Merced County Grand Jury
2004-2005
Findings & Recommendations
11 findings
F1:
Merced College Police Department collected money for fingerprinting. There was no proper documentation regarding receipts of money, which led to an unclear audit trail. There was no consistent use of the receipt books. In 2000, the police department used three-part receipts with six digit sequential numbers. The receipts contained the customer’s name and address. The badge number or employee number of the officer was indicated. The receipts were dated with quantity and total charges. During 2001 and 2002, the receipt books changed. There was no sequential number on the receipts. The demographics were vague. In 2003, the majority of the receipts 62 viewed did not have a customer name, address, or signature of receiving officer. An un-cashed check dated from a previous year was found in the box of the receipt books. Respondent agrees with the finding. •
F2:
Currently, there is no accounting policy at Merced College. Respondent agrees with the finding with respect to the police and security department. •
F3:
Inappropriate corrections were made on police employee’s time cards. Employees were instructed to use compensatory time during the week following that in which it was earned. The respondent disagrees with the finding on the basis of lack of information. • Nonetheless, all MC Police Department employees will be instructed as to proper • procedure for completion and changes on employee time cards. Employees will indicate prior to accruing overtime if that time will be taken as compensatory time.
F4:
The police department had access to Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service (DRMS). This service offers military excess equipment at no cost. This equipment includes various items such as riot gear, all weather clothing, gas masks, and body armor. There is no policy regarding this equipment nor who has access to it. Many items were assigned to employees. There is no tracking system in place for retrieving equipment once an employee has left the department. Respondent agrees with the finding. •
F5:
Employees were removing DRMS equipment from the college premises with and without permission. The respondent disagrees with the finding on the basis of lack of information. • However, proper procedure for removing equipment from college premises will be • reviewed with all department employees.
F6:
DRMS equipment is stored in an old trailer that is rusted, packed beyond capacity, and unprotected from the elements. The current storage situation is unsafe for employees to access equipment. There are tents that are being stored outside completely exposed. Lack of use and maintenance is causing the equipment to deteriorate. Respondent agrees with the finding. •
F7:
Merced College police are not authorized to issue moving violations at this time. They continue to issue parking citations. Respondent agrees with the finding. •
F8:
There has been inadequate supervision and support for the employees of the Merced College Police Department for a variety of reasons. In the past, the MC Police Department staff did not believe they had effective communication with supervisors, management and administration. Respondent agrees with the finding. •
F9:
Extra help employees are not issued parking permits. They must pay the $1 daily fee or the $20 semester fee to park their automobiles. Respondent agrees with the finding.
F10:
Recommendation: Dr. Johnson should report verbally and in writing to the Board of Trustees monthly regarding the progress at the MC Police Department. The recommendation requires further analysis. • The Board will determine who is responsible for progress reports as appropriate within • six months.
F11:
Recommendation: Extra help employees should be issued parking permits on a semester basis. This alleviates the need for them to pay the daily or semester parking fee. The recommendation requires further analysis. • The district will review this issue and take appropriate action within six months. • Grand Jury Follow-up: There was little information given as to the type of analysis needed in order to implement the
Additional Recommendations
12
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
Complaint form 19 should be made available in additional languages to reflect the diversity of the community.
R2:
Citizens complaint procedure handout should be changed to clearly define the process. DISPOSITION OF OTHER COMPLAINTS COMPLAINTS DISPOSITIONS #04-05-04 Complaint was withdrawn by complainant. #04-05-05 The Grand Jury determined that there was insufficient information to complete an investigation. #04-05-07 The Grand Jury determined that the information provided was too outdated to complete an investigation. #04-05-10 The Grand Jury determined that an investigation was not warranted at this time. A letter was sent to the complainant referring to another agency to file a complaint. #04-05-11 The Grand Jury determined that an investigation should not be conducted at this time because the inordinate amount of publicity on the case could compromise the investigation, and the content of the complaint was in litigation. #04-05-13 The Grand Jury determined that this complaint was not within the jurisdiction of the Grand Jury. #04-05-14 The Grand Jury determined that since this case anonymous and additional information was necessary, this complaint could not be investigated. #04-05-16 The Grand Jury determined that there was insufficient time to complete an investigation before the end of the term. Therefore, this complaint will be forwarded to next years Grand Jury for consideration. #04-05-18 The Grand Jury elected not to investigate this complaint. #04-05-19 The Grand Jury determined that the information provided was too outdated to investigate complaint. #04-05-20 The Grand Jury determined that there was insufficient time to complete an investigation before the end of the term. Therefore, this complaint will be forwarded to next years Grand Jury for consideration. #04-05-21 The Grand Jury determined that the content of this complaint was addressed in another complaint of similar nature. #04-05-22 The Grand Jury determined that there was insufficient time to conduct an investigation before the end of the term. Therefore, this complaint will be forwarded to next years Grand Jury for consideration. #04-05-23 The Grand Jury determined that there was insufficient time to conduct an investigation before the end of the term. Therefore, this complaint will be forwarded to next years Grand Jury for consideration. 47 #04-05-24 The Grand Jury determined that there was insufficient time to conduct an investigation before the end of the term. Therefore, this complaint will be forwarded to next years Grand Jury for consideration. RESPONSES TO THE 2003-2004 GRAND JURY REPORT MERCED COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT MAIN JAIL MANDATED INSPECTION Grand Jury recommendation: In addition to the annual budget requests to the Board of Supervisors, Sheriff Pazin should continue to seek outside funding sources, i.e. grants, to augment the annual budget shortfall, including exploration of the possibility of getting Federal and/or State funds for criminal justice system improvement. In the future, in anticipation of population growth as a result of the impending opening of the University of California and normal area development, the Sheriff's Department should actively pursue the approval for construction of a new jail facility. A non-linear design would require fewer personnel than the current design model and should be considered in future deliberations regarding construction. Human resource allocations as recommended by the California Board of Corrections Staffing Analysis should be addressed. Use of overtime for correctional officers should be drastically reduced and the funds saved could be used to hire additional officers. Areas with chipping paint should be tested to ensure that lead-based paint is not present and repainted. Broken glass on cell doors should be replaced immediately. The Sheriff's Department should work in conjunction with the court administration to ensure that the new court facility has an adequate holding area for inmates awaiting court proceedings. With appropriate staffing during visitation, the issues involving reduced security due to the necessity of the visitors passing through secure areas would be resolved. Commendations: Sheriff Pazin stated that the issue of safely transporting inmates from the jail to the courtroom is being addressed by altering the route to an existing hallway through a more secure area. The Sheriff's Department is commended for utilizing trustees to assist with laundry and other tasks that might otherwise require additional paid staff. The Sheriff's Department is commended for recognizing the dangers posed by placing rival gang members in close proximity. Utilizing a color coding system for the uniforms increases the safety and security of all inmates and staff. Response: I appreciate and thank the Merced county Grand Jury for their annual mandated inspection of the Merced County Main Jail and the Merced County Adult Correctional Facility. In accordance with Section 933 of the California Penal Code and in response to those recommendations for the Merced County Main Jail and the Merced County Adult Correctional Facility, attempts will be made throughout the ensuing year to fulfill those approbations as suggested by the Merced County Grand Jury. Sincerely, Mark N. Pazin Sheriff-Coroner The Board of Supervisors has reviewed the findings and recommendations of the 2003/2004 Grand Jury Report. Responses from elected and appointed officials have been received and were forwarded in accordance with the provisions of Penal Section 933. The following acknowledgments and information are presented on those issues of significance pertaining to matters under the control of the Board of Supervisors. SHERIFF The Grand Jury made a number of recommendations regarding the Main Jail and Correctional Facility. The recommendations included the Sheriff continuing to seek outside funding sources to augment the budget shortfall, exploration of funds for criminal justice system improvements, actively pursuing the approval for construction of a new jail facility, addressing human resource allocations as recommended by the California Board of Corrections Staffing Analysis, making necessary minor repairs to facilities, ensuring appropriate staffing during visitation, working with the Board of Supervisors for additional operating expense funds, forming a committee to develop a plan to build onto the existing correctional facility and to finance the project, ensuring adequate staff is hired and maintained, assigning another officer to the work furlough program, developing a more secure prisoner visitation area, conducting random searches of cells, installing a camera and bullet-proof glass for additional security, considering a law library, working with Court administration to ensure that the new court facility has adequate inmate holding areas, conducting monthly staff meetings with correctional officers and having the board of Supervisors visit the Sandy Mush Correctional facility on an annual basis. The Sheriff responded to the recommendations. The Board has established public safety as a priority as evidenced in a $17.2 million overmatch of the Proposition 172 Maintenance of Effort requirement. The Board supports and encourages the Sheriff to review and identify alternative funding resources towards facility staffing and operations. In addition, the Board of Supervisors will continue to work within fiscal constraints to assist the Sheriff regarding the various other recommendations listed. The Board appreciates the Grand Jury’s commendation to the Sheriff and staff for addressing the various issues regarding security, safety and operations. PROBATION The Grand Jury made two recommendations under the mandated inspections section of their report. The report included recommendations to incorporate vocation training into the curriculum and to demolish the older juvenile facility. The Chief Probation Officer responded to the recommendations. The Board is looking forward to full implementation of programs at the new Juvenile Justice Correctional Complex