Response says
Partly agrees and partly disagrees, distinguishes Behavioral Health’s assessment role from armed law enforcement, and describes referral procedures under the Mobile Crisis Response MOU.
← Back to this finding in the response audit
Public discussion · Finding F3-BOS
Coordination and safe handling
What should residents consider about Finding F3-BOS: Coordination and safe handling, and the County’s response?
Mono County Sheriff; Mono County Behavioral Health Director; Mono County Board of Supervisors; Mammoth HospitalAudit assessment: Addressed
Participate in this discussionAudit context
What the response says and how it was assessed
Audit analysis
Identifies both the accepted privacy concern and the disputed inference about mishandling; the described agreement is a checkable basis, not independently verified performance.
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
6/6
Public usefulness
- Coverage
- 2/2
- Reason specificity
- 2/2
- Support traceability
- 2/2
Clearly maps agreement and disagreement, explains agency roles and referral steps, and identifies the Mobile Crisis Response MOU as support.
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...