Contra Costa County Grand Jury

2009-2010

13 reports

Findings & Recommendations 3 findings
F1: Section 26909(b) of the California Government Code required that Special Districts submit audits to both the State Controller and Contra Costa County Auditor. Sixteen Special Districts did not submit audits to both agencies. Three districts did not submit an audit to either agency.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1: Section 26909(b) of the California Government Code required that Special Districts submit audits to both the State Controller and Contra Costa County Auditor. Sixteen Special Districts did not submit audits to both agencies. Three districts did not submit an audit to either agency. Recommendation: Special Districts that did not submit audits to the State Controller and the Contra Costa County Auditor need to institute procedures to ensure timely submissions of future audits to these agencies. Responses: Special District Response Recommendation Bethel Island Municipal No Reply Improvement District East Bay Regional Park Partially The Park District is a multi-county special District disagrees district. According to Government Code Section 26909(a)(4), a special district located in two or more districts, such as the Park District, shall file an audit report with the county auditor of the county in which the treasury is located. The Park District’s treasury is located in Alameda County. East Contra Costa Irrigation Disagrees Contra Costa County Office of the Auditor- District Controller has confirmed receipt of the District’s 2009 annual report. Green Valley Recreation and Disagrees Not reasonable for a district of our size. Will Park District make every effort to implement starting with financial audit for fiscal years 2006-2010. Los Medanos Community No reply Healthcare District Moraga Orinda Fire Agrees District financial audits have been submitted to Protection District the Contra Costa County Auditor-Controller’s office every year except for 2008-2009. A copy of the 2008-2009 financial audit was sent to the County Auditor/Controller’s office on July 6,
F2: There is no requirement that a Special District change auditors from time to time. However, to enhance accountability it is prudent that the audit firm be changed periodically. This will ensure that a “fresh set of eyes” can look at the financial compliance and health of the district. Thirty five percent of the districts have used the same audit firm for five or more years.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2: There is no requirement that a Special District change auditors from time to time. However, to enhance accountability it is prudent that the audit firm be changed periodically. This will ensure that a “fresh set of eyes” can look at the financial compliance and health of the district. Thirty five percent of the districts have used the same audit firm for five or more years. Recommendation: Special Districts should change audit firms at least every five years. Responses: Special District Response Recommendation East Bay Regional Park Agrees The Park District changes its audit firm every District three to five years. East Contra Costa Irrigation Agrees The District has a three-year contract with its District current auditing firm and will pursue a change upon the termination of that contract. Green Valley Recreation and Disagree We will make every effort to implement this Park District recommendation starting with the financial audit for fiscal years 2006-2010 by June 30, 2011. However, we find this recommendation not reasonable for a district of our size. Our annual budget is small, approximately $80,000. Several audit forms contacted in recent years refused our business because we are so small. We may need to use the same audit forma gain simply because we cannot find anyone else to do our audit. Los Medanos Community No reply Healthcare District Moraga Orinda Fire Disagrees The District used the same CPA firm to audit its Protection District financials for fiscal years 2002/2003 through 2006/2007. In 2007/2008 the District selected a new audit firm through an RFP process. The recommendation to change audit firms at least every five years will not be implemented as outlined. The Moraga-Orinda Fire District Board, as a matter of policy, may change audit firms every five years. However, when determining whether a new financial auditor is warranted the Moraga-Orinda Fire District Board will carefully consider prudent fiscal responsibilities as well as accountability. Quimby Island Reclamation No reply District #2090 Reclamation District 2065 Partially Even though we have used the same audit firm disagrees for several years, the actual individuals working within that firm have changed over the years and continue to change. Fresh sets of eyes have indeed looked at the financial compliance and health of RD 2065 during its engagement with its current audit firm. RD 2065 is agreeable to changing audit firms at least once every five years and has recently engaged a new audit firm to perform the audit for the year ending June 20,
F2010: The District has requested the District’s auditor to send a copy of the District’s completed financial audit to the County Auditor- Controller’s office as a standard practice. This procedure will be incorporated into all future Auditor Letter’s of Engagement. Quimby Island Reclamation No reply District #2090 Reclamation District 2065 Disagrees The recommendation has been implemented. It has been and will continue to be our practice to timely submit copies of its audits to both the State Controller and the Contra Costa County Auditor. Reclamation District 2121 No reply Reclamation District 2024 Agrees The district has in the past and intends to continue to submit annual audits to the State Controller and Contra Costa County Auditor. Reclamation District 2025 No reply Reclamation District 2026 No reply Reclamation District 2137 No reply San Ramon Valley Fire Agrees The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for District the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2008 was mailed to the State Controller and Contra Costa Auditor on April 7, 2010. Procedures have been implemented to ensure timely submission of future audits by District Finance Division staff to these agencies. Town of Discovery Bay CSD Partially The financial statements and independent Disagrees auditors’ report for the year ended June 30, 2007 was mailed to the County Auditor and State Controller on May 20, 2009. The reports for the year ended June 30, 2008 were mailed to the County Auditor and State Controller April 2,
