Gran Jurado del Condado de Fresno

2025-2026

4 informes

Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 3 hallazgos
F1: - FUSD and the Board of Education were within their authority under the California law and their policies and procedures to pay severance to a non-certified employee.
F2: - Outdated job descriptions and a lack of continuity and consistency in its personnel evaluations timeline and process may have contributed to this payout.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R1: - FUSD Board of Education should direct executive staff to develop a procedure for completing personnel evaluations per its current policies, including a standard timeline, with some exceptions, so that these evaluations can be completed on a biennial basis, to be done by November 1, 2026. (F2, F3)
R2: - The FUSD Board of Education should direct FUSD staff to complete personnel evaluations on all classified and administrative employees by the completion of the 2027-2028 school year, to be done by November 1, 2026. (F2, F3)
R3: - The FUSD Board of Education should direct FUSD staff to review and update job descriptions for all full-time employees by the end of the 2027-2028 school year, to be done by November 1, 2026. (F2, F3)
F3: - FUSD appears to be making an effort to update job descriptions and adhere to an updated performance review cadence.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R1: - FUSD Board of Education should direct executive staff to develop a procedure for completing personnel evaluations per its current policies, including a standard timeline, with some exceptions, so that these evaluations can be completed on a biennial basis, to be done by November 1, 2026. (F2, F3)
R2: - The FUSD Board of Education should direct FUSD staff to complete personnel evaluations on all classified and administrative employees by the completion of the 2027-2028 school year, to be done by November 1, 2026. (F2, F3)
R3: - The FUSD Board of Education should direct FUSD staff to review and update job descriptions for all full-time employees by the end of the 2027-2028 school year, to be done by November 1, 2026. (F2, F3)
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 3 hallazgos
F1: Because there is no established policy setting standards for revising CPD’s fee schedule, the CPD and City of Clovis management were both unable to show whether its past and current record fees meet the legal standards of the California Public Records Act and other relevant laws.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R2: The Clovis City Council should direct the CPD to develop a written, publicly available standard operation procedure to determine how future Department fee schedules are amended, including a recommended regular periodic review schedule every five years, by January 1, 2027. (F1, F2)
F2: Because there is no established policy setting the procedure for revising CPD’s fee schedule, the CPD was unable to provide a clear explanation of the protocol it uses to determine and review record fees for submission to the Clovis City Council for review and final approval.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R2: The Clovis City Council should direct the CPD to develop a written, publicly available standard operation procedure to determine how future Department fee schedules are amended, including a recommended regular periodic review schedule every five years, by January 1, 2027. (F1, F2)
F3: The CPD record fees may have violated the California Public Records Act’s “direct costs” standard because the records fees are predetermined flat fees.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R1: The Clovis City Council should direct the CPD to assess whether the public record fees in the Department’s current fee schedule meet the legal standards of the California Public Records Act and includes fees that are reasonable for constituents, to be completed September 30, 2026. (F3)
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 1 hallazgos
F1: – The Civil Grand Jury followed up on responses for two of the four reports for the 2024-2025 year; one report’s follow-up response was received, and the second report’s follow-up response was pending as of May 26, 2026. RECOMMMENDATIONS None. The CGJ analyzed the 2024-25 CGJ reports, Findings, and Recommendations and found all required responses have been received. The CGJ acknowledges the contributions of the Required Respondents and the Invited Respondents. These responses demonstrate organizational accountability and transparency. Governmental entities or elected officials who fail to submit required responses undermine the mission and the work of the Civil Grand Jury. This is a disservice to the residents of Fresno County and a missed opportunity to provide accountability and transparency to the public. By publishing this report, the CGJ is holding the entities and elected officials accountable. REFERENCES Civil Grand Jury Report 2024-2025 Fresno County, CA. “View All 2024-2025 Fresno County Civil Grand Jury Reports & Responses” Penal Code Section 933 “Complete Text of Penal Code Section 933” You can help create a report like this. Go to “Apply here to participate in the civil grand jury” and apply to be a member of the Civil Grand Jury. Civil Grand Jury | Superior Court of California County of Fresno If you have an issue with local government that the Civil Grand Jury should investigate go to: “Open the Citizen Complaint Form Here” Civil Grand Jury | Superior Court of California County of Fresno
