Score: +3 (9/9/6)

Sonoma County Grand Jury • 2012-2013

Graton Community Services District:

Published: June 26, 2013 7 pages

View Original PDF

⚠️ 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 12 findings

Board members do not have a working knowledge of their roles and responsibilities or Board policies as stated in the GCSD Policy Handbook.

Related Recommendations (1)

Board member roles and responsibilities be reviewed, clarified, and assigned with a goal of dividing work more equitably among members.

The absence of standing and ad hoc committees prevents the Board from exercising effective oversight of GCSD business.

Related Recommendations (1)

The Board President form the following standing committees as set forth in the GCSD Handbook: Planning, Ordinance, Personnel, Finance, and Public Relations. 33

Most Board members have not received sufficient training in subjects essential to successfully governing a wastewater district.

Related Recommendations (1)

The Board involve the community by developing and appointing ad hoc volunteer committees reporting to the Board that focus on short-duration projects vital to the governance of the GCSD.

The Board does not have a clear succession plan for itself or the General Manager position.

Related Recommendations (1)

The Board develop and implement a required Board training curriculum emphasizing effective Board governance and leadership.

A breakdown of communication between the Board and ratepayers is apparent and has created a hostile environment at public meetings.

Related Recommendations (1)

The Board develop and implement a clear succession plan for the GCSD’s senior management to include creating a general manager employee position reporting to the Board.

The GCSD website is not being fully utilized as a means of communicating current information.

Related Recommendations (1)

The Board contract for professional facilitation or mediation to alleviate tension and confrontation between Board members and ratepayers.

The Board’s request for monthly financial reports that are summarized and contain no supporting line item detail has led to inadequate financial oversight.

Related Recommendations (1)

The Board establish an ad hoc committee, including ratepayers, to optimize the GCSD website as a communications center for GCSD information.

Operational savings might be achieved by sharing staff and resources with other wastewater districts.

Related Recommendations (1)

The Board require clear, detailed, and comprehensive monthly financial reports from the General Manager and, when appointed, the finance committee.

Legal counsel needs to review and evaluate all professional services agreements entered into by the Board.

Related Recommendations (1)

The Board direct its legal counsel to review the General Manager’s professional services agreement and to address any unusual provisions.

F10

Regular self-assessments of Board performance and formal performance evaluations of senior management need to be implemented.

Related Recommendations (1)

R10

The Board conduct an annual performance evaluation of itself and senior GCSD management using financial performance goals, ratepayer feedback, enforcement actions from RWQCB, and other relevant measures.

F11

The lack of oversight by the Board concerning RWQCB compliance requirements and deadlines needs to be addressed with a goal of eliminating the costs of enforcement actions.

Related Recommendations (1)

R11

The Board request RWQCB to provide it with copies of all correspondence sent to the General Manager in order to monitor the status of compliance with the RWQCB directives to avoid penalties and fines.

F12

The mandated MSR by LAFCO is overdue and should be performed for the West County Region as soon as possible.

Related Recommendations (1)

R12

LAFCO conduct an MSR for the West County Region as soon as possible.

Agency Responses 1

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

GCSD

September 23, 2013 • 17 pages • 24 responses • Score: +3 (+9, 9, -6) View Details ▾

PDF

24 responses to findings and recommendations

Board members do not have a working knowledge of their roles and responsibilities or Board policies as stated in the GCSD Policy Handbook.

Response: Agree Score: +1

AGREE/ DISAGREE APPROXIMATE COST Disagree F1 ($67.

Board member roles and responsibilities be reviewed, clarified, and assigned with a goal of dividing work more equitably among members.

Response: Implemented

Score: 0

R1: This Recommendation has been implemented.

The absence of standing and ad hoc committees prevents the Board from exercising effective oversight of GCSD business.

Response: Disagree Score: -1

Disagree F2 ($18.

The Board President form the following standing committees as set forth in the GCSD Handbook: Planning, Ordinance, Personnel, Finance, and Public Relations. 33

Response: Implemented

Score: 0

R2: This Recommendation has been implemented; full implementation is infeasible.

Most Board members have not received sufficient training in subjects essential to successfully governing a wastewater district.

Response: Disagree Score: -1

Disagree Disagree

The Board involve the community by developing and appointing ad hoc volunteer committees reporting to the Board that focus on short-duration projects vital to the governance of the GCSD.

Response: Implemented

Score: 0

R3: This Recommendation has been implemented.

The Board does not have a clear succession plan for itself or the General Manager position.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

Disagree Disagree F4 Partially disagree ($210,000 est.

The Board develop and implement a required Board training curriculum emphasizing effective Board governance and leadership.

