection. SCC | ||
| 1b. The City Council should address the question of the competence of the senior staff. | The City has ongoing evaluations of all its personnel, including senior staff, through annual performance evaluations. SCC | ||
| 1c. No City Council member, staff member, or employee should negotiate for the City of Solvang without written authorization from the City Council. | No response. SCC |
| 2. No in-depth financial analysis was done in 1991 by the City to determine the projected costs of State water or to determine whether the city and its rate payers could afford to pay for the water. All issues considered by the City Council that have any fiscal impact on the city should be submitted to the Director of Administrative Services for a financial analysis. There should be opportunity for discussion and explanation of staff analyses before the Council votes. | No response. SCC | ||
| 3. Solvang's legal counsel did not prepare a written analysis of the August 1991 contract for the City Council. All city contracts should be reviewed and summarized by the city legal counsel. The City Council should not approve or disapprove any contract until the Council members have received a written copy of the counsel's summary in the staff report given to the City Council several days prior to regular meetings. | No response. SCC | ||
| 4. The City Council appoints two of its members to act as a Finance Committee. There should be a three to five member Finance Committee replacing the City Council Finance Committee, composed of Solvang residents who are not City Council members. They should be chosen by a combination of elections and appointments of the City Council. There should be three year staggered terms. | Disagrees because "it would be difficult for a non-Council Finance Commission to be informed about the City's programs and needs". SCC | ||
| 5. Two members of the ID #1 Board of Trustees are elected from the geographic base of Solvang. Those Trustees did not and do not consult with Solvang officials as to water decisions contemplated by ID #1. A representative from the Solvang City Council or the Finance Commission, when such a commission is established, should attend the monthly District meetings and inform the Solvang City Council of all decisions that may affect Solvang citizens. | There has been no cooperation or accountability by the present Solvang Trustees serving on the ID #1 Board. Solvang voters should elect Trustees to ID # 1 who would keep the City informed. SCC | ||
| 6. Solvang water rates will have to rise substantially with the arrival of state water. Solvang prepares its budgets on an annual basis with no three or five year projection. Solvang has had no recent water rate study to recommend how to allocate those increases. The City Council has held no public meetings devoted only to the water rate issue. | |||
| 6a. The City Council should schedule at least two public meetings at a site conducive to large gatherings. All water rate payers should be invited to participate. | Agrees. SCC | Two public meetings were held. |
| 6b. In consultation with the Water Department, the Solvang City Council should hire a water rate specialist to advise the city on how to allocate the increases, taking into account the options presented at the public forums. Consideration should be given to establishing a "Lifeline" of block rate for low usage residents. | Agrees with hiring a rate specialist. A lifeline rate has been considered, but could only generate a token saving. Would also be a dual subsidy from other ratepayers and the general fund. SCC |
Moved to hire a water rate specialist, but firm chosen declined. | Process of hiring a rate specialist will begin again. |
| 6c. The Supplemental Water Fund should be retained so as to provide a reservoir for water-related costs. | Agrees. SCC | ||
| 6d. Solvang should have multi-year budget projections. In conjunction with such budget projections, there should be a water rate study that would project water rates over the next five to seven years and be updated annually. | Agrees conceptually. "..how meaningful they would be pending outcome of the litigation is debatable". SCC | ||
| 7. The K91 ballot, one sentence of 232 words, and the Impartial Analysis failed fully to inform the voters what they were voting for. Ballot measures and accompanying official materials should be written in a clear and understandable manner, using words with common everyday meanings. The BOS and its legal counsel should evaluate ballot measures for their accuracy and readability, using readily available standards, such as Microsoft Word grammar check. | Agrees that the County has a strong interest in an informed electorate, providing complete and accurate information in ballot materials, that ballot measures and accompanying analysis should be written so that the electorate can understand (goal, not legal requirement). Express no opinion on the understandability of Measure K91, nor on whether the voters were fully informed. | ||
| Agrees that ballot materials should be written in
a clear and understandable manner and that County officials should evaluate
ballot measures presented to the BOS for clarity of meaning and accuracy.
