Butte County Grand Jury
2023-2024
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
4 findings
F1:
The City of Chico precipitated the Warren lawsuit when the unhoused were relocated without adequate shelter.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The Chico City Council direct the City Manager to develop and implement an internal committee specifically designated to interface with the unhoused population, current service providers and future county, state, and federal homelessness commissions by January 1, 2025.
F2:
The staff and volunteers at the different transitional and emergency housing programs are dedicated, enthusiastic and efficient.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The Chico City Council develop a written policy that will deal with how the city will address the unhoused by March 31, 2025.
F3:
The City of Chico established the Genesis Shelter (formerly known as the Pallet Shelter) which has served several hundred formerly unhoused individuals. 20
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The Chico City Council should implement this written policy within all City departments that interface with the unhoused population by June 30, 2025.
F4:
Due to the notification and site-clearing directions in the Settlement Agreement, the City of Chico is constrained in the handling of complaints regarding the unhoused.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
The City of Chico supports the efforts of government and non-governmental service agencies in addressing the special needs required by the unhoused in extreme weather.
Additional Recommendations
2
Not linked to specific findings.
R5:
The Chico City Council should expand shelter opportunities for unhoused people who currently live outside sanctioned shelter facilities by June 30, 2025.
R6:
The City of Chico continues funding transitional and emergency housing programs.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
4 findings
F1:
BCDD has created a website, bcdd.org, that includes current contact information including management and governing board information.
F2:
BCDD agrees that some administrative expenses could be shared with other drainage districts.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
BCDD intends to create a website that will include current contact information including management and governing board information by the end of the year but no later than January 15, 2023.
F3:
BCDD also agrees that administrative costs (insurance, audits) tend to outweigh the benefit to the community in many years.
F4:
BCDD has three governing board members. There have been two resignations of long term board members within the last ten years. BCDD board members have been able to seek interest from landowners to serve but it is agreed that there is not widespread interest among the population in general.
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R5:
BCDD is amenable to the idea of dissolution and having Drainage District #100 as the successor agency. BCDD has already begun discussions with LAFCO in the last year about consolidating services among special districts within Butte County. Indeed, earlier this year Drainage District #2 was dissolved. Respectfully submitted, Ted Trimble, Manager
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
3 findings
F2:
All these Districts [apparently referring to DD 200, DD 100, Butte Creek Drainage District, Reclamation District 833] have similar expenses that could be shared. DD 100 Response. DD100 does not believe any cost saving or "economy of scale" would be achieved through a consolidation with other Districts. Herbicides and other operating materials are currently obtained at cost without markup. The District is staffed to operate and maintain its current system, and does not have additional flexibility or bandwidth to assume additional duties. The District currently has two employees, whose full-time employment is devoted exclusively to DD 100 matters. Increasing the acreage and facilities under management would necessarily require increasing the size of staff, equipment, and materials. The additional complexities of a bigger District with more landowners, more revenues, and expenditures may in fact require more administrative oversight. These additional costs would have to be passed on to the landowners. Grand Jury Report
F3:
A few drainage districts have administrative costs that outweigh the benefit to the community. DD 100 Response. It is difficult to meaningfully respond to such a broad, and unrefined statement. Most, if not all of the acreage located within DD 100 boundaries is farmed to rice. Drainage is a necessary element of farming and harvesting rice. The District currently has only two full-time staff, and employs accountancy and legal services on a contracted, as-needed basis. In exchange, landowners within the District receive a reliable drainage service, which is of the utmost importance to the growing and harvesting of rice. The District incurs administrative expenses because the State of California imposes strict accounting, regulatory, and public meeting requirements on public agencies. For example, every year, the District is required to submit a Financial Activity and Compensation Report to the State Auditor's Office. Likewise, the District's financial statements must be audited by a certified public accountant. The District must also meet the requirements of the Brown Act and public meeting and Public Records Act requests. The District keeps these costs to an absolute minimum while meeting all legal requirements. In short, the District disagrees with any implied Finding that the District's meagre administrative costs "outweigh" the benefit to the Community. Grand Jury Report
