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
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and recommendations have not been extracted yet.
The full report content may still be accessible via the PDF link above.
Agency Responses 23
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 ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Additional Response from Sacramento LAFCo
February 07, 2022
•
2 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Del Paso Manor Water District
February 02, 2022
•
266 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Del Paso Manor Water District
February 02, 2022
•
266 pages
• 8 responses
•
Score: +1
(+1, 2, 0)
View Details ▾
8 responses to findings and recommendations
R3
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 ...
R4
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...
R5
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
F6
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...
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: 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
F7
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
R7
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...
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: 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 ▾
8 responses to findings and recommendations
R3
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
R4
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: 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
R5
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
F6
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: 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
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: 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.
F7
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
R7
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 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 ...
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: 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 ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Sacramento City Unified School District
November 22, 2021
•
3 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Sacramento County District Attorney
January 07, 2022
•
2 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Sacramento County District Attorney
January 07, 2022
•
2 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Sacramento County Office of Education
November 19, 2021
•
4 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Sacramento County Office of Education
November 19, 2021
•
4 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Sacramento County Sheriff's Office
June 09, 2022
•
2 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Sacramento County Sheriff's Office
June 09, 2022
•
2 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Sacramento County Sheriff's Office
April 14, 2022
•
3 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Sacramento County Sheriff's Office
April 14, 2022
•
3 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Sacramento LAFCo
May 17, 2022
•
1 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Sacramento LAFCo
May 17, 2022
•
1 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Sacramento LAFCo
December 01, 2021
•
2 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Sacramento LAFCo
December 01, 2021
•
2 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District
February 02, 2022
•
5 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District
February 02, 2022
•
5 pages
• 6 responses
View Details ▾
6 responses to findings and recommendations
R3
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
R4
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: 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...
R5
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
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 ...
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: 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...
R7
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
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...
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: 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 ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
State Water Resources Control Board
January 31, 2022
•
2 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
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.