Mendocino County 2001-2002 - California Grand Jury Reports

From the annual report

The consolidated year-end volume. The individual investigations it contains are listed separately below.

📑 Year-End Report

View the full annual report (PDF)

The full consolidated volume; individual reports are listed below.

Individual reports (14)

July 18, 2002 — City of Fort Bragg Community Development Department and Affordable Housing

4 pages 11 findings 1 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 11 findings

F1: The Department in carrying out its various duties working to capacity in terms of personnel.

F2: The Grand Jury reviewed 134 permit applications for the years 2000–

F3: The Department lacks a written complaint procedure for applicants unhappy with the permit process.

F4: The Department lacks a comprehensive informational handout for permit applicants detailing pertinent aspects of the process and rights and responsibilities of parties involved. The Department states a goal to produce a handout to this effect in 2002.

F5: The Department lacks written policies and procedures.

Related Recommendations (1)

R4: C. The Department with the City Council produce a policies and procedures compendium for the Department. (Finding 5) D. The Department with the City Council produce detailed job descriptions for Department employees. This is to include specific details on the scope of authority and discretion of Department in applying and interpreting Municipal Codes and ordinances. (Finding 6) Affordable Housing E. The City adopt a policy compliant with State Government Code Sec. 65915 through 65918 concerning mitigation of codes, ordinances, site development standards, and application of density bonus for affordable and low-income housing. (Finding 9) F. The City explore methods of insuring affordable housing development remain affordable. This may include Federal, State, and County funding of permanent low-income housing and ordinances requiring commercial development include low-income housing in their projects. (Finding 10) G. The City adopt a policy of tasteful design and suitable location of affordable and low-income housing. (Finding 11) Comment The Grand Jury commends the Department and the City for its support of grants for the Streetscape Plan, Project Sanctuary, the Coast Senior Tri-level Care Facility project, emergency and homeless shelter projects, housing rehabilitation, and preparation of an American with Disabilities Act Comprehensive Access Plan. The Grand Jury wishes to thank the employees of the Community Development Department for providing detailed documentation, which required considerable preparation. There are no easy answers to the problem of affordable and low-income housing. The solution of government support involves pain in the form of tax dollars. The inclusion of low-income housing as a portion of private commercial development is painful to the developer and may stifle enterprise. Raising of the minimum wage to a “living wage” was recently quashed at the Federal level. The problem shows no signs of abating. Response Required Fort Bragg City Council Response Requested Fort Bragg Community Development Department Fort Bragg Planning Commission Fort Bragg Community Development Advisory Committee

F6: The Department lacks employee job descriptions that state duties, responsibilities, and scope of authority in application and interpretation of codes and ordinances.

Related Recommendations (1)

F7: The affordable housing element of the draft General Plan has not been adopted. If adopted as proposed the City would not meet its existing or projected needs for affordable and low-income housing as proposed by the Government Code. There is a shortage of housing for low-income workers and seniors.

F8: The lack of water and high cost of real estate have constrained the development of adequate affordable and low-income housing in the City. Secondary constraints include the scarcity of redevelopment funds, land- use controls, building codes, local permit processing, various special fees and environmental/site condition studies, and limitations on density.

F9: In the past, the City, in conjunction with private enterprise, has supported affordable and low-income housing development by mitigation of fees, codes and ordinances, and reduction in site development standards, water use retrofit, and application of density bonus. Presently, City support of low-income and affordable housing is hampered by lack of redevelopment funds.

Related Recommendations (1)

F10: A major obstacle to affordable and low-income housing availability statewide as well as in Mendocino County is affordable housing becoming unaffordable because of market forces.

Related Recommendations (1)

F11: Poor design and undesirable location of low-income housing can contribute to legal and social problems.

Related Recommendations (1)

July 18, 2002 — Domestic Violence Restraining Orders The Grand Jury investigated the process by which a person subject to domestic

2 pages 9 findings

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 9 findings

F1: A person wishing to obtain a Restraining Order must first apply for an ex-parte court hearing for a Temporary Restraining Order. An applicant must present a typewritten application on the day of the scheduled hearing. There is no filing fee, but applicants are subject to court fees and costs, unless granted a waiver.

F2: The judge signs the Temporary Restraining Order after the ex-parte hearing and the applicant takes the signed order to the Superior Court Clerk who provides the applicant with five certified copies of the order.

F3: The applicant must then arrange for service of the order. Any person over 18 years of age can serve the order on the restrained person. Alternatively, a police officer or Sheriff’s deputy can perform that function, but the applicant must take it to the appropriate office to arrange for that service.

F4: At the Sheriff’s office, a clerk enters the order into the California Law Enforcement Tracking System (CLETS) computer so that information about it is available to officers who might need it. If the order doesn’t get to the Sheriff’s office, the information does not get into CLETS.

F5: Only law enforcement agencies and the District Attorney have access to CLETS. The Court has neither the personnel nor the secure work-station required to interact with CLETS.

F6: The Restraining Order process breaks down when applicants, confused or otherwise unclear about the system, fail to get the order to the Sheriff, with the result that the order is not in CLETS and officers have no information available when called out to deal with a person in violation of the order.

F7: Besides the Temporary Restraining Order, an applicant can get an Emergency Protective Order, good for three days. A police officer on the scene contacts an on-call judge in circumstances, which, in the officer’s judgment, warrant quick action. The judge authorizes the Emergency Protective Order, and the officer takes or faxes a hard copy to dispatch for immediate entry into CLETS.

F8: If an applicant calls police to report a violation of an order, an officer can make a misdemeanor arrest on the spot if the officer observes the violation or if there is a warrant. Also, after speaking with aggrieved party, neighbors, or other witnesses, the officer may arrest after determining there is probable cause to believe someone has violated an order.

F9: When an Restraining Order lapses or is lifted by request of the plaintiff or defendant, the Court informs the Sheriff, who enters that information into CLETS.

July 18, 2002 — Family and Children’s Services and Parents Within the Department of Social Services (dss), the Family and Children’s

8 pages 41 findings 1 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 41 findings

F1: Parents and their attorneys reported that FCS workers abuse the power they have both by intimidating parents and by not investigating sufficiently. FCS staff stated that decisions they make are inherently subjective and that whenever FCS takes action, it is with the intent to protect children.

F2: The lack of adequate communication and of written guidelines contributes to misunderstandings between Social Workers and parents.

F3: FCS has no policy or consistency about how and when written information is given to parents.

F4: Even though FCS policy is to give a packet of information when children are detained, and some staff report following that policy, all parents interviewed stated that they did not receive any written information.

F5: FCS has no policy requiring Social Workers to give parents written information upon initial Emergency Response investigation.

F6: FCS does not document receipt of written information given to parents.

F7: The County has no advocate similar to the Mental Health Patient Rights Advocate for parents involved with the FCS system. Parents do not have a source for information or support. A Social Worker has a responsibility to protect the children; at the same time a Social Worker must help the parent and family, creating a conflict. Often, this situation leaves the parent with no one for support.

F8: Once involved in the Juvenile Court system, a parent may have a court- appointed or private attorney. Parents reported that private attorneys have stretched parents’ financial means to the point of bankruptcy and that court-appointed attorneys appear to be too busy to adequately serve the parent.

F9: The Grand Jury heard conflicting information about specific events and conversations from parent witnesses and FCS witnesses. Parents requested audio recording so that conversations could be verified, but Social Workers refused. An FCS administrator stated that there is no written policy regarding audio or video recording of interviews; in practice, if both parties agree, interviews can be recorded.

F10: Other DSS Divisions use a client feedback survey form. FCS does not use a similar survey form for parents. Case Plans and Planning

Related Recommendations (1)

R10: G. FCS train all Social Workers on use of the new guidelines for case planning. (Findings 12 -14) H. FCS stress to all County Social Workers the need for consistency in case plan requirements. (Findings 12 -14) I. FCS develop and use a checklist to involve parents in the case planning process. (Findings 15 - 19) J. FCS adopt a policy that informs parents step by step of their status. Develop a procedure and a form with incremental approvals, and an incremental approval checklist. K. If a case plan changes, FCS provide written explanation to parents (before a Court hearing), stating the reason why and involving parents in the change of the plan. (Findings 18, 19) L. FCS continue to train Social Workers in standards for removal and reunification of children. (Findings 10 - 20) M. FCS establish and follow procedures for apprising parents of their rights. (Findings 21 - 31) N. DSS ensure that written complaint information and forms are available in DSS and FCS public lobbies. (Findings 21, 24, 25) O. FCS establish and use a complaint log that includes the disposition of complaints. (Finding 26) P. FCS expand the brochure “Grievance Review Policy” to include grievance procedures for all aspects of client/FCS interactions. (Finding 30) Q. FCS Supervisors consider case-load complexity in assigning Social Worker case-load. (Finding 33) R. The County and DSS establish a coordinated Social Worker recruiting program among the College of Redwoods, Mendocino College, and local high schools with more outreach to Latino and Native American populations. (Findings 34-37) S. The DSS Director request that Mendocino College and the College of the Redwoods begin Social Worker Assistant programs and that Sonoma State and Dominican College satellite campuses begin Social Worker programs. (Finding 35) T. Board of Supervisors re-evaluate the salary schedule within FCS. (Findings 32 - 35, 39) U. The County fill the vacant positions. (Findings 38, 40) Comment Public awareness of child abuse and neglect issues is lacking. More outreach by government to the citizenry regarding these issues is needed. Substance abuse is involved in many instances of child abuse and neglect. More public awareness of substance abuse and the harm it causes to families is needed. The County Child Abuse Prevention is not providing information to the public. Family and Children’s Services prepares an annual report to the Board of Supervisors summarizing child welfare issues in the County. The Board of Supervisors should distribute this report to media and all professionals involved with children and make it available to the general public. The problem of unclear and changing requirements for family reunification is a complicated issue involving the judgment and expertise of the professionals involved. FCS is working toward standardizing these requirements throughout the County as much as possible. The Grand Jury encourages FCS in this effort. Several witnesses alluded to the lack of adequate foster care in the County. This problem has been visited by the Grand Jury previously. Perhaps it is time to do so again. Response Required Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Response Requested Department of Social Services Director Family and Children Services Director