Page 1
Related Recommendations (1)
R2010: The District has requested the District’s auditor to send a copy of the District’s completed financial audit to the County Auditor- Controller’s office as a standard practice. This procedure will be incorporated into all future Auditor Letter’s of Engagement. Quimby Island Reclamation No reply District #2090 Reclamation District 2065 Disagrees The recommendation has been implemented. It has been and will continue to be our practice to timely submit copies of its audits to both the State Controller and the Contra Costa County Auditor. Reclamation District 2121 No reply Reclamation District 2024 Agrees The district has in the past and intends to continue to submit annual audits to the State Controller and Contra Costa County Auditor. Reclamation District 2025 No reply Reclamation District 2026 No reply Reclamation District 2137 No reply San Ramon Valley Fire Agrees The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for District the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2008 was mailed to the State Controller and Contra Costa Auditor on April 7, 2010. Procedures have been implemented to ensure timely submission of future audits by District Finance Division staff to these agencies. Town of Discovery Bay CSD Partially The financial statements and independent Disagrees auditors’ report for the year ended June 30, 2007 was mailed to the County Auditor and State Controller on May 20, 2009. The reports for the year ended June 30, 2008 were mailed to the County Auditor and State Controller April 2,
Findings & Recommendations 1 findings
F1937: Periodically, the courts have issued opinions regarding provisions of the Law. The CCCERA Board consists of: • Four members representing retirees and employees • Four members appointed by the Board of Supervisors • The County Treasurer/Tax Collector The cost of the retirement plan is covered by employer and employee contributions and CCCERA investment income. If these resources are not sufficient to cover pension costs, it is ultimately the responsibility of the taxpayer to pay the shortfall. In February 2010, two bills were introduced in the California Legislature to reform California public pensions and pension spiking.1 As of April 2010, these bills have not been debated. If passed, these laws will take precedence over current CCCERA policy. The County pension shortfall has been increasing over the last several years and is projected to increase in the future. From 1999 to 2009 pension shortfalls have increased from $67,000,000 to $202,000,000 and the shortfall is projected to be $293,000,000 by 2016. Past pension shortfalls have been funded through the general budget. In the past ten years, two previous Grand Jury reports made findings and recommendations regarding public employee retirement issues. The final compensation used to determine an individual’s retirement amount is not limited to the employee’s annual salary. It may also include many other cash benefits (pay elements), such as: • Sale back of vacation leave • Uniform allowance • Educational incentive pay • Vehicle allowance • Others (Appendix) The compensation must have been earned by and payable to the employee during the final compensation period. Within the law, employer members have discretion over 1 Assembly Bill 1987 and Senate Bill 1425 certain pay elements which may be included as part of final compensation. For example, subject to contractual rights, some employer members cap the number of vacation hours that can be accrued or counted towards final compensation. An employer member providing a vehicle for official use to an employee rather than providing a cash allowance is another example. Employer board members, as well as a CCCERA retiree, stated during interviews they did not fully comprehend the consequences of long-term pension liabilities with respect to the approval of an employee agreement. Spiking elements occur at the levels of rank- and-file, supervisor, manager and executive. Collective bargaining negotiations which deal with retirement benefits among other benefits, are held between managers and represented employees. Managers, in turn, negotiate with their respective employer. The current process provides for the opportunity of managers “to get what the staff gets” in spiking benefits. This may provide a disincentive for managers to be objective in negotiations with staff. Managers generally have more facts and knowledge about compensation impacts than employer board members. The salaries and benefits resulting from these negotiations may have a ‘trickle up” effect in the determination of the salary and benefits for managers. Current law (Lexin v. Superior Court 2010 Lexis 115.) holds that there is neither a conflict-of-interest nor an ethical issue with managers negotiating on self-benefiting issues. Although employer members cannot adopt less stringent conflict-of-interest or ethics codes than required by law; they can adopt more stringent codes. Current circumstances would suggest that employer members adopt more stringent procedures in salary and benefit negotiations. METHODOLOGY In September of 2009, the Grand Jury began looking into the issue of pension spiking and its financial and service delivery impact. The Grand Jury interviewed current and former employer members. Members of the Grand Jury attended several public meetings of CCCERA and the San Ramon Valley Protection District at which pension policies and spiking were discussed. Opinions prepared by legal counsel for the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District and for CCCERA, which were made available to the public, were reviewed. The Grand Jury also received and analyzed County Administrator’s financial report which included pension shortfalls. FINDINGS: 1: Increased pension costs directly reduce funds available for services. Higher pension obligations also become a debt to taxpayers of Contra Costa County. 2: Some CCCERA employer members are not fully knowledgeable about pension law and the financial impact of their decisions relating to the calculation of pension obligations on revenues and services. 3: Some employer board members rely heavily on input from staff. As members of the same pension system, the staff may benefit from actions recommended to their employer. 4: Many of the pay elements and policies related to calculating final compensation are at the discretion of the employer member. 5: Some employer member policies permitting pension spiking increase pension obligations, which in turn will annually increase the amount of pension funds needed.
