Contra Costa County Grand Jury
2014-2015
From the annual report
The consolidated year-end volume. The individual investigations it contains are listed separately below.
📑 Year-End Report
The full consolidated volume; individual reports are listed below.
Individual reports (13)
Findings and recommendations not yet extracted.
Findings and recommendations not yet extracted.
Findings and recommendations not yet extracted.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings and recommendations not yet extracted.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
9 findings
F1:
Rodeo-Hercules Fire District, Reclamation District 799 and WCCUSD members appear not to be familiar with certain requirements of the Brown Act.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
Rodeo-Hercules Fire District, Reclamation District 799 and WCCUSD should have annual training in the Brown Act for its board members and support staff.
F2:
Certain items were not identified correctly on the Rodeo-Hercules Fire District agendas, particularly those items discussed in closed sessions.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
Rodeo-Hercules Fire District should have annual training concerning how to draft agendas that comply with the Brown Act.
F3:
Many members of the public do not know how to correct a Brown Act violation and do not know the time frame to object to a perceived violation.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
Rodeo Hercules Fire District should consider maintaining a website of the District's minutes and agendas, and identify funds to do so.
F4:
Certain shortcomings in following the letter and spirit of the Brown Act may have eroded the public trust in the Rodeo-Hercules Fire District, Reclamation District 799 and WCCUSD.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
Rodeo Hercules Fire District, Reclamation District 799 and WCCUSD should have a link for citizens to post concerns about possible Brown Act infractions, and identify funds to do so.
F5:
At an October 2014 Rodeo-Hercules Fire District meeting, not enough copies of an employment agreement that was to be discussed that night in closed session were made available to the public.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
Rodeo Hercules Fire District, Reclamation District 799 and WCCUSD should have a link to an organization such as The First Amendment Coalition (thefirstamendmentcoalition.org) for both Cure and Correct and Cease and Desist letters, with instructions, and identify funds to do so.
F6:
The public may need more than 72 hours prior notice of an agenda item relating to labor contracts to evaluate the financial impact or to review the boards assumptions in regard to sources of funding because these matters are often complex.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
Rodeo Hercules Fire District, Reclamation District and WCCUSD Boards should consider voting to extend the review period for contracts involving large financial commitments.
F7:
Rodeo Hercules Fire District closed sessions are held at the end of evening board meetings, resulting in limited opportunity for public comment on the outcome of matters decided in closed session.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
Rodeo Hercules Fire District, Reclamation District 799 and WCCUSD should have sufficient hard copies of supporting documents of items to be discussed in closed sessions before the closed sessions begin, and the ability to make and distribute sufficient copies if necessary.
F8:
Decisions reached on matters discussed in closed session and the identity of the board members who voted for matters decided in closed session have not always been disclosed at meetings of Rodeo-Hercules Fire District as required by the Brown Act.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
Rodeo Hercules Fire District should consider conducting its closed sessions prior to the beginning of an evening meeting rather than the end because members of the public are less likely to be present to comment at a late hour on matters reported out of a closed session. Contra Costa County 2014-2015 Grand Jury Report 1513
F9:
Rodeo-Hercules Fire Department does not have the staff to keep a website updated. Contra Costa County 2014-2015 Grand Jury Report 1513
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
6 findings
F1:
Fire Chief Hanley's employment agreement was improperly identified on the agenda for the October 8, 2014 meeting.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The RHFD Board should attempt to re-open negotiations with the chief concerning his current employment agreement with RHFD to allow for proper notice under the Brown Act.
F2:
The RHFD Board's actions at the October 8, 2014 meeting do not reflect that adequate time for consideration and negotiation was given to an employment agreement that has a fiscal and operational impact on the RHFD.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The RHFD Board should properly identify all items on its agendas and include accurate descriptions of each agenda item.
F3:
The RHFD Board has had problems with its agendas subsequent to the October 8, 2014 Board meeting.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The RHFD Board should record each director's vote on reportable actions from closed session in the meeting minutes of every Board meeting.
F4:
The October 8, 2014 Board meeting minutes did not reflect how each Board Contra Costa County 2014-2015 Grand Jury Report 1512 member voted on Fire Chief Hanley's employment contract.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
The RHFD Board members should receive training on the Brown Act immediately upon taking office and no less than every two years afterward.
F5:
The 2014 Agreement was substantially changed from the 2010 agreement, including the 2011 and 2012 amendments, affecting 12 of 20 terms.
F6:
The changes in the 2014 Agreement all favored Fire Chief Hanley.