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 8 hallazgos
F1: Due to the high number of collisions, the Friant Road and Shepherd Avenue intersection is the most dangerous intersection in the City of Fresno.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R11: The City of Fresno Department of Public Works should remove a portion of the barrier/retaining wall on the east side of northbound Friant Road far enough to allow line of sight from westbound Shepherd Avenue to Friant Road by December 31, 2026. (Figure 6) (F6) PHOTOGRAPHS REFERENCED Figure 1: View of car accident from northbound Friant Road at Shepherd Avenue intersection. Photo source: YouTube Friant Roulette Figure 2: View of northbound Friant Road approaching Shepherd Avenue intersection Figure 3: View of northbound Friant Road at Shepherd Ave. intersection, six stoplights Figure 4: View of green right-hand turn arrows at northbound Friant Road/Shepherd Ave. Figure 5: View of trees in median on northbound Friant Road Figure 6: View of barrier wall on east side of northbound Friant Road at Shepherd Avenue intersection Figure 7: Example of banding around signal lights. Location: 2001 Middlefield Rd, Redwood City, CA. Photo source: Google Maps Figure 8: Example of signal ahead sign Figure 9: Example of “Signal Ahead” road markings. Photo source: American Traffic Safety Services Association Figure 10: Example of a lighted signal ahead sign Figure 11: Example of an Advance Traffic Signal Warning Sign Figure 12: View of left-hand turn lane at northbound Friant Road REQUIRED RESPONSE Pursuant to California Penal Code section 933, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. All interviews with the Civil Grand Jury are confidential, per Penal Code § 929. Responses must be based on the findings and recommendations of the report, not the process of how the findings and recommendations were acquired. (Penal Code § 933.05). Responses to Findings shall be either: ● The respondent agrees with the finding; or ● The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons, therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: ● The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or ● The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; or ● The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or ● The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation, therefor. Required response within 90 days: Fresno City Council: (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, and F8), and (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5,
F2: The vast majority of collisions (over 80%) occurred as drivers failed to obey the red-light traffic signal on northbound Friant Road, colliding with westbound Shepherd Avenue traffic turning onto southbound Friant Road. (Figure 1)
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R2: The City of Fresno Department of Public Works should change the green right- turn arrow lights to a flashing yellow arrow at northbound Friant Road by September 30, 2026. (Figure 4) (F2, F3)
R11: The City of Fresno Department of Public Works should remove a portion of the barrier/retaining wall on the east side of northbound Friant Road far enough to allow line of sight from westbound Shepherd Avenue to Friant Road by December 31, 2026. (Figure 6) (F6) PHOTOGRAPHS REFERENCED Figure 1: View of car accident from northbound Friant Road at Shepherd Avenue intersection. Photo source: YouTube Friant Roulette Figure 2: View of northbound Friant Road approaching Shepherd Avenue intersection Figure 3: View of northbound Friant Road at Shepherd Ave. intersection, six stoplights Figure 4: View of green right-hand turn arrows at northbound Friant Road/Shepherd Ave. Figure 5: View of trees in median on northbound Friant Road Figure 6: View of barrier wall on east side of northbound Friant Road at Shepherd Avenue intersection Figure 7: Example of banding around signal lights. Location: 2001 Middlefield Rd, Redwood City, CA. Photo source: Google Maps Figure 8: Example of signal ahead sign Figure 9: Example of “Signal Ahead” road markings. Photo source: American Traffic Safety Services Association Figure 10: Example of a lighted signal ahead sign Figure 11: Example of an Advance Traffic Signal Warning Sign Figure 12: View of left-hand turn lane at northbound Friant Road REQUIRED RESPONSE Pursuant to California Penal Code section 933, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. All interviews with the Civil Grand Jury are confidential, per Penal Code § 929. Responses must be based on the findings and recommendations of the report, not the process of how the findings and recommendations were acquired. (Penal Code § 933.05). Responses to Findings shall be either: ● The respondent agrees with the finding; or ● The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons, therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: ● The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or ● The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; or ● The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or ● The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation, therefor. Required response within 90 days: Fresno City Council: (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, and F8), and (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5,
