Score: +2 (2/2/0)

Sacramento County Grand Jury • 2021-2022

Sacramento County Grand Jury Final Report 2021-2022 a Call for Leadership*

Published: June 30, 2022 13 pages Consolidated Report

Ver PDF original

⚠️ Aviso de traducción: Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.

⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.

Recommendations 129

R1

Sacramento County Sheriff's Office Sacramento County Grand Jury Status Review: Sacramento County Board of Supervisors Non-Responsive to Covid-19 Investigation When required to respond to a Sacramento County Grand Jury report showing a less than robust record of leadership at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Grand Jury found that, Board of Supervisors has opted to dodge and deflect. But the Grand Jury's deep concern, plainly stated in that February 2022 report, continues. The Full Report can be found HERE Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury 2021-2022 Grand Jury Investigative Reports PUBLIC HEALTH OFFICE ABANDONED BY COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IN COVID-19 CRISIS An extensive investigation into the handling of the COVID-19 crisis by the Sacramento County Office of Public Health (OPH) has led the Grand Jury to find that the County Board of Supervisors ignored its Public Health Officer for five months before finally engaging in any sort of dialogue regarding the County's COVID-19 activities and its impact on County residents. The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R2

Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
R3

Sacramento County Sheriff's Office Return to Table of Contents REQUIREMENT FOR COVID-19 VACCINATION FOR ELIGIBLE SACRAMENTO COUNTY PUBLIC K-12 SCHOOL DISTRICTS The Sacramento County Grand Jury recommended that all eligible persons in Sacramento County's Public K-12 school districts be required to have the COVID-19 vaccine. The report calls upon the 13 school districts, representing more than 260,000 children and thousands of personnel within the County, to mandate vaccinations for all eligible public-school students and staff as a prerequisite for in-person attendance of classes or school activities. The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations Sacramento City Unified School District
R4

Sacramento County Office of Education Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury 2021-2022 Grand Jury Investigative Reports DEL PASO MANOR WATER DISTRICT FLOODED WITH PUBLIC SAFETY DANGERS A seven-month investigation into a formal complaint against the Del Paso Manor Water District has led to a scathing report by the Sacramento County Grand Jury identifying a literal flood of concerns ranging from water contamination to aging infrastructure to non-compliance with State of California water monitoring requirements. The report cites an on-going significant lack of public transparency by the District's Board of Directors to act on numerous recommended improvements made by its own consultants and other entities. A failure to complete an estimated $35 million in repairs and upgrades could have disastrous results, including the potential failure of the entire water complex. The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations Del Paso Manor Water District President Del Paso Manor Water District
R5

Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
R6

State Water Resources Control Board
R7

Sacramento County District Attorney Sacramento LAFCo - Initial Sacramento LAFCo - Additional Sacramento County Grand Jury Status Review: Del Paso Manor Water District There are more than 100 special districts in Sacramento County, with a staggering 3,400 spread across the state. From local water and sanitation services to lesser known entities like cemetery districts, each operates under individualized budgets and authorities. While some work well and have a large revenue support base, many others struggle to provide essential resources. The Full Status Review Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations Sacramento LAFCo
R8

Supervisor Rich Desmond
R9

Del Paso Manor Water District President
R10

Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury Investigative Reports ISLETON CITY COUNCIL VIOLATES STATE ELECTION LAWS A Sacramento County Grand Jury investigation has found that the Isleton City Council violated state law, and ignored voter concerns by failing to properly fill a council seat following the death of one of its members in April 2021. The position continues to remain empty some nine months later and could potentially go unfilled throughout 2022, diluting the public's representation in government. The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R11

City of Isleton - Initial
R12

City of Isleton - Update Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury Final Report PUBLIC CONFINEMENT REVIEW The Sacramento County Grand Jury is mandated each year by California Penal Code 919 (b) to inquire into the conditions and management of public confinement facilities in Sacramento County. In fulfillment of this obligation, the 2020-2021 Sacramento Grand Jury toured all six confinement facilities within its jurisdiction, as well as the Sacramento County Sheriff's Work Release Division. The Full Report can be found HERE Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury Final Report RESPONSES TO THE 2019-2020 GRAND JURY REPORTS ELK GROVE PARKS: WHERE HAVE ALL THE FLOWERS GONE The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R13

Cosumnes Community Services District
R14

City of Elk Grove Return to Table of Contents IMPACT OF GENTRIFICATION AND NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION ON THE DISPLACEMENT OF RESIDENTS The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
R15

• Downtown Sacramento Partnership
R16

Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency City of Sacramento
R17

Sacramento County Office of Education Return to Table of Contents Responses to the 2019-2020 Grand Jury Reports 911 – THE SACRAMENTO POLICE DEPARTMENT STAFFING CRISIS The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R18

Sacramento Police Department
R19

City of Sacramento Return to Table of Contents ELECTION SECURITY IN SACRAMENTO COUNTY The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R20

Sacramento County Board of Supervisors Return to Table of Contents CALIFORNIA SENATE BILL 1022: A GIFT TOO GOOD TO IGNORE The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
R21

