Gran Jurado del Condado de Mariposa
2023-2024
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
1 hallazgos
F2:
Available administration office space to staff ratio is small, creating cramped and shared quarters for staff.
Recomendaciones adicionales
1
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R2:
Continue to investigate and pursue ways of maximizing shared staff space while maintaining professional best practice. The following governing boards are required to respond within 90 days pursuant to Penal Code sections §933 and §933.05: Board of Supervisors: FI, F2, RI, R2 The following elected county official is required to respond with 60 days: County Sheriff: FI, F2, RI, R2 Per Penal Code §933.0S(a)( I) and (2), responses must include acceptance, refutal, and/or clarification of the findings, and a commitment to implementing the recommendations, as appropriate, per Penal Code §933.5(b)(l)(2)(3) and (4). Reports issued by the Grand Jury do not identify individuals interviewed. Penal Code section 929 requires that reports of the Grand Jury not contain the name of any person or facts leading to the identity of any person who provides information to the Grand Jury. Accessibility of Citizen Complaint Forms: Continuation of Civil Grand Jury Initiative During the 2023-2024 term, the MCCGJ continued the initiative from the 2022-2023 MCCGJ to improve access to Civil Grand Jury complaint forms. The previous Civil Grand Jury made hard copy complaint forms available at the Mariposa County Library, since complaint forms were only available on line. This way, anyone, regardless of internet access, is able to obtain a complaint form and provide their input to the MCCGJ. To take this initiative a step further, the MCCGJ made hard copy complaint forms available at the Coulterville library, known as Red Cloud Library/Greeley Hill Branch in northern Mariposa County. Misunderstandings of a Civil Grand Jury Throughout its term, the 2023-2024 MCCGJ found that there seemed to be a widespread misunderstanding regarding the jurisdiction of a Civil Grand Jury and its powers. Some of this discussion is included in the Introduction section above and the Continuity Report below, however the MCCGJ thought it would be pertinent to attempt to demystify opinions around a Civil Grand Jury and its purpose. During the 2023-2024 term, MCCGJ received multiple complaints that were not under the jurisdiction of a Civil Grand Jury. The MCCGJ was met with a general reticence, if not fear, of the implications of being interviewed or questioned by a Civil Grand Jury. Per California Penal Code Section 888, Civil Grand Juries do not have jurisdiction over criminal matters, like extortion or embezzlement. Separate Criminal Grand Juries are formed for these situations. Civil Grand Juries are empaneled to evaluate the local government procedures, methods, and systems for efficiency as a "watchdog" of the community. Furthermore, case law, specifically the Board of Trustees ofC alaveras Unified School District v. Leach, restricts the Civil Grand Jury from investigating or commenting on the wisdom or merit of policy decisions. MCCGJ's sole responsibility is to investigate the efficiency of current County process and procedures, such as how a building permit is processed or the procedure for training a staff member. Therefore, any criminal concerns that are uncovered during the course of an investigation or inquiry are forwarded to the District Attorney for further examination. Issues Ii ke staff misbehavior, code violations, or neighborly quarrels, are not under the jurisdiction of a Civil Grand Jury. The singular exemption is Penal Code Section 919(c) that mandates the grandjury to inquire into the willful or corrupt misconduct of any public officer or elected position. This accusation function of a Civil Grand Jury is further restricted by Government Code Section 3060 to 3075. Per Penal Code Section 924.1, specific information discovered by the Civil Grand Jury, and not included in a report or validated, remains confidential for life. All Civil Grand Jury proceedings are conducted in secrecy to retain the integrity of the information that a Civil Grand Jury may uncover and protect interviewees. The report cannot name individuals or include "raw evidence." Therefore, if an individual chooses to offer potentially controversial information to the Civil Grand Jury, the individual should not experience backlash or repercussions. The report will not provide enough detail to identify the individual nor particular actions. Although a Civil Grand Jury is entitled receive the information that it requests, the unwillingness to offer information based on the potential for negative consequences is misguided. It is never the intent of a Civil Grand Jury to disparage the hardworking staff in our County that are committed to public service. The objective is to provide clarity on some of the systemic process and procedure issues that prevent the effective delivery of County services and improve the public's trust in County government. County staff is likely already aware of the issues raised in this report. In fact, there may already be solutions underway. By law, the intent of the report is to summarize the Civil Grand Jury's verified facts and findings discovered throughout the term of service; and present this information to the public as a third-party observer or "watchdog" of the community. Continuity Report This Continuity or Compliance Report is not intended to pass any judgement on the Board of Supervisors for their responses to the 2022-2023 Mariposa County Civil Grand Jury final report. The Civil Grand Jury would like to take the opportunity to express gratitude to the Board of Supervisors (BOS), their staff, and the Sheriffs Office (SO). While it is unfair to characterize the responses from the Board of Supervisors as anything but an honest effort to apply the correct Penal Code response (Section 933.05 (a)(b)) to all the findings and recommendations, more action is needed to comply with the Penal Code for all future responses to Civil Grand Jury reports. This will ensure that the Civil Grand Jury can continue to complete its job of recommending improvements to County Policies and Procedures with integrity and accuracy.
📋Bibliography Page
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
1 hallazgos
F2:
Available administration office space to staff ratio is small, creating cramped and shared quarters for staff.
Recomendaciones adicionales
1
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R2:
Continue to investigate and pursue ways of maximizing shared staff space while maintaining professional best practice. The following governing boards are required to respond within 90 days pursuant to Penal Code sections §933 and §933.05: Board of Supervisors: FI, F2, RI, R2 The following elected county official is required to respond with 60 days: County Sheriff: FI, F2, RI, R2 Per Penal Code §933.0S(a)( I) and (2), responses must include acceptance, refutal, and/or clarification of the findings, and a commitment to implementing the recommendations, as appropriate, per Penal Code §933.5(b)(l)(2)(3) and (4). Reports issued by the Grand Jury do not identify individuals interviewed. Penal Code section 929 requires that reports of the Grand Jury not contain the name of any person or facts leading to the identity of any person who provides information to the Grand Jury. Accessibility of Citizen Complaint Forms: Continuation of Civil Grand Jury Initiative During the 2023-2024 term, the MCCGJ continued the initiative from the 2022-2023 MCCGJ to improve access to Civil Grand Jury complaint forms. The previous Civil Grand Jury made hard copy complaint forms available at the Mariposa County Library, since complaint forms were only available on line. This way, anyone, regardless of internet access, is able to obtain a complaint form and provide their input to the MCCGJ. To take this initiative a step further, the MCCGJ made hard copy complaint forms available at the Coulterville library, known as Red Cloud Library/Greeley Hill Branch in northern Mariposa County. Misunderstandings of a Civil Grand Jury Throughout its term, the 2023-2024 MCCGJ found that there seemed to be a widespread misunderstanding regarding the jurisdiction of a Civil Grand Jury and its powers. Some of this discussion is included in the Introduction section above and the Continuity Report below, however the MCCGJ thought it would be pertinent to attempt to demystify opinions around a Civil Grand Jury and its purpose. During the 2023-2024 term, MCCGJ received multiple complaints that were not under the jurisdiction of a Civil Grand Jury. The MCCGJ was met with a general reticence, if not fear, of the implications of being interviewed or questioned by a Civil Grand Jury. Per California Penal Code Section 888, Civil Grand Juries do not have jurisdiction over criminal matters, like extortion or embezzlement. Separate Criminal Grand Juries are formed for these situations. Civil Grand Juries are empaneled to evaluate the local government procedures, methods, and systems for efficiency as a "watchdog" of the community. Furthermore, case law, specifically the Board of Trustees ofC alaveras Unified School District v. Leach, restricts the Civil Grand Jury from investigating or commenting on the wisdom or merit of policy decisions. MCCGJ's sole responsibility is to investigate the efficiency of current County process and procedures, such as how a building permit is processed or the procedure for training a staff member. Therefore, any criminal concerns that are uncovered during the course of an investigation or inquiry are forwarded to the District Attorney for further examination. Issues Ii ke staff misbehavior, code violations, or neighborly quarrels, are not under the jurisdiction of a Civil Grand Jury. The singular exemption is Penal Code Section 919(c) that mandates the grandjury to inquire into the willful or corrupt misconduct of any public officer or elected position. This accusation function of a Civil Grand Jury is further restricted by Government Code Section 3060 to 3075. Per Penal Code Section 924.1, specific information discovered by the Civil Grand Jury, and not included in a report or validated, remains confidential for life. All Civil Grand Jury proceedings are conducted in secrecy to retain the integrity of the information that a Civil Grand Jury may uncover and protect interviewees. The report cannot name individuals or include "raw evidence." Therefore, if an individual chooses to offer potentially controversial information to the Civil Grand Jury, the individual should not experience backlash or repercussions. The report will not provide enough detail to identify the individual nor particular actions. Although a Civil Grand Jury is entitled receive the information that it requests, the unwillingness to offer information based on the potential for negative consequences is misguided. It is never the intent of a Civil Grand Jury to disparage the hardworking staff in our County that are committed to public service. The objective is to provide clarity on some of the systemic process and procedure issues that prevent the effective delivery of County services and improve the public's trust in County government. County staff is likely already aware of the issues raised in this report. In fact, there may already be solutions underway. By law, the intent of the report is to summarize the Civil Grand Jury's verified facts and findings discovered throughout the term of service; and present this information to the public as a third-party observer or "watchdog" of the community. Continuity Report This Continuity or Compliance Report is not intended to pass any judgement on the Board of Supervisors for their responses to the 2022-2023 Mariposa County Civil Grand Jury final report. The Civil Grand Jury would like to take the opportunity to express gratitude to the Board of Supervisors (BOS), their staff, and the Sheriffs Office (SO). While it is unfair to characterize the responses from the Board of Supervisors as anything but an honest effort to apply the correct Penal Code response (Section 933.05 (a)(b)) to all the findings and recommendations, more action is needed to comply with the Penal Code for all future responses to Civil Grand Jury reports. This will ensure that the Civil Grand Jury can continue to complete its job of recommending improvements to County Policies and Procedures with integrity and accuracy.