F11: When a child is removed from a home, FCS must develop a case plan within 30 days. (Welfare & Institutions Code §16501) The plan must state what a parent must do to reunify the family and concurrently, the plan must provide plans for the child if reunification fails.

Related Recommendations (1)

F12: Case plan requirements for reunification were inconsistent; individual social workers had broad latitude to require parent compliance.

Related Recommendations (1)

F13: Social Workers stated that FCS administration did not provide adequate information and support to Social Workers about changes in legal requirements for case planning.

Related Recommendations (1)

F14: FCS has developed a draft for County-wide guidelines for standardizing the case-planning policies and procedure.

Related Recommendations (1)

F15: Welfare & Institutions Code 16501.1(f) states: “Parents and legal guardians shall have an opportunity to review the case plan, sign it whenever possible, and then shall receive a copy of the plan. In any voluntary service or placement agreement, the parent or legal guardians shall be required to review and sign the case plan. Whenever possible, parents and legal guardians shall participate in the development of the case plan.”

Related Recommendations (1)

F16: Parents interviewed stated they were not involved in developing their case plans. FCS has no specific document for parent involvement in the case planning process, but administrators state they follow State Division 31 regulations.

Related Recommendations (1)

F17: FCS does not have a written County procedure to inform social workers how to involve parents in development of case plans, even though the signature page for case plans has a line for parents to sign indicating that they have participated in development of the plan. When parents’ refuse to sign a plan, FCS has an extensive written procedure. FCS developed the procedure after a State review indicated that non- response to a mailed case plan could not be assumed to be refusal of the plan. (Child Welfare Services Information Bulletin: 1:01)

Related Recommendations (1)

F18: Parents interviewed stated that FCS unfairly changed case plans during the process of reunification. Social Workers told parents that they must repeat classes even though the parents had received certificates of completion for the classes. In other case plans, Social Workers added new requirements as the process continued. Many times, the standard became higher to get the children back than the standard that had them removed.

Related Recommendations (1)

F19: Social Workers stated that case plans need to be flexible, that situations change. In the case planning process, Social Workers discover new information.

Related Recommendations (1)

F20: Parents reported that if they did not agree with the case plan or were contentious, the Social Worker used the parents’ views as marks against reunification. Complaint Process

Related Recommendations (1)

F21: FCS provided a DSS general complaint procedure, “How to Handle Complaints,” Training Guidelines 1999. The information, which includes “Mendocino County Department of Social Services Complaint Form,” is in the hall by the DSS personnel office. The complaint form is not posted in the public lobbies. FCS, in practice, does not use the procedure, even though administrators report the complaint form is being used. Some Social Workers testified that they provided the form if a verbal complaint had been received. Others were unaware of a complaint procedure. No County-wide standard system is in place.

Related Recommendations (1)

F22: Most complaints are handled informally; verbal complaints are directed to the worker’s supervisor.

Related Recommendations (1)

F23: FCS advises complainants to talk to the supervisor of the offending Social Worker. There is no third party to file a complaint with. Complainants do not have anonymity in the complaint process, thereby giving rise to fear of reprisal from the person being complained about. FCS does not have a separate complaint process for parents and other individuals receiving or providing services.

Related Recommendations (1)

F24: FCS workers testified that there were complaint forms in the public lobby. When the Grand Jury visited the Ukiah lobby in the Fall 2001, there was a box that stated “Complaint Form.” There were blank complaint forms in Spanish, none in English. The form was for people alleging discrimination, not for any other possible complaints. In April 2002, there were no complaint forms. In the Fort Bragg office only the State brochure (in Spanish) was in the lobby.

Related Recommendations (1)

F25: The DSS suggestion box in the DSS main lobby is available for clients and employees to present suggestions to the DSS Community Advisory Committee. No standard forms are by the box in Ukiah or Fort Bragg. The Willits office did have blank suggestion forms.

Related Recommendations (1)

F26: DSS keeps a log of discrimination complaints (a federal requirement), but neither DSS nor FCS track or keep a log of any other kind of verbal or written complaint or the disposition of complaints.

Related Recommendations (1)

F27: FCS has a grievance procedure for Foster Care providers, PPL 2:96, but not for any other situations.

Related Recommendations (1)

F28: The Grand Jury observed a pattern of parents stating FCS workers had not provided information regarding their rights to file a grievance or to complain.

Related Recommendations (1)

F29: A pamphlet, “Grievance Review Policy,” MCDSS 1000 (New 12/97), is part of a packet the FCS administrators say is given to parents when a child is removed from a home. Social Workers and parents interviewed were not aware of this packet.

Related Recommendations (1)

F30: FCS staff stated that the appropriate place for parents to present grievances regarding case information and plans is at Court appearances.

Related Recommendations (1)

F31: Parents interviewed were unaware they could file a complaint with the State Department of Social Services; however FCS does provide “Your Rights Under California Welfare Programs,” upon request. The brochure outlines civil rights and state remedies, but does not give specific local information on how to file a complaint. Staffing & Training

Related Recommendations (1)

F32: Former and present inland FCS workers interviewed stated there is low morale among social workers and assistant social workers due to job stresses, low pay, and high turnover. Coast FCS workers report less turnover and higher morale.

Related Recommendations (1)

F33: Social Workers testified that supervisors do not always look at the complexity of the cases when analyzing case loads. Some cases require more time on the part of the Social Worker

Related Recommendations (1)

F34: Department-wide Social Worker turnover has been over 30% annually for the past three years, with a higher relative percentage in case- carrying Social Workers.

Related Recommendations (1)

F35: FCS managers testified there is a statewide, as well as local, shortage of social workers. Educational facilities available for training Social Worker I are limited. Basic courses for Associate of Arts degree are available at Mendocino College and College of the Redwoods, but advanced training must be completed at distant campuses.

Related Recommendations (1)

F36: FCS staff reports that they must deal on a regular basis with clients from minority groups who often lack English language skills. FCS lacks bilingual social workers and staff.

Related Recommendations (1)

F37: FCS has not been successful recruiting Native Americans, even though Mendocino County has a large Native population.

Related Recommendations (1)

F38: FCS has difficulty recruiting and retaining skilled administrative assistants because of the workload and low pay.

Related Recommendations (1)

F39: Low pay and a poor benefits package relative to other counties make it difficult to recruit experienced Social Workers. Experienced workers are attracted to other counties and agencies, which pay more, often have signing bonuses, and have better working conditions.

F40: The FCS training position was vacant for several months during the past year. FCS now has an employee functioning as a trainer one-half of the time.

F41: FCS Supervisors train new Social Workers and FCS sends some Social Workers to UC Davis for specific training.

July 18, 2002 — Foster Care-Foster Parent Issues The Grand Jury has looked at various issues regarding Foster Care in 1995– 96,

2 pages 4 findings

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 4 findings

F1: In the 1995–96 Grand Jury Report “Review of Child Protective Services (CPS)” Recommendation 2 stated: “A position for training CPS personnel and foster parents should be established.” Family and Children’s Services (FCS) established positions for foster parent liaison, recruitment, and training, but they have often been vacant. Throughout the County, there are now three Social Worker foster placement positions (one vacant) and a Senior Analyst foster parent recruitment and training person.

F2: In the 1997–98 Grand Jury Report “Department of Social Services and Foster Parents,” Recommendation 2 stated: “FCS develop and distribute an up-to-date foster parent handbook.” FCS developed a new Foster Parent handbook and reported that it had been distributed to Foster Parents. Recent witnesses stated that all foster parents have not received handbooks and that other long-term foster parents are not receiving updates to the handbooks.

