Gran Jurado del Condado de Marin
2023-2024
From the annual report
The consolidated year-end volume. The individual investigations it contains are listed separately below.
📑 Year-End Report
The full consolidated volume; individual reports are listed below.
Individual reports (5)
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
1 hallazgos
F1:
The 2024–2025 Grand Jury finds that all of Marin County’s public agencies satisfied their legal obligations to respond to reports from the 2023–2024 Grand Jury.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R1:
By September 30, 2024, The District Attorney’s Office should start providing the requested quarterly update and statistical report regarding its progress in reducing the backlog of criminal cases to the Board of Supervisors and the County Executive’s Office. ● The BOS stated that this recommendation required further analysis. The BOS agreed that quarterly reports are warranted and feasible in the future and that the organizational study referenced in the findings will provide insight as to when quarterly reporting will be feasible. The BOS further stated that they welcomed input from the District Attorney on how they can help facilitate the process. The BOS will continue to explore this issue with the District Attorney and will partner on a regular reporting process informed by evaluation of an organizational study anticipated to be completed this calendar year. ● The District Attorney stated that the recommendation has not yet been implemented but would be in the future. The District Attorney however, did not give a timeframe for completion. The District Attorney further stated that the office looked forward to reporting quarterly to the BOS once the independent consultant (65th North Group) completes an analysis of office operations and identifies appropriate data to be included in workload update reports.
Recomendaciones adicionales
9
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R2:
By September 30, 2024, the Health and Human Services Department should commence open, public discussions with the Commission on Aging regarding the future status of the Office of Adult and Aging Services (AAS) and the funding of adult programs, including the cost analysis and rationale for not elevating the Office of Adult and Aging Services to a division-level department within the Health and Human Services Department ● The BOS responded that this recommendation had been implemented. The BOS further stated that on March 29, 2024, HHS provided a second presentation to the Commission on Aging to discuss the financial structure of the Aging and Adult Services Division within HHS. This presentation provided fiscal and service delivery data demonstrating the positive impact of all HHS divisions on the older adult population in Marin. ● The Marin County Commission on Aging (MCCOA), the Invited respondent, disagreed with the BOS updated response regarding public discussions of the financing and elevation of AAS to a divisional-level department within HHS. MCCOA responded that the discussions were delayed due to the departure of the Director of HHS and the hiring of the director of AAS. MCCOA asked that a new director of AAS not be hired until public discussions of the elevation of AAS to a divisional-level department had been done. This request did not receive a reply from HHS and a new director of AAS was hired. MCCOA also stated that the BOS had not documented nor proven that elevating AAS would cost $700,000 to $1,000,000 annually. A Free Public Education Includes School Supplies Released on April 19, 2024 California law is clear that school supplies are included in a free public education. Public schools throughout the state are required to provide, at no cost to students or their families, all the supplies, materials, and equipment necessary to fully participate at school. Nevertheless, at the outset of the school year, many schools in Marin County distribute school supply lists to students and their families. The Marin County Civil Grand Jury (Grand Jury) conducted an investigation to determine the extent to which students and their families are requested to buy school supplies that schools are required to provide. While the use of supply lists varies throughout the school districts, the Grand Jury concluded that many schools asked, or suggested, that students or their families purchase supplies that schools are required to provide. In addition, teachers often use their personal funds to pay for supplies so their students can fully participate in school activities. Recommendations and Responses The Grand Jury made seven recommendations to, and required responses from the Marin County Office of Education (MCOE) and Superintendent of Schools (Superintendent), as well as each of the 16 school districts in the County (Bolinas-Stinson, Kentfield, Laguna Joint, Lagunitas, Larkspur-Corte Madera, Mill Valley, Miller Creek Elementary, Nicasio, Novato Unified, Reed Union, Ross, Ross Valley, San Rafael City, Sausalito Marin City, Shoreline Unified, and Tamalpais Union High School) The recommendations are listed below. Because of the large number (17) of required respondents, as well as the uniformity of the responses from all required respondents, the results are summarized in the narrative following the recommendations.
R3:
Marin public schools should not distribute school supply lists to students or their families. ● Fourteen of the sixteen school districts had already implemented this recommendation, as had the MCOE and the Superintendent. The Larkspur-Corte Madera School District stated they would implement the recommendation in the 2024–2025 school year, and San Rafael City School District stated that it would implement it by August 21, 2024.
