Laserfiche WebLink
<br />'0010~g <br /> <br />example, in certain stable agricultural areas, districts face little or no pressure to change and <br /> <br /> <br />they are likely to continue to operate satiSfactorily under a one person, one vote election <br /> <br /> <br />system of governance. At the other end of tbe spectrum are diverse districts such as the <br /> <br /> <br />Metropolitan Water District in California wherein the district board is making major decisions <br /> <br /> <br />that impact many people, both rural and urban, It is in tbese latter types of districts that <br /> <br /> <br />reform in their method of governance may be necessary to make them more a=untable to <br /> <br /> <br />their nonagricultural constituents, <br /> <br />We DIllst use caution, however, when we classify districts in this way. We are saying <br /> <br /> <br />tbat there are (1) unimportant districts -. those located in rural areas not subject to intense <br /> <br /> <br />pressures to change as in more diverse districts; and (2) districts in urban area> subject to <br /> <br />greater pressures to change. While the unimportant districts are not evolving at this time, they <br /> <br />are still performing many functions that may affect those outside of their narrow constituency, <br /> <br />They collect taxes, they manage water rights, they oppose environmental legislation, etc, <br /> <br />Therefore, we should not underestimate their role because they are an important part of the <br /> <br />system, <br /> <br />Potential Change; Affecting Methods of Goveru'imte <br /> <br />Maybe our focus should not be on the method of selection of district board members <br /> <br /> <br />but ratber how do we fiild a mechanism by which the board will be responsive to extra- <br /> <br /> <br />agricultural interests. That is, wbat variables do we need to change in order "to affect district <br /> <br /> <br />board perfonnance to make the board more responsive to these other interests, <br /> <br />40 <br />