San Mateo County Grand Jury
2024-2025
From the annual report
The consolidated year-end volume. The individual investigations it contains are listed separately below.
📑 Year-End Report
The full consolidated volume; individual reports are listed below.
Individual reports (6)
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
2 findings
F1:
San Mateo County's youth services facilities are underutilized despite significant investment. Public funds are supporting largely empty facilities, although viable innovative reuse proposals already exist.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The Board of Supervisors should commission a comprehensive Master Plan for Youth Facility Utilization by January 1, 2026, with final publication by January 1, 2027.
F2:
Youth ages 18 to 25 who commit a crime after their 18th birthday are incarcerated in an adult jail, creating a disparity of rehabilitative services for young adults.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office should explore the feasibility of expanding rehabilitative services for young adults aged 18 to 25 in custody, comparable to those offered at the Youth Services Center. A written feasibility report outlining service options, resource needs, and potential timelines should be submitted to the Board of Supervisors and Civil Grand Jury by December 15, 2025.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
3 findings
F1:
The Controller’s Office auditing staff is conducting thorough audits of Community-Based Organizations contracted by the County to provide social services.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
By December 31, 2025, the Grand Jury recommends that the County Executive’s Office note on the County website which initiatives and Community-Based Organizations receiving Measure K funds have been audited in the previous fiscal year and make those audits directly available from the website. 3
F2:
Although the completed audits are public documents, they are not accessible to the public on the County Website.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
By December 31, 2025, the Grand Jury recommends that the County Executive’s Office include links to audit reports completed in the prior fiscal year in the Measure K Oversight Committee Annual Report.
F3:
The Grand Jury commends the Controller’s Office auditing staff for the quality and thoroughness of their audits.
Findings & Recommendations
5 findings
F1:
Students do not have sufficient opportunity to begin a CTE pathway before 11th or 12th grade due to District graduation requirements beyond State standards and a focus on preparing students for college admissions based on the UC and CSU A-G course requirements.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
By March 31, 2026, SMCOE should analyze districts’ master schedules for CTE pathway completer outcomes and recommend potential improvements.
F2:
Pathway completion rates within the County are only 15% on average. Factors include a lack of pathways with depth, a mismatch of pathways to student interest, and barriers to entry into pathways, resulting in lost opportunities for students and funding for districts.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
By January 1, 2026, each school district should ensure all pathways include a capstone course, add classes with dual enrollment credit, and those with certifications/credentials.
F3:
The high school district stated it has challenges with hiring qualified individuals with industry experience for CTE positions due to lower pay in education. Superintendents have the ability to negotiate salary schedules and offer CTE candidates compensation based upon years of industry experience (and not years of teaching).
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
By April 30, 2026, the district school board should determine if, and where, students’ schedules can be opened up for more CTE and dual enrollment opportunities earlier in their high school careers by evaluating district graduation requirements versus state-mandated requirements.
F4:
The district is not fully aware of new legislation impacting CTE programs, such as notifying parents or guardians of 11th and 12th graders about local pre-apprenticeship and apprenticeship programs, the loosening of internship rules and regulations for businesses hosting students, etc. 25Zeyu Xu and Ben Backes, “The case for specialized career and technical education,” Thomas B. Fordham Institute, Sept. 12, 2022, https://fordhaminstitute.org/national/commentary/case-specialized- career-and-technical-education 12
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
By August 1, 2026, the district should work with the union(s) to negotiate mutually agreeable salaries for CTE teachers based on pay commensurate with CTE experience, to incentivize talented and experienced candidates to apply.
F5:
The systems used by the district to follow up on graduating seniors have not been successful in gathering enough participation to provide useful data, with return rate percentages between single digits to low twenties.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
By October 31, 2025, SMCOE should share new legislation impacting CTE programs with business partners (via such means as Advisory Meetings, Steering Committees, etc.) and Superintendents who in turn disseminate it to their constituents (district CTE personnel, counselors, parents, etc.).
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R6:
By March 31, 2026, each school district should develop a more effective means or system for capturing post-graduate information, specifically if graduates are working or studying in the field of their completed pathway. 13
Findings & Recommendations
6 findings
F1:
The County Department of Emergency Management has not followed EPA
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The Grand Jury recommends that by December 31, 2025, the San Mateo County Department of Emergency Management develop a plan to align its policy with EPA recommendations by coordinating disaster response preparedness with all county water providers.