and appropriately disposing of the older facility that was vacated. The Probation Department is 50 currently working with the Merced County Office of Education in developing a vocational education program to be implemented during the next calendar year. The Board appreciates the Grand Jury’s commendation regarding the priority the Board has placed on completing the new facility and for ensuring appropriate credentials for the Chief Probation Officer and Division Manager positions. The Board also appreciates the Grand Jury’s commendation to the Chief Probation Officer and staff for ensuring that the department functions well even at minimal staffing levels. HUMAN RESOURCES – COMPLAINT 03-04-14 The Grand Jury made two recommendations for Human Resources. The Acting Human Resources Director responded to the recommendations that included a need to inform applicants that all interview questions will be rated equally and revising Resolution #91-32. The Board of Supervisors support a fair employee selection process that identifies the most capable individuals for each job opening. The County Human Resourced Department’s current interview process supports a practice that attempts to identify the most qualified persons through a series of questions presented to all applicants. Questions may vary in weight and importance depending on the significance that answers may have on required qualities and the merit of focus for questions. The same questions, with consistent weighing, are presented to all interviewees. During the interview process, applicants will continue to be advised of the importance of responding to all questions and to provide information about themselves and their qualifications. In addition, plans are already in process for revising Resolution #91-32 by the end of the 2005 Fiscal Year. The Board appreciates the Grand Jury’s commendation to the Acting Human Resources Director and staff for their assistance and cooperation during this investigation and to the Auditor-Controller for supplying requested documents in a timely manner. COUNTY EXECUTIVE OFFICE AND BOARD OF SUPERVISORS – COMPLAINTS 03- 04-03 & 03-04-02 The Grand Jury made recommendations for the County Executive Officer to avoid excess waste and for the Board of Supervisors to ensure their travel is necessary and justifiable and to keep in mind that they are elected officials whose job is to serve the people of Merced County. The County Executive Officer responded to the Grand Jury recommendations. The Board of Supervisors remains committed to preserving the County’s stability by ensuring that all spending is appropriate and that unnecessary waste is avoided. Board members will continue to be fiscally responsible by evaluating the necessity of all travel and always keep in mind their role in serving their constituents when discussing and making decisions that affect the County. In addition, The Grand Jury also investigated the closing of the Central Duplicating department and their findings reported that there was justification in closing the department. The Board concurs with the findings of the Grand Jury that the closing of the department was necessary. The Board appreciates the Grand Jury’s commendation to County employees for their efforts to ensure appropriate expenditures within their departments. HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY – COMPLAINTS 03-04-09 & 02-03-08 51 The Grand Jury made recommendations that Child Welfare Services comply with the mandated rates for foster families, that proper monitoring is provided to ensure the appropriate use of funds, that more people be employed to improve response times, that a training be hosted to include various mandated reporters, that communication be facilitated between their agency and mandated reporters, and that school districts are provided assistance in scheduling and providing training to mandated reporters on a yearly basis. The Human Services Agency has responded to the recommendations. Child welfare and safety is a priority of the Board. The Board supports the agency’s efforts in advocating for a different state rate payment schedule. Agency staff training will include guidelines for various checks to ensure physical and material needs are met. In addition, on June 11, 2004, the Board approved the addition of nine employees to the Child Welfare division to provide better response to the community. A number of other measures are being taken by the Human Services Agency which includes taking the lead role in facilitating and sponsoring a children’s summit, publishing and distributing a booklet on sexual abuse, developing a program to improve communication and education regarding the issue of sexual abuse, working with Mental Health to develop a therapeutic foster parent program, working with the Foster Parent Association to improve relations and boost recruitment efforts, meeting with law enforcement officials for cross training of staff, and meeting with the educational community to improve collaborative efforts. Due to laws governing confidentially of some child welfare information, all information cannot be communicated and thus staff may sometimes appear unresponsive. Although many responses have been via telephone, staff now responds in writing in order that proper documentation is available. Although the employer of record is the entity responsible for training their own mandated reporters, the Board encourages Human Services Agency to assist school, where feasible, with appropriate training and assessments for mandated reporters. The Board appreciates the Grand Jury’s commendation to the Child Welfare Services for developing a Human Services Agency Profile 2003/2004, for providing training to teachers at the school sites and for sponsoring and participating in the Merced County Children’s Summit. OTHER ISSUES Under the section relating to various other concerns of the Grand Jury, several recommendations were put forth that would save time, money, and better assist the Grand Jury in their duties. The recommendations included modifying the Merced County Grand Jury website to present important information to potential Grand Jury applicants, advertising in local newspapers to increase public awareness and to provide an avenue for prospective Grand Jurors to apply, to obtain a dedicated space to create and house essential handbooks, training manuals, policies and procedures of various county departments, past Grand Jury reports, and other resources, to facilitate a dedicated phone line and email address to improve the public’s communications with the Grand Jury, to update all the forms used by the Grand Jury and provide the forms on the Merced County Grand Jury website for download, and to increase the budget allocation for printing and distributing the final report. The Board of Supervisors is committed to ensuring that the Grand Jury is provided with the resources necessary to effectively perform their duties. To improve accessibility, the Information Systems Department has created an e-mail address specifically for use by the Grand Jury, has made available various new forms and the 2002/2003 and 2003/2004 Grand Jury Reports on the Merced County website, and has provided the Grand Jury Foreperson with a cellular phone. Grand Jury Follow-up: Grand Jury accepts the response. MERCED COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT SANDY MUSH CORRECTION FACILITY MANDATED INSPECTION Grand Jury recommendation: The Sheriff should work with the Board of Supervisors to have additional funds allocated for operational expenses. The Grand Jury recognizes that there are County-wide budgetary concerns, but the Sheriff and the Board should exercise diligence and creativity in pursuing alternate funding sources, including seeking federal, state, and private grants. Overcrowding has peaked to a crisis level. It is beyond our comprehension that ill inmates are sleeping on the floor while others are sleeping in the shower. A committee should be formed to generate a plan to build on to the existing facility and finance the project. Staffing should be a priority. Many concerns could be resolved if there was sufficient staff. Adequate staff, including female correctional officers, should be hired and maintained to avoid any further staffing crises. A portion of the funds expended to pay overtime could be used to cover the cost of additional employees. Another officer should be assigned to the work furlough program to assist with onsite supervision. The employer should not be solely responsible for the supervision of the furloughed inmates. There should be a more secured area for prisoner visitation. All panels on cell doors in the maximum-security area should be repaired or replaced. Random cell searches should be routinely conducted. A camera should be installed at or near the intercom just outside of the entrance. This will allow the staff inside the facility to view visitors at all times before entry. There is an existing camera monitoring visitors near the entrance. Once they enter the foyer, staff cannot see them. They can only be heard through the intercom. Bulletproof glass should be installed between the reception area and the receiving officer. A law library should be considered, because the new Juvenile Hall facility will be opening soon, where court sessions will be conducted. The Board of Supervisors should make annual visits to the facility. The Sheriff should conduct monthly staff meetings with the correctional officers at the facility. Commendations: Management and staff showed great concern in regards to the existing problems they face on a daily basis. Many employees work countless hours of overtime to meet the demands of staffing levels. The facility maintains a clean environment. Even with staffing issues and overcrowding, the facility works hard at maintaining organization. Response: Grand Jury Follow-up: MERCED COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER Mandated Inspection Grand Jury recommendation: Vocational Training needs to be incorporated into the curriculum. Demolish the current facility. It is outdated and would cost a considerable sum to refurbish. Commendations: The Chief Probation Officer and Division Manager have educational credentials appropriate for their positions. The department functions well even at minimal state staffing levels. Several members of the Grand Jury attended the grand opening of the new facility. The department is commended for making the construction of such a wonderful facility a priority and for completing it in a timely manner. Response: Contained within the Grand Jury’s Report is a section on the mandated inspection of the Merced County Juvenile Detention Center, otherwise known as the Juvenile Hall. That report contains eight “Findings”, relative to the current Juvenile Hall, eleven “Findings”, relative to the new Iris Garrett Juvenile Justice Correctional Complex, and two “Recommendations”. Following is this Department’s response to these “Findings” and “Recommendations”, as required pursuant to sections 933 and 933.05 of the California Penal Code. Below, each of the “Findings” relative to the current and new facility will be responded to in the order in which they were presented in the Grand Jury’s Report with comment on the two “Recommendations” made by the Grand Jury. AT the outset of the report it is mentioned that juveniles are under the age of 18 and are classified as “status offenders”. This in part is true in that being under the age of 18 gives them the status of juveniles. However, Probation Departments, when referring to status offenders are usually referring to Welfare and Institutions Code section 601 minors who are described as runaways, out-of-control or truant minors. By virtue of this description there status imparts their crime and if they were adults they could not be in charged with any wrong doing.
R3:
Finding Three is accurate relative to minors going through the court process. It is also correct that most youngsters serve only one third of any court ordered commitment at the facility, the remaining two thirds of the commitment is served at home on an electronic monitoring program or in an alternative program.
R4:
This writer concurs with the information in Finding Four.
R5:
This writer concurs with the information in Finding Five.
