Off Beat: Trustees speak to empty seats

Yuba City Unified School District trustees must have been somewhat shocked when nobody, save for some high school students, bothered to show up at last week's study session about trustee area boundaries.

After all, the trustees were trying to inform the public about something that affects voters at election time.

That's well and good — and they should be praised for the effort — but a simple question needs to be raised: Why are there trustee areas when the trustees are elected at large?

The point is ... what?

If there are trustee areas, shouldn't the voters in each area elect their own trustee?

Sounds awfully simple, but apparently there must be some vast complexity that stops it from happening. Whoever set up this system a long time ago must have thought it logical.

Trustee Fred Northern hit it on the head when he told all the empty seats during the study session: "I would find it hard to come across a person who knows where my trustee area starts and stops."

An excellent point. One wonders how many people in Yuba City could actually name the school board members. Or the City Council folks.

More government

There are some issues that government deals with that seem to have little to no affect on the public.

Take, for example, the ongoing legal battle between Yuba County and the Yuba County Probation Peace Officers Association.

For about two years, the association, which represents about 55 probation officers and group counselors, has sought recognition from the county for collective bargaining purposes because they are "peace officers" and are entitled to have their own unit under state law.

They've been trying since March 2010 to win recognition from the county, to no avail, according to a lawsuit the association recently filed against the county.

According to the suit, the county and the association worked things out in December 2010 with a settlement agreement.

A month later, the suit said, the county decided it didn't want to recognize the association, noting that "it is inefficient to multiply bargaining units and increase the amount of time it will take to bargain employment contracts when the county is facing further declines in employee numbers."

The county and the association have been skirmishing ever since, mostly out of the sight of the public.

The association has claimed the Board of Supervisors has refused to have a "hearing on the merits," according to the suit.

So that's where things stand, after two years.

A judge may sort this out in March when a hearing is scheduled.