F3: The 1997–98 report Recommendation 3 stated: “CPS should implement the use of a health and education record for foster children.” The 2000– 2001 Grand Jury report stated that DSS had implemented this and provided a Health and Education Passport notebook. Policy/Procedure Letter 6:99 “Health and Education Passport” states the procedures for use of the notebook. At least one foster parent, taking care of a child with special needs, did not get information that should have been included in the Health and Education Passport notebook. The foster parent received the notebook, but it only contained a Medical card. The foster parent updated notebook, but when FCS moved the child to another foster home, the passport notebook did not go with the child. No one from FCS asked for the notebook. In another case, the notebook did not contain information about a child’s critical need for therapy services. FCS now has nurses responsible for recording medical information and a clerk responsible for getting and recording education information. There is a sign off sheet for receipt of the Health and Education Passport, but no checklist for any other information FCS gives to a Foster Parent, such the “Shelter Care Placement Progress/Discharge Report,” “Placement Evaluation,” and the “Needs and Services Plan.” There is no sign-off sheet for return of the Health and Education Passport or any other documents.

F4: The 1997–98 Report, Recommendation 7 stated: “FCS should hold quarterly meetings between FCS and the Foster Parent Association to provide a forum for mutual communication.” FCS responded that they would implement this recommendation. In 2001–02, the voluntary Foster Parent Association was not functioning and FCS staff could not meet quarterly with the group.

July 18, 2002 — Mental Health Services for Children The 2000–2001 Grand Jury provided several recommendations for improved Mental

3 pages 6 findings

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 6 findings

F1: The Mental Health response to Finding 6 states “In a collaborative effort it often appears that responsibilities are blurred.” This statement emphasizes the need for a written Memo of Understanding to clarify the roles of each collaborating agency. Other agencies and parents need to know who the responsible party is so they know whom to contact. The Grand Jury reviewed a 1996 DRAFT Memo of Understanding between Mental Health and the SELPA. The draft was never finalized.

F2: Recommendation E stated: “Mental Health research the possibility of coordinating with other County agencies to hire a staff psychiatrist for children, who would assess children, create treatment plans, and evaluate therapeutic interventions, as well as monitor medications.” The need for a child psychiatrist was not disputed, but the response stated it was unfeasible. They are not going to try. Having a child psychiatrist available in the County needs to be a future goal and Mental Health needs to find a way to collaborate with the Court, Probation Department, and the Department of Social Services, who also have a need for evaluation of children. Currently, County dollars are being spent for these services.

F3: Recommendation H stated: “Mental Health develop a means of evaluating their service delivery outcomes.” The Mental Health response stated they had submitted reports to the State. However, when asked for the reports, Mental Health stated that the “County submits raw data electronically to the State where it is transformed into a report.” Mental Health stated staff would obtain copies of the reports and forward them to the Grand Jury. The reports were never received. Nonetheless, raw data sent to the State is not an adequate basis for needed evaluations.

F4: Recommendation J stated “Children’s Mental Health develop and distribute to all school districts a specific written notice of services available to school districts and the procedures for obtaining those services.” Mental Health responded that the information had been given to the Special Education Local Plan Area Director; the BOS said the Grand Jury should ask the SELPA Administrator about how the information is distributed. The SELPA Administrator furnished minutes showing dates when Mental Health personnel gave presentations to the school district superintendents and an essay entitled “School Based Mental Health Services,” undated and no author noted. The three-page essay presents general statements about the need for school-based mental health services, but does not give specifics on what programs there are or who to contact at the Mental Health Department to arrange for services. Parents reported that Mental Health was not providing specified services for their children.

F5: Recommendation K stated: “Mental Health develop guidelines that are in accordance with the Education Code for positive behavioral interventions.” The response discounted the need for such guidelines; the

F6: Recommendation L stated: “Children’s Mental Health revise the Compendium of Services to be a readable, easily understood document that accurately provides a detailed list of services available.” The Recommendation Implementation Schedule for Recommendation L states: “Will develop a separate brochure/flyer focused on services for children,” in June 2002. Mental Health provided the Grand Jury with a revised Compendium of Services in May 2002. The Children’s Services section reports on some programs, but except for day treatment programs, contains no information about other services offered on school sites.

July 18, 2002 — Point Arena City Government a review of Point Arena (City) city government and related issues found that the City is

4 pages 14 findings

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 14 findings

F1: The City is operating fiscally in the black, but City administration has expressed concern that the current recession and reduction in State revenue may present problems. The product tax from private fish companies has dwindled in recent years primarily from the reduction in the urchin fishery.

F2: The City manages revolving loan funds in accordance with published guidelines. The City uses the self-sustaining funds for private enterprise and affordable housing.

F3: City ordinances are not codified in a meaningful way. The City has established a goal to codify ordinances, but has not had the time or manpower to accomplish this goal.

F4: The City is not in compliance with the affordable housing element of its General Plan. According to the General Plan, affordable housing development in the City is hampered by price and availability of real estate, land use controls, building codes, local permit processing, various special fees, environmental/site condition studies, and limitations on density.

F5: The Grand Jury heard testimony that water pressure and capacity for fire protection to the southern end of the City in the cove area are not adequate.

F6: The Grand Jury heard testimony that emergency equipment access to the Wharf Master’s Inn and Coast Guard House bed and breakfast is not adequate.

F7: The City has recently adopted a policy for fire safety plan checks. The policy does not include systematic fire safety checks of existing buildings and businesses accessed by the public.

F8: Policies and procedures for City elected officials, employees, commissions, and citizen’s advisory groups are not complete or organized for easy reference.

F9: City Council and Planning Commission meetings reviewed and attended were in accordance with Brown Act requirements. However, citizens wishing to express concerns on various issues are allowed only five minutes.

F10: Emergency services procedures have been implemented, but the City lacks a dedicated shelter. The City is in continuous collaboration with the Emergency Services Authority to improve the effectiveness of the emergency services program.

F11: The rescue boat for Arena Rescue is inoperative because it needs new engines. The City is exploring the possibility of grants for new engines. At present the rescue boat is a depreciating asset because of lack of maintenance and damage from exposure to the elements.

F12: Recently a member of the City Council resigned his position and immediately took a salaried position with the City. Although this did not violate the present policies and procedures of the City, it gave the appearance of conflict of interest.

F13: The City General Plan lists a goal to establish a capital improvement plan.

F14: Areas within the City limits are not totally in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act Comprehensive Access Plan. Violations include lack of handicap or wheelchair access, parking, and signs.

July 18, 2002 — Visually Handicapped Funding at Mendocino College The Grand Jury investigation of the Visually Handicapped funding

1 pages 4 findings

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 4 findings

F1: MC uses part of the DSPS grant to prepare the faculty to accommodate visually handicapped students.

F2: MC uses part of the DSPS grant to purchase new materials and computer programs or to modify existing materials and computer programs to give the visually handicapped students access to all the educational materials and facilities available to other students.

F3: MC uses part of the grant for funding a full time employee, hired in November 2001, to monitor and modify materials and computer programs for the visually handicapped students, as well as to assist in the training faculty in the use of these tools for the education of the visually handicapped students.

F4: Through tracking the expenditures within the DSPS for the Visually Handicapped program, the Grand Jury found that funds were not misused or misappropriated. 2001-2002 Mendocino County Grand Jury Final Report 63

July 18, 2002 — Westport County Water District The Westport County Water District (District) supplies water, sewage, and fire

3 pages 13 findings 1 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 13 findings

F1: The District is current on all annual audits and bond payments.

F2: Board meetings are in compliance with the Brown Act.

F3: The present basic rate for water and sewer service is $83.01 per month, which provides up to 12,000 gallons of water for each residential and commercial user. Water use in excess of basic service is charged according to amount of usage. Commercial hookups are charged at a higher rate than residential.

F4: The District has an ongoing problem of obtaining enough citizen participation to fill the Board of Directors positions.

F5: The District has experienced a chronic shortage of revenue from lack of economy of scale. The District has aggressively pursued external grant funding.

F6: An outside contractor operating on behalf of the District has obtained a $264,000 grant to do a study of the watershed and existing system.

F7: The State recently awarded a grant to construct an additional water storage tank.

F8: The District drilled a deep well, which has a high flow rate, but is unusable because of high manganese and iron content. Use of the well water requires a filtration system costing more than $100,000.

F9: The sewage settlement ponds suffer from sediment accumulation and sewage seepage. They require dredging, draining, and lining. The District reports no funds are available for this work.

F10: Because of a shortage of personnel, the District does not mail bills in a timely manner. The 1999-2000 Grand Jury found similar problems. The District Board responded that their policy requires bills be out by the 15th of the month and that they have developed a form with a year of payment coupons to remind customers when a payment is due.

F11: The District is authorized to charge $30 per month to owners of undeveloped and unoccupied real estate parcels. The District has not implemented billing or collection of these fees, stating they would be difficult to collect because of absentee ownership and the lack of funds to legally pursue collection.