Page 2
Findings & Recommendations 13 findings
F1: There are 18 school districts in Contra Costa County, each with its own superintendent.
F2: SARB is the body that refers students to the juvenile court system for truancy.
F3: The school districts do not provide timely documentation of truancy to the courts resulting in the delay of court intervention.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2: All school districts shall initiate a stronger link between SARB and the courts to provide an opportunity for timely intervention.
F4: The 2008-2009 Combined Districts-SARB Report identified 113 referrals to the court. The court indicated that only 10 cases were received.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2: All school districts shall initiate a stronger link between SARB and the courts to provide an opportunity for timely intervention.
F5: Many schools do not have the required Certified Attendance Supervisor for reporting truancy.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3: All school districts shall provide a Certified Attendance Supervisor in each school pursuant to EC Section 48241.
F6: The review of truancy cases in some districts is not completed in a timely manner due to the infrequency of SARB meetings.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5: CCCOE shall conduct an annual or semi-annual county-wide SARB conference to evaluate, discuss and share program strengths and weaknesses.
F7: CCCOE receives truancy statistics but does not address truancy issues.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5: CCCOE shall conduct an annual or semi-annual county-wide SARB conference to evaluate, discuss and share program strengths and weaknesses.
F8: There are no County Probation Officers assigned to schools to deal with truancy.
F9: According to the California Department of Education SARB Handbook, students and parents must understand that school attendance is not a matter of choice but a mandate.
F10: To deter truancy, some school districts have implemented curfews during school hours.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6: All school districts in the County shall consider implementing curfews during school hours.
F11: Not all school districts comply with EC Section 48260.5 for the reporting of truancy and subsequent parental notification.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1: All school districts shall strictly and uniformly enforce the Education Code Section 48260.5 regarding truancy tracking and parental notification.
R4: All school districts shall notify parents and students of school attendance policies and truancy consequences.
F12: Truancy is detrimental to student achievement, promotions, graduation, self- esteem, and employment potential. Students lose the benefit of instruction, districts lose income and communities suffer.
F13: Exhibit 1 to this report shows the number of students referred to SARB, the gender of the referred students, the reason for the referrals, the number of students referred to the court, and the total enrollment for each identified school district. CONCLUSIONS As early as 1915, sociologists were calling truancy the “kindergarten of crime.” Truancy is often the first indicator of future problems and early intervention is the key to prevention. Frequently, cases are not referred to court until very near the end of the school year when adequate time to impose corrective action has passed. Courts would like to have case referrals earlier in the school year. SARB is not merely a punitive body but serves as a safety net to help students stay in school. SARB efforts are minimally effective if they do not link youths and their families to all appropriate school and community resources. Certification of attendance supervisors provides the opportunity for the successful and accurate tracking of truancy.
Findings & Recommendations 9 findings
F1: Awarding agreements to NEO without competitive bidding does not ensure the City is administering its programs in the most cost effective manner.
F2: Since 2003, the City of Hercules has executed agreements with NEO, previously owned by the current City Manager.
F3: NEO currently employs immediate family members of the City Manager and staff.
F4: In late 2009, the City purchased homes of nine affordable housing program loan recipients who defaulted on their original mortgage and redevelopment loans.
F5: The City then sold three of the homes back to the same recipients for less than the original purchase price, again utilizing the affordable housing loan program.
F6: Homes purchased from affordable housing loan recipients were resold by the City without being advertised for sale or rent on the City website. In addition, they did not appear on the Multiple Listing Service. (MLS)
F7: In 2008 and 2009 redevelopment loans were made to relatives of Hercules City Council members.
F8: The Transportation and Housing Subcommittee neither publishes minutes nor posts agendas regarding the affordable housing program.
