Merced County Grand Jury
2002-2003
Findings & Recommendations
11 findings
F1:
The Public Defender's Office has 13 attorneys and three clerical staff An additional half-time staff member is assigned to the Los Banos Office of the Public Defender (not reviewed). Two private investigators and three part-time jail interviewers are on staff
F2:
Contract public defenders are not managed by the Public Defender's Office .
F3:
Contract public defenders are hired by the Merced County Executive Officer (CEO) or his designee.
F4:
Concerns exist regarding the hiring of unqualified contract public defenders.
F5:
The total cases per year handled by the Public Defender's Office is between 9,000-10,000. The number of cases in one year peaked over 12,000 . Each attorney handles between 800-900 cases per year depending upon the balance between misdemeanor and felony cases. This caseload is monitored by the Public Defender. 2002-2003 GrandJuryReport -16-
F6:
The facility at 2150 M St., Merced, is conveniently and appropriately located near the courts.
F7:
The facility is over-crowded and inappropriate for a professional legal office. Many of the attorneys share office space. Most of the walls do not go to the ceiling, many offices double as walkways to other offices, and insulation is poor if it exists, making privacy and confidentiality nonexistent.
F8:
The carpeting is well worn and dirty, as are the seat covers on chairs in the waiting area. Dirt and dust is apparent behind the doors . The break room, which doubles as the library, has visible marks on the ceiling from an upstairs toilet, which has a history of overflowing.
F9:
It was reported by the Public Defender that the assignment and review of facilities is the responsibility of the Merced County CEO .
F10:
It was reported that the CEO has never visited this facility .
F11:
It was reported that three members of the Merced County Board of Supervisors visited t4e facility five years ago.
Additional Recommendations
4
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
The Grand Jury recommends that the County of Merced upgrade this facility.
R2:
The Public Defender's Office should be a facility comparable to private counsel handling a comparable law practice.
R3:
Contract public defenders should be reviewed and assigned on the basis of experience and qualifications by a panel of legal professionals (including, at least, one judge).
R4:
The Bar Association should be consulted regarding the credentials and prior experience of proposed contract public defenders. 2002-2003 Grand Jury Report
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
12 findings
F1:
There was repeated failure of Atwater Police Department detectives to use standard investigative techniques in child molestation investigations .
F2:
The repeated failure of standard investigative techniques compromised the investigation of a number of cases thereby adversely affecting public safety in the City of Atwater. 2002-2003 Grand Jurv Report -18-
F3:
Commander Richard Hawthorn and Commander Frank Pietro repeatedly requested Chief Moore to place new officers in the Detective Division . Chief Moore informed the Grand Jury that he had only recently become aware of the problems in the detective division and of the need to rotate personnel .
F4:
Chief Moore gave an unsatisfactory explanation of why a new detective failed to utilize a standard investigative interview technique .
F5:
Changes in the detective division were made and standard investigative techniques are now being used.
F6:
The City of Atwater's VISA credit cards are assigned to each department .
F7:
In reviewing the City of Atwater's invoices, it was discovered that city employees were utilizing the city's VISA credit card for items in which a purchase order should have been requested. This practice allowed employees to make purchases without planning ahead. The City of Atwater's purchasing policy for items under $1,000 is broadly interpreted.
F8:
In reviewing the City of Atwater's Annual Financial Report for the year ended June 30,2002, prepared by Price Paige & Company, the following finding was reported: 'During our testing we found that purchase orders were not being used consistently by the city in accordance with their established policy to use purchase orders for expenditures of nonrecurring goods and services in excess of $1,000."
F9:
The City of Atwater has no transportatiojo andtravel policy. Currently, reimbursement is based on actual costs with receipts . RFCOMNIENDATIONS
F10:
The City of Atwater Police Department should continue to use standard investigative techniques in the detective division.
F11:
VISA credit cards should be kept locked up by each department head and signed out and in for each transaction. All receipts shall be turned in to the department head when returning the credit card .
