Fresno County Grand Jury
2004-2005
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
34 findings
F1:
Completion of retention schedules
F2:
Storage of documents in the FCRMP facility 16 K. The Fresno County Auditor-Controller/Tax Collector and Public Defenders Office have completed all applicable retention schedules and store their documents in the FCRMP facility. L. Currently, the Agriculture Department and County Library have finished their retention schedules, but have not begun to implement the storage of documents phase. M. Not all departments in the county currently participate in the FCRMP. N. Prior to this program, records were frequently stored in an inefficient or inappropriate manner. O. Some departments’ methods of storage create serious physical safety hazards for staff and can result in financial liability to the county. P. Some storage facilities create fire hazards. Q. Not all of the county historical documents have been identified and protected. R. FCRMP primarily utilizes a county owned facility for its services. CONCLUSIONS A. The FCRMP has proven to be cost effective and an efficient approach to centralized County records management. B. Departments within Fresno County are not required to use FCRMP. C. Not all departments have developed retention schedules. D. The FCRMP requires equipment to provide centralized scanning of documents for all departments. Circumstances dictate the type of equipment needed. E. Use of a county owned facility by FCRMP is both cost efficient and practical. F. The FCRMP will assist departments and agencies with:
F3:
Establishing retention schedules 17
F4:
Destroying outdated documents
F5:
Retrieving of documents with speed and ease
F6:
Developing electronic records
F7:
Centralizing storage
F8:
Reducing storage space and accompanying costs
F9:
Identifying and protecting historical documents G. Four departments have completed all applicable retention schedules:
F10:
Auditor-Controller/Tax Collector
F11:
Public Defenders Office
F12:
Agriculture Department
F13:
County Library H. Two departments have completed storage of documents in the FCRMP storage facility:
F14:
Auditor-Controller/Tax Collector
F15:
Public Defenders Office I. Inappropriate storage of records results in:
F16:
Physical safety hazards for staff resulting in financial liability to the county.
F17:
Unnecessary rental expense for off-site storage
F18:
Damage or loss of historical documents 18
F19:
Establishing retention schedules 17
F20:
Destroying outdated documents
F21:
Retrieving of documents with speed and ease
F22:
Developing electronic records
F23:
Centralizing storage
F24:
Reducing storage space and accompanying costs
F25:
Identifying and protecting historical documents G. Four departments have completed all applicable retention schedules:
F26:
Auditor-Controller/Tax Collector
F27:
Public Defenders Office
F28:
Agriculture Department
F29:
County Library H. Two departments have completed storage of documents in the FCRMP storage facility:
F30:
Auditor-Controller/Tax Collector
F31:
Public Defenders Office I. Inappropriate storage of records results in:
F32:
Physical safety hazards for staff resulting in financial liability to the county.
F33:
Unnecessary rental expense for off-site storage
F34:
Damage or loss of historical documents 18
Additional Recommendations
3
Not linked to specific findings.
R14:
The Records Management Program: • Develop a compliance timetable for all departments to establish retention schedules • Create a compliance timetable for all departments to complete storage of documents within the FCRMP facility • Acquire the scanning equipment needed for centralized electronic record keeping
R15:
The County Board of Supervisors mandate and enforce: • All departments in Fresno County complete retention schedules by date established by FCRMP compliance timetable • All departments in Fresno County complete storage phase in program facility by date established by FCRMP • All departments are in full compliance by 2010
R16:
County Board of Supervisors fund the acquisition by FCRMP of scanning equipment for centralized electronic record keeping. Storage of files at Seaport building prior to records management program 20 Storage of files at Seaport building after initiation of records management program 21
Findings & Recommendations
3 findings
F1:
potable water for households
F2:
gray water for agriculture
F3:
tertiary water for landscape P. The use of purple pipe identifies tertiary water. Q. Prior land usage is a direct source of water contamination. R. The County requires tests to identify potential soil and groundwater contamination. S. For individual wells, the requirements for a draw-down test (pump test) has changed from .5 to 1.0 gallons per minute, under pressure. Wells, yielding less than 5 gallons per minute, require use of a 2,000 gallon storage tank. T. Most County Planning personnel are not knowledgeable in long-term water issues and potential water shortages. U. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is a valuable tool to preserve and protect water resources. V. Running water to obtain hot water is a costly waste of energy and millions of gallons of water each year. CONCLUSIONS A. Availability of water is a major issue. Experts in the field concur that lack of water is a great concern. B. The development of future water supplies will require additional means of water treatment, storage and delivery systems. C. Residential, commercial and public use of water should be balanced. D. Agriculture requires less water per acre consumption than subdivisions and provides recharge for aquifers. E. The long-term impact of preserving agricultural land may require constraints on urban growth. F. Fresno County Zoning Ordinances pertaining to water use should be reviewed since forty-year-old plans are still in use. G. Fresno County currently has a Water Advisory Committee overseeing water issues. H. Development of additional recharge basins will assist in the replenishment of aquifers. I. Pre-existing water contamination is a concern for redevelopment or in-fill projects. J. Additional water reservoirs are necessary to store mountain water run-off. K The implementation of meters and tiered pricing of water usage will encourage conservation. L. Water treatment plants with three stages would assist recharge and the purification of potable, tertiary and gray water. M. A knowledge of water planning is necessary for Planning Department personnel. N. Environmental Impact Reports (EIR) are useful and necessary tools to preserve and protect water resources. O. The present test standards for minimum gallons per minute is an insufficient volume for water supply requirements of a residence. P. The use of on-demand hot water recirculation systems would save millions of gallons of water and reduce costs. Q. The current Residential Building Code does not require on-demand hot water recirculation systems.
