Mendocino County Grand Jury
2003-2004
Findings & Recommendations
38 findings
F1:
The County’s computer hardware/software systems are contained in a small server room in the DIS. The DIS facility lacks adequate fire suppression for “mission critical” equipment, thus exposing County Government to a complete shutdown in the event of a fire.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The BOS provide the necessary funding for the installation of fire protection equipment at DIS. (Findings #1, 2)
F2:
Hardware/software systems provide services for County payroll, email, and property tax records, State mandated systems for the Sheriff-Coroner, Social Services, Mental Health and Probation Departments. In the event of a catastrophic event such as a seismic disruption or facility fire, many or all of these services could be interrupted and unavailable for months.
F3:
There is not a strategic plan in existence by the BOS to guide the County on policy and appropriations for the long-term acquisition and implementation of information services.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The BOS create an information services strategic plan for the County that the DIS implement. (Finding #3)
F4:
Testimony reveals an informal agreement exists between the DIS and the Office of Sheriff-Coroner for on-site technicians to be supplied by the DIS to the Office of Sheriff-Coroner each Thursday and Friday. Testimony received from the Sheriff-Coroner’s Department stated that technicians were “infrequently on site.” DIS time sheets corroborate this testimony. In September 2003, DIS technicians 6 were on site 90% of the agreed upon time, by January 2004, DIS technicians were on site 40% of the agreed upon time.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The DIS and Sheriff-Coroner Departments formalize a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that clearly defines the terms, conditions and scope of technical services to be provided and the responsibilities of each department. The MOU be reviewed on an annual basis. (Findings #4, #5))
F5:
The Grand Jury was unable to find written evidence regarding any agreement between DIS and the Office of Sheriff-Coroner and it was requested, from the DIS and the Office of Sheriff-Coroner it was not provided.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The DIS and Sheriff-Coroner Departments formalize a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that clearly defines the terms, conditions and scope of technical services to be provided and the responsibilities of each department. The MOU be reviewed on an annual basis. (Findings #4, #5))
F6:
Between September 1, 2003 and January 16, 2004 the help desk at DIS logged 2,338 calls for support. The Departments of Health and Child Support Services accounted for 38% of these calls.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
Review the Departments of Mental Health and Child Support Services to see if additional computer training and/or computer personnel is needed. (Finding #6).
F7:
The DIS contracts with two private title companies for which the fee structure has no indicator or agreement for rate adjustment. These contracts have not been reviewed since 1997.
Related Recommendations (3)
R5:
The DIS annually review contracts with private entities paying particular attention to fee structure. (Finding #7) Comment The Grand Jury recognized the County budget constraints and the need to trim budgets, however not to provide fire suppression for these mission critical services while promoting and funding private business interests presents a significant risk to the County operations that depend on DIS services. Response required: Board of Supervisors Response Requested: Department of Information Services 7 A Review of the Code Enforcement Division of the Department of Planning and Building The Code Enforcement Division (CED) of the Department of Planning and Building (DPB) is mandated by and responsible to the Board of Supervisors (BOS) to enforce building and code regulations in Mendocino County, ensuring the health and safety of the public. Introduction The Code Enforcement Division of the Department of Planning and Building does not make a meaningful contribution to the DPB primary responsibilities, as articulated by the DPB. The 1997-1998 Grand Jury found the DPB was unable to adequately monitor code violations and the DBP concurred. These conditions remain uncorrected today. Code Enforcement Officers (CEO) view their mission as one of goodwill ambassadors rather than enforcing building and zoning code regulations. The DBP has been burdened for many years with a perennial and growing backlog of unresolved violations/complaints for building and zoning code violation cases. Each year this backlog has increased while the number of cases opened has declined by 33 percent over the past four years. Method of Investigation The Grand Jury did not include the vehicle abatement function of the division in its investigation. The Grand Jury interviewed the Director of Planning and Building, Code Enforcement Officers, supporting staff of the Code Enforcement Division and staff from the County Counsel’s Office. Detailed reviews were conducted of departmental records including over 450 opened and closed violation/complaint cases, that were filed by the public as well as those filed by the Department’s Building Inspectors for the years 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003. The Grand Jury reviewed Code Enforcement Division policies and procedures, past Grand Jury reports and vehicle maintenance records.
