Response says
SacRT partially agrees and acknowledges that disabled mystery riders have not yet been assigned to its evaluations.
← Back to this finding in the response audit
Public discussion · Finding F4-board
The Grand Jury finds “mystery riders” assessing the District’s paratransit service are not required to be riders with a disability, reducing the accuracy of reporting on the paratransit experience for riders with disabilities
What should residents consider about Finding F4-board: The Grand Jury finds “mystery riders” assessing the District’s paratransit service are not required to be riders with a disability, reducing the accuracy of reporting on the paratransit experience for riders with disabilities, and the County’s response?
Sacramento Regional Transit District Board of Directors; William Charles Johnson, MAC Chair (personal views)Audit assessment: Addressed
Participate in this discussionAudit context
What the response says and how it was assessed
Audit analysis
The response clearly describes existing contractor hiring and the assignment gap. It identifies the relevant distinction and requested future inclusion.
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
The response clearly describes existing contractor hiring and the assignment gap. It identifies the relevant distinction and requested future inclusion.
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...