Gran Jurado del Condado de Marin
2026-2027
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
14 hallazgos
F1:
MCE’s Board as a whole has not played a sufficiently active role in key agency decisions including reviewing policies and future strategy, and setting / evaluating performance metrics for management.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R1:
By September 30, 2026, MCE’s Board of Directors should review whether its current delegation of authority provides adequate oversight regarding contract approval, setting / evaluating performance metrics for senior management, and overall company strategy.
F2:
The Board needs — but in recent years has not received — adequate and independent legal advice. Having ceded approval authority over the hiring of MCE’s General Counsel to the CEO in 2023, the Board has diminished its ability to govern.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R2:
By December 31, 2026, the Board should amend its Operating Rules and Regulations to reinstate approval authority for hiring of the CEO and General Counsel, to require Board approval for hiring all C-level employees, and to require an open, competitive process for all such hiring.
F3:
The Board’s size and composition make it difficult for the Board to govern.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R3:
By December 31, 2026, the Board should determine whether its current size and composition are impediments to oversight and governance.
F4:
Many Board members have — quite understandably — limited expertise regarding a large and complex company such as MCE.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R4:
By December 31, 2026, the Board should revise its Operating Rules and Regulations to regain responsibility for jointly creating meeting agendas in order to improve meeting efficiency and prioritization of agenda items.
F5:
All MCE Board members are local elected officials who face competing demands on their limited time and resources; as a result, meeting attendance has often been poor, and insufficient for optimally effective governance.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R5:
By December 31, 2026, all of MCE’s Marin jurisdictions (and preferably, all 38 jurisdictions covered by MCE) should implement a process by which its appointed Board member (or, in that person’s absence, the designated alternate member) commits to attending each regular Board meeting.
F6:
Energy contracts at the heart of MCE’s business are technical and complex. Board members face a considerable challenge to understand the costs, risks, and policy implications of MCE’s energy contracts — and the relationship between those contracts and the actual “greenness” of the electricity that MCE provides to its customers.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R6:
By December 31, 2026, all of MCE’s Marin jurisdictions (and preferably, all 38 jurisdictions covered by MCE) should reassess their appointments of chosen Board members to prioritize those with the most extensive financial and energy expertise.
F7:
The Board lacks sufficient visibility into the work of its contracted power purchasing agent and technical consultant (Pacific Energy Advisors) — an entity that has substantial influence over MCE’s business operations, and also purchases for (and advises) other CCAs in this market.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R7:
By March 31, 2027, the MCE Board should evaluate whether changes to Board composition or access to energy expertise would improve oversight and governance, and if necessary, consider amending its Joint Powers Agreement to allow the governing body of each jurisdiction to appoint and designate a Board member (or alternate Board member) who is not a member of its governing body, but who has strong energy industry experience and can commit to serve for multiple years.
F8:
The Board has not received from management an adequate and understandable explanation of the almost $200 million year-over-year increase in energy costs in FY 2024–25.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R8:
By December 31, 2026, the Board should review and assess the value to ratepayers of certain costly contracts that may serve primarily to allow MCE to claim a higher renewable Power Content Label.
F9:
Management has at times invoked confidentiality / market competitiveness concerns when providing the Board or individual members with only limited details about energy contracts (even though greater details are publicly reported on the California Energy Commission’s website), thus impairing Board members’ contemporaneous awareness about key aspects of MCE’s business.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R9:
By December 31, 2026, the MCE Board should hire an impartial, outside auditor to provide a comprehensive review of energy contracts executed in FY 2024–25, including review of cost, capacity, length of contract, fuel source, facility location and approval processes, in order to avoid future similar recurring contract variances and overruns.
