Amador County Grand Jury
2007-2008
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
4 findings
F1:
The existing County jail provides an overcrowded work/control area that is unsafe for correctional officers.
F2:
The jail population is well beyond what was established when it was built.
F3:
With a growing population in the County, overcrowding and security will cause additional strain on the jail system.
F4:
An increase in the number of correctional officers is needed to meet the requirements of current jail population.
Findings and recommendations not yet extracted.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
5 findings
F1:
All precincts observed (5) followed procedures required and as reviewed in training sessions with the following exceptions: one precinct handed the confidentiality cover for ballots to voters separately from the ballots without explaining the purpose, which was confusing to some voters.
F2:
Two precincts failed to post a Precinct Index at entrance to poll as required.
F3:
All machines were checked for accuracy and in working condition prior to being delivered to polls.
F4:
In all, all activity at Elections office and at precincts went very smooth. The many steps set up to insure an uncompromised election provided just that and were well thought out and implemented.
F5:
There is a well-experienced and conscientious staff working on behalf of our County elections.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
8 findings
F1:
The 2003/2004 Grand Jury Report, including its findings and recommendations, were not responded to by the Board of Supervisors or any other entity of the County, as required by California Penal Code Section 933.05.
F2:
The Begovich Building is too small for the Court’s current and future needs.
F3:
It would be more advantageous to relocate the Courthouse centrally, in proximity to the County Detention Facility and District Attorney’s offices.
F4:
Due to the close proximity of the Courthouse to approximately 500 minor children, the present location poses a significant risk to these children possibly encountering an active shooter incident emanating from the Courthouse.
F5:
The location of the Courthouse has significantly increased intruder incidents at Argonaut High School and Preschool.
F6:
Incidents at the Courthouse are a catalyst for lockdowns occurring at the High School and other adjacent campuses, interrupting the learning process. Our school’s environment should be a safe and secure place for learning, not one that is fraught with potential violence.
F7:
Moving the Courthouse to a more appropriately zoned location rather than close proximity to a residential neighborhood and schools will significantly reduce the risk of potential injury or catastrophic event at our schools.
F8:
Because of no signage at the Courthouse, court visitors are intruding on Argonaut High School campus to ask for directions to the Courthouse, creating possible security issues and concerns by school personnel. 14
Findings & Recommendations
5 findings
F1:
At the time of the meeting with the Mule Creek State Prison personnel, the actual outflows from the Prison’s system had been reduced by 240,000 gallons without any reduction of inflows from either the CAL FIRE Academy or Preston Youth Correctional Facility.
F2:
Amador County monies for the clean water connections were reimbursed by Mule Creek State Prison.
F3:
Installing clean water connections using County grant monies are the responsibility of the three remaining families whose wells were allegedly affected.
F4:
The Steam Loop is not a source of contamination.
F5:
It appears the dry cleaning facility, which has since ceased operation, was the source of the contamination.
Findings and recommendations not yet extracted.
Findings & Recommendations
11 findings
F1:
California Education Code Section 32280 requires that all public schools develop a comprehensive school safety plan in cooperation with local law enforcement agencies, community leaders, parents, pupils, teachers, administrators, and other persons who may be interested. Law enforcement agencies include local police departments, county sheriffs’ offices, school district police or security departments, probation departments, and district attorneys’ offices.
F2:
Each school was given the Comprehensive Safety Plan template to update to their school needs on October 3, 2007.
F3:
California Education Code Section 32286 mandates the Safety Plans be updated by March 1st of each year.
F4:
ACUSD has established a “Blue Ribbon” committee to discuss, evaluate and revise the school safety plans.
F5:
California Education Code Section 32282 B (II) requires an earthquake emergency procedure system and a DROP procedure practice be held at least once a school quarter in elementary schools and at least once a semester in secondary schools.
F6:
California Education Code Section 32001 states in part “ … a fire drill shall be conducted a least once every calendar month at the elementary level and at least four times a year at the intermediate levels. A fire drill shall be held at the secondary level not less than twice every school year.”
F7:
Amador County School Board Policy 3516 requires that each site administrator and school secretary shall hold a valid certificate in First Aid and Cardio Pulmonary Resuscitation (CPR).
F8:
The Blue Ribbon Committee does not have a law enforcement representative as part of the committee.
F9:
Schools are vulnerable to disaster procedure problems since the Safety Plan has not been fully implemented or reviewed by all Law enforcement agencies.
F10:
Only one school administrator has a valid First Aid and CPR certificate. No school secretaries hold a valid First Aid and CPR certificate.
F11:
Not all Disaster procedure drills have been practiced as outlined in the Comprehensive School Safety Plan Section 11, Appendices A – IIC. 30