F12:
All departments should use more efficient purchasing practices for items under $1,000 (grouping, planning, bulk purchases) to avoid small and frequent VISA credit card purchases. 2002-2003 GrandJuryReport
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
10 findings
F1:
When the free breakfast program started in the school year 2001-2002, snacks could not be sold while Food Services was selling during breakfast and lunch . 2002-2003 Grand Jury Report -23- Snacks continued to be sold throughout this school year by the 6'hgrade teacher at the appropriate times, 10:00 a.m. to 10:10 a.m. and after school. This program is to be discontinued next school year 2003-2004.
F2:
All requested materials were received from Tenaya Middle School. The bank signature form indicated two signatures are required . All checks reviewed showed the required signatures. Copies of checks for $2,750.00 and $900.00 payable to the San Francisco Giants were included .
F3:
Merced City School District provided copies of fond raising and field trip policies. According to these policies, all student body checks require two signatures. A check request form is also required. These policies were put into place this year, 2002-2003. Each year there is an independent audit of financial records, which includes student body.
F4:
When purchasing snacks the teacher submits a check request form for the estimated cost of the purchase and receives a signed check . A receipt is submitted after the purchase.
F5:
Daily collection. reports are submitted to the vice-principal. A collection report for $Sr4_SQfor the 6d -grade fundraiserr was submitted to the Grand Jury Committee for review.
F6:
According to the Tenaya Money Collection Process, "At the end of each day-
F7:
organize receipts (if called for)
F8:
organize and count money
F9:
fill out collection report
F10:
turn in all reports, receipts and money to the office before 4 :00 p.m. each day. Do not keep any money in your classroom overnight. All money is to be kept in the safe." RECONEMENDATIONS Strict accounting procedures should be used in all cases where student funds are involved. All personnel involved should be trained in proper school policy procedures . The Grand Jury agrees that this particular fund raising program be discontinued . 2002-2003 Grand Jute Retort
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
8 findings
F1:
The Lanterman Act and related laws of the Welfare and Institutions Code 4514 (1) are specific to Mental Health Patients with developmental disabilities .
F2:
When a referral is made to Child Protective Services (CPS), the Emergency Response Staff completes an Emergency Response Notice of Referral Disposition form.
F3:
The Emergency Response Staff determines the risk factors based on the information given to the Emergency Response Unit. The Emergency Response Unit determines whether the referral will be considered a i immediate response or a ten-day response. All reports must be handled within 10 days of the referral.
F4:
Emergency Response Staff investigates the referral and they determine if the allegation can be substantiated or appears to be unfounded . If substantiated, it is referred to another unit within CPS.
F5:
After the initial investigation is completed, a computerized program generates the completed Emergency Response Notice of Referral Disposition that should be sent to the mandated reporter. The mandated reporter does not always receive this report or may not receive it in a timely manner.
F6:
Many times the comment section of the Emergency Response Notice of Referral Disposition is not completed.
F7:
There is confusion as to who is responsible for the training of mandated reporters.
F8:
Some mandated reporters. have reported the following problems in dealing with Child Protective Services: Primary contact with law enforcement appears to get more immediate action than going through the usual channels . It is the view of some mandated reporters that when they make numerous referrals on the same child, some social workers dismiss the reporters as being overzealous. 2002-2003 Grand Jurv Report
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
8 findings
F1:
It is reported that the City of Merced has a zero tolerance policy for sexual harassment.
F2:
Asexual harassment and hostile work environment claim was filed with the Director of Support Services.
F3:
The investigation of the claim began with the Chief of Police.
F4:
The Chief of Police was directed by the City of Merced Director of Support Services to halt the investigation and turn over the investigation to her .
F5:
The claim was denied by the Director of Support Services.
F6:
During the interview process, the Law Committee noted extreme inconsistencies in the form of conflicting testimony by staff members.
