BART Watchdog Still Lacks Power, Contra Costa Grand Jury Says

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CA — BART needs a stronger watchdog that will push the agency to resolve a list of problems found by Contra Costa County civil grand jurors.

Jurors found unresolved disputes, missing policies, and delayed action have weakened the inspector general’s ability to investigate fraud, waste, abuse, and retaliation.

The 2025-26 Contra Costa County Civil Grand Jury report, titled “BART Office of Inspector General: Independence Delayed Is Independence Denied,” said BART’s Office of Inspector General still lacks a formal charter nearly six years after Bay Area voters approved its creation through Regional Measure 3.

Grand jurors said that gap has left the office without clear written authority over its independence, access to records, access to employees, and ability to determine whether BART management properly responds to watchdog recommendations.

“The Grand Jury examined the history of the OIG, its work, and the proposals and discussions regarding an OIG charter,” jurors said in the report released in May.

“Our findings highlight a lack of written clarity regarding the OIG’s independence, scope and exercise of authority, and access to information.”

The report says BART’s inspector general presented draft charters in 2021 and 2024, but the BART Board of Directors did not adopt either version. Union concerns over advance notice before employee interviews helped stall the process, according to the report.

Grand jurors said BART’s board asked the inspector general to work directly with unions on the issue, even though the report says the board, not the watchdog office, holds responsibility for negotiating with labor groups.

The report also describes a recent dispute that halted a retaliation investigation for several months. According to the grand jury, a BART executive questioned whether the inspector general could investigate executive leadership or conduct a retaliation inquiry without approval.

BART’s general counsel later told the board’s Audit Committee that the inspector general had authority to conduct retaliation investigations and interview executive leadership, the report says. However, the general counsel also said the office did not currently have authority to compel an employee to attend an interview.

Grand jurors contrasted the inspector general’s lack of written authority with BART’s Internal Audit office, which has a formal charter granting access to records, data, and personnel.

The report issued 21 findings and eight recommendations. It urged BART’s board to consider adopting written policies by Dec. 31, 2026, that would give the inspector general unrestricted access to data, records, information, physical property, and personnel needed to do the job.

The grand jury also recommended that BART revise its employee code of conduct to require officers and employees to cooperate with inspector general audits and investigations. It recommended that the board consider incorporating that code of conduct into future collective bargaining agreements.

Other recommendations call on BART to affirm the inspector general’s authority to interview any employee or officer, including executive leadership, without prior approval, and to begin adopting a formal charter for the office.

The BART Board of Directors must respond to all 21 findings and all eight recommendations.

BART did not respond immediately to a request for comment.