Findings & Recommendations
12 findings
F1:
The WCCUSD school board appoints CBOC members who oversee it, which may make CBOC members feel beholden to WCCUSD board members, which may result in an inherent conflict of interest.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The School Board should eliminate the following six member positions from CBOC at the expiration of their terms, to eliminate any concerns about conflicts of interest. Five members, one recommended by each member of the Board of Education One member representing the Contra Costa Building and Construction Trades Council.
F2:
CBOC membership is currently set at 19, which makes it difficult to reach a quorum or to get business done with so many voices to be heard at meetings.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The School Board should change the School Board discretionary category of "Public Employees Union Local 1" to that of an "at large" position from the general community in order to allow for a greater pool of qualified candidates to apply.
F3:
The School Board had added a discretionary category for a member of the Public Employees Union Local 1 on CBOC.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The School Board should create an independent selection committee to select new nominees for CBOC, comprised of the CBOC Chair and a designated appointee from CBOC, two members from the Board of Education, and School Superintendent or designee, for a committee of five. Selection should be based on merit and be a transparent process to ensure public confidence in this vital selection process.
F4:
WCCUSD did not agree to post CBOC’s meeting materials on its website when requested to do so by CBOC.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
WCCUSD should provide CBOC members with complete, detailed and comprehensive financial data relating to the expenditure of bond revenues and items put to vote on the board agenda at least 7 days in advance of the board meetings, in order to permit meaningful and effective review and oversight.
F5:
WCCUSD has complete control over CBOC's website.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
WCCUSD should allow CBOC full access to the CBOC website.
F6:
WCCUSD has denied CBOC’s requests for access to CBOC’s website and rejected CBOC’s suggestions.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
WCCUSD should not change or add items to CBOC’s website without the permission of the CBOC chair.
F7:
WCCUSD has not always timely furnished financial reports to CBOC, allowing CBOC very little time for any thoughtful analysis.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
WCCUSD should provide CBOC with accurate, understandable and timely financial and non-financial reports concerning bond funded projects as well as other relevant information requested on the bond construction program at least monthly.
F8:
Financial reports provided by WCCUSD to CBOC are not always accurate and complete.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
WCCUSD should provide CBOC with a comprehensive master plan for the school construction projects within the next three months and as requested by CBOC.
F9:
WCCUSD and the School Board were not in compliance with law in refusing to support CBOC’s requests for public posting of CBOC agendas and minutes on WCCUSD’s website.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9:
WCCUSD should provide timely and comprehensive training to all new CBOC members on a timely basis. The following training materials, at a minimum, should be provided to all new CBOC members within one week of their appointment: (a) California League of Bond Oversight Committee recommended Best Practices (b) San Diego County Taxpayers Association "Oversight Committee Best Practices" Guide (c) California Coalition for Adequate School Housing "Proposition 39 - Best Practices Handbook" (d) Little Hoover Commission 2009 Report "Bond Spending: Expanding and Enhancing Oversight" (e) California League of Cities "A Guide to The Ralph M. Brown Act" (f) State Controller's Office 2011 Audit Report on the Los Angeles Community College District's bond construction program
F10:
WCCUSD has not consistently provided timely, adequate and independent training for new CBOC members. Recommended training manuals and pamphlets have not been furnished to CBOC members.
Related Recommendations (1)
R10:
The School Board should follow all of its policies.
F11:
CBOC had lacked a member who was active in a senior citizen's organization.
Related Recommendations (1)
R11:
The School Board should ensure that the CBOC contains a member from each category required by California Education Code Section 15282.
F12:
The School Board has not always required an application before approving CBOC members.
Findings & Recommendations
8 findings
F1:
Participation in foster care after age 18 under AB 12 is voluntary and youth may opt-out of the program before they turn 21.
F2:
Youth who opt out of foster care after age 18 can re-enter before they turn 21 if they re-enter within six months after opting out of the program.
F3:
Contra Costa County informs foster youth about AB 12 and works with governmental agencies and other organizations to offer programs and information about how the system works to this population.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
Contra Costa County Children and Family Services should continue to pro-actively inform foster care youth about AB 12’s programs.
F4:
Extension of foster care to emancipated or aged out youth (ages 18-21) benefits society because foster youth receiving extended services are less likely to rely on public resources and more likely to become self-sufficient adults.
F5:
Emancipated youth who face housing instability and employment difficulties are frequently financially insecure and often have health and mental health issues.
