Mendocino County 2004-2005 - California Grand Jury Reports

F1: As of September 2004, the BOS has taken no action to designate "safe- surrender" sites in Mendocino County. Response (Sheriff): The Sheriff has no reason to doubt this finding; however we have not conducted an independent examination of the Board of Supervisors’ meeting records. The Department therefore can neither agree nor disagree with this finding. Response (Public Health): The Department disagrees in part with this finding because the law automatically designates hospitals as surrender sites. The posters and literature that Public Health received from the State Health and Human Services Agency when the law went into effect state “Parents are permitted to bring a baby within 3 days of birth to any hospital emergency room or other designated safe haven in California.” In Mendocino County, hospital emergency rooms are thus identified as the county’s safe-surrender sites. Response (Social Services): The Department disagrees in part with this finding because the law automatically designates hospitals as surrender sites. Mendocino County has three automatically designated surrender sites: Howard Memorial Hospital, Mendocino Coast District Hospital and Ukiah Valley Medical Center. The law requires any additional surrender sites, such as fire stations, to be designated by the board of supervisors. The Mendocino County Board of Supervisors has taken no action to designate any additional surrender sites. Response (Board of Supervisors): The BOS agrees with the response represented by the Public Health and Social Services Departments, in that law does automatically designate hospitals as surrender sites. No further board action has been taken on designating additional surrender sites without the need for further information in regards to the legitimacy of this action.

Page 35

Related Recommendations (1)

R1: The Grand Jury recommends that no changes be made to the Form 700 filing requirements for Grand Jurors. (Findings 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13).

F2: There have been no reports of abandoned or surrendered newborns within Mendocino County. Response (Sheriff): The Department agrees with this finding as it relates to records maintained by the Mendocino County Sheriff’s Office. The Department neither agrees nor disagrees with the finding as to reports maintained by other agencies. Response (Public Health): The Department agrees with this finding. Public Health has received no reports of abandoned or surrendered newborn infants. Response (Social Services): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The BOS agrees with the response represented by the Sheriff’s Department, Public Health and Social Services Departments.

Page 36

F3: The Adventist Health System distributed information regarding the law via email on or about September 2001, to all 21 California Member Hospitals when this Bill was passed in to law, including Howard Memorial Hospital and Ukiah Valley Medical Center. Response (Sheriff): Without benefit of the documents reviewed by the Grand Jury, the Department can neither agree nor disagree. Response (Public Health): This information was provided by another agency. Without additional information the Department can neither agree nor disagree. Response (Social Services): This information was provided by another agency. Without additional information the Department can neither agree nor disagree. Response (Board of Supervisors): The BOS can neither agree nor disagree without further information.

Page 36

Related Recommendations (1)

R3: The Grand Jury recommends that all safe-surrender sites and local hospitals provide at least one in-service training session per year to inform personnel of this code. (Findings 3, 5, 6) Response (Sheriff): This recommendation is directed to safe-surrender sites and local hospitals. Response (Public Health): The specific recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted as it is directed at the safe surrender sites and local hospitals. However, Public Health staff will also be provided with annual in-service training about the Safely Surrendered Baby Law and safe-surrender sites within Mendocino County within the 2005 calendar year. Response (Social Services): This recommendation is not being implemented by the Mendocino County Department of Social Services because it is directed to local hospitals. The Department is willing to assist the hospitals, if requested by them, in implementing annual in- service training on the safe surrender program. The Department includes information on the safe surrender law as part of staff training for Children’s Services emergency response services. Response (Board of Supervisors): The BOS agrees in part, with the recommendation relative to Departments within Mendocino County. The BOS supports the assistance by Mendocino County Departments, upon request, of local hospitals and safe-surrender sites regarding the implementation of annual in-service training.

F4: While the Mendocino Coast District Hospital in Fort Bragg was aware of the code, no formal action had been taken to supply services dictated by the Abandonment of Newborns Bill. At the time of the grand jury’s investigation, there had never been a newborn surrendered to the hospital; the executive that the Grand Jury interviewed felt this was not something to be overly concerned about. The executive was able to locate Health and Safety Code§1255.7 in the hospital’s manual and said they would be able to take the proper steps if the need arose. Response (Sheriff): Without further information, the Department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding. Response (Public Health): This information was provided by another agency. Without additional information the Department can neither agree nor disagree. Response (Social Services): This information was provided by another agency. Without additional information the Department can neither agree nor disagree. Response (Board of Supervisors): The BOS can neither agree nor disagree without further information.

Page 36

F5: Ukiah Valley Medical Center has neither shown a readiness nor taken the initiative to supply services dictated by the Abandonment of Newborns Bill. Response (Sheriff): Without further information, the Department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding. Response (Public Health): This information was provided by another agency. Without additional information the Department can neither agree nor disagree. Response (Social Services): This information was provided by another agency. Without additional information the Department can neither agree nor disagree. Response (Board of Supervisors): The BOS can neither agree nor disagree without further information.

Page 37

Related Recommendations (1)

R2: The Grand Jury recommends that each Grand Jury Foreperson ensure timely filings of Form 700 by all Grand Jurors. (Findings 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13). Response Required Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Mendocino County District Attorney Mendocino County Counsel Response Requested Mendocino County Clerk-Recorder Safe-surrender Sites for Abandoned Newborns (December 29, 2004) Summary “Every safely surrendered infant is a success.” -- Garrison Frost, LA County’s First Five Commission Sparking the label “No Shame, No Blame,” the State of California acted in 2001 to amend the Health and Safety Code and the Penal Code to ensure that parents or individuals who have lawful custody of a child could deliver an unwanted newborn infant safely and without penalty to welcoming and prepared institutions. The objective of the Grand Jury investigation was to examine Mendocino County’s response to this legislation. The Grand Jury found that some effort had been made to protect these innocent lives. For the most part, however, nothing has been done by the Board of Supervisors (BOS) to ensure that safe-surrender sites have been established and publicized in Mendocino County. It is the hope of this Grand Jury that this report will help to make all hospitals safe surrender sites. In addition, it is recommended that 911 emergency phone calls be dispatched appropriately to address safe surrender emergencies. The State of California provides free educational materials in English and Spanish to all counties. The Grand Jury urges the BOS to ensure that these materials are placed in locations in which they will be readily available to those in need, and to take all necessary steps to comply with this legislation.

F6: Howard Memorial Hospital in Willits is in complete compliance with the Abandonment of Newborns Bill. The Emergency Department has posters and brochures as well as the safe-surrender site state emblem, which are visible and available to the public. The emergency room has prepared newborn abandonment packets that are readily accessible if needed. This hospital is the only hospital in the county that has performed in-house training for all personnel. Response (Sheriff): Without further information, the Department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding. Response (Public Health): This information was provided by another agency. Without additional information the Department can neither agree nor disagree. Response (Social Services): This information was provided by another agency. Without additional information the Department can neither agree nor disagree. Response (Board of Supervisors): The BOS can neither agree nor disagree without further information.

Page 37

F7: Under current procedures, an emergency call to 911 to report an abandoned newborn is referred to law enforcement, resulting in a response by a uniformed officer. Response (Sheriff): The Department agrees with this finding as to the procedures of the Sheriff’s Office, however there may be some confusion regarding use of the term, “abandoned.” The surrender of a newborn in accordance with the safe-surrender laws is not a crime. The abandonment of a newborn is a felony, and an immediate response by law enforcement is essential to protect the child and begin a criminal investigation. Response (Public Health): This information was provided by another agency. Without additional information the Department can neither agree nor disagree. Response (Social Services): This information was provided by another agency. Without additional information the Department can neither agree nor disagree. Response (Board of Supervisors): The BOS can neither agree nor disagree without further information.

Page 37

Related Recommendations (1)

R4: The Grand Jury recommends that the BOS require that emergency 911 calls regarding abandonment of a newborn be routed to proper medical personnel rather than uniformed officers. (Finding 7) Response (Sheriff): As with Recommendation #2, the Board of Supervisors lacks the authority to implement this recommendation. This recommendation requires further analysis prior to any changes in Sheriff’s Office dispatch protocols. In particular, this recommendation requires a clarification of how the Grand Jury interprets the term, “abandonment.” As noted my response to Finding #7, abandonment of a newborn is a felony. Law enforcement must respond to these incidents. Given the possibility of medical complications and the fact that patrol cars are not equipped to transport newborns, common sense dictates that an ambulance should also be summoned. However it appears that the Grand Jury may have used the term, “abandonment,” to describe calls involving the surrender of a newborn. Following the release of this report, a Grand Jury member stated that the basis for this recommendation was the Grand Jury’s concern that a woman seeking to surrender her child might flee at the sight of a patrol car but not at the sight of an approaching ambulance. This may be true, but even in this scenario, dispatching an ambulance by itself as a mobile safe-surrender site is not necessarily the most appropriate response. A dispatcher’s first consideration when receiving a call from someone who wants to abandon or surrender a newborn must be the safety of the newborn. The caller may only need directions to a safe-surrender site. However if the caller gives any indication that their safety or the safety of the newborn is in peril, then law enforcement should be dispatched. An ambulance should also be dispatched, but they will generally not enter until law enforcement has secured the scene. The safe surrender dispatch guidelines currently under development will address circumstances in which it is appropriate to dispatch a peace officer, an ambulance or both. Response (Public Health): This department will not be acting on this specific recommendation, as it is not applicable to this department. The Public Health Department does not have medical personnel on call 24 hours a day for this purpose. We believe that Child Protective Services staff are the appropriate responders in conjunction with the uniformed officers. Response (Social Services): This recommendation is not being implemented by the Mendocino County Department of Social Services because it is beyond the Department’s scope. The Department will coordinate its 24-hour Children’s Services emergency response services with the safe surrender dispatch guidelines being developed by the Sheriff’s Office. Response (Board of Supervisors): The BOS agrees with the response represented by the Sheriff’s Department. The recommendation will not be implemented because it is outside the jurisdiction of the BOS.

F8: The educational literature regarding safe surrender, while provided free of charge by the state, does not list local safe-surrender sites. Response (Sheriff): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Public Health): The Department agrees with this finding. The posters and literature that Public Health received from the State Health and Human Services Agency when the law went into effect state “Parents are permitted to bring a baby within 3 days of birth to any hospital emergency room or other designated safe haven in California.” In Mendocino County, hospital emergency rooms are thus identified as the county’s safe-surrender sites, although the specific hospital names and addresses are not identified. Response (Social Services): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The BOS agrees with the response represented by the Sheriff’s Department, Public Health and Social Services Departments.

Page 38

Related Recommendations (1)

R6: The Grand Jury recommends that all educational materials list the locations of the "safe-surrender sites" within the county. (Finding 8) Response (Sheriff): This recommendation requires further analysis. The State Department of Social Services website has downloadable brochures describing the safe-surrender law (http://www.babysafe.ca.gov). The text of the brochures clearly identifies hospital emergency rooms as safe-surrender sites. These sites are already well-known in the community. The brochure also states, “If there are additional places, they will be listed on this brochure.” Until such time as the Board of Supervisors designates additional sites, then there is nothing else to list. Response (Public Health): The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future. Although the posters on the Safely Surrender Baby Law that Public Health displays identify “hospital emergency rooms” as the county’s safe-surrender sites, the specific names and addresses of the three hospitals in the county will be added to the posters by March 31, 2005. If other safe-surrender sites are added by the BOS, those will also be added to the posters within 60 days of the designation. Response (Social Services): This recommendation will be implemented as follows: The Mendocino County Department of Social Services will develop or alter educational materials to list the locations by May 31,

F9: This educational literature was found only at Howard Memorial Hospital and the Fort Bragg Police Department. Response (Sheriff): Without further information, the Department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, except to say that, at the present time, the Sheriff’s Office does not have a supply of safe-surrender educational literature. The point the Grand Jury makes in this finding is well- taken. A supply of this literature will be ordered for Sheriff’s Office facilities. Response (Public Health): This information was provided by another agency. Without additional information the Department can neither agree nor disagree. Mendocino County Department of Public Health received posters and literature from the State Health and Human Services Agency when the law went into effect. Posters in English and Spanish have been and continue to be prominently displayed in the Ukiah Public Health Clinics waiting area at 1120 S. Dora Street where clinic services for Family Planning, pregnancy testing, sexually transmitted infections, and immunizations are provided. The posters have also been displayed in the Ukiah WIC clinic waiting area. Public Health Nursing staff from Family Planning; Maternal, Child and Adolescent Health; Field Nursing; and WIC programs were provided with information about the Safely Surrender Baby Law in 2001 or 2002 at staff meetings when the posters and literature were received from the state. Information on the Safely Surrender Baby Law is provided to public health clients by staff as appropriate. Response (Social Services): This information was provided by another agency. Without additional information the Department can neither agree nor disagree. Response (Board of Supervisors): The BOS can neither agree nor disagree without further information.

Page 38

Related Recommendations (1)

R5: The Grand Jury recommends that a concerted effort be made to post educational materials at locations where they will do the most good, e.g., homeless shelters, medical clinics, food banks, post offices, service agencies, libraries, middle schools, and high schools. (Finding 9). Response (Sheriff): This recommendation has not yet been implemented at the Sheriff’s Office, but will be implemented in the near future. As noted in my response to Finding #9, a supply of safe-surrender educational literature will be ordered for Sheriff’s Office facilities. The materials should be on display no later than March 1, 2005. Response (Public Health): The recommendation has been implemented in this department. Mendocino County Department of Public Health will continue to display the English and Spanish Safely Surrender Baby posters in the Public Health Clinics and/or WIC waiting areas at 1120 S. Dora Street in Ukiah where services for Family Planning, pregnancy testing, sexually transmitted infections, immunizations and/or WIC are provided. Public Health will also determine whether space is available to post these materials at the Willits and/or Fort Bragg Public Health offices. Public Health staff will provide information on the Safely Surrender Baby Law to clients as appropriate, and to other agencies via existing committees and collaboratives. Response (Social Services): This recommendation will be implemented as follows: The Mendocino County Department of Social Services will develop a plan for distribution and posting of materials by April 30, 2005 and will complete the distribution and posting, in coordination with the sites and agencies listed, by June 30, 2005. Response (Board of Supervisors): The BOS agrees with this recommendation.

F10: The Grand Jury found that no fire station in Mendocino County is manned 24 hours a day seven days a week. Response (Sheriff): The Department disagrees with this finding. The City of Ukiah Fire Department and Ukiah Valley Fire Department are both manned 24-hours a day, 7-days a week. Other fire stations within the county are manned 24/7 during fire season. Response (Public Health): This information was provided by another agency. Without additional information the Department can neither agree nor disagree. Response (Social Services): This information was provided by another agency. Without additional information the Department can neither agree nor disagree. Response (Board of Supervisors): The BOS agrees with the response represented by the Sheriff’s Department.