F10:
Management has been, at some times and in key respects, insufficiently transparent with the Board, as it has (1) provided incomplete responses to Board members’ questions and requests for information; (2) obfuscated or conflated issues and details; (3) failed to inform the Board of important actions in a timely manner or done so after-the-fact; and (4) limited legitimate inquiries and comments from Board members who attempt to question management.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R10:
By December 31, 2026, the Board should conduct an internal review concerning the apparent April 2023 elevation of then-Associate General Counsel to the position of General Counsel, in order to determine whether that elevation occurred consistently with MCE’s then-operative Operating Rules and Regulations.
F11:
The Board has ceded control of its own meetings by relinquishing its responsibility over the creation of meeting agendas. This has contributed to meeting inefficiency and bloated meeting packets.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R11:
Initially by December 31, 2026 and periodically thereafter, the Board should direct management to issue a Request for Proposal concerning (1) services provided by independent energy consultants, and (2) services of all other consultants when the duration or cost exceeds a de minimis amount (as defined by the Board).
F12:
The process for amending the agency’s foundational rules — its Operating Rules and Regulations — has not been consistently and rigorously followed. As a result, the Grand Jury questions whether all relevant materials were made available to Board members and the public (in accordance with the Brown Act) in advance of the Board taking actions.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R12:
By December 31, 2026, the Board should review its August 17, 2023 amendment of its Operating Rules and Regulations to determine if, in doing so, (1) the Board received adequate and independent legal advice, and (2) whether MCE and the Board complied with the public inspection requirements of the Brown Act, California’s open public meetings law.
F13:
Management has repeatedly violated key internal controls, including “Resolution 2020-04” and “authorization chain” documents, requiring consultation about, and approval of, one- to-five year energy contracts.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R13:
By March 31, 2027, the Board should review its existing policies and internal controls to determine whether they are consistent with and adequate for a company approaching one billion dollars in revenue.
F14:
MCE has grown from a small company to its significant size today, yet its foundational documents have not been amended to reflect its increased scale and complexity.
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
7 hallazgos
F1:
The current fragmented structure of special districts results in unnecessary duplication of administrative services and operational inefficiencies.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R1:
By January 1, 2027, all special district boards should have conducted their first semi- annual consolidation exploration meeting with similar districts and will have established a regular meeting schedule moving forward.
F2:
Some districts perform competently but lack sufficient scale to support long-term strategic investment in infrastructure, technology, staffing, and resilience.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R2:
By October 1, 2026, the Board of Supervisors should direct the development of comprehensive, cost-efficient shared services (such as IT, legal, finance, HR/payroll, harmonized compensation/benefits package, insurance) for special districts to optimize expenses and secure a Marin-wide acceptable quality standard. First limited-service offerings are encouraged to be made available by January 1, 2027.
F3:
Smaller districts are disproportionately vulnerable to staffing disruptions and catastrophic events that could rapidly impair service delivery.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R3:
By January 31, 2027, with the assistance of the County, all districts should develop and publish on their website standardized, comparable Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) with regard to service pricing, finance, staffing, operations, and customer satisfaction.
F4:
Although consolidation is a popular idea among many elected board members, current governance structures, absence of board member term limits, and fear of loss of political influence discourage boards and administrators from initiating consolidation even when they recognize its benefits.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R4:
By January 31, 2027, each district should publicly update findings and progress regarding consolidation opportunities, and share those findings with the Board of Supervisors and the public on a semi-annual basis.
F5:
Service and pricing inequities currently exist across Marin and may increase if consolidation and functional collaboration do not accelerate.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R5:
By January 31, 2027, the Board of Supervisors should oversee compliance with R1–R4 and update the public on the districts’ performance.
F6:
Performance metrics for essential, mission-specific services exist but they are not readily available and standardized, which prevents meaningful public comparison of district effectiveness and undermines accountability.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R6:
By October 1, 2026, in the process of implementing R1 and R2, districts should prioritize functional consolidation in operations, procurement, training, and administration as a precursor to formal consolidation.
F7:
Without proactive reform, future consolidations are more likely to occur through crisis- driven intervention, resulting in greater disruption and higher costs.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R7:
By October 1, 2026, the district’s board compensation, benefits, length of service, date of term end, and expenses related to board work should be clearly and prominently posted on each district’s website and updated annually.