Related Recommendations (2)
R2:
Contra Costa County Children and Family Services Program should consider establishing more local housing options for aging out and emancipated youth, and identify funds to do so.
R3:
Contra Costa County Children and Family Services Program should continue to provide scholarship opportunities for youth so that they can have financial support while being trained or educated.
F6:
Emancipated youth often need strong supplemental supports into adulthood.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
Contra Costa County Children and Family Services Program should consider establishing more local housing options for aging out and emancipated youth, and identify funds to do so.
F7:
ILSP Programs help improve the lives of at-risk foster care youth by helping them secure housing, employment, educational opportunities, healthcare and community support, among other necessities.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
The County should continue to support the dedicated and professional skills offered by the ILSP service providers.
F8:
The County has established a database called Gold Mine to track the progress of foster youth served by the County programs.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
The County should maintain the Gold Mine database to monitor the progress and outcomes for County foster youth served by the County programs in order to help make future funding decisions about support services for foster youth.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
6 findings
F1:
Participants in Community Court benefit by resolving their issues outside of the traditional court system and avoiding having a criminal record.
F2:
The city benefits by receiving income from fines imposed on Community Court participants.
F3:
The city benefits from Community Court participants providing compulsory community service hours.
F4:
The District Attorney’s Office and Superior Court both benefit from Community Court due to the reduction in misdemeanor cases that each must process.
F5:
The hearing officer for Community Court issues directives that include fines, restitution, community service, diversion programs, and/or counseling.
F6:
The city does not have a Community Court program.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The city should consider establishing a Community Court.
Findings & Recommendations
10 findings
F1:
County employees record their time on timesheets or timecards.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The County should require timesheets or the system of time reporting to include a signed attestation of accuracy from the reporting employee and employee’s supervisor or manager.
F2:
County employees and their supervisor or manager are not required to attest to the accuracy of their timesheets or time cards.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The County should require department supervisors or managers to periodically review attendance and time records to ensure both accuracy and completeness.
F3:
The County has not implemented a method to verify the accuracy of timesheets and timecards.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The Auditor-Controller’s Office should consider codifying timekeeping and pay code procedures for each department, and identifying funds to do so.
F4:
Pay clerks sometimes enter inaccurate pay codes due to misunderstandings, lack of training, and lack of department-specific codified procedures.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
The County should make timekeeping and pay code procedures promulgated by the Auditor-Controller’s Office, along with associated training, available to all payroll clerks and included in the new employee orientation.
F5:
In March of 2014, County departments were directed to maintain employees’ schedules in the County-developed Time Schedule Collection Website.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
The County should direct all departments to place salaried employees’ schedules in the Time Schedule Collection Website as required in the March 6, 2014 bulletin from the office of the Auditor-Controller.
F6:
Currently, only 4,723 (56.7%) of the 8,326 employees have schedules in the Time Schedule Collection Website.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
The Auditor-Controller’s Office should explore possible ways to reduce the number of pay codes to a more manageable level.
F7:
The County encounters difficulty in tracking and recording appropriate time and pay codes due to the complexity of its timekeeping structure.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
The County should consider developing whistleblower procedures for employees reporting suspected timekeeping fraud, posting these procedures on the County’s intranet, and identifying funds to carry out these activities.
F8:
The County does not have its own whistleblower policy or procedures in place for employees to report suspected timekeeping fraud.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
The Auditor-Controller’s Office should consider including timekeeping practices in operational audits and recommending corrective action for all timekeeping deficiencies identified and identifying funds to carry out these activities.
F9:
Deficiencies in timekeeping practices are not systematically identified and corrected because operational audits do not include timekeeping practices and payroll queries are not sufficiently comprehensive to identify all deficiencies.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9:
The County should adopt a semi-monthly pay cycle for all employees which will eliminate the need for an option to take a monthly advance.
F10:
The County has a semi-monthly pay cycle for hourly employees and has created what amounts to a semi-monthly pay cycle for salaried employees by allowing these employees the option to take up to a one-third advance.
Findings & Recommendations
22 findings
F1:
The MCDF uses 1/3 of its dormitory space.
F2:
The five-year average daily occupancy rate at the MCDF is 52 inmates, although there is capacity for 160 inmates.
Related Recommendations (2)
R3:
Once Recommendations 1 - 2 have been accomplished, the SO should consider broadening the classification of MCDF inmates so that the facility will be fully utilized.
R4:
If the State does not award SB 863 jail construction funds to the County, the SO should consider alternative plans and associated funding methods to reduce inmate occupancy at the Martinez Detention Facility.
