Most public agencies in Marin fail to provide adequate websites, and 20 entities overseen by county officials do not maintain a website at all, according to a public information “transparency” probe by the Marin County Civil Grand Jury.
The jury audited 126 agencies, special districts and joint powers authorities and found “serious deficiencies” in the quantity and quality of online information provided — if at all.
Some 27 agencies lacked websites, and of 99 agencies with sites, 65 did not satisfy the grand jury’s website transparency criteria. Of those with sites, “a majority of the agencies were out of compliance” with state codes requiring the posting of annual pay for officials and employees, the jury reported.
A half-dozen agencies including the Novato Fire Protection District got top website scores from the grand jury. “It’s about content, and ease of use, not flashy appearance,” Novato Fire Chief Mark Heine said. “Since I became fire chief two years ago, we’ve had a strong commitment to transparency and public information, and I think the jury recognized that.”
About half the agencies contacted in advance by the jury improved their sites as a result, but even then, only 34 agencies received what the jury regarded as an adequate “B-” or better grade. The county government at the Civic Center got a “C-.” Sixty-four Marin agencies and entities were deemed public information web failures with an “F.”
“Increasing transparency ... makes it easier to understand where tax dollars go,” the jury said. “Residents should be able to easily find the description of services provided, the names and contact information of board members and management, the budget, agendas and minutes of meetings, and other information” including employee pay, the jury said in its “Web Transparency Report Card: Bringing Marin County’s Local Government to Light.”
Jurors awarded a top “A+” website information grade to six agencies. The top scores went to Corte Madera and Sausalito as well as the Novato Fire Protection District, the Novato Sanitary District, Marin/Sonoma Mosquito and Vector Control District and the Bolinas Community Public Utility District.
“We try to get out as much information as we can,” said Sandeep Karkal, general manager of the Novato Sanitary District. The district site is informative but “not glitzy or glamorous,” he said.
Grades of “A-” were given to Larkspur, Mill Valley and Tiburon. San Rafael got a “B” and Ross got a “C” while other cities scored “B-.”
Other “A-” grades went to the Novato Unified School District, Las Gallinas Valley Sanitary District, Marin Resource Conservation District, Sausalito-Marin City Sanitary District and Tamalpais Community Services District.
64 AGENCIES FLUNK
The list of 64 agencies flunked by the jury was dominated by neighborhood service areas, small school and joint power authorities and financing entities — but also included larger agencies such as the San Rafael city schools, where top officials were unavailable for comment Friday.
Other “F” grades went to Reed Union School District, Shoreline Unified School District, the county Open Space District, the Marin Major Crimes Task Force and the county Flood Control and Water Conservation District.
County administrators said the jury erred in putting the county fire department on the failure list, noting it is not a special district. In any event, “We will continue to cooperate and collaborate with the grand jury on the recommendations and are looking at improvements from the standpoint of county government as a whole,” county Fire Chief Jason Weber said.
Agencies with poor scores included Tamalpais High School District, “D-”; Marin County Healthcare District, “D-”; Ross School District, “D-”; Marin Community College District, “C-”; Kentfield School District, “C-”; Central Marin Police Authority, “C-”; Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit “C-” and Marin Clean Energy, “C-”. The jury asked all agencies to improve their scores to a “B-” or better.
Checklist criteria on which websites were graded included information about mission statements, budgets, board meetings, elected and appointed officials, administrators, audits, contracts and other public records, as well as agency-specific criteria that varied depending on the type of agency or district.
PANEL SCRAMBLES
The jury’s web test ran into an early hurdle: “There was no single comprehensive list of agencies in Marin County,” with a welter of organization lists jurors called “inconsistent, incomplete and or out of date.” The list the jury eventually developed was incomplete as well, as it overlooked two high-profile, big budget agencies — the Transportation Authority of Marin and the Marin County Office of Education. The jury did note that regional agencies such as the Golden Gate Bridge district were intentionally excluded.
The jury said that even small districts can create a handy website at minimal cost with easily available software tools that allow a “non-tech savvy person to manage website content easily.” It listed several website vendors and price ranges.
The jury found that county officials oversee 28 special districts and four joint powers agencies, including 20 that do not have websites. The county told the jury that while it will improve some website listings, “providing and maintaining duplicative information regarding each district, special district, community service area, flood control zone, permanent road division, joint powers agreement ... does not appear the best way to provide straightforward information to our residents.”
Many of these are “best described as financing mechanisms rather than agencies,” the county added.
“We disagree with the county’s approach,” the jury said. “It is unreasonable to ask citizens to become experts in sleuthing to find information.”
The panel suggested a web page for each small district, financial authority or joint powers entity that describes its role and provides links to information found elsewhere on the county website.
COUNTY REACTION
Common website deficiencies, the jury said, include failure to enable text searches of budget and audit documents, dated meeting schedules and archives, incomplete board member data, failure to list actual pay figures, failure to display vendor contracts, and failure to explain how to get more information.
Supervisor Steve Kinsey, president of the county board, credited the jury for its “interest in better Internet access to governmental information,” and added he especially appreciated the self-audit checklist the panel developed.
“Our views diverge at the fine-grained level they recommend for individual financial structures like community service areas or road improvement districts,” he said. “If constituents have questions that reach that depth, a single call to their district supervisor can connect them with appropriate staff to help.”
“We certainly share the grand jury’s goal of transparency,” said Assistant County Administrator Daniel Eilerman. “Last year, for example, we launched marincountyca.opengov.com to provide our residents access to our spending information on a 24/7 basis.”
Eilerman said some jury recommendations already have been put to work. The Department of Finance is developing a single website with summary descriptions that will link to special district budget information, he added.
March 27, 2016
Marin Independent Journal
By Nels Johnson
No comments:
Post a Comment