File #: WRAG 16-045    Name: Civil Grand Jury Response - WRA
Type: WR General Agenda Status: Approved
File created: 8/22/2016 In control: Board of Supervisors of the Monterey County Water Resources Agency
On agenda: 8/30/2016 Final action: 8/30/2016
Title: Consider approving the Monterey County Water Resources Agency's response to the Monterey County Civil Grand Jury 2016 Report, "Striving for Sustainability".
Attachments: 1. Board Report, 2. Civil Grand Jury Response Packet, 3. MCWRA Board Order, 4. Completed Board Order
Title
Consider approving the Monterey County Water Resources Agency's response to the Monterey County Civil Grand Jury 2016 Report, "Striving for Sustainability".
Report
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Monterey County Water Resources Agency Board of Supervisors:

Approve the Monterey County Water Resources Agency's response to the Monterey County Civil Grand Jury 2016 Report, "Striving for Sustainability."

SUMMARY:

The Monterey County Civil Grand Jury (MCCGJ) has completed its 2016 report titled, "Striving for Sustainability", as notified by letter on June 15, 2016. This report constitutes a Final Report for purposes of Penal Code Section 933. Pursuant to Section 933, the Monterey County Water Resources Agency (Agency) along with other required/recommended responders, must submit comments on the report to the Honorable, Mark E. Hood, Presiding Judge of the Superior Court, within 90 days.

DISCUSSION:

The Agency is responsible for Findings Nos. F1-F16, and Recommendation Nos. R1-R5. With respect to each finding, the Agency shall indicate one of the following:

1) Agree with the finding; or
2) Disagree wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the Agency must specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include in the response an explanation of the reasons for the disagreement.

For each recommendation, the Agency must report one of the following actions:
1) Recommendation has been implemented, with a summary of the implemented action,
2) Recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be in the future (and include a time frame for implementation),
3) Recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, including a timeframe for the matter to be discussed by the Agency (time frame not to exceed six months from publication date of MCCGJ Report, and
4) Recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an expla...

Click here for full text