• Sacramento County Sheriff's Office Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury 2021-2022 SACRAMENTO COUNTY GRAND JURY Pictured (Left to Right) Front Row: Rachel Kaldor, Deanna Hanson (Foreperson), Jeannine English Second Row: Fran Bremson, Olivia Washington, Tina Bonilla, Steve Holland, Barbara Marquez Third Row: Norv Wellsfry, Gregg Magaziner, Ken Smith, Jill Sherrill, Jim Parvis, Chris Budwine, Endy Tapia-Bouthillier (Grand Jury Coordinator) Back Row: Greg Williams, Scott McDonald, Marc Remis, Brian McElroy, Patty Murray-Turner Return to Table of Contents
R22

Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
R23

Sacramento County Sheriff's Office Return to Table of Contents REQUIREMENT FOR COVID-19 VACCINATION FOR ELIGIBLE SACRAMENTO COUNTY PUBLIC K-12 SCHOOL DISTRICTS The Sacramento County Grand Jury recommended that all eligible persons in Sacramento County's Public K-12 school districts be required to have the COVID-19 vaccine. The report calls upon the 13 school districts, representing more than 260,000 children and thousands of personnel within the County, to mandate vaccinations for all eligible public-school students and staff as a prerequisite for in-person attendance of classes or school activities. The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations Sacramento City Unified School District
R24

Sacramento County Office of Education Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury 2021-2022 Grand Jury Investigative Reports DEL PASO MANOR WATER DISTRICT FLOODED WITH PUBLIC SAFETY DANGERS A seven-month investigation into a formal complaint against the Del Paso Manor Water District has led to a scathing report by the Sacramento County Grand Jury identifying a literal flood of concerns ranging from water contamination to aging infrastructure to non-compliance with State of California water monitoring requirements. The report cites an on-going significant lack of public transparency by the District's Board of Directors to act on numerous recommended improvements made by its own consultants and other entities. A failure to complete an estimated $35 million in repairs and upgrades could have disastrous results, including the potential failure of the entire water complex. The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations Del Paso Manor Water District President Del Paso Manor Water District
R25

Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
R26

State Water Resources Control Board
R27

Sacramento County District Attorney Sacramento LAFCo - Initial Sacramento LAFCo - Additional Sacramento County Grand Jury Status Review: Del Paso Manor Water District There are more than 100 special districts in Sacramento County, with a staggering 3,400 spread across the state. From local water and sanitation services to lesser known entities like cemetery districts, each operates under individualized budgets and authorities. While some work well and have a large revenue support base, many others struggle to provide essential resources. The Full Status Review Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations Sacramento LAFCo
R28

Supervisor Rich Desmond
R29

Del Paso Manor Water District President
R30

Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury Investigative Reports ISLETON CITY COUNCIL VIOLATES STATE ELECTION LAWS A Sacramento County Grand Jury investigation has found that the Isleton City Council violated state law, and ignored voter concerns by failing to properly fill a council seat following the death of one of its members in April 2021. The position continues to remain empty some nine months later and could potentially go unfilled throughout 2022, diluting the public's representation in government. The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R31

City of Isleton - Initial
R32

City of Isleton - Update Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury Final Report PUBLIC CONFINEMENT REVIEW The Sacramento County Grand Jury is mandated each year by California Penal Code 919 (b) to inquire into the conditions and management of public confinement facilities in Sacramento County. In fulfillment of this obligation, the 2020-2021 Sacramento Grand Jury toured all six confinement facilities within its jurisdiction, as well as the Sacramento County Sheriff's Work Release Division. The Full Report can be found HERE Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury Final Report RESPONSES TO THE 2019-2020 GRAND JURY REPORTS ELK GROVE PARKS: WHERE HAVE ALL THE FLOWERS GONE The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R33

Cosumnes Community Services District
R34

City of Elk Grove Return to Table of Contents IMPACT OF GENTRIFICATION AND NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION ON THE DISPLACEMENT OF RESIDENTS The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
R35

• Downtown Sacramento Partnership
R36

Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency City of Sacramento
R37

Sacramento County Office of Education Return to Table of Contents Responses to the 2019-2020 Grand Jury Reports 911 – THE SACRAMENTO POLICE DEPARTMENT STAFFING CRISIS The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R38

Sacramento Police Department
R39

City of Sacramento Return to Table of Contents ELECTION SECURITY IN SACRAMENTO COUNTY The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R40

Sacramento County Board of Supervisors Return to Table of Contents CALIFORNIA SENATE BILL 1022: A GIFT TOO GOOD TO IGNORE The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
R41

• Sacramento County Sheriff's Office Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury 2021-2022 SACRAMENTO COUNTY GRAND JURY Pictured (Left to Right) Front Row: Rachel Kaldor, Deanna Hanson (Foreperson), Jeannine English Second Row: Fran Bremson, Olivia Washington, Tina Bonilla, Steve Holland, Barbara Marquez Third Row: Norv Wellsfry, Gregg Magaziner, Ken Smith, Jill Sherrill, Jim Parvis, Chris Budwine, Endy Tapia-Bouthillier (Grand Jury Coordinator) Back Row: Greg Williams, Scott McDonald, Marc Remis, Brian McElroy, Patty Murray-Turner Return to Table of Contents
R42

