In the end, Ms. Yamada was overruled by her colleagues on the board by a 4-1 vote. However, we sympathize with both the position of Mr. Rexroad and the position of Ms. Yamada.
LAFCO is the Local Agency Formation Commission and contains members of the public, from cities, and from the county. There is one seat given to a member from the public, two seats from cities, and two from the County Board of Supervisors.
LAFCOs are responsible for coordinating logical and timely changes in local governmental boundaries, conducting special studies that review ways to reorganize, simplify and streamline governmental structure and preparing a Sphere of Influence for each city and special district within each county. The Commission’s efforts are directed to seeing that services are provided efficiently and economically while agricultural and open-space lands are protected.
The regular city members are William Kristoff from the West Sacramento City Council and Tom McMasters-Stone from the Winters City Council. The alternate is Davis City Councilmember Stephen Souza. There are two city representatives and those representatives rotate.
There are also two County Supervisors on LAFCO. Helen Thomson who represents part of Davis holds one seat and Frank Sieferman had served prior to his defeat in November by Matt Rexroad.
Woodland Daily Democrat Jim Smith argued that Mr. Rexroad should be appointed due to the lack of representation for Woodland:
In this case, however, if Yamada does get herself appointed to LAFCO, it will mean minimal representation for Woodland.
This will be important because Woodland has number of annexation issues coming up in the future following last June’s expansion of the city’s urban limit line.
Former 3rd District Supervisor Frank Sieferman Jr. sat on LAFCO before he became chairman of the Board of Supervisors. However, if Yamada gets on the board then Davis could have an unfair advantage, since Supervisor Helen Thomson already is serving on the commission.
However, the seats on LAFCO from the county supervisors are supposed to represent county interests. If Mr. Rexroad who is now appointed is merely representing the interests of Woodland, then he is not serving the county well. In the end, this dispute may be better solved through structural changes to at least allow each municipality to have their interests heard–through the designated city representatives rather than creating a surrogate advocate at the county level. Mr. Rexroad is no longer on the Woodland City Council, he now represents the County of Yolo on such bodies as LAFCO even as he represents his constituents on the Board of Supervisors.
It seems to us improper to use one of the designated County seats as a substitute for the lack of a seat at the city level–that would seem to put county-wide interests at a disadvantage. If the concern by Mr. Smith and Mr. Rexroad truly is the lack of representation that Woodland had, perhaps the entire composition should be examined. If Mr. Rexroad approaches his position as representing Woodland interests, county residents as a whole may be short-changed.
“If Mr. Rexroad who is now appointed is merely representing the interests of Woodland, then he is not serving the county well.”
That is the nature of district elections. The people of Yolo County did not elect Matt. The people of the Third District did, most of whom are Woodlanders. Matt represents them before the county. He does not represent the county as a whole. He was not elected by the county as a whole. If you want supervisors to represent the entire county, you have to elect them on a countywide basis.
It’s no different at the state level, where members of the Assembly represent their districts before the state, as opposed to the state as a whole. Or at the national level, where members of the House represent their districts before the nation as a whole.
I do understand your concerns in this for LAFCO, because it has “county” reps and separate “city” reps. And “county” reps are specifically charged with representing the “county,” not the cities that they come from.
The way to fix that would be to get rid of the “city” reps entirely from the LAFCO board. Make the Board of Supervisors the LAFCO Board, too, much the way a city council can be a city council in one setting and a redevlopment authority in another. If that were done with LAFCO, Woodland and Davis and West Sacramento and so on would always be fairly represented. Yamada and Thomson would represent their district interests, as would Matt and the other two.
But the way that board is now composed, as a hybrid of different elected officials, some localities will at some times be overrepresented, and at other times underrepresented or not represented at all.
“If Mr. Rexroad who is now appointed is merely representing the interests of Woodland, then he is not serving the county well.”
That is the nature of district elections. The people of Yolo County did not elect Matt. The people of the Third District did, most of whom are Woodlanders. Matt represents them before the county. He does not represent the county as a whole. He was not elected by the county as a whole. If you want supervisors to represent the entire county, you have to elect them on a countywide basis.