F4:
Many of these Districts have difficulty finding candidates for their governing boards. DD 100 Response. This finding does not apply to DD 100. The District has had a fully formed three-member Board of Directors for its entire history. Any vacancies on the Board are promptly filled by appointment. Grand Jury Report
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
3 findings
F2:
All these Districts [apparently referring to DD 200, DD 100, Butte Creek Drainage District, Reclamation District 833] have similar expenses that could be shared. DD 200 Response. DD 200 has minimal operating and administrative expense. In FY 2020 - 2021, the District expended $11,560.00 total on services and supplies, and for FY 2022 - 2023, budgeted $15,000.00 for services and supplies. The District will likely again finish the year under budget in this regard. The majority of expenditures relate to materials and labor for maintenance, which is contracted to Richvale Irrigation District, and basic administrative requirements such as insurance and professional services, including legal counsel and accounting support. DD 200 does not believe any cost saving or 'economy of scale' would be achieved through a consolidation with other Districts. With respect to operation and maintenance, the services are currently provided at cost by another California Special District. Neither the cost of materials (herbicides) nor labor will be reduced by consolidation with other Districts. With respect to Administrative costs, it is far from clear how consolidation with other Districts would reduce costs. For example, DD 200 does not own or operate significant infrastructure and has no employees. Accordingly, the District's General Commercial Liability Policy is relatively inexpensive due to the District's low risk profile. Consolidating Districts would increase the acreage, infrastructure, employees, subject to a revised insurance policy, thereby likely increasing its costs. Also, there is no guarantee that the costs of professional services provided to a consolidated District would be less than those currently provided to DD 200. The additional complexities of a bigger District with more landowners, more revenues, and expenditures may in fact require more administrative oversight. Grand Jury Report
F3:
A few drainage districts have administrative costs that outweigh the benefit to the community. DD 200 Response. It is difficult to meaningfully respond to such a broad, and unrefined statement, and it is unclear whether this observation is intended to apply to DD 200. DD 200 spent a total of $11,560.00 total on services and supplies in the 2020-2021 fiscal year, which includes the operation and maintenance of its facilities. Spread across the District's 6,636 acres, the cost amounts to $1.74 cents per acre per year, with 'administrative costs' representing only a fraction of that expense. In exchange, landowners within the District receive a reliable drainage service, which is of the utmost importance to the growing and harvesting of rice. The District's Administrative Costs include primarily, accounting and legal services. These professional service providers are necessary because of the State of California's strict accounting, regulatory, and public meeting requirements. For example, every year, the District is required to submit a Financial Activity and Compensation Report to the State Auditor's Office, and every five years, must obtain an Audit by a Certified Public Accountant. Likewise, the District must comply with requirements imposed by the County to adopt budgets, and submit check requisition requests. The District must also meet the requirements of the Brown Act, Hon. Corie Caraway, Judge of the Superior Court To: Drainage District 200's Response to Grand Jury Re: Date: August 16, 2023 Page: 3 public meeting requirements, and Public Records Act requests. These specialized and time- intensive requirements are beyond the abilities of the District's unpaid Board of Directors. Unlike other Districts, DD 200 does not have any full or part time employees, and only pays for administrative and professional services on an 'as-needed' basis. In short, the District disagrees with any implied Finding that the District's meagre administrative costs "outweigh" the benefit to the Community. Grand Jury Report
F4:
Many of these Districts have difficulty finding candidates for their governing boards. DD 200 Response. This finding does not apply to DD 200. The District has had a fully formed three member Board of Directors for its entire history. A recent vacancy on the Board of Directors caused by a Director moving out of state was promptly filled by appointment. Grand Jury Report
* This report's PDF did not contain easily extractable text and required Optical Character Recognition (OCR) for analysis. There may be minor errors in the extracted findings and recommendations due to OCR limitations with scanned documents.