F7:
It was noted and acknowledged that sexual harassment complaints are very difficult to review due to the nature of such situations.
F8:
The complainant filed a complaint with the California State Department of Fair Employment and Housing (1320 E. Shaw Ave., Suite 150, Fresno) and awaits action.
Additional Recommendations
2
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
It is a conflict of interest to have a sexual harassment complaint by an employee of the City of Merced investigated by another employee of the City of Merced . An independent panel should review sexual harassment or hostile work environment claims.
R2:
Procedures and protocol for reporting sexual harassment needs to be understood and followed by all employees of the City of Merced and its representatives . 2002-2003 Grand JuryReuort
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
3 findings
F1:
School districts hire and pay a percentage ofthe cost for Merced County to run their bond elections, unless a special election is held and then the entire cost is carried by the school district. Voting districts are affected when school districts change boundaries. The Merced County Office of Education is heading up a review of all county schools and their boundaries. Each school is responsible for providing the county with their own maps . The maps have been updated but haven't been redrawn since 1977.
F2:
Because of the changing school boundaries, the county provided the schools with a copy of boundaries based on Merced County tax records.
F3:
It is the responsibility of the school districts to make sure that county tax maps and school districts' attendance maps coincide.
Additional Recommendations
5
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
Make the building of an adequate facility a priority by the Board of Supervisors in order to facilitate a "No Kill" program for adobtable animals .
R2:
Review the Kennel Attendants' job classification and adjust to better represent/compensate their major job duties.
R3:
Continue public education in regard to spaying and neutering of animals.
R4:
Implement their marketing ideas such as pet fairs and the sale of pet-related items.
R5:
Develop a volunteer program at the new facility. CONEM ENDATION The Grand Jury commends the Kennel Attendants for working daily with little resources to bring comfortto the homeless animals in Merced County. Their integrity and commitment in spite ofthe negative aspect ofthe job is to be applauded. 2002-2003 Grand JuryReport 9 MERCED COUNTY AUDITOR-CONTROLLER ELECTIONS-VOTER REGISTRATION DEPARTMENT TION
Findings & Recommendations
17 findings
F1:
The Marie Green Psychiatric Center is a 16-bed inpatient facility constructed in 1995. The facility is clean, modern, and well equipped.
F2:
This facility provides Medi Cal covered mental health services as mandated under the California Welfare and Institutions Code. Services include assessment, treatment for acute psychiatric problems, and brief total psychiatric care . Under 2002-2003 GrandJuryReport -13- California Welfare and Institutions Code 5150 a person may be detained involuntarily at this facility for 72 hours for evaluation and treatment of mental disorders.
F3:
The staff consists of nurses, mental health workers, counselors, a social worker, a contracted doctor, and the site coordinator.
F4:
Five nurses work on various shifts in a twenty-four hour period.
F5:
Extended inpatient care is contracted with Merced Manor and a California State Hospital for individuals with serious mental illness .
F6:
No patient deaths have occurred at this facility.
F7:
Food is _prepared at the Sandy Mush Correctional facility and transported to the center.
F8:
The patients' clothes are laundered on site . Children's System of Care
F9:
This department moved in January of 2003 from a facility (located at 380 E . 13' Street in Merced) that provided outpatient services for both adults and children. That facility now serves outpatient adults only. The move was primarily due to overcrowded conditions but also served to separate the location of services for outpatient adults and outpatient children. The facility at the new location is clean, provides privacy for client consultation, is adequate for the number of clients currently served, and is located in close proximity to a Merced County Transit has stop.
F10:
Clients continued to be served during the time the facility at the new location was being organized and readied for staff
F11:
The Children's System of Care provides mental health services for Medi-Cal beneficiaries as mandated by the California Welfare and Institutions Code . A small percentage of the clients served have private insurance. Ages eligible to be served at this outpatient facility are birth to 21 . Average ages served are nine through sixteen. Eight hundred clients are served yearly. Inpatient care for children is contracted with a Group Home pursuant to California Welfare and Institutions Code 5670-5676.5.