Response: Implemented

Score: 0

R4: This Recommendation has been implemented.

A breakdown of communication between the Board and ratepayers is apparent and has created a hostile environment at public meetings.

Response: Agree Score: +1

$322 per ESD) F6 Agree F7 Disagree

The Board develop and implement a clear succession plan for the GCSD’s senior management to include creating a general manager employee position reporting to the Board.

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

R5: This Recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or reasonable R6: This Recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or reasonable R7: This Recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or reasonable R8: This Recommendation has been implemented, since 2004.

The GCSD website is not being fully utilized as a means of communicating current information.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

: "The GCSD website is not being fully utilized as a means of communicating current information." The District agrees with the finding. Although there is not a lot of daily news to update, the Board has been diligently working with its website's Webmaster to upload information from years past and adding a great deal of new content. Those visiting the current website will find Notice of Board Vacancy, past meeting Agendas, the Sewer System Management Plan, past Newsletters in English and translated into Spanish, related informational articles, and more. This was a shared website [http://graton....

The Board contract for professional facilitation or mediation to alleviate tension and confrontation between Board members and ratepayers.

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

R6: This Recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or reasonable R7: This Recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or reasonable R8: This Recommendation has been implemented, since 2004.

The Board’s request for monthly financial reports that are summarized and contain no supporting line item detail has led to inadequate financial oversight.

Response: Agree Score: +1

The District agrees with the findings OCT 7 - 2013 F7: The District Disagrees wholly.

The Board establish an ad hoc committee, including ratepayers, to optimize the GCSD website as a communications center for GCSD information.

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

R7: This Recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or reasonable R8: This Recommendation has been implemented, since 2004.

Operational savings might be achieved by sharing staff and resources with other wastewater districts.

Response: Agree Score: +1

Agree F7 Disagree F8 Disagree F9 Agree F10 Agree F11 Disagree F12 Agree STATUS APPROXIMATE COST RECOMMENDATION (for rate-payers per ESD) Implemented R1 ($67.

The Board require clear, detailed, and comprehensive monthly financial reports from the General Manager and, when appointed, the finance committee.

Response: Implemented

Score: 0

R8: This Recommendation has been implemented, since 2004.

Legal counsel needs to review and evaluate all professional services agreements entered into by the Board.

Response: Agree Score: +1

Agree F7 Disagree F8 Disagree F9 Agree F10 Agree F11 Disagree F12 Agree STATUS APPROXIMATE COST RECOMMENDATION (for rate-payers per ESD) Implemented R1 ($67.

The Board direct its legal counsel to review the General Manager’s professional services agreement and to address any unusual provisions.

Response: Implemented

Score: 0

R9: This Recommendation has been implemented prior to 2012-2013 Grand Jury.

F10

Regular self-assessments of Board performance and formal performance evaluations of senior management need to be implemented.

Response: Agree Score: +1

Agree F7 Disagree F8 Disagree F9 Agree F10 Agree F11 Disagree F12 Agree STATUS APPROXIMATE COST RECOMMENDATION (for rate-payers per ESD) Implemented R1 ($67.

R10

Response: Implemented

Score: 0

R10: This Recommendation has been implemented since 2003 monthly.

F11

The lack of oversight by the Board concerning RWQCB compliance requirements and deadlines needs to be addressed with a goal of eliminating the costs of enforcement actions.

Response: Agree Score: +1

Agree F7 Disagree F8 Disagree F9 Agree F10 Agree F11 Disagree F12 Agree STATUS APPROXIMATE COST RECOMMENDATION (for rate-payers per ESD) Implemented R1 ($67.

R11

Response: Will Not Implement

Scheduled: FY 2012-13 Score: -1

: "The Board request RWQCB to provide it with copies of all correspondence sent to the General Manager in order to monitor the status of compliance with the RWQCB directives to avoid penalties and fines." This will not be implemented because it is not warranted or reasonable. Although 10-20 hours per week of volunteer time per Board member seems to be considered negligible, the Grand Jury opines that we all need to spend several ADDITIONAL hours per month reading technical requests and updates. The Board president already receives all necessary correspondence from the NCRWQCB; any corresponden...

F12

The mandated MSR by LAFCO is overdue and should be performed for the West County Region as soon as possible.

Response: Agree Score: +1

Agree F7 Disagree F8 Disagree F9 Agree F10 Agree F11 Disagree F12 Agree STATUS APPROXIMATE COST RECOMMENDATION (for rate-payers per ESD) Implemented R1 ($67.

R12

LAFCO conduct an MSR for the West County Region as soon as possible.

Response: Will Implement

Score: +1

R12 This Recommendation will be implemented.

No Responses Found 1

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

Sonoma County County