Gran Jurado del Condado de San Mateo

2021-2022

3 informes

From the annual report
The consolidated year-end volume. The individual investigations it contains are listed separately below.
📑 Year-End Report
View the full annual report (PDF)
The full consolidated volume; individual reports are listed below.
Individual reports (3)
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 4 hallazgos
F1: The 2016 Strategic Plan did not target programs addressing the large population of chronically homeless among the homeless population, diminishing the ability of the plan to deal with that group effectively.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R1: By March 31, 2023, the Board of Supervisors should consider directing Human Services Agency staff to include programs targeting the chronically homeless in its forthcoming strategic plan on homelessness.
F2: The 2016 Strategic Plan failed to establish baseline numbers for important metrics, and failed to set a quantified targets for what the related improvements should be, making it difficult to assess the ultimate effectiveness of this plan.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R2: By March 31, 2023, the Board of Supervisors should consider directing Human Services Agency staff to include quantifiable metrics to measure progress toward its goals in its forthcoming strategic plan on homelessness.
F3: Once homeless persons enter permanent housing or permanent supportive housing programs, the rate of return to homelessness is low, indicating that these programs can be an effective way to reduce homelessness.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R3: By March 31, 2023, the Board of Supervisors should consider directing Human Services Agency staff to make specific recommendations on how to increase inventory of permanent housing and permanent supportive housing.
F4: The absence of updated housing statistics on the Department of Housing website for any period after 2017 makes it difficult for the public to find relevant information on a matter of public interest.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R4: By December 31, 2022, the Board of Supervisors should direct the Department of Housing to update the statistical housing information on its website. 19
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 6 hallazgos
F1: more likely that requests could be handled inconsistently. The city uses a commercially available software application that includes a web portal
F2: enabling the public to easily request records and track their disposition. Information about how to access public records requires multiple clicks to find on the city's
F3: website, which hinders the public's access to public records. The City of San Mateo implements a Records Cleanup Day with the purpose of increasing
F4: employee understanding of the need to effectively maintain public records, thereby improving PRA request responsiveness. The city has no PRA request form online, making public access to public records less
F5: The city has no PRA request form online, making public access to public records less efficient. Response: the City agrees with this finding. The City is in process of procuring a commercially available public records request web portal to automate and centralize the submittal, records retrieval, internal processing, and response to all public records requests in a more efficient manner. Response to Grand Jury Recommendations (The City is instructed to respond to all
F11: Coleen Mackin Mayor City of Brisbane RICARDO ORTIZ, MAYOR The City of Burlingame MICHAEL BROWNRIGG, VICE MAYOR DONNA COLSON CITY HALL -- 501 PRIMROSE ROAD EMILY BEACH TEL: (650) 558-7201 BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010-3997 ANN O'BRIEN KEIGHRAN www.burlingame.org October 3, 2022 The Honorable Amarra A. Lee Judge of the Superior Court c/o Jenarda Dubois Hall of Justice 400 County Center, 2nd Floor Redwood City, CA 94063-1655 Subject: City of Burlingame's response to Civil Grand Jury Report entitled "A Delicate Balance between Knowledge and Power: Government Transparency and the Public's Right to Know" Dear Judge Lee: After reviewing the Grand Jury entitled "A Delicate Balance between Knowledge and Power: Government Transparency and the Public's Right to Know," the following are the City of Burlingame's responses to the Grand Jury's recommendations:
Recomendaciones adicionales 7

No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.