F3: There are natural characteristics at this intersection that contribute to collisions: the direction of northbound Friant Road veers west as drivers approach Shepherd, limiting visibility and reaction time, and there is a slight elevation change approaching Friant Road. (Figure 2)
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R2: The City of Fresno Department of Public Works should change the green right- turn arrow lights to a flashing yellow arrow at northbound Friant Road by September 30, 2026. (Figure 4) (F2, F3)
R5: The City of Fresno Department of Public Works should add “Signal Ahead” markings on northbound Friant Road prior to the intersection of Shepherd Avenue by December 31, 2026. (Figure 9) (F3, F4)
R11: The City of Fresno Department of Public Works should remove a portion of the barrier/retaining wall on the east side of northbound Friant Road far enough to allow line of sight from westbound Shepherd Avenue to Friant Road by December 31, 2026. (Figure 6) (F6) PHOTOGRAPHS REFERENCED Figure 1: View of car accident from northbound Friant Road at Shepherd Avenue intersection. Photo source: YouTube Friant Roulette Figure 2: View of northbound Friant Road approaching Shepherd Avenue intersection Figure 3: View of northbound Friant Road at Shepherd Ave. intersection, six stoplights Figure 4: View of green right-hand turn arrows at northbound Friant Road/Shepherd Ave. Figure 5: View of trees in median on northbound Friant Road Figure 6: View of barrier wall on east side of northbound Friant Road at Shepherd Avenue intersection Figure 7: Example of banding around signal lights. Location: 2001 Middlefield Rd, Redwood City, CA. Photo source: Google Maps Figure 8: Example of signal ahead sign Figure 9: Example of “Signal Ahead” road markings. Photo source: American Traffic Safety Services Association Figure 10: Example of a lighted signal ahead sign Figure 11: Example of an Advance Traffic Signal Warning Sign Figure 12: View of left-hand turn lane at northbound Friant Road REQUIRED RESPONSE Pursuant to California Penal Code section 933, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. All interviews with the Civil Grand Jury are confidential, per Penal Code § 929. Responses must be based on the findings and recommendations of the report, not the process of how the findings and recommendations were acquired. (Penal Code § 933.05). Responses to Findings shall be either: ● The respondent agrees with the finding; or ● The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons, therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: ● The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or ● The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; or ● The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or ● The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation, therefor. Required response within 90 days: Fresno City Council: (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, and F8), and (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5,
F4: There are man-made characteristics at this intersection that contribute to collisions: a) Vehicles have views of six light panels, which cause confusion when entering the intersection. (Figure 3) b) Two light panels have a green light arrow for a right turn onto Shepherd Avenue which adds to the confusion for northbound Friant Avenue drivers. (Figure 4) c) There are four evergreen trees in the median that block the view of the traffic signals, giving drivers less time to react as they approach the intersection. (Figure 5)
Recomendaciones relacionadas (6)
R3: The City of Fresno Department of Public Works should enhance signage on northbound Friant Road at the intersection of Shepherd Avenue by adding black striping to existing stop light fixtures by December 31, 2026. (Figure 7) (F4, F7)
R5: The City of Fresno Department of Public Works should add “Signal Ahead” markings on northbound Friant Road prior to the intersection of Shepherd Avenue by December 31, 2026. (Figure 9) (F3, F4)
R6: The City of Fresno Department of Public Works should add signage on northbound Friant Road prior to the intersection of Shepherd Avenue by erecting a stoplight sign with flashing yellow beacon by March 31, 2027. (Figure 10) (F4, F7)
R9: The City of Fresno Department of Public Works should increase timing intervals for the signal lights at this intersection by September 30, 2026. (F4, F6)
R10: The City of Fresno Department of Public Works should prune the evergreen trees or remove these trees in the median on northbound Friant Road approaching the intersection by September 30, 2026. (Figure 5) (F4)