It’s no different at the state level, where members of the Assembly represent their districts before the state, as opposed to the state as a whole. Or at the national level, where members of the House represent their districts before the nation as a whole.
I do understand your concerns in this for LAFCO, because it has “county” reps and separate “city” reps. And “county” reps are specifically charged with representing the “county,” not the cities that they come from.
The way to fix that would be to get rid of the “city” reps entirely from the LAFCO board. Make the Board of Supervisors the LAFCO Board, too, much the way a city council can be a city council in one setting and a redevlopment authority in another. If that were done with LAFCO, Woodland and Davis and West Sacramento and so on would always be fairly represented. Yamada and Thomson would represent their district interests, as would Matt and the other two.
But the way that board is now composed, as a hybrid of different elected officials, some localities will at some times be overrepresented, and at other times underrepresented or not represented at all.
“If Mr. Rexroad who is now appointed is merely representing the interests of Woodland, then he is not serving the county well.”
That is the nature of district elections. The people of Yolo County did not elect Matt. The people of the Third District did, most of whom are Woodlanders. Matt represents them before the county. He does not represent the county as a whole. He was not elected by the county as a whole. If you want supervisors to represent the entire county, you have to elect them on a countywide basis.
It’s no different at the state level, where members of the Assembly represent their districts before the state, as opposed to the state as a whole. Or at the national level, where members of the House represent their districts before the nation as a whole.
I do understand your concerns in this for LAFCO, because it has “county” reps and separate “city” reps. And “county” reps are specifically charged with representing the “county,” not the cities that they come from.
The way to fix that would be to get rid of the “city” reps entirely from the LAFCO board. Make the Board of Supervisors the LAFCO Board, too, much the way a city council can be a city council in one setting and a redevlopment authority in another. If that were done with LAFCO, Woodland and Davis and West Sacramento and so on would always be fairly represented. Yamada and Thomson would represent their district interests, as would Matt and the other two.
But the way that board is now composed, as a hybrid of different elected officials, some localities will at some times be overrepresented, and at other times underrepresented or not represented at all.
“If Mr. Rexroad who is now appointed is merely representing the interests of Woodland, then he is not serving the county well.”
That is the nature of district elections. The people of Yolo County did not elect Matt. The people of the Third District did, most of whom are Woodlanders. Matt represents them before the county. He does not represent the county as a whole. He was not elected by the county as a whole. If you want supervisors to represent the entire county, you have to elect them on a countywide basis.
It’s no different at the state level, where members of the Assembly represent their districts before the state, as opposed to the state as a whole. Or at the national level, where members of the House represent their districts before the nation as a whole.
I do understand your concerns in this for LAFCO, because it has “county” reps and separate “city” reps. And “county” reps are specifically charged with representing the “county,” not the cities that they come from.
The way to fix that would be to get rid of the “city” reps entirely from the LAFCO board. Make the Board of Supervisors the LAFCO Board, too, much the way a city council can be a city council in one setting and a redevlopment authority in another. If that were done with LAFCO, Woodland and Davis and West Sacramento and so on would always be fairly represented. Yamada and Thomson would represent their district interests, as would Matt and the other two.
But the way that board is now composed, as a hybrid of different elected officials, some localities will at some times be overrepresented, and at other times underrepresented or not represented at all.
Thanks for your comments and I’m glad that you understand my concern on this matter.
The only problem with your solution is that the purpose of LAFCO is also to have interagency cooperation–in other words the cities and the county are supposed to cooperate together on issues where jurisdictions overlap. I don’t have an answer to this, one would be to make this a 9 or 11 body board to encompass each of the major cities and the county as well. But I don’t know if that would be tenable either.
Thanks for your comments and I’m glad that you understand my concern on this matter.
The only problem with your solution is that the purpose of LAFCO is also to have interagency cooperation–in other words the cities and the county are supposed to cooperate together on issues where jurisdictions overlap. I don’t have an answer to this, one would be to make this a 9 or 11 body board to encompass each of the major cities and the county as well. But I don’t know if that would be tenable either.
Thanks for your comments and I’m glad that you understand my concern on this matter.