Page 39

Related Recommendations (1)

R7: The Grand Jury strongly encourages the general public to contact their state representatives to request that the Abandonment of Newborns Bill be extended beyond January 1, 2006 (Finding 10). Response (Sheriff): This recommendation has not been implemented by the Sheriff’s Office, but will be implemented in the future. The Sheriff would like to thank the Grand Jury for informing the public about this important law and alerting all of us about its impending repeal. Senator Robert Dutton has introduced SB 116, which would eliminate the repeal date and extend the safe-surrender statutes indefinitely. Senator Wes Chesbro is a co-author of the bill. The Sheriff will be contacting Senator Chesbro and Assembly member Patty Berg within the next few days to express support of this legislation. Response (Public Health): The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted, as this recommendation will be acted on by the Department of Social Services and is therefore, not in need of additional action on the part of this department. Response (Social Services): This recommendation will be implemented as follows: The Mendocino County Department of Social Services will forward this issue to all advisory bodies and groups concerned with child safety and will prepare an agenda summary to recommend that the Board of Supervisors convey support for the extension to State legislators, by April 30, 2005. Response (Board of Supervisors): The BOS agrees with this recommendation and supports the extension to State Legislators for the Abandonment of Newborns Bill. Comments The Grand Jury is pleased that Mendocino County has had no reported abandoned newborns. The Grand Jury considers Health and Safety Code§1255.7 to be vitally important and believes the actions recommended to the BOS and others may save lives. The Grand Jury compliments Howard Memorial Hospital on their compliance with and implementation of the Abandoned-Newborn Bill. During an unannounced

F11: The Abandonment of Newborns Bill is due to expire Jan 1, 2006. Response (Sheriff): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Public Health): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Social Services): The Department agrees with this finding. The law will be repealed on January 1, 2006, unless subsequent legislation extends or repeals that date. Response (Board of Supervisors): The BOS agrees with this finding.

Page 39

📋July 07, 2005 — 2. The Grand Jury recommends that the BOS step back from the management of individual departments as well as the

215 pages 25 findings 25 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 25 findings

F1: The office of the Clerk has a total permanent staff of nine. Response (County Clerk/Assessor): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding and the County Clerk/Assessor response.

Related Recommendations (2)

R4: The Grand Jury recommends that relevant changes in State and County policy be immediately communicated to staff and volunteers as well as added to the Policy and Procedures manual. (Findings 1,2,3,4)

R25: The Grand Jury recommends that RVUSD develop and use web-based informational resources to communicate with all concerned parties, and to network with others who share a concern for special education. (Findings 1, 3, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 32, 33). Comments The Grand Jury believes that all parties, especially parents, should know their rights, responsibilities and obligations so that they work together in the best interests of the students.

F2: Staff turnover is higher at the lower paid, entry level positions than among more senior personnel. Response (County Clerk/Assessor): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding and the County Clerk/Assessor response.

Related Recommendations (2)

R1: The Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Supervisors require the Department of Human Resources to perform desk audits for workers in the Clerk/Assessor’s office to determine the appropriateness of current salaries for those jobs. (Finding 2) Response (County Clerk/Assessor): This recommendation requires further analysis. I have met with the Human Resources Director regarding the shortage of adequately skilled employees in the Assessor’s office as well as desk audits for workers in the Clerk/Assessor’s office to determine the appropriateness of current salaries of these jobs. I believe it is appropriate for Human Resources to perform desk audits and determine the appropriateness of current salaries of these jobs. Response (Human Resources): Response (Human Resources): The Human Resources Department is prepared to review the job classes which are voted as high turnover (Staff Assistant I) and shortage of skilled staff (Auditor Appraiser) to determine if the positions are properly classified and compensated. The Human Resources Department has a backlog of over 30 positions requiring classification review, but these positions will be given a higher priority. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this recommendation. The Human Resources Department will perform desk audits for the classifications unique to the County Clerk/Assessors Office and will research salary levels for those positions. This work will be completed by January 1, 2006 and the results will be presented to the County Clerk/ Assessor, as well as the Board of Supervisors for their consideration.

R6: The Grand Jury recommends that the pages of the Policy and Procedures manual be numbered sequentially and that they be dated to reflect updates. (Finding 2)

F3: To the fullest extent possible, functions of the Clerk’s Office are computerized in a very technology-intensive environment. Response (County Clerk/Assessor): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding and the County Clerk/Assessor response.

F4: A portion of the document processing fees goes to pay for up-to-date technology. Response (County Clerk/Assessor): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding and the County Clerk/Assessor response.

F5: The remainder of revenues from the Office goes into the County General Fund. Response (County Clerk/Assessor): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding and the County Clerk/Assessor response.

F6: Requests for information and documents are met in a timely fashion. Response (County Clerk/Assessor): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding and the County Clerk/Assessor response.

Related Recommendations (1)

R8: The Grand Jury recommends that all dogs be scanned upon arrival at the ACC facility, regardless of their condition, and that the scanning occur before a dog is placed in a cage, freezer or incinerator. (Findings 6,7,8,14) Comments Whatever the circumstances, the death of a pet is a difficult, often traumatic experience for the owner. The treatment of a bereaved owner by a government agency which must often deal with such incidents should be, at the very least, professional. Two owners living outside Ukiah Valley learned from other sources that their two dogs, one unharmed and one dead, had been taken by an ACC employee to the city facility. They left phone messages indicating their desire to retrieve both pets. Although both dogs carried microchips, there is no indication that either was scanned at the Ukiah facility. Upon arrival, they were told at the reception desk that the dead dog was in the freezer. Indeed, the Grand Jury was told that an identified dead animal would be kept in the freezer until the owner is reached, then released to the owner or burned. When one of the owners was directed to the rear of the facility, he was told by another staff member that his animal was in the incinerator. The door was opened, his dead pet was pointed out, and the owner himself entered the incinerator to retrieve the dog. He was not offered, as a courtesy, a container such as a large plastic bag in which to carry the remains to his car. The Grand Jury recognizes the important and necessary work of Animal Care and Control workers. Spaying and neutering programs, the rescue of strays, organization and promotion of the adoption process are all vital services to this community. The Grand Jury believes, however, that those services would be improved by clear and concise guidelines in a Policy and Procedures manual disseminated to all staff members and volunteers. Finally, when saddened owners arrive at the facility to recover a dead pet, Mendocino County citizens expect courtesy and professionalism from ACC employees and volunteers. The Grand Jury would hope, in addition, that such clients be shown sensitivity and understanding. Response Required Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Response Requested Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer Director, Department of Animal Care and Control WET KENNELS AND LOW MORALE ANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL REPORT (June 16, 2005) Summary Several problems found through previous oversights of the Mendocino County Animal Care and Control Department (ACC), particularly in the areas of management, staff training, and public service, continue to cause concern within the County. Care of animals and euthanasia protocols at the Ukiah facility also surfaced as issues in the course of this year’s investigation. Recommendations include new and previously stated ideas for improvements.

F7: Despite a considerable increase in recent years in the volume of work, the Clerk’s Office has functioned without an increase in staffing for the last 20 years. Response (County Clerk/Assessor): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding and the County Clerk/Assessor response.

F8: The conduct of County elections by the Clerk’s Office has gone smoothly despite the increasing complexity of the process. Response (County Clerk/Assessor): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding and the County Clerk/Assessor response.

F9: The conduct of elections depends heavily on a well-organized group of temporary hires. Response (County Clerk/Assessor): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding and the County Clerk/Assessor response.

F10: Election results, sent by modem from the polling places, are now available almost immediately after the closing of the polls at the Clerk’s Office and the Mendocino County website. Response (County Clerk/Assessor): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding and the County Clerk/Assessor response.

F11: Safeguards for a fair election process appear to be both adequate and appropriate. Response (County Clerk/Assessor): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding and the County Clerk/Assessor response.

F12: Between elections voting machines are warehoused in two separate facilities, one of which has a leaky roof. Response (County Clerk/Assessor): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (General Services): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding and the responses of both departments.

Related Recommendations (1)

R2: The Grand Jury recommends that election machines be stored in one secure, structurally sound facility. (Finding 12) Response (County Clerk/Assessor): This recommendation requires further analysis. I have met with the General Services Director regarding the storage election machines in one secure, structurally sound facility. Currently, the Accu-vote optical scan ballot counters are stored in the County Clerk-Recorder-Elections designated section of the storage facility adjacent to the County Administration Center at 501 Low Gap Road while the voting booths and optical scan ballot boxes are maintained in a storage shed with a leaky roof in back of the General Services Department. The optimum solution would be to have all of our election equipment stored in the storage facility adjacent to the County Administration Center. However I recognize that this storage facility has already been partitioned out to other departments and there is now not room to expand our space. The General Services Director has therefore agreed to make space available in the General Services warehouse to store election voting booths and ballot boxes. The General Services warehouse is secure and structurally sound. Response (General Services): This recommendation requires further analysis. General Services has met with County Clerk-Recorder/Assessor Marsha Wharff to review the situation and discuss alternatives. We agree that the current storage location at General Services for the ballot boxes and portable voting booths is inadequate in that the ballot boxes are required to be stacked three high and that the metal roof over the storage area needs to be repaired. To resolve that situation, we have agreed to create an adequate and secure storage area for this equipment within the General Services warehouse. The electronic ballot tabulators are currently stored in the Clerk- Recorder/Elections’ designated portion of the new storage facility adjacent to the County Administration Center at 501 Low Gap Road. This area is adequate and secure and convenient to the Elections office, and therefore preferable to the General Services warehouse. There is not additional space available in the new storage facility for all of the elections equipment, and therefore General Services is not able to implement the Grand Jury’s recommendation that all “elections machines” be stored in one secure, structurally sound facility. Instead, as noted above, pursuant to our understanding with the Clerk-Recorder, the equipment will be housed in two separate but secure and structurally sound facilities. The Clerk-Recorder anticipates the delivery of some number of computerized, touch-screen voting “booths” in the near future. Prior to such delivery, General Services and the Clerk-Recorder will collaborate on a plan to ensure that this equipment is adequately and securely warehoused in a location convenient and acceptable to the Clerk-Recorder. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this recommendation in part. The County Clerk/Assessor and Department of General Services have developed a viable proposal for improved storage of election equipment. This proposal would address the issue of protection of equipment from the elements, but would utilize two locations rather than one. This solution is acceptable to the Board.

F13: The Assessor’s Office has an authorized staff of 24 permanent workers and supervisors. Response (County Clerk/Assessor): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding and the County Clerk/Assessor response.

F14: The Assessor’s Office is increasingly computerized, enabling it to handle the workload much more efficiently. Response (County Clerk/Assessor): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding and the County Clerk/Assessor response.

F15: Shortage of staff in the Assessor’s Office, particularly those with specific skills, is a serious problem, leading to a grievous overburdening of existing personnel. Response (County Clerk/Assessor): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding and the County Clerk/Assessor response.

Related Recommendations (1)

R3: The Grand Jury recommends that further efforts to address the shortage of adequately skilled employees in the Assessor’s office be undertaken. (Finding 15) Response (County Clerk/Assessor): This recommendation requires further analysis. I have met with the Human Resources Director regarding the shortage of adequately skilled employees in the Assessor’s office as well as desk audits for workers in the Clerk/Assessor’s office to determine the appropriateness of current salaries of these jobs. I believe it is appropriate for Human Resources to perform desk audits and determine the appropriateness of current salaries of these jobs. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this recommendation. The Board notes that the County Clerk/Assessor is currently working with the Human Resource Department on addressing the shortage of adequately skilled employees in the Assessor’s Office. COMMENTS The astute use of technology by the office of the Clerk/Assessor has mitigated the effect of budget cuts that have had such a negative impact on many County agencies. The Grand Jury commends the administration of the office for both the overall efficiency and helpfulness demonstrated in the workplace.

F16: A Life Skills class, offered through the Ford Street Project, includes instruction in anger management, health, and abusive behavior reduction. Response (Sheriff): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Buildings and Grounds): The Department neither agrees nor disagrees with this finding. This issue is not within the purview of Buildings and Grounds. Response (Board of Supervisors): The BOS agrees with the response represented by the Sheriff’s Department.

Related Recommendations (1)

R13: The Grand Jury recommends that RVUSD immediately make secure desks, computers, and fax machines where confidential student or personnel information is maintained or transferred. (Findings 16, 31).

F17: Inmates may attend on site meetings of Alcoholics Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous. Response (Sheriff): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Buildings and Grounds): The Department neither agrees nor disagrees with this finding. This issue is not within the purview of Buildings and Grounds. Response (Board of Supervisors): The BOS agrees with the response represented by the Sheriff’s Department.

F18: Religious services are available to the inmates. Response (Sheriff): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Buildings and Grounds): The Department neither agrees nor disagrees with this finding. This issue is not within the purview of Buildings and Grounds. Response (Board of Supervisors): The BOS agrees with the response represented by the Sheriff’s Department.

F19: The money generated from MCJ pay phones, through a service provider contract, defrays the cost of Inmate Services. Response (Sheriff): The Department agrees with this finding. Inmate phone and commissary commissions provide the funding for Inmate Services. Response (Buildings and Grounds): The Department neither agrees nor disagrees with this finding. This issue is not within the purview of Buildings and Grounds. Response (Board of Supervisors): The BOS agrees with this finding.

F20: There is a significant number of outstanding maintenance issues. Response (Sheriff): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Buildings and Grounds): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The BOS agrees with this finding

Related Recommendations (1)

R14: The Grand Jury recommends that RVUSD immediately purchase a locking display case to post meeting agendas, job announcements, school calendars, and other public notices as appropriate. Such notices must be displayed in a place of public access, in accordance with the Brown Act. (Finding 20).

F21: The Courthouse Holding Cells now provide space for attorney/client consultation. Response (Sheriff): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Buildings and Grounds): The Department neither agrees nor disagrees with this finding; however, it has no reason to doubt neither the Grand Jury’s finding nor the Sheriff’s response in agreement. Response (Board of Supervisors): The BOS agrees with the response represented by the Sheriff’s Department.

F22: Graffiti exist on holding cell walls in Ukiah and Fort Bragg. Response (Sheriff): The Department agrees with this finding. It is an ongoing problem. We paint; they scratch the paint; we repaint. There are some paints and surface finishes that are resistant to vandalism, but most are toxic and require closure of the cell during curing. There is no such thing as a “graffiti proof” or “inmate proof” surface. Response (Buildings and Grounds): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The BOS agrees with the response represented by the Sheriff’s Department.

F23: A significant number of the transients arriving in Mendocino County further stress the criminal justice system. Response (Sheriff): Without further information the Department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding. The Jail staff has observed an increase in the number of transients booked, together with a high incidence of mental health problems among this group. Whether or not the number of transient arrestees represents a significant portion of the overall transient population would require a count of that larger population. Response (Buildings and Grounds): The Department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding. The information required to verify this finding is outside the purview of Buildings and Grounds. Response (Board of Supervisors): The BOS can neither agree nor disagree with this finding without further information.

Related Recommendations (2)

R16: The Grand Jury recommends that RVUSD immediately update the Policy and Procedures Manual and take steps to insure that these changes are implemented by staff and School Board members. (Findings 23, 25, 29, 30).

R20: The Grand Jury recommends that RVUSD require all staff to adhere to an effective organizational system that is defined in the School Board’s Policy and Procedures Manual. (Findings 23, 29, 30).

F24: Since the closure of the Psychiatric Health Facility (PHF) in November, 2000, many of the individuals who would have been served at that location are now under the care of the MCJ, at a higher cost to Mendocino County. Response (Sheriff): Without further information the Department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding. It is extremely difficult to identify the impact of services that were not delivered. Response (Buildings and Grounds): The Department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding. The information required to verify this finding is outside the purview of Buildings and Grounds. Response (Board of Supervisors): The BOS can neither agree nor disagree with this finding without further information.

F25: The kennel used for detainees’ dogs at the Fort Bragg Holding Facility is not clean. Response (Sheriff): Without further information the Department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding. The kennel is not owned by the Sheriff’s Office. Sheriff’s Deputies assigned to the Fort Bragg Sub-Station take arrestees’ animals to the Department of Animal Care & Control shelter in Fort Bragg. Response (Buildings and Grounds): The Department neither agrees nor disagrees with this finding. The Department of Animal Care and Control is responsible for cleaning the kennels at the Fort Bragg Animal Shelter. Response (Board of Supervisors): The BOS agrees with the response represented by the Sheriff’s Department.

