DATE:
September 8, 2026
CATEGORY:
Consent
DEPT.:
City Attorney’s Office
TITLE: Response to Santa Clara County Civil
Grand Jury Report—Improving Pothole
Claims Process
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the City’s response to the 2026 Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury Report, Pothole Damage: Improving claims processes within Santa Clara County (Attachment 1 to the Council report).
BACKGROUND
The City received a copy of Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury’s final report, entitled “ Pothole Damage: Improving claims processes within Santa Clara County” on June 12, 2026 (hereinafter referred to as the “Civil Grand Jury Report” or the “Report”).
California Penal Code Section 933(c) requires that the governing body of a public agency which has been the subject of a Civil Grand Jury final report respond within 90 days to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the report’s findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body. The deadline for the City to submit its response to the above-referenced report is September 10, 2026.
The Civil Grand Jury Report focuses governmental tort claims for damages related to potholes that were filed with the 15 cities and towns in Santa Clara County and the County of Santa Clara.
The Grand Jury analyzed pothole damage claims filed in each of these jurisdictions between 2020 and 2025. The report indicates the local government agencies rejected 92% of these claims. The Grand Jury concluded it can be confusing for a claimant to determine the jurisdiction responsible for the roadway where the pothole is located. As a result, it is difficult for claimants to determine where a claim should be filed. The Grand Jury also reviewed the correspondence sent by the local government agencies regarding the claims process. The Report makes recommendations regarding the rejection notices sent by agencies.
In addition, the Grand Jury examined the websites of each of the local government agencies with respect to the claim filing process. The Grand Jury made several recommendations to improve the claims process for claimants, such as providing information to assist claimants in determining
Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury Report Response—Pothole Claims September 8, 2026
the proper jurisdiction for filing the claim, making claims forms easier to find and providing clearer instructions for filing claims.
The Grand Jury recommended the public agencies incorporate useable software on their websites to translate claim forms into multiple languages or provide claim forms in multiple languages based on the demographics served by the agency.
ANALYSIS
The City is required to respond to each of the Grand Jury’s findings and indicate whether the City agrees with the finding or disagrees, in whole or in part, with the finding, specifying any disputed portion and providing an explanation. The City must also respond to the recommendations by selecting and reporting one of the following four responses: (i) the recommendation has been implemented, with a summary of the implementation action; (ii) the recommendation will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; (iii) the recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation of the scope and time frame; or (iv) the recommendation will not be implemented because it is unwarranted or unreasonable, with an explanation.
Jurisdiction over roadways can be confusing. Several state and county roadways run through the City of Mountain View, such as U.S. 101, Highway 237 and State Route 82, known as El Camino Real. The majority of the recommendations of the Grand Jury can be implemented and will provide more information to claimants. It may also reduce the staff time necessary to investigate and process these claims. Accordingly, Table 1 provides a summary of the proposed responses which are found in Attachment 2 to the Council report.
Table 1: Summary of City Responses
to Civil Grand Jury Findings and Recommendations
Finding/
Recommendation Summary
City
Response
Response
Summary
Finding 1.
Jurisdictions within Santa
Clara County rejected 92% of
pothole claims from 2020 to
2025 due to reasons
including missed deadlines,
incorrect jurisdiction, and
lack of prior notice.
Agree. Acknowledges the City of
Mountain View rejected
some claims on this basis.
Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury Report Response—Pothole Claims September 8, 2026
Finding/
Recommendation Summary
City
Response
Response
Summary
Finding 2.
Claims are often rejected
because the claimant filed
with the incorrect
jurisdiction, which can
happen because
jurisdictional lines are often
unclear or poorly
communicated. The claims
websites of all jurisdictions
within Santa Clara County
lack information about how
to determine if a road is in
its jurisdiction.
Agree. The City of Mountain View
agrees the website could
provide additional
information about how to
determine if a road is owned
and maintained by the City
of Mountain View.
Recommendation 2a.
All jurisdictions within Santa
Clara County should include
a link to a map or list or
roads they maintain on their
claims website.
This recommendation will be
implemented by December
15, 2026
Interactive map to be added
to the City’s website to
provide information
regarding ownership and
maintenance of roads.
Recommendation 2b.
All jurisdictions within Santa
Clara County should update
their claims websites to
identify roads that are
commonly mistaken as being
in their jurisdictions.
This recommendation will be
implemented by December
15, 2026.
Interactive map to be added
to website to provide
information regarding
ownership and maintenance
of roads.
Finding 3.