Related Recommendations (1)

R10: E. The District pursue billing and collection of fees for undeveloped and unoccupied parcels and pass an ordinance to include unpaid fees in the cost of initial hookup. (Finding 11) F. The District review the matter of the recreational vehicles on a single service and determine if additional fees are warranted. (Finding 12) Comment It is not within the purview of the Grand Jury to make recommendations to citizens concerning political issues. However, in regard to the lack of citizen participation in the Water District, the Grand Jury would remind the citizenry of the District: “one gets the government one deserves.” Response required Westport County Water District Board of Directors

F12: The 1999-2000 Grand Jury found that “one large lot, which is divided into several parcels has five RV’s hooked up to one water and sewer line and paying a single rate” and recommended that “a complete review of all properties within the district, both occupied and vacant be made to determine if the district is receiving all revenues due.” The District responded that the recommendation was “in progress and of the highest priority.” The present Grand Jury finds that the single hookup for several residences still exists and the Chair of the Board of Directors reiterated this two-year old response.

Related Recommendations (1)

F13: The 1999-2000 Grand Jury found that the Waste Water Capital Reserve Fund as mandated by the California State Water Resources Control Board was in arrears and recommended that “delinquent payments be brought up to date.” The District Board responded that capital funds should come from hook up fees, but that the shortage of new hookups caused the lack of funds. The Capital Fund now shows a zero balance.

May 13, 2002 — Willits City Government, Little Lake Fire District, and Willits Unified School District

8 pages 29 findings

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 29 findings

F1: Willits has sound fiscal practices with an annual budget of $4.06 million, with a reserve of $415,00 for emergencies. Willits also had a carry over of $1.4 million from last fiscal year.

F2: Willits follows solid plans for operating the city and follows its policies and procedures.

F3: Appropriate departments handle all complaints quickly and efficiently.

F4: Willits is following its Ten Year Plan for improvements throughout the city.

F5: Willits is studying the possibilities for growth and new business.

F6: California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the City of Willits are still working on the Willits 101 Bypass; construction has not been started. The Willits administration has supported the bypass, but some local citizens continue to request more information from Caltrans, stalling construction. The Caltrans Director signed the Draft Environmental Document for the Willits Bypass on May 13, 2002.

F7: Willits has a strategic plan that emphasizes ‘Business to Business’ (business suppliers) and bringing cottage industries to the downtown area.

F8: Willits administration is concerned that local media is not reporting the city’s successful programs. Public Works Public Works Department (Public Works) performs its function well, however, there are a couple of problems that need attention. Method of Investigation The Grand Jury interviewed the Public Works Director and reviewed current job orders, complaint forms, and an organizational chart. The Grand Jury visited the public works yard and inspected the equipment. Background Information Public Works is charged with the maintenance of streets, landscaping, and city buildings. Public Works is also responsible for other city infrastructure such as the water and sewer systems. Findings

F9: The yard was clean and all equipment not in use was under cover.

F10: Public works maintains equipment properly.

F11: Public works does not have a common tracking system for all department data.

F12: The Public works Director advised the Grand Jury that the department needs one more technician and a clerical worker.

F13: During visits to the offices and shop areas, the Grand Jury saw no Cal-OSHA safety books or posters. Police Department The Willits Police Department (Police Department) infrastructure is in place, but the public perception of the Police Department is that there is a lack of communication between the public and the officers on the street. Method of Investigation The Grand Jury conducted a review of the Police Department and talked to the Police Department Chief and Captain and took a tour of the facilities. Grand Jurors accompanied on-duty police officers on three ride-alongs. Background Information The Highway 101 corridor is the major factor in police services required, from traffic to other crimes. The Police Department has 12 sworn personnel, three reserve officers, and 12 patrol vehicles. Findings

F14: While the Grand Jury observed officers, they conducted their activities professionally with restraint and consideration to those being stopped and talked to or given notice or citations.

F15: The Grand Jury’s attempted to interview citizens with a different perspective on the Police Department. Citizens refused to give details of their experiences with the Police Department because they said fear retaliation. Persons interviewed by the Grand Jury were reluctant to file formal complaints because of rear of retaliation.

F16: There is no citizen review board. The Police Department does not support the concept of a citizen review board.

F17: In September 2001, the Police Department reported staff shortage and high turnover; in May 2002, the Police Department reported that there is no staff shortage and turnover is minimal.

F18: The Police Department increasingly must work with Spanish-speaking people. The one bilingual Spanish-speaking officer on the Police Department staff cannot provide all translation services required. WPS has access to translation by telephone, but the service is less than effective because it can only be used at the station and not in the field.

F19: The Police Department is aware and concerned about drug activities in Willits, especially around school sites.

F20: The County of Mendocino owns and is responsible for maintenance of the building the Police Department occupies. The building needs repairs. There is a leak through an unsightly gaping hole in the ceiling of the main Police Department conference room. The Police Department turns in complaints to the County Buildings and Grounds Department when it rains. The County comes out and does a quick patch, but no permanent repairs. Little Lake Fire District The Fire District is extremely well run. Method of Investigation The Grand Jury interviewed the Fire Chief and a Director of the Fire District. The Grand Jury reviewed budgets and policies and procedures. The Grand Jury toured the Fire District facilities and viewed all apparatus and equipment. Background Information The Fire District has five elected Directors, who volunteer their time. The Directors are responsible for the administration of the Fire District finances and funding. The Fire District provides the following services: (cid:137) Disaster Preparedness and Response (cid:137) Fire Protection and Suppression (cid:137) Fire Safety Education (cid:137) Hazardous Materials Response and Mitigation Team (cid:137) Light and Heavy Rescue (cid:137) Auto Extrication (cid:137) High Angle and Cliff Rescue (cid:137) Swift Water Rescue (cid:137) Medical Response and Ambulance Assists (cid:137) Urban Search and Rescue (cid:137) Underwater diving team (cid:137) Public Assists (helping the elderly & others) There are only five paid positions at the Fire District; they are as follows: The Fire Chief is responsible to the Board of Directors and the Public. The Chief also serves as the City of Willits Fire Marshall and oversees matters that concern private and public safety. Included in his duties are the administration, budgeting, and operations of his department. The Secretary/Treasurer holds both positions. The secretary/treasurer manages the operations of the administrative office and the department’s daily functions as well as serving as secretary/treasurer to the Board of Directors. Firefighter 1 is the maintenance supervisor for all facilities and equipment. Firefighter 2, the training supervisor, provides 40 volunteers the best and most modern firefighting training available. The Fire District serves approximately 380 square miles, including 57 miles of state highways. The District also protects approximately $265 million in assessed property value. Findings

F21: The Fire Chief and Firefighters 1 and 2 have State and National Certification. Most volunteers are professionally certified in their rank; many hold State and National Certifications.

F22: The Fire District operates with a $450,000 budget. The Fire District provides strong services because of the volunteer force and private fund- raising.

F23: The Grand Jury found the fire-fighting apparatus well maintained.

F24: The Fire District is very astute in acquiring grants and new equipment. Willits Unified School District Willits Unified School District (School District) has undefined and uneven enforcement of dress codes and some school sites have maintenance problems. Method of Investigation The Grand Jury interviewed the School District Superintendent, school principals, and the Maintenance Supervisor. The Grand Jury toured school sites, including the Willits Charter School, and visited classes in session. The Grand Jury reviewed pertinent California Education Codes pertinent to school dress codes. Background Information The School District has an enrollment of 2,283 students and 153 paid staff. The School District has a dress code based on California Education Codes §35183 and 35294.2. Note §35294.2.(a)(2)(F): The provisions of any schoolwide dress code, pursuant to Section 35183, that prohibits pupils from wearing ‘gang-related apparel,’ if the school has adopted such a dress code. For those purposes, the comprehensive school safety plan shall define ‘gang-related apparel.’ The definition shall be limited to apparel that, if worn or displayed on a school campus, reasonably could be determined to threaten the health and safety of the school environment. Any schoolwide dress code established pursuant to this section and Section 35183 shall be enforced on the school campus and at any school- sponsored activity by the principal of the school or the person designated by the principal. For the purpose of this paragraph, ‘gang-related apparel’ shall not be considered a protected form of speech pursuant to Section

F25: The School District and Willits High School emphasize prohibition of certain colors or certain clothing and items that are known to depict gang colors or symbols and distract from teaching goals. The school safety plan does not define ‘gang-related apparel’ as required by Education Code §35294.2.(a)(2)(F). The Student Handbook does not specify prohibited colors or clothing items.

F26: Willits High School ground maintenance is poor. Back parking areas need upgrading. Some lockers are broken. Agriculture areas, including gardens and farm animal pens, are unkempt.

F27: The Willits High School dumpster area has no enclosure to hide the garbage and keep out animals.

F28: Many school sites have paved areas and walkways with uneven surfaces and potholes that can cause tripping.

F29: Baechtel Grove Middle School has a drainage problem on the west side of the school grounds, where older portable classrooms are located. Rain water puddles at ramps and runs under disabled students’ classrooms. Children have to traverse standing water to get to class. The standing water under classrooms also causes dampness and mold inside the classrooms.