Additional Recommendations 7

Not linked to specific findings.

R5: The Grand Jury recommends that the Policy and Procedures manual be reviewed and revised on a biannual basis by a panel of ACC employees and volunteers; the manual should be displayed and available for use by all employees, volunteers and clients of the ACC. (Findings 2,3,4,14,)

R7: The Grand Jury recommends that the Policy and Procedures manual contain clear guidelines which prevent anyone other than an ACC employee from entering the incinerator. (Findings 11,12,)

R9: Clerk of the Board 24. Sheriff*

R10: District Attorney 25. Social Services

R11: Farm Advisor 26. Transportation

R12: General Services 27. Treasurer-Tax Collector 13.Grand Jury 28. Water Agency 14.Human Resources *Subject of 2004-2005 Grand Jury Report 15.Information Services All Actual Department Responses Attached as Appendix 1 (Pg 118). Response Required Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Response Requested All Mendocino County Department Heads of 245 There’s a Change in the Weather (June 30, 2005) A Report on the New Position of Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer SUMMARY In response to citizen questions and concerns, the Grand Jury looked at the changes anticipated as a result of the shift from a County Administrative Officer (CAO) to a County Executive Officer (CEO).

R15: Response (County Clerk/Assessor): This recommendation requires further analysis. I have met with the Human Resources Director regarding the shortage of adequately skilled employees in the Assessor’s office as well as desk audits for workers in the Clerk/Assessor’s office to determine the appropriateness of current salaries of these jobs. I believe it is appropriate for Human Resources to perform desk audits and determine the appropriateness of current salaries of these jobs. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this recommendation. The Board notes that the County Clerk/Assessor is currently working with the Human Resource Department on addressing the shortage of adequately skilled employees in the Assessor’s Office. COMMENTS The astute use of technology by the office of the Clerk/Assessor has mitigated the effect of budget cuts that have had such a negative impact on many County agencies. The Grand Jury commends the administration of the office for both the overall efficiency and helpfulness demonstrated in the workplace.

📋July 07, 2005 — directives to employees are verbal and inconsistent rather than clearly codified in written form to which all can

215 pages 25 findings 25 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 25 findings

Related Recommendations (2)

R6: The Grand Jury recommends that the pages of the Policy and Procedures manual be numbered sequentially and that they be dated to reflect updates. (Finding 2)

Related Recommendations (1)

Related Recommendations (2)

Additional Recommendations 7

Not linked to specific findings.

R7: The Grand Jury recommends that the Policy and Procedures manual contain clear guidelines which prevent anyone other than an ACC employee from entering the incinerator. (Findings 11,12,)

R9: Clerk of the Board 24. Sheriff*

R10: District Attorney 25. Social Services

R11: Farm Advisor 26. Transportation

📋July 07, 2005 — There’s a Change in the Weather - a Report on the New Position of CEO

215 pages 25 findings 25 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 25 findings

Related Recommendations (2)

R6: The Grand Jury recommends that the pages of the Policy and Procedures manual be numbered sequentially and that they be dated to reflect updates. (Finding 2)

Related Recommendations (1)

Related Recommendations (2)

Additional Recommendations 7

Not linked to specific findings.

R7: The Grand Jury recommends that the Policy and Procedures manual contain clear guidelines which prevent anyone other than an ACC employee from entering the incinerator. (Findings 11,12,)

R9: Clerk of the Board 24. Sheriff*

R10: District Attorney 25. Social Services

R11: Farm Advisor 26. Transportation

July 01, 2005 — County of Mendocino Post Office Box 629

2 pages 9 findings

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 9 findings

F1: The approximate cost to incarcerate an inmate in a Conservation Camp is $10,000 annually compared to $50,000 annually at a higher security State prison.

F2: Inmate contributions to the community more than offset the cost of their incarceration. When inmates are not fighting fires they are available to do community work projects.

F3: Inmates at Parlin Fork help support the Make a Wish Foundation by making and donating craft items, sold to the public over the past five years for over $100,000.

F4: The seventeen-man crews are available at nominal rates to any tax-supported entity.

F5: Chamberlain Creek has a complete wood working shop and makes many types of cabinets and signs for city, county and State government.

F6: Parlin Fork operates their own sawmill and provides lumber for various projects.

F7: The Mendocino County Bookmobile serves both camps and is highly valued by the inmates.

F8: Inmates do most of the jobs required to run the camps.

F9: No tobacco products will be allowed in the camps after July 1, 2005. This will apply to staff as well as inmates.

July 01, 2005 — County of Mendocino Post Office Box 629

4 pages 9 findings

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 9 findings

F1: The approximate cost to incarcerate an inmate in a Conservation Camp is $10,000 annually compared to $50,000 annually at a higher security State prison. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with the finding, due to the fact that the Board has no authority or control over the Parlin Fork and Chamberlain Creek Conservation Camps.

F2: Inmate contributions to the community more than offset the cost of their incarceration. When inmates are not fighting fires they are available to do community work projects. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with the finding, due to the fact that the Board has no authority or control over the Parlin Fork and Chamberlain Creek Conservation Camps.

F3: Inmates at Parlin Fork help support the Make a Wish Foundation by making and donating craft items, sold to the public over the past five years for over $100,000. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with the finding, due to the fact that the Board has no authority or control over the Parlin Fork and Chamberlain Creek Conservation Camps.

F4: The seventeen-man crews are available at nominal rates to any tax- supported entity. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with the finding, due to the fact that the Board has no authority or control over the Parlin Fork and Chamberlain Creek Conservation Camps.

F5: Chamberlain Creek has a complete wood working shop and makes many types of cabinets and signs for city, county and State government. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with the finding, due to the fact that the Board has no authority or control over the Parlin Fork and Chamberlain Creek Conservation Camps. (707) 463-4320

F6: Parlin Fork operates their own sawmill and provides lumber for various projects. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with the finding, due to the fact that the Board has no authority or control over the Parlin Fork and Chamberlain Creek Conservation Camps.

F7: The Mendocino County Bookmobile serves both camps and is highly valued by the inmates. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding.

F8: Inmates do most of the jobs required to run the camps. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with the finding, due to the fact that the Board has no authority or control over the Parlin Fork and Chamberlain Creek Conservation Camps.

F9: No tobacco products will be allowed in the camps after July 1, 2005. This will apply to staff as well as inmates. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with the finding, due to the fact that the Board has no authority or control over the Parlin Fork and Chamberlain Creek Conservation Camps.

📋July 01, 2005 — Round Valley Unified School District – a School Board Left Behind

6 pages 9 findings 25 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 9 findings

F1: The approximate cost to incarcerate an inmate in a Conservation Camp is $10,000 annually compared to $50,000 annually at a higher security State prison.

Page 79

Related Recommendations (4)

R1: The Grand Jury recommends that RVUSD School Board adequately staff and support special education programs which identify and assist special education students at an early age. (Findings 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 17, 25, 26, 36, 37, 38, 39).

R4: The Grand Jury recommends that RVUSD establish and support a Parent-Teacher Association. (Findings 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 17, 18, 19, 20, 23, 25, 26, 38, 39).

R6: The Grand Jury recommends that RVUSD should make as much use as possible of the free services of The Northern California Diagnostic Center to identify and assist special education students. (Findings 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 36).

F2: Inmate contributions to the community more than offset the cost of their incarceration. When inmates are not fighting fires they are available to do community work projects.

Page 79

Related Recommendations (2)

R2: The Grand Jury recommends that parents of special education students maintain files with all paperwork associated with their child’s education. (Findings 2, 3, 4).

R3: The Grand Jury recommends that parents take a proactive and participatory role in the education of their children. (Findings 2, 3, 4, 6, 17, 19, 20, 23, 25, 38, 39).

F3: Inmates at Parlin Fork help support the Make a Wish Foundation by making and donating craft items, sold to the public over the past five years for over $100,000.

Page 79

F4: The seventeen-man crews are available at nominal rates to any tax-supported entity.

Page 79

Related Recommendations (1)

R15: The Grand Jury recommends that RVUSD develop a calendar and tracking system to assure that all important deadlines are met. (Findings 4, 21, 22, 25, 29, 30, 32, 40).

F5: Chamberlain Creek has a complete wood working shop and makes many types of cabinets and signs for city, county and State government.

Page 79

F6: Parlin Fork operates their own sawmill and provides lumber for various projects.

Page 79

F7: The Mendocino County Bookmobile serves both camps and is highly valued by the inmates.

Page 79

Related Recommendations (2)

R8: The Grand Jury recommends that RVUSD develop policies, procedures and incentive programs to attract and retain qualified Special Education teachers and staff that are certified to teach more than one subject or grade level, and that bring skills and qualities which make them a good fit in this unique community. (Findings 7, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, 23).

R9: The Grand Jury recommends that administrators consider recruiting candidates with rural backgrounds or with personal characteristics or educational experiences that predispose them to live in rural areas. (Findings 7, 8, 9, 13, 14).

F8: Inmates do most of the jobs required to run the camps.

Page 79

F9: No tobacco products will be allowed in the camps after July 1, 2005. This will apply to staff as well as inmates.

Page 79

Additional Recommendations 3

Not linked to specific findings.

R5: The Grand Jury recommends that MCOE assert to the fullest extent its power to oversee, regulate and influence the RVUSD to be more effective in carrying out its mission and protecting students’ welfare. (All Findings).

Page 79

R7: The Grand Jury recommends that the School Board and community members avail themselves of the free training offered through organizations such as MCOE, SELPA, and CASBA. (Finding 1, 3, 5, 10, 11, 12, 15, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 29, 38, 39, 40W).

Page 79

R10: The Grand Jury recommends that MCOE Human Resources Department conduct a

Page 80

June 28, 2005 — Seven Fire Districts of Rural Mendocino County (June 28, 2005)

27 pages 31 findings 7 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 31 findings

F1: The Hopland Volunteer Fire Department (HVFD) protects an area of 350 square miles and a population of approximately 1,400.

F2: Water supplies for the CFPD are provided by one hydrant; water is supplied by one well. Electricity is backed up by a generator. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): I agree with this finding.

Related Recommendations (1)

R6: The Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Supervisors create, as soon as possible, a centralized authority for overseeing the operations and funding of the rural fire districts. (Finding 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7) Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District strongly disagrees with the need to create another level of oversight between local Districts and the Board of Supervisors. In our opinion this would generate an additional cost to operate (much as LAFCO did) and drain away more of the precious few taxpayer dollars that do manage to trickle down to the District. Response (Safety Officer): The recommendation will not be implemented, due to the fact that I have no direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building: The recommendation will not be implemented, due to the fact that the department has no direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The recommendation requires further analysis. The Board of Supervisors will be relying on the County Executive Office to look into this matter and identify potential solutions for Board consideration within the next 6 months. (707) 463-4320 ALBION/LITTLE RIVER FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT ALBION/LITTLE RIVER VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT Specific Findings

F3: The CFPD has sufficient equipment to accomplish its mission, but much of the equipment is old and in need of replacement. For example, the 1970 International Type III engine is outdated. (707) 463-4320 Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): I agree with this finding.

F4: The CFPD has 23 members, two salaried and 21 volunteers, including two cadets. At present, the District also has three volunteers in training. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): I agree with this finding.

Related Recommendations (1)

R1: The Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Supervisors reevaluate the financial support given to rural fire districts in order to prevent impending rural fire department financial ruin and collapse. (Findings 4,5,6,7). Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this recommendation, however we feel there is very little more the Board of Supervisors can do to increase the financial support given to the rural Fire Districts. Response (Safety Officer): The recommendation will not be implemented, due to the fact that I have no direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building): The recommendation will not be implemented, due to the fact that the department has no direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. (707) 463-4320 Response (Board of Supervisors): The recommendation requires further analysis. The Board of Supervisors will be relying on the County Executive Office to look into this matter and identify potential solutions for Board consideration within the next 6 months.

F5: The CFPD annual revenues from taxes are $34,000; this amount is supplemented by donations, fundraisers, and interest from an endowment. Calls answered to Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) lands are usually reimbursed if it is a wildlands fire. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): I agree with this finding.

Related Recommendations (1)

R5: The Grand Jury recommends that, to the extent possible, rural fire districts provide incentive pay and/or other benefits to assist in recruiting and training volunteers. (Findings 5,10,11) Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): Although the recommendation states “to the extent possible –“ the District feels this recommendation is not realistic. The Districts are under funded to the point that it is almost impossible to supply needed safety clothing and necessary tools. Incentive pay or other benefits would be wonderful to provide but will have to wait until the ageing fleet and obsolete equipment is replaced and required training has been provided. Sources for funding incentive pay and/or benefits are not now or in the foreseeable future available. Response (Safety Officer): The recommendation will not be implemented, due to the fact that I have no direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. (707) 463-4320 Response (Planning and Building): The recommendation will not be implemented, due to the fact that the department has no direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The recommendation will not be implemented due to the fact that the Board of Supervisors has no direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

F6: Some rural fire districts indicate that the services they receive from LAFCO fall far short of the value of the funds they lose to support this agency. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this finding. Response (Safety Officer): I can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that I do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building): The department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that we do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that the Board has no direct contact, oversight, or complete knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

F7: Many rural fire districts incur more annual expenses than revenue. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this finding. Response (Safety Officer): I can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that I do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building): The department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that we do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that the Board has no (707) 463-4320 direct contact, oversight, or complete knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

F8: Workman’s Compensation absorbs a major part of the budget in many of the surveyed districts. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this finding. Response (Safety Officer): I can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that I do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building): The department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that we do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that the Board has no direct contact, oversight, or complete knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

F9: Most rural fire districts must supplement their budgets with fundraising events. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this finding. Response (Safety Officer): I can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that I do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building): The department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that we do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that the Board has no direct contact, oversight, or complete knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

Related Recommendations (1)

R4: The Grand Jury recommends that the FCA continue to inform the public of the accomplishments of rural fire districts as well as the increasing difficulties in some districts in recruiting and training staff and volunteers. (Findings 9,10,11,28) Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this recommendation, however we feel the FCA is currently doing everything possible to fulfill this recommendation. Response (Safety Officer): The recommendation will not be implemented, due to the fact that I have no direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building): The recommendation will not be implemented, due to the fact that the department has no direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The recommendation will not be implemented due to the fact that the Board of Supervisors has no direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

F10: Those districts which operate their own ambulance service derive a portion of their income from this service. (707) 463-4320 Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this finding. Response (Safety Officer): I can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that I do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building): The department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that we do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that the Board has no direct contact, oversight, or complete knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

F11: Most surveyed fire districts are 100% volunteer. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this finding. Response (Safety Officer): I can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that I do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building): The department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that we do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that the Board has no direct contact, oversight, or complete knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

F12: Some rural fire districts do not offer adequate training. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this finding. Response (Safety Officer): I can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that I do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. (707) 463-4320 Response (Planning and Building): The department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that we do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that the Board has no direct contact, oversight, or complete knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

Related Recommendations (2)

R2: The Grand Jury recommends that the FCA encourage and assist rural fire districts in facilitating staff and volunteer training through cooperation and, where feasible, collaboration. (Findings 10,11,28 ) Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this recommendation, however we feel the FCA is currently doing everything possible to fulfill this recommendation. Response (Safety Officer): The recommendation will not be implemented, due to the fact that I have no direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building): The recommendation will not be implemented, due to the fact that the department has no direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The recommendation will not be implemented due to the fact that the Board of Supervisors has no direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