The decision to propose a bond measure is for the district board. District counsel drafts water district measures and ballot language; the district board approves the final language. The authority of the BOS to adopt a resolution consolidating a district election does not imply any authority to revise ballot language for district measures. Agrees that ballot measures and official ballot material should be readable. A commitment by county officials to practice good writing suffices as a standard of quality. Does not support a specific readability index or grade level standard. CC |
|||
| 8. The process for placing a ballot measure for a County or Special District election starts with the BOS. Impartial arguments for county measures are written by the County Counsel. Impartial Arguments for Special District elections are written by the attorney for that Special District. This creates an appearance of conflict of interest. There is no single county division that has the responsibility of overseeing ballot measures for accuracy, impartiality and readability in conformity with state measures described in the legislative analysis for Electio Code Section 9087. The BOS should consider appointing a special commission to oversee county and Special District ballot measures for accuracy and impartiality. | There may be some positive aspects to appointing a special commission to oversee County and Special District ballot measures, however, it would result in a new layer of government causing increased processing time for election matters and additional expenses. It would also raise new issues such as the authority of such a commission to oversee statutory functions of public officials and how the commission would check the "accuracy", "impartiality" and "readability" of a ballot measure. Finally, there is an existing, expedient process or judicial review of ballot material alleged to be misleading. An elections oversight commission would not substitute for, and could not interfere with such a review. Therefore, the Board has elected not to pursue the creation of a commission at this time. BOS | ||
| 9. According to the legal ad published in the Santa Ynez Valley News the time allowed by the County Clerk-Recorder-Assessor for submission of opposing arguments was from the publication date of March 21, 1991 to 5 PM March 22. The County C-R-A should arrange "the time necessary to prepare and print the Arguments" so that there is more than one day's notice. Five business days would be a reasonable time for a voter to research, prepare and deliver to the Elections office an Argument against a ballot measure. | Agrees. Measure K91 was published in the Santa Ynez Valley News, the logical place of publication because its circulation was most likely to be read by affected voters. While Measure K91 was properly and timely noticed, its once-a-week publication restricted the time frame for counter arguments to be submitted. CRA | ||
| 10. K91 referred to both Ordinance No. 91-1 and the 1963 Water Supply Retention Agreement. The Ordinance in its entirety was not part of the K91 ballot measure and the Water Retention Agreement was not reasonably obtainable by the average voter. Ordinances that are referred to in the ballot measure should accompany the ballot measure in the voting materials provided prior to the election. Contracts that are referred to in the ballot measure should be available for reference at City Halls and the polling places. | We agree that Ordinance No. 91-1 and the Water Supply
Retention Agreement were not part of the K91 ballot measure. However, a
written impartial analysis of the ordinance was provided within the sample
ballot mailed to registered voters and, in accordance with the California
Elections Code, the entire ordinance and the agreement were made available
to any voter upon request and without cost. BOS The California Elections Code provides that whenever any ordinance is required to be submitted to the |
||
| voters of any election, such ordinance shall be printed and be made available to any voter upon request and without cost. In the absence of the full text of the proposed ordinances from the voter's sample ballot, a written impartial analysis is provided within the sample ballot. The department recognizes that measures and contracts are written in "legalese", not readily comprehensible to the voter. Accordingly the department supports and urges that local measures be written in clear and concise terms, to be easily understood by the average voter and avoid the use of technical terms wherever possible. CRA | |||
| 11. Ballot measure K91 did not disclose the fact that the revenue bond measure would trigger an additional DWR indebtedness that is more than one half of the total annual amount due by Solvang ratepayers. All Santa Barbara County and Special District revenue bond measures should be analyzed by the Santa Barbara County Elections Division in consultation with the County Counsel's office (and above recommended commission) to determine if all necessary information, including projected costs, is given for the voters to make an informed decision. | Agrees and avers that it acts in concert with other
county agencies. California Elections Code Sections 9314 and 9401 prescribe
responsibilities for water district measures and revenue for bond measures.
Therefore a special commission is unnecessary and would add another layer
of bureaucracy. CRA Doubts if the Elections Division has the expertise to evaluate whether the sponsor of a ballot measure gave all necessary financial information. CC evaluates various legal documents for adequacy of disclosure but do not have financial investigative resources. The AC and CA are better able to determine if the voters have the necessary information, including projected costs. CC |
||
| 12. There was no information sheet from the water District detailing the pros and cons of the ballot measure, such as was supplied by the County of Santa Barbara in the 1979 water election. The County of Santa Barbara and any Special District submitting a ballot measure requesting the authorization of bonds should explain the financial ramification of the measure. This can be done by an informational sheet in the voters' material or by an advertisement in area newspaper. | Agrees that the financial ramifications of bond measures should be explained to the voters. Governments can provide information to educate the public on the issues involved in proposed ballot measures, but may not spend public funds in support of a position on a ballot measure. Because the role of government is restricted, the media have a responsibility to assure that there is balanced coverage and thorough reporting on bond issues, tax proposals and other government-sponsored measures. CC | ||
| 13. Solvang has
raised its water rates since 1991 to meet the expected arrival of State
water in 1996, but the increases are not sufficient to meet the payments
that will soon begin. Raising water rates to the level required to meet
the annual bond payments will result in a drop in consumption as, homeowners
conserve to save money, which will require additional rate increases. Solvang
has not explored fully the range of possible revenue-enhancing ideas. The
Solvang City Council should investigate the following suggestions: *A city-wide tax, *Working with other Santa Barbara communities for an increase in the county sales tax, *Increase the water connection fees, |
It is difficult to predict the future. However, it appears likely that water rates will have to increase unless Solvang gains relief through the courts. The City Council is considering various revenue enhancing and money saving suggestions and actively pursuing an increase in the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT). SCC | Increase in TOT passed in the November election. | Considering various revenue enhancing and money saving suggestions. |
| *A water tax in the form of a restaurant tax or a
water tax over and above the Transient Occupancy Tax, *Giving control of tourism advertising and promotion to private enterprise, *Relinquishing control of recreation programs to local school districts or establishing a Santa Ynez Valley recreation district, *Contracting with the county for fire protection, *Privatizing departments within city government, *Privatizing the wastewater treatment plant, *Establishing policies so that development fees pay a substantial portion of future capital expenses, *Encouraging volunteerism in city government to reduce payroll expenditures, *Encouraging volunteers to work on city landscaping and the use of water-saving plantings, * Having a one day annual "retreat" for Solvang City Council and senior staff to explore new ways of becoming efficient and finding savings in the city budget. |