By Eldon Boone; Scott Carroll, ICMA-CM; Kathleen Jurasky; Neil McCormick; Greg Orsini; Tim Shackelford; and Martin Zvirbulis

In their April 2017 PM article "Hidden Government," authors Mary Eleanor Wickersham and R.P. "Sherman" Yehl contemplate the growth of special districts in the United States. The article goes on to question the accountability of special districts and put forward a wish list of opportunities to promote good governance.

The article, unfortunately, relies on generalizations that do not apply to all types of special districts throughout the nation. A closer look reveals that special districts in California are already tackling many of their suggestions, and we suspect districts in other states are taking similar proactive steps.

Special districts are created, funded, and overseen by community residents to focus on providing specific services to the community. In other words, special districts are community-owned agencies, governed by a board of community residents to deliver specialized services to the community.

Rarely does a one-size-fits-all approach provide viable solutions to our nation's vastly diverse communities and their unique challenges. An axiom for local government is that a local, case-by-case approach is the best approach.

Special districts epitomize this concept and have consequently become a popular solution for meeting communities' needs.

Striving to Meet Unmet Needs

To some, the increasing number of special districts nationwide is troubling, while to others it demonstrates that communities are turning to a unique form of government tailored to fit their growing needs.

Like other states, California saw a rise in the number of special districts during the baby boomer years following World War II. During the last 20 years, however, California has forged a new path distinguishing itself from the national trend.

Since 1997 (the United States conducts its census of local governments every five years, for years ending in 2 and 7), the number of special districts in California has declined 5 percent, while the number nationwide grew by 10 percent during that same period.

This is particularly significant given that the population in California and presumably the demand for services has increased by nearly 21 percent since 1997. There are now fewer special districts serving substantially more residents in California than there were 20 years ago.

So, has California forsaken special districts? Certainly not. Last year, communities in California formed four new special districts. They also dissolved seven and consolidated two special districts, (Currently, there are more than 2,070 independent special districts in California.)

This was not a hasty, wholesale, forced mandate in the name of "reform," but rather part of a steady, local examination of the evolving needs of unique communities through what are known as local agency formation commissions (LAFCOs).

LAFCOs only exist in California. They were first established in 1963, but their authority was enhanced in 2000 through what is known as the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act.

LAFCOs were created to promote orderly growth, prevent sprawl, preserve agriculture and open space, and ensure efficient, sustainable public services. They form new cities and special districts, adjust boundaries, change authorized services, allow service extensions, perform municipal service reviews, and reorganize local agencies.

Most impressive about the establishment of the LAFCO system is that the California State Legislature had the foresight to institute a local versus state-level process. California has 58 LAFCOs, one for each county, and these commissions are each comprised of two county supervisors; two city councilmembers; one public member; and, in half of California's counties, two special district board members.

LAFCOs hire independent staff and consultants. They conduct open and public meetings, bring local stakeholders to the table, and conduct objective analyses before forming, dissolving, or consolidating an agency. These actions are then subject to a protest vote of the affected local residents. This is a far more local, methodical, and democratic—not to mention more effective—process than the type of top-down actions often proposed in other states.

LAFCOs balance oversight with local control and self-determination. They help promote thoughtful analysis and long-term sustainability over state-level political whims. Such virtues are critical when dealing with communities' essential services, like fire protection, water, and sewer.

The Heart of Public Engagement

Is quantity or quality more important when it comes to public engagement? Merely because some special district elections, for example, may not be as big or expensive as the elections for federal, state, or some counties and cities does not mean they are less accountable as a form of government.

In fact, it can be argued that special districts foster qualitative public engagement. Even where the number of people participating in a particular election, meeting, or decision may be small, the amount of access for an average resident can be high.

Special districts often provide greater responsiveness to their community than other forms of government where the size, scope, partisanship, or politicization may feel insurmountable to residents.

These are not universal observations. All levels of government have advantages and disadvantages, and all levels of government have room to improve. Ultimately, it is not about which form of government is better in theory but rather, which form of government can best meet the specific needs of each unique community.

Most people do not have the time or inclination to regularly monitor their local government; they just want to know it is working. They want the lights to turn on, the tap to pour clean water, the trash to be picked up, and the toilet to flush.

But, when individuals do have an issue—whether it's because of a new need or a new tax—they want somebody from their community who will listen, and who can take action. Special districts do that.

Checking the Accountability Wish List

Regardless of size or form of government, residents need assurance that their government–all of their government–meets a high standard for transparency and accountability. California continues to raise that standard in state law.

Special districts in California must meet a wide range of public accountability laws, many of which exceed those governing state and federal governments.

These laws include but are not limited to:

Open meetings. Special district actions and deliberations must be conducted openly, with meetings noticed to the public 72 hours in advance.

California Public Records Act. The public has a right to inspect and request copies of special district records.

Municipal service reviews. LAFCOs are required to update special district spheres of influence every five years and must evaluate the services provided by the district and its potential future growth.

Regular financial audits. Special districts are required to undergo regular independent audits, conducted by the county auditor or a certified public accountant, and filed with the state controller's office.