March 12, 2002 — Department of Transportation The County Department of Transportation (dot) is responsible for maintenance of

7 pages 34 findings 31 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 34 findings

F1: The DOT has had five changes of directors since the 1997 resignation of the former, long-term director, resulting in some uncertainties and confusion among DOT personnel.

F2: The DOT has reputation, both within and outside the department, of continuing management practices foster arbitrary – sometimes self- serving – decision-making by supervisory personnel, to the possible detriment of the DOT mission.

Related Recommendations (1)

R34: Test results showing false positive or tainted by prescription medication have in the past led to loss of work and the necessity for payment of back wages for employees innocent of illegal drug use. Recommendations A. The DOT Director ensure that supervisory personnel receive training in modern, collaborative management practices. (Finding 2) B. The DOT Director ensure that top managers consult line staff before making decisions about issues, needs, and projects. (Finding 4) C. The DOT Director ensure that managers and supervisors receive training regarding Recommendation B. (Finding 4) D. The DOT develop and implement written policies and procedures for responding to citizen and employee complaints. (Finding 5) E. DOT refer to its equipment use and maintenance records, including information on hours of use, repair history, downtime, maintenance records and estimated useful life, to establish a 10-year equipment replacement schedule and a system of procurement for new equipment needed. (Findings 6 – 9, 11) F. Upper management and supervisors rely on the Equipment Supervisor for information concerning equipment maintenance repair and replacement needs. (Finding 7) G. BOS give DOT authorization and budget support to establish and maintain a capital reserve fund dedicated to replacing outdated equipment and procuring new equipment as appropriate. (Findings 6, 9, 10, 11) H. DOT provide portable toilet facilities in accordance with CalOSHA regulations for use by road crews when nearby facilities are not available (Finding 12) I. In accordance with CalOSHA regulations, DOT provide potable drinking water for all road crews. (Finding 13) J. DOT establish responsible and effective security measures to ensure that facilities, materials and equipment are secure from theft, pilferage, and vandalism (Finding 14, 15) K. DOT assume responsibility for minor yard maintenance, such as replacement of security lighting. (Finding 15) L. DOT direct Yard Supervisors to ensure that grounds are maintained in clean and orderly conditions and that alcohol not be brought on County premises. Recycle empty containers promptly. (Finding 16) M. DOT ensure that accident reports include details from follow-up investigations as well as in-depth treatment of the causes of accidents and suggestions for training on causes and prevention of such accidents (Finding 18) N. DOT use OSHA forms to report accidents. (Finding 19) O. DOT train employees to fill out accident report forms completely and accurately. (Findings 18, 20) P. DOT crew supervisors and the Safety Officer discuss accidents and accident prevention as regular topics at all safety meetings. (Finding 20) Q. DOT Safety Coordinator be an employee of the County Risk Manager. (Finding 21) R. DOT Safety Coordinator give accident reports to the County Risk Manager. (Finding 22) S. DOT establish a comprehensive training program for equipment operators. (Finding 23) T. DOT step up efforts to fill all funded positions. (Finding 26) U. When job openings occur, DOT follow the procedures and not allow supervisors to forward names to Human Resources. (Findings 27, 28) V. The Director make the final determination on all hiring decisions based on non-arbitrary factors. (Finding 29) W. DOT collaborate with Human Resources to create means of increasing the proportion of women and minorities hired. (Finding 30) X. DOT follow County policies and procedures regarding sexual harassment. (Finding 31) Y. DOT not suspend an employee for drug use unless and until reliable testing has proven such use beyond any doubt. DOT place employees testing positive on administrative leave until the issue is resolved. (Findings 32–34) Comment The morale of the road crews is low because of low pay, arbitrary decisions on job assignment, frequent loss of time due to the need to travel to toilet facilities, and work stoppage due to shortage of road crew members. The Grand Jury commends the many DOT personnel, who despite low morale and often inadequate funding and old equipment, perform their jobs efficiently and safely, with little turnover of personnel. Response Required Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Response Requested Department of Transportation Director Human Resources Department Director

F3: The current DOT Director requested and received authorization from the BOS for an internal management audit with the aim of ensuring that the DOT is functioning effectively and efficiently to carry out its mission. Five committees, made up of mostly DOT personnel, representatives from other County departments, and the public, met over a six-week period. The committees presented “Management Audit of the Mendocino County Department of Transportation” dated March 12, 2002, to the BOS on April 17. The Audit identifies critical issues and makes recommendations for DOT interaction with various agencies and increases in staffing levels and workload. The Audit looked at staff perceptions of efficiencies and inefficiencies in DOT operations and their fiscal impact. The Audit also details issues and recommendations about DOT organizational structure, emphasizing reporting relationships, lines of authority, decision-making processes, and inter-divisional coordination.

F4: According to County Supervisors and DOT management personnel, the DOT top managers make decisions without consulting line staff who have knowledge of daily operations and needs. These decisions have often been contrary to the best functioning of the organization A similar finding in the Audit states: “There is a perception that an attitude of inflexibility exists within the Department when working toward mutually acceptable solutions to specific issues or projects.”

Related Recommendations (2)

R4: According to County Supervisors and DOT management personnel, the DOT top managers make decisions without consulting line staff who have knowledge of daily operations and needs. These decisions have often been contrary to the best functioning of the organization A similar

F5: As noted in the Audit, DOT does have an “informal policy and procedure for handling complaints on road conditions and hazards.” However, DOT does not have a written policy and procedure for handling citizen or employee complaints. (For more information about County-wide complaint policies, see “Complaint Policies and Procedures for Mendocino County, “p. 9) Equipment

Related Recommendations (2)

R5: As noted in the Audit, DOT does have an “informal policy and procedure for handling complaints on road conditions and hazards.” However, DOT does not have a written policy and procedure for handling citizen or employee complaints. (For more information about County-wide complaint policies, see “Complaint Policies and Procedures for Mendocino County, “p. 9) Equipment

F6: Review of equipment records and visits to DOT yards reveal equipment in use that is out of date (more than 10 years old), inefficient, and potentially dangerous. For example, DOT uses compacting rollers lacking modern tracking ability that are difficult and dangerous to operate. DOT staff states that some of the equipment in use is suitable only for museum display.

Related Recommendations (2)

R6: Review of equipment records and visits to DOT yards reveal equipment in use that is out of date (more than 10 years old), inefficient, and potentially dangerous. For example, DOT uses compacting rollers lacking modern tracking ability that are difficult and dangerous to operate. DOT staff states that some of the equipment in use is suitable only for museum display.

F7: DOT upper management and supervisors do not consult with the Equipment Supervisor, who is most knowledgeable about equipment needs and availability, concerning equipment procurement. The Equipment Supervisor neither initiates new equipment requests nor appears before the BOS to justify such requests.

Related Recommendations (2)

R7: DOT upper management and supervisors do not consult with the Equipment Supervisor, who is most knowledgeable about equipment needs and availability, concerning equipment procurement. The Equipment Supervisor neither initiates new equipment requests nor appears before the BOS to justify such requests.

F8: DOT keeps adequate records for tracking equipment and equipment maintenance but does not consult these records in determining what equipment needs replacement and when.

Related Recommendations (2)

R8: DOT keeps adequate records for tracking equipment and equipment maintenance but does not consult these records in determining what equipment needs replacement and when.

F9: As repair parts for much of the older, often outdated, equipment are no longer available, mechanics cannibalize parts from non-functional units, manufacture parts, or buy high priced custom-manufactured parts.

Related Recommendations (2)

R9: As repair parts for much of the older, often outdated, equipment are no longer available, mechanics cannibalize parts from non-functional units, manufacture parts, or buy high priced custom-manufactured parts.

F10: DOT and the BOS have not established a capital reserve fund for replacement or modification of equipment before maintenance and repair costs exceed the value of the equipment. Consequently, DOT is unable to take timely advantage of equipment sales by other agencies.

Related Recommendations (1)

R10: DOT and the BOS have not established a capital reserve fund for replacement or modification of equipment before maintenance and repair costs exceed the value of the equipment. Consequently, DOT is unable to take timely advantage of equipment sales by other agencies.

F11: Due to the lack of proper equipment, operators must use some equipment for inappropriate purposes, for example application of asphalt paving mix by graders, which leads to uneven surfaces and varying asphalt thickness, and using of crawler tractors for snow removal, which is costly and causes surface degradation resulting in an unstable road base.

Related Recommendations (1)

R11: Due to the lack of proper equipment, operators must use some equipment for inappropriate purposes, for example application of asphalt paving mix by graders, which leads to uneven surfaces and varying asphalt thickness, and using of crawler tractors for snow removal, which is costly and causes surface degradation resulting in an unstable road base.

F12: In violation of California Occupational Health and Safety Agency (CalOSHA) Code of Regulations, Title 8, §1526, Subchapter 4, Article 3, DOT lacks portable toilets for use of crews when working in areas with no nearby toilet facilities. In addition, production time is lost when employees take vehicles and leave the job site to find toilet facilities.

