⚠️ 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 31 findings
F1
Mono County Sheriff’s Office regarding Jail Cook Position Analysis: In the 2014-2015 report, that Grand Jury found that creating a relief cook position would avoid unnecessary overtime and/or illness/injury absence expenditures. At the time, the Sheriff’s office agreed with the finding and responded they would request the Board of Supervisors creation of an additional full or part time jail cook position. Methodology: A review letter was sent on September 27, 2017 to the Sheriff’s Office asking whether the
F2
TOML Regarding the Collection of Transient Occupancy Tax Analysis: In the 2016-2017 Grand Jury report, that Grand Jury had several findings and recommendations regarding the collection of Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT). This included an estimate that 10%-40% of the TOT was uncollected, which the TOML dismissed; and the failure to perform any audits of TOT remitters, which the TOML concluded were cost prohibitive and that were not possible to accomplish with the current staff. Methodology: The 2017-2018 Grand Jury initiated a new investigation and sent inquiry letters on September 27, 2017 and again on November 7, 2017 regarding uncollected TOT and audits of remitters to both the Town Manager and Finance Director. Findings: In its response, the TOML advised that an audit of a “top 20 remitter” or one of the highest twenty payers of TOT tax, would take five to eight days to complete, with a cost of $2,048.00 -$4,842.00 and that an audit of a small remitter, one of the remaining approximately 720 rentals would cost between $823.00-$1,946.00 and take two to four days. TOML indicated that such audits would be both cost and staff prohibitive and therefore would not be conducted. We feel that the TOML’s declination to conduct an audit of any kind with respect to compliance by TOT remitters is not cost prohibitive. The Grand Jury finds that by conducting an audit, a standard business practice, the Town would be acting in the best interest of the community.
F3
Registrar of Voters Processes and Procedures Analysis: In the 2016-2017 report, the Grand Jury noted numerous problems with accuracy, functioning, and efficiency during the June 2016 and November 2016 elections. The Mono County Board of Supervisors (BOS) provided a response to the Grand Jury findings in August 2017. Methodology: 5 The 2017-2018 Grand Jury initiated a new investigation and sent an inquiry letter to the County Registrar of Voters regarding the status and/or any action taken as a result of the responses by the BOS.
F4
Registrar of Voters Processes and Procedures - Continued Findings: The County Clerk responded on October 3, 2017 that modifications in processes and procedures, as recommended by the Board of Supervisors, have been implemented. The elections in 2018 will determine if the current efforts prove sufficient.
F5
Assessor’s Office morale, education and communication Analysis: The 2014-2015 Grand Jury had numerous findings and recommendations for the Assessor’s Office. Many of the findings focused on the poor morale, lack of education and communications within the office. Methodology: The current Grand Jury created a confidential online survey addressing the issues of concern that were submitted to the nine employees of the Assessor’s Office. The survey was a combination of multiple choice (select or rank by importance) and yes and no questions, several of which included room for comment. Findings: Seven members of the office responded. Answers indicated that both morale and job satisfaction have increased.
F6
EMS COMPLAINT RECEIVED Analysis: The Grand Jury received a complaint from a member of the community regarding the failure of the County to reimburse emergency responders in the Tri-Valley area for Emergency Medical Services (EMS) responses. Methodology: The Grand Jury interviewed a Board of Supervisor member to confirm the circumstances. Findings: Based on that conversation it was learned that there was a recent hire of a new County EMS administrator and administrative assistant. Communication with the new EMS administrator indicated that the payments would be expedited. On January 16, 2018, the Grand Jury verified that the payments had been made so no further action is required.
F7
PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST COMPLAINT RECEIVED Analysis: The Grand Jury received a citizen complaint from a resident alleging a violation of the California Public Records Act by the TOML where the individual felt that there was a failure to locate and release requested Airport records. Methodology: The Grand Jury reached out to the Complainant, Town Clerk, the Public Works Director and the Airport Manager separately to seek direct information in response to the complaint received. Copies of the paperwork supplied to the Complainant were supplied by the FAA and reviewed by the Grand Jury. Findings: While the Grand Jury investigated the complaint, we were unable to determine if there was a violation. The complainant had received the records that were requested. A letter was sent to the Complainant to that effect.
