Grand Jury report commends group; says voters fail to actively
participate
Gilroy – The often criticized Santa Clara County Valley Water District received a pat on the back by a Grand Jury report that said they are doing a “commendable job.”
The report was issued by the Santa Clara County Grand Jury June 16. It stated that the water district has been doing “a commendable job of providing water, protecting watersheds, and implementing flood control in Santa Clara County.” The report also found that county voters have failed to actively participate in water district elections.
“There wasn’t one stone they didn’t turn over. Getting a report that said we do a commendable job … just floored us,” said Water District CEO Stan Williams, about the Grand Jury that looked over about 100 documents and interviewed close to 50 people to put the report together.
Earlier this month, incumbent Rosemary Kamei, whose district includes South County, beat four challengers but failed to garner 50 percent of the vote and will face Ram Singh in a November runoff election. She collected 19,099 votes, or 49.2 percent, compared to Singh who collected 8,489 votes, or 21.8 percent. About 37 percent of those registered voted, according to the Santa Clara County Register of Voters.
The 35-page report also credits the district for its operational efficiency and quality management efforts, and delved into some of the more contentious topics such as salaries, board spending, and water rates that community members have complained about the past few years. Although the Grand Jury did not recommend any major changes in spending or on projects it did let the board know that they need to better communicate with the public so there will be less heated debate.
“I think that’s true. That’s consistent with special districts around the state. We start off with a handicap because people don’t know who we are,” Williams said. “If people don’t know who we are then they don’t know who to hold responsible.”
Sig Sanchez, who is appointed to the seven-member board, said that water district could and should put themselves out into the community more. But he added that it may be hard getting people involved.
“I’ve been involved with local government for 50 years. Let’s be realistic … The community only gets excited about water when there’s a flood or when there’s a drought,” Sanchez said. “There’s nothing exciting about running a special district.”
Overall, the Grand Jury said the water district, which serves 1.8 million residents in the county, does well in serving those citizens and brushed off most of the criticism for which the water district has come under fire.
“There are many areas of district activities that involve judgments about goals, priorities, funding approaches, and allocation of costs that result in real and perceived differences of opinion,” the report said.
