Response says
The county wholly disagrees, saying reports would not create additional resources and additional road funding would require cuts elsewhere.
← Back to this finding in the response audit
Public discussion · Finding F6
Management information
What should residents consider about Finding F6: Management information, and the County’s response?
Amador County Board of Supervisors, County Administrative Officer, and Public Works DirectorResponse dated 2025-10-07Audit assessment: Addressed
Participate in this discussionAudit context
What the response says and how it was assessed
Audit analysis
The response clearly identifies whole disagreement and gives its resource-based reason. It does not fully engage the separate value of information for staffing and prioritization decisions. The item identifies no supporting record and ends with an unfinished sentence.
Finding-response score
Document completeness and usefulness—not factual verification or a legal conclusion.
4/4
Statutory elements
- Stated position
- 2/2
- Applicable disagreement elements
- 2/2
3/6
Public usefulness
- Coverage
- 1/2
- Reason specificity
- 1/2
- Support traceability
- 1/2
The response clearly identifies whole disagreement and gives its resource-based reason. It does not fully engage the separate value of information for staffing and prioritization decisions. The item identifies no supporting record and ends with an unfinished sentence.
Scoring confidence: high
Source pages
Review the underlying documents
Public participation
Discuss the finding and response
Use Pol.is to discuss both the Grand Jury finding and the County’s response, see where participants agree, and add a perspective for others to consider. Participant statements do not alter this audit or verify factual claims made by any participant or source document.
Loading the Pol.is conversation...