F8
SAN QUENTIN INMATE COMPLAINT Analysis: A complaint was received from a San Quentin inmate regarding due process. The letter from the complainant was not specific to Mono County but was sent as part of what appeared to be a mass mailer to several grand juries throughout the State. Findings: This complaint is not within the purview of the Grand Jury
F9
TOML Regarding the Collection of Transient Occupancy Tax Analysis: In the 2016-2017 Grand Jury report, that Grand Jury had several findings and recommendations regarding the collection of Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT). This included an estimate that 10%-40% of the TOT was uncollected, which the TOML dismissed; and the failure to perform any audits of TOT remitters, which the TOML concluded were cost prohibitive and that were not possible to accomplish with the current staff. Methodology: The 2017-2018 Grand Jury initiated a new investigation and sent inquiry letters on September 27, 2017 and again on November 7, 2017 regarding uncollected TOT and audits of remitters to both the Town Manager and Finance Director. Findings: In its response, the TOML advised that an audit of a “top 20 remitter” or one of the highest twenty payers of TOT tax, would take five to eight days to complete, with a cost of $2,048.00 -$4,842.00 and that an audit of a small remitter, one of the remaining approximately 720 rentals would cost between $823.00-$1,946.00 and take two to four days. TOML indicated that such audits would be both cost and staff prohibitive and therefore would not be conducted. We feel that the TOML’s declination to conduct an audit of any kind with respect to compliance by TOT remitters is not cost prohibitive. The Grand Jury finds that by conducting an audit, a standard business practice, the Town would be acting in the best interest of the community.
F10
Registrar of Voters Processes and Procedures Analysis: In the 2016-2017 report, the Grand Jury noted numerous problems with accuracy, functioning, and efficiency during the June 2016 and November 2016 elections. The Mono County Board of Supervisors (BOS) provided a response to the Grand Jury findings in August 2017. Methodology: 5 The 2017-2018 Grand Jury initiated a new investigation and sent an inquiry letter to the County Registrar of Voters regarding the status and/or any action taken as a result of the responses by the BOS.
F11
Registrar of Voters Processes and Procedures - Continued Findings: The County Clerk responded on October 3, 2017 that modifications in processes and procedures, as recommended by the Board of Supervisors, have been implemented. The elections in 2018 will determine if the current efforts prove sufficient.
F12
Assessor’s Office morale, education and communication Analysis: The 2014-2015 Grand Jury had numerous findings and recommendations for the Assessor’s Office. Many of the findings focused on the poor morale, lack of education and communications within the office. Methodology: The current Grand Jury created a confidential online survey addressing the issues of concern that were submitted to the nine employees of the Assessor’s Office. The survey was a combination of multiple choice (select or rank by importance) and yes and no questions, several of which included room for comment. Findings: Seven members of the office responded. Answers indicated that both morale and job satisfaction have increased.
F13
EMS COMPLAINT RECEIVED Analysis: The Grand Jury received a complaint from a member of the community regarding the failure of the County to reimburse emergency responders in the Tri-Valley area for Emergency Medical Services (EMS) responses. Methodology: The Grand Jury interviewed a Board of Supervisor member to confirm the circumstances. Findings: Based on that conversation it was learned that there was a recent hire of a new County EMS administrator and administrative assistant. Communication with the new EMS administrator indicated that the payments would be expedited. On January 16, 2018, the Grand Jury verified that the payments had been made so no further action is required.
F14
PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST COMPLAINT RECEIVED Analysis: The Grand Jury received a citizen complaint from a resident alleging a violation of the California Public Records Act by the TOML where the individual felt that there was a failure to locate and release requested Airport records. Methodology: The Grand Jury reached out to the Complainant, Town Clerk, the Public Works Director and the Airport Manager separately to seek direct information in response to the complaint received. Copies of the paperwork supplied to the Complainant were supplied by the FAA and reviewed by the Grand Jury. Findings: While the Grand Jury investigated the complaint, we were unable to determine if there was a violation. The complainant had received the records that were requested. A letter was sent to the Complainant to that effect.
