Stanislaus County 2020-2021 Grand Jury Final Report

Conclusions 15

• CL1 Page 125
  Finding: F4. City of Patterson has not provided sufficient information on their website to inform the public about how they are using the funds, as required by their MFS
• CL2 Page 125
  Recommendation: R4. City of Patterson shall update and maintain their website in accordance with the requirements of the MFA and provide the same data to StanCOG The City of Patterson has updated its website to include all Measure L projects (completed, in progress, future), as well as the Measure L Reports. In addition, the City's website has also included a weblink directed to the "Stanislaus Council of Governments" Measure L website containing Patterson's spendings.
• CL3 Page 125
  Monthly Expenditure Report
• CL4 Page 125
  Monthly Cash Balance Report
• CL5 Page 125
  Quarterly Milestone Report The City of Patterson will continue to update its website for the following items listed on MFA and be posted no later than June 30, 2022.
• CL6 Page 125
  Maintenance of Effort Form
• CL7 Page 125
  Annual Single Audit - Measure L
• CL8 Page 125
  Resolution of Approved Annual Budget/CIP identifying project funded by Measure L
• CL9 Page 125
  Annual Measure L Project List Ken Irwin City Manager 125 REPORT ON THE STANISLAUS COUNTY ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT AND AUDIT 127 Report on the Stanislaus County Annual Financial Report and Audit 2021-2022 Stanislaus County Civil Grand Jury Case #22-17GJ SUMMARY California Penal Code §925 requires that civil grand juries investigate and report on the operations, accounts and records of the departments or functions of the county. The 2021-2022 Stanislaus County Civil Grand Jury (SCCGJ) undertook an investigation of the County’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and its external audit. The SCCGJ reviewed all information available at the time this report was completed.
• CL10 Page 100
  The SCCGJ acknowledges the recommendation will be implemented. The General Services Agency (GSA) will work to include the requirement to “test for suspension and debarment” for leases. This will be part of the GSA contract verification process for federally funded programs which will be implemented by the County Auditor Controller. The SCCGJ appreciates this effort to include lessors in their current eligibility process. The SCCGJ encourages future juries to “look back” to determine that appropriate implementation of the vendor eligibility process has been completed. 100 101 102 d e r d e t h e O
• CL11 Page 103
  The Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors has directed the County Auditor Controller to implement a contract verification process for federally funded programs. The SCCGJ encourages the Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors to ensure that implementation has occurred no later than December 31, 2021. Future SCCGJs are encouraged to revisit this issue to determine the 2020-2021 the SCCGJ recommendation has been implemented. 103 104 105 106 107 Is Stanislaus Council of Governments Enforcing Measure L Master Funding Agreement? Case # 21-17GJ Reason for Investigation In November 2016, more than 70% of Stanislaus County voters approved Measure L: Local Roads First Transportation Funding Measure Ordinance #16-01, as a 25-year, one-half cent special sales tax used exclusively for regional and local transportation, as well as other transit improvements. The Stanislaus Council of Governments (StanCOG) administers Measure L funds. Resolution 17-10 was approved November 15, 2017, by the StanCOG Policy Board adopting the Measure L Master Funding Agreement (MFA). The MFA sets forth the general terms and conditions each jurisdiction must comply with in order to receive the funds. An executed copy for each jurisdiction is on file with StanCOG. Agencies Asked to Respond  City of Turlock City Council……………F2, R2  City of Ceres City Council…...………….F3, R3  City of Patterson City Council…………...F4, R4  StanCOG Board of Directors…………….F1, F2, F3, F4, R1, R2, R3, R4  Measure L Oversight Committee………...F1, F2, F3, F4, R1, R2, R3, R4 d e r e h d t e O
• CL12 Page 109