The only problem with your solution is that the purpose of LAFCO is also to have interagency cooperation–in other words the cities and the county are supposed to cooperate together on issues where jurisdictions overlap. I don’t have an answer to this, one would be to make this a 9 or 11 body board to encompass each of the major cities and the county as well. But I don’t know if that would be tenable either.
Thanks for your comments and I’m glad that you understand my concern on this matter.
The only problem with your solution is that the purpose of LAFCO is also to have interagency cooperation–in other words the cities and the county are supposed to cooperate together on issues where jurisdictions overlap. I don’t have an answer to this, one would be to make this a 9 or 11 body board to encompass each of the major cities and the county as well. But I don’t know if that would be tenable either.
Since Woodland is going to be dealing with some serious annexation issues in the coming year, it’s only right that Rexroad sits on the LAFCO board.
He has more balls than any of the other supes when it comes to making sound, well thought-out and sometimes unpopular decisions.
Josh (I don’t know what my f*ing password is)
Since Woodland is going to be dealing with some serious annexation issues in the coming year, it’s only right that Rexroad sits on the LAFCO board.
He has more balls than any of the other supes when it comes to making sound, well thought-out and sometimes unpopular decisions.
Josh (I don’t know what my f*ing password is)
Since Woodland is going to be dealing with some serious annexation issues in the coming year, it’s only right that Rexroad sits on the LAFCO board.
He has more balls than any of the other supes when it comes to making sound, well thought-out and sometimes unpopular decisions.
Josh (I don’t know what my f*ing password is)
Since Woodland is going to be dealing with some serious annexation issues in the coming year, it’s only right that Rexroad sits on the LAFCO board.
He has more balls than any of the other supes when it comes to making sound, well thought-out and sometimes unpopular decisions.
Josh (I don’t know what my f*ing password is)
So you’re saying that the other Supervisors are unfamiliar with the issue? And if this is a city issue and needs to represent the city of Woodland’s interests, shouldn’t that be the responsibility of the City Rep not the County Rep?
So you’re saying that the other Supervisors are unfamiliar with the issue? And if this is a city issue and needs to represent the city of Woodland’s interests, shouldn’t that be the responsibility of the City Rep not the County Rep?
So you’re saying that the other Supervisors are unfamiliar with the issue? And if this is a city issue and needs to represent the city of Woodland’s interests, shouldn’t that be the responsibility of the City Rep not the County Rep?
So you’re saying that the other Supervisors are unfamiliar with the issue? And if this is a city issue and needs to represent the city of Woodland’s interests, shouldn’t that be the responsibility of the City Rep not the County Rep?
That’s exactly what I’m saying. Also, they might not be as thoughtful when they consider annexation issues in Woodland.
Rexroad obviously cares about the city and if Yamada would have been on the board, there wouldn’t have been a Woodland city rep.
Whoever’s responsibility it falls under is not nearly as important as someone doing what’s right for a city that’s going to see its fair share of annexation issues in the near future.
Josh
That’s exactly what I’m saying. Also, they might not be as thoughtful when they consider annexation issues in Woodland.
Rexroad obviously cares about the city and if Yamada would have been on the board, there wouldn’t have been a Woodland city rep.
Whoever’s responsibility it falls under is not nearly as important as someone doing what’s right for a city that’s going to see its fair share of annexation issues in the near future.
Josh
That’s exactly what I’m saying. Also, they might not be as thoughtful when they consider annexation issues in Woodland.
Rexroad obviously cares about the city and if Yamada would have been on the board, there wouldn’t have been a Woodland city rep.
Whoever’s responsibility it falls under is not nearly as important as someone doing what’s right for a city that’s going to see its fair share of annexation issues in the near future.
Josh
That’s exactly what I’m saying. Also, they might not be as thoughtful when they consider annexation issues in Woodland.
Rexroad obviously cares about the city and if Yamada would have been on the board, there wouldn’t have been a Woodland city rep.
Whoever’s responsibility it falls under is not nearly as important as someone doing what’s right for a city that’s going to see its fair share of annexation issues in the near future.
Josh