R7: The geographic isolation of Covelo creates problems in training EMTS and volunteer firepersons. The problem is compounded by volunteer inability to devote time to travel and training while committed to fulltime employment. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): I agree with this

F13: Some rural fire districts offer training both on-site and out of district. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this finding. Response (Safety Officer): I can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that I do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building): The department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that we do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that the Board has no direct contact, oversight, or complete knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

F14: No rural fire district has 24/7 station staffing although volunteers are on-call 24/7. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this finding. Response (Safety Officer): I can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that I do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building): The department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that we do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that the Board has no (707) 463-4320 direct contact, oversight, or complete knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

F15: Most fire district volunteers carry their turnout gear in their vehicles. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this finding. Response (Safety Officer): I can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that I do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building): The department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that we do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that the Board has no direct contact, oversight, or complete knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

F16: Most fire district volunteers carry radio receivers. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this finding. Response (Safety Officer): I can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that I do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building): The department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that we do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that the Board has no direct contact, oversight, or complete knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

Related Recommendations (1)

R3: The Grand Jury recommends that the FCA, in conjunction with local fire districts, raise public awareness of the need to replace aging equipment that is expensive to maintain and becoming obsolete. (Findings 16,28) Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this recommendation, however we feel the FCA is currently doing everything possible to fulfill this recommendation. Response (Safety Officer): The recommendation will not be implemented, due to the fact that I have no direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building): The recommendation will not be implemented, due to the fact that the department has no direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. (707) 463-4320 Response (Board of Supervisors): The recommendation will not be implemented due to the fact that the Board of Supervisors has no direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

F17: Most rural fire districts have defibrillators and the Jaws of Life readily available. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this finding. (707) 463-4320 Response (Safety Officer): I can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that I do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building): The department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that we do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that the Board has no direct contact, oversight, or complete knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

F18: Many rural fire districts must rely on aging vehicles requiring frequent and expensive maintenance. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this finding. Response (Safety Officer): I can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that I do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building): The department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that we do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that the Board has no direct contact, oversight, or complete knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

F19: Some rural fire districts have difficulty recruiting volunteers. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this finding. Response (Safety Officer): I can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that I do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. (707) 463-4320 Response (Planning and Building): The department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that we do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that the Board has no direct contact, oversight, or complete knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

F20: The majority of calls in the surveyed fire districts are for medical emergencies. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this finding. Response (Safety Officer): I can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that I do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building): The department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that we do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that the Board has no direct contact, oversight, or complete knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

F21: A high percentage of the medical emergencies cited in Finding 18 are the result of traffic accidents. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this finding. Response (Safety Officer): I can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that I do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building): The department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that we do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that the Board has no (707) 463-4320 direct contact, oversight, or complete knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

F22: Insurance Service Organization (ISO) ratings for rural fire districts are scaled from 1 to 10; the higher the number, the higher the insurance premium for structure owners. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this finding. Response (Safety Officer): I can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that I do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building): The department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that we do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that the Board has no direct contact, oversight, or complete knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

F23: Most of the surveyed districts are rated at 7 or 8 by the ISO. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this finding. Response (Safety Officer): I can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that I do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building): The department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that we do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that the Board has no direct contact, oversight, or complete knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

F24: ISO ratings for rural districts are based, in part, on the number of hydrants available within the district; without hydrants, a district is rated no lower than 8. (707) 463-4320 Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this finding. Response (Safety Officer): I can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that I do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building): The department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that we do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that the Board has no direct contact, oversight, or complete knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

F25: The California Division of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF) assists most of the fire districts countywide, providing technical support and paid personnel; all surveyed rural fire districts depend upon this support and reciprocate. The districts are most often first on the scene to suppress a wildlands fire. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this finding. Response (Safety Officer): I can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that I do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building): The department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that we do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that the Board has no direct contact, oversight, or complete knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

F26: Most CDF stations are closed on a seasonal basis. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this finding. (707) 463-4320 Response (Safety Officer): I can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that I do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building): The department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that we do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that the Board has no direct contact, oversight, or complete knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

F27: The surveyed districts all have mutual aid agreements with CDF and adjacent districts. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this finding. Response (Safety Officer): I can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that I do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building): The department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that we do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that the Board has no direct contact, oversight, or complete knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

F28: CDF provides, if requested, arson investigation services for any county fire district. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this finding. Response (Safety Officer): I can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that I do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. (707) 463-4320 Response (Planning and Building): The department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that we do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that the Board has no direct contact, oversight, or complete knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

F29: There are numerous structures, including residences, which do not have adequate fire protection because of their isolation and/or inaccessibility. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this finding. Response (Safety Officer): I can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that I do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building): The department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that we do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that the Board has no direct contact, oversight, or complete knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

F30: The Mendocino County Fire Chief’s Association (FCA) meets on a regular basis with representatives of other County and State agencies, public utilities and private organizations to discuss mutual needs and concerns and to attempt resolution of problems. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this finding. Response (Safety Officer): I can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that I do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building): The department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that we do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. (707) 463-4320 Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that the Board has no direct contact, oversight, or complete knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts.

F31: Mendocino County does not have a program of fire prevention, as opposed to fire suppression. The Mendocino Board of Supervisors has the authority to adopt a more stringent fire safety code that would incorporate a fire prevention program. Response (Covelo Fire Protection District Fire Chief): The District agrees with this finding. Response (Safety Officer): I can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that I do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Planning and Building): The department can neither agree nor disagree with this finding, due to the fact that we do not have any direct contact, oversight, or knowledge of the seven local Fire Districts. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding if it pertains to County Government.

June 28, 2005 — Seven Fire Districts of Rural Mendocino County (June 28, 2005)

12 pages 1 findings 7 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 1 findings

F4: This staffing includes nine EMTS and two first responders. 7. The geographic isolation of Covelo creates problems in training EMTS and volunteer firepersons. The problem is compounded by volunteer inability to devote time to travel and training while committed to fulltime employment. /05 County of Mendocino Grand Jury Post Office Box 629 Ukiah, CA 95482 (707) 463-4320 HOPLAND VOLUNTEER FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT HOPLAND VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT Specific Findings 1. The Hopland Volunteer Fire Department (HVFD) protects an area of 350 square miles and a population of approximately 1,400. 2. Water supplies for the HVFD are provided by the municipal district to 72 hydrants and to Department storage tanks. 3. HVFD has the equipment necessary to accomplish its mission, but much of the equipment is old and in need of replacement. The Department has only one 22 year old water tender and it is in need of major repairs. 4. Although HVFD is authorized to carry 30 volunteer firefighter positions, only 17 of these positions are currently filled. From December to April, the Department carries four salaried positions, three fulltime and one part-time. 5. HVFD members, trained by in-house and off-site instructors, must sometimes pay for their own training. 6. Because the District has an arrangement with the CDF and has been working and training in CDF space for several years, the HVFD must comply with CDF standards. /05 County of Mendocino Grand Jury Post Office Box 629 Ukiah, CA 95482 (707) 463-4320 LONG VALLEY FIRE DISTRICT LAYTONVILLE FIRE DEPARTMENT Specific Findings 1. The Laytonville Fire Department (LFD) protects an area of 250 square miles and a population of approximately 3500. 2. Water supplies for the LFD are provided by a hydrant system which extends for two to three miles from the firehouse; water is supplied by the Laytonville Water District. 3. The LFD owns the most up-to-date equipment of the seven surveyed districts. For example, the Department’s oldest engine was built in 1989. 4. The LFD has 32 members, two salaried and 30 volunteers, including a chaplain. The department has two ambulances; the volunteers include four paramedics. 5. The LVFD is supported by a $120,000 tax base. 6. The LFD offers an EMT class onsite annually to which other County districts send their volunteers. The District also offers a community classroom at the station in which interested high school students spend a class period learning the tasks and responsibilities of fire service. /05 County of Mendocino Grand Jury Post Office Box 629 Ukiah, CA 95482 (707) 463-4320 POTTER VALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT POTTER VALLEY VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT Specific Findings 1. The Potter Valley Volunteer Fire Department (PVVFD) protects an area of 275 square miles and a population of approximately 2000. 2. Water supplies for the PVVFD are provided by a hydrant with generator backup located at the firehouse and supplied by a well. 3. A water tender holding 5000 gallons is a PVVFD standby water source. 4. PVVFD has the equipment necessary to accomplish its mission, but much of the equipment is old and in need of replacement. 5. The PVVFD is a 100% volunteer district; the 21 members include a chief, two assistant chiefs, four active EMTS and one paramedic, and four volunteers who are also CDF employees. Two Junior firemen (cadets) also serve the district. 6. PVVFD volunteer training includes Swift Water Rescue training for Russian and Eel River incidents. /05 County of Mendocino Grand Jury Post Office Box 629 Ukiah, CA 95482 (707) 463-4320 REDWOOD VALLEY-CALPELLA FIRE DISTRICT Specific Findings 1. The Redwood Valley-Calpella Fire District (RVCFD) protects an area of 60 square miles and a population of approximately 7800. 2. Water supplies for the RVCFD are provided by 110 hydrants in Redwood Valley and 38 in Calpella; water is supplied by three water districts and various private water sources. These sources are primarily on the Valley floor; few are in the rural or foothill areas. 3. RVCFD has sufficient equipment to accomplish its mission, but much of the equipment is old and in need of replacement. For example, the mutual aid wildland1979 Ford Type 3 pumper is no longer reliable enough to be taken on out-of-County Strike Teams. 4. The RVCFD has 26 members; of these, three are salaried, 16 are volunteers, and seven are cadets. 5. The RVCFD’s recently purchased water tender was funded by the volunteers, private donations, and a grant through the Sho-Ka-Wah casino in Hopland. 6. The RVCFD has converted a retired ambulance into a mobile compressed air support to refill firefighters’ portable air tanks at the scene of an incident. /05 County of Mendocino Grand Jury Post Office Box 629 Ukiah, CA 95482 (707) 463-4320 PIERCY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT PIERCY VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT Specific Findings NOTE: The Piercy Fire Protection District, supporting a 100% volunteer Fire Department, was formed in 1956 when three lumber mills were flourishing in the area. On January 1, 2004, the Department was no longer a viable entity: OSHA specifications could not be met, the Chief retired and two of the remaining volunteers resigned. Residents of this bedroom community in northern Mendocino County, while they do not seem willing to pay additional taxes, continue to be hopeful that their District can support an active Fire Department in the near future. 1. The Piercy Volunteer Fire Department (PVFD) protected an area of 98 square miles and a population of approximately 290. 2. Water supplies for the PVFD were provided primarily by the South Fork of the Eel River and landowner’s private reservoirs when available. PVFD also had access to the hydrants in Richardson’s Grove. Two of three storage tanks in the district are presently unusable. 3. The PVFD owns a 1972 Chevrolet Type I 1200 gallon pumper and a 1978 Dodge one ton 4x4 wildlands truck. Two International engines obtained through the Federal Excess Program had to be returned following the collapse of the Department. The Department also has eight sets of turnout gear that do not meet OSHA requirements. 4. The PVFD has, at present, no members. After recent recruiting efforts by the Interim Chief and the two remaining Fire Commissioners, fifteen residents expressed an interest in joining a reconstituted PVFD. 5. There is, at present, $15,000 in the District Funds account in the State Controller’s office in reserve for the Piercy Fire Protection District. Piercy receives $8000 annually from the County from which various fees and expenses are deducted. /05 County of Mendocino Grand Jury Post Office Box 629 Ukiah, CA 95482 (707) 463-4320 COMMENTS In a State as huge and geographically diverse as California, fire protection services range from well-trained, well-paid urban districts using state of the art equipment to rural, 90% to 100% volunteer districts struggling for time and funds to train members and searching for ways to replace aging, outmoded equipment. Much of Mendocino County is served by the latter, many caught in an economic “perfect storm” as they attempt to protect their communities. Even as retirees flock to the County and developers rush to meet the demands of the second home market, the cost of firefighting equipment increases, potential volunteers see jobs decline and home prices soar, and the State imposes additional training hours and mandated services on rural fire districts. The portion of property taxes allotted to rural fire districts has not increased since1956, although the cost of district operations continues to rise. While some fortunate districts receive endowments and gifts from members of the community, others write and rewrite grant requests, raffle patchwork quilts, and pray that the annual district barbeque will attract paying customers from beyond their boundaries into the outlying areas. It is estimated that a rural fire district in our County of between 20-25 volunteers and an annual budget of between $75,000-$85,000 is equal to the cost of one fully equipped journeyman firefighter employed by the San Francisco Fire Department. The volunteer, who may well hold a full time job and cherish time with his/her family, must also manage on-call and training hours and State mandated services to public buildings in addition to dwellings, small businesses and wildlands. Volunteer EMTS may be called to the scene of a midnight heart attack or a vehicle accident on State 101, State 1 or any of the myriad of winding, deteriorating County roads. Mendocino County residents would surely agree with the thought that one of the finest ways to serve your community is to join their volunteer fire department. Thousands of us depend on rural fire districts for our safety, our health and the integrity of our communities. The Grand Jury recommends that both State and County governments serve these districts as fairly and faithfully as these districts serve their residents. Response Required Mendocino County Board of Supervisors /05 County of Mendocino Grand Jury Post Office Box 629 Ukiah, CA 95482 (707) 463-4320 Response Requested Chairman, Local Agency Formation Commission President, Mendocino County Fire Chief’s Association Mendocino County Safety Officer Director, Mendocino County Department of Building and Planning Mendocino County Unit Manager, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Chief, Little River Fire Department Chief, Covelo Volunteer Fire and Ambulance Service Chief, Hopland Fire Department Chief, Long Valley Fire District Chief, Potter Valley Volunteer Fire Department Chief, Redwood Valley-Calpella Fire District Interim Chief, Piercy Fire Department /05

Page 1

Related Recommendations (1)

Additional Recommendations 2

Not linked to specific findings.

R7: In addition to light and heavy trucks, engines and water tenders, A/LRFD equipment includes an oceangoing Zodiac rescue boat. (707) 463-4320 COVELO FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT COVELO VOLUNTEER FIRE AND AMBULANCE SERVICE Specific Findings

June 23, 2005 — County of Mendocino Post Office Box 629

7 pages 20 findings 1 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 20 findings

F1: The number of patrol officers in the service of the Mendocino County Sheriff’s Department is the same (68) as it was 30 years ago. Response (Sheriff): I agree with this finding. To be precise, the Mendocino County Sheriff’s Office has the same number of authorized patrol positions (deputies & sergeants) today as it had in fiscal year 1973-74. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding. (707) 463-4320

F2: Most of the County does not have around -the-clock (24/7) patrol personnel on duty. Response (Sheriff): I agree with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding.

F3: Ukiah and its environs have continuous patrol coverage. Response (Sheriff): I agree with this finding. The Central Sector patrol area, which includes the Ukiah Valley, is staffed 24-hours a day, 7-days a week. Notwithstanding this fact, the size of the area and the volume of calls mean there are instances where the response to a given call may be significantly delayed. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding.

F4: Duty assignments for patrol officers are adjusted to ensure that personnel are on duty at the most critical times. Response (Sheriff): I agree with this finding. Although it is impossible to predict emergency calls, we make every attempt to project days and hours of higher activity and schedule accordingly. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding.

