Response says
Partly disagrees; distinguishes qualifying C-25 complaints and cites cross-reporting history.
← Back to this finding in the response audit
Public discussion · Finding DA-F3
Public safety agencies are not following Policy C-25 requirements to cross reporting and/or forward C-25 complaints to HR.
What should residents consider about Finding DA-F3: Public safety agencies are not following Policy C-25 requirements to cross reporting and/or forward C-25 complaints to HR., and the County’s response?
See per-item agency attributionAudit assessment: Addressed
Participate in this discussionAudit context
What the response says and how it was assessed
Audit analysis
Agency Finding 1 quotes jury F3. The complete signed letter identifies protected-status scope and reporting practices, not a general refusal to report all qualifying complaints.
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
Agency Finding 1 quotes jury F3. The complete signed letter identifies protected-status scope and reporting practices, not a general refusal to report all qualifying complaints.
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...