Sacramento County Office of Education Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury 2021-2022 Grand Jury Investigative Reports DEL PASO MANOR WATER DISTRICT FLOODED WITH PUBLIC SAFETY DANGERS A seven-month investigation into a formal complaint against the Del Paso Manor Water District has led to a scathing report by the Sacramento County Grand Jury identifying a literal flood of concerns ranging from water contamination to aging infrastructure to non-compliance with State of California water monitoring requirements. The report cites an on-going significant lack of public transparency by the District's Board of Directors to act on numerous recommended improvements made by its own consultants and other entities. A failure to complete an estimated $35 million in repairs and upgrades could have disastrous results, including the potential failure of the entire water complex. The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations Del Paso Manor Water District President Del Paso Manor Water District
R43

Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
R44

State Water Resources Control Board
R45

Sacramento County District Attorney Sacramento LAFCo - Initial Sacramento LAFCo - Additional Sacramento County Grand Jury Status Review: Del Paso Manor Water District There are more than 100 special districts in Sacramento County, with a staggering 3,400 spread across the state. From local water and sanitation services to lesser known entities like cemetery districts, each operates under individualized budgets and authorities. While some work well and have a large revenue support base, many others struggle to provide essential resources. The Full Status Review Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations Sacramento LAFCo
R46

Supervisor Rich Desmond
R47

Del Paso Manor Water District President
R48

Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury Investigative Reports ISLETON CITY COUNCIL VIOLATES STATE ELECTION LAWS A Sacramento County Grand Jury investigation has found that the Isleton City Council violated state law, and ignored voter concerns by failing to properly fill a council seat following the death of one of its members in April 2021. The position continues to remain empty some nine months later and could potentially go unfilled throughout 2022, diluting the public's representation in government. The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R49

City of Isleton - Initial
R50

City of Isleton - Update Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury Final Report PUBLIC CONFINEMENT REVIEW The Sacramento County Grand Jury is mandated each year by California Penal Code 919 (b) to inquire into the conditions and management of public confinement facilities in Sacramento County. In fulfillment of this obligation, the 2020-2021 Sacramento Grand Jury toured all six confinement facilities within its jurisdiction, as well as the Sacramento County Sheriff's Work Release Division. The Full Report can be found HERE Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury Final Report RESPONSES TO THE 2019-2020 GRAND JURY REPORTS ELK GROVE PARKS: WHERE HAVE ALL THE FLOWERS GONE The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R51

Cosumnes Community Services District
R52

City of Elk Grove Return to Table of Contents IMPACT OF GENTRIFICATION AND NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION ON THE DISPLACEMENT OF RESIDENTS The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
R53

• Downtown Sacramento Partnership
R54

Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency City of Sacramento
R55

Sacramento County Office of Education Return to Table of Contents Responses to the 2019-2020 Grand Jury Reports 911 – THE SACRAMENTO POLICE DEPARTMENT STAFFING CRISIS The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R56

Sacramento Police Department
R57

City of Sacramento Return to Table of Contents ELECTION SECURITY IN SACRAMENTO COUNTY The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R58

Sacramento County Board of Supervisors Return to Table of Contents CALIFORNIA SENATE BILL 1022: A GIFT TOO GOOD TO IGNORE The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
R59

• Sacramento County Sheriff's Office Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury 2021-2022 SACRAMENTO COUNTY GRAND JURY Pictured (Left to Right) Front Row: Rachel Kaldor, Deanna Hanson (Foreperson), Jeannine English Second Row: Fran Bremson, Olivia Washington, Tina Bonilla, Steve Holland, Barbara Marquez Third Row: Norv Wellsfry, Gregg Magaziner, Ken Smith, Jill Sherrill, Jim Parvis, Chris Budwine, Endy Tapia-Bouthillier (Grand Jury Coordinator) Back Row: Greg Williams, Scott McDonald, Marc Remis, Brian McElroy, Patty Murray-Turner Return to Table of Contents
R60

Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
R61

State Water Resources Control Board
R62

Sacramento County District Attorney Sacramento LAFCo - Initial Sacramento LAFCo - Additional Sacramento County Grand Jury Status Review: Del Paso Manor Water District There are more than 100 special districts in Sacramento County, with a staggering 3,400 spread across the state. From local water and sanitation services to lesser known entities like cemetery districts, each operates under individualized budgets and authorities. While some work well and have a large revenue support base, many others struggle to provide essential resources. The Full Status Review Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations Sacramento LAFCo
R63

Supervisor Rich Desmond
R64

Del Paso Manor Water District President
R65

Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury Investigative Reports ISLETON CITY COUNCIL VIOLATES STATE ELECTION LAWS A Sacramento County Grand Jury investigation has found that the Isleton City Council violated state law, and ignored voter concerns by failing to properly fill a council seat following the death of one of its members in April 2021. The position continues to remain empty some nine months later and could potentially go unfilled throughout 2022, diluting the public's representation in government. The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R66