R11: The City of Fresno Department of Public Works should remove a portion of the barrier/retaining wall on the east side of northbound Friant Road far enough to allow line of sight from westbound Shepherd Avenue to Friant Road by December 31, 2026. (Figure 6) (F6) PHOTOGRAPHS REFERENCED Figure 1: View of car accident from northbound Friant Road at Shepherd Avenue intersection. Photo source: YouTube Friant Roulette Figure 2: View of northbound Friant Road approaching Shepherd Avenue intersection Figure 3: View of northbound Friant Road at Shepherd Ave. intersection, six stoplights Figure 4: View of green right-hand turn arrows at northbound Friant Road/Shepherd Ave. Figure 5: View of trees in median on northbound Friant Road Figure 6: View of barrier wall on east side of northbound Friant Road at Shepherd Avenue intersection Figure 7: Example of banding around signal lights. Location: 2001 Middlefield Rd, Redwood City, CA. Photo source: Google Maps Figure 8: Example of signal ahead sign Figure 9: Example of “Signal Ahead” road markings. Photo source: American Traffic Safety Services Association Figure 10: Example of a lighted signal ahead sign Figure 11: Example of an Advance Traffic Signal Warning Sign Figure 12: View of left-hand turn lane at northbound Friant Road REQUIRED RESPONSE Pursuant to California Penal Code section 933, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. All interviews with the Civil Grand Jury are confidential, per Penal Code § 929. Responses must be based on the findings and recommendations of the report, not the process of how the findings and recommendations were acquired. (Penal Code § 933.05). Responses to Findings shall be either: ● The respondent agrees with the finding; or ● The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons, therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: ● The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or ● The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; or ● The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or ● The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation, therefor. Required response within 90 days: Fresno City Council: (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, and F8), and (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5,
F5: There is an additional man-made characteristic, a sound wall whose height impedes the view on eastbound Shepherd Ave and creates a tunnel effect on northbound Friant Road, contributing to the dangerous situation. (Figure 6)
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R8: The City of Fresno Department of Public Works should remove the left-hand turn lane at northbound Friant Road at the Friant-Shepherd intersection by December 31, 2026. (Figure 12) (F5)
R11: The City of Fresno Department of Public Works should remove a portion of the barrier/retaining wall on the east side of northbound Friant Road far enough to allow line of sight from westbound Shepherd Avenue to Friant Road by December 31, 2026. (Figure 6) (F6) PHOTOGRAPHS REFERENCED Figure 1: View of car accident from northbound Friant Road at Shepherd Avenue intersection. Photo source: YouTube Friant Roulette Figure 2: View of northbound Friant Road approaching Shepherd Avenue intersection Figure 3: View of northbound Friant Road at Shepherd Ave. intersection, six stoplights Figure 4: View of green right-hand turn arrows at northbound Friant Road/Shepherd Ave. Figure 5: View of trees in median on northbound Friant Road Figure 6: View of barrier wall on east side of northbound Friant Road at Shepherd Avenue intersection Figure 7: Example of banding around signal lights. Location: 2001 Middlefield Rd, Redwood City, CA. Photo source: Google Maps Figure 8: Example of signal ahead sign Figure 9: Example of “Signal Ahead” road markings. Photo source: American Traffic Safety Services Association Figure 10: Example of a lighted signal ahead sign Figure 11: Example of an Advance Traffic Signal Warning Sign Figure 12: View of left-hand turn lane at northbound Friant Road REQUIRED RESPONSE Pursuant to California Penal Code section 933, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. All interviews with the Civil Grand Jury are confidential, per Penal Code § 929. Responses must be based on the findings and recommendations of the report, not the process of how the findings and recommendations were acquired. (Penal Code § 933.05). Responses to Findings shall be either: ● The respondent agrees with the finding; or ● The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons, therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: ● The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or ● The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; or ● The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or ● The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation, therefor. Required response within 90 days: Fresno City Council: (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, and F8), and (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5,
F6: The limited ongoing police presence contributes to the elevated collision rate at this intersection.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R9: The City of Fresno Department of Public Works should increase timing intervals for the signal lights at this intersection by September 30, 2026. (F4, F6)