F5: Approximately 30% of a patrol officer's time is spent writing reports. Response (Sheriff): Without further information, I can neither agree nor disagree with this finding. This appears to be a fair estimate, but our timekeeping systems do not track time spent on reports versus other activity in the station. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors can neither agree nor disagree without further information. Please see the response provided by the Sheriff. Issues:

F6: The Mendocino County Sheriff Dispatch Communication Center (911 calls) has personnel on duty 24/7. Response (Sheriff): I agree with this finding. (707) 463-4320 Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding.

F7: The majority of 911 calls to the Mendocino County Sheriff Dispatch come from the greater Ukiah area. Response (Sheriff): I agree with this finding. Historically the Ukiah area generates approximately one-half of all Sheriff’s Office calls for service. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding.

F8: Telephone landlines in the northern part of the County, including Round Valley, are owned and serviced by Verizon Communications, while the rest of the county is served by SBC. Response (Sheriff): I agree with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding.

F9: On occasion the Verizon 911 system for the northern part of the County fails. Response (Sheriff): I agree with this finding. At times Verizon customers in the north county have lost the ability to call anywhere outside their prefix; this includes 9-1-1 calls. Verizon has isolated the problem to an aging and trouble- prone microwave relay site. The company has approved plans to replace the faulty equipment. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding.

F10: Mendocino County Sheriff Dispatch has a contingency plan to supplant the Verizon 911 system when it fails. Response (Sheriff): I agree with this finding. Although we cannot replicate the 9-1-1 system, we have developed and exercised contingency plans with the assistance of the California Department of Forestry and local volunteer fire departments in the affected areas. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding.

F11: State legislation and funding exists which in the future will result in the consolidation of dispatch facilities that are currently operated by other agencies. (707) 463-4320 Response (Sheriff): I disagree with this finding only because it gives the impression that consolidation is a certainty. Although consolidation offers several advantages (particularly in the areas of personnel and equipment cost), it is not currently required by either legislation or the terms of the State 9-1-1 funding program. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors disagrees with this finding. Please see the response provided by the Sheriff. Round Valley Issues:

F12: The County Sheriff’s Department has its main office on Low Gap Road in Ukiah, with substations located in Willits, Round Valley, Laytonville, Fort Bragg, Point Arena, Anderson Valley, Potter Valley, and one soon to be located by the Grace Hudson Elementary School in South Ukiah. Response (Sheriff): I agree with this finding. The Willits and Fort Bragg sub- stations are full-service stations with civilian support staff available during the regular workweek. The other substations provide workstation space for deputies assigned to that area. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding.

F13: A policy unique to Round Valley allows for patrol officers to receive incentive pay as an inducement to live and work in the valley. Response (Sheriff): I agree with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding.

F14: Round Valley has one sergeant and three patrol officers to share the daily duties; this represents a higher staffing ratio than is found in other remote parts of the County. Response (Sheriff): I agree with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding.

F15: Round Valley patrol officers have the support and assistance of tribal police in performing their duties. Response (Sheriff): I agree with this finding, however it is important to note that Tribal Police do not have peace officer status off tribal lands. (707) 463-4320 Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding.

F16: The Sheriff’s Department holds monthly meetings in Round Valley as a community relation’s effort, but the community poorly attends them unless a hot button issue is on the agenda. Response (Sheriff): I agree with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding. Incidental Issues:

Related Recommendations (1)

R1: The Grand Jury recommends that the Sheriff’s Department and local authorities strive to better inform the public when monthly meetings are being held in Round Valley. (Finding 16.) Response (Sheriff): This recommendation requires further analysis. Sheriff’s Office community meetings in Round Valley are always held on the third Wednesday of the month. This has remained constant since the meetings began. The Sheriff’s Office will consult with tribal and community leaders within the next 30 days to identify what additional forms of meeting notification are necessary, reasonable and prudent. Response (Board of Supervisors): The recommendation requires further analysis. Please see the response provided by the Sheriff. Comments The Mendocino County Sheriff’s Department is doing well with the staff available. In an era with so many funding issues, it is remarkable that the work of the Department continues with a high degree of efficiency and professional dedication, which provides the citizens of Mendocino County a reasonable level of police protection. Should citizens in a given area feel the need for additional protection, a Neighborhood Watch Groups can be organized. The Sheriff’s Department is willing to assist in the formation of such groups if their help is requested. The Mendocino County Sheriff’s Department must patrol approximately 3800 square miles with a patrol staff of 68. Their duties are varied and complex. In response to a growing County population and a growing drug problem they work to provide the best service possible with the funds available. Citizens within the County will find that they are best served when involved with their communities and willing to invest time to make the County a better place in which to live and work. For example, volunteers who dedicate time to the Reserves and Search and Rescue teams are to be commended. The duty assignments for patrol officers in the County provide a very challenging logistical problem. With the staff available the Department must strive for maximum protection at the most critical times. Citizens of the county must realize that the remote areas will not have 24/7 coverage. Other deputies must cover for personnel who are injured, on sick leave, or on vacation. Law enforcement personnel within the County and beyond must be prepared to respond in a timely fashion to a wide variety of emergencies. (707) 463-4320 The Emergency Response System in the County does well to service such a vast area. Communication within all parts of the county continues to improve. The Sheriff Dispatch works constantly to improve the existing communication system. An upgrade of the microwave communication system used by officers on the ground is necessary. Verizon should give closer attention to their landline communication system in the northern part of the County. Citizens with a concern regarding the 911-response system should work with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to exact a change.

F17: Mendocino County has curfew laws on the books, but they are unevenly enforced. Response (Sheriff): I agree with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding.

F18: The Mendocino County Sheriff’s Department uses the expertise of the California Division of Forestry (CDF) in arson fire investigations. Response (Sheriff): I agree with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding.

F19: Through mutual aid agreements, other local, State and Federal agencies assist the County in law enforcement when necessary. Response (Sheriff): I agree with this finding. The reverse is also true. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding.

F20: The City of Point Arena contracts with the County Sheriff’s Department to provide law enforcement protection for their city. Response (Sheriff): I agree with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding. (707) 463-4320

June 18, 2005 — County of Mendocino Post Office Box 629

6 pages 39 findings 24 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 39 findings

F1: The Grand Jury recommends that RVUSD School Board adequately staff and support special education programs which identify and assist special education students at an early age. (Findings 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 17, 25, 26, 36, 37, 38, 39).

Related Recommendations (6)

R4: The Grand Jury recommends that RVUSD establish and support a Parent-Teacher Association. (Findings 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 17, 18, 19, 20, 23, 25, 26, 38, 39).

R24: The Grand Jury recommends that RVUSD develop and use web-based informational resources to communicate with all concerned parties, and to network with others who share a concern for special education. (Findings 1, 3, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 32, 33). Comments The Grand Jury believes that all parties, especially parents, should know their rights, responsibilities and obligations so that they work together in the best interests of the students.

F2: California Education Code gives enormous authority and control to the parents over the education of their children in special education programs.

Related Recommendations (3)

R2: The Grand Jury recommends that parents of special education students maintain files with all paperwork associated with their child’s education. (Findings 2, 3, 4).

R3: The Grand Jury recommends that parents take a proactive and participatory role in the education of their children. (Findings 2, 3, 4, 6, 17, 19, 20, 23, 25, 38, 39).

F3: Parents of special education students may not be fully informed of these rights and may not therefore maintain complete, accurate records that could help them to exercise their rights. 2004-2005 Mendocino County Grand Jury County of Mendocino Post Office Box 629 Grand Jury Ukiah, CA 95482 (707) 463-4320 4. Some RVUSD students who were qualified for special education services have not received them.

Related Recommendations (2)

F4: The Grand Jury recommends that RVUSD establish and support a Parent-Teacher Association. (Findings 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 17, 18, 19, 20, 23, 25, 26, 38, 39).

Related Recommendations (2)

R14: The Grand Jury recommends that RVUSD develop a calendar and tracking system to assure that all important deadlines are met. (Findings 4, 21, 22, 25, 29, 30, 32, 40).

F5: Mismanagement of special education services, including retention of staff, has precluded any discernible improvement in the delivery of special education services. An updated California Special Education Management Information System report which shows compliance dates and delivery of special education services, though requested, was not made available to the Grand Jury.

Related Recommendations (2)

F6: RVUSD does not avail itself of free diagnostic testing services and programs from within and outside the County that would identify and prescribe services for special education students. Findings - Personnel 7. The geographical isolation and housing shortage in RVUSD make it difficult to attract and employ properly credentialed staff.

Related Recommendations (1)

F7: The Grand Jury recommends that the School Board and community members avail themselves of the free training offered through organizations such as MCOE, SELPA, and CASBA. (Finding 1, 3, 5, 10, 11, 12, 15, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 29, 38, 39, 40W). 2004-2005 Mendocino County Grand Jury County of Mendocino Post Office Box 629 Grand Jury Ukiah, CA 95482 (707) 463-4320 8. The Grand Jury recommends that RVUSD develop policies, procedures and incentive programs to attract and retain qualified Special Education teachers and staff that are certified to teach more than one subject or grade level, and that bring skills and qualities which make them a good fit in this unique community. (Findings 7, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, 23).

Related Recommendations (3)

F8: RVUSD has had an extremely high turnover of administrators and special education staff, resulting in the loss of services to special education students.

Related Recommendations (1)

F9: The RVUSD School Board has not acted to reduce turnover of essential Special Education staff, jeopardizing continuity of special education services.

Related Recommendations (1)

F10: Even after a change in personnel, the administration of RVUSD has continued to control and limit the flow of information to the School Board, thereby curbing its effectiveness.

Related Recommendations (3)

R10: The Grand Jury recommends that MCOE Human Resources Department conduct a performance audit of RVUSD administration to correct the abuse and intimidation that pervade the entire organization. (Findings 10, 11, 12).

F11: RVUSD administration has had a pattern of using verbal abuse and intimidation to control staff at all levels.

Related Recommendations (2)

F12: The Administration has interfered with the employee complaint process and prevented witnesses from appearing before the School Board in closed session on employee matters.

Related Recommendations (2)

F13: RVUSD does not have a qualified school nurse, public health nurse, or licensed physician, available to supervise physical health care services in the school setting in accordance with law. (Education Code §49423.5, Code of Regulations, Title 5, §3051.12).

Related Recommendations (2)

R11: The Grand Jury recommends that RVUSD immediately contract with adequate medical staff in accordance with State Education Code. (Findings 13, 14, 15).

F14: Staff members appropriately trained and certified to administer medications are not available during all school hours, thus compromising the health and safety of the students. (Education Code 49423.5; Code of Regulations, Title 5, Section 3051.12(b)(1)(C)).

Related Recommendations (1)

F15: Training certificates required to administer medications to students are not current.

Related Recommendations (2)

F16: Fax machines that transmit and receive confidential personnel information are not secured. 2004-2005 Mendocino County Grand Jury County of Mendocino Post Office Box 629 Grand Jury Ukiah, CA 95482 (707) 463-4320 Findings – General 17. On the most recent California Annual Progress Index, RVUSD had the lowest possible score.

Related Recommendations (2)

R12: The Grand Jury recommends that RVUSD immediately make secure desks, computers, and fax machines where confidential student or personnel information is maintained or transferred. (Findings 16, 31).

F17: The Grand Jury recommends that RVUSD immediately organize and maintain in a professional manner all offices and storage areas. (Findings 29, 30).

Related Recommendations (1)

F18: Significant other social issues which include crime, drug use and community turmoil, affect the functioning of the school community.

Related Recommendations (1)

F19: Parent apathy is reflected in low citizen attendance at School Board meetings, and low voter turnout for School Board elections.

Related Recommendations (1)

F20: School Board meeting agendas are not posted in a timely manner at conspicuous and accessible places throughout the district as required by the Brown Act. At one meeting attended by the Grand Jury, the only copy of the Agenda that they could find was pinned on a bulletin board over the copy machine inside the District Office.

Related Recommendations (3)

R13: The Grand Jury recommends that RVUSD immediately purchase a locking display case to post meeting agendas, job announcements, school calendars, and other public notices as appropriate. Such notices must be displayed in a place of public access, in accordance with the Brown Act. (Finding 20).

F21: The RVUSD Board members do not receive board meeting packets in a timely manner and are often unable to make informed decisions.

Related Recommendations (2)

F22: In the past three years School Board minutes have not been approved until as much as ten months after meetings.

Related Recommendations (2)

F23: The RVUSD Board Policy and Procedure Manual is not current, has sections missing, and is not available to staff and parents.

Related Recommendations (4)

R15: The Grand Jury recommends that RVUSD immediately update the Policy and Procedures Manual and take steps to insure that these changes are implemented by staff and School Board members. (Findings 23, 25, 29, 30).

R19: The Grand Jury recommends that RVUSD require all staff to adhere to an effective organizational system that is defined in the School Board’s Policy and Procedures Manual. (Findings 23, 29, 30).

F24: The RVUSD School Board has not taken valuable training in Board membership when it has been offered by both the Mendocino County Office of Education (MCOE) and California School Boards Association (CASBA).

Related Recommendations (2)

F25: The RVUSD School Board has been uninformed, misinformed, and willfully ignorant of its responsibilities and authority.

Related Recommendations (2)

F26: The supervisory authority of MCOE over RVUSD has been ineffective in ensuring that all special education services are delivered to RVUSD students.

Related Recommendations (1)

F27: RVUSD records indicate that some students have been admitted to classes without being properly immunized.

Related Recommendations (2)

R16: The Grand Jury recommends that MCOE oversee and enforce compliance with regulations requiring full immunization for all students in attendance. (Finding 27).

F28: Student medications are not dispensed from a central location, in violation of State Education Code and the Policy and Procedures Manual of RVUSD.

Related Recommendations (1)

F29: Basic office management and organization procedures are not in place in the administrative offices, resulting in a loss of time and productivity.

Related Recommendations (4)

R17: The Grand Jury recommends that RVUSD immediately organize and maintain in a professional manner all offices and storage areas. (Findings 29, 30).

R18: The Grand Jury recommends that RVUSD digitally archive as many records and other documents as possible and use secure offsite storage. (Findings 29, 30, 31).

F30: Administrative offices in the school have not implemented an effective filing system, resulting in fire hazards and loss of records.

Related Recommendations (1)

F31: Students are allowed access to desks and computers where confidential student and employee information is maintained.

Related Recommendations (1)

F32: In the fall of 2004 the Grand Jury requested to be placed on the mailing list to receive School Board Meeting agendas and minutes of the meetings. None has been received by the Grand Jury.

Related Recommendations (2)

R20: The Grand Jury recommends that RVUSD comply with all requests for School Board Meeting agendas and minutes in a timely manner. (Finding 32).

F33: During the course of this investigation the Grand Jury requested documents and records from the RVUSD. Most of the documents had to be picked up personally by 2004-2005 Mendocino County Grand Jury County of Mendocino Post Office Box 629 Grand Jury Ukiah, CA 95482 (707) 463-4320 members of the Grand Jury well after the requested delivery date, while others arrived late or were never provided at all.

Related Recommendations (2)

R21: The Grand Jury recommends that RVUSD administrators comply with all future Grand Jury requests for information to avoid possible criminal charges. (Finding 33). (707) 463-4320

F34: An antiquated and uninsulated heating system in the high school administration building poses a significant fire risk. Findings - Funding 35. The economic depression in Covelo is a huge contributing factor to the problems of the RVUSD.

Related Recommendations (2)

R22: The Grand Jury recommends that a fire safety engineer perform an inspection of all RVUSD facilities and that all potential building or fire code violations be immediately addressed. (Findings 34).

F36: Throughout the state of California, Federal and State funding is insufficient to cover the cost of special education programs. The difference in cost is drawn from the general fund of local school districts.