F53060: Government Code Section 4526 states: “In addition, these procedures shall specifically prohibit practices which might result in unlawful activity including, but not limited to, rebates, kickbacks, or other unlawful consideration, and shall specifically prohibit government agency employees from participating in the selection process when those employees have a relationship with a person or business entity seeking a contract under this section which would subject those employees to the prohibition of §87100.” The current process generally followed by the City for approving affordable housing loans is:  All redevelopment loan applications are submitted to NEO.  NEO reviews individual loan applications and forwards its recommendations to the City Manager.  City staff members and the City Manager evaluate and determine if an application can be forwarded to the Transportation and Housing Subcommittee.  The Transportation and Housing Subcommittee, which includes two City Council members, recommends the loans as a package for inclusion on the consent calendar of the Redevelopment Agency agenda.  The City Council, acting as the Redevelopment Agency, approves the affordable housing loans on the consent calendar generally without discussion. Homes were repurchased from affordable housing program recipients by the City in late 2009 through short sale or foreclosure. They are being resold or rented without notice to the public. There were no Housing and Transportation Subcommittee minutes regarding action taken with respect to affordable housing loans. There were multiple incidents of problematic conduct between the City and NEO. For example, during the past two years, two immediate family members of the City Council received affordable housing loans. A family member purchased a home utilizing the affordable housing loan process and subsequently defaulted. The purchaser did not repay the affordable housing loan provided by the city. In another instance, a City employee, who reports to the City Manager, was appointed to NEO’s board within thirty days of receiving an affordable housing loan from the City. Additionally in 2006, NEO hired a relative of the former City Manager. This individual is still employed by NEO. METHODOLOGY: The Grand Jury interviewed a number of the following: Past and current City Council members City staff Citizens of Hercules Public documents reviewed included: Annual professional service agreements California Attorney General’s memorandum, Ethics Training for Local Government Officials United States v. Chavis/Lassiter (Indictment) FINDINGS: 1. Awarding agreements to NEO without competitive bidding does not ensure the City is administering its programs in the most cost effective manner.
Page 2
Findings & Recommendations 5 findings
F1: and Recommendation: School District Governing Boards (Appendix I) Acalanes Union High School District Antioch Unified School District Brentwood Union School District Liberty Union High School District Mount Diablo Unified School District Oakley Union Elementary School District Walnut Creek School District West Contra Costa Unified School District Findings #5, #6 and Recommendations: School District Governing Boards (Appendix II) Antioch Unified School District Byron Union School District Canyon Elementary School District John Swett Unified School District Pittsburg Unified School District Contra Costa County 2009-2010 Grand Jury Report No 1005 APPENDIX I Non-Responding Schools Acalanes Union High School District Center For Independent Study Antioch Unified School District Antioch Charter Academy Antioch Charter Academy II Black Diamond Middle School Encore Home Schooling Brentwood Union School District Brentwood Elementary School Liberty Union High School District Heritage High School Independence High School Liberty High School Mount Diablo Unified School District Diablo Community Day School Horizons School Nueva Vista Summit School Pine Hollow Middle School Prospect School Oakley Union Elementary School District Delta Vista Middle School Gehringer Elementary School Iron Horse elementary School Laurel Elementary School Oakley Elementary School O'Hara Park Middle School Vintage Parkway Elementary School Walnut Creek School District Indian Valley Elementary School West Contra Costa Unified School District Delta High School Manzanita Middle School Middle College High School Contra Costa County 2009-2010 Grand Jury Report No 1005 West County Community High School APPENDIX II Schools with Manual Alarm Systems Antioch Unified School District Antioch High School Antioch Middle School Belshaw Elementary School Kimball Elementary School Park Middle School Byron Unified School District Discovery Bay Elementary School Canyon Elementary School District Canyon Elementary School John Swett Unified School District Willows Continuation School Pittsburg Unified School District Heights Elementary School Riverside High School Stoneman Elementary School Contra Costa County 2009-2010 Grand Jury Report No 1005
F3: Automatic Alarm Systems are fire alarms, sprinklers, and/or smoke detectors that automatically detect a fire and activate a campus-wide alarm. A connection is made electronically to a certified 24-hour supervising station at an offsite private alarm company or to a fire or police department. Some systems provide specific zone details to the offsite station. Of the 236 responding schools, 225 reported having automated systems.
F4: Sounding the Alarm Survey Results 4% 10% Automated 225 ■ Manual 11 No Response 26 Contra Costa County 2009-2010 Grand Jury Report No 1005
F5: Eleven schools reported having manual alarms, (Appendix II) • Three plan to upgrade their systems in 2010
F6: Of the eleven schools with manual alarms: Three have pull stations, smoke and heat detectors Three have pull stations and smoke detectors One has pull stations and heat detectors Four have only pull stations
Additional Recommendations 1

Not linked to specific findings.

R1: procedures for notifying authorities of a fire emergency. (
Findings & Recommendations 12 findings
F1: In 2008-2009, there were approximately 1,100 foster care children served by CFS.
F2: In 2008-2009, 179 of the foster care children in CFS were being served by 157 trained CASA volunteers.
F3: Approximately 50 children are on a waiting list for a CASA volunteer assignment.
F4: In 2008-2009, of the 119 positions eliminated in CFS, 65 were social workers responsible for foster children.
F5: In the same year, CASA volunteers provided 20,477 case hours of advocacy services to foster care children of Contra Costa County.
F6: At least forty-six (46) new CASA volunteers must be recruited, selected and trained each year to maintain the current level of volunteer services.
F7: The Fall 2009 CASA training cycle was eliminated due to budgetary constraints.