R11: The City of Fresno Department of Public Works should remove a portion of the barrier/retaining wall on the east side of northbound Friant Road far enough to allow line of sight from westbound Shepherd Avenue to Friant Road by December 31, 2026. (Figure 6) (F6) PHOTOGRAPHS REFERENCED Figure 1: View of car accident from northbound Friant Road at Shepherd Avenue intersection. Photo source: YouTube Friant Roulette Figure 2: View of northbound Friant Road approaching Shepherd Avenue intersection Figure 3: View of northbound Friant Road at Shepherd Ave. intersection, six stoplights Figure 4: View of green right-hand turn arrows at northbound Friant Road/Shepherd Ave. Figure 5: View of trees in median on northbound Friant Road Figure 6: View of barrier wall on east side of northbound Friant Road at Shepherd Avenue intersection Figure 7: Example of banding around signal lights. Location: 2001 Middlefield Rd, Redwood City, CA. Photo source: Google Maps Figure 8: Example of signal ahead sign Figure 9: Example of “Signal Ahead” road markings. Photo source: American Traffic Safety Services Association Figure 10: Example of a lighted signal ahead sign Figure 11: Example of an Advance Traffic Signal Warning Sign Figure 12: View of left-hand turn lane at northbound Friant Road REQUIRED RESPONSE Pursuant to California Penal Code section 933, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. All interviews with the Civil Grand Jury are confidential, per Penal Code § 929. Responses must be based on the findings and recommendations of the report, not the process of how the findings and recommendations were acquired. (Penal Code § 933.05). Responses to Findings shall be either: ● The respondent agrees with the finding; or ● The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons, therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: ● The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or ● The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; or ● The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or ● The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation, therefor. Required response within 90 days: Fresno City Council: (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, and F8), and (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5,
F7: There are no signs along northbound Friant Avenue prior to the intersection of Shepherd Avenue that alert drivers of an upcoming stop light signal ahead.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (4)
R3: The City of Fresno Department of Public Works should enhance signage on northbound Friant Road at the intersection of Shepherd Avenue by adding black striping to existing stop light fixtures by December 31, 2026. (Figure 7) (F4, F7)
R6: The City of Fresno Department of Public Works should add signage on northbound Friant Road prior to the intersection of Shepherd Avenue by erecting a stoplight sign with flashing yellow beacon by March 31, 2027. (Figure 10) (F4, F7)
R7: The City of Fresno Department of Public Works should erect a flashing beacon with an Advance Traffic Signal Warning Sign to be situated over northbound Friant Road prior to Shepherd Avenue by June 30, 2027. (Figure 11). (F7)
R11: The City of Fresno Department of Public Works should remove a portion of the barrier/retaining wall on the east side of northbound Friant Road far enough to allow line of sight from westbound Shepherd Avenue to Friant Road by December 31, 2026. (Figure 6) (F6) PHOTOGRAPHS REFERENCED Figure 1: View of car accident from northbound Friant Road at Shepherd Avenue intersection. Photo source: YouTube Friant Roulette Figure 2: View of northbound Friant Road approaching Shepherd Avenue intersection Figure 3: View of northbound Friant Road at Shepherd Ave. intersection, six stoplights Figure 4: View of green right-hand turn arrows at northbound Friant Road/Shepherd Ave. Figure 5: View of trees in median on northbound Friant Road Figure 6: View of barrier wall on east side of northbound Friant Road at Shepherd Avenue intersection Figure 7: Example of banding around signal lights. Location: 2001 Middlefield Rd, Redwood City, CA. Photo source: Google Maps Figure 8: Example of signal ahead sign Figure 9: Example of “Signal Ahead” road markings. Photo source: American Traffic Safety Services Association Figure 10: Example of a lighted signal ahead sign Figure 11: Example of an Advance Traffic Signal Warning Sign Figure 12: View of left-hand turn lane at northbound Friant Road REQUIRED RESPONSE Pursuant to California Penal Code section 933, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. All interviews with the Civil Grand Jury are confidential, per Penal Code § 929. Responses must be based on the findings and recommendations of the report, not the process of how the findings and recommendations were acquired. (Penal Code § 933.05). Responses to Findings shall be either: ● The respondent agrees with the finding; or ● The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons, therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: ● The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or ● The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; or ● The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or ● The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation, therefor. Required response within 90 days: Fresno City Council: (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, and F8), and (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5,
