LAFCO Agenda for Thursday Night to Decide Marinwood's Fate

What can be done to fix the Marinwood CSD according to the Little Hoover Commission.

When Districts Go Bad from the Little Hoover Commission

Given the Commission’s general interest in this review of working within existing institutions and the established system to regulate special districts, Commissioners also considered what legal or other mechanisms exist to deal with districts (or district officials) that go off the rails with poor ethical decisions or illegal behavior. 

The Commission learned of a number of options to right wrongs within the existing system: 

• Residents of the district can vote perceived offenders on the board out at the next election. 

• Residents of the district can mount a recall effort of board members who exercise questionable conduct. 

• The county District Attorney can file criminal charges.
 
• Whistleblowers can use the State Attorney General’s whistleblower system. The Attorney General also has authority for criminal matters. 

• County civil grand juries can investigate special districts and report on findings.

• County Local Agency Formation Commissions can do a Municipal Service Review and initiate a process for dissolution or reorganization. 

• The California State Auditor has statutory authority to identify, audit and issue reports on local government agencies, including special districts deemed at “high risk for the potential of waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement or that has major challenges associated with its economy, efficiency, or effectiveness.” Audited districts must file reports every six months on their progress implementing corrective action plans until the auditor is satisfied with results. 

• The California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) can administratively address pension issues such as reports of pension spiking related to special districts and district members. 

• The state’s Fair Political Practices Commission has authority to investigate and fine special district officials for elections or campaign financing violations.
 
• Voters have power to qualify a local ballot initiative regarding a special district. 

• Depending on the type of district or situation there may also be recourse through various regulatory bodies, such as the State Water Resources Control Board, the Public Employment Relations Board and others.


See the complete Little Hoover Commission Report" Special Districts: Improving Oversight & Transparency" : HERE

Editor's Note:  The Marinwood CSD should have an exhaustive review on its accounting and business practices in accordance to the law.  For far too long, the Marinwood CSD has been allowed to operate outside the public view which has led to multiple abuses.  The most recent and glaring example, is the secret hiring of a former CSD director for $13,000 for architecture services.  Despite billing $30k plus for plans of the Marinwood Maintenance Facility aka "white elephant", the error filled plan is non compliant with Marin County building codes and will likely never get built.

The Marinwood CSD general manager and the board must be held accountable to a higher authority.

What are Joint Powers Authorities?

Joint Powers Authorities(JPAs) have been called the "Shadow Government". They are "governments of governments",  which are made up of appointed officials of member governments.  They have no direct voter accountability.  Although individual politicians can be recalled, citizens cannot recall the entire JPA.   It therefore becomes an effective "Administrative State" with massive powers to tax and create government policy and no citizens can thwart it's power.   Essentially, it is "extra-constitutional" in many critic's eyes.

Here is the Citizen's Guide to Joint Powers Authority to help you understand.

Children sit under the American flag and watch the puppets on stage in amazement,
 never seeing the puppet master behind the curtain.

LAFCO recommendations for Marinwood CSD in 2006

"Beware of LAFCO"- Marinwood Lucas Valley History of fighting development by Ron Marinoff

Ron Marinoff describes the fight to keep Marinwood Lucas Valley a beautiful community.  Over the years, developers, politicians and LAFCO have wanted to develop our community. Each time the community fought back to protect open space and the suburban/rural nature of our neighborhoods.

LAFCO "lays down the law" to the Marinwood CSD

Editor's Note: The Marinwood CSD got a visit from Keene Simonds, executive director for Marin LAFCO.  He essentially said, "LAFCO is in charge of everything.  The Marinwood CSD has no power without our approval".   He definitely suggested there will be changes and his word will be law.  It is really chilling actually.   We have no rights and they can take our CSD assets.  No appeal.  
Susan Adams ( Damon Connolly as of 1/1/2015), Judy Arnold and Kate Sears serve on it's board, and issue orders to the director. Could this be the county's "workaround" the 85% of us who oppose high density development of unincorporated Marin? 

If you don't have time for the full video, just watch the last three minutes. Dearborn asks, "If we don't want a study, will you still do your study?". Simonds responds, " Oh, we WILL study you"

Sorry that I did not edit this video down.   For more information on LAFCO see www.marinlafco.org

Marin Voice: LAFCO's governmental role in Marin

ByKeene Simonds
Guest op-ed column

Posted:   11/14/2013 06:15:11 PM PST

WHAT exactly is Marin LAFCO? This is certainly a common response — at least one version — for most citizens when they hear or read about LAFCO; a governmental agency whose acronym alone seemingly conjures up imagines of everything other than what it actually is.