Related Recommendations (2)

R23: The Grand Jury recommends that RVUSD generate additional revenue to compensate for the loss to the district General fund caused by mandated special education services. (Finding 36).

F37: Per-pupil funding at RVUSD is among the highest of all local districts in Mendocino County.

Related Recommendations (1)

F38: RVUSD has been identified as an underperforming school for the past three years and thus has been receiving additional funds to address its problems.

Related Recommendations (2)

F39: RVUSD, because of its designation as an underperforming school, risks an external takeover by the State unless there is significant improvement.

Related Recommendations (2)

F40: RVUSD incurred a $100,000 penalty because of an administrative oversight in the filing of paperwork for a one million dollar grant.

Related Recommendations (2)

June 13, 2005 — Wet Kennels and Low Morale Animal Care and Control Report

4 pages 12 findings 5 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 12 findings

F1: In the past, the Board of Supervisors has exercised only indirect oversight of the ACC; oversight and evaluation responsibility was assigned to the County Administrative Officer, but neither the intent of the Board nor the oversight practices of the CAO’s office has been apparent to the public.

Related Recommendations (1)

R1: The Grand jury recommends that the Board of Supervisors ensure the formation of a Citizen’s Advisory Committee to oversee the Department of ACC. (Findings 1,2)

F2: A flawed management style in which both favoritism and intimidation are used to keep employees unsettled creates a culture of fear at the ACC which affects work efficiency, staff interaction and, inevitably, treatment of the animals housed at the facility.

F3: The ACC Policies and Procedures manual omits or imprecisely describes many procedures which are performed frequently, even daily, by (707) 463-4320 staff and/or volunteers. (See ACC Complaint Report 2004-2005 Grand Jury.)

Related Recommendations (1)

R3: The Grand Jury recommends that the ACC give education and training for employees a high priority in budget expenditures; a skilled, proficient staff should mean a more efficient use of ACC software and equipment and reduce staff turnover in the Department. (Findings 3, 4, 5, 6, 7).

F4: As a result of Finding 3, there is a potentially dangerous gap between procedures and “practices”. The “practices” are described by employees as verbal or understood instructions which vary in application and consistency.

F5: Education and training of ACC employees is sporadic and inconsistent; some employees may receive formal training, others receive informal and often insufficient training onsite, still others receive little or no training for mandatory tasks.

F6: There are no funds in the latest ACC budget allocated to education and training. While it is possible that this is the result of a bookkeeping procedure, it may also reflect the lack of priority given to these activities within the Department.

F7: CHAMELEON, a highly rated, complex and expensive software specifically designed for use by agencies such as ACC, is underused by the County Department, primarily due to a lack of employee training.

F8: While the ACC advertises itself as “working towards eliminating euthanasia”, there is no stated and transparent policy regarding the definition of an “adoptable” animal. Which employees make these decisions and what guidelines are followed are not clear; the “unadoptable” animal faces euthanasia.

Related Recommendations (1)

R5: The 2003-2004 Grand Jury recommended that the ACC “develop a positive working relationship with the Humane Societies.” These non-profit groups were encouraged to reciprocate. This Grand Jury reiterates this recommendation and, in addition, strongly urges the ACC to utilize licensed, non-profit animal shelters and rescue groups in a concerted effort to promote adoption rather than euthanasia. (Findings 8,9, 12). Comments The management of the ACC appears to be primarily committed to showing a profit, in contradiction to its Mission Statement. This may explain the ACC’s reputation in the animal welfare community as more interested in collecting fees from those groups offering adoption services than in finding good homes for as many animals as possible. Too many clients are met with hostility and rudeness at the front desk of the Ukiah facility; too many employees serve multiple probations which seem more a means of staff control than a time for education and training; too many directives to employees are verbal and inconsistent rather than clearly codified in written form to which all can refer; too many animals are designated as “unadoptable” for reasons that are unclear and/or arbitrary. It is true that the Board of Supervisors has the ultimate responsibility for the management philosophy and style of every County Department. As stated in (707) 463-4320 Recommendation 1, however, the Grand Jury strongly urges the Board to form a community advisory committee to facilitate public scrutiny of a troubled Department.

F9: The situation described in Finding 8 makes it impossible to measure the degree to which ACC euthanizes animals which private animal shelters and rescue groups might judge as adoptable.

F10: Euthanizing animals as a necessary professional activity is rated statistically as one of the most stressful tasks an employee is asked to perform. There is no evidence that ACC offers any formal counseling and/or debriefing to employees who must routinely euthanize animals at the Ukiah or Fort Bragg facilities.

Related Recommendations (1)

R4: The Grand Jury recommends that the ACC institute formal stress management procedures to meet the needs of those staff members who are involved in the euthanasia process. (Finding 10).

F11: Both the ACC Administration and numerous additional witnesses have testified that generating revenue is the primary goal of the department.

F12: Beds, although available, are not used in the Ukiah ACC facility, forcing dogs to sit, stand and lie on cold, often wet, concrete floors. This situation, which can be injurious as well as uncomfortable, arises because facility attendants complain of extra work required in cleaning cages which contain beds. (707) 463-4320

Related Recommendations (1)

R2: The Grand Jury recommends that the Ukiah ACC facility utilize the beds at their disposal; dogs in all cages must have a dry place off the concrete available to them. (Finding 12).

May 19, 2005 — County of Mendocino Post Office Box 629

3 pages 12 findings

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 12 findings

F1: The Library Director’s and Administrative Assistant’s offices are located in the Ukiah Branch.

F2: Strong, supportive and creative volunteer groups such as the Friends of the Library have provided vital services and financial support throughout the Mendocino County Library system.

F3: The Libraries have functioned remarkably well as a result of the dedication of many hard-working employees.

F4: In comparison to similar California counties, Mendocino County has a very high proportion of County residents who hold library cards.

F5: Under recent administration, employee morale, particularly in the Ukiah branch, has been a serious on-going problem.

F6: The Bookmobile was out of service during much of 2004, for lack of a qualified driver.

F7: Over the last five years, a substantial number of grievances have been filed with the County and the Union by Library employees.

F8: There was a significant failure to follow through on a negotiated mediation agreement within the Library Department, involving library personnel and administration, a representative of the Human Resources Department, and a representative from the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).

F9: There have been inadequate audit functions within the County Library to account for cash receivables. 1

F10: The Board of Supervisors (BOS) failed to complete the mandated annual performance review of Library administration.

F11: Collectively and individually, members of the BOS received many written and oral complaints about conditions in the Library.

F12: The BOS failed to respond to a survey of Library personnel that disclosed serious management problems in the department.

May 14, 2005 — County of Mendocino Post Office Box 629

4 pages 23 findings 15 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 23 findings

F1: The MTA management reports directly to the MTA Board of Directors.

Related Recommendations (1)

R13: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA Board of Directors and MCOG develop new management strategies to ensure the transit authority’s future viability. (Findings 1 through 22)

F2: The MTA Board of Directors is responsible for the hiring and firing of MTA management.

Related Recommendations (1)

R13: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA Board of Directors and MCOG develop new management strategies to ensure the transit authority’s future viability. (Findings 1 through 22)

F3: The MTA annual operating budget is approximately $ 3 million. (707) 463-4320

Related Recommendations (1)

R13: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA Board of Directors and MCOG develop new management strategies to ensure the transit authority’s future viability. (Findings 1 through 22)

F4: The MTA permits the use of its publicly funded shop space, tools, hydraulic lift and other equipment for the repair and maintenance of a private corporation’s vehicle fleet for the personal gain (unjust enrichment) by an employee.

Related Recommendations (5)

R1: The Grand Jury recommends the immediate end to the process of unjust enrichment available to the individual employee. (Finding 4)

R2: The Grand Jury recommends immediate remedial attention by management and the MTA Board of Directors relating to questionable policy decisions. (Findings 4, 5, 6)

R3: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA Board of Directors, MCOG and the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors meet with the MTA management to discuss the problems and potential liabilities to Mendocino County raised by the findings in this report. (Findings 4 through 23)

R5: The Grand Jury recommends that a policy and procedures manual be created covering the daily operations of the maintenance shop. (Findings 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12)

R13: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA Board of Directors and MCOG develop new management strategies to ensure the transit authority’s future viability. (Findings 1 through 22)

F5: The MTA permits its employees to purchase automotive parts through the maintenance shop and permits the repair and maintenance of personal vehicles in the MTA shop.

Related Recommendations (2)

R13: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA Board of Directors and MCOG develop new management strategies to ensure the transit authority’s future viability. (Findings 1 through 22)

F6: The MTA permits the storage of old and non-operable vehicles belonging to employees and their friends, creating a de facto junkyard at the Ukiah facility.

Related Recommendations (2)

R13: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA Board of Directors and MCOG develop new management strategies to ensure the transit authority’s future viability. (Findings 1 through 22)

F7: Substantial liability to Mendocino County taxpayers has been created by the activities in findings 4, 5 and 6.

Related Recommendations (2)

R13: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA Board of Directors and MCOG develop new management strategies to ensure the transit authority’s future viability. (Findings 1 through 22)

F8: Some MTA hourly employees are not required to track their work hours.

Related Recommendations (3)

R4: The Grand Jury recommends that all hourly MTA employees be required to individually record their work hours by use of a time clock to assure accuracy of actual work hours. (Finding 8)

R13: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA Board of Directors and MCOG develop new management strategies to ensure the transit authority’s future viability. (Findings 1 through 22)

F9: The MTA does not have a policy and procedures manual covering the daily operation of the maintenance shop.

Related Recommendations (2)

R13: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA Board of Directors and MCOG develop new management strategies to ensure the transit authority’s future viability. (Findings 1 through 22)

F10: Some high-level MTA managers use verbal abuse and intimidation to control employees, creating a workplace of fear and anxiety.

Related Recommendations (3)

R6: The Grand Jury recommends an external review of management practices associated with abuse and intimidation of employees. (Findings 10, 19)

R13: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA Board of Directors and MCOG develop new management strategies to ensure the transit authority’s future viability. (Findings 1 through 22)

F11: The MTA bus drivers are on call and have at times been required to assist in cleaning the MTA fleet without the benefit of proper safety attire.

Related Recommendations (4)

R7: The Grand Jury recommends that cleaning procedures for bus drivers to follow when called on to clean the fleet be incorporated into the Policy and Procedure manual for the maintenance shop and be made readily accessible to all bus drivers. (Finding 11, 12 )

R12: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA management and MTA Board of Directors implement, insofar as is feasible, the recommendations of all audits, particularly those relating to safety. (Findings 11, 19, 20)

R13: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA Board of Directors and MCOG develop new management strategies to ensure the transit authority’s future viability. (Findings 1 through 22)

F12: The MTA maintenance shop has no written safety guidelines for bus drivers to follow when cleaning the MTA fleet.

Related Recommendations (3)

R13: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA Board of Directors and MCOG develop new management strategies to ensure the transit authority’s future viability. (Findings 1 through 22)

F13: The MTA has failed to implement an Injury Illness Prevention Program.

Related Recommendations (3)

R8: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA adopt and implement an Injury Illness Prevention Program. (Finding 13)

R13: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA Board of Directors and MCOG develop new management strategies to ensure the transit authority’s future viability. (Findings 1 through 22)

F14: The MTA receives a portion of its funding from the federal government which mandates implementation of random drug and alcohol testing.

Related Recommendations (5)

R9: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA designate all employees, including all levels of management, as Safety Sensitive and therefore subject to Random Drug and Alcohol Testing. (Findings 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20)

R10: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA adopt and adhere to the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Transit Administration Best Practices which ensures a truly random drug and alcohol testing program. (Findings 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20) (707) 463-4320

R11: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA Board of Directors consider monitoring the transit authority’s drug and alcohol testing procedures to ensure a random policy is in place. (Findings 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20)

R13: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA Board of Directors and MCOG develop new management strategies to ensure the transit authority’s future viability. (Findings 1 through 22)

F15: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration provides policy and procedures for the mandated Random Drug and Alcohol Testing (RDAT) program.

Related Recommendations (2)

R13: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA Board of Directors and MCOG develop new management strategies to ensure the transit authority’s future viability. (Findings 1 through 22)

F16: Under this mandate, the MTA is required to identify personnel who perform Safety Sensitive functions (ones that have a direct effect on day-to-day operations) who are subject to RDAT.

Related Recommendations (2)

R13: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA Board of Directors and MCOG develop new management strategies to ensure the transit authority’s future viability. (Findings 1 through 22)

F17: In small rural transit authorities all personnel have a direct effect on day to day operations and therefore perform Safety Sensitive functions.

Related Recommendations (2)

R13: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA Board of Directors and MCOG develop new management strategies to ensure the transit authority’s future viability. (Findings 1 through 22)

F18: The MTA does not identify all personnel who have a direct effect on the transit authority’s day to day operations as Safety Sensitive.

Related Recommendations (2)

R13: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA Board of Directors and MCOG develop new management strategies to ensure the transit authority’s future viability. (Findings 1 through 22)

F19: The MTA Drug and Alcohol testing program is selective not random.

Related Recommendations (2)

R13: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA Board of Directors and MCOG develop new management strategies to ensure the transit authority’s future viability. (Findings 1 through 22)

F20: Some Safety Sensitive employees have gone untested for extended periods of time.

Related Recommendations (2)

R13: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA Board of Directors and MCOG develop new management strategies to ensure the transit authority’s future viability. (Findings 1 through 22)

F21: The MTA submits to a yearly Single Audit, a Triennial Performance Audit for the benefit of Mendocino Council of Governments (MCOG), and a Safety & (707) 463-4320 Loss Control Survey conducted by the California Transit Insurance Pool (CalTIP).

Related Recommendations (3)

R13: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA Board of Directors and MCOG develop new management strategies to ensure the transit authority’s future viability. (Findings 1 through 22)

R14: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA management immediately bond all employees who handle cash. (Finding 23) COMMENTS Taxpayers in Mendocino County expect a proactive MTA management team which holds safety and future sustainability as top priorities. In order to tackle the complex puzzle of rural public transportation, the existing management team has been presented with a comprehensive list of goals, objectives and performance measures all designed to reduce liability, costs and to improve the safety and performance records and ensure future sustainability of the agency (see Findings 21, 22). These guidelines are apparently being ignored. The instability of fuel prices and the economy exacerbate the MTA’s problems. As reflected in this complaint report, the Grand Jury lacks confidence in the MTA management team’s ability to carry out the agency’s responsibilities.

F22: The MTA has failed to implement goals and objectives contained in the 1999 Five Year Transit Development Plan, the Safety and Loss recommendations outlined in the 2002 CalTIP survey, and recommendations in the 2000/01– 2002/03 Triennial Performance Audit, all of which are designed to assess and improve the overall health and strength of the transit authority.

Related Recommendations (2)

R13: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA Board of Directors and MCOG develop new management strategies to ensure the transit authority’s future viability. (Findings 1 through 22)

F23: MTA employees responsible for handling cash are not bonded.

Related Recommendations (4)

R13: The Grand Jury recommends that the MTA Board of Directors and MCOG develop new management strategies to ensure the transit authority’s future viability. (Findings 1 through 22)

R23: MTA employees responsible for handling cash are not bonded. RECOMMENDATIONS

May 11, 2005 — County of Mendocino Post Office Box 629

7 pages 15 findings 4 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 15 findings

F2: Staff turnover is higher at the lower paid, entry level positions than among more senior personnel. (707) 463-4320 Response (County Clerk/Assessor): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding and the County Clerk/Assessor response.

