Response says
Partly agrees about historical information access and describes the new website.
What should residents consider about Finding F5: The SMCD did not have a website with pertinent district information at the time of our investigation. As of February 2026, a website has been established with pertinent SMCD information, which the Grand Jury commends., and the County’s response?
Audit context
Response says
Partly agrees about historical information access and describes the new website.
Audit analysis
Agency Finding 2 uniquely supplies the website subject rather than matching the jury’s number. It identifies historical in-person access and a current site with documents, maps and contact details, but does not explain what part of the jury’s past-lack/current-improvement finding is disputed.
Finding-response score
Document completeness and usefulness—not factual verification or a legal conclusion.
3/4
Statutory elements
6/6
Public usefulness
Agency Finding 2 uniquely supplies the website subject rather than matching the jury’s number. It identifies historical in-person access and a current site with documents, maps and contact details, but does not explain what part of the jury’s past-lack/current-improvement finding is disputed.
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.