Measure H: Finger pointing, citizen oversight falls short

One of the selling points proponents used to help convince Porterville voters to pass Measure H in 2005 was that expenditures of funds collected through the additional half cent sales tax would have citizen oversight.
But nearly everyone familiar with how this “oversight” has taken place agrees that it has fallen short of expectations.

When it comes down to determining who is at fault, there is plenty of finger-pointing.

“I don’t think the Measure H committee has ended up the way it was intended to,” former City Councilman Ron Irish said. “It didn’t end up the way I perceived it would. Overall the intention was to make sure that the $10 million did not just go running amuck and be at the disposal of city staff.”

The June meeting

The oversight committee last met June 9, and voted­—for the first time—that the city’s spending of the sales tax revenue was inconsistent with the intent ballot measure, and that a report to the City Council was forthcoming. The report was not prepared, but a memo was sent to City Manager John Lollis and the City Council the next day, alerting them to the committee’s determination.

The memo, provided to The Recorder by Chairman Greg Gillett, is dated June 10 and states “The expenditures as presented at the meeting of 9 June 2009 were inconsistent with Measure H. The committee has agreed to meet and to prepare a report detailing its findings for your review.”
Lollis said he never received the memo.

On the same night that the committee met to review the 2009-10 Measure H spending plan and the prior year’s expenditures, the City Council met at 6 p.m. to hold a study session on the proposed 2009-10 budget — which included the Measure H spending plan. Lollis and Administrative Services Manager Patrice Hildreth were also at the committee’s meeting, and at the council meeting which followed.

Gillett said that when the oversight committee adjourned that evening at 5:53 p.m., all of the City Councilmen, with the exception of Brian Ward, were told “in passing” about the committee’s vote.

But some of the City Councilmen said they were not aware of the oversight committee’s vote before they approved the fiscal year 2009-10 spending plan 4-1 on June 16.

“Had the committee filed a report at the time we adopted the budget, my vote might have been different,” Mayor Pete McCracken said. “Had the chairman stepped up to the podium, I guarantee you I would have moved to continue the certification of the spending plan and scheduled a public hearing. I became aware of their determination well after [the City Council] voted.”

Councilman Cameron Hamilton — who said he was aware of the ‘non consistent’ vote — said it was up to the oversight committee to make it explicitly clear to the council about the determination they had made.

“I was told they had some concerns, most of it had to do with the library,” he said.

Hamilton said the oversight committwee’s vote might have been taken into consideration by the City Council had some sort of presentation, report, or formal announcement been made at its June 16 meeting.

“The report is important,” oversight committee member Dick Eckhoff said. “Someone should have been at the City Council meeting to make a presentation to the council.”

But Gillett said the committee did not have all the information it needed to produce the report, and that he had a time conflict and was not able to attend the June 16 meeting.

“We needed more information, [the city] didn’t provide us with a full budget to review,” he said.

While the committee has no authority to make recommendations or to advise the City Council, the resolution establishing the existence of the committee requires that if a determination of ‘non consistent’ is “brought forth, the council shall hold a public hearing on the issue and take whatever action is necessary and appropriate to correct any issues the council concurs are inconsistent.”

The city did not host a public hearing, because the committee’s report was never submitted, city officials said.

“I’m very bothered by this,” oversight committee member Rick McIntire said. “The City Council was aware of the vote. The only purpose that we serve at this point is to inform the public ... at the City Council level we are being ignored.”

While the City Council resolution requires that an annual report be issued, it does not describe what information the report should contain, and it does not state that it must be submitted before the public hearing is held.

“I’m not going to waste my time writing a report if it’s not going to be effective anyway,” Gillett said. “This committee has been thrown under the bus, totally ignored. At this point, I don’t know if there’s a need for it.”
Additionally, the resolution does not state the consequences of the committee not submitting an annual report or if no public hearing is not held.

“To be ignored as we were this year is really outrageous,” committee member Shirley Hickman said.

The ‘powers’ of the committee

“Looking back on Measure H, there are two things that have not gone as we intended,” Ron Irish said. “The first is literacy and the second is the oversight committee. It seem like city staff just wants the committee to rubber stamp everything.”

The 10-member committee is currently comprised of the following members: Bob Gray, Josef Guerrero, Shirley Hickman, Rick McIntire, John Baumgartner, Greg Shelton, Jack Irish, Dick Eckhoff and Barbra Black.

“The meetings we’ve had so far, they haven’t accomplished much,” Jack Irish said. “The report should have gone to the City Council.”

The committee met once in 2009, once in 2008, twice in 2007 and twice in 2006, but has the option to meet multiple times per year.

If the committee met more than once a year, it could review the findings of an independent audit completed each spring. Members might meet again in the winter to monitor the Measure H spending mid-way through the fiscal year and in the early summer to review the draft spending plan, a city official suggested.

“I don’t think the committee should be tied down to having to meet the second Tuesday of such and such month,” McCracken said. “Nothing prohibits the committee from meeting monthly.”

According to the resolution establishing the independent citizen’s oversight committee, its powers are restricted to oversight, reviewing financial statements and reviewing the general fund budget:

- Oversight: responsible for reviewing expenditures related to certain spending decisions and priorities in the Porterville police, fire and emergency response 9-1-1 measure program guidelines and expenditure plan.

- Review of financial statements: authority to review independent financial and performance audits of the General Fund No. 4, Public Safety Sales Tax.

- Review of general fund budgets: authority to review the fire, police and literacy budgets and the general fund application to the public safety to assure a continued, base level support.

“It was never intended to be an advisory committee,” Eckhoff said.

According to the resolution, the committee does not have the authority to recommend, direct or advise the City Council, and the City Council retains discretion and flexibility in what it asks directs, or allows the committee to address.

“There is some question about what the scope of our job is,” Gillett said. “All we’re doing is an up and down vote, whether it’s consistent or not consistent.”

The charge of the committee is to monitor Measure H expenditures and inform the public when the money is not being expended in accordance with the expenditure plan.

“The oversight committee will serve its purpose as long as we are voicing our concerns and interacting with the City Council,” Eckhoff said.

But his fellow committee member Greg Shelton disagrees, “either disband it, or give it some teeth,” Shelton said.

Contact Jenna Chandler at 784-5000, Ext. 1050, or jchandler@portervillerecorder.com.