F8: In 2008-2009, approximately 70% of foster children in CFS assigned to a CASA volunteer were Latino or children of color.
F9: Representatives of CFS and CASA staff expressed the need for more ethnically diverse volunteers since 80% of CASA volunteers are Caucasian.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1: CFS shall assist CASA in its recruitment efforts to broaden the diversity of its volunteers’ ethnicity and gender.
F10: Of the foster care children served by CASA, 55% are from East and West County while only 16% of CASA volunteers are from East and West County.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2: CFS shall assist CASA in expanding recruitment and orientation sessions into East and West County.
F11: Representatives of CFS and CASA suggested that team effectiveness can be improved by addressing the differences in understanding or appreciation of their respective roles and responsibilities.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3: CFS and CASA shall explore methods for improving their team effectiveness.
F12: CFS can be instrumental in supporting additional training of CASA volunteers in the areas of juvenile court procedures, dependency law and standards of care. CONCLUSIONS: Foster care children reap the benefit when CFS and CASA work effectively as a team. CFS is responsible for providing these children with an array of services, many of which require professionals with specialized training, such as mental health, medical and social services. CASA pairs a foster child with a volunteer adult who continuously advocates for the child’s needs, assessing living arrangements, education, medical and emotional needs. Together CFS and CASA support the child and the Juvenile Court as it oversees the well-being of the child. CFS and CASA can take steps to improve their working relationship and effectiveness.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4: CFS shall support additional CASA volunteer training in the areas of juvenile court procedures, dependency law and standards of care.
Findings & Recommendations 4 findings
F1: Information & Assistance staff reductions have caused delays in elders receiving immediate responses to their concerns.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1: The County shall initiate a volunteer program to supplement staffing. Volunteers shall be recruited immediately for Information and Assistance and for Adult Protective Services. 4. In-Home Supportive Services is a “train wreck” waiting to happen if the State eliminates its funding.
F2: Staffing cuts to any one adult services program ultimately result in reduced services throughout the Aging and Adult Services Bureau.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2: The County shall develop a contingency plan for funding the IHSS program. CONCLUSIONS The elder population in the United States has increased 16.3% since 2002 and will represent 25% of the population by the end of 2010. Contra Costa County’s elder population mirrors these numbers. As the elder population continues to grow, funding concurrently erodes. Unless the County steps up to its responsibilities to this growing and vulnerable population, Adult Services will exist in name only. REQUIRED RESPONSES Findings and Recommendations Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors 1 through 4
F3: Adult Protective Service staff reductions have eliminated face-to-face case work assessments. Case assessments and reassessments are now handled by phone.
F4: In-Home Supportive Services is a “train wreck” waiting to happen if the State eliminates its funding.
Findings & Recommendations 11 findings
F1: The First 5 Commission of Contra Costa County is an independent, stand alone, decision- making agency, fully State funded and established by County ordinance. The Commission is neither a County department nor a Special District.
F2: The Commission's funds are received from the State and disbursed through the County Treasurer's office.
F3: The Commission's Sustainability and Special Reserve Funds are invested under the management of the County Treasurer.
F4: The Commission's payroll is processed by the County and employees participate in the County's health and retirement benefit programs.
F5: Grand Jury research revealed that, unlike First 5 Contra Costa, more than half of the First 5 Commissions in California operate as units of county government.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5: The Board of Supervisors shall pursue inclusion of the First 5 Commission as a unit of County government.
F6: The Commission utilizes multiple contracts to meet its goals. Some of these contracts are awarded as a result of a Request for Proposal (RFP) process. An examination of the RFP documents and procedures revealed the process to be efficient and effective.
F7: Since Commissioners who have a financial interest in a contract are allowed to be present during the discussion and vote on the contract, there is potential for improper or undue influence of Commissioners.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1: The Board of Supervisors shall appoint commissioners not affiliated with agencies most likely to be awarded significant funding, thereby minimizing perceptions of impropriety.
R2: First 5 Commissioners having financial interests in contracts before the Board of Commissioners shall recuse and physically remove themselves from meetings while the contracts are being considered.
F8: The Commission’s Executive Committee meets monthly with the Executive Director. It is comprised of four members, two of whom are employed by agencies that receive significant funds from First 5 Contra Costa.
F9: The Grand Jury investigation revealed that neither employees nor management clearly understand the First 5 Commission’s policies and procedures related to employee complaints and grievances as well as other provisions specified in the Employee Handbook.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4: First 5 Commission shall provide annual training to all employees on Employee Handbook procedures and provisions.
F10: The Grand Jury investigation revealed that neither employees nor management receive regular, appropriate training regarding best or preferred employment practices.