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
3 hallazgos
F2:
Tyler's platform limitations and rigorous schedule for release raises concerns about the success of implementation
F3:
Technology and software support, training and assistance is lacking, leading to a slow transition to Oracle.
F4:
Multiple County employees use personal phones for county work, Multiple Factor Authentication, and communication, which raises concerns about security.
Recomendaciones adicionales
4
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R2:
The County should examine methods of eliminating double entry in County functions within six (6) months.
R3:
The County should allow for ample time to implement Tyler while being aggressive about complete implementation of the new system.
R4:
The County should fully implement the Oracle Accounts Receivable module within one (I) year, in addition to any other areas of incomplete implementation.
R5:
The County should review use of private cell phones for work activities. The following governing boards are required to respond within 90 days pursuant to Penal Code sections §933 and §933.05: Board of Supervisors: FI, F2, F3, F4, F5, RI, R2, R3, R4, R5, The following elected county official is required to respond with 60 days: County Auditor: FI, RI, R2, R4 The following appointed officials are invited to respond within 60 days: Chief Administrative Officer: FI, F2, F3, F4, F5, RI, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6 Assistant CAO/Human Resources: Fl, RI, R2, R4 Per Penal Code §933.05(a)( I) and (2), responses must include acceptance, refutal, and/or clarification of the findings, and a commitment to implementing the recommendations, as appropriate, per Penal Code §933.5(b)(l)(2)(3) and (4). Reports issued by the Grand Jury do not identify individuals interviewed. Penal Code section 929 requires that reports of the Grand Jury not contain the name of any person or facts leading to the identity of any person who provides infonnation to the Grand Jury. Complaints and Code Compliance Multiple departments lack written procedures on how to handle, track, and respond to complaints. As a result, many citizens feel unheard and forgotten. The public is positioned to best understand the flaws of County processes; therefore, their complaints must be taken seriously. One of the County entities that handles the most complaints is the Code Compliance Division, housed under the Planning Department. The current Code Compliance Division processes and procedures illustrate some of the broader issues associated with complaint management across County departments. The Code Compliance Division investigates complaints relating to code violations, for example, grading without a permit or structures built within setback areas, but life and safety issues are usually the primary concern with investigations. Investigations regarding code violations begin predominately with citizen complaints. A citizen can submit a Request for Investigation (RFI), anonymously or not. Reporting forms are available at the Planning Department and on line. They can be mail, faxed, or emailed. Once an RFI is received, Code Compliance staff assigns an RFI number through the AS400/HTE system and tracks cases through an Excel spreadsheet with restricted access. The assigned RFI number does not necessarily carry through to other reviewing entities. Review of complaints by other County entities is generally completed via hard copy forms or over email. Several County departments participate in the Code Compliance review process, like the Building Department, Assessor's Office, and Environmental Health Division. Processing RFls properly takes time and adequate staff, however the Code Compliance Division currently has only two staff members, leading to delays in response time. Additionally, interdepartmental engagement can be slow, further preventing timely responses to potentially sensitive issues. Lastly, there are no clearly written processes and procedures for follow-through or enforcement of complaints, leading to approximately 400-500 active code cases in Mariposa County. In an attempt to resolve issues associated with adequate functionality of and enforcement by the Code Compliance Division, the Mariposa County Board of Supervisors established a new Code Compliance Advisory Committee (CCAC) on June 8, 2021. The primary purposes of the committee are to I) develop recommendations to the Board for an effective code compliance process and program, and 2) develop recommendations for innovative public policy and programs that address residents' needs while also mitigating alleged violations. The committee is also charged with 3) supporting the work of staff in the conduct of fact finding and data gathering, and 4) providing periodic assessment and evaluation of and feedback to the Board regarding the success of an amended process and program. The CCAC was intended to be temporary and disbanded once an appropriate system for code enforcement was established. The CCAC has yet to be disbanded. Although progress has been shown to the Board of Supervisors in tenns of establishing an action plan for the CCAC, there have been limited results as of the release of this report. Although other County departments do not have the same complaint-centered services as the Code Compliance Division, the MCCGJ found that complaints were inconsistently managed between departments. There are few established systems for recording and considering complaints that are received. This lack of standardized policies and procedures for complaint management has led to inconsistencies in how complaints are addressed and resolved, causing frustration and distrust among residents. When complaints are not managed uniformly, some may go unresolved or receive inadequate attention, undermining the confidence citizens have in their local government. A transparent standardized system for handling complaints is essential for several reasons. Uniform procedures ensure that every complaint is treated with the same level of importance and urgency, promoting fairness and preventing any perception of bias or favoritism. Clear policies and procedures also hold departments accountable for their responses to complaints, ensuring that issues are addressed promptly and effectively, which maintains the integrity of County operations. A transparent process allows citizens to understand how their concerns are being handled, reassuring residents that their voices are heard and valued. Standardized procedures streamline the handling of complaints, making the process more efficient and reducing the likelihood of oversight or error, which helps resolve issues more quickly and improves overall service delivery. It is crucial for the integrity and effectiveness of County government that citizen complaints are handled in a consistent and transparent manner across all County departments. A uniform approach to managing and resolving complaints will better ensure that all citizens receive fair and equitable treatment. By prioritizing the development of these policies and procedures, the County can enhance the way it handles citizen complaints, leading to improved trust, transparency, and overall satisfaction within the community. Addressing this issue is not only a matter of good governance but also essential for fostering a positive relationship between the county government and its residents.
📋Development Services Environmental Health Division
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
3 hallazgos
F2:
Tyler's platform limitations and rigorous schedule for release raises concerns about the success of implementation
F3:
Technology and software support, training and assistance is lacking, leading to a slow transition to Oracle.
F4:
Multiple County employees use personal phones for county work, Multiple Factor Authentication, and communication, which raises concerns about security.
Recomendaciones adicionales
4
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R2:
The County should examine methods of eliminating double entry in County functions within six (6) months.
