Marin watchdog faults report subjects for noncompliance

The latest review by Marin County Civil Grand Jury follows up on whether agencies have followed its recommendations from previous reports.

The Marin County Civil Grand Jury is taking some agencies to task for failing to follow its recommendations.

The investigative panel’s new report — titled “What Have They Done? An Update on the Responses to the 2022-2023 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Reports” — evaluates six of the eight reports it issued that session. It identifies failures to implement key recommendations contained in three of the reports.

One such report was titled “Justice Delayed Is Justice Denied — Marin District Attorney’s Office in Crisis.” In it, the grand jury blamed the prosecution office for a substantial backlog of criminal cases in the county.

The investigation recommended that by Nov. 1, 2023, the District Attorney’s Office begin providing quarterly reports to county supervisors and the county executive on its progress in reducing the backlog.

In its new report, the grand jury writes, “The county and the District Attorney’s Office have been negotiating about the content of the quarterly report, but no agreement has been reached. As a result, the District Attorney has not provided the Board of Supervisors and the County Executive’s office with a quarterly report detailing the progress being made to reduce the backlog of criminal cases. Discussions are ongoing.”

The initial report also recommended that county supervisors hire an independent consultant no later than Nov. 1 to analyze the operations of the District Attorney’s Office and formulate solutions.

According to the new evaluation, the county has allocated $500,000 to hire an outside consulting firm to perform a comprehensive organizational and operational analysis of the prosecution office. The terms of the contract are expected to be finalized, and work on the contract to commence in the next few months.

In an email, District Attorney Lori Frugoli wrote, “We have been meeting with the County Executive’s office and providing periodic updates on our progress, including the jury trial settings. Through this collaboration, an auditor was selected to analyze this office later this year. We expect the auditor’s report to be comprehensive and go well beyond the jury trial data that the civil grand jury focused their attention upon.”

Frugoli said her office had made some recent hires.

“Despite this progress, the truth is that the District Attorney’s Office continues to be seriously understaffed and the increasing workload is still a major challenge,” she wrote.

Dan Eilerman, the county’s interim county executive, wrote in an email, “We will carefully consider the recent grand jury report and will bring recommended responses to the board later this spring.”

In another report issued last year — titled “The Coming Wave of Older Adults — Is Marin Prepared?” — the grand jury examined whether Marin County Aging and Adult Services (AAS) is properly staffed and organized.

The report noted that even though 33% of Marin’s population is over the age of 60, the AAS budget constituted just 2.3% of the $236 million Department of Health and Human Services budget in the previous fiscal year. One of the report’s key commendations was for the county to elevate the office on aging to a division level within the Department of Health and Human Services.

The same recommendation was made by Githens & Associates, a consultant the county paid $125,000 to produce an integrated aging services study. The results of the study were presented to county supervisors in February 2023.

In its new evaluation, the grand jury writes that “the county and the Commission on Aging are in stark disagreement about implementation of all of the prior grand jury recommendations, including the future status of Aging and Adult Services.”

According to the new grand jury review, county supervisors have decided not to elevate the AAS because doing so “would create a scenario where social services dollars could no longer support existing staffing costs.” The county maintains the move would result in increased annual costs of $700,000 to $1 million.

The county’s Commission on Aging asserts that the county has not thoroughly explained the cost analysis.

In an email, Lisa Warhuus, the new director of the Department of Health and Human Services, wrote, “HHS has provided information about the associated costs to stakeholders, most recently to the Commission on Aging at their meeting of March 29th.”

Lee Notowich, who heads the commission, said, “We had a meeting a couple of weeks ago, but it really didn’t address this question. A new director of HHS is now in place and there is still no conversation despite requests by the Commission on Aging and other community partners.”

In another report last year, the grand jury called for action to address Novato’s chronic fiscal deficits. According to the new evaluation, the city has decided not to implement two of panel’s recommendations.

The Novato City Council has said it will not implement a suggestion to create and fund a new position of independent internal auditor with the authority to investigate and report on city operations.

“Creation of an internal independent auditor position is costly and not fiscally responsible as it would add ongoing expense to the city’s already strained operating budget,” Novato’s interim city manager, Amy Cunningham, wrote in an email. “We know of no other Marin County city, or city of a similar size to Novato, that employs an internal auditor.”

The City Council also rejected a recommendation that the Novato’s Finance Advisory Commission (FAC) issue quarterly financial reports on the city’s financial condition and require that the reports be discussed at council meetings. The council said the commission’s role is to review financial information, not prepare it.

“However,” Cunningham wrote, “beginning in October 2022 — prior to the grand jury’s investigation and report — the recommended quarterly reports have been prepared by Finance staff, and reviewed at public meetings by the FAC and the city council.”

“We are actively seeking to bring Novato’s sales tax rate in line with neighboring communities to increase locally controlled revenues, as the grand jury recommended,” Cunningham added. “This will require approval by local voters.”