  At present, StanCOG as the watchdog for the public, is not satisfying its role as Measure L administrator. The SCCGJ acknowledges that recommendation 1 (R1) will not be implemented by StanCOG. The SCCGJ recognizes that the voters authorized StanCOG to administer Measure L funding and StanCOG adopted a MFA providing procedures that each jurisdiction must comply with in order to receive Measure L. In this MFA each jurisdiction must create and maintain an accurate website that informs the public how Measure L funds are being utilized. If this does not happen StanCOG may withhold funding until compliance is achieved. The SCCGJ emphasizes the MFA must be adhered to and StanCOG, as the administrative agency, is required to enforce the requirement. The response from StanCOG that “At present, all receiving entities are in compliance with the provisions of Measure L MFA.” is not supported by the SCCGJ findings that the cities of Ceres, Patterson, and Turlock did not provide sufficient information on their website. Furthermore, in their response to 109 the SCCGJ, each of these cities acknowledged their websites did not contain the required data and pledged to update and maintain their websites. Furthermore, StanCOG responded, “The sufficiency of that information is subjective.” StanCOG should be proactive in developing objective standards for the clear display of Measure L information on its member websites. 110 111 112 113 d e r e h d t e O Findings A w g / r F e i n e di n g A g r e e s P a rti all y D i s a g r e e s W h oll y Recommendations m pl e m e n t e d W ill I m pl e m e nt F u rt h e r A n al y si s N e Will N o t I m pl e m e n t/ I Measure L Oversight Committee F1. StanCOG, as the “Pass-Through” X R1. StanCOG shall establish a X agent for Measure L, has failed in its procedure for monitoring and responsibility to follow through with enforcing compliance with the the requirements of the Measure L requirements of the MFA by MFA to withhold funding from those December 31, 2021. entities not in compliance with the agreement. F2. City of Turlock has not provided X R2. City of Turlock shall update X sufficient information on their website and maintain their website in to inform the public about how they accordance with the requirements are using the funds, as required by of the MFA and provide the same their MFA. data to StanCOG. F3. City of Ceres has not provided X R3. City of Ceres shall update X sufficient information on their website and maintain their website in to inform the public about how they accordance with the requirements are using the funds, as required by of the MFA and provide the same their MFA. data to StanCog. F4. City of Patterson has not provided X R4. City of Patterson shall update X sufficient information on their website and maintain their website in to inform the public about how they accordance with the requirements are using the funds, as required by of the MFA and provide the same their MFA. data to StanCOG.
• CL13 Page 114
  StanCOG’s website states, “Measure L includes strong taxpayer safeguards to ensure that the projects and programs approved by the voters are funded and delivered. A Citizens Oversight Committee has been created to provide an enhanced level of accountability for expenditures made under the Expenditure Plan to ensure that all voter mandates are carried out and that financial integrity and performance of the program is maintained.” In response to Finding 1 the MLOC stated, “The MLOC is created by Section 18 of the Measure L Ordinance and its scope of authority is limited to review the independent fiscal audit of the expenditures of the tax funds and issue an annual report on its findings 114 regarding compliance with the requirements of the Expenditure Plan and the Ordinance. The MLOC does not have authority to enforce or opine on the enforcement of the Measure L MFA”. The SCCGJ maintains a differing opinion than the MLOC. Measure L specifically states, “The Measure L Oversight Committee is responsible for oversight of the proper use of sales tax funds and implementation of the programs and projects set forth in the Expenditure Plan…” The MLOC was established as a safeguard to oversee those jurisdictions are held to a high level of accountability and compliance. The cities of Ceres, Patterson, and Turlock failed to comply with the ordinance by not maintaining websites to inform the public on use of Measure L funds. The MLOC is expected to use its oversight responsibility to ensure its member entities are in compliance with the Measure L Ordinance. Future SCCGJs are encouraged to continue to review compliance with the Measure L Ordinance. 115 116 117 118 d e r e h d t e O
• CL14 Page 119
  The SCCGJ acknowledges this recommendation will be implemented by the City of Turlock no later than December 31, 2021. The SCCGJ acknowledges the City of Turlock for their efforts in complying with the MFA and encourages them to continually update accurate information for the public. 119 120 121 d e r e h d t e O
• CL15 Page 119
  The SCCGJ acknowledges this recommendation will be implemented for the City of Ceres no later than December 31, 2021. SCCGJ acknowledges the City of Ceres for its efforts in complying with the MFA and encourages them to continually provide updated and accurate information for the public. 122 123 d e r e h d t e O