R6:
The MTA Board should have at least one meeting a year in each of the outlying communities. (Finding #7and #8)
R7:
MTA should advertise any meeting requesting public input, including MCOG’s yearly meeting, inside their busses, in the “Passenger Newsletter”, on new route schedules, on their website and any other appropriate media. (Finding #7, #8, and #9)
F8:
Some cases are more than 10 years old and are still considered active. Many of these cases contain multiple notices to correct violations. Some cases show multiple final notices to correct violation without any action or follow up being taken.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
MTA should advertise any meeting requesting public input, including MCOG’s yearly meeting, inside their busses, in the “Passenger Newsletter”, on new route schedules, on their website and any other appropriate media. (Finding #7, #8, and #9)
F9:
The DPB does not have a policy regarding use and training on the CRW. Case Management
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
MTA should advertise any meeting requesting public input, including MCOG’s yearly meeting, inside their busses, in the “Passenger Newsletter”, on new route schedules, on their website and any other appropriate media. (Finding #7, #8, and #9)
F10:
The CRW has the capability to track cases and provide follow up actions, provide notices, case priorities, and staff assigned to the case. This program is under utilized and minimal training has been provided.
F11:
Code Enforcement Officers have not been properly trained in the use of the CRW computer program.
F12:
The computer CRW system is under utilized and only used for minimal record keeping.
Related Recommendations (2)
R8:
MTA should reconsider discounting fares for handicapped passengers. (Finding #12 and #14a)
R9:
The MTA board should consider increased advertising on their busses to gain revenue. (Finding #12, #14a and b, #17, #21, #33 and #35) Comments The Grand Jury commends the MTA general manager for his excellent grant writing skills. Response Requested: Mendocino Transit Authority 19 MENTAL HEALTH CONTRACTED SERVICES FOR CHILDREN/YOUTH AND THEIR FAMILIES IN MENDOCINO COUNTY Introduction The 2003-2004 Grand Jury conducted an overview of the mental health contracted services available for Children/Youth, and their families in Mendocino County. Mendocino County Department of Mental Health, contracts with three organizational providers: A. Mendocino County Youth Project B. Redwood Children’s Services Inc. C. Tapestry Services Inc. Method of Investigation The Grand Jury interviewed the Director the Mental Health Department, Assistant Director Mendocino County Department of Social Service. The Directors of the following; Organizational Providers; Tapestry Family Services Inc., Redwood Children’s Services Inc., and Mendocino County Youth Project. The Grand Jury visited Mental Health Department Crisis Service Center, Tele-psychiatry center, Tapestry Family Services, Redwood Children’s Services, and the Mendocino County Youth Project. The Grand Jury reviewed the following documents: State of California Codes, charts, budgets, Mental Health Department 2003-2004 Compendium of Services, Organizational Providers Policy and Procedure manuals, and Memorandum of Understanding and contracts. Organizational Providers Organizational Providers Services under the Managed Care Plan are required to follow regulations as defined in Title 9, Section 1810.227 of the California Code of Regulations. Each organization provides a qualified staff member to serve on the Multi-Provider Screening Team.The Mental Health Department Organizational Provider manual defines the following three designated levels of service; Level One is for families seeking counseling regarding issues that result in behaviors classified as “mild”. Level Two services is for families seeking counseling regarding behaviors that are moderate and chronic (lasting more than 6 months). Level Three services are for severely emotionally disturbed. Mendocino County Youth Project Introduction Program services include: Share Youth Crisis, Crossroads Youth Drop in Center, Schools, Mental Health and Substance Abuse Treatment, Juvenile Hall, Family Enhancement, and Peer Helping Programs. Offices are located in Ukiah, Willits, Fort Bragg and Point Arena.
F13:
In 2003, the DPB opened 135 building code violations/complaints, and 69 Zoning code violations.
F14:
Testimony stated Code Enforcement Officers spend 65% of their time in the field, contradictory testimony states 65% to 85% of Code Enforcement Officers time is spent in the office. Code Enforcement Officers spend a disproportion amount of their time engaged in office activities and not enough time in the field investigating.
Related Recommendations (2)
R8:
MTA should reconsider discounting fares for handicapped passengers. (Finding #12 and #14a)
R9:
The MTA board should consider increased advertising on their busses to gain revenue. (Finding #12, #14a and b, #17, #21, #33 and #35) Comments The Grand Jury commends the MTA general manager for his excellent grant writing skills. Response Requested: Mendocino Transit Authority 19 MENTAL HEALTH CONTRACTED SERVICES FOR CHILDREN/YOUTH AND THEIR FAMILIES IN MENDOCINO COUNTY Introduction The 2003-2004 Grand Jury conducted an overview of the mental health contracted services available for Children/Youth, and their families in Mendocino County. Mendocino County Department of Mental Health, contracts with three organizational providers: A. Mendocino County Youth Project B. Redwood Children’s Services Inc. C. Tapestry Services Inc. Method of Investigation The Grand Jury interviewed the Director the Mental Health Department, Assistant Director Mendocino County Department of Social Service. The Directors of the following; Organizational Providers; Tapestry Family Services Inc., Redwood Children’s Services Inc., and Mendocino County Youth Project. The Grand Jury visited Mental Health Department Crisis Service Center, Tele-psychiatry center, Tapestry Family Services, Redwood Children’s Services, and the Mendocino County Youth Project. The Grand Jury reviewed the following documents: State of California Codes, charts, budgets, Mental Health Department 2003-2004 Compendium of Services, Organizational Providers Policy and Procedure manuals, and Memorandum of Understanding and contracts. Organizational Providers Organizational Providers Services under the Managed Care Plan are required to follow regulations as defined in Title 9, Section 1810.227 of the California Code of Regulations. Each organization provides a qualified staff member to serve on the Multi-Provider Screening Team.The Mental Health Department Organizational Provider manual defines the following three designated levels of service; Level One is for families seeking counseling regarding issues that result in behaviors classified as “mild”. Level Two services is for families seeking counseling regarding behaviors that are moderate and chronic (lasting more than 6 months). Level Three services are for severely emotionally disturbed. Mendocino County Youth Project Introduction Program services include: Share Youth Crisis, Crossroads Youth Drop in Center, Schools, Mental Health and Substance Abuse Treatment, Juvenile Hall, Family Enhancement, and Peer Helping Programs. Offices are located in Ukiah, Willits, Fort Bragg and Point Arena.