F15
SAN QUENTIN INMATE COMPLAINT Analysis: A complaint was received from a San Quentin inmate regarding due process. The letter from the complainant was not specific to Mono County but was sent as part of what appeared to be a mass mailer to several grand juries throughout the State. Findings: This complaint is not within the purview of the Grand Jury
F16
Registrar of Voters Processes and Procedures Analysis: In the 2016-2017 report, the Grand Jury noted numerous problems with accuracy, functioning, and efficiency during the June 2016 and November 2016 elections. The Mono County Board of Supervisors (BOS) provided a response to the Grand Jury findings in August 2017. Methodology: 5 The 2017-2018 Grand Jury initiated a new investigation and sent an inquiry letter to the County Registrar of Voters regarding the status and/or any action taken as a result of the responses by the BOS.
F17
Registrar of Voters Processes and Procedures - Continued Findings: The County Clerk responded on October 3, 2017 that modifications in processes and procedures, as recommended by the Board of Supervisors, have been implemented. The elections in 2018 will determine if the current efforts prove sufficient.
F18
Assessor’s Office morale, education and communication Analysis: The 2014-2015 Grand Jury had numerous findings and recommendations for the Assessor’s Office. Many of the findings focused on the poor morale, lack of education and communications within the office. Methodology: The current Grand Jury created a confidential online survey addressing the issues of concern that were submitted to the nine employees of the Assessor’s Office. The survey was a combination of multiple choice (select or rank by importance) and yes and no questions, several of which included room for comment. Findings: Seven members of the office responded. Answers indicated that both morale and job satisfaction have increased.
F19
EMS COMPLAINT RECEIVED Analysis: The Grand Jury received a complaint from a member of the community regarding the failure of the County to reimburse emergency responders in the Tri-Valley area for Emergency Medical Services (EMS) responses. Methodology: The Grand Jury interviewed a Board of Supervisor member to confirm the circumstances. Findings: Based on that conversation it was learned that there was a recent hire of a new County EMS administrator and administrative assistant. Communication with the new EMS administrator indicated that the payments would be expedited. On January 16, 2018, the Grand Jury verified that the payments had been made so no further action is required.
F20
PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST COMPLAINT RECEIVED Analysis: The Grand Jury received a citizen complaint from a resident alleging a violation of the California Public Records Act by the TOML where the individual felt that there was a failure to locate and release requested Airport records. Methodology: The Grand Jury reached out to the Complainant, Town Clerk, the Public Works Director and the Airport Manager separately to seek direct information in response to the complaint received. Copies of the paperwork supplied to the Complainant were supplied by the FAA and reviewed by the Grand Jury. Findings: While the Grand Jury investigated the complaint, we were unable to determine if there was a violation. The complainant had received the records that were requested. A letter was sent to the Complainant to that effect.
F21
SAN QUENTIN INMATE COMPLAINT Analysis: A complaint was received from a San Quentin inmate regarding due process. The letter from the complainant was not specific to Mono County but was sent as part of what appeared to be a mass mailer to several grand juries throughout the State. Findings: This complaint is not within the purview of the Grand Jury
F22
Assessor’s Office morale, education and communication Analysis: The 2014-2015 Grand Jury had numerous findings and recommendations for the Assessor’s Office. Many of the findings focused on the poor morale, lack of education and communications within the office. Methodology: The current Grand Jury created a confidential online survey addressing the issues of concern that were submitted to the nine employees of the Assessor’s Office. The survey was a combination of multiple choice (select or rank by importance) and yes and no questions, several of which included room for comment. Findings: Seven members of the office responded. Answers indicated that both morale and job satisfaction have increased.
F23
EMS COMPLAINT RECEIVED Analysis: The Grand Jury received a complaint from a member of the community regarding the failure of the County to reimburse emergency responders in the Tri-Valley area for Emergency Medical Services (EMS) responses. Methodology: The Grand Jury interviewed a Board of Supervisor member to confirm the circumstances. Findings: Based on that conversation it was learned that there was a recent hire of a new County EMS administrator and administrative assistant. Communication with the new EMS administrator indicated that the payments would be expedited. On January 16, 2018, the Grand Jury verified that the payments had been made so no further action is required.