F12:
Services available include assessment ; individual, family, and group therapy; case management, medication support, and Therapeutic Behavior Services (T.B.S.) which is a short term one-on-one service for fully covered Medi-Cal beneficiaries. 2002-2003 GrandJuryReport -14-
F13:
The staff consists of one child psychiatrist, one nurse, two psychologists, ten clinicians, ten mental health workers, seven clerical support employees, one educational psychologist (contracted through the Merced County Office of Education), two probation officers (contracted through the Merced County Probation Department), one child welfare social worker, two managers, and the coordinator.
F14:
The caseload for each clinician is fifty to seventy-five clients. These caseloads are shared by the mental health workers who do the field work (home and school visits).
F15:
Children are referred. by schools within the county, the Merced County Probation Department, and the Merced County Department of Human Resources .
F16:
Children's System of Care partners with schools, Child Protective Services, Merced County Probation Department, Central Valley Regional Center, and Family Service Center.
F17:
The allocation for children's services is approximately 25% of the Merced County Department of Mental Health budget. Grant monies in the amount of $400,000 accounted for about one fourth of the 2002-2003 budget for Children's System of Care. COMMENDATION The staff at Children's System of Care is commended for the capable handling of client services during the process of organizing the facility at the new location . The facility is well organized for the efficient use of available space . 2002-2003 Grand JuryReport
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
1 findings
F22:
I, (Sheriff Gary T. Carlson) along with Assistant SheriffrMark Pazin and Correctional Administration, met with representatives of the Merced County Sheriffs Employee Association and discussed the issues at hand. We agreed on a course of action that met both of our concerns and subsequently the Writ ofMandate has been withdrawn. This matter will be worked out in upcoming MO U's with Merced County and the Merced County Sheriff "s Department Policies and Procedures. Grand Jury Follow-up Response accepted. Merced County Sheriff's Department-Complaint Number 01-02-24 Grand Jury Recommendation #1 The County, including elected officials, needs to apply county rules and policies in a fair and equitable manner, regardless of the person's position. 2002-2003 GrandJuryReport -53- Response Every member of County Government is required to apply all laws, rules, and regulations and policies in afair and equitable manner, regardless of a person's position Anything less is unacceptable. Grand Jury Follow-up Response accepted. Grand Jury Recommendation #2 Since there is no policyfor disciplinary action against elected employees, the County needs to develop and enforce a mechanism to protect the employees and itselffrom sexual harassment issues. Response, The Sheriffs of this State are held to standards much higher than other positions within the County or State. The Peace Officer's Code ofEthics spells out standards. The Grand Jury can be impaneled to check on the Sheriff's actions and the State Attorney General oversees the various Sheriff's conduct. Please let's not forget secret ballot elections and the ability of the voters to decide if a person gets thejob or retains it. Last, but not least, the ability of the voters to recall an elected ofcial . Grand Jury Follow-up Response accepted. Grand Jury Recommendation #3 The county's F.F,OC officer should be able to seek legal opinions outside of County Counsel so the employee's complaint does not present a conflict of interest with county liability. Response The duties of the County Counsel include representing the county against claims of liability and providing legal advice to the Board of Supervisors, the ChiefExecutive Officer, all department heads and elected officials. In that capacity, the County Counsel is the only authorized legal advisor to the county's Equal Employment Opportunity Officer. There is no conflict of interest, as a matter of low, because the mission of the Equal Employment Opportunity Officer and the County Counsel are the same : to assure that the county, its officers, employees and departments comply with the law. Grand Jury Follow-up Response accepted. Grand Jury Recommendation #4 The Sherif's Department needs to enforce policies for investigation of wrongdoing by officials in the department so they do not end up investigation themselves. These 2002-2003 Grand Jurv Revort -54- procedures should include employingprivate outside investigators to conduct independent investigations. Response We have and do retain outside investigative services to deal with sensitive or high profile matters occurring within the department. Grand Jury Follow-up Response accepted. Grand Jury Recommendation #5 The Sheriff's Office must actively enforce the zero-tolerance policy for sexual harassment. Response The Sheriff adheres to the Zero Tolerance Policyfor sexual harassment and has all complaints investigated and matters referred to the F.F,OC Officer and County Administration. Grand Jury Follow-up Response accepted. 2002-2003 GrandJuryReport
Additional Recommendations
2
Not linked to specific findings.
