JCDA Bylaw Change

What is Happening

The Jefferson County Development Authority (JCDA) board is considering the County Commission’s request to change its bylaws decreasing the number of people on the board, narrowing the representation on the board, and removing critical committees like the agriculture committee.

Big Picture Consequences

Removing the requirements for broad representation will make it easier for one group to be over-represented while others are absent, and makes cronyism too easy.  Also, why would we get rid of the agriculture committee? It doesn’t make sense! We are constantly saying we need to help farmers; why would we then get rid of the very committee design to help them!

Background

How this started: According to the County Administrator Edwina Benites, the current Executive Director of JCDA Krista Hoffman recently inquired if the JCDA could change its bylaws to decrease the number of committee meetings a month. Apparently the JCDA staff wanted to reduce the number of meetings because they are down at least one staff member and it is difficult to hold all the meetings while they are short staffed.

What happened at the County Commission: At the very end of the March 6 meeting of the Jefferson County Commission (JCC), the commission discussed the bylaws of the JCDA.

After a frustrating and unfortunately ill-informed discussion, the JCC decided to change the bylaws of the JCDA. First, the JCC does not have this authority. West Virginia state code §7-12-3 clearly gives the JCDA and only the JCDA the authority to write its own bylaws. Second, some members indicated that the JCDA agriculture committee is not needed and redundant with the extension office.

The relevant state law: The state code at §7-12-7 (a)(1) gives the authority to write the bylaws for the JCDA to the JCDA, not the County Commission. It states:

“§7-12-7. Powers generally. (a) The development authority is hereby given power and authority as follows: (1) To make and adopt all necessary bylaws and rules for its organization and operations not inconsistent with laws;”

So, the JCC cannot dictate what the bylaws are to the JCDA. The JCDA has the authority to write and amend its own bylaws as it sees fit.

How the state law has changed: In 2024 the West Virginia Legislature amended and reenacted §7-12-3 of the Code of West Virginia. Chapter 7 Article 12 of WV code deals with the County and Municipal Development authorities. This amendment related to the composition of county development authority boards. It removed the requirement that municipalities be represented on county authority boards and removed the requirement that certain board members must be representatives of business, industry, and labor. While this change allowed counties to change the constitution of their development authorities, it did not require it and allowed counties to continue to require their representation requirements if they so choose. Following this change, Jefferson County took no immediate action to change its board requirements.

There have only been three changes to Chapter 7 Article 12 of the WV code in the last 10 years and none of them limit the types of committees or require that committees be evenly or equitably spread between different types of development. So, there is no requirement that if you have an agricultural committee, for example, that you also have a committee to support heavy industry.

The other two amendments to §7-12 in the last 10 years.

In 2023 – amended and reenact §7-12-9 relating to allowing counties and municipalities the opportunity to jointly undertake economic development projects and to allow a pro-rata share in costs and revenues generated from said economic development projects.
 
In 2021 – amended and reenacted §7-12-5 relating to reimbursement of members of county and municipal development authorities; providing that a member of a county or municipal development authority may be reimbursed for certain necessary expenses in connection with his or her performance of certain other duties authorized by the authority; providing that such other duties and such reimbursement must first be approved by a vote of the authority with the member to be reimbursed being recused from voting on the question; and providing that the prohibition against certain public officers and officials with any voice, influence, or control with respect to certain contracts becoming pecuniarily interested in such contracts does not apply to certain members of a county or municipal development authority who receive certain reimbursements from such authority.
 
All other amendments to the part of the code relating to county development authorities since its enactment in 1986 were before 2016, and should have been incorporated into the JCDA by laws.

The changes that are being recommended, the effect, and our recommendations

Instead of addressing the actual request of the JCDA, to reduce some committee meetings to quarterly, the JCC recommended that:

• The board of the JCDA be made smaller going from 15 to 13 members. State code 7-12-3 requires that the board have between 12 and 21 members. Unlike other boards, the JCDA does not have a legislative role. Instead, it works to support our community through supporting the businesses and the local economy. The JCDA’s large size is not a hindrance to governing. Because the JCDA is not charged with making rules, but with coming up with ideas and serving, the large size is a benefit to the community and economy. Effect: This would have the effect of consolidating power.

Recommendation: The Foundation advocates for the board to be larger. We believe that more representation from the community and different sectors of business would help the JCDA be more successful. We recommend that the JCDA be expanded to 21 people as allowed by state code 12-7-3.

• That the requirements for representation from each municipality, the school board, and other classes like labor be removed. This would remove the requirement that the JCDA attempt to represent a broad cross section of the county. If the JCDA would like to change the requirements, in light of the 2024 amendment to 2-12-3, to better fit our community, we would support that, but don’t remove this requirement entirely.
• Effect: This would have the effect of allowing some groups to be over-represented and others to lack representation all together and would support cronyism. These are already issues experienced by other bodies in the county and should be avoided.