F24
PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST COMPLAINT RECEIVED Analysis: The Grand Jury received a citizen complaint from a resident alleging a violation of the California Public Records Act by the TOML where the individual felt that there was a failure to locate and release requested Airport records. Methodology: The Grand Jury reached out to the Complainant, Town Clerk, the Public Works Director and the Airport Manager separately to seek direct information in response to the complaint received. Copies of the paperwork supplied to the Complainant were supplied by the FAA and reviewed by the Grand Jury. Findings: While the Grand Jury investigated the complaint, we were unable to determine if there was a violation. The complainant had received the records that were requested. A letter was sent to the Complainant to that effect.
F25
SAN QUENTIN INMATE COMPLAINT Analysis: A complaint was received from a San Quentin inmate regarding due process. The letter from the complainant was not specific to Mono County but was sent as part of what appeared to be a mass mailer to several grand juries throughout the State. Findings: This complaint is not within the purview of the Grand Jury
F26
EMS COMPLAINT RECEIVED Analysis: The Grand Jury received a complaint from a member of the community regarding the failure of the County to reimburse emergency responders in the Tri-Valley area for Emergency Medical Services (EMS) responses. Methodology: The Grand Jury interviewed a Board of Supervisor member to confirm the circumstances. Findings: Based on that conversation it was learned that there was a recent hire of a new County EMS administrator and administrative assistant. Communication with the new EMS administrator indicated that the payments would be expedited. On January 16, 2018, the Grand Jury verified that the payments had been made so no further action is required.
F27
PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST COMPLAINT RECEIVED Analysis: The Grand Jury received a citizen complaint from a resident alleging a violation of the California Public Records Act by the TOML where the individual felt that there was a failure to locate and release requested Airport records. Methodology: The Grand Jury reached out to the Complainant, Town Clerk, the Public Works Director and the Airport Manager separately to seek direct information in response to the complaint received. Copies of the paperwork supplied to the Complainant were supplied by the FAA and reviewed by the Grand Jury. Findings: While the Grand Jury investigated the complaint, we were unable to determine if there was a violation. The complainant had received the records that were requested. A letter was sent to the Complainant to that effect.
F28
SAN QUENTIN INMATE COMPLAINT Analysis: A complaint was received from a San Quentin inmate regarding due process. The letter from the complainant was not specific to Mono County but was sent as part of what appeared to be a mass mailer to several grand juries throughout the State. Findings: This complaint is not within the purview of the Grand Jury
F29
PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST COMPLAINT RECEIVED Analysis: The Grand Jury received a citizen complaint from a resident alleging a violation of the California Public Records Act by the TOML where the individual felt that there was a failure to locate and release requested Airport records. Methodology: The Grand Jury reached out to the Complainant, Town Clerk, the Public Works Director and the Airport Manager separately to seek direct information in response to the complaint received. Copies of the paperwork supplied to the Complainant were supplied by the FAA and reviewed by the Grand Jury. Findings: While the Grand Jury investigated the complaint, we were unable to determine if there was a violation. The complainant had received the records that were requested. A letter was sent to the Complainant to that effect.
F30
SAN QUENTIN INMATE COMPLAINT Analysis: A complaint was received from a San Quentin inmate regarding due process. The letter from the complainant was not specific to Mono County but was sent as part of what appeared to be a mass mailer to several grand juries throughout the State. Findings: This complaint is not within the purview of the Grand Jury
F31
SAN QUENTIN INMATE COMPLAINT Analysis: A complaint was received from a San Quentin inmate regarding due process. The letter from the complainant was not specific to Mono County but was sent as part of what appeared to be a mass mailer to several grand juries throughout the State. Findings: This complaint is not within the purview of the Grand Jury
Recommendations 5
-
R1Were responses received by the Presiding Judge within the legal time limits from the date of each final report's release (90 days for a public agency and 60 days for an elected official)?
-
R2If a response indicated that a recommendation had been implemented, did it include a summary of what was done?
