Colusa County Grand Jury
2019-2020
Findings & Recommendations
8 findings
F1:
In its current state, the facility continues to function adequately.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The Colusa County Grand Jury recommends that Yuba County continue with its existing plans of constructing a new, modern facility that incorporates up to date safety and inmate management features.
F2:
Inspections of the facility are up to date and a Safety plan is in place for staff and inmates.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
Continue to fill open positions to ensure the safety of staff and juveniles
F3:
The current linear jail design does not allow for continuous observation of inmate living areas. The American Correctional Association stipulates that the linear design should be absolutely avoided in order to maintain safe, secure custody, and control of inmates.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The Grand Jury recommends that the District implement a formal process for tracking complaints/resolutions/outcomes. The Grand Jury recommends the District review their IIPP to ensure it is up to date. The current
F4:
The Grand Jury finds that in the past five years Colusa County has not had high numbers of WNV.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
IIPP does not indicate when it was last updated/created. The Grand Jury recommends dating the document each time it is updated.
F5:
The Grand Jury finds that the District does not have a formal educational/outreach program to provide consistent educational opportunities and community engagement in prevention and abatement efforts.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
The Grand Jury recommends the District review their Hazard Communication Program document to ensure it is up to date. The current Hazard Communication Program document does not indicate when it was last updated/created. The Grand Jury recommends dating the document each time it is updated.
F6:
The Grand Jury finds that the District has no formal process for tracking complaints/resolutions/outcomes.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
The Grand Jury recommends that the District update its website to provide easier navigation, as well as more robust information to inform the public and foster community interest and partnership. Specific recommendations are: Include more information regarding mosquito population data, trends, control and a) numbers of West Nile Virus cases by providing direct links to helpful resources, such as FAQ's, brochures and recommendations that are designed for public communication that are on the California West Nile Virus website, as well as the CDC website. Currently the website links the public to websites that require the consumer to wade through a lot of policy documents/guidelines to find helpful information for the general public. b) Include educational information as a way to foster awareness, such as videos, resources/activities for families and schools, as well as brochures to print. Include the names of the members on the Board of Trustees; post Board meeting C) schedules, agendas and minutes on the website (also suggested in 2018 LAFCo report). d) Consider using a web based service request form that tracks specific data about complaints, requests, and resolutions, with the ability to retain the data for future tracking and review of trends. Highlight the use of aerial fogging on their website. e) f) Clarify district boundaries and those areas that are not included in the District. RESPONSES The California Penal Code 933 requires the governing body of any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court). Additionally, in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g. District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such elected County official shall comment on the findings and recommendations pertaining to the matters under that elected official's control within 60 days to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. (a) Furthermore, California Penal Code Section 933.05 (a), (b), (c), details, as follows, the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding; (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore. (b) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report; (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefore. (c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary/or personnel matters over which it has some decision making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. Comments to the presiding Judge of the Superior Court in compliance with Penal Code section 933.05 are required or requested from:
F7:
The Grand Jury finds that the Injury and Illness Prevention Program and the Hazard Communications program are outdated and that although there are training records that correlate to various aspects of these programs, such as training on chemicals and safety, there are no records showing that employees have read or been trained on the overarching written documents. The Grand Jury finds that upon review the District's website, the layout is difficult to navigate
F8:
and is lacking in a variety of information that could be useful to the public.
* 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.