R3:
The County should allow for ample time to implement Tyler while being aggressive about complete implementation of the new system.
R4:
The County should fully implement the Oracle Accounts Receivable module within one (I) year, in addition to any other areas of incomplete implementation.
R5:
The County should review use of private cell phones for work activities. The following governing boards are required to respond within 90 days pursuant to Penal Code sections §933 and §933.05: Board of Supervisors: FI, F2, F3, F4, F5, RI, R2, R3, R4, R5, The following elected county official is required to respond with 60 days: County Auditor: FI, RI, R2, R4 The following appointed officials are invited to respond within 60 days: Chief Administrative Officer: FI, F2, F3, F4, F5, RI, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6 Assistant CAO/Human Resources: Fl, RI, R2, R4 Per Penal Code §933.05(a)( I) and (2), responses must include acceptance, refutal, and/or clarification of the findings, and a commitment to implementing the recommendations, as appropriate, per Penal Code §933.5(b)(l)(2)(3) and (4). Reports issued by the Grand Jury do not identify individuals interviewed. Penal Code section 929 requires that reports of the Grand Jury not contain the name of any person or facts leading to the identity of any person who provides infonnation to the Grand Jury. Complaints and Code Compliance Multiple departments lack written procedures on how to handle, track, and respond to complaints. As a result, many citizens feel unheard and forgotten. The public is positioned to best understand the flaws of County processes; therefore, their complaints must be taken seriously. One of the County entities that handles the most complaints is the Code Compliance Division, housed under the Planning Department. The current Code Compliance Division processes and procedures illustrate some of the broader issues associated with complaint management across County departments. The Code Compliance Division investigates complaints relating to code violations, for example, grading without a permit or structures built within setback areas, but life and safety issues are usually the primary concern with investigations. Investigations regarding code violations begin predominately with citizen complaints. A citizen can submit a Request for Investigation (RFI), anonymously or not. Reporting forms are available at the Planning Department and on line. They can be mail, faxed, or emailed. Once an RFI is received, Code Compliance staff assigns an RFI number through the AS400/HTE system and tracks cases through an Excel spreadsheet with restricted access. The assigned RFI number does not necessarily carry through to other reviewing entities. Review of complaints by other County entities is generally completed via hard copy forms or over email. Several County departments participate in the Code Compliance review process, like the Building Department, Assessor's Office, and Environmental Health Division. Processing RFls properly takes time and adequate staff, however the Code Compliance Division currently has only two staff members, leading to delays in response time. Additionally, interdepartmental engagement can be slow, further preventing timely responses to potentially sensitive issues. Lastly, there are no clearly written processes and procedures for follow-through or enforcement of complaints, leading to approximately 400-500 active code cases in Mariposa County. In an attempt to resolve issues associated with adequate functionality of and enforcement by the Code Compliance Division, the Mariposa County Board of Supervisors established a new Code Compliance Advisory Committee (CCAC) on June 8, 2021. The primary purposes of the committee are to I) develop recommendations to the Board for an effective code compliance process and program, and 2) develop recommendations for innovative public policy and programs that address residents' needs while also mitigating alleged violations. The committee is also charged with 3) supporting the work of staff in the conduct of fact finding and data gathering, and 4) providing periodic assessment and evaluation of and feedback to the Board regarding the success of an amended process and program. The CCAC was intended to be temporary and disbanded once an appropriate system for code enforcement was established. The CCAC has yet to be disbanded. Although progress has been shown to the Board of Supervisors in tenns of establishing an action plan for the CCAC, there have been limited results as of the release of this report. Although other County departments do not have the same complaint-centered services as the Code Compliance Division, the MCCGJ found that complaints were inconsistently managed between departments. There are few established systems for recording and considering complaints that are received. This lack of standardized policies and procedures for complaint management has led to inconsistencies in how complaints are addressed and resolved, causing frustration and distrust among residents. When complaints are not managed uniformly, some may go unresolved or receive inadequate attention, undermining the confidence citizens have in their local government. A transparent standardized system for handling complaints is essential for several reasons. Uniform procedures ensure that every complaint is treated with the same level of importance and urgency, promoting fairness and preventing any perception of bias or favoritism. Clear policies and procedures also hold departments accountable for their responses to complaints, ensuring that issues are addressed promptly and effectively, which maintains the integrity of County operations. A transparent process allows citizens to understand how their concerns are being handled, reassuring residents that their voices are heard and valued. Standardized procedures streamline the handling of complaints, making the process more efficient and reducing the likelihood of oversight or error, which helps resolve issues more quickly and improves overall service delivery. It is crucial for the integrity and effectiveness of County government that citizen complaints are handled in a consistent and transparent manner across all County departments. A uniform approach to managing and resolving complaints will better ensure that all citizens receive fair and equitable treatment. By prioritizing the development of these policies and procedures, the County can enhance the way it handles citizen complaints, leading to improved trust, transparency, and overall satisfaction within the community. Addressing this issue is not only a matter of good governance but also essential for fostering a positive relationship between the county government and its residents.
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
5 hallazgos
F2:
Inconsistent communication between Mariposa County departments has led to a lack of continuity and transparency in County services.
F3:
Loss of and anticipated loss of institutional knowledge across multiple Mariposa County departments has created and is expected to continue to create large gaps in County operations and efficiency.
F4:
Lack of training opportunities across multiple Mariposa County departments and for all level of job classifications leads to work errors, department inefficiencies and missed opportunities to learn best practices.
F5:
Working relationships between the Auditor's Office and County Administration were negatively affected by the combination of miscalculated budget for FY 23-24 projections and lack of completed FY 21-22 audit.
F6:
Lack of fonnal written policies and procedures for the Planning and Building Departments and the Division of Environmental Health has led to confusion in completing job tasks among employees, affecting quality and timeliness of work in Development Services.
Recomendaciones adicionales
5
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R2:
Board of Supervisors should identify a central point of contact for review of necessary written policies and procedures within six (6) months. This should include review of policies and procedures to guarantee compatibility and consistency across departments.
R3:
Working with the Chief Administrative Officer, the Board of Supervisors should develop procedures that establish regular communication between departments within six (6) months.