R4:
Marin public schools should not distribute school supply lists that indicate the supplies are optional. ● Fourteen of the sixteen school districts had already implemented this recommendation, as had the MCOE and the Superintendent. The Larkspur-Corte Madera School District stated they would implement the recommendation in the 2024–2025 school year, and San Rafael City School District stated that it would implement it by August 21, 2024.
R5:
The superintendent of each school district should ensure that the schools in their districts are in compliance with California law with respect to school supplies. ● Fifteen of the sixteen school districts had already implemented this recommendation, as had the MCOE and the Superintendent. The Larkspur-Corte Madera School District stated they would implement the recommendation in the 2024–2025 school year.
R6:
If a Marin public school chooses to solicit donations of any kind from anyone, whether the solicitation is on paper, verbal, or electronic, such as a website or email, the school should make it clear that donations are not required but rather are entirely voluntary. ● All required respondents stated that they had implemented this recommendation.
R7:
Marin public schools should not put teachers in a position where they need to use their personal funds to provide supplies, materials, or equipment for students to fully participate at school. ● Fifteen of the sixteen school districts had already implemented this recommendation, as had the MCOE and the Superintendent. The San Rafael City School District stated they would implement the recommendation by August 21, 2024. With Power Comes Responsibility - Youths Under Age 16 Operating Class 2 E-Bikes: A Safety Risk Released April 26, 2024 Marin County roads, trails, and paths are enjoyed by many cyclists throughout the year. Over the past decade, the popularity of electric bicycles (e-bikes) has grown, with nationwide e-bike sales almost doubling between 2020 and 2021.3 E-bikes are now used by all types of bike riders in Marin, including commuters, mountain bikers who need a little help getting up steep trails, riders with disabilities or other physical limitations, casual adult riders, and children. Unfortunately, some riders under the age of 16 are not ready for the power of the e-bikes they are operating. Additionally, some young riders are operating e-bikes that have multiple power modes or aftermarket modifications that make them illegal. The rate of e-bike accidents in Marin among children aged 10-15 is far higher than it is with any other age groups. This has led bike advocacy groups, law enforcement, and public health officials to issue warnings and advisories to Marin families about the danger of e-bikes for children. The laws in California and in Marin do not closely regulate e-bike use. California designates three classes of legal e-bikes. All are limited to 750 watt electric motors. Class 1 and class 3 e- bikes only get electric assistance when the pedals are in use, with class 1 limited to 20 mph assisted speed, and class 3 limited to 28 mph assisted speed.4 Class 2 e-bikes offer pedal-assist electric power, up to 20 mph, and also have a throttle device which will power the bicycle to move even when the rider does not pedal at all. Many class 2 e-bikes can be easily modified to remove the throttle-assisted speed limit, so those e-bikes can travel much faster than 20 mph. These modified bikes no longer legally qualify as e-bikes. Several bills have been proposed in the California State Legislature to further regulate the use of e-bikes, especially among children under age 16. In addition, a few Marin municipalities have passed ordinances regarding e-bikes. The Marin Civil Grand Jury conducted an investigation to determine the extent of the problem when children under age 16 operate e-bikes in Marin, and to explore possible solutions. The Grand Jury concluded that children under age 16 who operate class 2 e-bikes in Marin pose a danger to themselves and others. The Grand Jury also concluded that the same dangers do not apply to youths riding class 1 e-bikes in Marin. Boudway, Ira, Bloomberg, “America’s Best-Selling Electric Vehicles Ride on Two Wheels,” January 21, 2022, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-21/u-s-e-bike-sales-outpaced-electric-cars-in-2021, subscription required (accessed 11/11/24). These e-bikes have a sensor to detect the rate of travel. If the bicycle is going 20 mph (class 1 or 2) or 28 mph (class 3), the electric motor is programmed to shut off. Like non-electric bicycles, e-bikes can all travel above those rates, such as when they are coasting downhill. Recommendations and Responses The Grand Jury made three recommendations to, and required responses from both the BOS and the 11 municipalities in Marin. An additional recommendation was made just to the BOS:
R8:
The Board of Supervisors require that the Marin Department of Information Services and Technology and the Department of Human Resources develop a plan for negotiating the inclusion of language that allows for managed service agreements in new Collective Bargaining agreements with MAPE and MCMEA that will start in July of 2025. ● The BOS stated this recommendation required further analysis. According to the BOS the recommendation could not be unilaterally implemented because it required the approval of both MAPE and MCMEA. The terms of their respective Collective Bargaining Agreements specifically limit contracting out of bargaining unit work. MAPE and MCMEA agreements are not open to bargaining and negotiation until the first half of 2025 and first half of 2026, respectively.