-
R3If a response indicated that a recommendation would be implemented, did it include a summary and schedule for what would be done?
-
R4If a response indicated that a recommendation required further analysis or study, did it include an explanation of the scope, parameters, and timeframe of the proposed analysis or study?
-
R5If a response indicated that a recommendation would not be implemented because it was unwarranted or unreasonable, did the respondent include a reasoned explanation supporting that position? TABLE 1 – 2017-2018 Continuity Committee Report and Responses Date Issued Replies Required Comments Carryover Issues Mono County Sheriff’s September 2017 Mono County Response received; No further action Office – Holding Cell Sheriff required Mono County Sheriff’s September 2017 Mono County Response received; No further action Office – Jail Cook position Sheriff required Town of Mammoth Lakes - September 2017 Town Manager/ Recommendation made by 2017-2018 Grand TOT Finance Director Jury Mono County Registrar’s September 2017 Mono County Response received; No further action Office Registrar’s Office required Mono County Assessor’s January 2018 Mono County Response received; No further action Office Assessor Office required 3 • Mono County Sheriff’s Office regarding Holding Cell Analysis: In the 2014-2015 report, that Grand Jury found that the holding cell at the new Mammoth courthouse was un-usable due to poor design. This was one of the main reasons that was used to promote the need for a new courthouse. At the time, the Sheriff agreed with the finding and responded they would pursue solutions with the Judicial Council in 2015-2016. Methodology: A letter was sent to the Sheriff’s Office asking if there was a follow up to their response about following up the issue based on the previous GJ’s recommendation.
Comments 10
-
CO1Findings: The County Clerk responded on October 3, 2017 that modifications in processes and procedures, as recommended by the Board of Supervisors, have been implemented. The elections in 2018 will determine if the current efforts prove sufficient.
-
CO2Analysis: A complaint was received from a San Quentin inmate regarding due process. The letter from the complainant was not specific to Mono County but was sent as part of what appeared to be a mass mailer to several grand juries throughout the State. Findings: This complaint is not within the purview of the Grand Jury
-
CO3Findings: The County Clerk responded on October 3, 2017 that modifications in processes and procedures, as recommended by the Board of Supervisors, have been implemented. The elections in 2018 will determine if the current efforts prove sufficient.
-
CO4Analysis: A complaint was received from a San Quentin inmate regarding due process. The letter from the complainant was not specific to Mono County but was sent as part of what appeared to be a mass mailer to several grand juries throughout the State. Findings: This complaint is not within the purview of the Grand Jury
-
CO5Findings: The County Clerk responded on October 3, 2017 that modifications in processes and procedures, as recommended by the Board of Supervisors, have been implemented. The elections in 2018 will determine if the current efforts prove sufficient.
-
CO6Analysis: A complaint was received from a San Quentin inmate regarding due process. The letter from the complainant was not specific to Mono County but was sent as part of what appeared to be a mass mailer to several grand juries throughout the State. Findings: This complaint is not within the purview of the Grand Jury
-
CO7Analysis: A complaint was received from a San Quentin inmate regarding due process. The letter from the complainant was not specific to Mono County but was sent as part of what appeared to be a mass mailer to several grand juries throughout the State. Findings: This complaint is not within the purview of the Grand Jury
-
CO8Analysis: A complaint was received from a San Quentin inmate regarding due process. The letter from the complainant was not specific to Mono County but was sent as part of what appeared to be a mass mailer to several grand juries throughout the State. Findings: This complaint is not within the purview of the Grand Jury
-
CO9Analysis: A complaint was received from a San Quentin inmate regarding due process. The letter from the complainant was not specific to Mono County but was sent as part of what appeared to be a mass mailer to several grand juries throughout the State. Findings: This complaint is not within the purview of the Grand Jury
-
CO10Analysis: A complaint was received from a San Quentin inmate regarding due process. The letter from the complainant was not specific to Mono County but was sent as part of what appeared to be a mass mailer to several grand juries throughout the State. Findings: This complaint is not within the purview of the Grand Jury
No Responses Found 4
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
County of Mono
Agency
Mono County Assessor
Elected County Office
Mono County Sheriff
Elected County Office