F3:
MCDF, built in 1942, is 73 years old.
F4:
MCDF occupies 32 acres of a 164-acre parcel owned by the County at the southeastern foot of Mt. Diablo.
F5:
The Sheriff's Office has a shooting range and a training facility on the County's 164-acre parcel at the southeastern foot of Mt. Diablo.
F6:
There are six dormitory wings at the MCDF.
F7:
The MCDF dormitory, Wings F and G, are permanently closed, Wings B and C are open; and Wings A and B are closed but could re-open if the flooring were reinforced.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The SO should consider ways to fund the restoration of MCDF Wings A and B.
F8:
Barbed wire fences surround the perimeter of the MCDF.
F9:
MCDF is a low-security prison.
F10:
MCDF lacks security cameras.
F11:
The SO does not transfer offenders who are flight risks and prone to violence to the MCDF because it lacks adequate security.
F12:
One Contra Costa County deputy sheriff is on duty at night at the MCDF.
F13:
There are minimal behavioral conflicts at the MCDF.
F14:
The infirmary at the MCDF is open 8:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m., Monday - Friday.
F15:
Inmates needing access to medical personnel 24-hours a day, such as those with cardiac and pulmonary issues, diabetes, asthma and severe allergies, may not be housed at the MCDF
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The SO should consider providing medical staffing 24-hours a day, seven days a week and a pharmacy at the MCDF, and ways to fund such staffing and the pharmacy.
F16:
The MCDF lacks a pharmacy.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The SO should consider providing medical staffing 24-hours a day, seven days a week and a pharmacy at the MCDF, and ways to fund such staffing and the pharmacy.
F17:
The MCDF inmates have opportunities for rehabilitation.
F18:
The So provides classes for personal growth, academic education and job skills to inmates at the MCDF.
F19:
Gang issues are a primary reason why Martinez Detention Facility inmates do not eat in a communal setting or take group classes.
F20:
Inmates at the Martinez Detention Facility are released to an interior room and a cement-walled courtyard for one to three hours either once a day or every other day, based on an inmate's classification.
F21:
In August 2015, there are plans to submit an application on behalf of Contra Costa County, for $90 million of State funds made available pursuant to Senate Bill 863. The funds will be used to build a 240-bed mental health wing at the WCDF.
F22:
If the State awards Contra Costa County with Senate Bill 863 funds, the SO estimates that construction of the 240-bed mental health wing at the WCDF will be completed by late 2018 or early 2019.
Findings & Recommendations
13 findings
F1:
BART is an essential part of the San Francisco Bay Area transportation system.
F2:
A strike by BART employees or a lockout causes a significant disruption to the riders, citizens, and counties of Alameda, Contra Costa , San Francisco , San Mateo, and Santa Clara .
F3:
An interruption of BART service directly disrupts riders and impacts BART income, and indirectly affects the environment, the roads, employment, businesses surrounding BART station sites, and other means of transportation.
F4:
The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors has not adopted a plan to minimize the effects of a BART strike on residents of the county.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors should adopt a plan to mitigate the effects of any future BART strikes on county residents.
F5:
A multi-jurisdictional transit service plan developed and initiated by the MTC Commission during the last BART strike was insufficient to mitigate the impact of the strike.
F6:
In previous years BART management and its labor unions have had an adversarial and distrustful relationship.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
BART Board of Directors should adopt a negotiation method that is built on trust, communication and transparency.
F7:
The modified baseball type negotiation model presents a better likelihood of success, unlike the current method, which was not able to avert the last strike
F8:
During the last strike BART management was working to address the problems confronting management, and labor unions were working to address the problems confronting labor.
F9:
BART’s labor unions have not agreed to refrain from a strike when there is no contract in place.
Related Recommendations (4)
R2:
BART Board of Directors should immediately re-open negotiations with their labor unions to agree on the process for future negotiations.
R3:
BART Board of Directors should review and negotiate the use of an independent arbitrator during labor negotiations, who can decide any major financial and work rule issues pursuant to the baseball style arbitration process.
R6:
The arbitrator would have only two choices in making his or her decision. The arbitrator’s decision must accept either the management offer or the labor offer. The purpose of this rule is to encourage both sides to make responsible offers, rather than to make extremely one-sided offers. Such extreme offers should be easily rejected by the arbitrator. There could be one last chance, however, after the arbitrator has chosen one or the other offers, to allow the parties to argue for some modifications to the offer chosen in the event it clearly posed some unworkable or impractical difficulties. The arbitrator would be the one to make any final decision on that point.