Recommendation: We recommend that the JCDA 1) keep the requirements for municipality representation and school board representation, and 2) remove the requirements for the business, industry, and labor representative and replace those requirements with requirements for representatives from each of the following sectors: one small business representative, one representative from a start up (in the last 7 years), 2 representatives from tourism, 2 representatives from the equine industry (one owner, breeder, or trainer and one from any other group in the equine industry), and 3 from other agriculture industry sectors (including cash crop, meat/dairy, produce/small specialty crop, farmers market, and other, with no two being from the same of these groups.) This would give the JCDA a 21-member board, and would give far more expertise in the biggest sectors of our local economy.

• That some committee’s be removed entirely. In a truly bizarre move, the JCC decided to recommend to keep the “ad hoc” committee and nix the agriculture committee. The JCC decided (again without authority) that they would keep only three committees. They decided to get rid of the agriculture committee and keep the “ad hoc” committee. The Foundation follows the agriculture committee, and this committee is doing real work to try to support the needs of agricultural businesses. This move makes no sense.  We repeatedly say that we need to find ways to support farmers; getting rid of the agriculture committee at the JCDA is certainly not servicing this goal.
• The JCC indicated that they thought the agriculture committee was redundant with the state extension office. However, this completely ignores the fact that the state extension office does not work on business. The JCDA agriculture committee and the state extension office do totally different things. The state extension agency supports the practice of agriculture while the JCDA agriculture committee supports the business of agriculture. While these missions are synergistic and the agencies certainly support each other, they are not the same and not redundant of each other. 
• The JCC indicated that they thought the agriculture committee was redundant with the state extension office. However, this completely ignores the fact that the state extension office does not work on business. The JCDA agriculture committee and the state extension office do totally different things. The state extension agency supports the practice of agriculture while the JCDA agriculture committee supports the business of agriculture. While these missions are synergistic and the agencies certainly support each other, they are not the same and not redundant of each other. 
• Even if these agencies did the same thing, the argument is flawed. Just because there is a state agency does not necessarily mean there does not need to be a local agency. For example, there is a state development authority, and yet we still have a county development authority – the JCDA.
• Effect: this would have the effect of removing support from our farmers, precisely the opposite of what we have said we want to do.

Recommendation: We believe that the JCDA should:

Keep the agriculture committee. We should make it more robust by adding the representation discussed in the previous section (2 equine industry reps (one from owners, breeders, and trainers and from one any other equine industry group), and 3 from other agriculture sectors (including cash crop, meat/dairy, produce/small specialty crop, farmers market, and other with no two being from the same of these groups.)).

Change the meeting requirement for committees to quarterly and allow committees to meet more frequently if they have enough business. 

Remove the ad hoc committee and the executive committee. There is no need for a standing at hoc committee; the whole point of ad hoc is that it is ad hoc or as needed. If they need to make a specific ad hoc committee to address a particular issue that can be done as needed. 

How to take action

Attend the County Commission meeting this Thursday, March 20 and speak in public comment tell them:

• The JCDA is a separate entity from the county and the JCC and the County Administrator should not attempt to control the JCDA. The JCDA needs to be independent to achieve its mission.
  • The County does not have control over the JCDA. The JCC’s oversight of the JCDA is through their authority to appoint the board members and control the amount of money the JCDA gets from the JCC.
  • State Code 7-12-3 – “The management and control of a county authority, its property, operations, business, and affairs shall be lodged in a board of not fewer than 12 nor more than 21 persons who shall be appointed by the county commission and be known as members of the authority.”

• Please don’t try to change the bylaws of the JCDA to reduce or narrow representation or remove the agriculture committee.
  • The County has NO authority from the State Code to amend or approve the JCDA bylaws.
  • State Code 7-12-7 – “(a) The development authority is hereby given power and authority as follows: (1) To make and adopt all necessary bylaws and rules for its organization and operations not inconsistent with laws;”
  • Currently the JCDA bylaws give the JCC the ability to approve changes to the JCDA bylaws, but this could be removed by the JCDA.

• Please don’t interfere in the personnel matters of the JCDA.
  • The County Commission has no authority in the state code to interfere in personnel matters at the JCDA.
  • The board of directors at the JCDA has the power to direct the director to advertise positions and fill them as they see fit.
  • The two other staff positions at the JCDA need to be filled so they are back to a 4-person staff. The county should not be hindering this process.
  • State Code 7-12-7 – “(a) The development authority is hereby given power and authority as follows: … (2) to elect its own officers, to appoint committees and to employ and fix compensation for personnel necessary for its operation;”