R6:
Finding Six notes that the “west wing was built in 1984 and is the most up to date.” As clarification the most recently built and up to date wing would be south wing II. Relative to the other three wings (south I, east and west) all have up to two rooms with toilets, however the other rooms without toilet or sinks require that minors be taken to a central restroom facility. This will not be the case in the new facility where each room has a toilet, sink and drinking fountain.
R7:
This writer concurs with the information in Finding Seven.
R8:
The information contained in Finding Eight is accurate.
R9:
This writer concurs with the information in Finding Nine.
R10:
This writer concurs with the information in Finding Ten.
R11:
This writer is convinced and hopes the information in Finding Eleven will prove to be true. Only operation of the new facility will bear this finding out. Recommendations
R04-03:
& 03-04-02 The Grand Jury made recommendations for the County Executive Officer to avoid excess waste and for the Board of Supervisors to ensure their travel is necessary and justifiable and to keep in mind that they are elected officials whose job is to serve the people of Merced County. The County Executive Officer responded to the Grand Jury recommendations. The Board of Supervisors remains committed to preserving the County’s stability by ensuring that all spending is appropriate and that unnecessary waste is avoided. Board members will continue to be fiscally responsible by evaluating the necessity of all travel and always keep in mind their role in serving their constituents when discussing and making decisions that affect the County. In addition, The Grand Jury also investigated the closing of the Central Duplicating department and their findings reported that there was justification in closing the department. The Board concurs with the findings of the Grand Jury that the closing of the department was necessary. The Board appreciates the Grand Jury’s commendation to County employees for their efforts to ensure appropriate expenditures within their departments. HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY – COMPLAINTS 03-04-09 & 02-03-08 51
Findings & Recommendations
11 findings
F1:
Merced College Police Department collected money for fingerprinting. There was no proper documentation regarding receipts of money, which led to an unclear audit trail. There was no consistent use of the receipt books. In 2000, the police department used three-part receipts with six digit sequential numbers. The receipts contained the customer’s name and address. The badge number or employee number of the officer was indicated. The receipts were dated with quantity and total charges. During 2001 and 2002, the receipt books changed. There was no sequential number on the receipts. The demographics were vague. In 2003, the majority of the receipts 62 viewed did not have a customer name, address, or signature of receiving officer. An un-cashed check dated from a previous year was found in the box of the receipt books. Respondent agrees with the finding. •
F2:
Currently, there is no accounting policy at Merced College. Respondent agrees with the finding with respect to the police and security department. •
F3:
Inappropriate corrections were made on police employee’s time cards. Employees were instructed to use compensatory time during the week following that in which it was earned. The respondent disagrees with the finding on the basis of lack of information. • Nonetheless, all MC Police Department employees will be instructed as to proper • procedure for completion and changes on employee time cards. Employees will indicate prior to accruing overtime if that time will be taken as compensatory time.
F4:
The police department had access to Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service (DRMS). This service offers military excess equipment at no cost. This equipment includes various items such as riot gear, all weather clothing, gas masks, and body armor. There is no policy regarding this equipment nor who has access to it. Many items were assigned to employees. There is no tracking system in place for retrieving equipment once an employee has left the department. Respondent agrees with the finding. •
F5:
Employees were removing DRMS equipment from the college premises with and without permission. The respondent disagrees with the finding on the basis of lack of information. • However, proper procedure for removing equipment from college premises will be • reviewed with all department employees.
F6:
DRMS equipment is stored in an old trailer that is rusted, packed beyond capacity, and unprotected from the elements. The current storage situation is unsafe for employees to access equipment. There are tents that are being stored outside completely exposed. Lack of use and maintenance is causing the equipment to deteriorate. Respondent agrees with the finding. •
F7:
Merced College police are not authorized to issue moving violations at this time. They continue to issue parking citations. Respondent agrees with the finding. •
F8:
There has been inadequate supervision and support for the employees of the Merced College Police Department for a variety of reasons. In the past, the MC Police Department staff did not believe they had effective communication with supervisors, management and administration. Respondent agrees with the finding. •
F9:
Extra help employees are not issued parking permits. They must pay the $1 daily fee or the $20 semester fee to park their automobiles. Respondent agrees with the finding.
F10:
Recommendation: Dr. Johnson should report verbally and in writing to the Board of Trustees monthly regarding the progress at the MC Police Department. The recommendation requires further analysis. • The Board will determine who is responsible for progress reports as appropriate within • six months.
F11:
Recommendation: Extra help employees should be issued parking permits on a semester basis. This alleviates the need for them to pay the daily or semester parking fee. The recommendation requires further analysis. • The district will review this issue and take appropriate action within six months. • Grand Jury Follow-up: There was little information given as to the type of analysis needed in order to implement the
Additional Recommendations
12
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
CHW needs to work on its’ customer service in ER, marketing and the appearance of the present facilities.
R2:
Physicians need to understand the county’s financial position and work for a better tomorrow.
R3:
Greater community involvement.
R4:
The County needs to help educate IHCP (MAP) clients better so they might utilize clinics instead of the ER in non emergency cases.
R5:
This writer concurs with the information in Finding Five.
R6:
Finding Six notes that the “west wing was built in 1984 and is the most up to date.” As clarification the most recently built and up to date wing would be south wing II. Relative to the other three wings (south I, east and west) all have up to two rooms with toilets, however the other rooms without toilet or sinks require that minors be taken to a central restroom facility. This will not be the case in the new facility where each room has a toilet, sink and drinking fountain.
R7:
This writer concurs with the information in Finding Seven.
R8:
The information contained in Finding Eight is accurate.
R9:
This writer concurs with the information in Finding Nine.
R10:
This writer concurs with the information in Finding Ten.
R11:
This writer is convinced and hopes the information in Finding Eleven will prove to be true. Only operation of the new facility will bear this finding out. Recommendations
R04-03:
& 03-04-02 The Grand Jury made recommendations for the County Executive Officer to avoid excess waste and for the Board of Supervisors to ensure their travel is necessary and justifiable and to keep in mind that they are elected officials whose job is to serve the people of Merced County. The County Executive Officer responded to the Grand Jury recommendations. The Board of Supervisors remains committed to preserving the County’s stability by ensuring that all spending is appropriate and that unnecessary waste is avoided. Board members will continue to be fiscally responsible by evaluating the necessity of all travel and always keep in mind their role in serving their constituents when discussing and making decisions that affect the County. In addition, The Grand Jury also investigated the closing of the Central Duplicating department and their findings reported that there was justification in closing the department. The Board concurs with the findings of the Grand Jury that the closing of the department was necessary. The Board appreciates the Grand Jury’s commendation to County employees for their efforts to ensure appropriate expenditures within their departments. HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY – COMPLAINTS 03-04-09 & 02-03-08 51
Findings & Recommendations
11 findings
F1:
Merced College Police Department collected money for fingerprinting. There was no proper documentation regarding receipts of money, which led to an unclear audit trail. There was no consistent use of the receipt books. In 2000, the police department used three-part receipts with six digit sequential numbers. The receipts contained the customer’s name and address. The badge number or employee number of the officer was indicated. The receipts were dated with quantity and total charges. During 2001 and 2002, the receipt books changed. There was no sequential number on the receipts. The demographics were vague. In 2003, the majority of the receipts 62 viewed did not have a customer name, address, or signature of receiving officer. An un-cashed check dated from a previous year was found in the box of the receipt books. Respondent agrees with the finding. •
F2:
Currently, there is no accounting policy at Merced College. Respondent agrees with the finding with respect to the police and security department. •
F3:
Inappropriate corrections were made on police employee’s time cards. Employees were instructed to use compensatory time during the week following that in which it was earned. The respondent disagrees with the finding on the basis of lack of information. • Nonetheless, all MC Police Department employees will be instructed as to proper • procedure for completion and changes on employee time cards. Employees will indicate prior to accruing overtime if that time will be taken as compensatory time.
F4:
The police department had access to Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service (DRMS). This service offers military excess equipment at no cost. This equipment includes various items such as riot gear, all weather clothing, gas masks, and body armor. There is no policy regarding this equipment nor who has access to it. Many items were assigned to employees. There is no tracking system in place for retrieving equipment once an employee has left the department. Respondent agrees with the finding. •
F5:
Employees were removing DRMS equipment from the college premises with and without permission. The respondent disagrees with the finding on the basis of lack of information. • However, proper procedure for removing equipment from college premises will be • reviewed with all department employees.
F6:
DRMS equipment is stored in an old trailer that is rusted, packed beyond capacity, and unprotected from the elements. The current storage situation is unsafe for employees to access equipment. There are tents that are being stored outside completely exposed. Lack of use and maintenance is causing the equipment to deteriorate. Respondent agrees with the finding. •
F7:
Merced College police are not authorized to issue moving violations at this time. They continue to issue parking citations. Respondent agrees with the finding. •
F8:
There has been inadequate supervision and support for the employees of the Merced College Police Department for a variety of reasons. In the past, the MC Police Department staff did not believe they had effective communication with supervisors, management and administration. Respondent agrees with the finding. •
F9:
Extra help employees are not issued parking permits. They must pay the $1 daily fee or the $20 semester fee to park their automobiles. Respondent agrees with the finding.