F11: There is no requirement that the First 5 Commission change auditors from time to time. However to enhance accountability it is prudent that the audit firm be changed periodically. First 5 has engaged the same independent auditor for more than five years. CONCLUSIONS The Grand Jury commends the First 5 Commission for the beneficial work it has done to provide essential services to children and the families of children from pre-natal to age five. The Grand Jury concludes the Commission would greatly benefit from closer County oversight and regular employee training. By following the Grand Jury’s recommendations, the Commission can engender even greater confidence in its role in the community.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3: First 5 Commission shall select a new independent auditor through a competitive bid process.
Findings & Recommendations 3 findings
F2: Individual departments manage and administer their own cell phone contracts, resulting in higher cost and inefficiency: i.e., tracking of minutes purchased vs. minutes used, equipment inventory control and simplified invoicing and payment.
F3: Multiple providers result in charges for cell to cell communication between provider networks.
F4: Push to talk, an essential no cost communication tool which includes group calling, is only possible within a single provider network.
Findings & Recommendations 2 findings
F1: Section 26909(b) of the California Government Code requires that Special Districts submit audits to both the State Controller and Contra Costa County Auditor. Sixteen Special Districts did not submit audits to both agencies. Three districts did not submit an audit to either agency.
F2: There is no requirement that a Special District change auditors from time to time. However, to enhance accountability it is prudent that the audit firm be changed periodically. This will ensure that a "fresh set of eyes" can look at the financial compliance and health of the district. Thirty-five percent of the districts have used the same audit firm for five or more years.
Findings & Recommendations 3 findings
F3: Chris Adams Girls' Center was permanently closed effective September 30,
F4: Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Center demonstrated improvements from findings in last year's Grand Jury Inspection Report Number 0905. However, CSA standards related to hygiene were not met. Showers and drains are in need of deep cleaning, mold removal and leak repair.
F6: Martinez Detention Facility, West County Detention Facility and Marsh Creek Detention Facility provide meals that meet nutritional requirements for only $3.30 a day per inmate.
Findings & Recommendations 6 findings
F1: LMCHD’s primary mission is to improve the quality of health care in the community while promoting education and wellness. However, actual grants and programs reviewed by the Grand Jury did not address the priority health needs as identified in the Contra Costa Health Services’ Community Health Assessment.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1: LMCHD’s primary mission is to improve the quality of health care in the community while promoting education and wellness. However, actual grants and programs reviewed by the Grand Jury did not address the priority health needs as identified in the Contra Costa Health Services’ Community Health Assessment. Recommendation: Grants and programs shall be awarded in relation to the identified community health care needs as identified in the Contra Costa Health Services’ Community Health Assessment (i.e. heart disease, cancer and stroke).
F2: Of the sixteen grants and programs awarded for the year 2008-2009, fifteen were for $25,000 or less. Awarding multiple grants in small dollar amounts is inefficient.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2: Of the sixteen grants and programs awarded for the year 2008-2009, fifteen were for $25,000 or less. Awarding multiple grants in small dollar amounts is inefficient. Recommendation: A new grant allocation process shall be developed which focuses on funding fewer projects with larger grants.
F3: Community health programs and grant dollars consumed less than half of LMCHD’s total revenue for the years 2006 through 2009.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3: Community health programs and grant dollars consumed less than half of LMCHD’s total revenue for the years 2006 through 2009. Recommendation: LMCHD shall reduce unnecessary administrative expenditures thereby increasing funds available for priority health care needs.
F4: The District has not collaborated with HAC and other health consortia.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4: The District has not collaborated with HAC and other health consortia. Recommendation: LMCHD shall work with health care consortia within the County to expand its impact in awarding of grants and programs.
F5: There have been two strategic plans; neither was effectively implemented. LMCHD is spending $140,000 over a two year period for its third strategic plan in eight years.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5: There have been two strategic plans; neither was effectively implemented. LMCHD is spending $140,000 over a two year period for its third strategic plan in eight years. Recommendation: LMCHD board shall adopt, and effectively implement the new strategic plan.
F6: The 2007 LAFCO Municipal Service Review identified four options that could be taken by the District. The District chose to maintain the status quo.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6: The 2007 LAFCO Municipal Service Review identified four options that could be taken by the District. The District chose to maintain the status quo. Recommendation: At the time of LAFCO’s next Municipal Service Review of the District, when addressing the District’s accountability for community service needs, LAFCO shall consider the recommendations of this report and the District’s implementation of its strategic plan. CONCLUSIONS Los Medanos Health Care District must live up to its mission and focus on awarding grants based upon identifiable health care needs in its jurisdiction. Community Health Indicators for Contra Costa County clearly delineate this information every three years. It is imperative that the District track the expenditure of funds granted and measure the outcomes to determine future funding efforts. Fewer dollars must be directed from superfluous projects such as the costly Community Garden. The taxpayers of Bay Point, Pittsburg, and portions of Clayton, Antioch and Clyde deserve more for their money!