Additional Recommendations
29
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
There is considerable traffic congestion on the streets of Fresno near freeway intersections and during rush hours.
R2:
Traffic signals on most high traffic city streets are not synchronized for efficient flow of traffic.
R3:
Traffic flow problems are the most serious in areas of the city where there are no effective expressways or freeway systems designed to move heavy traffic.
R4:
Fresno is currently installing a centrally controlled, synchronized traffic system along major arteries.
R5:
The synchronized traffic system is being installed in six phases. The first three phases are funded.
R6:
The synchronized traffic system is being installed on streets with significant traffic flow.
R7:
Fresno has over four hundred traffic signals within the city and maintains another 200 in other Fresno County cities.
R8:
Only forty of the over four hundred city traffic signals are connected to the Traffic Operation Center (TOC): • not all traffic signals will be connected to the TOC • the TOC is currently not fully operational 37
R9:
The majority of the signaled intersections in Fresno have programming capability: • sixty-five percent of signals are activated and capable of detecting traffic at the intersection • approximately twenty percent of signals are technologically advanced and programmable and are designed to be coordinated with other intersections • fifteen percent are incapable of being programmed (fixed time/electromechanical) • the cost to upgrade the specific functions of signals is $250,000 per signal
R10:
The City Traffic Engineering Section will respond to citizen suggestions on improving traffic flow at “problem” intersections.
R11:
The City Traffic Operations Center is currently composed of a manager and two 0.80 full-time equivalent staff.
R12:
The City Traffic Engineering Section has one quarter-time position that works on timing of signals.
R13:
The City Traffic Engineering Section spends two-thirds or more of its time responding to new development projects as opposed to traffic infrastructure projects: • developers may request traffic signals to enhance traffic flow into their businesses and developments • developers are required to pay for new signals they request be installed • a new signal that does not meet the requirements of the Traffic Engineering Section must be approved by the City Council
R14:
Traffic signals in Fresno are currently under two different divisions. The Traffic Engineering Section implements the planning, placement and timing of signals. The Street Maintenance Division installs and maintains signals.
R15:
The City of Fresno is conducting a search to employ a licensed Traffic Engineer to manage the TOC. TRAFFIC FLOW/CONGESTION CONCLUSIONS
R22:
The Fresno County Board of Supervisors: • direct the Water Advisory Committee to be more diligent in overseeing the sale and use of water • develop and implement a tiered system of water pricing for the use of potable, tertiary and gray water • require the installation of double water meters in all future developments • require developers to demonstrate availability of an adequate water supply for all future developments • require performance bonds from developers for the assurance of future water supplies to their projects • require developers to set aside land to be used for re-charge basins 35
R23:
The Fresno County Planning Commission require documented evidence of availability of water supply that complies with County policy before approving any new development.
R24:
Temperance Flat be developed as a reservoir for snowmelt and foothill run-off.
R25:
Tertiary water from all water treatment plants be used.
R26:
Draw-down test (pump test) standards be raised to a minimum of 5 gallons per minute, not under pressure, for 48 hours.
R27:
An immediate building moratorium be implemented until proven water sources are located, developed and preserved.
