Municipal Advisory Councils

R4

That the Merced County Planning Department schedule semi-annual collaboration meetings with MAC members. RESPONSE #1: The Civil Grand Jury investigated the County’s Municipal Advisory Councils (MACs), how their meetings are conducted and how the MACs interact with their district Supervisors. It was reported that MAC members were not aware of the availability or the process for MACs to receive financial support to conduct business, not all MACs receive annual Brown Act and parliamentary procedures training, the County website does not provide current information about all MACs, and MAC members need to collaborate with other council members in the County. Regarding financial support for conducting business, an annual memorandum has been historically developed for each MAC chair detailing the reimbursement process for incurred expenses. It is the Board’s understanding that prospectively, the Department of Community and Economic Development will send the memorandums electronically and will also hand-deliver them to the MAC chairs. The Brown Act is critically important not only for the Board of Supervisors, but for its auxiliary bodies as well. The Board appreciates the Civil Grand Jury’s attention to this matter, and is pleased to report that the Merced County Counsel’s Office has recently provided Brown Act training for each MAC. The Civil Grand Jury found that the Merced County website does not provide current information about all MACs. Recently, the County launched a new, redesigned website that improves access to County information, provides better compatibility with mobile devices and brings the County’s website into compliance with new Americans with Disabilities Act standards. As the County progresses forward with the new site, it will build upon and improve information about the MACs. It is the Board’s understanding that the Department of Community and Economic Development has previously facilitated collaborative meetings with each of the MACs to discuss best practices and various issues taking place. While only a few MAC chairs participated, the Board still finds value in these types of collaborative efforts and hopes for more participation in the future. (Merced County Board of Supervisors, September 19, 2017) RESPONSE #2: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on Internal Investigation 16-06-14 pertaining to Municipal Advisory Councils (MACs) as detailed in the 2016-2017 Grand Jury Report. In regards to the findings (F1-F4) and recommendations (R1-

R4

That the Merced County Planning Department schedule semi-annual collaboration meetings with MAC members. RESPONSE #1: The Civil Grand Jury investigated the County’s Municipal Advisory Councils (MACs), how their meetings are conducted and how the MACs interact with their district Supervisors. It was reported that MAC members were not aware of the availability or the process for MACs to receive financial support to conduct business, not all MACs receive annual Brown Act and parliamentary procedures training, the County website does not provide current information about all MACs, and MAC members need to collaborate with other council members in the County. Regarding financial support for conducting business, an annual memorandum has been historically developed for each MAC chair detailing the reimbursement process for incurred expenses. It is the Board’s understanding that prospectively, the Department of Community and Economic Development will send the memorandums electronically and will also hand-deliver them to the MAC chairs. The Brown Act is critically important not only for the Board of Supervisors, but for its auxiliary bodies as well. The Board appreciates the Civil Grand Jury’s attention to this matter, and is pleased to report that the Merced County Counsel’s Office has recently provided Brown Act training for each MAC. The Civil Grand Jury found that the Merced County website does not provide current information about all MACs. Recently, the County launched a new, redesigned website that improves access to County information, provides better compatibility with mobile devices and brings the County’s website into compliance with new Americans with Disabilities Act standards. As the County progresses forward with the new site, it will build upon and improve information about the MACs. It is the Board’s understanding that the Department of Community and Economic Development has previously facilitated collaborative meetings with each of the MACs to discuss best practices and various issues taking place. While only a few MAC chairs participated, the Board still finds value in these types of collaborative efforts and hopes for more participation in the future. (Merced County Board of Supervisors, September 19, 2017) RESPONSE #2: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on Internal Investigation 16-06-14 pertaining to Municipal Advisory Councils (MACs) as detailed in the 2016-2017 Grand Jury Report. In regards to the findings (F1-F4) and recommendations (R1-

R4

That the Merced County Planning Department schedule semi-annual collaboration meetings with MAC members. RESPONSE #1: The Civil Grand Jury investigated the County’s Municipal Advisory Councils (MACs), how their meetings are conducted and how the MACs interact with their district Supervisors. It was reported that MAC members were not aware of the availability or the process for MACs to receive financial support to conduct business, not all MACs receive annual Brown Act and parliamentary procedures training, the County website does not provide current information about all MACs, and MAC members need to collaborate with other council members in the County. Regarding financial support for conducting business, an annual memorandum has been historically developed for each MAC chair detailing the reimbursement process for incurred expenses. It is the Board’s understanding that prospectively, the Department of Community and Economic Development will send the memorandums electronically and will also hand-deliver them to the MAC chairs. The Brown Act is critically important not only for the Board of Supervisors, but for its auxiliary bodies as well. The Board appreciates the Civil Grand Jury’s attention to this matter, and is pleased to report that the Merced County Counsel’s Office has recently provided Brown Act training for each MAC. The Civil Grand Jury found that the Merced County website does not provide current information about all MACs. Recently, the County launched a new, redesigned website that improves access to County information, provides better compatibility with mobile devices and brings the County’s website into compliance with new Americans with Disabilities Act standards. As the County progresses forward with the new site, it will build upon and improve information about the MACs. It is the Board’s understanding that the Department of Community and Economic Development has previously facilitated collaborative meetings with each of the MACs to discuss best practices and various issues taking place. While only a few MAC chairs participated, the Board still finds value in these types of collaborative efforts and hopes for more participation in the future. (Merced County Board of Supervisors, September 19, 2017) RESPONSE #2: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on Internal Investigation 16-06-14 pertaining to Municipal Advisory Councils (MACs) as detailed in the 2016-2017 Grand Jury Report. In regards to the findings (F1-F4) and recommendations (R1-

R4

That the Merced County Planning Department schedule semi-annual collaboration meetings with MAC members. RESPONSE #1: The Civil Grand Jury investigated the County’s Municipal Advisory Councils (MACs), how their meetings are conducted and how the MACs interact with their district Supervisors. It was reported that MAC members were not aware of the availability or the process for MACs to receive financial support to conduct business, not all MACs receive annual Brown Act and parliamentary procedures training, the County website does not provide current information about all MACs, and MAC members need to collaborate with other council members in the County. Regarding financial support for conducting business, an annual memorandum has been historically developed for each MAC chair detailing the reimbursement process for incurred expenses. It is the Board’s understanding that prospectively, the Department of Community and Economic Development will send the memorandums electronically and will also hand-deliver them to the MAC chairs. The Brown Act is critically important not only for the Board of Supervisors, but for its auxiliary bodies as well. The Board appreciates the Civil Grand Jury’s attention to this matter, and is pleased to report that the Merced County Counsel’s Office has recently provided Brown Act training for each MAC. The Civil Grand Jury found that the Merced County website does not provide current information about all MACs. Recently, the County launched a new, redesigned website that improves access to County information, provides better compatibility with mobile devices and brings the County’s website into compliance with new Americans with Disabilities Act standards. As the County progresses forward with the new site, it will build upon and improve information about the MACs. It is the Board’s understanding that the Department of Community and Economic Development has previously facilitated collaborative meetings with each of the MACs to discuss best practices and various issues taking place. While only a few MAC chairs participated, the Board still finds value in these types of collaborative efforts and hopes for more participation in the future. (Merced County Board of Supervisors, September 19, 2017) RESPONSE #2: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on Internal Investigation 16-06-14 pertaining to Municipal Advisory Councils (MACs) as detailed in the 2016-2017 Grand Jury Report. In regards to the findings (F1-F4) and recommendations (R1-