A Local Agency Formation Commission — LAFCO — is a planning arm of the California Legislature sited in all 58 counties and tasked with producing efficient and accountable government.

Additionally, for those with some existing awareness of LAFCO, questions frequently persist in understanding what the agency actually does and for what reasons.

All LAFCOs ostensibly operate with relatively low "q" ratings in terms of the public's familiarity with their purpose and work despite the agency's very public role in directing growth and development by forming, modifying, and dissolving local governmental agencies and service areas.
This dynamic is amplified locally given the increasing number of acronym-laden agencies in and around Marin County that provide some type of focused planning ranging from broadband to transportation. Marin LAFCO, however and contrast to observations in a recent Marin Voice column in the Independent Journal ("We are losing local control," Oct. 24), is different from most of the other referenced agencies given it exercises broad powers derived directly from state law (unlike joint powers authorities) and comprised solely of locally elected and appointed officials drawn from the affected county (unlike other regional regulatory agencies).

As for the ins and outs in getting to the "oh" — most citizens reaction to hearing more on our activities — in Marin LAFCO, here are some takeaways:

• Marin LAFCO includes seven voting members divided between two county supervisors, two city council members, two special district representatives and one public member. Each voting category also has one alternate.
Importantly, all members are obligated by oath to exercise their independent judgment on behalf of the interests of the entire county.
• Marin LAFCO maintains local discretion in administering its prescribed regulatory and planning responsibilities with observance to three core objectives that apply to all LAFCOs: prevent urban sprawl; protect against the premature conversion of agriculture and open space; and produce studies to contribute to the orderly development of local communities.
This local discretion markedly helps to explain why governmental boundaries and service areas take up different forms from one county to the next.
• State law now requires Marin LAFCO to prepare studies every five years to independently assess governmental services relative to local needs; studies known as "municipal service reviews."
These studies have three connected purposes: inform the public; facilitate opportunities to make government more efficient; and guide the commission in its duty to regularly update all local agencies' spheres of influence — the state's version of urban/service limit lines.
• Marin LAFCO currently oversees governmental boundaries and service areas of 63 local governmental agencies divided between 11 cities and 52 special districts with most of the latter consisting of independent boards providing services to unincorporated communities.
With regard to upcoming activities, Marin LAFCO is starting work on a countywide municipal service review on potable water with the goal of presenting a draft outline for initial discussion as early as December 2013.

This study will focus on independently evaluating the supply and demand issues underlying water service and its integral role in supporting growth in Marin County.

Public input of this and all of Marin LAFCO's studies are encouraged. Toward this end, Marin LAFCO generally meets on the second Thursday of each month at 7 p.m. at San Rafael City Hall.
Information on meetings and other items is available by visiting www.marinlafco.org.

We hope to hear from you.

Keene Simonds is the executive officer of the Marin Local Agency Formation Commission.

Meet Rachel Jones, LAFCO associate that will be Conducting Marinwood Merger Study

Rachel Jones is the new LAFCO associate that will be assigned to the Marinwood, Lucas Valley, Los Ranchitos, San Rafael study.

She was an associate with SPUR, an urban policy think tank pushing high density housing and regionalism.  Here is a humorous video that she did in 2015.

The dangers of LAFCO: A conversation with a Government Scholar on LAFCO, Regionalism and the Future of Local Government.

After last week's postings about LAFCO and the future of the Marinwood CSD, HERE, I wrote my friend who is a government scholar, specializing in California constitutional issues.  Here are his answers to my questions about LAFCO

What do you make of LAFCO?

 I'm compelled by your own grace to give you a civilized answer. :)

 I'm very concerned about LAFCo. These are independent political subdivisions of our State operating within our Counties via the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg government reorganization act. LAFCo's operate under a "governance" structure much like ABAG. I don't know that these LAFCo's are constitutional. There is no direct representation of the people through a democratic process with LAFCo.

While there is a legitimate role for the State to try to manage the many agencies that are set up by government, the people on LAFCo boards are a step removed from our County jurisdiction, elected officials and our election process.