F10:
Recommendation: Dr. Johnson should report verbally and in writing to the Board of Trustees monthly regarding the progress at the MC Police Department. The recommendation requires further analysis. • The Board will determine who is responsible for progress reports as appropriate within • six months.
F11:
Recommendation: Extra help employees should be issued parking permits on a semester basis. This alleviates the need for them to pay the daily or semester parking fee. The recommendation requires further analysis. • The district will review this issue and take appropriate action within six months. • Grand Jury Follow-up: There was little information given as to the type of analysis needed in order to implement the
Additional Recommendations
12
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
CHW needs to work on its’ customer service in ER, marketing and the appearance of the present facilities.
R2:
Physicians need to understand the county’s financial position and work for a better tomorrow.
R3:
Greater community involvement.
R4:
The County needs to help educate IHCP (MAP) clients better so they might utilize clinics instead of the ER in non emergency cases.
R5:
This writer concurs with the information in Finding Five.
R6:
Finding Six notes that the “west wing was built in 1984 and is the most up to date.” As clarification the most recently built and up to date wing would be south wing II. Relative to the other three wings (south I, east and west) all have up to two rooms with toilets, however the other rooms without toilet or sinks require that minors be taken to a central restroom facility. This will not be the case in the new facility where each room has a toilet, sink and drinking fountain.
R7:
This writer concurs with the information in Finding Seven.
R8:
The information contained in Finding Eight is accurate.
R9:
This writer concurs with the information in Finding Nine.
R10:
This writer concurs with the information in Finding Ten.
R11:
This writer is convinced and hopes the information in Finding Eleven will prove to be true. Only operation of the new facility will bear this finding out. Recommendations
R04-03:
& 03-04-02 The Grand Jury made recommendations for the County Executive Officer to avoid excess waste and for the Board of Supervisors to ensure their travel is necessary and justifiable and to keep in mind that they are elected officials whose job is to serve the people of Merced County. The County Executive Officer responded to the Grand Jury recommendations. The Board of Supervisors remains committed to preserving the County’s stability by ensuring that all spending is appropriate and that unnecessary waste is avoided. Board members will continue to be fiscally responsible by evaluating the necessity of all travel and always keep in mind their role in serving their constituents when discussing and making decisions that affect the County. In addition, The Grand Jury also investigated the closing of the Central Duplicating department and their findings reported that there was justification in closing the department. The Board concurs with the findings of the Grand Jury that the closing of the department was necessary. The Board appreciates the Grand Jury’s commendation to County employees for their efforts to ensure appropriate expenditures within their departments. HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY – COMPLAINTS 03-04-09 & 02-03-08 51
Findings & Recommendations
11 findings
F1:
CHW needs to work on its’ customer service in ER, marketing and the appearance of the present facilities.
F2:
Physicians need to understand the county’s financial position and work for a better tomorrow.
F3:
Greater community involvement.
F4:
The County needs to help educate IHCP (MAP) clients better so they might utilize clinics instead of the ER in non emergency cases.
F5:
Employees were removing DRMS equipment from the college premises with and without permission. The respondent disagrees with the finding on the basis of lack of information. • However, proper procedure for removing equipment from college premises will be • reviewed with all department employees.
F6:
DRMS equipment is stored in an old trailer that is rusted, packed beyond capacity, and unprotected from the elements. The current storage situation is unsafe for employees to access equipment. There are tents that are being stored outside completely exposed. Lack of use and maintenance is causing the equipment to deteriorate. Respondent agrees with the finding. •
F7:
Merced College police are not authorized to issue moving violations at this time. They continue to issue parking citations. Respondent agrees with the finding. •
F8:
There has been inadequate supervision and support for the employees of the Merced College Police Department for a variety of reasons. In the past, the MC Police Department staff did not believe they had effective communication with supervisors, management and administration. Respondent agrees with the finding. •
F9:
Extra help employees are not issued parking permits. They must pay the $1 daily fee or the $20 semester fee to park their automobiles. Respondent agrees with the finding.
F10:
Recommendation: Dr. Johnson should report verbally and in writing to the Board of Trustees monthly regarding the progress at the MC Police Department. The recommendation requires further analysis. • The Board will determine who is responsible for progress reports as appropriate within • six months.
F11:
Recommendation: Extra help employees should be issued parking permits on a semester basis. This alleviates the need for them to pay the daily or semester parking fee. The recommendation requires further analysis. • The district will review this issue and take appropriate action within six months. • Grand Jury Follow-up: There was little information given as to the type of analysis needed in order to implement the
Additional Recommendations
12
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
CHW needs to work on its’ customer service in ER, marketing and the appearance of the present facilities.
R2:
Physicians need to understand the county’s financial position and work for a better tomorrow.
R3:
Greater community involvement.
R4:
The County needs to help educate IHCP (MAP) clients better so they might utilize clinics instead of the ER in non emergency cases.
R5:
This writer concurs with the information in Finding Five.
R6:
Finding Six notes that the “west wing was built in 1984 and is the most up to date.” As clarification the most recently built and up to date wing would be south wing II. Relative to the other three wings (south I, east and west) all have up to two rooms with toilets, however the other rooms without toilet or sinks require that minors be taken to a central restroom facility. This will not be the case in the new facility where each room has a toilet, sink and drinking fountain.
R7:
This writer concurs with the information in Finding Seven.
R8:
The information contained in Finding Eight is accurate.
R9:
This writer concurs with the information in Finding Nine.
R10:
This writer concurs with the information in Finding Ten.
R11:
This writer is convinced and hopes the information in Finding Eleven will prove to be true. Only operation of the new facility will bear this finding out. Recommendations
R04-03:
& 03-04-02 The Grand Jury made recommendations for the County Executive Officer to avoid excess waste and for the Board of Supervisors to ensure their travel is necessary and justifiable and to keep in mind that they are elected officials whose job is to serve the people of Merced County. The County Executive Officer responded to the Grand Jury recommendations. The Board of Supervisors remains committed to preserving the County’s stability by ensuring that all spending is appropriate and that unnecessary waste is avoided. Board members will continue to be fiscally responsible by evaluating the necessity of all travel and always keep in mind their role in serving their constituents when discussing and making decisions that affect the County. In addition, The Grand Jury also investigated the closing of the Central Duplicating department and their findings reported that there was justification in closing the department. The Board concurs with the findings of the Grand Jury that the closing of the department was necessary. The Board appreciates the Grand Jury’s commendation to County employees for their efforts to ensure appropriate expenditures within their departments. HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY – COMPLAINTS 03-04-09 & 02-03-08 51 The Grand Jury made recommendations that Child Welfare Services comply with the mandated rates for foster families, that proper monitoring is provided to ensure the appropriate use of funds, that more people be employed to improve response times, that a training be hosted to include various mandated reporters, that communication be facilitated between their agency and mandated reporters, and that school districts are provided assistance in scheduling and providing training to mandated reporters on a yearly basis. The Human Services Agency has responded to the recommendations. Child welfare and safety is a priority of the Board. The Board supports the agency’s efforts in advocating for a different state rate payment schedule. Agency staff training will include guidelines for various checks to ensure physical and material needs are met. In addition, on June 11, 2004, the Board approved the addition of nine employees to the Child Welfare division to provide better response to the community. A number of other measures are being taken by the Human Services Agency which includes taking the lead role in facilitating and sponsoring a children’s summit, publishing and distributing a booklet on sexual abuse, developing a program to improve communication and education regarding the issue of sexual abuse, working with Mental Health to develop a therapeutic foster parent program, working with the Foster Parent Association to improve relations and boost recruitment efforts, meeting with law enforcement officials for cross training of staff, and meeting with the educational community to improve collaborative efforts. Due to laws governing confidentially of some child welfare information, all information cannot be communicated and thus staff may sometimes appear unresponsive. Although many responses have been via telephone, staff now responds in writing in order that proper documentation is available. Although the employer of record is the entity responsible for training their own mandated reporters, the Board encourages Human Services Agency to assist school, where feasible, with appropriate training and assessments for mandated reporters. The Board appreciates the Grand Jury’s commendation to the Child Welfare Services for developing a Human Services Agency Profile 2003/2004, for providing training to teachers at the school sites and for sponsoring and participating in the Merced County Children’s Summit. OTHER ISSUES Under the section relating to various other concerns of the Grand Jury, several recommendations were put forth that would save time, money, and better assist the Grand Jury in their duties. The recommendations included modifying the Merced County Grand Jury website to present important information to potential Grand Jury applicants, advertising in local newspapers to increase public awareness and to provide an avenue for prospective Grand Jurors to apply, to obtain a dedicated space to create and house essential handbooks, training manuals, policies and procedures of various county departments, past Grand Jury reports, and other resources, to facilitate a dedicated phone line and email address to improve the public’s communications with the Grand Jury, to update all the forms used by the Grand Jury and provide the forms on the Merced County Grand Jury website for download, and to increase the budget allocation for printing and distributing the final report. The Board of Supervisors is committed to ensuring that the Grand Jury is provided with the resources necessary to effectively perform their duties. To improve accessibility, the Information Systems Department has created an e-mail address specifically for use by the Grand Jury, has made available various new