Response says
Partly agrees; describes historical burial records, a new map and claimed marker installation.
What should residents consider about Finding F4: Physical section markers, row markers, and posted maps at the SMC are nonexistent, resulting in difficulty identifying the location of plots., and the County’s response?
Audit context
Response says
Partly agrees; describes historical burial records, a new map and claimed marker installation.
Audit analysis
Agency Finding 1 describes a poster-board map, spreadsheet and markers reportedly installed July 3, plus a proposed kiosk and database reconciliation. Existing records do not clearly rebut the jury’s finding about absent physical wayfinding. The disputed portion remains incomplete; claimed installation and future-work language also overlap.
Finding-response score
Document completeness and usefulness—not factual verification or a legal conclusion.
3/4
Statutory elements
6/6
Public usefulness
Agency Finding 1 describes a poster-board map, spreadsheet and markers reportedly installed July 3, plus a proposed kiosk and database reconciliation. Existing records do not clearly rebut the jury’s finding about absent physical wayfinding. The disputed portion remains incomplete; claimed installation and future-work language also overlap.
Scoring confidence: medium
Source pages
Public participation
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.