 These LAFCo agencies, if allowed to continue as is, will likely overtake our original County political subdivisions of our State where our registrar of voters and the real political power of the people resides. Instead replacing this County government structure with a governance structure of unelected, unaccountable people who have no reason to listen to the people nor can be compelled by the people to operate on behalf of the people.

 It's also problematic to me that these LAFCo's likely encourage formation of community service districts (CSD) and impose "conditions" on agencies which are anything but the equal rights, equal justice, under just laws, and three branch balance of power, enshrined in our U.S. Constitution. The people who put our government together realized the potential for abuse of power and wrote limits into our founding documents to try to prevent this type of abuse of power. We forget or dismiss this at our peril. While our system of government is less than perfect, in my view it will always be better than this governance structure.

"Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force. And force, like fire, is a demanding servant and a fearful master." George Washington

Our government is now actively implementing a plan to separate, we the people, from our government, transitioning us from our constitutional self-government of elected public servants representing the will of the people, to a governance model of appointed people representing sustainable development implementation. Our U.S. and State Constitutions were written and put in place to put bounds on the power of the government to avoid the abuse that led to the creation of these constitutions in the first place.

If County land is annexed into cities and property tax is siphoned off into community service districts, then the political power of the people (jurisdiction), which resides in the County will effectively be neutered. There's more on this if you are interested.

From your email subject line: Is LAFCO the secret weapon for the Supervisors to force growth on unincorporated Marin?

 I don't think so. I think it's the secret governance weapon to take your political rights away through the management, creation and replacement of the jurisdictional boundaries of our government.

Unincorporated areas will likely not be allowed to develop. We are faced with difficult choices. Do we want to decide for ourselves how we grow? Do private property owners have equal rights to develop? Do we give up our property rights to provide the means to build more housing within existing development footprints? Do we give up our private property rights to provide for open space and habitat? Do we stop having children? Do we keep our immigration numbers low? What are we trying to save? What are we willing to give up to save it? How can we make life fair when there are so many ways to be? What role does the government have in determining how we live? What role do we want the government to have in determining how we live?

Do we let the government make all our choices for us? Does giving up our individual rights get us something better in return?

 Time for a break!

Regarding our less than perfect constitutional government, all I can say is you don't know what you've got till it's gone.

 Some notes from the videotaped Marinwood CSD meeting with LAFCO:

a.) LAFCO "political sub-division of state of CA" authority rests in legislation. . . (think Darrel Steinberg and Leland Yee!)

Yes, think Steinberg and Yee.

b.) legislation (1963 created LAFCO in every CA county); 

 You might be interested in the report titled: State of California, Growth Within Bounds, Report of the Commission on Local Governance for the 21stCentury. This report can be downloaded as a pdf. It's all in there.

They didn't title this report using the word "governance" for no reason. In my view, the structure of LAFCo is a deliberate effort to change our way of government and reduce or eliminate the power of we the people (jurisdiction).

c.) Organizational structure: 11 bosses: 3 BOS: Judy Arnold, Susan Adams, Kate Sears; 3 local City Council; 3 District members; 2 public members)

In my view, any time you have this type of indirect government structure, you are looking at a change from government to governance. 

These folks are not accountable to you and if you recall any of these people, a replacement will be on this LAFCo board before the sun rises the next day. These governance boards are bullet proof against the will of the people and in my view are not legitimate and should not exist.

When government creates these types of governing structures where the people have little choice. If it gets really bad, the only way people know how to respond is by force. Social unrest. Riots. This type of government in my view is the root of the breakdown of social order. Muting the political power of the people yields to a demonstration of physical power by those same people because they feel they have no other way to respond to this injustice.

In my view, the integrity of our current political system must be maintained if we are to avoid this type of social unrest in the future.

d.) Task: Create, update "spheres of influence" - urban growth boundary lines; gatekeepers to all future growth.

"Spheres of Influence" are updated every 5 years to assess "service provisions" to meet community needs.

 People are not going to be able to do anything without the government deciding what is best for them and the environment and they will comply.

At some point, I think we will have to decide what we want: freedom to build on our private property, to do what we want or freedom to look out from our urban dwelling and see the verdant hills under a collective form of government (think Stalin, Hitler, etc).

e.) Proposed study schedule: North Central 101 Corridor - Marinwood, San Rafael, handful of others - through 2015.