forms and the 2002/2003 and 2003/2004 Grand Jury Reports on the Merced County website, and has provided the Grand Jury Foreperson with a cellular phone. Grand Jury Follow-up: Grand Jury accepts the response. MERCED COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT SANDY MUSH CORRECTION FACILITY MANDATED INSPECTION Grand Jury recommendation: The Sheriff should work with the Board of Supervisors to have additional funds allocated for operational expenses. The Grand Jury recognizes that there are County-wide budgetary concerns, but the Sheriff and the Board should exercise diligence and creativity in pursuing alternate funding sources, including seeking federal, state, and private grants. Overcrowding has peaked to a crisis level. It is beyond our comprehension that ill inmates are sleeping on the floor while others are sleeping in the shower. A committee should be formed to generate a plan to build on to the existing facility and finance the project. Staffing should be a priority. Many concerns could be resolved if there was sufficient staff. Adequate staff, including female correctional officers, should be hired and maintained to avoid any further staffing crises. A portion of the funds expended to pay overtime could be used to cover the cost of additional employees. Another officer should be assigned to the work furlough program to assist with onsite supervision. The employer should not be solely responsible for the supervision of the furloughed inmates. There should be a more secured area for prisoner visitation. All panels on cell doors in the maximum-security area should be repaired or replaced. Random cell searches should be routinely conducted. A camera should be installed at or near the intercom just outside of the entrance. This will allow the staff inside the facility to view visitors at all times before entry. There is an existing camera monitoring visitors near the entrance. Once they enter the foyer, staff cannot see them. They can only be heard through the intercom. Bulletproof glass should be installed between the reception area and the receiving officer. A law library should be considered, because the new Juvenile Hall facility will be opening soon, where court sessions will be conducted. The Board of Supervisors should make annual visits to the facility. The Sheriff should conduct monthly staff meetings with the correctional officers at the facility. Commendations: Management and staff showed great concern in regards to the existing problems they face on a daily basis. Many employees work countless hours of overtime to meet the demands of staffing levels. The facility maintains a clean environment. Even with staffing issues and overcrowding, the facility works hard at maintaining organization. Response: Grand Jury Follow-up: MERCED COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER Mandated Inspection Grand Jury recommendation: Vocational Training needs to be incorporated into the curriculum. Demolish the current facility. It is outdated and would cost a considerable sum to refurbish. Commendations: The Chief Probation Officer and Division Manager have educational credentials appropriate for their positions. The department functions well even at minimal state staffing levels. Several members of the Grand Jury attended the grand opening of the new facility. The department is commended for making the construction of such a wonderful facility a priority and for completing it in a timely manner. Response: Contained within the Grand Jury’s Report is a section on the mandated inspection of the Merced County Juvenile Detention Center, otherwise known as the Juvenile Hall. That report contains eight “Findings”, relative to the current Juvenile Hall, eleven “Findings”, relative to the new Iris Garrett Juvenile Justice Correctional Complex, and two “Recommendations”. Following is this Department’s response to these “Findings” and “Recommendations”, as required pursuant to sections 933 and 933.05 of the California Penal Code. Below, each of the “Findings” relative to the current and new facility will be responded to in the order in which they were presented in the Grand Jury’s Report with comment on the two “Recommendations” made by the Grand Jury. AT the outset of the report it is mentioned that juveniles are under the age of 18 and are classified as “status offenders”. This in part is true in that being under the age of 18 gives them the status of juveniles. However, Probation Departments, when referring to status offenders are usually referring to Welfare and Institutions Code section 601 minors who are described as runaways, out-of-control or truant minors. By virtue of this description there status imparts their crime and if they were adults they could not be in charged with any wrong doing. Findings – Juvenile Hall 1. Finding One, is accurate with reference to the current facility and it’s condition. 2. As clarification to Finding Two, it is important to note the rated capacity of 42 for the Juvenile Hall is set by the State board of Corrections. The maximum capacity of 50 was set by this writer in consultation with the Superior Court Judges and takes into account the safety of both 54 the employees who work at the facility, the minors incarcerated therein, and the requirements set forth in the California Administrative Code. The staffing ratios are correct at noted. 3. Finding Three is accurate relative to minors going through the court process. It is also correct that most youngsters serve only one third of any court ordered commitment at the facility, the remaining two thirds of the commitment is served at home on an electronic monitoring program or in an alternative program. 4. This writer concurs with the information in Finding Four. 5. This writer concurs with the information in Finding Five. 6. Finding Six notes that the “west wing was built in 1984 and is the most up to date.” As clarification the most recently built and up to date wing would be south wing II. Relative to the other three wings (south I, east and west) all have up to two rooms with toilets, however the other rooms without toilet or sinks require that minors be taken to a central restroom facility. This will not be the case in the new facility where each room has a toilet, sink and drinking fountain. 7. This writer concurs with the information in Finding Seven. 8. The information contained in Finding Eight is accurate. Findings – Iris Garrett Juvenile Justice Correctional Complex 1. Relative to Finding One it should be noted the total cost for the new Iris Garrett Juvenile Justice Correctional Complex was $23 million which included planning, assessments, Architectural fees, Engineering fees, Construction Management fees and the cost of actual construction. 2. As clarification to Finding Two, the new facility comprises 58300 square feet contained within three buildings. In addition, the “booking area” for law enforcement officers is not located off the main entrance, but in a secure location on the western side of the Administration/Intake building. 3. This writer concurs with the information in Finding Three. 4. This writer concurs with the information in Finding Four. 5. Finding Five refers to “10 self-contained living units”. There are in fact eight self contained living units or “pods”. Other information in this finding is accurate. 6. The information is correct in Finding Six. In addition, it should be noted this same area will provide parking for the Juvenile Court Commissioner and the entrance and area of delivery for minors being admitted to the facility by law enforcement officers. 7. This writer concurs with the information in Finding Seven. 8. At the time of the Grand Jury’s inspection the information in Finding Eight was accurate. However, as of this writing the dates for occupying and opening this new facility have changed. The Department took possession of the new facility on June 7, 2004, for the purposes of furniture set up. On June 21, 2004, the Department was given authorization to begin using the facility to conduct training, and therefore, the first week long training session with employees began. Those training sessions have been taking place every week since that date. It appears all is in order for the facility to begin operating in mid August 2004. At that time the Administration/Intake and first residential living unit will open for the purpose of holding youngsters in detention while they go through the Juvenile Court process. This residential living unit is rated by the Board of Corrections to hold 60 minors n detention. In January of 2005, it is now anticipated the first 30rooms of the second residential living unit will be opened and staffed allowing for minors to serve time on court ordered commitments and to provide the beginning for the new R.E.T.U.R.N. commitment program. This program will be aimed at youngsters who need time away from the community in order to restructure their lives before being released to attempt to live a delinquency free lifestyle. This program will be evaluated and adjusted to respond to the minors committed to it over the first six to nine months of its trial period. In September of 2005, it is anticipated this program will go fully operational. This will mean that the last 30 rooms in the second residential living unit will open bringing that building to a rated capacity of 60 rooms of which 15 will be used for short court ordered commitments and 45 will be used for the R.E.T.U.R.N. program. When fully operational the facility will house up to 120 minors. 9. This writer concurs with the information in Finding Nine. 10. This writer concurs with the information in Finding Ten. 11. This writer is convinced and hopes the information in Finding Eleven will prove to be true. Only operation of the new facility will bear this finding out. Recommendations 1. The information contained in Recommendation One has been forwarded on to the Director of the school program for the new facility. Planning for vocation education has been in the planning stages for some months with a component to hopefully allow practical application of the skills learned. 2. The disposition of the current facility will be made by the Board of Supervisors. Once all functions of the current facility are moved to the new Iris Garrett Juvenile Justice Correction Complex this Department will no longer occupy, operate or maintain the facility. Cc: Deidre Kelsey, Chairperson, Merced County Board of Supervisors Demitrios Tatum, County Executive Officer James Brown, Assistant County Executive Officer Grand Jury Follow-up: Grand Jury accepts the response. Merced County Human Resources Complaint # 03-04-14 Grand Jury recommendation: The Grand Jury recommends that applicants be informed that all questions will be rated equally. The Grand Jury recommends that Resolution # 91-32 be revised by the end of Fiscal Year 2005. Commendations: The Grand Jury commends the employees of the Department of Human Resources for their assistance and cooperation during this investigation. The Grand Jury commends Stephen Jones for supplying us with all requested documents in a timely manner. Response: Human Resources completed a review of the Merced County 2003-2004 Grand Jury Report and in response to the findings and recommendations for Complaint #03-04-14 are the following comments.
Findings & Recommendations
29 findings
F1:
Before the tour of the facility began, we were given a quick presentation by Officer Blodgett regarding the Work Release Program. He presented a graph that demonstrated a savings to the County of almost $3 million from the efforts of 180 work-in-lieu participants.
F2:
Officer Griffith gave a quick oral overview of the Home Arrest Program and how the detained are tracked with a Global Positioning System (GPS) and the Internet. The Home Arrest Program saved the County $320,000 the first year.
F3:
The ratio of correctional officers to inmates is critically low. Currently, on any given shift, there are at least six, but no more than seven correctional officers on the grounds. The facility houses 514 inmates (full capacity) on a consistent basis. A large percentage of these inmates are charged with serious and violent felonies. The low staffing levels are at issue due to the danger both to the staff and the inmates.