Related Recommendations (1)

F11: Safeguards for a fair election process appear to be both adequate and appropriate. (707) 463-4320 Response (County Clerk/Assessor): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding and the County Clerk/Assessor response.

Related Recommendations (1)

R2: The Grand Jury recommends that election machines be stored in one secure, structurally sound facility. (Finding 12) Response (County Clerk/Assessor): This recommendation requires further analysis. I have met with the General Services Director regarding the storage election machines in one secure, structurally sound facility. Currently, the Accu-vote optical scan ballot counters are stored in the County Clerk-Recorder-Elections designated section of the storage facility adjacent to (707) 463-4320 the County Administration Center at 501 Low Gap Road while the voting booths and optical scan ballot boxes are maintained in a storage shed with a leaky roof in back of the General Services Department. The optimum solution would be to have all of our election equipment stored in the storage facility adjacent to the County Administration Center. However I recognize that this storage facility has already been partitioned out to other departments and there is now not room to expand our space. The General Services Director has therefore agreed to make space available in the General Services warehouse to store election voting booths and ballot boxes. The General Services warehouse is secure and structurally sound. Response (General Services): This recommendation requires further analysis. General Services has met with County Clerk-Recorder/Assessor Marsha Wharff to review the situation and discuss alternatives. We agree that the current storage location at General Services for the ballot boxes and portable voting booths is inadequate in that the ballot boxes are required to be stacked three high and that the metal roof over the storage area needs to be repaired. To resolve that situation, we have agreed to create an adequate and secure storage area for this equipment within the General Services warehouse. The electronic ballot tabulators are currently stored in the Clerk- Recorder/Elections’ designated portion of the new storage facility adjacent to the County Administration Center at 501 Low Gap Road. This area is adequate and secure and convenient to the Elections office, and therefore preferable to the General Services warehouse. There is not additional space available in the new storage facility for all of the elections equipment, and therefore General Services is not able to implement the Grand Jury’s recommendation that all “elections machines” be stored in one secure, structurally sound facility. Instead, as noted above, pursuant to our understanding with the Clerk-Recorder, the equipment will be housed in two separate but secure and structurally sound facilities. The Clerk-Recorder anticipates the delivery of some number of computerized, touch-screen voting “booths” in the near future. Prior to such delivery, General Services and the Clerk-Recorder will collaborate on a plan to ensure that this equipment is adequately and securely warehoused in a location convenient and acceptable to the Clerk-Recorder. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this recommendation in part. The County Clerk/Assessor and Department of (707) 463-4320 General Services have developed a viable proposal for improved storage of election equipment. This proposal would address the issue of protection of equipment from the elements, but would utilize two locations rather than one. This solution is acceptable to the Board.

F15: Shortage of staff in the Assessor’s Office, particularly those with specific skills, is a serious problem, leading to a grievous overburdening of existing personnel. Response (County Clerk/Assessor): The Department agrees with this finding. (707) 463-4320 Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding and the County Clerk/Assessor response.

Related Recommendations (2)

April 11, 2005 — County of Mendocino Post Office Box 629

3 pages 10 findings 4 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 10 findings

F1: The guidelines and regulations governing the use of MHSA funds call for innovation grounded in the recovery-based model, that is, very much client- oriented and with much group and peer activities.

F2: The emphasis in the vision statement of the MHSA (available at http://www.dmh.cahwnet.gov/MHSA/docs/Vision_and_Guiding_Principles_2- 16-05.pdf) is for greater client involvement in providing mental health services. Programs funded under Prop. 63 must document that they are client-designed and client-driven.

F3: Planning must involve the stakeholders in the broad domain of mental health services in our County: professionals in the County workforce involved with the provision of services for persons with mental illness; those who work in the private or non-profit sector concerned with mental health; and those who volunteer their time and money to mental health issues.

Related Recommendations (3)

R2: The Grand Jury recommends that individuals and groups with concerns for the MHSA continue to participate in the planning process, most usefully perhaps by joining one of the workgroups. (Finding 3, 4)

R3: The Grand Jury recommends that every effort be made to hold meetings of the workgroups at times that facilitate the attendance of the greatest possible number of stakeholders and that those meetings be well publicized. (Finding 3) (707) 463-4320

R4: The Grand Jury recommends specifically that the work schedules of employees in departments with an interest in Prop. 63 be adjusted to allow their participation in the workgroups. (Finding 3, 4) COMMENT The Grand Jury welcomes the widely expressed commitment to openness and transparency in the planning process for Prop. 63 and urges that it be carried out to the fullest by all concerned. The exercise in planning that we in this County are now engaged in presents a welcome opportunity to examine in the broadest possible perspective mental health services in the County. There are difficult choices to be made, and prior experience tells us that any decision made will be questioned. The best place to raise those questions is during the workgroup process rather than after the groups’ work is done. Officials and members of the general public who participate in those groups will have much more influence on the final plans. The guidelines call for an emphasis on new approaches and methods. Innovation for its own sake has limited value, but a study of alternatives to the status quo that is both rigorous and open-minded has great promise. And even if the specific programs initiated as a result of the MHSA accomplish relatively little, an honest and truth-seeking debate across all the boundary lines on the map of mental health services may yield great rewards. Response Required Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Mendocino County Sheriff’s Department Response Requested Director, Department of Mental Health Mendocino Mental Health Board Director, Department of Social Services Director, Public Health Department Director, Alcohol and Other Drug Programs Director, Ford Street Project

F4: The planning process in Mendocino County uses the following 11 workgroups, open to all in the community, each of which will center on one aspect of the mental health process: (707) 463-4320 Children’s Services Medical Services Client Self-Help Programs Older Adult Services Client’s/Family Rights Advocacy Supportive and Other Housing Crisis Services Transition Age Youth Jail Diversion Vocational/Educational Opportunities Law Enforcement

Related Recommendations (1)

R1: The Grand Jury recommends that officials, both elected and appointed, do everything possible to establish unity within the interest groups as the planning goes on. (Finding 4, 10)

F5: The Mental Health Board (MHB), which has been involved in the planning process to a degree largely unmatched in other California counties, helped draw up the County’s plan before it was approved by the BOS.

F6: The State of California has promised (though not delivered) about $100,000 for our County in the fiscal year 2004-2005, to be used specifically for planning; the County has had to spend much of that amount before its arrival.

F7: Beginning in fiscal year 2005-06, increased funding will be available, designated for both Adult and Children Community Services and Support, and Prevention and Early Intervention Programs, as well as for education, training, capital facilities, and technology.

F8: The disbursement of funds will be spread out over several years, with Community Services and Support being the first area to receive funding.

F9: Prop. 63 funds may not supplant existing budget allocations; all MHSA programs must demonstrate the potential for both significant innovation and improvement over past practices.

F10: The planning process thus far has included considerable discussion over the process itself, most of all about the level of representation of different agencies and interests in the planning groups.

April 10, 2005 — Animal Care and Control Complaint Report

4 pages 14 findings 8 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 14 findings

F1: Mendocino County ACC utilizes both paid staff and volunteers in the day- to-day functioning of the Ukiah facility.

Related Recommendations (3)

R2: The Grand Jury recommends that the Policy and Procedures manual distinguish between tasks that volunteers may do and tasks only to be performed by trained staff. (Findings 1,2,3,4)

R3: The Grand Jury recommends that ACC volunteers become trained in and knowledgeable of those sections of the Policy and Procedures manual which pertain to tasks appropriate to their status. (Findings 1,2,4)

F2: The ACC Policy and Procedures manual was revised thirteen years ago (1992). (707) 463-4320

Related Recommendations (3)

R1: Grand Jury recommends that all ACC employees be required to read and develop a working knowledge of the Policy and Procedures manual within two weeks of hire and that verification of this task be timely and consistent. (Findings 2,3)

R6: The Grand Jury recommends that the pages of the Policy and Procedures manual be numbered sequentially and that they be dated to reflect updates. (Finding 2)

F3: While all new ACC employees may be asked to read the Policy and Procedures within one or two weeks of hire, records indicate that verification of this reading is inconsistent.

F4: ACC volunteers are not required to become familiar with the Policy and Procedures.

F5: There are three microchip scanners available at the Ukiah facility to assist in pet identification, one at the front desk, one in the clinic and one in the back room where animals are euthanized.

F6: An unidentified dog brought to the Ukiah facility would be scanned for a microchip within a time frame which can be as long as 24 hours.

Related Recommendations (1)

R8: The Grand Jury recommends that all dogs be scanned upon arrival at the ACC facility, regardless of their condition, and that the scanning occur before a dog is placed in a cage, freezer or incinerator. (Findings 6,7,8,14) Comments Whatever the circumstances, the death of a pet is a difficult, often traumatic experience for the owner. The treatment of a bereaved owner by a government (707) 463-4320 agency which must often deal with such incidents should be, at the very least, professional. Two owners living outside Ukiah Valley learned from other sources that their two dogs, one unharmed and one dead, had been taken by an ACC employee to the city facility. They left phone messages indicating their desire to retrieve both pets. Although both dogs carried microchips, there is no indication that either was scanned at the Ukiah facility. Upon arrival, they were told at the reception desk that the dead dog was in the freezer. Indeed, the Grand Jury was told that an identified dead animal would be kept in the freezer until the owner is reached, then released to the owner or burned. When one of the owners was directed to the rear of the facility, he was told by another staff member that his animal was in the incinerator. The door was opened, his dead pet was pointed out, and the owner himself entered the incinerator to retrieve the dog. He was not offered, as a courtesy, a container such as a large plastic bag in which to carry the remains to his car. The Grand Jury recognizes the important and necessary work of Animal Care and Control workers. Spaying and neutering programs, the rescue of strays, organization and promotion of the adoption process are all vital services to this community. The Grand Jury believes, however, that those services would be improved by clear and concise guidelines in a Policy and Procedures manual disseminated to all staff members and volunteers. Finally, when saddened owners arrive at the facility to recover a dead pet, Mendocino County citizens expect courtesy and professionalism from ACC employees and volunteers. The Grand Jury would hope, in addition, that such clients be shown sensitivity and understanding. Response Required Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Response Requested Mendocino County Chief Executive Officer Director, Department of Animal Care and Control

F7: A dead dog brought to the Ukiah facility might or might not be scanned for a microchip.

F8: It is unclear whether a dead dog arriving at the Ukiah facility would be placed in the freezer or in the incinerator.

F9: The incinerator at the Ukiah facility is kept locked and must be unlocked by a staff member for a specific purpose.

F10: It is unclear whether an owner, under ACC procedures, might be allowed by an employee or a volunteer to retrieve a dead animal from the incinerator prior to a burning.

Related Recommendations (1)

R7: The Grand Jury recommends that the Policy and Procedures manual contain clear guidelines which prevent anyone other than an ACC employee from entering the incinerator. (Findings 11,12,)

F11: The incinerator at the Ukiah facility may contain, at any given time, dead animals which are color-coded as possible biohazards.

F12: It is unclear whether an owner attempting to recover a dead animal would be offered, by an employee or volunteer, a plastic bag in which to carry the remains.

F13: The ACC Policy and Procedures manual, as currently written, does not contain specific references to the urgency of scanning dogs immediately for a microchip and the importance of scanning all dogs received at the facility.

Related Recommendations (1)

F14: The ACC Policy and Procedures manual, as currently written, does not contain specific regulations regarding who may enter the incinerator to retrieve a dead animal. (707) 463-4320

Related Recommendations (1)

R7: The Grand Jury recommends that the Policy and Procedures manual contain clear guidelines which prevent anyone other than an ACC employee from entering the incinerator. (Findings 11,12,)

March 27, 2005 — County of Mendocino Post Office Box 629

4 pages 20 findings 1 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 20 findings

F1: The number of patrol officers in the service of the Mendocino County Sheriff’s Department is the same (68) as it was 30 years ago.

F2: Most of the County does not have around -the-clock (24/7) patrol personnel on duty.

F3: Ukiah and its environs have continuous patrol coverage.

F4: Duty assignments for patrol officers are adjusted to ensure that personnel are on duty at the most critical times. (707) 463-4320

F5: Approximately 30% of a patrol officer's time is spent writing reports. Issues:

F6: The Mendocino County Sheriff Dispatch Communication Center (911 calls) has personnel on duty 24/7.

F7: The majority of 911 calls to the Mendocino County Sheriff Dispatch come from the greater Ukiah area.

F8: Telephone land lines in the northern part of the County, including Round Valley, are owned and serviced by Verizon Communications, while the rest of the county is served by SBC.

F9: On occasion the Verizon 911 system for the northern part of the County fails.

F10: Mendocino County Sheriff Dispatch has a contingency plan to supplant the Verizon 911 system when it fails.

F11: State legislation and funding exists which in the future will result in the consolidation of dispatch facilities that are currently operated by other agencies. Round Valley Issues:

F13: A policy unique to Round Valley allows for patrol officers to receive incentive pay as an inducement to live and work in the valley.

F14: Round Valley has one sergeant and three patrol officers to share the daily duties; this represents a higher staffing ratio than is found in other remote parts of the County.

F15: Round Valley patrol officers have the support and assistance of tribal police in performing their duties.

F16: The Sheriff’s Department holds monthly meetings in Round Valley as a community relations effort, but they are poorly attended by the community unless a hot button issue is on the agenda. (707) 463-4320 Incidental Issues:

Related Recommendations (1)

R1: The Grand Jury recommends that the Sheriff’s Department and local authorities strive to better inform the public when monthly meetings are being held in Round Valley. (Finding 16.) Comments The Mendocino County Sheriff’s Department is doing well with the staff available. In an era with so many funding issues, it is remarkable that the work of the Department continues with a high degree of efficiency and professional dedication which provides the citizens of Mendocino County a reasonable level of police protection. Should citizens in a given area feel the need for additional protection Neighborhood Watch Groups can be organized. The Sheriff’s Department is willing to assist in the formation of such groups if their help is requested. The Mendocino County Sheriff’s Department must patrol approximately 3800 square miles with a patrol staff of 68. Their duties are varied and complex. In response to a growing County population and a growing drug problem they work to provide the best service possible with the funds available. Citizens within the County will find that they are best served when involved with their communities and willing to invest time to make the County a better place in which to live and work. For example, volunteers who dedicate time to the Reserves and Search and Rescue teams are to be commended. The duty assignments for patrol officers in the County provide a very challenging logistical problem. With the staff available the Department must strive for maximum protection at the most critical times. Citizens of the county must realize that the remote areas will not have 24/7 coverage. Other deputies must cover for personnel who are injured, on sick leave, or on vacation. Law enforcement (707) 463-4320 personnel within the County and beyond must be prepared to respond in a timely fashion to a wide variety of emergencies. The Emergency Response System in the County does well to service such a vast area. Communication within all parts of the county continues to improve. The Sheriff Dispatch works constantly to improve the existing communication system. An upgrade of the microwave communication system used by officers on the ground is necessary. Verizon should give closer attention to their land line communication system in the northern part of the County. Citizens with a concern regarding the 911 response system should work with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to exact a change.

F17: Mendocino County has curfew laws on the books, but they are unevenly enforced.

F18: The Mendocino County Sheriff’s Department uses the expertise of the California Division of Forestry (CDF) in arson fire investigations.

F19: Through mutual aid agreements, other local, State and Federal agencies assist the County in law enforcement when necessary.

F20: The City of Point Arena contracts with the County Sheriff’s Department to provide law enforcement protection for their city.