R9:
The Board of Supervisors requires that the Marin Department of Information Services and Technology update its Top 10 Cybersecurity Tips for Organizations at least once a year. ● The BOS stated that this recommendation would be implemented by October of 2024. A review of the County webpage, https://www.marincounty.gov/departments/it/cybersecurity/top-10-cybersecurity-tips- organizations confirmed that this has been accomplished.
R10:
The Board of Supervisors requires that the Marin Department of Information Services and Technology more directly promote, through the Marin Security and Privacy Council, its Top 10 Cybersecurity Tips for Organizations to all of Marin’s public agencies. ● The BOS stated the recommendation is already implemented. An Analysis of the Use and Oversight of County Purchase Cards Released on May 23, 2024 Large organizations like the County of Marin (the County) employ the use of business credit cards for specific purposes. These include the purchasing of goods and services in situations where the expense is a small dollar amount, out of the ordinary, needed under urgent circumstances (e.g. disasters, investigations, etc.), or where there are suppliers/vendors who cannot employ the usual purchase order and invoice payment system used for most of the procurement needs of the County. Within the County, business credit cards used by employees are known as Purchase Cards and CAL-Cards, and the terms are used on an interchangeable basis (CAL-Cards). CAL-Card purchases historically account for annual expenditures ranging from $2.9 million to $3.9 million. The majority of purchases under $5,000 are made with cards rather than purchase orders (PO’s). This report explored the use of CAL-Cards by the County. There are a large number of CAL- Cards in use in Marin compared to other counties of similar size. It is often not clear that cardholders are making purchases from suppliers with competitively bid best pricing. The Grand Jury found considerable variability in the oversight and processing of CAL-Card purchases. This is the result of a structure of joint management by Procurement within the Department of Public Works and the Department of Finance. The Grand Jury is recommending that the Department of Finance assume all administrative, oversight, audit, and training activities for CAL-Cards. Since CAL-Cards can be subject to misuse, the Grand Jury is recommending tighter approval controls and better training for department leaders and cardholders. The recommendations in this report are intended to standardize the use and oversight of the CAL-Card program in order to mitigate the possibility of misuse and financial risk. Recommendations and Responses The Grand Jury made a total of eight recommendations to, and required responses from the BOS:
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
5 hallazgos
F1:
Climate change is increasing the atmospheric rivers’ strength and frequency which impacts communities across Marin County. Failure to include and recognize these growing threats underestimates current dam safety risks and possible preventive strategies.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R1:
By March 15, 2024, MMWD and NMWD should establish a Climate Change and atmospheric rivers working group to consider, and begin to develop, new hazard mitigation actions. These should be based on the current scientific projections regarding atmospheric rivers and other extreme precipitation events.
F2:
MMWD and NMWD are in full compliance with both state DOSD, as well as all federal regulations. However, dam safety analysis and reporting would be enhanced by including current data on probable maximum precipitation (basis for risk analysis) numbers.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R2:
By December 31, 2023, the two water districts should begin work to expand their respective hazard mitigation plans, which should include a new section dedicated to climate change, and a discussion of atmospheric rivers and their accelerating potential threats to dam and reservoir safety.
F3:
MMWD and NMWD hazard mitigation plans fail to incorporate the latest scientific studies on climate change. They use DOSD and FEMA climate models that were last updated in 2012. This eleven-year gap may lead to an underestimation of current and future risks.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R3:
By January 1, 2026, the water districts (at the time of their next dam inspections, and when their hazard mitigation plans are revised) should provide the public with new information about the updated plans. This information needs to ensure that they effectively consider flood risks in light of the new science, thus ensuring that the public is aware of this.
F4:
FEMA and National Flood Insurance maps may not have entirely incorporated the most recent dam inundation maps and are not available on the MMWD and NMWD websites.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R4:
By September 30, 2023, both water districts should update their websites to include links to the inundation and FEMA maps. They should also provide links to the National Flood Insurance Program.