F8: The City of Fresno Department of Public Works has two upgrade options under consideration for this intersection, and neither of these options address the primary issue for this intersection to reduce collisions, which is drivers failing to obey the red- light traffic signal on northbound Friant Road.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R11: The City of Fresno Department of Public Works should remove a portion of the barrier/retaining wall on the east side of northbound Friant Road far enough to allow line of sight from westbound Shepherd Avenue to Friant Road by December 31, 2026. (Figure 6) (F6) PHOTOGRAPHS REFERENCED Figure 1: View of car accident from northbound Friant Road at Shepherd Avenue intersection. Photo source: YouTube Friant Roulette Figure 2: View of northbound Friant Road approaching Shepherd Avenue intersection Figure 3: View of northbound Friant Road at Shepherd Ave. intersection, six stoplights Figure 4: View of green right-hand turn arrows at northbound Friant Road/Shepherd Ave. Figure 5: View of trees in median on northbound Friant Road Figure 6: View of barrier wall on east side of northbound Friant Road at Shepherd Avenue intersection Figure 7: Example of banding around signal lights. Location: 2001 Middlefield Rd, Redwood City, CA. Photo source: Google Maps Figure 8: Example of signal ahead sign Figure 9: Example of “Signal Ahead” road markings. Photo source: American Traffic Safety Services Association Figure 10: Example of a lighted signal ahead sign Figure 11: Example of an Advance Traffic Signal Warning Sign Figure 12: View of left-hand turn lane at northbound Friant Road REQUIRED RESPONSE Pursuant to California Penal Code section 933, each entity or individual named below must respond to the enumerated Findings and Recommendations within specific statutory guidelines. All interviews with the Civil Grand Jury are confidential, per Penal Code § 929. Responses must be based on the findings and recommendations of the report, not the process of how the findings and recommendations were acquired. (Penal Code § 933.05). Responses to Findings shall be either: ● The respondent agrees with the finding; or ● The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons, therefor. Responses to Recommendations shall be one of the following: ● The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; or ● The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; or ● The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency where applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; or ● The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation, therefor. Required response within 90 days: Fresno City Council: (F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, and F8), and (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5,
Recomendaciones adicionales 2

No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.

R1: The Fresno City Police Department should increase the number and frequency of police officers at this intersection, including enforcement by September 30, 2026. (F1,
R4: The City of Fresno Department of Public Works should add signage on both sides of northbound Friant Road prior to the intersection of Shepherd Avenue by installing two stoplight signs, to be completed by December 31, 2026. (Figure 8) (F4,
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 8 hallazgos
F1: We commend the Fresno County Coroner’s Office staff for their consistent compassion, professionalism, and resilient service to families during some of the most difficult and traumatic moments in their lives.
F2: The Fresno County Coroner’s Office employs only one half-time forensic pathologist, which does not provide adequate in-house forensic pathology coverage.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R1: The Fresno County Board of Supervisors should adopt a budget for the Coroner’s Office to recruit and retain at least one full-time, board-certified Forensic Pathologist prior to expiration of Master Service Agreement No. 24-014 to be completed by September 30, 2026. (F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8)
R5: The Fresno County Sheriff’s Office and the Coroner’s Office should develop a three-year forensic pathology staffing stabilization plan to be completed by December 31, 2026. (F2, F3, F4, F7)
F3: There are 1,164 open cases creating a three-year backlog with no plan to alleviate the backlog.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R1: The Fresno County Board of Supervisors should adopt a budget for the Coroner’s Office to recruit and retain at least one full-time, board-certified Forensic Pathologist prior to expiration of Master Service Agreement No. 24-014 to be completed by September 30, 2026. (F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8)
R2: The Fresno County Sheriff’s Office and the Coroner’s Office should develop and implement an immediate plan to reduce the existing backlog of 1,164 open cases to be completed by December 31, 2026. (F3)
R5: The Fresno County Sheriff’s Office and the Coroner’s Office should develop a three-year forensic pathology staffing stabilization plan to be completed by December 31, 2026. (F2, F3, F4, F7)
F4: Due to the absence of a full-time Forensic Pathologist, the Coroner’s Office relies heavily on contracted Forensic Pathologists to perform routine and complex autopsies, provide case consultations, and deliver court testimony.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (4)