Commendations 2

• CM1 Page 12
  The SCCGJ salutes all the public agencies and private organizations working to alleviate homelessness. The recommendations which follow are meant to help these agencies and organizations as they address this complicated and challenging task.
• CM2 Page 93
  The SCCGJ would like to commend the Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Department, Modesto Police Department, Stanislaus County Probation Department, and the Stanislaus Regional 9-1-1 Emergency Call Center for providing the SCCGJ with tours/presentations. The tours/presentations were thorough, and staff were knowledgeable and professional. The SCCGJ left with a knowledge of the good work you and your staff are contributing to our community. 93 94 ELECTION

Observations 2

• OB1 Page 46
  2021-2022 Stanislaus County Civil Grand Jury CASE # 22-16GJ SUMMARY Since 1953, virtually all levels of local government in California have operated under the Brown Act. The Act, authored by Assemblyman Ralph M. Brown (D-Modesto), is often referred to as an “Open Meeting Law” or “Sunshine Law”. The Brown Act defines the manner in which local government is required to disclose intended actions so the general public is informed and is provided the opportunity to participate in the deliberations of their elected local leaders. The Brown Act is intended to strike a balance between public access and the need for confidential deliberations, with the presumption in favor of public access. The Riverbank Language Academy (RLA) is a charter school operating under a charter issued by the Riverbank Unified School District (RUSD). The Stanislaus County Civil Grand Jury (SCCGJ) determined the Brown Act is applicable to the RLA. The SCCGJ also determined the RLA did not adhere to specific sections of the Brown Act pertaining to the time requirements for posting an agenda, use of their website to post RLA Advisory Board agendas, access to RLA Advisory Board agendas and minutes, and remote participation in RLA Advisory Board meetings. While the primary focus of the SCCGJ’s investigation was the RLA’s observance of the Brown Act, in the course of its investigation the SCCGJ made other observations of RLA practices not addressed in the Brown Act. These practices include the use of a school calendar and an archive of past RLA Advisory Board agendas and minutes, both found on the RLA website. The SCCGJ determined these practices contribute to the public’s awareness of RLA governance and administration. However, the SCCGJ also determined the use of these practices was inconsistent. The SCCGJ determined compliance with the Brown Act ultimately results from regular training and self-regulation on the part of elected officials and administrators. To maintain the public’s confidence in the RLA, it is essential the training provided by the RLA’s legal counsel be consistently followed.
• OB2
  95 ELECTION OBSERVATIONS 2021-2022 Stanislaus County Civil Grand Jury Case # 22-02GJ The jury was invited by the Clerk-Recorder to observe county elections procedures for two all- mail ballot special elections. Based on these observations, and the fact that no complaints were received regarding elections, the jury is not issuing a report. Following is a brief description of the jury’s observations. The first election was to fill a vacant city council seat for District 1 in Ceres after the City Council was unable to reach a consensus in appointing a new member; the second was to decide whether the Governor should be recalled and, if so, whom his replacement should be. Jurors observed election activities on both August 31 and September 14, 2021. The Stanislaus County Registrar of Voters conducted a tour of the Elections Office for members of the jury and several public officials, while explaining the process. Jurors observed the verification of signatures of registered voters, including ballots with discrepancies. Ballots are then scanned and recorded electronically onto specially formatted USB drives. Once staff has confirmed the integrity of the drives, the drives are manually connected to the tally computer in order to transfer the data. Jury members returned to the Elections Office on September 2 and September 16, 2021, to observe the next step of the balloting process. After every election, the Elections Office is required to perform a manual tally of 1% of precincts selected at random, which are compared to the software-counted votes to verify they match. This includes reconciling the number of ballots which have been invalidated for various reasons. Jurors were able to observe various steps of the balloting process as well as the checks and balances designed to ensure the accuracy and security of this process. Elections Code 15104(b) also allows that, in addition to grand jurors and representatives of any political party with a candidate on the ballot, representatives from “…any other interested organization shall be permitted to observe and challenge the manner in which the vote by mail ballots are handled, from the processing of vote by mail ballot return envelopes through the counting and disposition of the ballots”. 96 SUMMARY OF RESPONSES TO THE 2020-2021 STANISLAUS COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY 97 SUMMARY OF THE RESPONSES TO THE 2020-2021 STANISLAUS COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY 2021-2022 Stanislaus County Civil Grand Jury Case #22-12GJ SUMMARY Each year the Stanislaus County Civil Grand Jury (SCCGJ) issues a report with findings and recommendations directed to Stanislaus County officials, agencies, municipal and other public entities. The continuity process is to monitor the filing of responses to the previous year’s grand jury report and advise the current grand jury if those responses are complete and legally sufficient, or if additional follow-up is necessary. If the recommendations of the SCCGJ are not verifiably implemented, or at least seriously considered, this function is undermined. The golden rule of continuity is to: Do for last year’s grand jury what you would like next year’s grand jury to do for you; do for future grand juries what you would like previous grand juries to have done for you.

No Responses Found 10

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