Related Recommendations (2)

R12: In violation of California Occupational Health and Safety Agency (CalOSHA) Code of Regulations, Title 8, §1526, Subchapter 4, Article 3, DOT lacks portable toilets for use of crews when working in areas with no nearby toilet facilities. In addition, production time is lost when employees take vehicles and leave the job site to find toilet facilities.

F13: In violation of CalOSHA, Code of Regulations, Title 8, §1524, Subchapter 4, Article 3, only one of the DOT’s 25 trucks has a drinking water container. Security and Housekeeping

Related Recommendations (2)

R13: In violation of CalOSHA, Code of Regulations, Title 8, §1524, Subchapter 4, Article 3, only one of the DOT’s 25 trucks has a drinking water container. Security and Housekeeping

F14: Equipment yards County-wide and some materials and fuel lockers remain unlocked during the day when no DOT personnel are on the premises. Yards are susceptible to theft, pilferage, and vandalism.

Related Recommendations (2)

R14: Equipment yards County-wide and some materials and fuel lockers remain unlocked during the day when no DOT personnel are on the premises. Yards are susceptible to theft, pilferage, and vandalism.

F15: The County Department Building and Grounds maintains physical facilities at DOT yards. Many security lights at the yards are non- functional.

Related Recommendations (2)

R15: The County Department Building and Grounds maintains physical facilities at DOT yards. Many security lights at the yards are non- functional.

F16: Site inspections revealed inadequate buildings and materials storage facilities, spillage of fuel and oil, and poor housekeeping, including overflowing trash receptacles and empty alcoholic beverage cans and bottles in office areas. This gives the perception that alcohol is consumed on the premises. Safety: Reporting and Training

Related Recommendations (2)

R16: Site inspections revealed inadequate buildings and materials storage facilities, spillage of fuel and oil, and poor housekeeping, including overflowing trash receptacles and empty alcoholic beverage cans and bottles in office areas. This gives the perception that alcohol is consumed on the premises. Safety: Reporting and Training

F17: DOT experienced fatal employee accidents involving equipment in 1984 and 1991. Reports for these accidents included no recommendation for prevention of further such accidents.

Related Recommendations (1)

R17: DOT experienced fatal employee accidents involving equipment in 1984 and 1991. Reports for these accidents included no recommendation for prevention of further such accidents.

F18: Accident reports for 2000 (66) and 2001 (76) do not meet common requirements for accident reports. They lack details about the cause of accident and possible accident prevention and reference to any follow-up investigation. In many reports reviewed, sections were left blank.

Related Recommendations (2)

R18: Accident reports for 2000 (66) and 2001 (76) do not meet common requirements for accident reports. They lack details about the cause of accident and possible accident prevention and reference to any follow-up investigation. In many reports reviewed, sections were left blank.

F19: The DOT does not use “Employer’s Report of Occupational Injury or Illness” Form 5020, Rev.6 as required by Penal Code 14004. Until recently, DOT used a DOT form for reporting accidents. Currently, DOT is using a standard County form for reporting accidents.

Related Recommendations (2)

R19: The DOT does not use “Employer’s Report of Occupational Injury or Illness” Form 5020, Rev.6 as required by Penal Code 14004. Until recently, DOT used a DOT form for reporting accidents. Currently, DOT is using a standard County form for reporting accidents.

F20: Crews take part in CalOSHA required “tailgate” safety meetings about once every ten days or two weeks. Crew supervisors or sometimes the DOT Safety Coordinator conducts those meetings. Employees reported receiving inadequate review or discussion of accidents or prevention at the “tailgate” meetings.

Related Recommendations (2)

R20: Crews take part in CalOSHA required “tailgate” safety meetings about once every ten days or two weeks. Crew supervisors or sometimes the DOT Safety Coordinator conducts those meetings. Employees reported receiving inadequate review or discussion of accidents or prevention at the “tailgate” meetings.

F21: The Safety Coordinator is a DOT employee and is not a disinterested third party.

Related Recommendations (2)

R21: The Safety Coordinator is a DOT employee and is not a disinterested third party.

F22: The Safety Coordinator does not give accident reports to the County Risk Manager.

Related Recommendations (2)

R22: The Safety Coordinator does not give accident reports to the County Risk Manager.

F23: While new operators receive hands-on training on equipment from experienced operators, there is no formal, classroom training such as might take place in a comprehensive apprenticeship program.

Related Recommendations (2)

R23: While new operators receive hands-on training on equipment from experienced operators, there is no formal, classroom training such as might take place in a comprehensive apprenticeship program.

F24: DOT employees are Service Employees International Union (SIEU) members.

Related Recommendations (1)

R24: DOT employees are Service Employees International Union (SIEU) members.

F25: The SEIU does not have an apprentice program. Personnel Policies

Related Recommendations (1)

R25: The SEIU does not have an apprentice program. Personnel Policies

F26: DOT is allotted 119 road crew workers. In April 2002, 101 positions were filled, with applications for 12 positions being processed.

Related Recommendations (2)

R26: DOT is allotted 119 road crew workers. In April 2002, 101 positions were filled, with applications for 12 positions being processed.

F27: The process for filling positions, either by new hire, transfer, or promotion, which takes an average of three to four months, is as follows, except where the DOT Director initiates transfers: (cid:53) DOT has an opening; (cid:53) DOT sends a “Request to Fill” to Human Resources (HR); (cid:53) HR advertises the opening (including posting at DOT sites, screens applications, administers a written test, and provides DOT with a list of those who have passed; (cid:53) DOT, with help from HR, schedules a performance test; (cid:53) DOT and HR obtain outside evaluations, which HR evaluates, along with test scores and added points (veterans, etc.); (cid:53) HR establishes an eligibility list for the specific position and gives that to DOT; (cid:53) DOT sets up interviews with the area foreman who selects from the list; (cid:53) DOT Director gives final approval for the hire.

Related Recommendations (2)

R27: The process for filling positions, either by new hire, transfer, or promotion, which takes an average of three to four months, is as follows, except where the DOT Director initiates transfers: (cid:53) DOT has an opening; (cid:53) DOT sends a “Request to Fill” to Human Resources (HR); (cid:53) HR advertises the opening (including posting at DOT sites, screens applications, administers a written test, and provides DOT with a list of those who have passed; (cid:53) DOT, with help from HR, schedules a performance test; (cid:53) DOT and HR obtain outside evaluations, which HR evaluates, along with test scores and added points (veterans, etc.); (cid:53) HR establishes an eligibility list for the specific position and gives that to DOT; (cid:53) DOT sets up interviews with the area foreman who selects from the list; (cid:53) DOT Director gives final approval for the hire.

F28: In violation of the above procedure, DOT supervisors sometimes pre- screen potential employees and send to HR the name(s) of a person(s) the supervisor wants to have included on the list. Then the supervisor hires a person he put on the list.

Related Recommendations (1)

R28: In violation of the above procedure, DOT supervisors sometimes pre- screen potential employees and send to HR the name(s) of a person(s) the supervisor wants to have included on the list. Then the supervisor hires a person he put on the list.

F29: Historically, the DOT Director has rubber-stamped the foreman’s personnel decisions. The new DOT Director has indicated that he wants to have an increasingly active role in personnel decisions.

Related Recommendations (2)

R29: Historically, the DOT Director has rubber-stamped the foreman’s personnel decisions. The new DOT Director has indicated that he wants to have an increasingly active role in personnel decisions.

F30: Less than one percent of road crew workers are women or minorities, which leads to the perception that DOT hiring practices discriminate against women and minorities.

Related Recommendations (2)

R30: Less than one percent of road crew workers are women or minorities, which leads to the perception that DOT hiring practices discriminate against women and minorities.

F31: Witnesses stated that women employees have been subject to incidents of sexual harassment, but those incidents have not been reported.

Related Recommendations (2)

R31: Witnesses stated that women employees have been subject to incidents of sexual harassment, but those incidents have not been reported.

F32: DOT conducts drug screening by means of urine tests on randomly selected employees; the DOT contracts with a private lab to evaluate the results. The process involves tests that are not always reliable.

Related Recommendations (2)

R32: DOT conducts drug screening by means of urine tests on randomly selected employees; the DOT contracts with a private lab to evaluate the results. The process involves tests that are not always reliable.

F33: DOT policy is to suspend an employee who tests positive for drugs.

Related Recommendations (2)

R33: DOT policy is to suspend an employee who tests positive for drugs.

F34: Test results showing false positive or tainted by prescription medication have in the past led to loss of work and the necessity for payment of back wages for employees innocent of illegal drug use.

Related Recommendations (1)

January 25, 2002 — Community Development Commission The Community Development Commission (cdc) has had erratic leadership and acted

3 pages 14 findings 2 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 14 findings

F1: An outside consultant acts as the fiscal officer for the CDC.

F2: Employee morale has been low. The new Executive Director appears to be restoring morale and establishing appropriate lines of authority.

F3: While there are budgets for the various government programs, the CDC does not have an agency-wide budget with which to gauge agency performance.

F4: The CDC does not have a long-range plan identifying goals and expected results.

