Response says
Disagrees wholly that required disciplinary reporting is omitted.
← Back to this finding in the response audit
Public discussion · Finding SHERIFF-F4
Public safety agencies are not following the Policy C-25 requirement to report disciplinary action related to C-25 complaints to HR.
What should residents consider about Finding SHERIFF-F4: Public safety agencies are not following the Policy C-25 requirement to report disciplinary action related to 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
Pages 2–3 describe notification and coordination when C-25 reporting duties are triggered, while distinguishing disciplinary action from proof of a policy violation.
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
Pages 2–3 describe notification and coordination when C-25 reporting duties are triggered, while distinguishing disciplinary action from proof of a policy violation.
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...