R2:
The Atwater City Council should review its current policy for appointing planning commissioners to be in compliance with state law. Response No response received from the Atwater City Planning Commission. 2002-2003 Grand Jurv Report - 50 - Grand Jury Follow-up No action taken. Merced County Board Supervisor-Complaint Number 01-02-19 Grand Jury Recommendation #1 A Code of Ethics Policy should be in place for the Board of Supervisors. Response Another item mentioned in the Grand Jury Report was something called a "Code of Ethics". The Board of Supervisors has adopted a Code of Conflicts pursuant to the code sections set forth above. Grand Jury Follow-up Response accepted. Grand Jury Recommendation #2 The County Planning Department needs to improve and strictly enforce its permit policies, even when a Supervisor is involved. Response The Planning and Community Development Department has a consistent and formalized zoning code compliance program. There are no new policies or procedures needed to address the concerns raised in the Grand Jury investigation . However, in response to the Grand Jury's findings and recommendations, the Department will endeavor to pursue of enforcement allpending cases whether they involve elected officials or other citizens, and we will continue to utilize the services ofthe District Attorney when we have exhausted all the avenues available to the department in bringing a property into compliance with County Code requirements. Grand Jury Follow-up Response accepted. Grand Jury Recommendation #3 The County Public Works Road Division needs to implement and regulate a Roadway Impact Agreement tracking system. Response No response received regarding this recommendation Grand Jury Follow-up No action taken. 2002-2003 Grand JuryReport -51- Grand Jury Recommendation #4 All permit holders within the county should be held accountablefor any violation of their permit conditions. Response See response to #2 above. Grand Jury Follow-up Response accepted. Grand Jury Recommendation #5 The Planning Department must equally enforce policies and regulations for all individuals conducting business in Merced County. Response See response to #2 above. Grand Jury Follow-up Response accepted. Grand Jury Recommendation #6 Inquiries made by County Supervisors to department heads, on behalf of their constituents, should be submitted in writing. Response No response received regarding this recommendation. Grand Jury Follow-up. No action taken. Merced County Sheriff's Department-Complaint Number 01-02-22 Grand Jury Recommendation #1 Proper training should be provided to correctional officers before they are asked to be Officer in Charge. Grand Jury Recommendation #2 Appropriate compensation should be given to correctional officers when they meet all training criteria and are assigned to Qfficer in Charge status . Grand Jury Recommendation #3 To avoidfurther confusion, the list should only contain names of those who have been trained and are qualified to be Officer in Charge. 2002-2003 Grand Jury Report -52- Response We currently utilize Correctional Sergeants, CO III's and on occasion, CO II's to supervise a shift. The vast majority of the time, supervision is scheduled to be handled by the CO III and Sergeants. Our duties are 365 days ayear, 7daysa week, 24 hours a day. With that said, the conditions under which we work and the circumstances make it impossible to staff the totalyear with CO III 's and Sergeants. It has always been a law enforcement practice to have Officers in Charge that are traditionally senior personnel and have qualified, through on-the-job training, and are willing to accept a leadperson role for a short period of time . They only handle the immediate need of one shift and are not required to do the other duties of a supervisor, i . e., approving time off, scheduling and disciplinary issues. We intend to identify concerns of the Employee's Association and deal with County Personnel to see if their concerns are dealt with in upcoming MOU's. Grand Jury Follow-up Response accepted. Grand Jury Recommendation #4 The correctional officers who were deniedpromotion as a result ofthe blacklist should be reconsideredfor any future promotions or tofilladditional positions. Response On June 7, 2002, the Law Offices ofBennett & Shape, Inc. 9256N6 Street, Suite 150, Fresno, CA, filed a Petitionfor Writ ofMandate on behalfofMerced County