F5: BOS ad-hoc committee recommended the BOS “develop a system that the CDC could employ to benefit from the resource pool currently available from the County, such as Human Resources, Auditor- Controller, General Services, and County Counsel, to fulfill the mission of the CDC.”

F6: The 1999–2000 Grand Jury found that two units of CDC-owned housing were destroyed by fire and the insurance settlement was received in February of 1998, but to date the CDC has not replaced the units. CDC is investigating the feasibility of rebuilding these units on that site.

Related Recommendations (1)

R5: E. The CDC take immediate steps to replace the two housing units lost in 1998. (Finding 6) F. When making important decisions that concern the public as well as the employees, such as opening or closing of a satellite office, the BOC hold well-advertised special meetings to garner public comment. (Finding 12) G. The BOC attend training seminars to become familiar with the Brown Act and have a copy available at every meeting. (Findings 7–12) H. The BOC open a Fort Bragg office with posted regular office hours. (Findings 13, 14) Response Required Community Development Commission of Mendocino County Board of Commissioners Response Requested Community Development Commission Executive Director

F7: The personnel in the Fort Bragg office felt the office was closed as retribution for those who testified before the 1999–2000 Grand Jury. The CDC management indicated the office closure was due to the difficulty of supervising that office from a long distance and the expense of the operation for the services provided. The Grand Jury was unable to determine conclusively why it was closed.

Related Recommendations (1)

F8: The Executive Director had discussed the Fort Bragg office closure with the AFSCME (AFL-CIO) union prior to September 21, 2000, without receiving direction from the BOC.

Related Recommendations (1)

F9: The BOC agenda October 19, 2000, showed item 10A as a closed session discussion/action item regarding personnel matters and labor negotiations under Govt. Code §54957.6.

Related Recommendations (1)

F10: The BOC minutes of the October 19, 2000 reporting on the closed session states, “The BOC has decided to close the Fort Bragg office and transfer the employees to the Ukiah office.” The BOC properly made employee transfers in closed session, but the Brown Act requires that the BOC make the decision to close the Fort Bragg office in open session.

Related Recommendations (1)

F11: The BOC, in violation of the Govt. Code (§54954.2 (a) “no action or discussion shall be undertaken on any item not appearing on the posted agenda”) did not show as a separate discussion/action item on any agenda about the closure of the Fort Bragg office.

Related Recommendations (1)

F12: The BOC did not hold a public hearing and did not allow public comment prior to closing the Fort Bragg office. The right to know is paramount when conducting the public’s business. Govt. Code §54950 in part states, “In enacting this chapter, the Legislature finds and declares that the public commissions, boards and councils and other public agencies in this State exist to aid in the conduct of the people’s business. It is the intent of the law that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly.” Govt. Code §54953(a) states “All meetings of the legislative body of a local agency shall be open and public, and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting of the local agency, except as otherwise provided in this chapter.”

Related Recommendations (1)

F13: All services normally provided in Ukiah, are also provided to Fort Bragg clients. Ukiah employees travel to Fort Bragg, usually once a week, to provide these services by appointment only.

Related Recommendations (1)

F14: While CDC can handle applications and renewals from Fort Bragg by mail, CDC employees expressed concern that the loss of face-to-face meetings and inspections may result in a higher incidence of fraud and result in a lack of control of the condition of the agency housing.

October 01, 2001 — The Mentally Ill—A New Approach to Crisis Services In October 2001, the Department of Mental Health (dmh) opened an

6 pages 22 findings

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 22 findings

F1: While causing concern in the County, many saw the closure of the locked PHF as an opportunity for change. The loss of the PHF triggered a comprehensive re-evaluation of the delivery system of help to the mentally ill, especially to those in crisis. Numerous stakeholders were brought together to examine the system in place, research the latest practices in the field, and explore the various options for possible change.

F2: On July 17, 2001, the DMH submitted a staff report on mental health services in the County. The nine-page report summarized various possible solutions. The recommendations were: close the PHF and create the CSC, adopt a community-based Adult Systems of Care model, assign mental health workers to the Jail, increase staff for case management, and continue to use out-of-county contract mental health treatment facilities. In addition the County would take over the operation of a residential recovery center, Casa de Marta, in Ukiah, and provide for quick response crisis workers to hospitals, Jail, or other places in the community needing their services. The new plan, with the CSC as an important component, would result in a community based program, a “recovery model” with case management to bring together available resources, including patient advocacy groups, to provide each case with a range of services and continuing follow-up.

F3: The BOS approved the plan, which the County Administrative Office described as “a major shift in the delivery of mental health services in our community.” County administrative employees recognized that the changes would require a great deal of effort to overcome resistance and for various departments and clients to work together to make the new system successful.

F4: An important piece in the new system is the Memo of Understanding between the DMH, the Sheriff, the three city police departments, and the three hospitals in the County whose emergency rooms will be receiving people in mental health crisis. The document, effective October 1, 2001, establishes the protocols for the assessment and care of persons exhibiting signs of mental illness who come into contact with law enforcement.

F5: DMH, law enforcement, and hospital staff, do not meet regularly to share knowledge and procedures. Agencies confer on a case-by-case basis.

F6: The CSC, located at 860 North Bush Street in Ukiah, in the government complex, went into full operation in the middle of October 2001.

F7: The CSC is open and staffed 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Participation of clients is voluntary and there are some beds for overnight “time-out” stays if necessary.

F8: A CSC worker’s duties include evaluation, intervention, placement at a contract psychiatric hospital for 72-hour evaluation under §5150, and planning for discharge from the center to follow-up services.

F9: The policy statement for the CSC includes job descriptions for all staff, definition and philosophy of the recovery model concept of treatment, and details of operations.

F10: State regulations require the County to provide a Patient Rights Advocate. The patient rights advocate office is now in the CSC, a partial implementation of a 2000-2001 Grand Jury recommendation.

F11: The CSC has developed a transportation system to drive clients to out of county psychiatric facilities thus relieving the sheriff from that duty except when the client requires a law enforcement escort. These workers will also have other duties at the center.

F12: The CSC is officially designated under State of California guidelines as a Community Mental Health Clinic in which client services are billed under Medi-Cal regulations. It is anticipated that the final costs to the County could be reduced while at the same time providing better services to the mentally ill.

F13: Records indicate that as many as one in four inmates housed at the Jail have mental health issues. When the PHF was closed, officers no longer had a secure facility to leave people who needed evaluation. Patrol Officers reported being out of normal service while they waited for mental health crises workers to respond to hospital emergency rooms to evaluate and assume custody of the client. In addition, mental health or law enforcement staff time had to be increased to transport patients to out of county psychiatric facilities.

F14: With the assignment of DMH personnel to the Jail and the ability of the CSC to send crisis workers to the jail after regular working hours, Jail workers believe the treatment of inmates with mental health issues has improved.

F15: There is a strong connection between mental illness and substance abuse. Clients in crisis typically exhibit a multitude of problems in addition to the ones that have brought them to the immediate crises. These include homelessness, health, employment, and childcare. DMH has recognized the multiple layers of need with the creation of a new position, Consumer Services Coordinator, with the job of ensuring that the clients receive the help needed from whatever source is available. However, some clients exhibiting aberrant behavior are sometimes shuffled back and forth between AODP and DMH.

F16: With the PHF no longer available, the need for costly transportation of patients out of the county has increased. Both the Sheriff and the DMH have standby transportation staff and/or ambulances available (if restraint is required) to transport patients to out-of-county psychiatric facilities.

F17: Redwood Coast Regional Center, DMH, and the Sheriff are collaborating in a unique grant-funded training program to bring more understanding of the relationship of law enforcement and the developmentally disabled and the mentally ill. A private training group from the Bay Area has been conducting the training.

F18: DMH has in place tools for evaluation, such as the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire and the California Quality of Life instrument. The Mental Health Board is planning to evaluate client satisfaction. Coast Crisis Services

F19: The Grand Jury has heard testimony that the impact of the new procedures on Fort Bragg and the coastal areas of the County have been mixed. The Fort Bragg area had in place, prior to the closure of the PHF, a system for crisis response that has not changed. The Fort Bragg office of the DMH has employees to respond to crisis calls Monday to Friday 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. The County has a contract with Ford Street Project, a private non-profit human service organization, to provide crisis response during all other times. DMH supervisors are available for telephone consultation with the Ford Street crisis workers. The Ford Street Project also provides three beds for “time-out” cases in the same situations now available at the CSC. The primary change has been for §5150 cases, which require a custodial setting. Information from crisis workers on the coast indicates without a PHF, it sometimes takes longer to find a placement for persons who must be detained under §5150 because they must be taken out of the county.

F20: There are currently three on-call crisis workers who are employed in other human service jobs. They participate in continual training and case conferences and are supervised by on-call DMH personnel. Often the crisis workers have extensive prior knowledge of the client and the needs of the case, thus facilitating decision-making.