What is capacity to provide services Now, projecting forward next 10 years?

The first Marin LAFCo study seems to be on water.
http://lafco.marin.org/index.php/special-studies/water-study-2014

 What property should be annexed?

 If you look at the OBAP maps and the DPA maps related to fire, you can see the various land uses and planned jurisdictions using a very cryptic legend. I think some of this land use and acquisition relates to areas that are "policy" protected. These policy protected areas will likely expand through more detailed County/City general plans (think RHNA) and more restrictive zoning laws. My guess is all property is planned to be annexed into a district/city so you lose the original County political jurisdiction and with that probably lose your constitutional protections. Ask Peter S. about jurisdiction if you are interested in this topic.

What are property tax implications?

If community service districts (CSD) are allowed to take property tax money away from cities, over time, I think you'll see cities ability to provide services to all residents diminished. Government functions would be less integrated and would become more specialized.

 What I think I know :)

 Counties are legitimate government power of the people manifest as a subdivision of our State.
Counties have legitimate political jurisdiction as a subdivision of the State.

County board of supervisors are directly elected by the people through a democratic process (each person gets an equal vote and equal chance to vote as well as an equal chance to run for office).

County BOS people can be recalled, the people can do referendum and initiatives if they believe there is a need to remove elected officials for abuse of power and/or correct an unjust law.


County has three branches for balance of power: legislative (makes laws), executive (implements laws), judicial (upholds laws) like the State and Federal governments. These distinctions are increasingly being blurred, in my view to our detriment.

 LAFCo is an illegitimate governance structure operating within the County.

 LAFCo board is appointed, self selected people associated with legitimate government structure.
Elected officials can be recalled, but replacement of members on LAFCo board is easily done without interruption in their LAFCo proceedings.

No three branches, just one, central government, Soviet style. 

Remedy for bad policy is a short time frame for protest by affected persons only (no direct approval as with a ballot measure, no equal opportunity). 

This seems like sort of a negative right in that you get that right only if enough people protest. It's very hard to organize lots of people in this short time frame. Goes against our equal opportunity to participate in our democratic process and our unalienable rights as called out in the Declaration of Independence and enshrined in our constitution. This process changes our positive right to make law through our representatives to a negative process where protest is our tool to impact this government. 

 Another remedy is a lawsuit which is expensive and requires legal expertise likely not possessed by the majority of people.

Boundary changes, organizational structure

These boundary changes are likely to make the land use changes from our current, urban, suburban and rural to urban, open space, agriculture, and wildland/habitat and create a new jurisdictional model. My guess is boundaries will be drawn and redrawn according to the OBAP maps until ultimately LAFCo's will aggregate and replace our Counties and we will officially come under a regional entity such as the joint policy committee replacing our County government with governance.

 IE - San Rafael Sanitary: Look at different ways to deliver waste water services - Consider consolidating 4 services into 1.

I think the plan is to aggregate all water: drinking water, storm water and wastewater together captured, treated and returned to the urban areas (sustainable) , no private property with lawns and the rest of the water is for nature. Check out the Bay Delta Conservation Plan governance structure and "stakeholder" model for details.

Influence: Fire, parks and rec, street lighting, open space.

All districts. I'm guessing these districts are viewed as eventually becoming part of the federal government as an extension of the District of Columbia (Washington D.C). Crazy isn't it?

 Sphere of Influence: Find out where growth in appropriate (ie., Silveria Ranch)

If you check out the Direct Protection Areas (DPA's) you will see green lines that look like the limits of growth to me. These are presented as fire protection areas, but I think they are also land use planning maps.

Expand, reduce"sphere of influence" - gov't entity to create incorporation.
If all becomes incorporated or a district then our original, legitimate political jurisdictions (Counties) are essentially eliminated and so goes our Constitutional three branch system of government, our sovereignty, our freedoms and rights under our Constitution.

CSD - provide municipal service, with LAFCO approval, except land use authority

It looks like land use is to be left to our General Plans. Our housing elements requiring RHNA seems to be the beginning of this type of control over our cities. If allowed to continue, State law general plan laws will likely increasingly impact our cities as RHNA has.

If LAFCo recommends land annexation, in a district "CSD has limited authority to stop an annexation unless they can provide documentation in a 30-day window showing a financial hardship." 