City of Isleton - Initial
R67

City of Isleton - Update Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury Final Report PUBLIC CONFINEMENT REVIEW The Sacramento County Grand Jury is mandated each year by California Penal Code 919 (b) to inquire into the conditions and management of public confinement facilities in Sacramento County. In fulfillment of this obligation, the 2020-2021 Sacramento Grand Jury toured all six confinement facilities within its jurisdiction, as well as the Sacramento County Sheriff's Work Release Division. The Full Report can be found HERE Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury Final Report RESPONSES TO THE 2019-2020 GRAND JURY REPORTS ELK GROVE PARKS: WHERE HAVE ALL THE FLOWERS GONE The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R68

Cosumnes Community Services District
R69

City of Elk Grove Return to Table of Contents IMPACT OF GENTRIFICATION AND NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION ON THE DISPLACEMENT OF RESIDENTS The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
R70

• Downtown Sacramento Partnership
R71

Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency City of Sacramento
R72

Sacramento County Office of Education Return to Table of Contents Responses to the 2019-2020 Grand Jury Reports 911 – THE SACRAMENTO POLICE DEPARTMENT STAFFING CRISIS The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R73

Sacramento Police Department
R74

City of Sacramento Return to Table of Contents ELECTION SECURITY IN SACRAMENTO COUNTY The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R75

Sacramento County Board of Supervisors Return to Table of Contents CALIFORNIA SENATE BILL 1022: A GIFT TOO GOOD TO IGNORE The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
R76

• Sacramento County Sheriff's Office Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury 2021-2022 SACRAMENTO COUNTY GRAND JURY Pictured (Left to Right) Front Row: Rachel Kaldor, Deanna Hanson (Foreperson), Jeannine English Second Row: Fran Bremson, Olivia Washington, Tina Bonilla, Steve Holland, Barbara Marquez Third Row: Norv Wellsfry, Gregg Magaziner, Ken Smith, Jill Sherrill, Jim Parvis, Chris Budwine, Endy Tapia-Bouthillier (Grand Jury Coordinator) Back Row: Greg Williams, Scott McDonald, Marc Remis, Brian McElroy, Patty Murray-Turner Return to Table of Contents
R77

Supervisor Rich Desmond
R78

Del Paso Manor Water District President
R79

Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury Investigative Reports ISLETON CITY COUNCIL VIOLATES STATE ELECTION LAWS A Sacramento County Grand Jury investigation has found that the Isleton City Council violated state law, and ignored voter concerns by failing to properly fill a council seat following the death of one of its members in April 2021. The position continues to remain empty some nine months later and could potentially go unfilled throughout 2022, diluting the public's representation in government. The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R80

City of Isleton - Initial
R81

City of Isleton - Update Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury Final Report PUBLIC CONFINEMENT REVIEW The Sacramento County Grand Jury is mandated each year by California Penal Code 919 (b) to inquire into the conditions and management of public confinement facilities in Sacramento County. In fulfillment of this obligation, the 2020-2021 Sacramento Grand Jury toured all six confinement facilities within its jurisdiction, as well as the Sacramento County Sheriff's Work Release Division. The Full Report can be found HERE Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury Final Report RESPONSES TO THE 2019-2020 GRAND JURY REPORTS ELK GROVE PARKS: WHERE HAVE ALL THE FLOWERS GONE The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R82

Cosumnes Community Services District
R83

City of Elk Grove Return to Table of Contents IMPACT OF GENTRIFICATION AND NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION ON THE DISPLACEMENT OF RESIDENTS The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
R84

• Downtown Sacramento Partnership
R85

Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency City of Sacramento
R86

Sacramento County Office of Education Return to Table of Contents Responses to the 2019-2020 Grand Jury Reports 911 – THE SACRAMENTO POLICE DEPARTMENT STAFFING CRISIS The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R87

Sacramento Police Department
R88

City of Sacramento Return to Table of Contents ELECTION SECURITY IN SACRAMENTO COUNTY The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R89

Sacramento County Board of Supervisors Return to Table of Contents CALIFORNIA SENATE BILL 1022: A GIFT TOO GOOD TO IGNORE The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
R90

• Sacramento County Sheriff's Office Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury 2021-2022 SACRAMENTO COUNTY GRAND JURY Pictured (Left to Right) Front Row: Rachel Kaldor, Deanna Hanson (Foreperson), Jeannine English Second Row: Fran Bremson, Olivia Washington, Tina Bonilla, Steve Holland, Barbara Marquez Third Row: Norv Wellsfry, Gregg Magaziner, Ken Smith, Jill Sherrill, Jim Parvis, Chris Budwine, Endy Tapia-Bouthillier (Grand Jury Coordinator) Back Row: Greg Williams, Scott McDonald, Marc Remis, Brian McElroy, Patty Murray-Turner Return to Table of Contents
R91

