Will my hardworking friends who serve so dutifully on the Idyllwild PTA please inform the commissioners of the Idyllwild Fire Protection District (IFPD) board that the majority of five is three not two?
Recently, these commissioners appointed a new commissioner to the board, claiming that two votes counted as a simple majority since only three members of a five-member board participated in the vote. Two voted “Yes” and one voted “No.” The two who voted yes figured that since only three voted, two was the majority. Hello!
Since when did the board suddenly become three members? Check the vote again, people: one had resigned, one abstained, two voted “yes,” one voted “no.”
I don’t know about you, but I think the Idyllwild PTA could do a significantly better job in this situation, and do it with some integrity and still have dinner available for their family at home.
To put the cherry on top, this “appointed” commissioner had a shotgun swearing-in on Friday, Nov. 11.
Does this bother anybody but me? Is this questionable to anybody but me?
Editor’s note: According to the Health and Safety Code, which regulates local fire districts, the replacement of an elected board member is governed by Government Code 1780. It’s languague reads, “The remaining members of the district board shall make the appointment pursuant to this subdivision within 60 days.” The confusion occurs with section 13856 of the Health and Safety Code, “(a) A majority of the district board shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business.
“(b) The district board shall act only by ordinance, resolution, or motion. Except as specifically provided to the contrary in this part, a recorded vote by a majority of the total membership of the district board is required on each action.”
The question, Ms. Schelly raises is whether the bolded phrase means a majority of the actual board members (four with one vacancy) or a majority of the number of potential board members (five).