F21: Other partners in the process, law enforcement and hospital medical staff, at times, question the qualifications and decisions made by the crisis workers. On the other hand, crisis workers feel that police officers and emergency room staff do not understand the requirements and consequences of a §5150 detention nor the difficulty in diagnosing a mental disorder.

F22: There is no licensed holding cell or room on the coast. At times a patient will be held at the Sheriff’s substation in Fort Bragg or by the Fort Bragg Police, perhaps in the back of a patrol car, until a crises worker arrives.

August 03, 2001 — Marijuana and Methamphetamine Suppression Efforts in Mendocino County The Grand Jury investigated the problems of

7 pages 23 findings

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 23 findings

F1: COMMET consists of a Commander, one other full time officer, and three volunteer officers who help out when needed. If necessary, the unit can call on the entire law enforcement community for assistance.

F2: Upon referral, COMMET personnel travel to locations within Mendocino County where they cut or uproot any growing marijuana plants they find and make appropriate arrests. They transport the plants for disposal, retaining some as potential evidence. COMMET personnel indicate that they only eradicate a small percentage of the marijuana grown in the County.

F3: The Sheriff has determined that, given passage of Proposition 215 concerning medical marijuana and given his limited resources, he must concentrate his department’s efforts on eradication of large-scale plantings, which are obviously destined for illegal sale. Consequently, COMMET does not carry out raids on known medical plantings or on smaller patches.

F4: COMMET confiscates 100,000 outdoor plants and 30,000 indoor plants in an average year of operations.

F5: COMMET personnel carry firearms and will have them drawn at the outset of an operation; use of firearms or other physical force is limited to situations involving potential injury to officers or others.

F6: Testimony indicates that COMMET personnel are generally respectful of the persons and civil liberties of those they encounter and/or arrest. Law Enforcement Suppression Efforts: Methamphetamine Findings

F7: The Task Force operates under the supervision of the State Department of Justice, Bureau of Narcotics Enforcement. Personnel consist of two Sheriff’s deputies and one officer each from the Ukiah and Willits Police Departments and the Highway Patrol, a Probation Officer, a representative from the State Parks Department, and a representative of the District Attorney. Fort Bragg does not supply an officer, but it does help support the Task Force financially, as do the other jurisdictions.

F8: Total funding for the Task Force is $52,000 ($30,000 from the State and $22,000 from participating law enforcement agencies. Participating agencies provide personnel and equipment.

F9: The Task Force does not have enough resources to deal realistically with the meth problem in Mendocino County.

F10: The Task Force deals with crimes involving violence, such as homicide and assault as well as burglary and drug crimes. Drug suppression is their major mission and within that they direct their primary activities toward elimination of production, trafficking and use of methamphetamine in the County.

F11: Task Force officers get leads concerning meth suppliers from persons they arrest, from paid or unpaid informants, and from interested citizens who are suspicious of certain activities. Starting with that information, they work up to larger dealers. Sometimes that process gets results, but whether they actually arrest a major supplier is often a matter of luck and timing.

F12: Officers express frustration at having to arrest the same violators time after time. They complain that the District Attorney often charges persons arrested for possession for sale with simple possession, which allows them to get probation or Proposition 36 diversion. The District Attorney, on the other hand, cites the difficulty of getting a conviction without solid proof that sales are involved.

F13: Some other law enforcement officers have complained that they receive little cooperation from the Task Force in the fight against meth. But Task Force personnel contend that they don’t get adequate information from other agencies to follow up. Other Approaches to the Drug Problem: AODP Findings

F14: The AODP is part of the County Public Health Department and has as a mission “to promote healthy behaviors by preventing, reducing and treating alcohol and other drug abuse in Mendocino County.” Most program funding comes from federal, State, and private foundation sources.

F15: AODP approaches the use of alcohol and other drugs as a public health problem, though they find it hard to convince others that that is the case.

F16: From July to December 2001, AODP saw 855 persons; 518 were involved in the criminal justice system.

F17: suggests that there may be no substantial improvement of the meth problem without an upgrading of the economic and educational status of residents of the County. Response Required Board of Supervisors (Recommendations B & E–G & related Findings) Mendocino County Sheriff (Recommendations A, B, & D & related Findings) Mendocino County Task Force Governing Board (Recommendations B–D & related Findings) District Attorney Recommendation B–D & related Findings) Response Requested Director, AODP (Recommendations E–G & related Findings)

F18: AODP reports that persons negatively impacted by substance use take up two-thirds of hospital beds in the county.

F19: AODP has several options for treatment of substance users, ranging from intensive detoxification through post-detox, residential treatment, and day treatment to outpatient aftercare.

F20: AODP develops and circulates drug education curricula for use in the schools and encourages community based anti-substance use activities. Community Involvement in Suppression of Meth Use Findings

F21: Police recently arrested a local high school student for possession of meth for sale on campus.

F22: That incident motivated a teacher to contact Anderson Valley community leaders and agencies and bring some 30 people together at a meeting; that led to a larger community gathering on the topic of the meth problem attended by about 300 residents. Smaller groups are following up by getting together to learn ways to identify the problem and how to deal with it.

F23: As a result, law enforcement has stepped up its presence and anti- meth activities in that community.

Mendocino County Information Services Department The Information Services Department (isd) directly or indirectly

5 pages 20 findings

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 20 findings

F1: The 1989-90 Grand Jury reported, “Some departments have developed independent computerized systems with no coordination of efforts.” The report recommended, “Department heads and key personnel of all county departments should participate in development and operation of a central computerized data processing, information storage, retrieval and analysis system.” The County has not yet implemented this forward- looking recommendation.

F2: ISD provides computer and software support for most County departments. Because of perceived unique requirements, the following departments have IT staff to provide computer and software support: Public Health Mental Health Child Support Services Social Services (DSS) Sheriff Assessor/Clerk Recorder

F3: The ISD Director is working toward all departments in a County-wide system. Past and present ISD Directors stated that, using one system, the ISD can provide service to all departments, including the Sheriff and DSS. (Directors recognized that DSS must use State-supplied computers to run State-mandated programs.) The Sheriff and DSS IT personnel report that those departments require separate systems and personnel for delivery of their services (except for County financial data).

F4: Grand Jury interviews revealed that some departments IT personnel are not aware of the authority granted to the ISD Director under Policy 22. Policy 22, Section 4 (2) states that the ISD Director “may award various levels of authority to different departments” based on analysis of the services required and the skill level of the supporting staff. Policy 22, Section 5, The Role of Departmental IT Personnel, states: “This section is applicable only when a determination has been made by IS that departmental IT personnel are required to support departmental computer systems. If such a determination is made, the departmental IT personnel shall be employees of their respective departments.”

F5: Department heads hire their IT personnel, with some ISD input in the early screening process.

F6: Policy 22, Section 4(3) gives the ISD authority to “conduct assessments of the technical services and the IT skill levels of supporting staff. The result of an assessment may cause ISD to modify the delivery model of IT services in the County, including the assignment of department personnel.”

F7: County decisions on voice and data communication format and equipment are fragmented. For example, the Sheriff and DSS acquire and maintain their own equipment. A County-wide unified system could use current computer technology for digital transmission of voice and data communication.

F8: The lack of long-range planning and consolidation has led to a fragmented use of all the County IT assets, personnel, hardware, and software. Each department acting independently often causes duplication of services and hardware.

F9: The two County AS400 mainframe computers, one in ISD and one in the Sheriffs Office, have network connection only. To ensure continuous operation in case of failure, the ISD Director has considered requesting another AS400 at a cost of approximately $100,000. The Director found that the two existing computers have ample capacity to configure the AS400s so that if one failed, or needed to be taken off-line for maintenance or upgrade, the other could take over with minimal loss of data and service to the County. ISD employees report that they can provide the additional required security to address the concerns of Sheriffs IT personnel regarding law enforcement data.

F10: Department heads meet monthly to discuss information services and information technology.

F11: ISD and IT personnel hold monthly meetings to discuss technology and seek solutions to common problems.

F12: Lack of a standardized County data security system compromises a completely secure County-wide system.

F13: ISD employees report that the software firewalls and passwords in place at ISD are adequate to ensure the security of the data at ISD.

F14: ISD has a policy and procedure for periodic backup of data kept and maintained by ISD. ISD does not control backup within departments. Backup procedures and equipment vary from department to department. A centralized file server would eliminate the need for individual department backup.

F15: Storage of backup data varies from department to department. The County does not have a designated fireproof central depository for all data backup. Departments store backup tapes at the Sheriffs secure vault, within their own departments, and in private facilities, including employee homes.

F16: The lack of an identified County network topology decreases the ability to locate, identify, and troubleshoot County-wide network connections and hardware.

F17: ISD physical security is not as effective as it could be because ISD shares the building with other departments. One department requiring daily public access will relocate this year.

F18: Information for the operation of the ISD computer system is not consolidated in manuals.

F19: ISD has not updated its systems design and programming functions manual recently.

F20: ISD has not updated the Disaster Recovery Guide since October 2000. Personnel, vendor contacts, and phone numbers are not current.