📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report
This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.
Mariposa County Grand Jury
• 2021-2022
Road Maintenance Agreements: Standards and Provisions for Long-Term Maintenance
⚠️ 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 8 findings
F1
Page 66
A School Board Member made a motion and voted on it when the subject involved a relative.
No recommendations for this finding
F2
Page 66
School Superintendent and School Board Members must avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest in order to maintain public trust.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
Page 74
Within the next six (6) months, a standard RMA template guidelines should be developed and adopted by the BOS with the following provisions: a. Define the roles and responsibilities for implementing the conditions of the agreement (e.g., establishment of a road maintenance association). (F2) b. Specifications for collection and allocation of funds for road maintenance. (F3) c. Lien authorities to ensure compliance. (F4) d. Road maintenance duration responsibilities per the updated RICP. (F5) e. An annual self-inspection and compliance report. (F6, F7)
F3
Page 73
There is no mechanism by which the BOS can make certain that a successful RMA applicant requires a committee to collect and manage funds for routine road maintenance and emergency repairs.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
Page 74
Within the next six (6) months, a standard RMA template guidelines should be developed and adopted by the BOS with the following provisions: a. Define the roles and responsibilities for implementing the conditions of the agreement (e.g., establishment of a road maintenance association). (F2) b. Specifications for collection and allocation of funds for road maintenance. (F3) c. Lien authorities to ensure compliance. (F4) d. Road maintenance duration responsibilities per the updated RICP. (F5) e. An annual self-inspection and compliance report. (F6, F7)
F4
Page 73
There is no mechanism by which the BOS can make certain that the successful RMA applicant applies enforcement tools (e.g., liens) to ensure delinquent fees and assessments are collected. MCCGJ 2021-2022 Final Report
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
Page 74
Within the next six (6) months, a standard RMA template guidelines should be developed and adopted by the BOS with the following provisions: a. Define the roles and responsibilities for implementing the conditions of the agreement (e.g., establishment of a road maintenance association). (F2) b. Specifications for collection and allocation of funds for road maintenance. (F3) c. Lien authorities to ensure compliance. (F4) d. Road maintenance duration responsibilities per the updated RICP. (F5) e. An annual self-inspection and compliance report. (F6, F7)
F5
Page 74
The RICP identifies the duration of road maintenance to extend through the life of the project, a vague term with opportunities for multiple interpretations.
Related Recommendations (2)
R3
Page 74
Within the next six (6) months, a standard RMA template guidelines should be developed and adopted by the BOS with the following provisions: a. Define the roles and responsibilities for implementing the conditions of the agreement (e.g., establishment of a road maintenance association). (F2) b. Specifications for collection and allocation of funds for road maintenance. (F3) c. Lien authorities to ensure compliance. (F4) d. Road maintenance duration responsibilities per the updated RICP. (F5) e. An annual self-inspection and compliance report. (F6, F7)
R4
Page 74
Within the next six (6) months, the BOS should approve by resolution an update of the RICP including clearly identified standard duration periods and responsibilities with clearly defined terms. Approved changes should be made in an act by BOS resolution and should document clarity of decision and reasoning for the resolution. (F5, F7)
F6
Page 74
There is concern that public access to privately maintained roads can result in additional wear and tear as well as safety and liability concerns.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
Page 74
Within the next six (6) months, a standard RMA template guidelines should be developed and adopted by the BOS with the following provisions: a. Define the roles and responsibilities for implementing the conditions of the agreement (e.g., establishment of a road maintenance association). (F2) b. Specifications for collection and allocation of funds for road maintenance. (F3) c. Lien authorities to ensure compliance. (F4) d. Road maintenance duration responsibilities per the updated RICP. (F5) e. An annual self-inspection and compliance report. (F6, F7)
F7
Page 74
Some Mariposa County regulations and policies regarding road design and maintenance standards (e.g., RICP and MCIS) are older than ten (10) years.
Related Recommendations (3)
R3
Page 74
Within the next six (6) months, a standard RMA template guidelines should be developed and adopted by the BOS with the following provisions: a. Define the roles and responsibilities for implementing the conditions of the agreement (e.g., establishment of a road maintenance association). (F2) b. Specifications for collection and allocation of funds for road maintenance. (F3) c. Lien authorities to ensure compliance. (F4) d. Road maintenance duration responsibilities per the updated RICP. (F5) e. An annual self-inspection and compliance report. (F6, F7)
R4
Page 74
Within the next six (6) months, the BOS should approve by resolution an update of the RICP including clearly identified standard duration periods and responsibilities with clearly defined terms. Approved changes should be made in an act by BOS resolution and should document clarity of decision and reasoning for the resolution. (F5, F7)
R5
Page 74
Within the next six (6) months, the BOS should approve by resolution an update of the MCIS. Approved changes should be made in an act by BOS resolution and should document clarity of decision and reasoning for the resolution. (F7)
F8
Page 74
Mariposa County has no review authority for amendments to an RMA.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6
Page 74
Within the next six (6) months an amendment procedure should be established that requires interdisciplinary review by the County when a project and associated RMA is amended. (F8)
Additional Recommendations 2
These recommendations are not explicitly linked to specific findings.
-
R1Page 66School Board Members should recuse themselves from making motions or voting on matters that involve a conflict of interest or give the appearance of a conflict of interest.
-
R2Page 66The language in the bylaws should be written to more clearly define conflict of interest, and the process to determine if a conflict of interest exists.