R4:
Board of Supervisors, working with Human Resources, should make efforts to minimize the loss of institutional knowledge by facilitating a transition period where outgoing staff overlap with their successors. RS Board of Supervisors, working with Human Resources, should review and develop standardized training opportunities for all County employees within six (6) months. The following governing boards are required to respond within 90 days pursuant to Penal Code sections §933 and §933.05: Board of Supervisors: FI, F2, F3, F4, RI, R2, R3, R4, RS The following appointed officials are invited to respond within 60 days: Chief Administrative Officer: FI, F2, RI, R2, R3 Assistant CAO/Human Resources: F3, F4, R4, R5 Per Penal Code §933.05(a)( t) and (2), responses must include acceptance, refutal, and/or clarification of the findings, and a commitment to implementing the recommendations, as appropriate, per Penal Code §933.5(b)(l)(2)(3) and (4). Reports issued by the Grand Jury do not identify individuals interviewed. Penal Code section 929 requires that reports of the Grand Jury not contain the name of any person or facts leading to the identity of any person who provides information to the Grand Jury. Perception of County Government and Importance of Transparency How the community views County government is crucial for maintaining public trust and ensuring effective governance. Transparency is key to shaping this perception, as it creates an environment of openness and accountability. When County operations are transparent, citizens are better informed about how decisions are made, how resources are allocated, and how their local government functions overall. Transparency means making information readily available to the public - like financial reports, meeting minutes, and policy decisions. This openness allows residents to engage in the governance process, provide feedback, and hold officials accountable. By promoting transparency, the County government shows its commitment to ethical practices and responsible management of public resources. Transparency helps prevent corruption, reduces misunderstandings, and builds a stronger community. It enables citizens to see how their tax dollars are spent and ensures that government actions align with the community's needs and values. This fosters greater public confidence in county government, leading to increased civic participation and collaboration. How people perceive County government is greatly influenced by its transparency. By prioritizing openness and accountability, the County can enhance public trust, promote good governance, and build a more engaged and informed community. One area that requires greater transparency is the roles, scope, and work of various County departments. Misunderstanding of identified departmental scope leads to confusion and a gap in communication between the government and the community. County departments are responsible for a wide range of services that impact daily life, from public health and safety to infrastructure and social services. However, many citizens are unaware of the specific functions and responsibilities of these departments, which can lead to unrealistic expectations and misconceptions about what the County can and cannot do. For example, residents might not fully understand the specialized nature of certain departments, such as public health or social services, leading to confusion about the processes and limitations they face. To address these issues, it's important for the County to improve communication and outreach efforts. Providing clear, accessible information about the functions and responsibilities of each department can help bridge the knowledge gap. Public forums, informational campaigns, and user-friendly online resources can all play a role in educating citizens about how their government works. By increasing awareness and understanding, the County can foster a more informed and engaged community. When citizens have a clearer picture of how County departments operate, they are better equipped to interact with the government, seek appropriate services, and provide meaningful feedback. Addressing the lack of awareness about County departments' roles and work is essential for improving the relationship between the government and the community. Through better communication and educational efforts, we can ensure that citizens have the knowledge they need to navigate and utilize County services effectively. Understanding the Roles of the County Auditor, Assessor, and Tax Collector All County government functions are vital to the wel I-being of our community. Each office of the County Auditor, Assessor, and Tax Collector plays a crucial part in maintaining financial integrity and supporting the County's fiscal health. County Auditor The County Auditor is responsible for overseeing the financial operations of the County. This includes conducting audits of County departments to ensure proper use of public funds, preparing, and maintaining accurate financial records and reports, monitoring, and reviewing financial transactions and expenditures, ensuring compliance with state and federal regulations, and providing financial analysis and recommendations to support County decision-making. One of the main functions of the Auditor's Office is to prepare the levy for all taxable properties in the County once assessed values have been provided by the Assessor's Office. The Auditor's Office calculates the tax rate for voter approved debt ( considering debt service amounts), multiplies these rates times the assessed values and then adds any direct charges. This levy is used to create the tax bills mailed by the Tax Collector. In Mariposa County the Auditor an elected position that serves four years. County Assessor The County Assessor is tasked with determining the value of properties within the County for tax purposes. This role involves assessing the value ofreal estate and personal property, maintaining property records and assessment rolls, implementing property tax laws to ensure fair and equitable assessments, assisting property owners with assessment questions and appeals, and providing data on property values to other County departments and the public. In Mariposa County this is an elected position that serves four years and is a combined role with the County Recorder, who is responsible for recording documents like deeds and other documents nto the County Official Record and ensuring that all documents comply with California law. County Tax Collector The County Tax Collector is responsible for collecting taxes and other revenues owed to the County. Their duties include issuing tax bills and collecting property taxes, administering the collection of other County revenues such as business licenses and permit fees, enforcing tax laws to ensure timely payment of taxes, managing delinquent tax accounts, conducting tax sales, and providing taxpayer assistance and information. In Mariposa County, this is an elected position that serves four years. The County Tax Collector is a position that is combined with the County Clerk and Treasurer positions and includes the responsibilities of those roles, as well. Explanation of Assessor/A uditor/Tax Collector Creation of the Yearly Tax Roll The Assessor is responsible for assessment, assigning the value of how much to bill for tax collection, for all County property. This information is used to create a yearly tax roll. The Auditor assigns the amount of tax due based on assessment information from the Assessor. These billable property tax amounts are recorded into the tax roll. The Tax Collector is responsible for billing property tax based on the information in the tax roll. Usually in Mariposa County, property tax bills are sent out by the end of October. As mentioned previously, each of these positions are elected for four-year terms in Mariposa County. Of these, the Assessor/Recorder position is the only one mandated by law (California Constitution Article 11) to be elected. These positions are all elected on the same four-year cycle, meaning that it could be possible for three brand new individuals to be elected to serve in these positions in one election. Additionally, because these positions are elected, they have no direct supervision. As discussed above, the lack of training and support for County leadership positions, means that turnover is a cause for concern regarding the management of the County's finances. The Importance of Timely Audits Audits are essential to ensuring the financial health and transparency of County operations. They hold County departments accountable for their financial practices, ensuring that public funds are used appropriately and effectively. Regular audits provide transparency, allowing citizens to see how their tax dollars are being spent and fostering trust in County government. Audits ensure compliance with state and federal regulations, preventing legal issues and potential penalties. They also help identify financial irregularities, inefficiencies, and areas for improvement, contributing to the overall financial health of the County. The absence of a fiscal year audit can affect budget projections, which can lead to undetected deficit outcomes midyear. Impact on Grants and Funding Mechanisms Timely completion of audits is critical for securing and maintaining grants and other funding mechanisms. Many grants require up-to-date financial audits as a condition of eligibility, so delays can result in the County being ineligible for important funding opportunities. Existing grants often require periodic financial reporting and audits; failure to meet these requirements can result in the loss ofongoing funding, impacting County programs and services. Additionally, delayed or incomplete audits can harm the County's financial reputation, making it harder to secure future funding and negotiate favorable terms with lenders and grantors. Understanding the roles of the County Auditor, Assessor, and Tax Collector is essential for understanding how County government manages public funds and maintains financial integrity. Timely audits are crucial for accountability, transparency, compliance, and the financial health of the County. They also play a vital role in securing and maintaining grants and other funding mechanisms that support County operations and services. By ensuring these processes work effectively, we can foster a more transparent, accountable, and a financially stable County government, ultimately benefiting all citizens. Analysis of Fiscal Year 2023-2024 The MCCGJ was able to identify a couple areas that contributed towards the necessary budget adjustments that occurred during the Fiscal Year (FY) 2023-2024. Adjustments were necessary to accommodate accounting mistakes, roughly in the amount of $6.8 million dollars. One contributing factor is the installation of the Oracle software system for Mariposa County in 2022, which required all departments to learn how to enter their own budget information. Prior to this time period, all financial journal entry for the County was completed by the Auditors Office using AS400 and paper tracking. The change in software systems led to the Auditor's Office stepping in to cross-train County departments for the new system, see the "Technology" section below. Consequently, the Auditor's Office was required to designate limited personnel and time to training, leading to the hiring of additional Payroll Specialists. Ultimately, this led to the Auditor's Office falling behind on daily and essential tasks, such as financial reporting, specifically the Fiscal Year audit for the year 2021- 2022. A second component of the FY 23-24 budget issues is that two (2) contributions were made from the general fund to the County reserve accounts, roughly in the amount of $6.8 million. While the contributions were recorded on a balance sheet, these contributions were not correctly recorded on County operating sheets. The precedent for creating a fiscal year budget for Mariposa County has been to establish a budget prediction for anticipated funds that will be available the first three (3) months of the fiscal year. The lack of a completed audit for FY 2021-22 and an error in reporting the transfer of reserve contributions, led to incorrect budget predictions.