F2:
The water provider does not have three (3) days of emergency water storage, potentially compromising its ability to supply water following a catastrophic interruption in water distribution service.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The Grand Jury recommends that by December 31, 2027, the water provider will develop plans to increase emergency water storage capacity sufficient to provide emergency water to its community for a minimum of three (3) days.
F3:
The water provider does not have three (3) days of emergency fuel storage, affecting its ability to supply water following a catastrophic interruption in water distribution service.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The Grand Jury recommends that by December 31, 2026, the water provider develop plans to increase emergency fuel and pumping capabilities in order to provide emergency water to their community for a minimum of three (3) days.
F4:
The water provider could not produce documentation analyzing past exercises to test readiness and improve their performance, impacting their ability to supply water following a catastrophic interruption in water distribution service.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
The Grand Jury recommends that by December 31, 2025, the water provider perform an analysis and document an After-Action Report consistent with its emergency response plan.
F5:
The water provider does not perform operational Functional or Full-Scale exercises, compromising the clarity of roles and responsibilities, and helping identify resource gaps. Connecting Water Utilities and Emergency Management Agencies, accessed May 21, 2025 https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2018-05/documents/water_emaconnection.pdf
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
The Grand Jury recommends that by June 30, 2026, the water provider perform, at a minimum, functional operational exercises consistent with its emergency response plans (ERP).
F6:
Local agencies are responsible for oversight of the status of their Local Hazard Mitigation Plans, published in October 2021. While local jurisdictions remain responsible for implementation, there is no central repository reporting on overall progress.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
The Grand Jury recommends that by October 31, 2026, SMCEM report on the status of the mitigation projects contained in the 2021 and upcoming 2026 LHMP plans. The status of the 2021 projects should be included in the relevant partner annex when the plan is published in 2026.
Findings & Recommendations
7 findings
F1:
When an entity does not have a process to identify organizational risks, and the entity does not demonstrate how its internal controls address identified risks, the likelihood of a failure internal controls that results in fraud or waste increases. Response: The City of Burlingame agrees with this finding.
F2:
When an entity does not periodically assess its internal controls and the entity cannot demonstrate that it is monitoring its internal controls, the likelihood of a failure in internal controls that results in fraud or waste increases. Response: The City of Burlingame agrees with this finding.
F3:
When management does not report the results of its assessment of internal controls to its governing board and the entity has not communicated externally, the likelihood that others see this as an opportunity to commit fraud or waste increases. Response: The City of Burlingame agrees with this finding. Docusign Envelope ID: A81F77A6-69B1-4011-BA99-FEBE1E8BD83B The Honorable Amarra A. Lee September 3, 2024 Response to Recommendations
F4:
Most restaurant exterior areas are “out of sight” of the public and as a result complaints are less frequent. The City agrees with the finding.
F5:
Because they lack oversight, unacceptable conditions in restaurant trash areas are likely not to be rectified. The City agrees with the finding. Docusign Envelope ID: 6DFA0101-AADB-4F1F-A644-1DA35C73A3B2 Hon. Amarra Lee September 4, 2024
F6:
Waste water from the cleaning of trash areas and from rain flow into the storm drain systems. The City partially concurs with the finding. The Burlingame Municipal Code, specifically Section 25.31.130 Trash and Refuse Collection Areas, mandates that all restaurants must provide dedicated interior space or exterior trash enclosures for proper waste management. This requirement ensures that restaurants have designated areas for storing and handling their refuse. Furthermore, the City enforces strict guidelines for new construction and tenant improvements associated with restaurants. These establishments are required to have an interior dedicated trash washing area that is plumbed to the sanitary sewer system. This measure helps maintain cleanliness and prevent potential contamination. However, staff acknowledges the possibility of individual restaurant operators violating these code requirements despite the City's efforts. To address this issue, the City takes appropriate code enforcement action when necessary. This includes issuing warnings, fines, or other penalties to ensure compliance with the municipal code and maintain a clean and well-managed environment for the community.
F7:
Effective inspection of parklet sanitation can be severely hampered by closed skirting and lack of under floor access. Spacing between planking and lack of solid flooring can lead to accumulation of organic debris and possible infestation by vermin. The City agrees with the finding. Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations: Of the four Grand Jury recommendations, the City of Burlingame has been requested to respond to R4.
Additional Recommendations
4
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
Beginning by no later than December 31, 2024, and at least annually thereafter, each entity will document its organizational risks and address those risks in its annual assessment of internal controls. Response: The recommendation will be implemented by December 31, 2024.