Findings & Recommendations 9 findings
F1: The Sheriff’s VSP is organized into the following groups: • The Sheriff’s Air Squadron provides air operation support services. The Air Squadron consists of pilots and observers who conduct personnel transportation, aerial cataloging, aerial surveillance, logistical support, and assistance to the Sheriff’s Air Support. The Air Squadron has 8 aircraft, 8 pilots and 7 observers. The pilots bring their privately owned aircraft to the VSP and some also pay for the aviation fuel used. Highlighting the fleet are a 6-passenger twin turbo propeller driven aircraft for long distance transport, and a high performance 5-6 seat helicopter. One volunteer has recently acquired a larger jet aircraft that requires two pilots and it may be added to the Sheriff’s VSP inventory in the near future. Should it be used, its deployment will be limited to major crisis or war. In the calendar year 2007, the Air Squadron members contributed 557 hours of service. The members range in age from 30 to 70 years. • The Sheriff’s Explorer Program is conducted under the auspices of the Boy Scouts of America. The Explorer Program provides members with experience and training in law enforcement. The Explorers participate in public events, provide traffic control, and serve in other ancillary functions. In 2007, the Explorers contributed 5,865 hours of service. The Explorers range in age from 14 to 21 years. • The Sheriff’s Dive Team provides underwater services. Members of the Dive Team are highly trained and certified divers. As requested, the Dive Team activities include body recovery, evidence searches, vehicle recovery and swift water rescue. In 2007, members of the Dive Team contributed 550 hours of service. The Dive Team members range in age from 40 to 70 years. • The Sheriff’s Medical Support Team consists of volunteers with specialized medical training who are prepared to respond during times of emergency or disaster. The Medical Support Team is also trained to deploy in support of the Mobile Field Force and the SWAT team during training or active deployment. This team also provides specialized medical training to the first responders of the Search and Rescue Team. Member retention is difficult for this team due to the monetary loss incurred by medical professionals who contribute time to train with the team. In 2007, members of the Medical Support Team contributed 250 hours of service. The three members of the team range in age from 30 to 50 years. • The Sheriff’s Food Service Unit provides meals to units during extended operations and supports overnight training missions of the other volunteer service units. Events include: SWAT operations, in line-of-duty deaths, search and rescue activations, and other Sheriff’s Department functions. In 2007, the Food Service Unit contributed 550 hours of service. The team members, who range in age from 30 to 60 years, are led by a Volunteer Food Service professional. Plans are in place to expand this unit. • The Sheriff’s Reserve Deputy Program provides support for all divisions within the department. Reserve Deputies operate and supplement the daily operations of the Field Services Unit by providing: transportation services, off-road vehicle support, and crime scene support. They assist in many search and rescue functions, and serve at hundreds of community events throughout the year providing operational support, traffic control and event security. Security for the Contra Costa County Fair is provided solely by the Reserve Deputy Program. In 2007, Reserve Deputy Program personnel contributed more than 22,000 hours of service. Its 65 members range in age from 21 to 75 years. • The Sheriff’s Search and Rescue Team is well known throughout the state for its search and rescue efforts. It is regularly called to assist throughout California, including Yosemite and other high risk situations. In addition to responding to routine missing person calls or lost child calls, the team is in a constant training mode. Currently the team is working toward Mountain Rescue Association accreditation and expects to receive it in early 2009. The team operates its own training academy for new members as well as for those who are preparing for advancement assignments. In 2007, the team contributed over 45,000 hours of service. The program’s 211 members range in age from 14 to 60 years. • The Sheriff’s Amateur Radio Communications Team (also known as ARC) primarily provides communication support to all department operations. Team members provide essential communications for events and operations, and ultimately support the Office of the Sheriff in times of disaster by providing an alternate means of communication when the normal systems are overloaded or destroyed. In addition they also support the Sheriff’s emergency mobile command center. In 2007, the team contributed over 2,000 hours of service. The 22 members of the team range in age from 40 to 60 years. • The Sheriff’s Radio Amateur Civil Emergency Service (also known as RACES) Team provides communications for all of the emergency operations centers within Contra Costa County. Members are all licensed amateur radio operators (also known as HAMS). During times of disaster the team establishes and supplements communication networks. In 2007, they contributed nearly 4,000 hours of service. The team has 124 members ranging in age from 35 to 70 years. • The Sheriff’s Chaplaincy Program provides spiritual guidance and counseling as needed to all members of law enforcement and the community. Chaplains participate in community events, ride along with deputies on patrol, and assist during times of crisis. In 2007, members contributed in excess of 3,500 hours of service. The 35 members of the team range in age from 40 to 70 years. • The Sheriff’s Auxiliary Volunteer Extended Services (SAVES) program provides assistance to all areas of the Office of the Sheriff. SAVES members can be found providing essential services to the Crime Lab, the Coroner, Field Operations Bureau, and Emergency Services Support Unit. In 2007, members contributed over 15,000 hours of service. The team’s 135 members range in age from 18 to 75 years. Response: Agree.