R5:
After completion of R4, the Auditor and Assistant CAO/Finance will develop a plan to continue a strong working relationship The following governing boards are required to respond within 90 days pursuant to Penal Code sections §933 and §933.05: Board of Supervisors: FI, F2, F3, F4, F5, R3 The following elected county official are required to respond within 60 days: Assessor: Section Narrative Auditor: FI, F4, F5, RI, R2, R4, R5 Tax Collector/fr easurer: Section Narrative The following appointed officials are invited to respond within 60 days: Chief Administrative Officer: Fl, F2, F3, F4, F5, R3 Assistant CAO/Human Resources: F2, F3, F5, R4, R5 Per Penal Code §933.0S(a)( I) and (2), responses must include acceptance, refutal, and/or clarification of the findings, and a commitment to implementing the recommendations, as appropriate, per Penal Code §933.5(b)(t)(2)(3) and (4). Reports issued by the Grand Jury do not identify individuals interviewed. Penal Code section 929 requires that reports of the Grand Jury not contain the name of any person or facts leading to the identity of any person who provides information to the Grand Jury. Continued Technology and Software Lessons County uptake in current technology and purchasing of various software systems was a topic of research for the previous 2022-2023 Mariposa County Civil Grand Jury. Their report described a digital divide that affects different generations, as well as rural and urban communities. However, "while technology is a tool to help accomplish goals and to work more efficiently, it is only as good as those who manage and use it. "2 The 2023-2024 Mariposa County Civil Grand Jury had similar findings in this regard. The MCCGJ would like to acknowledge that progress has been made in improving the accessibility and modernity of County technology, however there are still ongoing issues that affect the efficiency of County services, in addition to concerns with the implementation of new software. Similar with specific investigations undertaken by the 2023-2024 MCCGJ, facts in the technology area emerged during the many interviews held with County employees, recognizing the use of computers throughout Mariposa County government. Mariposa County uses various computer systems for different purposes. The legacy system is an IBM AS/400 system using "green screen" data terminals (IBM 3270). The AS/400 system is still in use in many County departments for essential functions. A newer system from Oracle was acquired several years ago and was intended to fully replace the AS/400 system, but thus far it has not. Other software products that have been procured by the County includes software from Megabyte, used for the accounting, auditing, and assessment of property taxes; and Tyler, which is a permitting software that is oriented to operate best with Apple client platforms and is currently in the implementation stage. Tyler is expected to go live this upcoming fall. The Tyler software is intended to improve transparency, consistency, and tracking of development permits by al lowing various users, including the public, to review the status of a permit and its outstanding requirements. One of the other key benefits offered by Tyler database products is improved efficiency and database integrity attained by moving databases to a cloud configuration versus using individual Excel spreadsheets spread around between various departments. The spreadsheet-based recordkeeping was developed on an as-needed basis over the years and has many vulnerabilities involving data loss, inconsistency in recordkeeping, and limited access to information between individual permit reviewers. Tyler is expected to increase the sharing of information and consolidate review processes when it comes to development permits. However, the process of implementing Tyler software within existing County systems will be integral to its success. The incomplete transition from AS/400 to Oracle offers a few lessons and forewarnings for Tyler implementation. A number of obstacles have prevented a complete transition from AS/400 to Oracle from occurring. Based on the MCCGJ's research, one of the main issues is a lack of adequate training and experience in using the new Oracle system, especially at its initial implementation, which occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic and was largely missed. Training is generally provided to individuals on an as needed basis, rather than a comprehensive one-time training on Oracle's modules. A weekly "office hours" and help I ine exist for County staff but these solutions do not address the lack of training within departments and incomplete implementation of Oracle's modules, such as the Accounts Receivable module. As a result, many County departments use both Oracle and AS/400, if not paper, for various functions, especially for the management of finances. This requires double entry of critical data, wasting valuable staff time and capacity, while also increasing the rate of human error. These issues with Oracle offer some points of consideration for the implementation of Tyler. Training at the onset of software implementation will be critical. It will be important to allow for adequate time for County staff to become comfortable with the software before it becomes available to the public. It is possible that existing systems for processing development permits may have to change to adapt to the structure created by the software and this requires plenty of time to determine. Additionally, Tyler's primary compatibility with Apple products is important to resolve when the majority of County employees rely on Microsoft technology.
R6:
Within one (1) year, written policies and procedures for the Departments of Planning and Building and the Division of Environmental Health should be reviewed for consistency and accuracy across the units. The following governing boards are required to respond within 90 days pursuant to Penal Code sections §933 and §933.05: Board of Supervisors: FI, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, RI, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, The following appointed officials are invited to respond within 60 days: Building Interim Director: Fl, F4, F5, F6, R2, R5, R6 Chief Administrative Officer: f 4, F6, RI, R5 HHSA, Interim Director: F2, F5, F6, R3, R6 Planning Director: FI, F3, F5, F6, RI, R4, R6 Per Penal Code §933.0S(a)( I) and (2), responses must include acceptance, refutal, and/or clarification of the findings, and a commitment to implementing the recommendations, as appropriate, per Penal Code §933.5(b)(l)(2)(3) and (4). Reports issued by the Grand Jury do not identify individuals interviewed. Penal Code section 929 requires that reports of the Grand Jury not contain the name of any person or facts leading to the identity of any person who provides information to the Grand Jury. Evaluation of Department Directors Individual performance reviews are a crucial part of supervision. They serve as an opportunity to summarize ongoing performance and develop conversations for work. Additionally, they can provide a record of measurable performance objectives used for comparative review in the future. They are an opportunity to ensure that directors are aware of county goals and that supervisors are aware of current work within individual departments. Mariposa County is divided among eighteen ( 18) departments. Each department is led by a designated director. Reviews for department directors in Mariposa County are scheduled annually and occur in May or June of each fiscal year. These reviews are the only opportunity that the Board of Supervisors have to hear from directors, provide supervisorial feedback or ask questions of directors. While the work of some departments (Building, DPW, Planning) puts those department directors in front of the Board regularly (to address agenda items), there is no requirement for directors to attend meetings or address the Board outside of their annual review. It is possible that a full year may take place without report from a director to the Board of Supervisors. Reviews are closed session with only the supervisors, the department director and the Clerk of the Board attending (the Clerk of the Board is required by law to be present at all Supervisor meetings). Performance reviews should include: • balanced feedback that acknowledges strengths and accomplishments while also identifying areas for improvement • communication of objectives and goals for the County and how the department fits within • progress reports for all completed and ongoing department activities • measurable rating systems that differentiate between high and low performance. • departmental needs review that provide a clear opportunity for supervisors to learn of shortfalls the departments may be experiencing Consistent, measured performance evaluation of each department director should be a goal and desired outcome for the Board of Supervisors.
📋General Inquiry into County Operations: Complaints and Code Compliance
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
1 hallazgos
F2:
Inconsistent management of complaints between County departments has led to public frustration and disempowerment in providing feedback on county processes.
Recomendaciones adicionales
1
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R2:
The Board of Supervisors should require that uniform standards for managing complaints specific to County operations be established within one (I) year. The following governing boards are required to respond within 90 days pursuant to Penal Code sections §933 and §933.05: Board of Supervisors: FI, F2, RI, R2, The following appointed officials are invited to respond within 60 days: Planning Director: F 1, RI Per Penal Code §933.0S(a)( I) and (2), responses must include acceptance, refutal, and/or clarification of the findings, and a commitment to implementing the recommendations, as appropriate, per Penal Code §933.5(b)(l)(2)(3) and (4). Reports issued by the Grand Jury do not identify individuals interviewed. Penal Code section 929 requires that reports of the Grand Jury not contain the name of any person or facts leading to the identity of any person who provides information to the Grand Jury.
📋General Inquiry into County Operations: Continued Technology and Software Lessons
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
3 hallazgos
F2:
Tyler's platform limitations and rigorous schedule for release raises concerns about the success of implementation
F3:
Technology and software support, training and assistance is lacking, leading to a slow transition to Oracle.
F4:
Multiple County employees use personal phones for county work, Multiple Factor Authentication, and communication, which raises concerns about security.
Recomendaciones adicionales
4
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R2:
The County should examine methods of eliminating double entry in County functions within six (6) months.
R3:
The County should allow for ample time to implement Tyler while being aggressive about complete implementation of the new system.
R4:
The County should fully implement the Oracle Accounts Receivable module within one (I) year, in addition to any other areas of incomplete implementation.
