📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report

This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.

Los Angeles County Grand Jury • 2014-2015

LOS Angeles County

Published: June 23, 2015 10 pages
View PDF View Full Original

Findings 15 findings

F1 Page 152
A bill has been introduced in the California State Senate that would allow Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) to seek a new sales tax via the ballot.
F2 Page 152
The Orange Line Bus Rapid Transit is congested during peak times.
F3 Page 152
Metro used the goal of achieving a 33 percent farebox recovery rate as a reason to raise fares in 2014 and increase enforcement of fare collection.
F4 Page 152
Metro uses armed and unarmed personnel to cite fare evaders.
F5
Metro safety signage is ineffective. Metro 52, Executive Management Committee, March 19, 2015, Subject: Metro Parking Ordinance, Metro Parking Rates and Permit Fee Resolution. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Administrative Code, Title 8. Metro Parking management, San Gabriel Valley Service Council Minutes, March 9, 2015. LOS ANGELES COUNTY 2014–2015 CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT
F6
The Board of Supervisors has not fully adopted the 2012 Affordable Housing and Economic Development Framework and Implementation Strategy and has underfunded the affordable housing development goals by $98,196,500.
F7
Staffing levels may be insufficient if Notices of Funding Availability of a higher value are released.
F8
Without public access to city identifier numbers, city staff cannot respond to public inquiries.
F9
After the public hearing, data is confidential, available to the property owner and the city only, until the project is approved.
F10
The City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works’ website is not organized to help the public register disputes.
F11
The City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works has no dedicated phone number that the public can use to register disputes.
F12
The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors is moving toward consolidating most of Los Angeles County data centers into one disaster-resistant facility.
F13
Los Angeles County information systems use many different programming languages. The county has no standard or guideline on how to select a programming language for use on its development projects.
F14
There are no enterprise-wide programming standards for the languages that are used. There is no central guide to good programming practices.
F15
In Los Angeles County, there is a countywide tendency to replace existing systems rather than modernize them, in part because COBOL is unjustifiably considered obsolete, and lack of expertise in COBOL contributes to this tendency.

Recommendations 6

Commendations 1

No Responses Found 1

Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.

Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors Elected County Office