F15:
Testimony stated Code Enforcement Officer’s travel in excess of 3400 miles per month in the CED vehicle. A review of vehicle maintenance records reveal the CED vehicle, which is used by three CEO’s, averages 1200 miles per month. Policies and Procedures
F16:
There are limited policies and procedures that the CED relies on in the performance of employee’s day to day duties. Those in place fail to provide the necessary guidance for staff. The limited written policy and procedures results in inconsistent enforcement of building and zoning code regulations.
F17:
Testimony of staff supports the need and desire for a comprehensive set of written policy and procedures.
F18:
The DPB does not have a written policy or procedure regarding opening a case.
F19:
The DPB does not have a written policy or procedure regarding closure of a case. 10
F20:
The DPB does not have a written policy or procedure regarding establishing case priorities.
F21:
The DPB does not have a written policy or procedure for reviewing cases.
F22:
The DPB does not have a written policy or procedure relating to number of days Violators are given to correct violations.
F23:
The DPB does not have a written policy or procedure for issuance of NOV’s and follow up actions.
F24:
The DPB does not have a written policy or procedure relating to Final Notices to correct a violation/complaint and follow up.
F25:
The DPB does not have a written policy or procedure regarding issuance of a citation to correct a violation.
F26:
The DPB does not have a written policy or procedure regarding formal or legal procedures for establishing compliance of violations.
F27:
MTA & Sonoma County collaborate to find solutions to transportation needs which cross over county lines.
F28:
A group of south coasters from Sea Ranch up to Elk formed the Redwood Coast Community Transportation Coalition (RCCTC) and received a grant to study coastal transportation solutions. A need was identified in Sea Ranch, where there was a transportation need to serve a low-income Apartment Complex with 150 units near the Gualala River. The cost for this route was determined to cost a total 17 of $6000 per year. North Coast Opportunities (NCO) pledged $3000 of seed money. Sonoma County came up with the remainder. MTA has been successfully doing this route for a few months. In the 2004-2005 fiscal year, MTA will ask Sonoma County to provide total funding for this route. MTA exceeded the projected ridership projections, which gives some credibility to this group’s work.
F29:
MTA averages only three to five complaints per month, most of which concern buses arriving too late or too early. Safety
F30:
During times of emergency road conditions, drivers are successful at finding alternate routes around road closures.
F31:
The primary tool for communication between drivers and dispatch is by radios and radio reception is marginal throughout the county, especially between Willits and the Coast.
F32:
MTA has “Policy of Passenger Conduct” brochures in each bus. Drivers may remove passengers from the bus if they violate the policy. Yearly there are approximately six incidents of unruly passengers. In 20 years there have been only two situations where a driver was assaulted by a passenger. Special Services
F33:
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires that MTA have complimentary para-transit (Dial-a-Ride) available for any local route MTA establishes, which effectively doubles the cost of establishing each route.
F34:
All MTA vehicles are ADA compliant.
F35:
ADA regulations have a budget impact. Wheelchair ridership has greatly increased in the last few years which increases the average stop time, and negatively impacts the budget
F36:
Senior citizen, defined as anyone 62 years of age or older and handicapped riders receive half-fare rates.
F37:
MTA rates are as follows: a. MTA provides a summer student pass for $25.00 entitling students 18 years and younger, to unlimited rides during the months of June, July, and August. b. Fare costs: Dial-A-Ride within a City is $3/person. c. Bus Fare is $0.75 for each Zone. Bus fare increases by $0.75 as you enter a new zone. d. Fares from Ukiah to the Santa Rosa Airport: $13 one way and $21 roundtrip
F38:
MTA contracts with six of the seven the Senior Centers to subsidize their transportation programs, which includes the cost of purchasing and maintaining the Senior Center fleets. 18