R5:
The County should review use of private cell phones for work activities. The following governing boards are required to respond within 90 days pursuant to Penal Code sections §933 and §933.05: Board of Supervisors: FI, F2, F3, F4, F5, RI, R2, R3, R4, R5, The following elected county official is required to respond with 60 days: County Auditor: FI, RI, R2, R4 The following appointed officials are invited to respond within 60 days: Chief Administrative Officer: FI, F2, F3, F4, F5, RI, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6 Assistant CAO/Human Resources: Fl, RI, R2, R4 Per Penal Code §933.05(a)( I) and (2), responses must include acceptance, refutal, and/or clarification of the findings, and a commitment to implementing the recommendations, as appropriate, per Penal Code §933.5(b)(l)(2)(3) and (4). Reports issued by the Grand Jury do not identify individuals interviewed. Penal Code section 929 requires that reports of the Grand Jury not contain the name of any person or facts leading to the identity of any person who provides infonnation to the Grand Jury. Complaints and Code Compliance Multiple departments lack written procedures on how to handle, track, and respond to complaints. As a result, many citizens feel unheard and forgotten. The public is positioned to best understand the flaws of County processes; therefore, their complaints must be taken seriously. One of the County entities that handles the most complaints is the Code Compliance Division, housed under the Planning Department. The current Code Compliance Division processes and procedures illustrate some of the broader issues associated with complaint management across County departments. The Code Compliance Division investigates complaints relating to code violations, for example, grading without a permit or structures built within setback areas, but life and safety issues are usually the primary concern with investigations. Investigations regarding code violations begin predominately with citizen complaints. A citizen can submit a Request for Investigation (RFI), anonymously or not. Reporting forms are available at the Planning Department and on line. They can be mail, faxed, or emailed. Once an RFI is received, Code Compliance staff assigns an RFI number through the AS400/HTE system and tracks cases through an Excel spreadsheet with restricted access. The assigned RFI number does not necessarily carry through to other reviewing entities. Review of complaints by other County entities is generally completed via hard copy forms or over email.
📋General Inquiry into County Operations: Development Services — Environmental Health Division, Building Department, and Planning Department
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
4 hallazgos
F2:
Staff shortages in Environmental Health have created an overwhelming workload, putting the County at risk for timely identification of environmental hazards.
F3:
The continued vacancy in the position of Deputy Director and other staff positions for the Planning Department is having a direct effect on time management of County projects and timely department communications.
F4:
Building Department budget does not effectively reflect the department's revenue and expense streams as an enterprise fund, making the Building Department budget unclear and confusing. FS Although lumped together under the tenn Development Services, the Departments of Planning and Building, and the Division of Environmental Health have separate procedures for how work is managed leading to confusion, lack of efficiency and complaints from the community.
F6:
Lack of fonnal written policies and procedures for the Planning and Building Departments and the Division of Environmental Health has led to confusion in completing job tasks among employees, affecting quality and timeliness of work in Development Services.
Recomendaciones adicionales
4
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R2:
Immediately, effort should be made to address staff shortages in the Environmental Health Division
R3:
Immediately, effort should be made to address the Planning Department Deputy Director and other staff vacancies.
R4:
Working with Administration, the interim Building Department Director should evaluate and establish an effective reflection of the department's budget as an enterprise within six (6) months. RS Immediately, policies and procedures should be written for the Departments of Planning and Building and the Division of Environmental Health.
R6:
Within one (1) year, written policies and procedures for the Departments of Planning and Building and the Division of Environmental Health should be reviewed for consistency and accuracy across the units. The following governing boards are required to respond within 90 days pursuant to Penal Code sections §933 and §933.05: Board of Supervisors: FI, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, RI, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, The following appointed officials are invited to respond within 60 days: Building Interim Director: Fl, F4, F5, F6, R2, R5, R6 Chief Administrative Officer: f 4, F6, RI, R5 HHSA, Interim Director: F2, F5, F6, R3, R6 Planning Director: FI, F3, F5, F6, RI, R4, R6 Per Penal Code §933.0S(a)( I) and (2), responses must include acceptance, refutal, and/or clarification of the findings, and a commitment to implementing the recommendations, as appropriate, per Penal Code §933.5(b)(l)(2)(3) and (4). Reports issued by the Grand Jury do not identify individuals interviewed. Penal Code section 929 requires that reports of the Grand Jury not contain the name of any person or facts leading to the identity of any person who provides information to the Grand Jury. Evaluation of Department Directors Individual performance reviews are a crucial part of supervision. They serve as an opportunity to summarize ongoing performance and develop conversations for work. Additionally, they can provide a record of measurable performance objectives used for comparative review in the future. They are an opportunity to ensure that directors are aware of county goals and that supervisors are aware of current work within individual departments. Mariposa County is divided among eighteen ( 18) departments. Each department is led by a designated director. Reviews for department directors in Mariposa County are scheduled annually and occur in May or June of each fiscal year. These reviews are the only opportunity that the Board of Supervisors have to hear from directors, provide supervisorial feedback or ask questions of directors. While the work of some departments (Building, DPW, Planning) puts those department directors in front of the Board regularly (to address agenda items), there is no requirement for directors to attend meetings or address the Board outside of their annual review. It is possible that a full year may take place without report from a director to the Board of Supervisors. Reviews are closed session with only the supervisors, the department director and the Clerk of the Board attending (the Clerk of the Board is required by law to be present at all Supervisor meetings).
📋General Inquiry into County Operations: Rural Disparity, Observations, and Parallels Between County Government and Jcfhd
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
1 hallazgos
F2:
JCFHD and Mariposa County do not have clear procedures for establishing, managing and reviewing contracts with external consultants which often leads to contract delays, deliverables that do not meet original objectives and excessive financial costs.
Recomendaciones adicionales
1
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R2:
JCFHD and Mariposa County Board of Supervisors should establish procedures that create more strategic engagement practices with external consultants to include pre-contract negotiations, clear and timely project review mechanisms and post contract review. The following governing boards are required to respond within 90 days pursuant to Penal Code sections §933 and §933.05: Board of Supervisors: Fl, F2, RI, R2 JCFHD Board of Directors: Fl, F2, RI, F2 The following appointed officials are invited to respond within 60 days: County Counsel: Fl, RI Per Penal Code §933.05(a)( I) and (2), responses must include acceptance, refutal, and/or clarification of the findings, and a commitment to implementing the recommendations, as appropriate, per Penal Code §933.5(6)(1)(2)(3) and (4). Reports issued by the Grand Jury do not identify individuals interviewed. Penal Code section 929 requires that reports of the Grand Jury not contain the name of any person or facts leading to the identity of any person who provides information to the Grand Jury. Observations of Elections The Civil Grand Jury was invited by County Clerk to observe the March 5th , 2024, California Primary Election. MCCGJ observed the elections staff process mail-in ballots, absentee ballots and persons who wanted to hand-deliver their ballot. In addition to the Mariposa County Elections Office, MCCGJ was also invited to observe the elections staff and processes at both the Lushmeadows and the Greeley Hill sites on election day. At least two Civil Grand Jury members were at each of the three locations. These locations are: • Mariposa County Elections Office, 4982 I 0th Street, Mariposa; • Lushmeadows Fire Department, 6008 Monte Vista Ln, Mariposa; • Greeley Hill Library, I 0332 Fiske Rd, Coulterville. The elections staff met every visitor with courtesy and professionalism and all concerns or questions were answered, regardless of the nature of the question. The Civ ii Grand Jury observers were treated with the same respect, courtesy and professionalism as everyone who came through the door. All the staff members have a specific job in the ballot counting process, one member verifies signatures, another prepares the ballots for insertion into the into the voting machine, and a different staff member prepares the proper documentation for each batch of ballots. Staff reported that the formal training elections received is important for the smooth processing of each ballot. Each staff member was able to verify the signatures and confirm identities properly prior to having the ballots counted. There are many other examples of the elections staff responsibilities during elections. MCCGJ was shown each step in these processes and given explanations as why certain actions were done and so that each vote could be counted. On election day, elections staff are expected to work 12+ hours. Each staff member is also expected to continue to provide County Clerk services amidst their election responsibilities. Despite the overwhelming tasks, Mariposa County elections staff are diligent, courteous, and pay attention to detail. It is important that we recognize the entire elections staff for their dedication to the very important work of conducting our elections in the secure and accurate manner. MCCGJ has no recommendations for elections operations at this time.
📋General Inquiry into County Operations: Understanding the Roles of County Auditor, Assessor, and Tax Collector and Analysis of Fiscal Year 2023-2024
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
4 hallazgos
F2:
Incorrect FY 2022-23 budget projections and untimely communication led to a later than normal mid-year budget review.
