Fresno County Grand Jury

2007-2008

6 reports

Findings & Recommendations 17 findings
F101: Because of low revenues, the Lanare Community Service District is unable to support itself.
Page 22
F102: The Board of Directors violated the Brown Act due to a lack of notification of meetings.
Page 22
F103: The District lacks accounting procedures.
Page 22
F104: The Board of Directors does not have sufficient expertise to manage the district's daily operation.
Page 22
F105: No daily operational records have been maintained, therefore the district is not able to determine a level of service needed for present or future water customers.
Page 22
F106: Current water supplied by the district does not comply with Federal Arsenic Level Standards.
Page 22
F107: Neither the Fresno County Board of Supervisors nor any other county governmental agency has any legal oversight in governing the Lanare Community Service District.
Page 22
F108: A potential emergency exists at the Lanare Community Service District because of insufficient funds, mismanagement, water arsenic levels, and the lack of potable water.
Page 22
F201: The public costs of supporting the unsheltered homeless are very high.
Page 43
F202: The total costs associated with the unsheltered homeless in Fresno County are not quantified.
Page 43
F203: Fresno County, cities within Fresno County, and many non-profit and for-profit non- governmental organizations attempt to address problems of the homeless.
Page 43
F204: There is widespread (almost universal) agreement that the City of Fresno and Fresno County are not coordinating efforts to help solve the problems of the chronic unsheltered homeless.
Page 43
F205: The Fresno-Madera Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) is an on-line computer system that provides information about the homeless to partner agencies.
Page 43
F206: The HMIS system is not receiving data from all agencies that provide services to the homeless.
Page 43
F207: The various efforts currently in place to provide housing for the homeless have not been effective solutions to Fresno’s homeless problem.
Page 43
F208: “Housing First” programs provide permanent transitional housing and support services for the unsheltered homeless.
Page 43
F209: “Housing First,” meaning providing housing and supportive social services for the chronically unsheltered homeless, may cost less public money than leaving the homeless on the streets. COMMENDATION The Fresno-Madera Continuum of Care, and its member organizations are to be commended for the help they have provided and continue to provide to the homeless in Fresno and Madera Counties.
Page 43
Additional Recommendations 1

Not linked to specific findings.