City of Isleton - Initial
R92

City of Isleton - Update Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury Final Report PUBLIC CONFINEMENT REVIEW The Sacramento County Grand Jury is mandated each year by California Penal Code 919 (b) to inquire into the conditions and management of public confinement facilities in Sacramento County. In fulfillment of this obligation, the 2020-2021 Sacramento Grand Jury toured all six confinement facilities within its jurisdiction, as well as the Sacramento County Sheriff's Work Release Division. The Full Report can be found HERE Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury Final Report RESPONSES TO THE 2019-2020 GRAND JURY REPORTS ELK GROVE PARKS: WHERE HAVE ALL THE FLOWERS GONE The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R93

Cosumnes Community Services District
R94

City of Elk Grove Return to Table of Contents IMPACT OF GENTRIFICATION AND NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION ON THE DISPLACEMENT OF RESIDENTS The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
R95

• Downtown Sacramento Partnership
R96

Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency City of Sacramento
R97

Sacramento County Office of Education Return to Table of Contents Responses to the 2019-2020 Grand Jury Reports 911 – THE SACRAMENTO POLICE DEPARTMENT STAFFING CRISIS The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R98

Sacramento Police Department
R99

City of Sacramento Return to Table of Contents ELECTION SECURITY IN SACRAMENTO COUNTY The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R100

Sacramento County Board of Supervisors Return to Table of Contents CALIFORNIA SENATE BILL 1022: A GIFT TOO GOOD TO IGNORE The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
R101

• Sacramento County Sheriff's Office Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury 2021-2022 SACRAMENTO COUNTY GRAND JURY Pictured (Left to Right) Front Row: Rachel Kaldor, Deanna Hanson (Foreperson), Jeannine English Second Row: Fran Bremson, Olivia Washington, Tina Bonilla, Steve Holland, Barbara Marquez Third Row: Norv Wellsfry, Gregg Magaziner, Ken Smith, Jill Sherrill, Jim Parvis, Chris Budwine, Endy Tapia-Bouthillier (Grand Jury Coordinator) Back Row: Greg Williams, Scott McDonald, Marc Remis, Brian McElroy, Patty Murray-Turner Return to Table of Contents
R102

Cosumnes Community Services District
R103

City of Elk Grove Return to Table of Contents IMPACT OF GENTRIFICATION AND NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION ON THE DISPLACEMENT OF RESIDENTS The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
R104

• Downtown Sacramento Partnership
R105

Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency City of Sacramento
R106

Sacramento County Office of Education Return to Table of Contents Responses to the 2019-2020 Grand Jury Reports 911 – THE SACRAMENTO POLICE DEPARTMENT STAFFING CRISIS The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R107

Sacramento Police Department
R108

City of Sacramento Return to Table of Contents ELECTION SECURITY IN SACRAMENTO COUNTY The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R109

Sacramento County Board of Supervisors Return to Table of Contents CALIFORNIA SENATE BILL 1022: A GIFT TOO GOOD TO IGNORE The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
R110

• Sacramento County Sheriff's Office Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury 2021-2022 SACRAMENTO COUNTY GRAND JURY Pictured (Left to Right) Front Row: Rachel Kaldor, Deanna Hanson (Foreperson), Jeannine English Second Row: Fran Bremson, Olivia Washington, Tina Bonilla, Steve Holland, Barbara Marquez Third Row: Norv Wellsfry, Gregg Magaziner, Ken Smith, Jill Sherrill, Jim Parvis, Chris Budwine, Endy Tapia-Bouthillier (Grand Jury Coordinator) Back Row: Greg Williams, Scott McDonald, Marc Remis, Brian McElroy, Patty Murray-Turner Return to Table of Contents
R111

• Downtown Sacramento Partnership
R112

Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency City of Sacramento
R113

Sacramento County Office of Education Return to Table of Contents Responses to the 2019-2020 Grand Jury Reports 911 – THE SACRAMENTO POLICE DEPARTMENT STAFFING CRISIS The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R114

Sacramento Police Department
R115

City of Sacramento Return to Table of Contents ELECTION SECURITY IN SACRAMENTO COUNTY The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R116

Sacramento County Board of Supervisors Return to Table of Contents CALIFORNIA SENATE BILL 1022: A GIFT TOO GOOD TO IGNORE The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
R117

• Sacramento County Sheriff's Office Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury 2021-2022 SACRAMENTO COUNTY GRAND JURY Pictured (Left to Right) Front Row: Rachel Kaldor, Deanna Hanson (Foreperson), Jeannine English Second Row: Fran Bremson, Olivia Washington, Tina Bonilla, Steve Holland, Barbara Marquez Third Row: Norv Wellsfry, Gregg Magaziner, Ken Smith, Jill Sherrill, Jim Parvis, Chris Budwine, Endy Tapia-Bouthillier (Grand Jury Coordinator) Back Row: Greg Williams, Scott McDonald, Marc Remis, Brian McElroy, Patty Murray-Turner Return to Table of Contents
R118

Sacramento County Office of Education Return to Table of Contents Responses to the 2019-2020 Grand Jury Reports 911 – THE SACRAMENTO POLICE DEPARTMENT STAFFING CRISIS The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R119

Sacramento Police Department
R120

City of Sacramento Return to Table of Contents ELECTION SECURITY IN SACRAMENTO COUNTY The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R121

