San Benito LAFCO directs staff to return with options for rotating meeting locations

The San Benito County Local Agency Formation Commission voted unanimously on April 10 to direct staff to return at the next meeting with options for rotating the commission’s meeting location and a proposed amendment to the commissioners’ handbook.

Commissioner Jordan led the discussion, saying he raised the topic to clarify that LAFCO is a separate entity from the county: “I just want to make everybody aware and that it’s not a county, it’s not a county board.” The question prompted commissioners to consider whether rotating meetings among member jurisdictions would increase visibility or cause logistical problems.

Jennifer, the LAFCO executive officer, told commissioners the principal operational consideration is clerk support: “We pay for clerk time, for Vanessa’s time, to help with agenda posting and for clerking of the meetings. That’s the only item that I can think of that would make us beholden to meeting at the county.” She said a contract could be drawn up with alternate locations to cover those duties if the commission chose to rotate sites.

Commissioners discussed frequency and administrative burden. One commissioner said quarterly rotation could be “confusing” for clerks and favored annual rotation; another proposed rotation on a less-frequent schedule so phasing and notice would be simpler. Some commissioners said rotating periodically was a “healthy practice” while acknowledging it would require coordination with hosting jurisdictions’ clerks.

After discussion, Commissioner Jordan moved — and a colleague seconded — that staff prepare options for a rotation schedule and a draft handbook amendment clarifying the process. The motion passed 4-0.

The commission’s direction does not itself change meeting locations; the motion asks staff to return with specific options and a proposed amendment that would require a four-fifths vote of the commission to adopt changes to the handbook. Jennifer said the handbook change would need to be agendized and would require that supermajority vote.

Commissioners also confirmed there are no legal or state requirements that force counsel to attend meetings in person; legal counsel may continue to participate remotely unless the commission decides otherwise. Jennifer noted that if the commission wanted counsel to attend regularly in person, the budget line for legal services could be adjusted to reflect that expense or covered from contingency funds.

The item drew no public comment at the time it was considered.

The commission expects the staff report and draft handbook language to appear on the May meeting agenda for formal consideration and any required vote.