Page 9
F2: The Superintendent, rather than the Board, controlled the agenda for board meetings and decided what information to give or withhold from the Board. Response: The respondent partially disagrees with the finding. Board members occasionally placed items on the Board agenda. 3. Some Board members did not have a full understanding of their duties regarding their function and financial responsibilities to taxpayers. As a result, they failed to lead and instead, followed the Superintendent’s directives. Response: The respondent agrees with the finding. 4. The District had not paid its correct federal payroll tax obligations for several years. In 2005 the District paid a levy of over $105,000 for payroll taxes, interest, and penalties. The Board did not approve these payments and was unaware of these issues because financial documents given to the Board lacked adequate detail. In 2008 the IRS informed the District that it may owe $833,000 in unpaid payroll taxes, interest, and penalties. This matter remains unresolved as of this writing. Response: The respondent partially disagrees with the finding. The District never failed to pay its federal payroll taxes. 5. ADP, a private corporation which had served as the District’s payroll tax processor, cancelled its contract in November 2006, because the District failed to fund the necessary amounts to provide for payment to the IRS. Contra Costa County 2009-2010 Grand Jury Report No. 1001 Grand Jury reports are posted at http://www.cc-courts.org/grandjury Response: The respondent partially agrees with the finding. ADP did write to the District in November 2006. The District believes that ADP bears partial responsibility for the IRS problems. 6. The Board approved the creation of an in-house attorney position as a cost cutting measure. It directed that the attorney report to the Superintendent. This reporting relationship limited the volume and type of work provided to the Board by the in-house attorney. Response: The respondent agrees with the finding. 7. Between 2002 and 2007, the District paid for work performed by an outside law firm. The law firm worked without a valid contract. This action violated District policy and the Board was unaware of this situation because renewal contracts were not forwarded by the Superintendent. Response: The respondent agrees with the finding. 8. District policy dated 7/16/2002 requires Board approval for all bills over $25,000. The Superintendent frequently violated this policy by not submitting bills in excess of $25,000 to the Board. As one example, he unilaterally authorized payment in 2007 of a disputed bill for almost $110,000 to an outside legal firm. Response: The respondent agrees with the finding. 9. The Superintendent withheld critical financial information from the Board. Response: The respondent agrees with the finding. 10. The Superintendent inhibited the free exchange of information between various departments within the District. These actions undermined employee morale and, in some cases, led them to not report for work or to resign. Response: Respondent partially disagrees with the finding. Respondent cannot speculate as to the mental processes of employees, and on that basis cannot completely agree with the finding.
Page 1
F3: The 500 volunteers are supervised by two county employees. Response: Agree.
Page 11
Related Recommendations (1)
R1: The VSP would be more effective if more support staff were made available. Currently, two county employees are supervising 500 people. We recommend that the Sheriff identify the amount of funds necessary to support additional staff to enhance this valuable county resource. Response: The Office of the Sheriff agrees with this recommendation and has explored funding, but has faced huge budget restrictions. This coupled with the fact the Office is anticipating layoffs of staff, adding additional staff is not feasible.
F4: All volunteers are extensively screened. This process includes a Department of Justice background check, a DMV report, and fingerprinting. Reserve Deputy Sheriffs must undergo the same physical, psychological and academic testing as regular Police Officers. Response: Agree.
Page 11
F5: All volunteers are trained for emergency responses in their respective programs. The Search and Rescue Team members, for example, must successfully complete training on the Search and Rescue Mutual Aid-Ground Searcher Guidelines before they can be certified to become eligible to participate in search and rescue missions. Response: Agree. 6. The Search and Rescue Team members pay for some of their own rescue gear, which can be costly. It is not unusual for team members to incur costs of $1000 to $2000 during their first year. Response: Agree.
Page 11
F7: The county provides the first uniform for volunteers and also pays an annual uniform allowance of $150 - if there is adequate money in the budget. Response: Agree.
Page 12
F8: The Reserve Deputy Program members provide services for events not normally budgeted by the County Sheriff’s Department. They are not paid for these services. Response: Agree.
Page 12
Related Recommendations (2)
R2: Other than for emergency services, the Sheriff should consider generating revenue from the services the volunteers perform. The Sheriff should consider whether event organizers should pay a nominal fee for volunteer services provided, including events such as athletic events, car shows, parades, and community events.
R3: The Sheriff should consider whether all monies generated from the VSP, including funds from the contract with the County Fair, should be reinvested in the volunteer program. Response: The recommendation to consider reinvestment of all monies generated from the Volunteer Service Program has been implemented.
F9: Most volunteers maintain their volunteer status and do not apply to become a sworn Deputy Sheriff. Response: Agree.
Page 12
F10: The longest tenured volunteer has 35 years of dedicated service and pictured below is the oldest volunteer in the program, a retired deputy sheriff sergeant who is 75 years old. Response: Agree.
Page 12

* 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.