Sacramento County Board of Supervisors Return to Table of Contents CALIFORNIA SENATE BILL 1022: A GIFT TOO GOOD TO IGNORE The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
R122

• Sacramento County Sheriff's Office Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury 2021-2022 SACRAMENTO COUNTY GRAND JURY Pictured (Left to Right) Front Row: Rachel Kaldor, Deanna Hanson (Foreperson), Jeannine English Second Row: Fran Bremson, Olivia Washington, Tina Bonilla, Steve Holland, Barbara Marquez Third Row: Norv Wellsfry, Gregg Magaziner, Ken Smith, Jill Sherrill, Jim Parvis, Chris Budwine, Endy Tapia-Bouthillier (Grand Jury Coordinator) Back Row: Greg Williams, Scott McDonald, Marc Remis, Brian McElroy, Patty Murray-Turner Return to Table of Contents
R123

Sacramento Police Department
R124

City of Sacramento Return to Table of Contents ELECTION SECURITY IN SACRAMENTO COUNTY The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations
R125

Sacramento County Board of Supervisors Return to Table of Contents CALIFORNIA SENATE BILL 1022: A GIFT TOO GOOD TO IGNORE The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
R126

• Sacramento County Sheriff's Office Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury 2021-2022 SACRAMENTO COUNTY GRAND JURY Pictured (Left to Right) Front Row: Rachel Kaldor, Deanna Hanson (Foreperson), Jeannine English Second Row: Fran Bremson, Olivia Washington, Tina Bonilla, Steve Holland, Barbara Marquez Third Row: Norv Wellsfry, Gregg Magaziner, Ken Smith, Jill Sherrill, Jim Parvis, Chris Budwine, Endy Tapia-Bouthillier (Grand Jury Coordinator) Back Row: Greg Williams, Scott McDonald, Marc Remis, Brian McElroy, Patty Murray-Turner Return to Table of Contents
R127

Sacramento County Board of Supervisors Return to Table of Contents CALIFORNIA SENATE BILL 1022: A GIFT TOO GOOD TO IGNORE The Full Report can be found HERE Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
R128

• Sacramento County Sheriff's Office Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury 2021-2022 SACRAMENTO COUNTY GRAND JURY Pictured (Left to Right) Front Row: Rachel Kaldor, Deanna Hanson (Foreperson), Jeannine English Second Row: Fran Bremson, Olivia Washington, Tina Bonilla, Steve Holland, Barbara Marquez Third Row: Norv Wellsfry, Gregg Magaziner, Ken Smith, Jill Sherrill, Jim Parvis, Chris Budwine, Endy Tapia-Bouthillier (Grand Jury Coordinator) Back Row: Greg Williams, Scott McDonald, Marc Remis, Brian McElroy, Patty Murray-Turner Return to Table of Contents
R129

• Sacramento County Sheriff's Office Return to Table of Contents 2021-2022 Grand Jury 2021-2022 SACRAMENTO COUNTY GRAND JURY Pictured (Left to Right) Front Row: Rachel Kaldor, Deanna Hanson (Foreperson), Jeannine English Second Row: Fran Bremson, Olivia Washington, Tina Bonilla, Steve Holland, Barbara Marquez Third Row: Norv Wellsfry, Gregg Magaziner, Ken Smith, Jill Sherrill, Jim Parvis, Chris Budwine, Endy Tapia-Bouthillier (Grand Jury Coordinator) Back Row: Greg Williams, Scott McDonald, Marc Remis, Brian McElroy, Patty Murray-Turner Return to Table of Contents

Agency Responses 12

Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.

Additional Response from Sacramento LAFCo

February 07, 2022 • 2 pages View Details ▾

PDF

Del Paso Manor Water District

February 02, 2022 • 266 pages • 8 responses • Score: +1 (+1, 2, 0) View Details ▾

PDF

8 responses to findings and recommendations

The DPMWD should develop and publicize its own Action Plans with timeframes for the Municipal Service Review and Proposition 218 process to secure voter approval of necessary rate increases.

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

r 3. The Auditor Selection Ad-hoc Committee stated they interviewed two fums of the four firms that presented proposals and were reconunending Richardson & Company to perfonn the 2018/ 19 fiscal year audit as they felt they were the most qualified. Director Bu1t disclosed that she had contacted Richardson & Company last year to ask questions about the prior year's audit. Although Richardson & Company did not accept payment for their time with her, she sent them a $25 gift card. Resident Carl Dolk suggested that for appearance, Director Burt should exclude herself from the vote. Attorney Brown ...

The DPMWD should develop a strategic communications planning effort to regularly interact with its ratepayers through a variety of direct outreach efforts to ensure constituencies are informed of actions and associated costs to ensure a safe water supply.

Response: Will Implement

Score: +1

R4. This recommendation will be implemented as proposed. DPMWD has a "Water Quality Emergency Notification Plan" posted in the office and maintained for many years. It will be updated on or before March 31, 2022. The notification requirement is based on the tier of the violation. For example, even a minor coliform violation can have a 30-day notice requirement, while another violation could have a 15-day requirement. 2167065.6 14685-004 3 The District has an existing Emergency Response Plan, last updated on July 6, 2017. Since only 618 out of a little less than 1,800 customers agreed to provid...