F4:
There is a grave shortage of correctional officers, particularly females. There must be a female officer on duty at all times. Because of this shortage, female officers are regularly denied requests for time off, which is essential in this high-stress position. The mental health of all officers are affected. 11
F5:
There is excessive overtime due to the staff shortages.
F6:
The facility operates at maximum capacity throughout the year. Annually, hundreds of inmates are released prematurely to allow space for incoming inmates to be housed.
F7:
There is no library available for inmate use. The former library is currently under renovation to be converted into a dorm to house more prisoners.
F8:
The Sheriff does not consistently visit the facility to meet with all levels of personnel.
F9:
The staff are not adequately prepared or equipped to house inmates with varying degrees of mental illness.
F10:
The 2003-2004 Grand Jury recommendation to install bullet proof glass between the reception area and the receiving officer was not implemented.
F11:
There are no correctional officers in the kitchen while the inmates are preparing meals. The cook who oversees the process is not qualified to supervise inmates who have access to knives and other dangerous implements.
F12:
The complex is a state of the art facility. It is projected to be fully operational in October 2005.
F13:
The Department hired Brian Cooley as the new chief. An assistant chief position was created. The position of Division Director was vacant and had not been filled.
F14:
The new facility will house 120 juvenile offenders and the county is committee to having them serve the full sentence. 13
F15:
A total of 74 full-time staff are anticipated when the facility becomes fully operational. There is one full-time correctional officer for every ten juveniles during the day and evening shifts. There is one correctional officer on duty for every 30 juveniles during the graveyard shift, 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.
F16:
There are three buildings that consist of approximately 40,000 square feet. One building house administrative functions. The other two house juvenile inmates. The main entrance has a metal detector and booking area. There is a control center manned 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, with bulletproof glass.
F17:
There are four wings with 10 cells per wing in each building. The cells are furnished with two beds, a sink and toilet. Each wing has a separate classroom. The Merced County Office of Education provides a vice-principal, teachers, and curriculum for the students. Teachers rotate among the classrooms to provide specific subject area instruction.
F18:
The facility also includes a medical examination room and a nurses station where pharmaceuticals can be dispensed.
F19:
There is a “state of the art” courtroom complete with computers and closed circuit TVs, clerks’ officers, and judge’s chambers. The average number of cases presided over each day ranges from 45 to 50. Hearings are conducted on a daily basis.
F20:
Juveniles are detained while awaiting sentencing, which takes approximately 14 days.
F21:
At any given time, there are approximately 37 juveniles waiting to serve their sentences. This is a vast improvement over last year when there were 100 cases at any given time. Juveniles are segregated by their gang affiliation, gender, and the seriousness of their transgressions.
F22:
A quarter mile track serves as the main recreation areas. There are also covered basketball courts to allow for exercise during inclement weather.
F23:
The Division Manager has completed a new procedural manual for the facility staff.
F24:
The Law and Justice Committee found that the complaint had merit. 16
F25:
The complainant called and complained to a Sergeant, but did not file a formal complaint under Section 1020 with the police department.
F26:
The Merced Police Department has no written uniform policy and procedures to address the removal of a child from a home.
F27:
Not all incidents had reports filed.
F28:
There was no court order awarding custody to either parent at the time of removal.
F29:
The officer’s actions in the removal of the child were not erroneous.
Additional Recommendations
12
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
CHW needs to work on its’ customer service in ER, marketing and the appearance of the present facilities.
R2:
Physicians need to understand the county’s financial position and work for a better tomorrow.
R3:
Greater community involvement.
R4:
The County needs to help educate IHCP (MAP) clients better so they might utilize clinics instead of the ER in non emergency cases.
R5:
This writer concurs with the information in Finding Five.
R6:
Finding Six notes that the “west wing was built in 1984 and is the most up to date.” As clarification the most recently built and up to date wing would be south wing II. Relative to the other three wings (south I, east and west) all have up to two rooms with toilets, however the other rooms without toilet or sinks require that minors be taken to a central restroom facility. This will not be the case in the new facility where each room has a toilet, sink and drinking fountain.
R7:
This writer concurs with the information in Finding Seven.
R8:
The information contained in Finding Eight is accurate.
R9:
This writer concurs with the information in Finding Nine.
R10:
This writer concurs with the information in Finding Ten.
R11:
This writer is convinced and hopes the information in Finding Eleven will prove to be true. Only operation of the new facility will bear this finding out. Recommendations
R04-03:
& 03-04-02 The Grand Jury made recommendations for the County Executive Officer to avoid excess waste and for the Board of Supervisors to ensure their travel is necessary and justifiable and to keep in mind that they are elected officials whose job is to serve the people of Merced County. The County Executive Officer responded to the Grand Jury recommendations. The Board of Supervisors remains committed to preserving the County’s stability by ensuring that all spending is appropriate and that unnecessary waste is avoided. Board members will continue to be fiscally responsible by evaluating the necessity of all travel and always keep in mind their role in serving their constituents when discussing and making decisions that affect the County. In addition, The Grand Jury also investigated the closing of the Central Duplicating department and their findings reported that there was justification in closing the department. The Board concurs with the findings of the Grand Jury that the closing of the department was necessary. The Board appreciates the Grand Jury’s commendation to County employees for their efforts to ensure appropriate expenditures within their departments. HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY – COMPLAINTS 03-04-09 & 02-03-08 51 The Grand Jury made recommendations that Child Welfare Services comply with the mandated rates for foster families, that proper monitoring is provided to ensure the appropriate use of funds, that more people be employed to improve response times, that a training be hosted to include various mandated reporters, that communication be facilitated between their agency and mandated reporters, and that school districts are provided assistance in scheduling and providing training to mandated reporters on a yearly basis. The Human Services Agency has responded to the recommendations. Child welfare and safety is a priority of the Board. The Board supports the agency’s efforts in advocating for a different state rate payment schedule. Agency staff training will include guidelines for various checks to ensure physical and material needs are met. In addition, on June 11, 2004, the Board approved the addition of nine employees to the Child Welfare division to provide better response to the community. A number of other measures are being taken by the Human Services Agency which includes taking the lead role in facilitating and sponsoring a children’s summit, publishing and distributing a booklet on sexual abuse, developing a program to improve communication and education regarding the issue of sexual abuse, working with Mental Health to develop a therapeutic foster parent program, working with the Foster Parent Association to improve relations and boost recruitment efforts, meeting with law enforcement officials for cross training of staff, and meeting with the educational community to improve collaborative efforts. Due to laws governing confidentially of some child welfare information, all information cannot be communicated and thus staff may sometimes appear unresponsive. Although many responses have been via telephone, staff now responds in writing in order that proper documentation is available. Although the employer of record is the entity responsible for training their own mandated reporters, the Board encourages Human Services Agency to assist school, where feasible, with appropriate training and assessments for mandated reporters. The Board appreciates the Grand Jury’s commendation to the Child Welfare Services for developing a Human Services Agency Profile 2003/2004, for providing training to teachers at the school sites and for sponsoring and participating in the Merced County Children’s Summit. OTHER ISSUES Under the section relating to various other concerns of the Grand Jury, several recommendations were put forth that would save time, money, and better assist the Grand Jury in their duties. The recommendations included modifying the Merced County Grand Jury website to present important information to potential Grand Jury applicants, advertising in local newspapers to increase public awareness and to provide an avenue for prospective Grand Jurors to apply, to obtain a dedicated space to create and house essential handbooks, training manuals, policies and procedures of various county departments, past Grand Jury reports, and other resources, to facilitate a dedicated phone line and email address to improve the public’s communications with the Grand Jury, to update all the forms used by the Grand Jury and provide the forms on the Merced County Grand Jury website for download, and to increase the budget allocation for printing and distributing the final report. The Board of Supervisors is committed to ensuring that the Grand Jury is provided with the resources necessary to effectively perform their duties. To improve accessibility, the Information Systems Department has created an e-mail address specifically for use by the Grand Jury, has made available various new forms and the 2002/2003 and 2003/2004 Grand Jury Reports on the Merced County website, and has provided the Grand Jury Foreperson with a cellular phone. Grand Jury Follow-up: Grand Jury accepts the response. MERCED COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT SANDY MUSH CORRECTION FACILITY MANDATED INSPECTION Grand Jury recommendation: The Sheriff should work with the Board of Supervisors to have additional funds allocated for operational expenses. The Grand Jury recognizes that there are County-wide budgetary concerns, but the Sheriff and the Board should exercise diligence and creativity in pursuing alternate funding sources, including seeking federal, state, and private grants. Overcrowding has peaked to a crisis level. It is beyond our comprehension that ill inmates are sleeping on the floor while others are sleeping in the shower. A committee should be formed to generate a plan to build on to the existing facility and finance the project. Staffing should be a priority. Many concerns could be resolved if there was sufficient staff. Adequate staff, including female correctional officers, should be hired and maintained to avoid any further staffing crises. A portion of the funds expended to pay overtime could be used to cover the cost of additional employees. Another officer should be assigned to the work furlough program to assist with onsite supervision. The employer should not be solely responsible for the supervision of the furloughed inmates. There should be a more secured area for prisoner visitation. All panels on cell doors in the maximum-security area should be repaired