March 01, 2005 — County of Mendocino Post Office Box 629

5 pages 7 findings

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 7 findings

F1: Reports published earlier this year by the Mendocino County Grand Jury (on Animal Control and the Library) cited the failure of the BOS to exercise proper and sufficient control over the administration of those departments. The same criticism occurs in a number of Grand Jury reports from previous years. Response (CEO): The CEO agrees with this finding that the reports have been critical. Response (County Counsel): The Department agrees with the finding that this year the Grand Jury did allege that the Board of Supervisors failed to exercise proper and sufficient control over the administration of Animal Care & Control and the Library. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board agrees with this finding that the reports have been critical.

F2: Under the new organization, the BOS retains direct supervisory responsibility only for the Clerk of the Board, the County Counsel and the CEO. All other County agencies are ultimately the responsibility of the BOS but will be supervised by the CEO. Response (CEO): The CEO disagrees with this finding in part and agrees with this finding in part. Elected department heads cannot be supervised by the Board or the CEO. The Chief Probation Officer and the Farm Advisor are appointed and supervised by other entities than the Board and the CEO. Additional language will be necessary in the County Code to make provisions regarding appointed department heads consistent with supervision by the CEO. Response (County Counsel): The Department disagrees with this finding in that the CEO does not supervise the Assessor-Clerk-Recorder’s Office, the Sheriff’s Office, the District Attorney’s Office, the Auditor-Controller, Treasurer-Tax Collector, or any other elected official’s department. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board disagrees with this finding in part and agrees with this finding in part, in concurrence with the response of the CEO.

F3: The language in the ordinance, which does not clearly assign responsibilities for supervision of departments, leaves considerable room for confusion and misinterpretation. Response (CEO): The CEO agrees with this finding. Response (County Counsel): The Department disagrees with this finding. The ordinance amending Mendocino County Code § 2.28 et seq. states that the CEO will “appoint, transfer, discipline, suspend or dismiss, as appropriate, any non-elected department head who is not required to be appointed by the Board of Supervisors.” (§ 2.28050 (3)(h)) The amended ordinance also defines those department heads who report directly to the BOS. (see § 2.28.050(3)(g)) In addition, when read as a whole, the new ordinance clearly establishes that the department heads, except for elected department heads, County Counsel, and the Clerk of the Board, all report to the CEO, and that the CEO has the ability to terminate and/or discipline the department heads that report to the CEO. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board agrees with this finding.

F4: Mendocino County Supervisors are elected officials who do not necessarily have the training and expertise to be personnel managers. Response (CEO): The CEO does not have sufficient information to agree or disagree with this finding. Response (County Counsel): The County Counsel cannot agree or disagree with this finding due to insufficient information. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board does not have sufficient information to agree or disagree with this finding.

F5: The CAO’s office had seven funded positions in the 2004-5 County budget. Response (CEO): The CEO agrees with this finding. Response (County Counsel): The Department does not have sufficient information to either agree or disagree with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board agrees with this finding.

F6: There is no anticipated increase in staffing for that office under the CEO. Response (CEO): The CEO agrees with this finding in part and disagrees with this finding in part. There has been no increase in staffing attributable to the transition to CEO, at this point in time. Analysis is underway regarding workload and resources. There has been the addition of two positions as a result of incorporation of the risk management function into the Executive Office. The two Safety Officers are not included in this count. Response (County Counsel): The Department does not have sufficient information to either agree or disagree with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board agrees with this finding in part and disagrees with this finding in part; in concurrence with the response of the CEO.

F7: The CEO is an at-will employee of the County – that is, his employment may be terminated at any time by a vote of the BOS. Response (CEO): The CEO agrees with this finding. Response (County Counsel): The Department agrees with this finding. Response (Board of Supervisors): The Board agrees with this finding.

March 01, 2005 — County of Mendocino Post Office Box 629

2 pages 7 findings

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 7 findings

F3: The language in the ordinance, which does not clearly assign responsibilities for supervision of departments, leaves considerable room for confusion and misinterpretation.

F4: Mendocino County Supervisors are elected officials who do not necessarily have the training and expertise to be personnel managers.

F5: The CAO’s office had seven funded positions in the 2004-5 County budget.

F6: There is no anticipated increase in staffing for that office under the CEO.

F7: The CEO is an at-will employee of the County – that is, his employment may be terminated at any time by a vote of the BOS. 1

February 20, 2005 — County of Mendocino Post Office Box 629

3 pages 15 findings 4 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 15 findings

F1: The office of the Clerk has a total permanent staff of nine.

F2: Staff turnover is higher at the lower paid, entry level positions than among more senior personnel.

Related Recommendations (1)

F3: To the fullest extent possible, functions of the Clerk’s Office are computerized in a very technology-intensive environment.

F4: A portion of the document processing fees goes to pay for up-to-date technology.

F5: The remainder of revenues from the Office goes into the County General Fund.

F6: Requests for information and documents are met in a timely fashion. (707) 463-4320

F7: Despite a considerable increase in recent years in the volume of work, the Clerk’s Office has functioned without an increase in staffing for the last 20 years.

F8: The conduct of County elections by the Clerk’s Office has gone smoothly despite the increasing complexity of the process.

F9: The conduct of elections depends heavily on a well-organized group of temporary hires.

F10: Election results, sent by modem from the polling places, are now available almost immediately after the closing of the polls at the Clerk’s Office and the Mendocino County website.

F11: Safeguards for a fair election process appear to be both adequate and appropriate.

F12: Between elections voting machines are warehoused in two separate facilities, one of which has a leaky roof.

Related Recommendations (1)

R2: The Grand Jury recommends that election machines be stored in one secure, structurally sound facility. (Finding 12)

F13: The Assessor’s Office has an authorized staff of 24 permanent workers and supervisors.

F14: The Assessor’s Office is increasingly computerized, enabling it to handle the workload much more efficiently.

F15: Shortage of staff in the Assessor’s Office, particularly those with specific skills, is a serious problem, leading to a grievous overburdening of existing personnel.

Related Recommendations (1)

R3: The Grand Jury recommends that further efforts to address the shortage of adequately skilled employees in the Assessor’s office be undertaken. (Finding 15) COMMENTS The astute use of technology by the office of the Clerk/Assessor has mitigated the effect of budget cuts that have had such a negative impact on many County agencies. The Grand Jury commends the administration of the office for both the overall efficiency and helpfulness demonstrated in the workplace. (707) 463-4320

Additional Recommendations 1

Not linked to specific findings.

R15: COMMENTS The astute use of technology by the office of the Clerk/Assessor has mitigated the effect of budget cuts that have had such a negative impact on many County agencies. The Grand Jury commends the administration of the office for both the overall efficiency and helpfulness demonstrated in the workplace. (707) 463-4320

February 18, 2005 — County of Mendocino Post Office Box 629

2 pages 11 findings 1 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 11 findings

F1: The staff turnover rate at the Mendocino Juvenile Hall is very low.

F2: In response to budget cuts, management has been able to keep line-staffing levels by not filling the office of Assistant Superintendent.

F3: The Juvenile Work Program, which provides community service opportunities for juveniles on probation, has been discontinued due to lack of funding.

Related Recommendations (1)

R1: The Grand Jury recommends that the funding for the Juvenile Work Program be reinstated (Finding #3). Comments The Grand Jury finds that Juvenile Hall management and staff are doing a commendable job. They strive to find a balance between punishment and rehabilitation. The Grand Jury believes the minimal staff turnover rate is the result of their commitment to making positive changes in the lives of local youth. The absence of a Juvenile Work Program negatively impacts on the rehabilitation process for Mendocino County youth on probation. While the Graffiti Abatement program located in Ukiah could be restored at a cost of $28,000, a broader program with centers in Willits, Fort Bragg and Ukiah would require funding up to $280,000. Response Required Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Response Requested Mendocino County Juvenile Hall Superintendent Mendocino County Chief Probation Officer

F4: Most juvenile arrests are drug related.

F5: Most juvenile crime does not result in a stay in Juvenile Hall.

F6: Most juvenile incarceration is the result of probation violation.

F7: Juvenile Hall has experienced an increase in incarcerations as a result of gang activity.

F8: Officials working in Juvenile Hall state that ninety-five percent of the incarcerated youth at Juvenile Hall come from dysfunctional homes.

F9: Resident youth who are incarcerated at the Mendocino County Juvenile Hall receive educational opportunities through the services of the Mendocino County Office of Education (MCOE).

F10: Legal guardians are expected to pay $15 per day while their charge is in Juvenile Hall.

F11: Pay phones in Juvenile Hall pay for all recreational equipment. (707) 463-4320

February 06, 2005 — Mendocino County Department of Transportation Unpaved Road Report

2 pages 13 findings 6 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 13 findings

F1: The DOT top priority is safe roads and safe driving conditions.

F2: The local yard Senior Road Crew Supervisors are the public's primary contact for local maintenance work and are available by phone.

F3: Applications of fresh water are required prior to any grading of unsurfaced roads.

Related Recommendations (1)

R1: The Grand Jury recommends that the DOT make every effort to contact local reservoir/pond owners to assist in supplying adequate water in close proximity to road grading work. (Findings 3,4,5,6)

F4: If water must be applied, it may have to be purchased by the DOT and hauled to the work sites.

F5: A consistent supply of water is required for efficient roadwork; thus progress may be slowed when water must be hauled from a distance.

F6: The California Department of Fish and Game sets stringent requirements for the taking of water from waterways, which can affect both the cost and efficiency of road maintenance.

F7: Motorists have a tendency to increase speed after grading has been completed. This driving pattern causes the road to return to its prior condition of disrepair within a short time.

F8: Very few unsurfaced roads are posted for speed limits.

Related Recommendations (1)

R2: The Grand Jury recommends that the DOT increase the number of speed limit signs on unsurfaced roads. (Finding 8)

F9: Vegetation growth along roadways impedes maintenance work and creates hazardous driving conditions, decreasing visibility and narrowing the usable road surface.

F10: Magnesium chloride, a bonding agent, is used to improve unpaved roads, control dust, and create a longer lasting surface.

Related Recommendations (1)

R3: The Grand Jury recommends that DOT increase the use of magnesium chloride for unpaved road maintenance. (Finding 10)

F11: The DOT Engineering Division has recently acquired four new pneumatic traffic-counting devices.

Related Recommendations (1)

R4: The Grand Jury recommends that the Engineering Department use the newly acquired traffic counting devices to develop a maintenance plan for unsurfaced roads consistent with the increased use of such roads in rapidly developing areas. (Finding 11)

F12: Some of the maintenance yards lack adequate surveillance and security features, leading to serious theft and vandalism.

Related Recommendations (1)

R5: The Grand Jury recommends that security be increased at problem maintenance yards. (Finding 12)

F13: For the past three years, funding for road maintenance has been so inadequate as to create an impending transportation crisis and a threat to public safety.

Related Recommendations (1)

R6: The Grand Jury recommends that the DOT, in cooperation with the Board of Supervisors, act to ensure public awareness of this rapid decline in the infrastructure caused by lack of appropriate funding.(Finding 13) Comments The Grand Jury believes that the DOT is doing an acceptable job just to maintain our present road system with the amount of dollars and manpower available, even though many roads are falling behind on maintenance and improvements. Response Required Board of Supervisors Response Requested Mendocino County DOT Director

December 21, 2004 — Mendocino County Jail, Courthouse Holding Cells, and Fort Bragg Sheriff’s Holding Cells

3 pages 25 findings 10 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 25 findings

F1: The MCJ is currently understaffed at 39 Corrections Deputies, although the County Budget provides funding for 44.

Related Recommendations (1)

R1: The Grand Jury recommends that the staffing for 54 Corrections Deputies be implemented upon completion of the new MCJ addition. (Findings 1 and 3)

F2: The MCJ can currently accommodate 302 inmates.

F3: A new 64-bed addition to the MCJ is expected to open in July, 2006.

F4: The MCJ has two padded Safety Cells in the men’s wing.

Related Recommendations (1)

R3: The Grand Jury recommends that the MCJ increase the number of Safety Cells from three to ten. The men’s wing needs four additional cells and the women’s wing needs three additional cells. (Findings 4 and 6)

F5: A doorframe in one of the men’s Safety Cells is missing padding and poses a safety concern.

Related Recommendations (1)

R2: The Grand Jury recommends that the doorframe of the Safety Cell be repaired. (Finding 5)

F6: The MCJ has one padded Safety Cell in the women’s wing.

F7: The MCJ Holding Cells do not contain television or any other means of occupying inmate time.

Related Recommendations (1)

R4: The Grand Jury recommends that the MCJ provide television in Holding Cells. (Finding 7)

F8: There is continuing staff turnover at the MCJ because the patrol division is considered more desirable work.

F9: The Booking Area lacks adequate organizational space for efficient use.

F10: There is only one MCJ Booking Officer per shift.

Related Recommendations (1)

R5: The Grand Jury recommends that an assistant be available to allow the Booking Officer to efficiently perform required duties .(Finding 10)

F11: A new electronic control board for monitoring and controlling inmate activity was recently installed.

F12: The remote video monitoring station has a digital video recorder to monitor inmate behavior and provide staff liability protection.

F13: In the coming year, MCJ will provide video conferencing for remote attorney/client consultation and family visitation.

F14: A renovation of the laundry room has not been completed.

Related Recommendations (1)

R6: The Grand Jury recommends that the MCJ complete renovation of the laundry area. (Finding 14)

F15: Classroom education and computer lab instruction under the direction of the Ukiah Adult School are offered to inmates.

F16: A Life Skills class, offered through the Ford Street Project, includes instruction in anger management, health, and abusive behavior reduction.

F17: Inmates may attend on site meetings of Alcoholics Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous.

F18: Religious services are available to the inmates.

F19: The money generated from MCJ pay phones, through a service provider contract, defrays the cost of Inmate Services.

F20: There is a significant number of outstanding maintenance issues.

Related Recommendations (1)

R7: The Grand Jury recommends that the MCJ’s maintenance problems be addressed and solved with adequate funding to Building and Grounds. (Finding 20)

F21: The Courthouse Holding Cells now provide space for attorney/client consultation.

F22: Graffiti exist on holding cell walls in Ukiah and Fort Bragg.

Related Recommendations (1)

R8: The Grand Jury recommends that the graffiti on the walls of the Courthouse Holding Cells and the Fort Bragg Holding Cells be removed. (Finding 22)

F23: A significant number of the transients arriving in Mendocino County further stress the criminal justice system.

Related Recommendations (1)

R9: The Grand Jury recommends that further study be done to resolve the costly problem created by the closure of the PHF, with particular consideration given to the establishment of dual-diagnosis beds. (Finding 24)

F25: The kennel used for detainees’ dogs at the Fort Bragg Holding Facility is not clean.

Related Recommendations (1)

R10: The Grand Jury recommends that a policy be established to ensure timely cleaning of the Fort Bragg dog kennels. (Finding 25) Comments The three major reasons for inmates coming to MCJ are substance abuse, theft, and domestic violence. Ninety-nine percent of these inmates have problems related to alcohol, other drugs, or mental health issues. Methamphetamine is a factor in 80% of the arrests in the County. The use of this drug increases the combative and suicidal tendencies in the inmate population. The use of Methamphetamine is a primary factor in the higher rate of women incarcerated. There is an increase of indigent inmates in MCJ during the cold winters and hot summers. The Booking Officer needs an assistant to answer telephone calls and take messages in regard to bail-related matters, court appearances, attorneys, and other relevant matters. This would increase the efficiency of the booking process. The recently installed electronic control board ensures the reliable function of all the security doors in the facility. Jail personnel do an excellent job of providing basic custody services with available facilities and funds. Response Required Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Mendocino County Sheriff Response Requested Mendocino County Building and Grounds Director

Additional documents

Documents found alongside this year's reports — not grand jury reports or responses.