F3:
The accounting error of reserve contributions resulted in necessary emergency budget reconciliation and redistribution across County departments.
F4:
Daily activities not completed and left incomplete over a long time put the County at risk, as shown with the lack of a completed audit for FY 2021-22.
F5:
Working relationships between the Auditor's Office and County Administration were negatively affected by the combination of miscalculated budget for FY 23-24 projections and lack of completed FY 21-22 audit.
Recomendaciones adicionales
4
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R2:
The Auditor should complete two (2) management/leadership trainings totaling a minimum of 16 hours within 12 months. Successful completion of this activity shall be documented with the 2024-25 Civil Grand Jury within 30 days of completion.
R3:
Board of Supervisors should establish procedures for regular financial review, including "check ins," for the completion of annual fiscal year audits within six (6) months.
R4:
Within six (6) months, the Auditor and Assistant CAO/Finance should participate in a facilitated debrief of activity and decisions reached between their offices over the last two (2) years.
R5:
After completion of R4, the Auditor and Assistant CAO/Finance will develop a plan to continue a strong working relationship The following governing boards are required to respond within 90 days pursuant to Penal Code sections §933 and §933.05: Board of Supervisors: FI, F2, F3, F4, F5, R3 The following elected county official are required to respond within 60 days: Assessor: Section Narrative Auditor: FI, F4, F5, RI, R2, R4, R5 Tax Collector/fr easurer: Section Narrative The following appointed officials are invited to respond within 60 days: Chief Administrative Officer: Fl, F2, F3, F4, F5, R3 Assistant CAO/Human Resources: F2, F3, F5, R4, R5 Per Penal Code §933.0S(a)( I) and (2), responses must include acceptance, refutal, and/or clarification of the findings, and a commitment to implementing the recommendations, as appropriate, per Penal Code §933.5(b)(t)(2)(3) and (4). Reports issued by the Grand Jury do not identify individuals interviewed. Penal Code section 929 requires that reports of the Grand Jury not contain the name of any person or facts leading to the identity of any person who provides information to the Grand Jury. Continued Technology and Software Lessons County uptake in current technology and purchasing of various software systems was a topic of research for the previous 2022-2023 Mariposa County Civil Grand Jury. Their report described a digital divide that affects different generations, as well as rural and urban communities. However, "while technology is a tool to help accomplish goals and to work more efficiently, it is only as good as those who manage and use it. "2
📋General Inquiry into County Operations: Workplace Culture, Training, and Organization
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
3 hallazgos
F2:
Inconsistent communication between Mariposa County departments has led to a lack of continuity and transparency in County services.
F3:
Loss of and anticipated loss of institutional knowledge across multiple Mariposa County departments has created and is expected to continue to create large gaps in County operations and efficiency.
F4:
Lack of training opportunities across multiple Mariposa County departments and for all level of job classifications leads to work errors, department inefficiencies and missed opportunities to learn best practices.
Recomendaciones adicionales
3
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R2:
Board of Supervisors should identify a central point of contact for review of necessary written policies and procedures within six (6) months. This should include review of policies and procedures to guarantee compatibility and consistency across departments.
R3:
Working with the Chief Administrative Officer, the Board of Supervisors should develop procedures that establish regular communication between departments within six (6) months.
R4:
Board of Supervisors, working with Human Resources, should make efforts to minimize the loss of institutional knowledge by facilitating a transition period where outgoing staff overlap with their successors. RS Board of Supervisors, working with Human Resources, should review and develop standardized training opportunities for all County employees within six (6) months. The following governing boards are required to respond within 90 days pursuant to Penal Code sections §933 and §933.05: Board of Supervisors: FI, F2, F3, F4, RI, R2, R3, R4, RS The following appointed officials are invited to respond within 60 days: Chief Administrative Officer: FI, F2, RI, R2, R3 Assistant CAO/Human Resources: F3, F4, R4, R5 Per Penal Code §933.05(a)( t) and (2), responses must include acceptance, refutal, and/or clarification of the findings, and a commitment to implementing the recommendations, as appropriate, per Penal Code §933.5(b)(l)(2)(3) and (4). Reports issued by the Grand Jury do not identify individuals interviewed. Penal Code section 929 requires that reports of the Grand Jury not contain the name of any person or facts leading to the identity of any person who provides information to the Grand Jury. Perception of County Government and Importance of Transparency How the community views County government is crucial for maintaining public trust and ensuring effective governance. Transparency is key to shaping this perception, as it creates an environment of openness and accountability. When County operations are transparent, citizens are better informed about how decisions are made, how resources are allocated, and how their local government functions overall. Transparency means making information readily available to the public - like financial reports, meeting minutes, and policy decisions. This openness allows residents to engage in the governance process, provide feedback, and hold officials accountable. By promoting transparency, the County government shows its commitment to ethical practices and responsible management of public resources. Transparency helps prevent corruption, reduces misunderstandings, and builds a stronger community. It enables citizens to see how their tax dollars are spent and ensures that government actions align with the community's needs and values. This fosters greater public confidence in county government, leading to increased civic participation and collaboration. How people perceive County government is greatly influenced by its transparency. By prioritizing openness and accountability, the County can enhance public trust, promote good governance, and build a more engaged and informed community. One area that requires greater transparency is the roles, scope, and work of various County departments. Misunderstanding of identified departmental scope leads to confusion and a gap in communication between the government and the community. County departments are responsible for a wide range of services that impact daily life, from public health and safety to infrastructure and social services. However, many citizens are unaware of the specific functions and responsibilities of these departments, which can lead to unrealistic expectations and misconceptions about what the County can and cannot do. For example, residents might not fully understand the specialized nature of certain
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
1 hallazgos
F2:
Inconsistent communication between Mariposa County departments has led to a lack of continuity and transparency in County services.
📋Importance of Timely Audits Page
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
1 hallazgos
F2:
Inconsistent communication between Mariposa County departments has led to a lack of continuity and transparency in County services.
📋John C. Fremont Healthcare District
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
6 hallazgos
F2:
The JCFHD Board of Directors withheld information between themselves leading to individual discontent and poor decision making.
F3:
The JCFHD Board of Directors did not have an opportunity to vet interim CEO which led to a longer period until issues could be legally responded to and resolved.
F4:
JCFHD Human Resources did not properly vet executive level positions leading to instability at C-suite level.
F5:
Multiple CEOs exceeded contractual spending limits without JCFHD Board notification eroding inherent checks and balances in organizational structure and straining the hospital financially.
F6:
The JCFHD found themselves behind in regular financial audits jeopardizing funding from governmental agencies.
F7:
Work and dialogue outside of regular, special, and emergency meetings between directors of the JCFHD puts the Board at risk of violating Brown Act practices.
Recomendaciones adicionales
8
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R2:
JCFHD Board should be more diligent in financial review of the Healthcare District.
R3:
JCFHD should review existing vetting procedures for hiring C-suite level management within 6 months.
R4:
JCFHD Board of Directors should ensure adherence to existing vetting procedures for hiring C-suite level management.
R5:
Immediately, JCFHD should make it a priority to work together and function cohesively as a team.
R6:
Immediately, JCFHD Board of Directors should ensure procedures for financial oversight of CEO are being followed at all times.
R7:
JCFHD Board of Directors should review the organizational structure of the Healthcare District, specifically related to financial responsibilities of the CEO, COO and CFO with the intention of creating more financial oversight within their purview, within 9 months.
R8:
Immediately, JCFHD Board of Directors should review and establish mechanisms to guarantee timely production of accurate audits.
R9:
Immediately, the JCFHD Board of Directors should continue with the reimplementation of the JCFHD compliance hotline. RIO JCFHD Board of Directors should practice due diligence with the Board Clerk to make certain all meeting minutes are recorded and kept as required by law. The following governing boards are required to respond within 90 days pursuant to Penal Code sections §933 and §933.05: JCFHD Board of Directors: Fl, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, RI, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9, RIO Per Penal Code §933.05(a)( I) and (2), responses must include acceptance, refutal, and/or clarification of the findings, and a commitment to implementing the recommendations, as appropriate, per Penal Code §933.5(b)(l)(2)(3) and (4).