R28:
The County Residential Building Code require an on-demand hot water recirculating system be installed in all new residential construction.
R29:
The Fresno County Zoning Ordinances pertaining to water use be reviewed 36 TRAFFIC FLOW/CONGESTION INTRODUCTION Fresno is rapidly becoming a large urban city experiencing increasing traffic flow and congestion problems. The 2004/2005 Fresno County Grand Jury (FCGJ) interviewed experts in the field of traffic control and governmental leaders about these problems and possible solutions. The FCGJ strongly believes that it is time our city leaders address this problem before it becomes unmanageable. TRAFFIC FLOW/CONGESTION FINDINGS
R30:
Hire additional personnel to accomplish its responsibilities.
R31:
Require developers to mitigate traffic problems caused by their development projects.
R32:
Address current and future traffic flow and congestion problems on streets not included in the current synchronized traffic system program.
R33:
Install and upgrade technically advanced signals capable of being coordinated with those at other intersections.
R34:
Devise and implement a definitive plan for the completion of the TOC.
R35:
Request funding be provided by the Fresno City Council for the remaining phases of the synchronized traffic control system. BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, AND DISTRICTS COMMITTEES INTRODUCTION The 2004/2005 Fresno County Grand Jury gathered information about the various City and County Boards, Commissions, and Districts. Past Grand Jury reports were also reviewed. Citizens’ complaints prompted this Committee to concentrate its time and efforts on the Lighting and Maintenance Districts of the City of Fresno. For many years an issue regarding common landscaping in some neighborhoods and the problem of keeping pace with the rising costs of needed maintenance has existed. To date no solution has emerged to accommodate those neighborhoods caught in the dilemma. Sprinklers are not working, weeds are not being sprayed or removed. Many complaints from the affected homeowners have resulted and continue to be a bone of contention because services paid for are not performed or not completed in a timely manner. Our goal has been to first sort out the various historical issues. Secondly, to make recommendations for the work and funding of these special maintenance districts to keep pace with the maintenance needs of the homeowners. 40
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
3 findings
F17:
Fresno County find additional sources of funding and increase mental health staffing at Juvenile Hall and at the new Juvenile Justice campus to accommodate minors twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, and all holidays.
F18:
Fresno County provide mental health and substance abuse evaluation for minors incarcerated in the Juvenile Justice system.
F19:
Fresno County takes leadership in supporting the proposal by Kaweah Delta Hospital to open a new psychiatric inpatient program serving all children and teens in the Central Valley. 26
Additional Recommendations
3
Not linked to specific findings.
R17:
Fresno County find additional sources of funding and increase mental health staffing at Juvenile Hall and at the new Juvenile Justice campus to accommodate minors twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, and all holidays.
R18:
Fresno County provide mental health and substance abuse evaluation for minors incarcerated in the Juvenile Justice system.
R19:
Fresno County takes leadership in supporting the proposal by Kaweah Delta Hospital to open a new psychiatric inpatient program serving all children and teens in the Central Valley. 26
Findings & Recommendations
39 findings
F1:
Indicating 173 users per 10,000 Fresno residents compared to a 96 city median of 60 users per 10,0000 residents
F2:
Implying Fresno County has approximately 14,700 users at risk for HIV/ AIDS and/or Hepatitis C if dirty needles and syringes are shared (based on an extrapolation from a U.S. Census 2003 population estimate). B. Nationwide, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 15% of HIV/AIDS cases and an estimated 60% of Hepatitis C cases are associated with intravenous drug use. C. In California each year, according to the California Department of Health and CDC estimates, the sharing of dirty needles and syringes is associated with:
F3:
Over 1,000 people infected with HIV
F4:
Over 3,000 new Hepatitis C infections reported. D. In Fresno County, according to the Department of Community Health:
F5:
25% of AIDS cases from February 1983, to March 31, 2005, involved intravenous drug users (IDUs)
F6:
In preliminary data from a current ongoing study of IDUs, 90% tested positive for Hepatitis C. E. The numbers cited in B, C and D above do not reflect the hundreds of additional transmitted infections from drug injectors to others. F. Reputable published investigations concur that clean needle and syringe exchange programs:
F7:
Reduce incidence and transmission of HIV/AIDS among IDUs, their sexual partners, and their children
F8:
Reduce incidence of Hepatitis C among IDUs
F9:
Encourage drug users to enter detoxification and drug treatment programs
F10:
Do not increase rates of drug use, drug injection, or crime.
