Response says
The Manager partially disagrees, acknowledges no standalone plan, describes existing condition-based project planning and says a broader CIP process is being developed.
← Back to this finding in the response audit
Public discussion · Finding MANAGER-F1
The City of Marysville’s street maintenance program lacks a clearly documented long-term pavement management plan that prioritizes repairs based on pavement condition data and transportation needs.
What should residents consider about Finding MANAGER-F1: The City of Marysville’s street maintenance program lacks a clearly documented long-term pavement management plan that prioritizes repairs based on pavement condition data and transportation needs., and the County’s response?
Marysville City Council and Marysville City ManagerResponse dated 2026-08-20Audit assessment: Addressed
Participate in this discussionAudit context
What the response says and how it was assessed
Audit analysis
The future CIP scope and timeline depend on resources and Council direction. No December 31 adoption commitment is stated.
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
5/6
Public usefulness
- Coverage
- 2/2
- Reason specificity
- 2/2
- Support traceability
- 1/2
Partial disagreement separates standalone documentation from active planning and explains specific inputs. The CIP and investment assertions lack an identified supporting record on this page.
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...