Response says
Acknowledges an outdated allocation plan and possible overallocation, describing a new consultant plan, direct legal billing and expanded time tracking.
← Back to this finding in the response audit
Public discussion · Finding F1
The Grand Jury estimated that the City’s failure to update its Cost Allocation Plan for more than 20 years resulted in the City overallocating approximately $5.5 Million of indirect costs to the Enterprise Funds. This was non-compliant with Proposition 218 and left the Enterprise Funds without sufficient money for maintenance and capital improvements.
What should residents consider about Finding F1: The Grand Jury estimated that the City’s failure to update its Cost Allocation Plan for more than 20 years resulted in the City overallocating approximately $5.5 Million of indirect costs to the Enterprise Funds. This was non-compliant with Proposition 218 and left the Enterprise Funds without sufficient money for maintenance and capital improvements., and the County’s response?
Sebastopol City CouncilResponse dated 2026-07-22Audit assessment: Partially addressed
Participate in this discussionAudit context
What the response says and how it was assessed
Audit analysis
Expresses partial agreement, but does not clearly resolve the disputed $5.5 million estimate, Proposition 218 conclusion and funding effect. Identifies ClearSource and planned FY 2027/28 work as concrete bases; R2 on page 5 says no specific historical amount has been determined.
Finding-response score
Document completeness and usefulness—not factual verification or a legal conclusion.
3/4
Statutory elements
- Stated position
- 2/2
- Applicable disagreement elements
- 1/2
5/6
Public usefulness
- Coverage
- 1/2
- Reason specificity
- 2/2
- Support traceability
- 2/2
Expresses partial agreement, but does not clearly resolve the disputed $5.5 million estimate, Proposition 218 conclusion and funding effect. Identifies ClearSource and planned FY 2027/28 work as concrete bases; R2 on page 5 says no specific historical amount has been determined.
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...