F11:
Reduce the number of circulating and discarded contaminated needles and syringes in a community. G. Costs to the County compared to the estimated $1 cost per distributed syringe are:
F12:
$200,000 to treat one HIV/AIDS infected person for a lifetime
F13:
$15,000 - $20,000 annual expense for treatment of one patient with Hepatitis C; and an additional $300,000 for a liver transplant. H. The Fresno County Alcohol and Advisory Board, in a resolution supporting AB2871 dated Sept 1, 2004, acknowledged the importance of a clean needle and syringe exchange program. I. The following state, local and national organizations advocate the use of needle and syringe programs:
F14:
UCSF Fresno Medical Education Program
F15:
Fresno-Madera Medical Society
F16:
California Medical Association
F17:
California Nurses Association
F18:
School of Public Health of the University of California 28
F19:
American Medical Association
F20:
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. J. A volunteer “underground tolerated” needle exchange program has been functioning in Fresno County for ten years:
F21:
Reaches approximately 500-600 intravenous drug users each week
F22:
Receives 4,000-5,000 dirty needles and syringes for disposal in biohazard containers each week
F23:
Has limited funds and cannot advertise
F24:
Only meets at one site a week for one hour. K. California State laws allow localities to legalize needle exchanges and purchases:
F25:
AB136 (effective Jan. 1, 2000) protects local entities, their agents, and employees from criminal prosecution for distributing syringes as part of a needle exchange program authorized pursuant to the declaration of a local emergency due to existence of a critical public health crises which, once adopted, can be regularly renewed on the Board of Supervisors “consent calendar”
F26:
SB1159 (effective Jan. 1, 2005) allows cities and counties to authorize pharmacies within their borders to sell ten or fewer hypodermic needles or syringes at any one time to a person 18 years of age or older, as long as the pharmacist agrees to certain conditions, including providing information on drug treatment and disease control, participating in a program to insure safe disposal of used syringes, and registering with the approval of local governments. L. Charitable foundations and a State agency have funded legal needle exchange programs:
F27:
The Comer Foundation
F28:
Syringe Access Fund supported by Levi Strauss Foundation and Tides Foundation
F29:
California State Office of AIDS. Conclusions A. Fresno County has a large number of intravenous drug users who are at risk for acquiring HIV and, especially, Hepatitis C infections. B. Needle and syringe exchange and purchase programs are an important public health measure and a cost effective way to reduce the spread of HIV/ AIDS and Hepatitis C. C. Needle and syringe exchange programs do not encourage the use of illegal drugs and do not enhance criminal activity. D. California State laws AB136 and SB1159 permit localities to legalize needle exchange and purchase programs. E. A legal needle and syringe exchange program in Fresno County will:
F30:
Be eligible to receive funding from charitable foundations
F31:
Be able to establish several needle and syringe exchange sites with reasonable hours of operation
F32:
Reach more intravenous drug users
F33:
Reduce haphazard elimination of contaminated needles
F34:
Reduce incidence of HIV/AIDS and Hepatitis C in Fresno County.
F35:
Be eligible to receive funding from charitable foundations
F36:
Be able to establish several needle and syringe exchange sites with reasonable hours of operation
F37:
Reach more intravenous drug users
F38:
Reduce haphazard elimination of contaminated needles
F39:
Reduce incidence of HIV/AIDS and Hepatitis C in Fresno County.
Additional Recommendations
2
Not linked to specific findings.
R20:
Establish needle and syringe exchange and purchase programs in accordance with State laws AB136 and SB1159.
R21:
Establish a relationship with one or more charitable organizations that fund legal needle and syringe exchange programs. CITY COMMITTEE INTRODUCTION The City Committee reviewed the traffic flow/congestion within the city of Fresno. Motorists experience repeated delays in traffic flow and congestion throughout the city. Traveling on east-west or north-south streets, one experiences traffic signals that fail to be synchronized resulting in inefficient, wasteful and frustrating driving conditions that need fixing. This stood out as the most urgent issue needing our attention. The committee interviewed city officials, city department heads and obtained information from the media to obtain its findings and make recommendations. The City Committee further investigated these possible areas of fact finding: • No Neighborhood Left Behind. • Calwa/Malaga Water District. • City Beautification Issues • Review Little Hoover Commission Report on the City of Fresno. • Traffic Flow, Congestion and Air Quality on City Streets • After School programs offered by the City in conjunction with FUSD. • Fresno County workforce After conferring with other committees, a decision was made to combine the efforts of the County, City and Education Committees in a joint report to address a most pressing issue of double digit unemployment in Fresno County with the Workforce Report. The City Committee proceeded with its investigation culminating in these reports: • Traffic Flow/Congestion • Fresno County Workforce 31
Findings & Recommendations
25 findings
F1:
Sweeping, dishwashing, changing bed linens
F2:
Meal preparation, laundry, grocery shopping
F3:
Paramedical services ordered by a licensed health care professional
F4:
Non-medical personal care
F5:
Assistance with transportation
F6:
Protective supervision C. Services IHSS does not pay for:
F7:
24-Hour care and supervision
F8:
Routine outdoor work or gardening
F9:
Clean-up after pets, visitors and family members
F10:
Moving or lifting heavy furniture, etc.