F5:
The advancement of dam safety is greatly enhanced with the expertise of scientific institutions. They use a range of tools and practices such as FIRO, flyovers, weather balloons, radar along the coast, and collaborations between dam owners and scientific institutions. These practices, used by other water districts, serve as an example from which MMWD and NMWD can benefit.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R5:
By December 31, 2023, dam owners should provide the public with easily accessible information on flood risks, as FEMA and National Flood Insurance may not have entirely incorporated the most recent dam inundation maps.
Recomendaciones adicionales
1
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R6:
By December 2023, both water districts should begin to explore collaborations with scientific institutions to learn from, expand their toolkit of mitigation strategies, and thus augment the safety of their dams in light of growing risks posed by atmospheric rivers.
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
6 hallazgos
F1:
SMART is heavily dependent on revenue from voter approved Marin and Sonoma County sales taxes for funding its operations.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R1:
By December 1, 2023, the Board of Directors should initiate a fully transparent, public process to be completed by April 1, 2024 that examines how SMART might continue funding its operations beyond April 2029, including an evaluation of when the voters would decide whether to continue levying a sales tax for SMART’s operations.
R3:
SMART’s Board of Directors should consider hiring consultants to help evaluate the feasibility and timing of future tax measures.
F2:
SMART has never attained the ridership levels that it promised in 2008.
F3:
SMART’s past inability to be open and transparent about decision making and operations contributed to the erosion of public confidence leading to the defeat of the Measure I sales tax extension in 2020.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R2:
By December 1, 2023, SMART’s Board of Directors should direct staff to develop a written strategic marketing communications and public outreach plan and budget focused on educating voters in Marin County about the community benefits derived from the continued operation of the SMART rail system.
F4:
SMART will likely be forced to discontinue services if Marin and Sonoma County voters do not approve a sales tax extension by the required supermajority in an election before 2029.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R1:
By December 1, 2023, the Board of Directors should initiate a fully transparent, public process to be completed by April 1, 2024 that examines how SMART might continue funding its operations beyond April 2029, including an evaluation of when the voters would decide whether to continue levying a sales tax for SMART’s operations.
R3:
SMART’s Board of Directors should consider hiring consultants to help evaluate the feasibility and timing of future tax measures.
F5:
SMART’s new leadership, especially its General Manager and Chief Financial Officer, appear qualified, energetic and motivated to take on the many challenges that SMART is facing.
F6:
SMART does not have a comprehensive marketing and communications strategy.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R2:
By December 1, 2023, SMART’s Board of Directors should direct staff to develop a written strategic marketing communications and public outreach plan and budget focused on educating voters in Marin County about the community benefits derived from the continued operation of the SMART rail system.
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
9 hallazgos
F1:
BHRS does not currently have a one call/one door entry for all of residents who are seeking mental or behavioral health services. The website lists several phone numbers and contact points for its services, which is confusing to the public when seeking help.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R1:
By December 31, 2023, the Marin County Board of Supervisors should direct the County’s BHRS division to develop and begin to implement a written strategic plan and operating budget detailing the enhancement, expansion, and funding of the 988 Lifeline Call Navigation Center to become the one call/one door entry for county residents who are seeking immediate help with a behavioral health crisis.
F2:
Most Marin County residents have limited or no knowledge of where to call, other than 911, for help with a mental or behavioral health crisis, and the 988 Lifeline is not widely known or used.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R2:
By December 31, 2023, the Marin County Board of Supervisors should direct the County’s BHRS division to develop a new public awareness and educational outreach campaign promoting the 988 Lifeline Call Navigation Center.
F3:
Most calls to BHRS are not answered by a live person 24x7.
F4:
The new 988 Lifeline represents a first step toward shifting the primary response to mental and behavioral health emergencies from law enforcement, EMS and Fire to trained behavioral health care navigators, thus reducing the burden on law enforcement, EMS and Fire so they are available for other public safety calls, and at a lower cost to the County.
F5:
BHRS’s $125,000 historic annual funding of the Suicide Prevention Line has not been adjusted to reflect the expanded services provided by the Buckelew-run 988 Lifeline Navigation Call Center.
F6:
A county-wide needs/gaps assessment (broader than what the Mental Health Services Act mandates) has not been completed for several years.
F7:
Despite the HHS’s Mission Statement “To promote and protect the health, well-being, self-sufficiency, and safety of all people in Marin,” the large majority of the programs and funding are limited to the approximate 20 percent of Marin’s population who qualify for Medi-Cal or are uninsured.