R7:
The final decision of the arbitrator would be binding on both sides and any remaining issues still open would be subject to further collective bargaining. There would be no right to strike on the remaining issues, nor further arbitration unless separately agreed by both sides. This alternative to a BART strike would be in the public interest. Regardless of which type of negotiation is used, the current negotiation process has not worked to the benefit of the BART riders, BART management, or their labor unions. While employee/management rights to negotiate are not in question, the public service obligations to the people of the San Francisco Bay Area are likewise not in question. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLAIMER One or more Grand Jurors recused themselves due to a possible conflict and did not participate in the preparation or approval of this report.
F10:
A report from Agreement Dynamics Inc. was commissioned by BART which resulted in 63 recommendations on what problems existed during the last negotiation process and how to address the many problems between management and labor unions.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
BART Board of Directors should monitor the implementation of the recommendations made in Agreement Dynamics Inc.’s report that it has chosen to adopt.
F11:
Some believe there is not enough time for BART and its labor unions to correct enough of their problems in order to conduct productive negotiations in 2017.
F12:
There is currently nothing in place which ensures that if a contract expires that BART service will continue.
F13:
The overall impact of a strike is too damaging to the San Francisco Bay Area to allow a strike to occur.
Findings & Recommendations
7 findings
F1:
The County and CCCFPD currently have unfunded accrued pension and OPEB liabilities that exceed $2.6 Billion. The cost to the County and CCCFPD to cover these and additional annual pension and OPEB liabilities require payments in excess of $375 Million each year.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
Establish a special web page on the County web site where citizens can easily track by means of a pension "dashboard" the costs and size of the County's and CCCFPD's pension obligations and the progress on its plans to reduce their costs.
F2:
Pension costs alone now consume over 11% of the combined budgets of the County and CCFPD. These costs have risen from a percentage slightly under 5% in 2000 and now constitute the largest financial challenge facing the County.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
Establish a special web page on the County web site where citizens can easily track by means of a pension "dashboard" the costs and size of the County's and CCCFPD's pension obligations and the progress on its plans to reduce their costs.
F3:
The cost of pension and OPEB obligations are debts that must be paid before the County can allocate available resources to other needs and services. This has contributed to the "crowding out" of other County services, the deferral of needed building maintenance projects, and the postponement of needed system improvements for the County.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
Establish a special web page on the County web site where citizens can easily track by means of a pension "dashboard" the costs and size of the County's and CCCFPD's pension obligations and the progress on its plans to reduce their costs.
F4:
Pension costs are difficult to manage because they vary directly with the investment results obtained by CCCERA on its pension funds. The County and CCCFPD are at risk each year of having to increase pension payments in the event CCCERA does not achieve its 7.25% assumed rate of investment return on the pension fund.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
Establish a special web page on the County web site where citizens can easily track by means of a pension "dashboard" the costs and size of the County's and CCCFPD's pension obligations and the progress on its plans to reduce their costs.
F5:
The County faces competitive pressures in retaining and recruiting a skilled and professional workforce. This limits its ability to seek greater contributions from its employees to the costs of the pension and OPEB obligations because other counties and cities may not seek the same contributions from their employees.
F6:
The County and CCCFPD have a severe handicap in reducing their pension obligations because of a highly inflexible rule under a long-standing California court precedent that the County believes severely limits their ability to negotiate reductions in future, unearned pension benefit rates with their current employees.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1:
The County Board of Supervisors and the Board of Directors of CCCFPD should establish a task force to review all options available to reduce the burden of the Contra Costa County 2014-2015 Grand Jury Report 1503 County and CCCFPD's pension obligations, including efforts to bring about a reform in California public pension law. The task force should: Confirm with the County's or CCCERA's actuaries what level of potential
R2:
The task force should be formed within 90 days and be required to report back to the Boards with its recommendations within 90 - 120 days.
F7:
The County has not taken steps to challenge or change the California legal rule on changes to future pension benefits for existing employees, whether through the initiative process, clarifying legislation, or friend of the court legal briefs.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1:
The County Board of Supervisors and the Board of Directors of CCCFPD should establish a task force to review all options available to reduce the burden of the Contra Costa County 2014-2015 Grand Jury Report 1503 County and CCCFPD's pension obligations, including efforts to bring about a reform in California public pension law. The task force should: Confirm with the County's or CCCERA's actuaries what level of potential
R2:
The task force should be formed within 90 days and be required to report back to the Boards with its recommendations within 90 - 120 days.
* 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.