F11:
Mileage D. Until the formation of the IPW, RP services could be domestic only and performed only by a parent of a minor child or a spouse. PCSP services could not be domestic only nor performed by the parent of a minor child or a spouse E. With the passage of the IPW, the PCSP will now cover domestic services only and/or protective supervision services only when these services are not provided by a parent of a minor child or a spouse. F. There are numerous serious problems with the PCSP program which need addressing.
F12:
The number of hours worked by providers; as reported on the time card, cannot be verified by IHSS
F13:
Social worker approved services performed by the provider cannot be verified
F14:
Providers and recipients may not fully understand the consequences of fraud 47
F15:
IHSS time cards do not address fraud and its consequences
F16:
There is no county registry of providers or recipients convicted of fraud
F17:
Providers convicted of fraud are removed from the program, whereas recipients are allowed to remain in the program with no consequences
F18:
There has been limited training of social workers to detect fraud
F19:
The commission of fraud is still unchecked in the PCSP within IHSS system G. Since its inception in July 2003, the newly formed fraud unit in the District Attorney’s Office has had 401 cases referred for investigation for fraud, with 166 cases completed. Of these, 113 cases were referred for prosecution resulting in 60 convictions for restitution. H. In this same time frame:
F20:
There has been an estimated $713,219 in losses resulting from fraud
F21:
$432,205 has been ordered to be paid in restitution I. There are only two investigators assigned to handle IHSS fraud. J. Investigators lack adequate surveillance equipment. K. The first training session for social workers to better detect fraud, held in March of this year, had an immediate result of 85 cases being referred to the fraud unit of the District Attorney’s Office. L. The doctor’s referral/evaluation form does not address the specific needs of the recipient. M. There are 55 social workers in the PCSP. Of these, 42 are assigned to monitor the 11,839 recipients and 13 social workers are assigned to intake services. N. Social workers are only required to visit assigned recipients once a year according to state regulations. O. Social worker’s ability to make unannounced visits is limited by a heavy caseload P. The cost of providing in-home services is projected to increase 21% annually in Fresno County. Q. The statewide cost of IHSS for PCSP’s initial year (1993/1994) was $232 million. The cost for PCSP in 2003/2004 was $1.4 billion. R. The cost in Fresno County for the first six months of the current fiscal year was budgeted for $52 million and the actual money spent was $63 million. An increase of 21% over budget. S. Fresno County authorities estimate that fraud is committed by 30% to 35% of the recipients/providers in the program. T. Providers are not required to be trained to meet the specific needs of the recipient. U. The Fresno County Board of Supervisors established the Public Authority in 2002, in accordance with Assembly Bill 1682 passed in 1999. The purpose of the Public Authority is to:
F22:
Serve as the provider’s employer of record for wage negotiations and benefits
F23:
Furnish a provider registry
F24:
Offer provider and recipient access to training
F25:
Perform provider background checks V. Recipients are not required to use Public Authority trained providers. Providers are not required to be registered with the Public Authority. W. Recipients select and employ the provider of their choice, making them the employer of record. X. There are approximately 10,000 IHSS providers in Fresno County with less than 10% having been hired through the Public Authority process. Y. The State of California’s primary function is to disburse payments to the providers for services rendered. Z. According to IHSS statistics, over 60% of care providers are relatives. AA. Neither the State of California nor Fresno County require criminal background checks for providers. BB. The Public Authority is the only entity that performs background checks on providers, and does so without State funding. CC. A medical doctor’s statement of the medical and/or physical needs of a recipient is not required for a social worker’s assessment of the recipient. DD. Many of the recommendations made by the 2003/2004 Fresno County Grand Jury, relative to fraud, were not adopted by Fresno County on the premise that they were not required by the State of California. CONCLUSIONS A. The use of timecards in the In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) program lacks adequate oversight and leads to fraud. B. IHSS forms, including time cards, are not specific to enable the detection of fraud. C. There is no admonition on the time cards relative to the consequences of fraud. D. Social workers only recently have received training to better detect fraud. E. The first training session for social workers