R1: The city council should direct city staff to consider and report back by June 30, 2023, on the creation of a written PRA policy or procedures document for circulation to all relevant staff.
R2: The city council should direct city staff to consider performing a cost/benefit analysis and report back by September 1, 2023, on the purchase of commercially available public records request software.
R3: By June 30, 2023, the city council should consider directing city staff to place information about how to access public records on the home page of the city's official website.
R4: By June 30, 2023, the city council should direct city staff to review and consider adopting a records management practice analogous to the City of San Mateo's "Records Cleanup Day."
R5: By June 30, 2023, the city council should direct city staff to create, on the city clerk's page of its website, a submittable PRA request form. Contracting cities are Half Moon Bay, Millbrae, San Carlos, Woodside, and Portola Valley. 2021-22 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury
R11: Coleen Mackin Mayor City of Brisbane RICARDO ORTIZ, MAYOR The City of Burlingame MICHAEL BROWNRIGG, VICE MAYOR DONNA COLSON CITY HALL -- 501 PRIMROSE ROAD EMILY BEACH TEL: (650) 558-7201 BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010-3997 ANN O'BRIEN KEIGHRAN www.burlingame.org October 3, 2022 The Honorable Amarra A. Lee Judge of the Superior Court c/o Jenarda Dubois Hall of Justice 400 County Center, 2nd Floor Redwood City, CA 94063-1655 Subject: City of Burlingame's response to Civil Grand Jury Report entitled "A Delicate Balance between Knowledge and Power: Government Transparency and the Public's Right to Know" Dear Judge Lee: After reviewing the Grand Jury entitled "A Delicate Balance between Knowledge and Power: Government Transparency and the Public's Right to Know," the following are the City of Burlingame's responses to the Grand Jury's recommendations: Recommendation R2 has been implemented. The City utilized Laserfiche forms in order to create its own unique public records request portal. This portal went live January 2021 and acts in the same manner as commercially available public records request software. The portal link can be found on the City's homepage under "Government" or under "Popular Links." Additionally, the portal link is included on each department's webpage. Staff is in the process of moving hard copies of records into the Laserfiche records management system. This allows staff to easily find records and more quickly answer public records request. Additionally, by creating the public portal through Laserfiche, once a records request is answered, it is automatically saved into the records management system. Therefore, it meets the State requirement of retaining public records requests for two years under Government Code Section 34090. Additionally, it saves staff time and allows staff to quickly sort through records requests. The Honorable Amarra A. Lee October 3, 2022 Recommendation R4 has been partially implemented. The City Clerk's Office meets regularly with the different departments to:
R26-50: 60% 51-100 More than 100 Not Sure 10% 25% 2021-22 . Does your city mandate formal Public Records Act training for key employees? 20 responses YES 50% NO 50% 6. Does your city offer Public Records Act training for elected and appointed officials (i.e. advisory boards, commissions, committees)? YES NO NO 10 5
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 5 hallazgos
F1: The water provider was unable to demonstrate that it conducts the emergency exercises specified by its ERP, which may compromise its ability to supply water following a catastrophic interruption in water distribution service.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R1: The Grand Jury recommends that, by March 31, 2023, the water provider perform emergency preparedness exercises consistent with its emergency response plan.
F2: The water provider was not able to produce documentation analyzing past exercises to test readiness and improve their performance, which may compromise its ability to supply water following a catastrophic interruption in water distribution service.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R2: The Grand Jury recommends that, by March 31, 2023, the water provider perform an analysis and document an After-Action Report consistent with its emergency response plan.
F3: The water provider does not have three days of emergency water storage, which may compromise its ability to supply water following a catastrophic interruption in water distribution service.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R3: The Grand Jury recommends that, by March 31, 2023, the water provider develop plans to increase emergency water storage sufficient to provide emergency water for a period of at least three days.
F4: The water provider does not have three days of emergency fuel storage, which may compromise its ability to supply water following a catastrophic interruption in water distribution service.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R4: The Grand Jury recommends that, by March 31, 2023, the water provider develop plans to increase emergency fuel storage sufficient to provide emergency fuel for a period of at least three days.
F5: The County Department of Emergency Management has not followed EPA
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R5: The Grand Jury recommends that, by December 31, 2022, the County Department of Emergency Management develop a plan to bring its policy in line with EPA recommendations to coordinate disaster response with County water providers. 2021-22

* This report's PDF did not contain easily extractable text and required Optical Character Recognition (OCR) for analysis. There may be minor errors in the extracted findings and recommendations due to OCR limitations with scanned documents.