Madera County Grand Jury
• 2011-2012
2011-2012 Madera County Grand Jury Final Report on Madera County Road Department
⚠️ 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 17 findings
F1
The Grand Jury found that the Road Department is authorized 86 positions, of which approximately 11 are vacant.
No recommendations for this finding
F2
The Grand Jury found that there are two major divisions within the Department: the Engineering & Traffic Division and the Maintenance & Operations Division (M&O). In addition, there is a small administrative and accounting support unit.
No recommendations for this finding
F3
The Grand Jury found that the Department’s support unit assists with the administrative work and accounting of the other RMA departments.
No recommendations for this finding
F4
The Grand Jury found that road repair priorities are established by safety issues, traffic volume, and road condition.
No recommendations for this finding
F5
The Grand Jury found that the contract awarding process follows Federal, State, and local contracting requirements. There has been only one formal protest in the last 5 years.
No recommendations for this finding
F6
The Grand Jury found that the Department's Engineering Division provides complete contracting processes including request for proposal, bid review, award, and project oversight.
No recommendations for this finding
F7
The Grand Jury found that the Engineering Division, by performing more projects in- house, has reduced costs. In-house project completion has increased from an average of 5 in past years to 10 projects completed in 2011.
No recommendations for this finding
F8
The Grand Jury found that the Department uses current communications technology and automation. a. Online processes are provided for reporting road repair issues. b. Twitter and Facebook are used to communicate with the public.
No recommendations for this finding
F9
The Grand Jury found that within the M&O Division there are 5 road crews, a weed abatement crew, and a graffiti removal crew. a. Three of the road crews work from outlying yards in Raymond, Chowchilla, and North Fork. b. Two road crews plus the weed abatement and graffiti removal crews report daily to the Almond Avenue Yard in Madera. c. A crew is comprised of 5 to 7 workers.
No recommendations for this finding
F10
The Grand Jury found that in-house work consists of smaller repairs, shoulder grading, blacktop overlay, culvert installation, drainage issues, minor bridge repairs, road signage, weed abatement, and graffiti and litter removal.
No recommendations for this finding
F11
The Grand Jury found that the M&O Division is aware of the need for additional training of workers in current road repair materials and methodologies.
No recommendations for this finding
F12
The Grand Jury found that there have been no recent feasibility studies regarding lease versus purchase of heavy equipment.
No recommendations for this finding
F13
The Grand Jury found that the Road Shop maintains 270 vehicles and other pieces of equipment, including: a. 71 vehicles (sedans, vans, SUVs, and various pickup trucks), 6 of which are being surplused for disposal; b. 16 pickup trucks and 3 small sedans which operate on compressed natural gas (CNG), limiting their range due to lack of available fueling facilities; and c. some pickup trucks which have special equipment installed for specific duties such as weed spraying, sign installation and removal, vehicle recovery, and arrow displays for safety of road crews.
No recommendations for this finding
F14
The Grand Jury found that Department mechanics are not properly trained to repair the modern equipment.
No recommendations for this finding
F15
The Grand Jury found that both County Central Garage and the Road Shop perform repair and maintenance of sedans, vans, and light pickup trucks.
No recommendations for this finding
F16
The Grand Jury found that there are no Road Department policies or procedures for vehicle pre-operation checks, e.g., oil level, tire inflation, and visual safety inspection.
No recommendations for this finding
F17
The Grand Jury found that the Almond Avenue Yard has experienced vandalism and theft. Conclusions:
No recommendations for this finding
Conclusions 6
-
CL1The Grand Jury concluded that the Road Department is well managed and making progress toward becoming a modern, efficient department.
-
CL2The Grand Jury concluded that road repair priorities are properly and fairly established.
-
CL3The Grand Jury concluded that the Department’s contracting processes are open and fair.
-
CL4The Grand Jury concluded that the Department is making good use of technology to reduce costs and enhance efficiency.
-
CL5The Grand Jury concluded that Department mechanics need updated training to repair the newer equipment.
-
CL6The Grand Jury concluded that the Almond Avenue Yard lacks adequate security.