to detect fraud had immediate positive results with 85 referrals being made to the fraud unit. F. Providers and recipients need to be given training addressing fraud and its consequences. G. Until tighter controls are implemented in the PCSP, fraud will continue at the expense of the taxpayers. H. Social worker’s heavy caseloads limit their ability to visit recipients more than once each year and to properly monitor recipients continuing and changing needs. I. Social workers are limited in their ability to make unannounced visits to recipients. J. There is an insufficient number of fraud investigators assigned to the IHSS. K. Fraud investigators lack sufficient surveillance equipment to carry out fraud investigations. L. The commission of fraud continues to be prevalent in Fresno County. M. Specialized training of care providers is not required by State law and County ordinance. N. Recipients are not required to employ Public Authority trained providers. O. The State of California and Fresno County does not require background checks of providers. P. The Public Authority is the only public entity that requires and provides criminal background checks on all registered providers. Q. There needs to be a County master registry of IHSS providers or recipients convicted of fraud. R. The medical doctor’s referral/evaluation form needs to address the specific needs of the recipient to be performed by the provider. S. The fraud unit in the District Attorney’s Office is a valuable tool that will begin to pay for itself and the monies recovered in restitution.
Additional Recommendations
13
Not linked to specific findings.
R40:
In-Home Supportive Services time cards be revised to indicate each specific service provided.
R41:
Time cards include an admonishment citing the penalties for committing fraud and perjury.
R42:
Fresno County establish an approved list of physicians who would make medical evaluations of recipients.
R43:
A standard medical form be created to provide detailed information to be used by the social workers for evaluation of the recipient’s needs.
R44:
Only a medical doctor sign and approve the medical assessment form of the recipient.
R45:
The District Attorney’s Fraud Unit continue ongoing training for social workers to detect and report fraud.
R46:
The fraud investigation staff in the District Attorney’s office be increased.
R47:
In-Home Supportive Services officials investigate the increasing costs of the program in Fresno County.
R48:
Require providers to utilize the Public Authority training programs. 51
R49:
Fresno County establish and maintain a master registry of all providers and recipients convicted of In-Home Supportive Services fraud.
R50:
In-Home Supportive Services continue to encourage the State Legislature to improve and tighten controls on the program statewide.
R51:
County Board of Supervisors provide funding to: • Hire more Personal Care Services Program social workers • Purchase additional surveillance equipment for the In-Home Supportive Services Fraud Unit of the District Attorney’s Office • Encourage State Legislature to improve and tighten controls of the In-Home Supportive Services program
R52:
Fresno County Work with our local State Legislators to change State regulations to allow counties to establish more control over their In-Home Supportive Services program. 52
Findings & Recommendations
28 findings
F1:
California State laws empower cities to form these districts
F2:
These districts are located throughout the city, totaling 160.8 acres of common landscaping
F3:
The homeowners in these districts pay a special yearly maintenance fee that is included in the County property tax statement
F4:
Most homes and businesses in the city are not located in the districts B. Landscaping, Lighting and Maintenance District 1 (LLMD#1):
F5:
Was implemented in 1983 and stopped adding new tracts in 1997
F6:
Consists of 145 tracts, totaling 78.8 acres of common landscaping
F7:
Is an assessment district in which the fee is fixed at 19 cents per square foot of common landscaping
F8:
Has no practical means for increasing the fee as maintenance costs rise C. Community Facilities District 2 (CFD#2):
F9:
Implemented in 1997, consists of 131 tracts, totaling 82.0 acres of common landscaping 41
F10:
A tax district initiated by Proposition 218 that has a current annual fee of 22.4 cents per square foot
F11:
This fee can be adjusted by and annual escalator clause
F12:
The City Council approves annexation of new tracts to this district D. The City Parks and Recreation Department was responsible for maintaining the landscape districts until August 2, 2004:
F13:
Retained the monies collected from LLMD#1 and CFD#2 in separate accounts
F14:
Did not track money spent for specific housing tracts
F15:
Claimed maintenance was performed “once a month,” but, in reality, it was done “once every ninety days” or longer
F16:
Poor quality of maintenance in LLMD#1 led to numerous homeowner complaints about improper watering and failure to remove and replace dead trees and shrubs