Recomendaciones adicionales
2
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R8:
By June 1, 2027, special districts should adopt term limits of two consecutive four-year terms for all board members. Staggered implementation of term limits to avoid disruptions is encouraged.
R9:
By June 1, 2027, board compensation structures should be reviewed across districts, and considered for adjustment. All components of board compensation should be posted on their website (see best practice example in Appendix B).
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
9 hallazgos
F1:
The Civic Center interior spaces have deteriorated due to a lack of long-term strategic facilities management planning.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R1:
By January 1, 2028, the Board of Supervisors should approve and fund a comprehensive Conditions and Uses Assessment Report / Facilities Asset Management Plan for the Civic Center. The Report / Plan should analyze current uses of the Civic Center and the entire Campus, and plan for its future.
F2:
The Civic Center interior spaces have deteriorated due to insufficient resources and staffing in the Department of Public Works and its Facilities Maintenance Division.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R1:
By January 1, 2028, the Board of Supervisors should approve and fund a comprehensive Conditions and Uses Assessment Report / Facilities Asset Management Plan for the Civic Center. The Report / Plan should analyze current uses of the Civic Center and the entire Campus, and plan for its future.
F3:
Previously approved County budgets have not provided for major replacements and maintenance for the Civic Center. Additional funding will need to be allocated to address these shortcomings.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R1:
By January 1, 2028, the Board of Supervisors should approve and fund a comprehensive Conditions and Uses Assessment Report / Facilities Asset Management Plan for the Civic Center. The Report / Plan should analyze current uses of the Civic Center and the entire Campus, and plan for its future.
F4:
The Civic Center does not meet modern security standards.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R3:
By January 1, 2028, the Board of Supervisors should approve and fund a full security and safety study for the Marin County-managed portions of the Civic Center building.
F5:
The Civic Center is large enough and important enough to require additional advocates other than the Department of Public Works. No County body is empowered to make the Civic Center a great place to work and visit, inside and out. Although entities are tasked with historical preservation and maintenance, no entity takes a holistic view of the building in regard to long-term functionality, financing, and sustainability.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R1:
By January 1, 2028, the Board of Supervisors should approve and fund a comprehensive Conditions and Uses Assessment Report / Facilities Asset Management Plan for the Civic Center. The Report / Plan should analyze current uses of the Civic Center and the entire Campus, and plan for its future.
R2:
By January 1, 2027, the Board of Supervisors should appoint a commission consisting of County staff and members of the public that focuses on long-term revitalization of the Civic Center, including improvements to the uses and functionality of the work and community spaces. This commission should make recommendations to the Board of Supervisors regarding future planning and uses, facilitate community engagement, encourage public- private partnerships, support philanthropic funding, and monitor the progress of planned maintenance and improvements.
F6:
The Design Guidelines used by DPW, Facilities Maintenance, and Parks staff are over 20 years old and should be updated.
F7:
The Civic Center Campus is underutilized as a gathering place for members of the Marin community. Despite enthusiasm for it to become a community gathering spot — a true “third place” — it has not had sufficient planning or monies allocated to achieve such a goal.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R5:
By June 30, 2027, the Board of Supervisors should direct County staff to explore and report back on expanding the availability of the Civic Center as a venue for celebratory events such as wedding ceremonies, adoption finalizations, and a place to observe other moments that are especially memorable in the lives of Marin residents.
F8:
Public-private partnerships have been a useful tool to renovate other public buildings.
F9:
The Civic Center building is confusing and hard to navigate. Modern, clear maps and signage, at the Civic Center, on the Campus grounds and online, would help residents and visitors alike.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R4:
By January 1, 2028, the Board of Supervisors should direct the Department of Public Works to update the Civic Center Building and Campus maps across all formats (online, physical, etc.) in order to improve routes to and navigation within the building and campus.