Sheriff's Employees 'Association vs. County ofMerced, Board ofSupervisors, County ofMerced, Gary Carlson, Sheriff-Coroner, County ofMerced. (Case No. 145987) The Writ cites some of the concerns among others that are contained in Complaint 01-02- 22. I, (Sheriff Gary T. Carlson) along with Assistant SheriffrMark Pazin and Correctional Administration, met with representatives of the Merced County Sheriffs Employee Association and discussed the issues at hand. We agreed on a course of action that met both of our concerns and subsequently the Writ ofMandate has been withdrawn. This matter will be worked out in upcoming MO U's with Merced County and the Merced County Sheriff "s Department Policies and Procedures. Grand Jury Follow-up Response accepted. Merced County Sheriff's Department-Complaint Number 01-02-24 Grand Jury Recommendation #1 The County, including elected officials, needs to apply county rules and policies in a fair and equitable manner, regardless of the person's position. 2002-2003 GrandJuryReport -53- Response Every member of County Government is required to apply all laws, rules, and regulations and policies in afair and equitable manner, regardless of a person's position Anything less is unacceptable. Grand Jury Follow-up Response accepted. Grand Jury Recommendation #2 Since there is no policyfor disciplinary action against elected employees, the County needs to develop and enforce a mechanism to protect the employees and itselffrom sexual harassment issues. Response, The Sheriffs of this State are held to standards much higher than other positions within the County or State. The Peace Officer's Code ofEthics spells out standards. The Grand Jury can be impaneled to check on the Sheriff's actions and the State Attorney General oversees the various Sheriff's conduct. Please let's not forget secret ballot elections and the ability of the voters to decide if a person gets thejob or retains it. Last, but not least, the ability of the voters to recall an elected ofcial . Grand Jury Follow-up Response accepted. Grand Jury Recommendation #3 The county's F.F,OC officer should be able to seek legal opinions outside of County Counsel so the employee's complaint does not present a conflict of interest with county liability. Response The duties of the County Counsel include representing the county against claims of liability and providing legal advice to the Board of Supervisors, the ChiefExecutive Officer, all department heads and elected officials. In that capacity, the County Counsel is the only authorized legal advisor to the county's Equal Employment Opportunity Officer. There is no conflict of interest, as a matter of low, because the mission of the Equal Employment Opportunity Officer and the County Counsel are the same : to assure that the county, its officers, employees and departments comply with the law. Grand Jury Follow-up Response accepted. Grand Jury Recommendation #4 The Sherif's Department needs to enforce policies for investigation of wrongdoing by officials in the department so they do not end up investigation themselves. These 2002-2003 Grand Jurv Revort -54- procedures should include employingprivate outside investigators to conduct independent investigations. Response We have and do retain outside investigative services to deal with sensitive or high profile matters occurring within the department. Grand Jury Follow-up Response accepted. Grand Jury Recommendation #5 The Sheriff's Office must actively enforce the zero-tolerance policy for sexual harassment. Response The Sheriff adheres to the Zero Tolerance Policyfor sexual harassment and has all complaints investigated and matters referred to the F.F,OC Officer and County Administration. Grand Jury Follow-up Response accepted. 2002-2003 GrandJuryReport
R22:
I, (Sheriff Gary T. Carlson) along with Assistant SheriffrMark Pazin and Correctional Administration, met with representatives of the Merced County Sheriffs Employee Association and discussed the issues at hand. We agreed on a course of action that met both of our concerns and subsequently the Writ ofMandate has been withdrawn. This matter will be worked out in upcoming MO U's with Merced County and the Merced County Sheriff "s Department Policies and Procedures. Grand Jury Follow-up Response accepted. Merced County Sheriff's Department-Complaint Number 01-02-24 Grand Jury Recommendation #1 The County, including elected officials, needs to apply county rules and policies in a fair and equitable manner, regardless of the person's position. 2002-2003 GrandJuryReport -53- Response Every member of County Government is required to apply all laws, rules, and regulations and policies in afair and equitable manner, regardless of a person's position Anything less is unacceptable. Grand Jury Follow-up Response accepted. Grand Jury Recommendation #2 Since there is no policyfor disciplinary action against elected employees, the County needs to develop and enforce a mechanism to protect the employees and itselffrom sexual harassment issues. Response, The Sheriffs of this State are held to standards much higher than other positions within the County or State. The Peace Officer's Code ofEthics spells out standards. The Grand Jury can be impaneled to check on the Sheriff's actions and the State Attorney General oversees the various Sheriff's conduct. Please let's not forget secret ballot elections and the ability of the voters to decide if a person gets thejob or retains it. Last, but not least, the ability of the voters to recall an elected ofcial . Grand Jury Follow-up Response accepted. Grand Jury Recommendation #3 The county's F.F,OC officer should be able to seek legal opinions outside of County Counsel so the employee's complaint does not present a conflict of interest with county liability. Response The duties of the County Counsel include representing the county against claims of liability and providing legal advice to the Board of Supervisors, the ChiefExecutive Officer, all department heads and elected officials. In that capacity, the County Counsel is the only authorized legal advisor to the county's Equal Employment Opportunity Officer. There is no conflict of interest, as a matter of low, because the mission of the Equal Employment Opportunity Officer and the County Counsel are the same : to assure that the county, its officers, employees and departments comply with the law. Grand Jury Follow-up Response accepted. Grand Jury Recommendation #4 The Sherif's Department needs to enforce policies for investigation of wrongdoing by officials in the department so they do not end up investigation themselves. These 2002-2003 Grand Jurv Revort -54- procedures should include employingprivate outside investigators to conduct independent investigations. Response We have and do retain outside investigative services to deal with sensitive or high profile matters occurring within the department. Grand Jury Follow-up Response accepted. Grand Jury Recommendation #5 The Sheriff's Office must actively enforce the zero-tolerance policy for sexual harassment. Response The Sheriff adheres to the Zero Tolerance Policyfor sexual harassment and has all complaints investigated and matters referred to the F.F,OC Officer and County Administration. Grand Jury Follow-up Response accepted. 2002-2003 GrandJuryReport
Findings & Recommendations
13 findings
F1:
There was an altercation in the classroom when the officer in charge left the immediate area.
F2:
A student was assaulted by other students.
F3:
This disagreement continued during an unsupervised bus ride home to Los Banos on public transportation.
F4:
Staff absences resulted in a shortage of coverage in the program on the day of the assault.
F5:
The site administrator reported a lack of communication by the probation department concerning the assault.
F6:
No guidelines exist for the ratio of probation officers to students .
F7:
The students involved in the altercation and assault received court ordered punishment.
F8:
Staffing has been changed since the incident and there is now additional coverage of the COOL Program when a Probation Officer is not present .
F9:
An additional probation department office exists on the school site facilitating coverage of the program. CONCLUSION
F10:
Ratio guidelines for probation officers to students need to be established.
F11:
Measures have been taken to supervise the behavior of the juveniles and to ensure their safety. The Committee commends the COOL Program for its expediency in addressing this matter. 2002-2003 Grand JuryReport
F12:
Ratio guidelines for probation officers to students need to be established.
F13:
Measures have been taken to supervise the behavior of the juveniles and to ensure their safety. The Committee commends the COOL Program for its expediency in addressing this matter. 2002-2003 Grand JuryReport