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
6 hallazgos
F2:
The JCFHD Board of Directors withheld information between themselves leading to individual discontent and poor decision making.
F3:
The JCFHD Board of Directors did not have an opportunity to vet interim CEO which led to a longer period until issues could be legally responded to and resolved.
F4:
JCFHD Human Resources did not properly vet executive level positions leading to instability at C-suite level.
F5:
Multiple CEOs exceeded contractual spending limits without JCFHD Board notification eroding inherent checks and balances in organizational structure and straining the hospital financially.
F6:
The JCFHD found themselves behind in regular financial audits jeopardizing funding from governmental agencies.
F7:
Work and dialogue outside of regular, special, and emergency meetings between directors of the JCFHD puts the Board at risk of violating Brown Act practices.
Recomendaciones adicionales
8
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R2:
JCFHD Board should be more diligent in financial review of the Healthcare District.
R3:
JCFHD should review existing vetting procedures for hiring C-suite level management within 6 months.
R4:
JCFHD Board of Directors should ensure adherence to existing vetting procedures for hiring C-suite level management.
R5:
Immediately, JCFHD should make it a priority to work together and function cohesively as a team.
R6:
Immediately, JCFHD Board of Directors should ensure procedures for financial oversight of CEO are being followed at all times.
R7:
JCFHD Board of Directors should review the organizational structure of the Healthcare District, specifically related to financial responsibilities of the CEO, COO and CFO with the intention of creating more financial oversight within their purview, within 9 months.
R8:
Immediately, JCFHD Board of Directors should review and establish mechanisms to guarantee timely production of accurate audits.
R9:
Immediately, the JCFHD Board of Directors should continue with the reimplementation of the JCFHD compliance hotline. RIO JCFHD Board of Directors should practice due diligence with the Board Clerk to make certain all meeting minutes are recorded and kept as required by law. The following governing boards are required to respond within 90 days pursuant to Penal Code sections §933 and §933.05: JCFHD Board of Directors: Fl, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, RI, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9, RIO Per Penal Code §933.05(a)( I) and (2), responses must include acceptance, refutal, and/or clarification of the findings, and a commitment to implementing the recommendations, as appropriate, per Penal Code §933.5(b)(l)(2)(3) and (4).
📋Rural Disparity in Combination with State Reimbursements
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
1 hallazgos
F6:
Lack of fonnal written policies and procedures for the Planning and Building Departments and the Division of Environmental Health has led to confusion in completing job tasks among employees, affecting quality and timeliness of work in Development Services.
Recomendaciones adicionales
4
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R2:
Immediately, effort should be made to address staff shortages in the Environmental Health Division
R3:
Immediately, effort should be made to address the Planning Department Deputy Director and other staff vacancies.
R4:
Working with Administration, the interim Building Department Director should evaluate and establish an effective reflection of the department's budget as an enterprise within six (6) months. RS Immediately, policies and procedures should be written for the Departments of Planning and Building and the Division of Environmental Health.
R6:
Within one (1) year, written policies and procedures for the Departments of Planning and Building and the Division
📋Understanding Conflict of Interest and Employee Abstention Page
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
3 hallazgos
F2:
Staff shortages in Environmental Health have created an overwhelming workload, putting the County at risk for timely identification of environmental hazards.
F3:
The continued vacancy in the position of Deputy Director and other staff positions for the Planning Department is having a direct effect on time management of County projects and timely department communications.
F4:
Building Department budget does not effectively reflect the department's revenue and expense streams as an enterprise fund, making the Building
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
6 hallazgos
F2:
The JCFHD Board of Directors withheld information between themselves leading to individual discontent and poor decision making.
F3:
The JCFHD Board of Directors did not have an opportunity to vet interim CEO which led to a longer period until issues could be legally responded to and resolved.
F4:
JCFHD Human Resources did not properly vet executive level positions leading to instability at C-suite level.
F5:
Multiple CEOs exceeded contractual spending limits without JCFHD Board notification eroding inherent checks and balances in organizational structure and straining the hospital financially.
F6:
The JCFHD found themselves behind in regular financial audits jeopardizing funding from governmental agencies.
F7:
Work and dialogue outside of regular, special, and emergency meetings between directors of the JCFHD puts the Board at risk of violating Brown Act practices.
Recomendaciones adicionales
8
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R2:
JCFHD Board should be more diligent in financial review of the Healthcare District.
R3:
JCFHD should review existing vetting procedures for hiring C-suite level management within 6 months.
R4:
JCFHD Board of Directors should ensure adherence to existing vetting procedures for hiring C-suite level management.
R5:
Immediately, JCFHD should make it a priority to work together and function cohesively as a team.
R6:
Immediately, JCFHD Board of Directors should ensure procedures for financial oversight of CEO are being followed at all times.
R7:
JCFHD Board of Directors should review the organizational structure of the Healthcare District, specifically related to financial responsibilities of the CEO, COO and CFO with the intention of creating more financial oversight within their purview, within 9 months.
R8:
Immediately, JCFHD Board of Directors should review and establish mechanisms to guarantee timely production of accurate audits.
R9:
Immediately, the JCFHD Board of Directors should continue with the reimplementation of the JCFHD compliance hotline. RIO JCFHD Board of Directors should practice due diligence with the Board Clerk to make certain all meeting minutes are recorded and kept as required by law. The following governing boards are required to respond within 90 days pursuant to Penal Code sections §933 and §933.05: JCFHD Board of Directors: Fl, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, RI, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9, RIO Per Penal Code §933.05(a)( I) and (2), responses must include acceptance, refutal, and/or clarification of the findings, and a commitment to implementing the recommendations, as appropriate, per Penal Code §933.5(b)(l)(2)(3) and (4).
📋Workplace Culture, Training, and Organization
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
6 hallazgos
F2:
The JCFHD Board of Directors withheld information between themselves leading to individual discontent and poor decision making.
F3:
The JCFHD Board of Directors did not have an opportunity to vet interim CEO which led to a longer period until issues could be legally responded to and resolved.
F4:
JCFHD Human Resources did not properly vet executive level positions leading to instability at C-suite level.
F5:
Multiple CEOs exceeded contractual spending limits without JCFHD Board notification eroding inherent checks and balances in organizational structure and straining the hospital financially.
F6:
The JCFHD found themselves behind in regular financial audits jeopardizing funding from governmental agencies.
F7:
Work and dialogue outside of regular, special, and emergency meetings between directors of the JCFHD puts the Board at risk of violating Brown Act practices.
Recomendaciones adicionales
8
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R2:
JCFHD Board should be more diligent in financial review of the Healthcare District.
R3:
JCFHD should review existing vetting procedures for hiring C-suite level management within 6 months.
R4:
JCFHD Board of Directors should ensure adherence to existing vetting procedures for hiring C-suite level management.
R5:
Immediately, JCFHD should make it a priority to work together and function cohesively as a team.
R6:
Immediately, JCFHD Board of Directors should ensure procedures for financial oversight of CEO are being followed at all times.
R7:
JCFHD Board of Directors should review the organizational structure of the Healthcare District, specifically related to financial responsibilities of the CEO, COO and CFO with the intention of creating more financial oversight within their purview, within 9 months.
R8:
Immediately, JCFHD Board of Directors should review and establish mechanisms to guarantee timely production of accurate audits.
R9:
Immediately, the JCFHD Board of Directors should continue with the reimplementation of the JCFHD compliance hotline. RIO JCFHD Board of Directors should practice due diligence with the Board Clerk to make certain all meeting minutes are recorded and kept as required by law. The following governing boards are required to respond within 90 days pursuant to Penal Code sections §933 and §933.05: JCFHD Board of Directors: Fl, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, RI, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9, RIO Per Penal Code §933.05(a)( I) and (2), responses must include acceptance, refutal, and/or clarification of the findings, and a commitment to implementing the recommendations, as appropriate, per Penal Code §933.5(b)(l)(2)(3) and (4).