In the absence of a meaningful response by local leaders and agencies, the DPMWD should look for opportunities at the state and federal levels for funding resources which might help to alleviate the financial hardships confronting its ratepayers.

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

R5. The DPMWD should prepare its 2021 Consumer Confidence Report and all subsequent annual reports to fully comply with the requirements issued by the State of California. The DPMWD should request that its draft 2021 Consumer Confidence Report be reviewed by DDW to ensure that it meets all of the State requirements before its final release. The review of this draft public document should be completed in May 2022. Response to

Sacramento County's allocation of the majority of CARES Act funds to the Sheriff's Department achieved several benefits. It ensured there was no loss of CARES Act funds, provided the County with greater financial flexibility in funding services, and addressed the COVID-19 emergency. The Grand Jury was unable to determine if the switching of funds was in compliance with federal CARES Act requirements.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

F6. The District partially disagrees with this finding. Until 2019, the District provided well-articulated and clear agendas and reports for all of its meetings. Between 2019, 2020 and until late fall 2021, the District agrees that while it substantially complied with agenda requirements, some past agenda items could have been more accurately described, as illustrated by the examples in the Grand Jury's Report. With a new Board of Directors, new General Manager, and new legal counsel, the District is well positioned to ensure compliance with the relevant public meeting laws and encourage publi...

The DPMWD board meeting agendas and minutes should be reviewed by their legal counsel to ensure that the documents have clear and unambiguous descriptions. The Grand Jury recommends that reviews begin immediately and continue for every meeting.

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

R6. The DPMWD board meeting agendas and minutes should be reviewed by their legal counsel to ensure that the documents have clear and unambiguous descriptions. The Grand Jury recommends that reviews begin immediately and continue for every meeting. Response to

The County Executive's decision to allocate 70% of Sacramento County's FY2019/2020 CARES Act expenditures to the Sheriff's Department ignored many of the critical public health needs to contain the spread of COVID-19. The Grand Jury was unable to determine if this action was in compliance with federal CARES Act requirements.

Response: Unknown Score: 0

F7. The ambiguous agenda item descriptions of the DPMWD Board of Directors meetings violate the intent of the Ralph M. Brown Act, which is designed to properly inform the public of the business to be undertaken at public meetings by public officials and to encourage their participation. Response to

The DPMWD board members and staff should attend annual and detailed Brown Act training sessions with an emphasis on developing unambiguous agenda descriptions. That Brown Act training could include participation in the California Special District Association's Certificate of Excellence Program for District Transparency. The Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Directors conduct its first training session by January 31, 2022, particularly as more than half of the Board members are new.

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

r 7, 2021 Board meeting, the Board directed staff to publish a Request for Proposals/Qualifications for Engineering Services. Included within that scope of work was design engineering services related to potable water facilities, including pipelines, pump stations, tanks, dams, and dive4rsion facilities. Furthermore, the prospective engineering company will be asked to assist with support services during bidding and construction, and task orders would be issued by the General Manager to effectuate projects. Staff recommends that once the District retains and approves a contract for said Engine...

The DPMWD board members and staff must ensure that all materials in the board meeting packets are available to the public 72 hours prior to any Board meeting to avoid any Brown Act violations. The Grand Jury recommends that this begin immediately and continue for every meeting.

Response: Implemented

Score: 0

R8. This recommendation has been implemented, as proposed. 2167065.6 14685-004 5 DPMWD is now, and will continue, complying with all notice requirements of the Brown Act, as applicable. For example, packets will be available to the public 72 hours prior to any regular meeting. DPMWD meeting agendas, minutes, Board packets, and virtual meeting recordings are available in the DPMWD office for review, and are posted on DPMWD's website. The public has an opportunity to comment on agenda items before the Board takes action, and separately has an opportunity to make comments on items that are not on...

Del Paso Manor Water District President

February 04, 2022 • 10 pages • 8 responses • Score: +1 (+1, 0, 0) View Details ▾

PDF

8 responses to findings and recommendations

The DPMWD should develop and publicize its own Action Plans with timeframes for the Municipal Service Review and Proposition 218 process to secure voter approval of necessary rate increases.

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

R3. A Municipal Service Review should be performed by LAFCO to study and analyze information about the Water District’s governance structures and efficiencies. The Grand Jury also recommends that DPMWD fully cooperate with LAFCO to initiate this process by January 31, 2022 for completion of a new Municipal Service Review by June 20, 2022. Response to

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

R4. The DPMWD should notify ratepayers in the required timeframe for any Notice of Violation, including when a water sampling test result exceeds the water Maximum Contaminant Level, along with its corrective actions. The DPMWD Board of Directors and staff should be trained on the public notification requirements. The Grand Jury recommends that the DPMWD complete this training by January 31, 2022, and the Policy Manual should be updated accordingly by March 31, 2022. Response to

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

Response: Unknown Score: 0

F6. The agendas for the public meetings of the DPMWD Board of Directors have provided inadequate and vague descriptions of the items to be discussed or acted upon at its General and Special meetings. Response to

Response: Will Implement

Score: +1

R6. This recommendation will be implemented for the foreseeable future, and until such time that staff is adequately prepared and trained to draft and review meeting agendas and minutes. I respectfully defer to the District response to this recommendation for a more robust explanation.