R3: Fresno City Council. (R201-R204, F201-209) RESEARCH DATA The Grand Jury utilized a variety of resources in its investigation of the chronic unsheltered homeless in Fresno County: Interviews of representatives or attending meetings from:
Page 12
Findings & Recommendations 9 findings
F301: The participation of the community was perceived to be unwelcome at Board meetings.
Page 66
F302: Monies from the water, sewer, solid waste disposal, and recreation budgets are being commingled. The water and sewer fees must be used only for water and sewer purposes.
Page 66
F303: The MCWD Policies and Procedures Manual does not provide health benefits other than vision for Board members. Nevertheless, members of the Board of Directors are receiving monies in-lieu-of health, vision, and dental insurance.
Page 66
F304: Independent contracts are awarded to Board members as well as friends and family of the Board members.
Page 66
F305: The Board had prior knowledge of probable improprieties.
Page 66
F306: A previous independent investigation approved by the MCWD Board and submitted to the Board of Supervisors advised the MCWD Board of inappropriate and illegal practices.
Page 66
F307: Public monies were used for purposes not provided in the law, e.g., funeral receptions and flowers to bereaved families.
Page 66
F308: A past board member/interim manager trained the present manager at additional cost to the District..
Page 66
F309: The Board of Directors has violated the Brown Act. 5 51
Page 66
Findings & Recommendations 8 findings
F401: There has been an increase in the medical staffing at PVSP that appears to have improved the availability of medical care.
Page 171
F402: The state has not yet implemented the cost-savings recommendation to establish a secured wing for patient-inmates at the Coalinga Regional Medical Center despite continued local support for this proposal.
Page 171
F403: The need for an improved medical record storage system remains.
Page 171
F404: Valley Fever continues to be an ongoing threat to inmates and staff despite attempts to minimize its impact.
Page 171
F405: The prison’s administrative tracking system provides incomplete information on inmate complaints and appeals.
Page 171
F406: While there have been alleged improvements, the prison is still not in complete compliance with the appeal processing time constraints established by controlling regulations.
Page 171
F407: Failure to resolve inmate complaints through the existing administrative process results in increased costs both to the prison and to other governmental agencies.
Page 171
F408: The prison staff does not always acknowledge and promptly respond to complaints and inquiries including those of the Grand Jury. 6 156
Page 171
Findings & Recommendations 13 findings
F1: Interviews with Election Department officials and staff.
Page 231
F2: Interviews with voters.
Page 231
F3: Observations: a) Certification of Parlier Unified School District recalls petitions. b) City of Selma and special district vote tabulation. c) Warehouse and storage facilities. d) Ballot printing facilities.
F4: Newspapers and other print media.
Page 231
F5: State generated voter information pamphlets.
Page 231
F6: Grand Jury members worked at precincts and as observers on Election Day.
Page 231
F7: Internet 4 216 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 217 R ESPONSES A. Fresno County Clerk / Registrar of Voters R601 through R602 218 219 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 220 R #7 EPORT CITY AND COUNTY AIR SUPPORT UNITS 221 222
F601: Adequate working and storage space is available to accommodate election needs.
Page 230
F602: Security and responsibility were demonstrated in all phases of the system that were observed.
Page 230
F603: The Election Department, its staff, and volunteers were able to accomplish their election responsibilities satisfactorily within the constraints of State law.
Page 230
F604: The voting machines, scanners, special handicapped screens, and tabulating equipment are approved for use in California and meet the needs of the voters of Fresno County.
Page 230
F605: Differing instructions by the Republican and Democrat parties resulted in voter confusion at some polling precincts during the presidential primary. 3 215
Page 230
F606: Subject to the constraints of state law, expansion of the vote-by-mail ballot process may result in cost savings and increased voter participation. RECOMMENDATIONS
Page 231
Findings & Recommendations 5 findings
F501: Some who were involved in this sale were not aware of relevant conflict-of- interest laws.
Page 186
F502: The procedures used by the City staff to dispose of surplus property appear to be based on administrative memos and directives rather than on policies formally adopted by the Council.
Page 186
F503: A City employee was allowed to purchase one of the vehicles for less than his original bid when no other bids were received.
Page 186
F504: Nine of the vehicles were purchased by a member of the City Council that had authorized the sale of these vehicles. 171
Page 186
F505: The vehicles were sold for less than the minimum bid requirement originally specified for these vehicles.
Page 187
Findings & Recommendations 31 findings
F701: The City helicopter cannot provide necessary coverage for the County.
Page 242
F702: The City is paying too much for fuel because they have not purchased in bulk. 5 227
Page 242
F703: The County purchases fuel in bulk but is paying too much to have their fuel delivered because they do not have a fuel trailer.
Page 243
F704: The County can be a good public servant by equipping its helicopters to assist in fighting small fires.
Page 243
F705: Fixed-wing aircraft of both agencies are under utilized.
Page 243
F706: The City and County currently lease separate hanger facilities. The City hanger is inadequate because its design is inefficient and lacks restroom facilities
Page 243
F801: The Fresno County Board of Supervisors has not been filling crucial positions within the Purchasing Department that are needed to insure fair competitive bid process.
Page 267
F802: The Fresno County Board of Supervisors has not been filling crucial positions within the Auditor’s Office that are needed to insure proper collection and expenditure of public money and provide necessary insight.
Page 267
F803: The Auditor is unable to use the best practice of conducting departmental financial audits every three years.
Page 267
F804: Contract and provider audits cannot be done regularly.
Page 267
F805: Approximately one-half of the current Purchasing staff will be retiring within the next three years leaving an experience and knowledge gap.
Page 267
F806: Some department heads are complaining about the length of time it takes to procure goods and services through Purchasing.
Page 267
F807: The Fresno County Purchasing Manual contains procedures to insure fair, cost effective contracting.
Page 267
F808: Some department heads and staff are not well versed on all County policy and procedures including the Fresno County Purchasing and Procedures Manual.
Page 267
F809: Departments provide primary oversight of their contracts.
Page 267
F810: The California Election Code allows the Election Department to bypass some County purchasing procedures. 6 252
Page 267
F811: Ambiguity in the California Election Code causes friction between Purchasing and Elections.
Page 268
F812: In a few instances, a Fresno County Supervisor and/or staff member has been involved in evaluating bids or in other ways inserting themselves into the purchasing process.
Page 268
F813: The Fresno County Board of Supervisors has not been filling positions within the CAO’s Office that are needed to provide oversight.
Page 268
F814: Operational audits enable the CAO to make recommendations for best practice and efficiencies.
Page 268
F901: The District Auditor has repeatedly informed the Board of Directors of the Del Rey Community Services District of deficiencies which they have failed to adequately address. 271
Page 286
F902: In his letter to the Board of Directors dated January 31, 2008, the District Auditor reported an operating loss of $154,269 noting, “Losses of this magnitude are unsustainable.”
Page 287
F903: Del Rey has operated at a loss for 13 of the past 14 years.
Page 287
F904: Del Rey is in serious financial trouble due to poor management by the Board of Directors.
Page 287
F905: Del Rey has failed to prepare operating budgets for recent years.
Page 287
F906: Del Rey has failed to maintain reserves required by the Sewer Revenue Bond Covenant.
Page 287
F908: Del Rey has commingled funds reserved for specific purposes.
Page 287
F909: Members of the Board of Directors and staff of Del Rey have failed to take advantage of training available from the California Special District Association.
Page 287
F910: The LAFCO MSR pertaining to Del Rey is inadequate in that it does not show the real financial condition of the District when compared to the reports of the District’s own auditor.
Page 287
F911: The LAFCO SOI could evaluate evidence for the merger of special districts where appropriate.
Page 287
F912: The Grand Jury investigation of the Del Rey Community Services District, as well as the Malaga County Water District and Lanare Community Service District, show problems with the management of special service district operations.
Page 287