California Civil Grand Jury reports
Alameda County Civil Grand Jury
Read findings and recommendations from Alameda County Civil Grand Jury reports, compare recorded agency responses, and explore the questions they raise.
- Report cycles
- 1 report cycles
- Official reports
- 4 official reports
- Civic questions
- 8 civic questions
Latest cycle
2025–2026 findings and responses
Read the latest published cycle’s findings and recommendations, follow recorded agency responses, and explore public discussion.
Alameda County · 2025–2026
8 civic questions · 4 official reports
Issue area
Preventing dumping and improving disposal access
The jury links persistent dumping to disposal access, education and coordination. Discussion weighs service design and measurable results, not whether agency promises have been independently fulfilled.
2 questions
Issue area
School governance and public accountability
The jury revisits Newark governance, fiscal oversight and public information. The District disputes parts of the account and rejects some proposed measures; discussion should distinguish those positions from established outcomes.
2 questions
Issue area
Emergency readiness and accessible communication
The jury examines how Alameda prepares, informs and learns from emergencies. The supplied response remains an unverified agenda draft, not a final audited position.
2 questions
Issue area
Detention conditions and facility upkeep
Narrative inspections describe generally favorable conditions and remaining infrastructure needs. There are no new numbered findings or recommendations in this chapter.
2 questions
Browse by year
Report cycle archive
Official sources
All reports by year
Open a report overview for its summary, related civic questions, and official PDF.
2025–2026
View cycle2025–2026 report
Illegal Dumping in Oakland: City Buried Under Trash
Examines education, cleanup, enforcement, bulky-waste access, equipment and coordination. The jury issues 24 findings and eight recommendations. Oakland’s joint Administration/Council response agrees with many findings, disputes some characterizations and describes enacted measures, ongoing work and future commitments. Implementation statements remain agency claims. The unchanged annual PDF contains this chapter on physical pages 13–38 (printed pages 12–37).
2025–2026 report
Newark Unified School District Revisited: Unresolved Problems and New Challenges
Examines board conduct, leadership stability, finances, information access, advisory committees and district-office safety. The jury issues 18 findings and 13 recommendations, including a district-viability study. The District accepts several findings, disputes others and declines seven recommendations, while promising evaluations, information reporting and a safety consultation. These positions are attributed, not independently verified. The unchanged annual PDF contains this chapter on physical pages 39–57 (printed pages 38–56).
2025–2026 report
A Call for Readiness: Improving the City of Alameda’s Emergency Preparedness
Examines emergency planning, public education, accessible outreach, tsunami messaging, exercises and after-action reviews. The jury issues 12 findings and nine recommendations. The supplied City response is an agenda-draft DOCX; adoption and transmission are unverified, so it is linked as draft context and excluded from final-response audits. This source gap does not establish nonresponse. The unchanged annual PDF contains this chapter on physical pages 58–74 (printed pages 57–73).
2025–2026 report
Jail and In-Custody Holding Cell Facilities Inspections
Describes inspections of Wiley Manuel Courthouse holding cells, the Juvenile Justice Center, East County Hall of Justice holding cells and Rene C. Davidson Courthouse holding cells. The jury reports favorable conditions overall while identifying aging camera, HVAC and cell-door systems at Davidson. This chapter has narrative observations but no formal numbered findings or recommendations. The unchanged annual PDF contains it on physical pages 75–80 (printed pages 74–79).