County of Yuba, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

MARYSVILLE, CA (MPG) - In its formal response to the 2024–2025 Grand Jury Report, the Yuba County Board of Supervisors on Sept. 9 acknowledged the need for expanded mental health crisis services and committed to a series of action plans aimed at improving mobile crisis response, law enforcement coordination and behavioral health training.  

The Grand Jury’s report, titled “Is Mental Illness a Crime? Law Enforcement and Behavioral Health Response in Yuba County,” which was released earlier this summer, found the county lacked a fully operational mobile crisis team available 24/7 to respond to mental health emergencies outside of business hours.

The board’s response, prepared by County Administrator Kevin Mallen and signed by Chair Gary Bradford, agreed with the findings and committed several specific actions. 

The board stated Yuba County Behavioral Health will explore funding options to expand mobile crisis coverage beyond standard business hours. The board also pledged to improve coordination between departments, noting that Yuba County Behavioral Health will work with law enforcement agencies to develop joint response protocols. These protocols are intended to reduce reliance on law enforcement as the primary responder to mental health calls and ensure that individuals in crisis receive appropriate clinical support, officials said. 

Additionally, the board committed to increasing training for law enforcement personnel. According to the response, additional Crisis Intervention Training sessions will be scheduled for sheriff’s deputies and dispatch personnel in 2026, after the grand jury emphasized that without adequate mobile crisis coverage, individuals experiencing mental health emergencies may be unnecessarily detained or criminalized. The board acknowledged this concern and stated that it would prioritize behavioral health response in future budget planning. While the board did not commit to a fully staffed 24/7 mobile crisis unit, it expressed willingness to expand services contingent on available funding and staffing resources.

“Yuba County Behavioral Health will continue to explore funding options to expand mobile crisis coverage beyond standard business hours,” the response states. 

The 2024/25 grand jury report also addressed several other areas of county operations, including significant issues within the county’s 10 community cemetery districts, citing deteriorating conditions, fragmented governance and incomplete or poorly stored burial records - some kept in barns or private homes. The report also noted a lack of public awareness regarding the tax-funded nature of these districts and recommended forming an ad hoc committee to improve coordination, transparency and record management.

The grand jury recommended improved communication between agencies, formal agreements for recordkeeping, public outreach and stronger recruitment efforts. In response, the board acknowledged that CCDs operate independently and are not under its jurisdiction. For most recommendations, including those related to resolutions, interagency communication, data management, public visibility and service enhancements, the Board stated that further analysis is needed. To that end, the board, at its Sept. 9 meeting, approved the formation of an ad hoc committee composed of Bradford, Supervisor Andy Vasquez Jr. and Auditor-Controller Richard Eberle to lead reform efforts and strengthen accountability across the cemetery districts.

Two recommendations were accepted. The Board confirmed that CCDs already have access to statewide resources and that county staff are available to assist with administrative questions. The board also committed to improving recruitment by posting announcements and information on a dedicated CCD webpage.

One recommendation, regarding the adoption of a new Sphere of Influence resolution, was rejected, as that authority lies with Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) - not the Yuba County Board of Supervisors, the response states. 

Overall, the Board expressed a willingness to collaborate within legal boundaries, while reaffirming the autonomy of CCDs and the importance of further study before implementing changes.