My Personal Rebuttal to the Grand Jury Report

My City Council comments during the March 10, 2025 council meeting regarding the Grand Jury Report.

Thank you Mayor.

I feel it is important to address the flawed Grand Jury report that appears to undermine the diligent work we do here in Upland. This report misrepresents both the challenges and the accomplishments of our city, and it contains inaccuracies that cannot go unchallenged.

One of the most glaring areas of concern in the report is its criticism of our Public Works Department and the process for handling street repairs. The Grand Jury seems to suggest that the City is failing in its responsibilities by not responding quickly enough to repair requests, but that narrative is far from the truth.

The reality is that the Public Works Department receives hundreds of requests for street repairs annually. These requests come in daily by phone, through the City's online reporting system, and internally as part of routine street surveys conducted by the City. The report criticizes that the city does not notify the reporting party when the work is completed. However. A factor that the report doesn’t even acknowledge is that many residents who call in or use the app to report a pothole very often place the report anonymously and do not input their name, email, or contact number.

Each work order is carefully prioritized based on several important factors: weather conditions, safety concerns, the time and date the complaint was received, and the nature of the street's condition. Additionally, requests are prioritized based on the volume of complaints received for a particular area, the amount of traffic on the street, and the overall impact to the community. This thoughtful and systematic approach ensures that repairs are made efficiently and in the best interest of the residents.

What’s particularly troubling is that despite receiving hundreds of repair requests annually, the City does its absolute best to ensure that repairs are completed promptly and within a reasonable time frame. Page 16 of the report’s states: "Once a complaint is made, and a repair request is created for a pothole repair, the time frame to repair is approximately 2-3 months. This time frame allows the City to focus on emergencies and weather conditions that impact the street conditions. The pothole repair request is often completed within days or weeks of the initial complaint." Then on page 17 and 18 the reports states: "The City of Upland does its best to complete all requests within 2-3 months and the repairs are often completed within days of the complaint."

The fact that repairs are often completed within days or weeks of the initial complaint is a level of service that should be recognized and appreciated. However, the Grand Jury fails to acknowledge the careful, responsible prioritization process in their report. Instead, they offer a simplistic and paradoxical critique of the city’s repair processes.

Let’s be clear: when the Grand Jury criticizes the City's ability to handle street repairs, they are ignoring the very real and practical constraints that every local government faces. Repairing roads is not a simple matter of snapping fingers and expecting instant results. Municipalities must work within a complex web of competing priorities—emergencies, weather conditions, available manpower, funding, and the volume of complaints.

The Grand Jury also criticizes our training methods for pothole repairs, suggesting classroom or online courses are necessary. This recommendation shows a complete misunderstanding of how public works training functions. Pothole repair is a practical, hands-on skill best learned in the field, not in a classroom. The suggestion that we should require classroom training for a field-based task is not only impractical but also a waste of taxpayer money.

Furthermore, the report criticizes the use of cold mix asphalt, which is a temporary solution used in emergency repairs or during the winter months when hot mix is unavailable. This is common knowledge in road maintenance and is used by cities across the country. But the Grand Jury frames it as a failure, showing a lack of understanding about how and why cold mix is used. Permanent repairs require ideal conditions, proper funding, and long-term planning—all of which Upland works toward, but must do so within the constraints of available resources.

This report does not serve the residents of Upland. It doesn’t provide an accurate assessment, actionable recommendations, or an honest reflection of the work we’ve done.

I stand by the work that we are doing here in Upland. We have made great strides in addressing the needs of our community, improving our infrastructure, and providing quality services to our residents. But when an official body like the Grand Jury issues a report that fails to do its homework and misrepresents the facts, it’s not only frustrating—it’s harmful.

We should not allow this report to dictate the narrative about our city. Upland deserves better.