F8:
The Mobile Crisis Response Team, Crisis Stabilization Unit, Access Team, and County oversight of the 988 Lifeline Navigation Center do not report to the same department manager; thus complicating the coordination and communication between the four departments.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R3:
By December 31, 2023, the Marin County Board of Supervisors should direct the County’s BHRS division to create a new Behavioral Health Crisis Services department reporting directly to the division director. The new department would integrate the Access Team, the Mobile Crisis Response Team, the Crisis Stabilization Unit, and oversight of the 988 Lifeline Call Navigation Center under a single responsible and accountable management structure.
R4:
By December 31, 2023, the Marin County Board of Supervisors should direct the County’s BHRS division to create an organizational plan to improve its utilization and outcome reporting across the Mobile Crisis Response Team, the Crisis Stabilization Unit, the Access Team and the 988 Lifeline Navigation Call Center: 1) its sharing of that data across the units within BHRS; 2) its consolidated reporting and conclusions based on that consolidated data; and, 3) its ability to consequently make informed decisions regarding staffing, funding, program development, and new service opportunities to improve behavioral health outcomes.
F9:
The Mobile Crisis Response Team is not currently available 24x7 to respond to an urgent mental or behavioral health crisis.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R5:
By December 31, 2023, the Marin County Board of Supervisors should direct the County’s BHRS division to develop a plan and operating budget to transition the Mobile Crisis Response Team to 24x7.
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
10 hallazgos
F1:
More housing in Marin is needed and ADUs are one solution.
F2:
Many homeowners lack information and knowledge about ADU development, and Marin’s jurisdictions are not always helpful to homeowners seeking information about ADU development.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R3:
By December 1, 2023, begin the process of merging and/or collaborating with Napa/Sonoma ADU, and hiring a full-time Marin ADU Program Coordinator. The program coordinator should work with all jurisdictions on the development of ADUs and identify impact and connection fees within each jurisdiction.
F3:
It is often difficult, if not impossible, for a Marin homeowner to determine the planning, building, connection, capacity and impact fees associated with developing an ADU in a particular jurisdiction.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R3:
By December 1, 2023, begin the process of merging and/or collaborating with Napa/Sonoma ADU, and hiring a full-time Marin ADU Program Coordinator. The program coordinator should work with all jurisdictions on the development of ADUs and identify impact and connection fees within each jurisdiction.
F4:
Many Bay Area cities and counties, for example Napa and Sonoma, have implemented comprehensive websites and related support to help homeowners create ADUs.
F5:
ADUs may be rented affordably and provide additional benefits for older adults and their caregivers.
F6:
Most Marin jurisdictions could provide better resources offering or identifying financing incentives for ADU development.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R1:
On or before December 31, 2023, the Marin County Board of Supervisors should direct the Community Development Agency's Development Priority Setting Committee to: 1) Identify available funding/financing information for residents who need help with the cost of building an ADU, 2) Transmit the collected information to all the jurisdictions represented on the Committee. 3) Start a continuous monitoring program to update the information sources as they become available.
R6:
By December 1, 2023, begin feasibility assessments of new incentives for ADU development, such as pre-approved plans, technical assistance, property tax relief, development fee waivers, and forgivable loans; implement at least one such incentive no later than July 1, 2024.
F7:
Impact, connection, and capacity fees vary considerably throughout the County and such fees can be a disincentive to homeowners considering ADU development.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R4:
By December 1, 2023, begin a feasibility assessment of waiving or significantly lowering impact and connection fees for units smaller than 750 square feet.
F8:
Not every jurisdiction in Marin has updated its planning and building policies to conform with current California ADU laws.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R5:
By December 1, 2023, begin creating plans to accelerate the permit approval process for ADU applications to within 30 days, or less, of submission. Implement such plans no later than July 1, 2024.
F9:
Granting amnesty, following safety inspection, to existing non-conforming second units could help Marin meet its housing obligations.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R2:
By December 1, 2023, begin investigation to consider an amnesty program to legalize existing unpermitted second units. Add a marketing communications plan so that citizens can be made aware of it.
F10:
ADU Marin and HelloADU are a good start. However, compared to several other Bay Area cities and counties, for example Napa and Sonoma, they could be substantially enhanced and expanded.