Response: Unknown Score: 0

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

r 7th meeting of the Board of Directors, Director Matteoli and Director Osmar Macias voted me as Board President. Later that month, we appointed two additional Directors to the Board. In October we hired a new General Manager, and in November we hired a new general counsel. We intend to hire a District Engineer in February. We are beginning to right the ship. It is within this context that I find myself once again on the DPMWD Board of Directors, this time as Board President, amidst a Grand Jury investigation, significant infrastructure needs, and continued community division and mistrust. My ...

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

R8. The DPMWD board members and staff must ensure that all materials in the board meeting packets are available to the public 72 hours prior to any Board meeting to avoid any Brown Act violations. The Grand Jury recommends that this begin immediately and continue for every meeting. Response to

Sacramento City Unified School District

November 22, 2021 • 3 pages View Details ▾

PDF

Sacramento County District Attorney

January 07, 2022 • 2 pages View Details ▾

PDF

Sacramento County Office of Education

November 19, 2021 • 4 pages View Details ▾

PDF

Sacramento County Sheriff's Office

June 09, 2022 • 2 pages View Details ▾

PDF

Sacramento County Sheriff's Office

April 14, 2022 • 3 pages View Details ▾

PDF

Sacramento LAFCo

May 17, 2022 • 1 pages View Details ▾

PDF

Sacramento LAFCo

December 01, 2021 • 2 pages View Details ▾

PDF

Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District

February 02, 2022 • 5 pages • 6 responses View Details ▾

PDF

6 responses to findings and recommendations

The DPMWD should develop and publicize its own Action Plans with timeframes for the Municipal Service Review and Proposition 218 process to secure voter approval of necessary rate increases.

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

Recommendation 3: A Municipal Service Review should be performed by LAFCO to study and analyze information about the Water District’s governance structures and efficiencies. The Grand Jury also recommends that DPMWD fully cooperate with LAFCO to initiate this process by January 31, 2022 for completion of a new Municipal Service Review by June 30, 2022. District’s Response: Metro Fire has no opinion or control over whether or how this recommendation is implemented. Findings 4: During its Octobe

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

Recommendation 4: The DPMWD should notify ratepayers in the required timeframe for any Notice of Violation, including when a water sampling test result exceeds the water Maximum Contaminant Level, along with its corrective actions. The DPMWD Board of Directors and staff should be trained on the public notification requirements and procedures. A new section in the DPMWD Policy Manual should be added to address these public notification requirements. The Grand Jury recommends that the DPMWD complete this training by January 31, 2022, and the Policy Manual should be updated accordingly by March 3...

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

Recommendation 5: The DPMWD should prepare its 2021 Consumer Confidence Report and all subsequent annual reports to fully comply with the requirements issued by the State of California. The DPMWD should request that its draft 2021 Consumer Confidence Report be reviewed by DDW to ensure that it meets all of the State requirements before its final release. The review of this draft public document should be completed in May 2022. District’s Response: Metro Fire has no opinion or control over whether or how this recommendation is implemented. Findings 6: The agendas for the public meetings of the ...

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

Recommendation 6: The DPMWD board meeting agendas and minutes should be reviewed by their legal counsel to ensure that the documents have clear and unambiguous descriptions. The Grand Jury recommends that reviews begin immediately and continue for every meeting. District’s Response: Metro Fire has no opinion or control over whether or how this recommendation is implemented. Findings 7: The ambiguous agenda item descriptions of the DPMWD Board of Directors meetings violate the intent of the Ralph M. Brown Act, which is designed to properly inform the public of the business to be undertaken at p...

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

Recommendation 7: The DPMWD board members and staff should attend annual and detailed Brown Act training sessions with an emphasis on developing unambiguous agenda descriptions. That Brown Act training could include participation in the California Special District Association's Certificate of Excellence Program for District Transparency. The Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Directors conduct its first training session by January 31, 2022, particularly as more than half of the Board members are new. District’s Response: Metro Fire has no opinion or control over whether or how this recomm...

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

Recommendation 8: The DPMWD board members and staff must ensure that all materials in the board meeting packets are available to the public 72 hours prior to any Board meeting to avoid any Brown Act violations. The Grand Jury recommends that this begin immediately and continue for every meeting. District’s Response: Metro Fire has no opinion or control over whether or how this recommendation is implemented. Serving Sacramento and Placer Counties

State Water Resources Control Board

January 31, 2022 • 2 pages View Details ▾

PDF

No Responses Found 6

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

Cosumnes Community Services District Special District

Elk Grove City

Isleton City

Sacramento City

Sacramento County Board of Supervisors Elected County Office

Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency Housing Authority

* This report's PDF did not contain easily extractable text and required Optical Character Recognition (OCR) for analysis. There may be minor errors in the extracted findings and recommendations due to OCR limitations with scanned documents.