R2:
Authorizes the City Manager to submit the City's response on behalf of the City, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference, to the San Mateo Superior Court. Resolution No. 91-2024 1 of 2
R4:
By June 30, 2025, inspectors for all jurisdictions with restaurants should be empowered to require owners/operators to add receptacles or increase the frequency of pick-ups. Response: By June 30, 2025, the City will consider adopting appropriate policies and/or regulations to empower inspectors and staff members to require owners/operators to add receptacles or increase the frequency of pick-ups. The recommendation has not been implemented but will be considered for implementation in the future with an amendment to Burlingame Municipal Code Section 25.31.130 Trash and Refuse Collection Areas pending further evaluation of feasibility given limited right-of-way in many instances. The Burlingame City Council has approved this response letter at its public meeting on September 3, 2024. Sincerely, Donna Colson Mayor c: Burlingame City Council Lisa K. Goldman, City Manager Syed Murtuza, Director of Public Works
☐ Register online with the City of Burlingame to receive regular City updates at www.burlingame.org/enews.
☐ CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER The Honorable Judge Amarra A. Lee Judge of the Superior Court c/o Bianca Fasuescu Hall of Justice 400 County Center; 2nd Floor Redwood City, CA 94063-1655 September 25, 2024 Dear Honorable Judge Amarra A. Lee: Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Report titled: "Restaurant Exteriors: The Neglected Space" released on July 9, 2024 (“Report”). The City Council of the City of East Palo Alto approved the following response to the Report at its September 17, 2024, meeting. The City of East Palo Alto’s Response to Each Relevant Finding:
R11-65:
allows for enforcement to prevent health and safety nuisances from refuse accumulation. Code Enforcement is empowered to require restaurant owners to add receptacles and increase pick up frequency to rectify the nuisance. This response was approved by the Belmont City Council at a public meeting on September 24, 2024. Sincerely, Afshin Oskoui City Manager www.belmont.gov
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
8 findings
F1:
High green cart enrollment costs and insufficient bin space are the dominant contributors to low participation rates among multi-family dwellings and businesses.
F2:
Green bin contamination among compliant multi-family dwellings and businesses prevents them from diverting more organic waste.
F3:
City, County, and RethinkWaste compliance outreach efforts for multi-family dwellings and businesses could improve because a significant portion of these properties remain non-compliant.
F4:
Multi-family dwellings and businesses produce a significant amount of the County’s organic waste.
F5:
Citizens cannot conveniently access reliable diversion and participation rates because JPAs and cities do not make the information available on their government websites.
F6:
Assessing progress on organic waste diversion in Atherton, Brisbane, Millbrae, Pacifica, San Bruno, South San Francisco, and Woodside is difficult because they and their haulers do not separate waste tons by property type on their annual or quarterly reports.
F7:
An alternate and reliable method to separating waste tons by property type would be analyzing contamination statistics from route audits and waste evaluations.
F8:
Brisbane, South San Francisco, and Millbrae cannot properly track their waste trends since their hauler and contractor have contradictory diversion rate formulas and tonnage measurements.
Additional Recommendations
8
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
Beginning March 1, 2025, cities, the County, and RethinkWaste should host regular in- person green cart enrollment summits for non-compliant businesses and multi-family dwellings, and identify other new compliance strategies.
R2:
Beginning January 1, 2025, Brisbane, South San Francisco, and Millbrae should investigate their Electronic Annual Report contractor’s diversion rate conversion formulas and their hauler’s waste scales. 32 2023-2024 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury
R3:
By July 1, 2025, Brisbane, South San Francisco, and Millbrae should begin using the simpler diversion rate calculation the report mentioned or develop a contingency plan if their hauler’s scales are inaccurate.
R4:
Beginning November 30, 2024, cities should publish quarterly or annual waste reports with diversion and participation rates on their government websites.
R5:
Beginning December 31, 2024, cities should separate waste tons and diversion rates into the three (or two) property types (business, residential, multi-family) in their annual or quarterly reports.
R6:
Starting April 1, 2025, cities that cannot separate waste tons and diversion rates by property type should conduct waste evaluations on highly contaminated routes more often.
R7:
Starting May 1, 2025, cities that cannot separate waste tons and diversion rates by property type should analyze problematic routes’ past and present contamination trends to track their progress.
R8:
By February 1, 2025, jurisdictions should develop and implement new ways to make green bins usable in multi-family dwellings’ and businesses’ narrow or small waste enclosures.