I find this very problematic.

I would ask why LAFCo wants to annex County property to Cities and/or form districts in these unincorporated County areas?

I would like to learn more about this financial hardship angle.

Check the LAFCo strategic plan for details on what they are planning for Marin County.
For more see www.marinlafco.org

Likely to neuter the legitimate role of these Counties as our political power base and constitutional jurisdiction.

Counties now operate as a pass through for federal subsides supporting government social service programs (money drain). The enterprise funded government services such as water, energy, etc. (money makers) are now increasingly with the regional government. These Counties will in time likely be viewed as "federal" counties. The federal government will have completed their mission of eliminating State's rights, State land and the rights of the people.

Some cities have given thought to disincorporation, returning to an unincorporated model of government coming back under the jurisdiction of the County. I wonder if Peter S. might be interested in explaining this jurisdictional concept to us at some point.

There's much more to share on this issue, but don't want to overwhelmed you.

I hope that helps.

All the best,

xxxx

Local Control Under Attack in Marinwood-Lucas Valley

ABAG and MTC control over 200 Billion Dollars of Transportation Funds

Local Control under Attack

by Carol Brandt

 The regional war on suburbia has been simmering for quite some time but the heat is being turned up and the pot is about to boil over.  The “Plan Bay Area” is the brainchild of a head-spinning group of four regional agencies: Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) and Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). They hope that the public is too busy to pay attention. However, the resistance is growing as local community leaders and neighborhood groups are starting to stand up against this plan that will forever change the landscape of our small towns. Plan Bay Area will require future housing to be high-density and transit-oriented. It could also allow for a change in the zoning of existing single-family neighborhoods to allow high-density housing units – no more single family lifestyle for you!

Governor Jerry Brown wants to reform the requirements of CEQA review, particularly for high density developments. He claims that CEQA is the NIMBY group’s tool to oppose development. I believe most of the public sees CEQA as a tool to help preserve the character of neighborhoods, downtowns and open space and gives the public the right to speak up for or against a proposed project and hold that project to defined environmental standards.  Brown has political allies with Senator Noreen Evans (D-Santa Rosa) and Senate Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) jumping on the CEQA-bashing bandwagon by piling on their versions of CEQA reform bills this past week.  At a recent conference on the future of California’s housing, Brown was asked how he avoided CEQA-related lawsuits over all the development that happened under his watch in Oakland. He replied that they put so many projects in the planning pipeline that the opposition couldn't mobilize fast enough. He also said they overwhelmed the opposition with mass, “kind of the Soviet model.” Afterwards he tried to backpedal by saying he probably should not have said that, but it was too late and the press got it down. This is our Governor speaking and we should be outraged.

We also have our local officials participating as board members or commissioners on all four of the agencies pushing the Plan Bay Area. Are they representing our voices or are they helping form this regional high-density plan? ABAG’s Regional Planning Commission includes Supervisor Susan Adams and Novato Mayor Pat Eklund. Supervisor Adams and Supervisor Judy Arnold serve as ABAG’s County representatives as does San Rafael councilmember Damon Connolly.  ABAG’s Executive Board includes Supervisor Katie Rice and Mayor Eklund. Supervisor Steve Kinsey serves on the board of MTC. Supervisor Adams also serves on the board of BAAQMD and both Supervisor Adams and Supervisor Kathrin Sears are commissioners on BCDC.

It is contradictory that local officials jump up and down with joy as they champion things like banning plastic bags in the name of saving the environment, yet they don’t object to high-density developments that will require huge increases in demand for building materials, water, energy, schools and other infrastructure.

Regional agencies and politicians are full steam ahead on the Plan Bay Area. Who is listening to the voice of the people? One response is the upcoming Town Hall Meeting, June 20, 2013, 7:30pm at the Marinwood Community Center, San Rafael.  The information states the meeting will address planning and housing challenges in Marin and the public will have a chance to learn the truth about Plan Bay Area. It is sponsored by Organized Residents of Marinwood, a group of well-informed citizens.

LA Times story on Housing Conference.

[Editor's Note: Carol Brandt was a ten year resident of Marinwood. She ran against Susan Adams for Supervisor. Although she now lives in the Glenwood area, she remains vitally interested in Marinwood . She is an advocate for renewing Marinwood Plaza for  a vibrant retail center that will serve as a true town center.]