Ethics training. Board members and key staff for special districts are required to take ethics training courses every two years.

Political Reform Act. Through reporting of contributions and personal finances, special districts must ensure that elections are fair and that board members do not use their position to influence decisions in which they have financial interest.

Right to Vote on Taxes Act. Known in California as Prop. 218, voters may reduce or repeal any local tax, assessment, fee, or charge. Additionally, special districts may not impose property-related fees and charges greater than the cost of providing the service for which the fee pays.

Compensation disclosure and financial reports. Special districts are required to submit a financial transaction report as well as a compensation report to the state controller and post or link the report to their website.

Beyond California's robust statutory standards for special districts, the Special District Leadership Foundation (SDLF), a nonprofit 501(c)(3) established to promote good governance for special districts, promotes transparency through its district transparency certificate of excellence program.

More than 100 districts in California have received the SDLF certificate, which ensures special districts provide key governance and finance information on their websites and conduct special community outreach and engagement. Details can be found at www.sdlf.org.

The California Special Districts Association (CSDA) has partnered with Streamline, a business affiliate, to offer districts affordable websites that make compliance with the SDLF transparency requirements clear, simple, and efficient.

CSDA has also launched a statewide public outreach campaign called Districts Make the Difference to raise public awareness and understanding about special districts. We encourage you to visit www.DistrictsMakeTheDifference.org to learn more.

Special Districts Leading the Way

Here are just a few examples on the specific efforts our special districts are making to proactively engage our communities and ensure good governance:

Chino Valley Independent Fire District. CVIFD became the first fire-protection district in California to receive the SDLF District of Distinction accreditation in 2008. Last year, the district interacted with nearly 33,000 people from its community, providing valuable fire- and life-safety information through various outreach programs.

These programs included youth programs in local schools and daycare facilities, mentoring programs to those interested in a fire-service career through its fire-explorer program, and informational videos shown on the Web and local cable channels. CVIFD is currently preparing for its third annual state of the fire district presentation to the community.

Costa Mesa Sanitary District. CMSD has a smartphone app called GoCMSD that allows residents to report such issues as broken manhole covers and trash cans stored in public view or left unemptied.

It has conducted two community surveys (2012 and 2016) of approximately 1,500 residents and has received an average approval rating of 84 percent between the two surveys. Results from the engagement efforts allowed CMSD to embark on a new and innovative program, the first of its kind in Southern California, where residential green waste and food scraps are collected and recycled into renewal natural gas by using anaerobic digestion technology.

Cucamonga Valley Water District. CVWD demonstrates open government through use of its website, social media, and active community engagement. Each year, it hosts or participates in more than 30 community events, providing its nearly 200,000 water and wastewater users the opportunity to connect with district staff and board members.

It has launched a customer engagement tool called FlashVote, enabling customers to participate in monthly surveys, providing timely feedback on district programs and initiatives. When drought restrictions were implemented in 2015, the CVWD Responds app was launched to provide customers with a quick and easy way to report water waste.

Palm Springs Cemetery District. PSCD is a member of five cities' chambers of commerce and regularly presents to businesses, service organizations, and other local governments. This outreach, in part, led to the district being nominated for Cathedral City's 2015 Business of the Year. The district also received a nomination for the Small Business Innovator of the Year award.

PSCD annually draws more than 2,500 attendees to its Day of the Dead celebration, an important cultural event in Cathedral City. In 2001, the district became the first in the nation to install a memorial dedicated in honor of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender veterans.

McKinleyville Community Services District. Although not incorporated as a city, McKinleyville is the third largest community in Humboldt County. MCSD provides water, wastewater, street lighting, open space maintenance, and parks and recreation programing for a population of almost 17,000. The district demonstrates accountability through its collaboration.

MCSD has built a successful foundation for community engagement through partnerships with the Boys & Girls Club of the Redwoods in Humboldt County, and other community organizations. It partnered with a service club to construct a building that is used by the sheriff's department as a substation and with the county to provide for a branch of the county's public library.

Vista Irrigation District. In 2016, VID completely revamped its website. A special outage alert page can be activated remotely to inform customers when it has an unplanned outage, providing information about the location, how many customers are impacted, and the projected time water service will be restored.

VID also actively engages the community through its speakers' bureau program, participation in local community events, hosting local WaterSmart landscaping classes, as well as sponsoring a high school scholarship program and poster contest for fourth graders.

Eldon Boone is general manager, Vista [California] Irrigation District (eboone@vidwater.org). Scott Carroll, ICMA-CM, is general manager, Costa Mesa [California] Sanitary District (scarroll@cmsdca.gov). Kathleen Jurasky is district manager, Palm Springs [California] Cemetery District (kjurasky@pscemetery.com). Neil McCormick is chief executive officer, California Special Districts Association, Sacramento, California (neilm@csda.net). Greg Orsini is general manager, McKinleyville [California] Community Services District (mcsdgm@mckinleyvillecsd.com). Tim Shackelford is fire chief, Chino Valley Independent Fire District, Chino Hills, California (tshackelford@chofire.org). Martin Zvirbulis is general manager, Cucamonga Valley Water District, Rancho Cucamonga, California.