Fifteen jurisdictions – the
County, Campbell,
Cupertino, Gilroy, Los Altos,
Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos,
Milpitas, Monte Sereno,
Morgan Hill, Mountain View,
Palo Alto, San Jose, Santa
Clara, and Saratoga – have
websites with deficiencies
Agree. The City is updating its
website to provide more
information about the claims
process to make it easier to
file a claim.
Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury Report Response—Pothole Claims September 8, 2026
Finding/
Recommendation Summary
City
Response
Response
Summary
that make it difficult to file a
claim.
Recommendation 3a.
Eleven jurisdictions – the
County, Campbell,
Cupertino, Los Altos, Los
Altos Hills, Milpitas, Monte
Sereno, Morgan Hill,
Mountain View, San Jose,
and Saratoga – should
update their website to
provide clear instructions
and information about how
to file a claim in addition to
a link to the claim form.
This recommendation has
not yet been implemented
but will be implemented by
December 15, 2026.
The City is updating its
website to provide more
information about the claims
process and make it easier
to file a claim and a link to a
claim form.
Recommendation 3b.
Fourteen jurisdictions – the
County, Campbell,
Cupertino, Gilroy, Los Altos,
Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos,
Milpitas, Monte Sereno,
Morgan Hill, Mountain View,
Palo Alto, San Jose, and
Santa Clara should
incorporate useable
software on their websites
that can translate claim
forms into multiple
languages or provide claim
forms in multiple languages
based on the demographics
they serve.
This recommendation
requires further analysis.
The claims form is a legal
document. In order to
translate this form would
require the translation to
meet legal standards. To
respond to this
recommendation, the City is
updating its website to
provide instructions regarding
the claims process and
guidance regarding the claim
form in multiple languages
based on the demographics it
serves. This update will be
implemented by December
15, 2026.
Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury Report Response—Pothole Claims September 8, 2026
Finding/
Recommendation Summary
City
Response
Response
Summary
Finding 4.
When pothole claims are
rejected, claimants filing
claims against the County,
Los Altos, Los Gatos,
Mountain View, Palo Alto
and San Jose receive a
notice that provides little or
sometimes no explanation
for the rejection. Although
jurisdictions within Santa
Clara County are not legally
obligated to provide a
reason for rejection, the lack
of clarity in the decisions
made on the claims can add
to a claimant’s frustration.
Agrees partially with this
finding.
Rejection notices for pothole
claims will include
Information regarding basis
of the rejection.
Recommendation 4.
The County, Los Altos, Los
Gatos, Mountain View, Palo
Alto, and San Jose should
update their rejection letters
to specify whether the
decision was due to lack of
timeliness, incorrect
jurisdiction, lack of prior
notice, or other reason and
to provide a specific contact
to call or email if the
claimant has further
questions about the reason
for the rejection.
This recommendation has
been implemented.
Rejection letters now
include information
explaining why claim was
rejected and contact
information for further
questions about the claim.
Upon approval by Council, the City’s detailed response will be transmitted to the Presiding Judge on or before September 10, 2026.
Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury Report Response—Pothole Claims September 8, 2026
FISCAL IMPACT
Council’s approval of the City’s response to the Civil Grand Jury report will have no fiscal impact.
LEVINE ACT
California Government Code Section 84308 (also known as the Levine Act) prohibits city officials from participating in any proceeding involving a “license, permit, or other entitlement for use” if the official has received a campaign contribution exceeding $500 from a party, participant, or agent of a party or participant within the last 12 months. The Levine Act is intended to prevent financial influence on decisions that affect specific, identifiable persons or participants. For more information see the Fair Political Practices Commission website: www.fppc.ca.gov/learn/pay-to- play-limits-and-prohibitions.html
Please see below for information about whether the recommended action for this agenda item is subject to or exempt from the Levine Act.
EXEMPT FROM THE LEVINE ACT
☒ General policy and legislative actions
CONCLUSION
Jurisdiction over roadways can be confusing. The recommendations of the Grand Jury can be implemented and will provide more information to claimants. It may also reduce the staff time necessary to investigate and process these claims.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Provide other input regarding the City’s response to the Report’s findings and recommendations.
2. Do not approve City’s response to the Report’s finding and recommendations.
3. Provide other direction.
Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury Report Response—Pothole Claims September 8, 2026
PUBLIC NOTICING
Agenda posting.
Prepared by:
Jannie L. Quinn
Interim City Attorney
Approved by:
Kimbra McCarthy
City Manager
33958v1
Attachments: 1. Response to Civil Grand Jury Report
2. Civil Grand Jury Report