F17:
Twenty-three maintenance workers were to be available every week; vacancies often reduced this number to as few as eighteen
F18:
Tree Fresno, and sometimes jail inmates, provided additional labor until one year ago
F19:
Additionally, maintenance workers were required to maintain all median islands with various buffer zones, bicycle paths, and temporary ponding basins E. The City Council approved transfer of the maintenance districts to Public Works Department on August 2, 2004. Given these new responsibilities, the Public Works Department has:
F20:
Established special accounts for each tract with all costs specifically documented
F21:
Required workers to document work performed and hours worked
F22:
Planned to have a detailed audit of each tract performed and provide a projection of future costs
F23:
Included the transfer of the Parks and Recreation maintenance crew
F24:
Contracted for four crews from the local Conservation Corps 42 F. According to a report to City Council by the interim directors of Parks and Recreation Department and the Public Works Department on September 11, 2004:
F25:
The lack of an escalator clause in the LLMD#1 has resulted in annual revenues approximately $100,000 less than the cost of providing services
F26:
A special election complying with Proposition 218, requiring a two-thirds majority of favorable ballots is necessary to increase the annual assessment in LLMD#1
F27:
The ballot should include a provision for an automatic escalator similar to CFD#2
F28:
The cost to conduct the election is estimated at $60,000, and requires holding special hearings and mailing ballots to 14,900 property owners by certified mail G. According to legal and political opinions, landscape setbacks of the tracts in LLMD#1 are public right-of-ways and the increased maintenance costs could be included as a budget item and paid out of City’s General Fund. CONCLUSIONS A. The City of Fresno has two landscaping and lighting maintenance districts; an assessment district, LLMD#1, with no practical provisions for increasing fees; and a tax district, CFD#2, with the ability to raise taxes to meet rising maintenance costs. B. Rising labor and supply costs, coupled with poor management and cost accounting by Parks and Recreation Department resulted in many years of deteriorating maintenance. The City has defaulted in its responsibility to maintain the districts. C. In response to poor maintenance, the City Council approved transfer of the management of LLMD#1 and CFD#2 districts to the Public Works Department on August 2, 2004. D. The Public Works Department has reorganized accounting functions to analyze actual expenses incurred in each housing tract in the districts and correlate this information with revenues received. With this audit, the Public Works Department will be able to provide a detailed cost projection. E. CFD#2 costs are subject to increase. The fixed assessment in LLMD#1 will have to be supplemented either by a special election or monies from the General Fund.
Additional Recommendations
4
Not linked to specific findings.
R36:
Use General Fund monies to being neglected tracts in the maintenance districts up to required standards, including the replacement of defective watering systems, dead trees and shrubs.
R37:
Budget General Fund monies to cover future revenue shortfalls in LLMD#1, using cost projections of the Public Works Department as a guide.
R38:
Review the faulty management and accounting practices employed by the Parks and Recreation Department in dealing with the maintenance districts to provide insight into other maintenance practices needing revision in that department.
R39:
Evaluate the feasibility of privatizing the maintenance of LLMD#1 and CFD#2 districts. INTRODUCTION TO THE LAW COMMITTEE REPORT The Law Committee of the 2004/2005 Fresno County Grand Jury investigated several areas of interest and letters from citizens of cities within Fresno County. The areas considered for investigation included: • Continued investigation of I.H.S.S. fraud • Numerous complaints from incarcerated individuals in Fresno County Jails • Coalinga City Management • Other Cities within Fresno County In the course of its investigation, the Law Committee interviewed: • Department heads in Fresno County agencies • City Officials from various cities in Fresno County including: Coalinga Firebaugh Kingsburg Orange Cove Mendota Committee members toured the I.H.S.S. offices and the Fresno County Jail. A number of complaints from citizens incarcerated in various prison systems were given to the Law Committee for their consideration. It was decided that several issues were beyond the purview of the Grand Jury. Some complaints were referred to the proper agencies for further consideration. After investigating complaints and concerns brought to the committee’s attention, it was decided to focus our investigation on the I.H.S.S. Personal Care Services program. This report does not reflect changes in the law or events that transpired after completion of the investigation. 45