R1: The Fresno County Board of Supervisors should adopt a budget for the Coroner’s Office to recruit and retain at least one full-time, board-certified Forensic Pathologist prior to expiration of Master Service Agreement No. 24-014 to be completed by September 30, 2026. (F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8)
R3: The Fresno County Board of Supervisors should direct the Chief Administrative Office to conduct a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis comparing annual expenditures on contracted forensic pathology services with the cost of employing full-time Forensic Pathologists to be completed by March 31, 2027. (F4, F5, F6, F7)
R4: The Fresno County Board of Supervisors should evaluate whether the current Sheriff-Coroner model provides optimal administrative oversight for forensic pathology to be completed by March 31, 2027. (F4, F5, F6, F7)
R5: The Fresno County Sheriff’s Office and the Coroner’s Office should develop a three-year forensic pathology staffing stabilization plan to be completed by December 31, 2026. (F2, F3, F4, F7)
F5: Over the past three years, the County Purchasing Department increased spending on contracted Forensic Pathologists, even though these funds could have supported multiple full-time Forensic Pathologist positions under industry standards.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R1: The Fresno County Board of Supervisors should adopt a budget for the Coroner’s Office to recruit and retain at least one full-time, board-certified Forensic Pathologist prior to expiration of Master Service Agreement No. 24-014 to be completed by September 30, 2026. (F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8)
R3: The Fresno County Board of Supervisors should direct the Chief Administrative Office to conduct a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis comparing annual expenditures on contracted forensic pathology services with the cost of employing full-time Forensic Pathologists to be completed by March 31, 2027. (F4, F5, F6, F7)
R4: The Fresno County Board of Supervisors should evaluate whether the current Sheriff-Coroner model provides optimal administrative oversight for forensic pathology to be completed by March 31, 2027. (F4, F5, F6, F7)
F6: The current Master Service Agreement expires January 8, 2027, after which continued reliance on contracted services will require renewal, rebidding, or the development of an alternative staffing model.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (3)
R1: The Fresno County Board of Supervisors should adopt a budget for the Coroner’s Office to recruit and retain at least one full-time, board-certified Forensic Pathologist prior to expiration of Master Service Agreement No. 24-014 to be completed by September 30, 2026. (F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8)
R3: The Fresno County Board of Supervisors should direct the Chief Administrative Office to conduct a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis comparing annual expenditures on contracted forensic pathology services with the cost of employing full-time Forensic Pathologists to be completed by March 31, 2027. (F4, F5, F6, F7)
R4: The Fresno County Board of Supervisors should evaluate whether the current Sheriff-Coroner model provides optimal administrative oversight for forensic pathology to be completed by March 31, 2027. (F4, F5, F6, F7)
F7: The hybrid staffing model creates operational inefficiencies such as scheduling challenges, case continuity concerns, delayed report completion, and limited institutional knowledge retention.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (4)
R1: The Fresno County Board of Supervisors should adopt a budget for the Coroner’s Office to recruit and retain at least one full-time, board-certified Forensic Pathologist prior to expiration of Master Service Agreement No. 24-014 to be completed by September 30, 2026. (F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8)
R3: The Fresno County Board of Supervisors should direct the Chief Administrative Office to conduct a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis comparing annual expenditures on contracted forensic pathology services with the cost of employing full-time Forensic Pathologists to be completed by March 31, 2027. (F4, F5, F6, F7)
R4: The Fresno County Board of Supervisors should evaluate whether the current Sheriff-Coroner model provides optimal administrative oversight for forensic pathology to be completed by March 31, 2027. (F4, F5, F6, F7)
R5: The Fresno County Sheriff’s Office and the Coroner’s Office should develop a three-year forensic pathology staffing stabilization plan to be completed by December 31, 2026. (F2, F3, F4, F7)
F8: The current facility lacks essential operational and public spaces necessary for effective and compassionate service delivery. | P a g e
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R1: The Fresno County Board of Supervisors should adopt a budget for the Coroner’s Office to recruit and retain at least one full-time, board-certified Forensic Pathologist prior to expiration of Master Service Agreement No. 24-014 to be completed by September 30, 2026. (F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8)
R6: The Fresno County Sheriff-Coroner’s Office should prioritize funding for three modular buildings in its 2026-2027 budget to include essential operational and public spaces to be completed by September 30, 2026. (F8) | P a g e