or replaced. Random cell searches should be routinely conducted. A camera should be installed at or near the intercom just outside of the entrance. This will allow the staff inside the facility to view visitors at all times before entry. There is an existing camera monitoring visitors near the entrance. Once they enter the foyer, staff cannot see them. They can only be heard through the intercom. Bulletproof glass should be installed between the reception area and the receiving officer. A law library should be considered, because the new Juvenile Hall facility will be opening soon, where court sessions will be conducted. The Board of Supervisors should make annual visits to the facility. The Sheriff should conduct monthly staff meetings with the correctional officers at the facility. Commendations: Management and staff showed great concern in regards to the existing problems they face on a daily basis. Many employees work countless hours of overtime to meet the demands of staffing levels. The facility maintains a clean environment. Even with staffing issues and overcrowding, the facility works hard at maintaining organization. Response: Grand Jury Follow-up: MERCED COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER Mandated Inspection Grand Jury recommendation: Vocational Training needs to be incorporated into the curriculum. Demolish the current facility. It is outdated and would cost a considerable sum to refurbish. Commendations: The Chief Probation Officer and Division Manager have educational credentials appropriate for their positions. The department functions well even at minimal state staffing levels. Several members of the Grand Jury attended the grand opening of the new facility. The department is commended for making the construction of such a wonderful facility a priority and for completing it in a timely manner. Response: Contained within the Grand Jury’s Report is a section on the mandated inspection of the Merced County Juvenile Detention Center, otherwise known as the Juvenile Hall. That report contains eight “Findings”, relative to the current Juvenile Hall, eleven “Findings”, relative to the new Iris Garrett Juvenile Justice Correctional Complex, and two “Recommendations”. Following is this Department’s response to these “Findings” and “Recommendations”, as required pursuant to sections 933 and 933.05 of the California Penal Code. Below, each of the “Findings” relative to the current and new facility will be responded to in the order in which they were presented in the Grand Jury’s Report with comment on the two “Recommendations” made by the Grand Jury. AT the outset of the report it is mentioned that juveniles are under the age of 18 and are classified as “status offenders”. This in part is true in that being under the age of 18 gives them the status of juveniles. However, Probation Departments, when referring to status offenders are usually referring to Welfare and Institutions Code section 601 minors who are described as runaways, out-of-control or truant minors. By virtue of this description there status imparts their crime and if they were adults they could not be in charged with any wrong doing. Findings – Juvenile Hall 1. Finding One, is accurate with reference to the current facility and it’s condition. 2. As clarification to Finding Two, it is important to note the rated capacity of 42 for the Juvenile Hall is set by the State board of Corrections. The maximum capacity of 50 was set by this writer in consultation with the Superior Court Judges and takes into account the safety of both 54 the employees who work at the facility, the minors incarcerated therein, and the requirements set forth in the California Administrative Code. The staffing ratios are correct at noted. 3. Finding Three is accurate relative to minors going through the court process. It is also correct that most youngsters serve only one third of any court ordered commitment at the facility, the remaining two thirds of the commitment is served at home on an electronic monitoring program or in an alternative program. 4. This writer concurs with the information in Finding Four. 5. This writer concurs with the information in Finding Five. 6. Finding Six notes that the “west wing was built in 1984 and is the most up to date.” As clarification the most recently built and up to date wing would be south wing II. Relative to the other three wings (south I, east and west) all have up to two rooms with toilets, however the other rooms without toilet or sinks require that minors be taken to a central restroom facility. This will not be the case in the new facility where each room has a toilet, sink and drinking fountain. 7. This writer concurs with the information in Finding Seven. 8. The information contained in Finding Eight is accurate. Findings – Iris Garrett Juvenile Justice Correctional Complex 1. Relative to Finding One it should be noted the total cost for the new Iris Garrett Juvenile Justice Correctional Complex was $23 million which included planning, assessments, Architectural fees, Engineering fees, Construction Management fees and the cost of actual construction. 2. As clarification to Finding Two, the new facility comprises 58300 square feet contained within three buildings. In addition, the “booking area” for law enforcement officers is not located off the main entrance, but in a secure location on the western side of the Administration/Intake building. 3. This writer concurs with the information in Finding Three. 4. This writer concurs with the information in Finding Four. 5. Finding Five refers to “10 self-contained living units”. There are in fact eight self contained living units or “pods”. Other information in this finding is accurate. 6. The information is correct in Finding Six. In addition, it should be noted this same area will provide parking for the Juvenile Court Commissioner and the entrance and area of delivery for minors being admitted to the facility by law enforcement officers. 7. This writer concurs with the information in Finding Seven. 8. At the time of the Grand Jury’s inspection the information in Finding Eight was accurate. However, as of this writing the dates for occupying and opening this new facility have changed. The Department took possession of the new facility on June 7, 2004, for the purposes of furniture set up. On June 21, 2004, the Department was given authorization to begin using the facility to conduct training, and therefore, the first week long training session with employees began. Those training sessions have been taking place every week since that date. It appears all is in order for the facility to begin operating in mid August 2004. At that time the Administration/Intake and first residential living unit will open for the purpose of holding youngsters in detention while they go through the Juvenile Court process. This residential living unit is rated by the Board of Corrections to hold 60 minors n detention. In January of 2005, it is now anticipated the first 30rooms of the second residential living unit will be opened and staffed allowing for minors to serve time on court ordered commitments and to provide the beginning for the new R.E.T.U.R.N. commitment program. This program will be aimed at youngsters who need time away from the community in order to restructure their lives before being released to attempt to live a delinquency free lifestyle. This program will be evaluated and adjusted to respond to the minors committed to it over the first six to nine months of its trial period. In September of 2005, it is anticipated this program will go fully operational. This will mean that the last 30 rooms in the second residential living unit will open bringing that building to a rated capacity of 60 rooms of which 15 will be used for short court ordered commitments and 45 will be used for the R.E.T.U.R.N. program. When fully operational the facility will house up to 120 minors. 9. This writer concurs with the information in Finding Nine. 10. This writer concurs with the information in Finding Ten. 11. This writer is convinced and hopes the information in Finding Eleven will prove to be true. Only operation of the new facility will bear this finding out. Recommendations 1. The information contained in Recommendation One has been forwarded on to the Director of the school program for the new facility. Planning for vocation education has been in the planning stages for some months with a component to hopefully allow practical application of the skills learned. 2. The disposition of the current facility will be made by the Board of Supervisors. Once all functions of the current facility are moved to the new Iris Garrett Juvenile Justice Correction Complex this Department will no longer occupy, operate or maintain the facility. Cc: Deidre Kelsey, Chairperson, Merced County Board of Supervisors Demitrios Tatum, County Executive Officer James Brown, Assistant County Executive Officer Grand Jury Follow-up: Grand Jury accepts the response. Merced County Human Resources Complaint # 03-04-14 Grand Jury recommendation: The Grand Jury recommends that applicants be informed that all questions will be rated equally. The Grand Jury recommends that Resolution # 91-32 be revised by the end of Fiscal Year 2005. Commendations: The Grand Jury commends the employees of the Department of Human Resources for their assistance and cooperation during this investigation. The Grand Jury commends Stephen Jones for supplying us with all requested documents in a timely manner. Response: Human Resources completed a review of the Merced County 2003-2004 Grand Jury Report and in response to the findings and recommendations for Complaint #03-04-14 are the following comments.
Findings & Recommendations
7 findings
F1:
Atwater’s City Codes: 2:04.060 (City Manager) & 2:08.320 (City Council) each clearly state that City Council members are not to interfere with administrative services, either publicly or privately. They are not to give orders or instruction to any subordinate of the City Manager. A Council Member may give orders to the City Manager only with the knowledge and concurrence of the whole Council. The above-mentioned codes do not state consequences should a Council Member violate these ordinances.
F2:
Atwater City Council meetings are aired live the second and fourth Monday of each month.
F3:
The City of Atwater has a toll free phone number for people to report complaints against city employees. These complaints are reviewed by the appropriate department head.
F4:
Council members violate Atwater City Code 2:08.320 on a consistent basis. There are numerous instances in open City Council meetings alone to verify this. These actions often go unchecked. 34
F5:
Some Council members have tried to interfere in Internal Affairs investigations. This is a violation of California Labor Laws (Cite Law).
F6:
A council member appears to use his authority to settle personal vendettas.
F7:
Furthermore, some council members attempt to manipulate the Council calendar.
Findings & Recommendations
7 findings
F1:
The committee found that the complaint did not have merit. The results of the traffic collision report for the incident did not find either party at fault. The financial hardship and resulting repercussions were not caused by the APD report.
F2:
The committee noted that the complaint filed with the Atwater Police Department was assigned for additional review. The professional opinion of an outside agency was sought within a reasonable time period.
F3:
The committee noted that supplemental reports are made to reflect findings of follow-up. The committee also noted a supplemental report was made.
F4:
The committee was informed that notification of findings relative to a complaint are shared with and/or made available to the complainant.
F5:
The committee established that the Atwater Police Department has an ongoing staff development training program in place to address the needs of the department in their professional and interpersonal growth skills.
F6:
The committee believes that circumstances surrounding the complaint were enhanced by difficulties in language barriers, acknowledgement of receipt of written communication, and an understanding of the complaint process.
F7:
The committee noted that the Atwater Police Department is aware of the continuing needs of the community and strives to accommodate their needs.
Findings & Recommendations
5 findings
F1:
The City of Atwater has an approximate population of 27,500. The department currently has 19 sworn officers, four detectives and four school resource officers who provide service to the community. There are bilingual services provided to the community as needed. Currently two sworn officer positions are vacant.
F2:
The Atwater Police Department has employed an additional traffic officer whose position is funded through annual grants.
F3:
There is an active community volunteer program within the department.
F4:
Although the department has an established complaint procedure and guidelines, it does not have a handout explaining this procedure to the citizenry.
F5:
Thoroughness of investigation is documented in departmental reports.
Additional Recommendations
2
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
The Atwater Police Department should develop a handout addressing the complaint process and procedures, which should be made available in English and other languages as needed.
R2:
Vacancies on the police force should be filled as quickly as possible. 38
Findings & Recommendations
10 findings
F1:
Merced County recruits from the same job pool as every other county in this valley. Without competitive wages, potential employees either do not take the job or leave in a short time for more money. The same circumstance applies to private sector as well as government employees. The six counties Merced uses to compare its salaries are chosen because of their close proximity to the County. They are Fresno, Kings, Kern, Madera, Stanislaus and San Joaquin. This is referred to as the seven-county survey. This survey is also used in determining staff salaries.
F2:
Retirement benefits are received by all county employees after they have been vested, (employed by the County for ten years). A Supervisor would need to serve two and a half terms in order to be vested.
F3:
The current facilities, the John Latorraca Correctional Facility (Sandy Mush) and the Merced County Main Jail, are woefully inadequate to deal with the county’s needs.
F4:
The County does little in the area of adult or juvenile criminal rehabilitation.
F5:
People with mental health issues are housed in the same facilities as other inmates.
F6:
Infrastructure is the biggest obstacle to growth in this County. Infrastructure includes roads, public safety, schools, hospitals, air, water, and sewage.
F7:
An inadequately trained work force is another obstacle to growth. Current agencies in the County attempting to remedy this include the Work Force Investment Board (also known as Work Net) and the Human Services Agency.
F8:
The County is relying on the reuse of Castle Aviation and Development Center to build industry. Merced County Department of Commerce, Aviation, and Economic Development, located at Castle, is charged with that challenge. 36
F9:
The County has adopted the County-wide Agricultural Preservation Strategy (CAPS). This program will create a funding source through mitigation fees that developers will be paying, matched with money from the State and Federal governments, as well as private organizations like the Packard Foundation. These funds will be used as an incentive for people who live in and near the areas being developed to cash out part of the value of their land through this conservation easement.
F10:
Merced County adopted the Williamson Act, which enables local government to enter into contract with private landowners for the purpose of restricting specific parcels of land to agricultural or related open space use. In return, landowners receive property tax assessments which are much lower than normal because they are based upon farming and open space uses as opposed to full market value.
Findings & Recommendations
4 findings
F1:
CHW needs to work on its’ customer service in ER, marketing and the appearance of the present facilities.
F2:
Physicians need to understand the county’s financial position and work for a better tomorrow.
F3:
Greater community involvement.
F4:
The County needs to help educate IHCP (MAP) clients better so they might utilize clinics instead of the ER in non emergency cases.
Additional Recommendations
4
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
CHW needs to work on its’ customer service in ER, marketing and the appearance of the present facilities.
R2:
Physicians need to understand the county’s financial position and work for a better tomorrow.
R3:
Greater community involvement.
R4:
The County needs to help educate IHCP (MAP) clients better so they might utilize clinics instead of the ER in non emergency cases.
Findings & Recommendations
2 findings
F1:
Verbal counseling and complaint on file for five years
F4:
Termination • The complainant receives a letter from the chief of police after the investigation is completed. If the proposed consequences entail a lengthy suspension or termination, the officer may request a Skelly Hearing in accordance with State Personnel Board Rule 52.3. 39
Findings & Recommendations
3 findings
F1:
There was no breach of confidentiality.
F2:
The requested documentation was not received.
F3:
Phone calls were not returned in a timely manner
Findings & Recommendations
11 findings
F1:
Livingston Police Department (LPD) employs 26 people. Eighteen are sworn officers. The population of Livingston is approximately 14,500.
F2:
LPD had a total of 22 complaints in the 2004 calendar year. There are a total of five complaints to date in 2005.
F3:
A complaint is taken by a commander during the day and a sergeant at night. The administrative sergeant will go to complainant’s home to take the complaint if they are afraid to come into the police station.
F4:
The complaint form is clear. The complainant must sign a False Complaint Admonition, which is printed in ten different languages.
F5:
If a complaint is made against someone at the sergeant rank or higher, it is investigated by another agency (e.g., Atwater Police Department, Merced Police Department, etc.).
F6:
The commander reviews the complaint and determines if it becomes a Supervisor Inquiry (SI) or an Internal Affair (IA). He then decides who will investigate the complaint. Most complaints are assigned to the administrative sergeant. All complaints are investigated by a sergeant or above.
F7:
Each step of the process is documented, including transcripts of each interview.
F8:
Once the investigation is completed, the investigator will offer his conclusions to the commander, who will then review the entire file and make a suggestion to the chief of police. The chief then determines the proper steps to take.
F9:
In the event the complaint is determined to be valid the one or more of the following could occur: a. Verbal counseling and complaint placed in the ‘Watch File’ (for SI’s) 41 b. Reduction in Pay c. Reduction in Rank d. Termination
F10:
The complainant receives a letter from the chief of police after the investigation is completed. By law, the chief is not allowed to state the final determination or consequence.
F11:
By state law, (State Personnel Board Rule 52.3) the officer may request a Skelly Hearing if they disagree with the final result of the investigation or its consequence.
Findings & Recommendations
4 findings
F1:
The property was zoned as a multi-family dwelling, but it was the two separate edifices rather than the single building to which the complainant referred.
F2:
The Los Banos Police Department followed correct operating procedures regarding the above mentioned California Penal Codes. 32
F3:
The Los Banos Police Department did not violate the Second, Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments.
F4:
The complaint did not have merit. COMMENDATIONS: The Merced County Grand Jury commends the officers of the Los Banos Police Department for their time, assistance and cooperation during this investigation. The Merced County Grand Jury commends Chief Knapp and Commander Fitchie for supplying the Grand Jury with any and all documents needed in a timely manner. 33
Findings & Recommendations
2 findings
F5:
Verbal counseling and information kept in complaint file
F8:
Termination 43 • The complainant receives a letter from the chief of police after the investigation is completed. By law, (State Personnel Board Rule 52.3) the officer may request a Skelly Hearing if they disagree with the final result of the investigation or its consequences.
Additional Recommendations
12
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
CHW needs to work on its’ customer service in ER, marketing and the appearance of the present facilities.
R2:
Physicians need to understand the county’s financial position and work for a better tomorrow.
R3:
Greater community involvement.
R4:
The County needs to help educate IHCP (MAP) clients better so they might utilize clinics instead of the ER in non emergency cases.
R5:
This writer concurs with the information in Finding Five.
R6:
Finding Six notes that the “west wing was built in 1984 and is the most up to date.” As clarification the most recently built and up to date wing would be south wing II. Relative to the other three wings (south I, east and west) all have up to two rooms with toilets, however the other rooms without toilet or sinks require that minors be taken to a central restroom facility. This will not be the case in the new facility where each room has a toilet, sink and drinking fountain.
R7:
This writer concurs with the information in Finding Seven.
R8:
The information contained in Finding Eight is accurate.
R9:
This writer concurs with the information in Finding Nine.
R10:
This writer concurs with the information in Finding Ten.
R11:
This writer is convinced and hopes the information in Finding Eleven will prove to be true. Only operation of the new facility will bear this finding out. Recommendations
R04-03:
& 03-04-02 The Grand Jury made recommendations for the County Executive Officer to avoid excess waste and for the Board of Supervisors to ensure their travel is necessary and justifiable and to keep in mind that they are elected officials whose job is to serve the people of Merced County. The County Executive Officer responded to the Grand Jury recommendations. The Board of Supervisors remains committed to preserving the County’s stability by ensuring that all spending is appropriate and that unnecessary waste is avoided. Board members will continue to be fiscally responsible by evaluating the necessity of all travel and always keep in mind their role in serving their constituents when discussing and making decisions that affect the County. In addition, The Grand Jury also investigated the closing of the Central Duplicating department and their findings reported that there was justification in closing the department. The Board concurs with the findings of the Grand Jury that the closing of the department was necessary. The Board appreciates the Grand Jury’s commendation to County employees for their efforts to ensure appropriate expenditures within their departments. HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY – COMPLAINTS 03-04-09 & 02-03-08 51 The Grand Jury made recommendations that Child Welfare Services comply with the mandated rates for foster families, that proper monitoring is provided to ensure the appropriate use of funds, that more people be employed to improve response times, that a training be hosted to include various mandated reporters, that communication be facilitated between their agency and mandated reporters, and that school districts are provided assistance in scheduling and providing training to mandated reporters on a yearly basis. The Human Services Agency has responded to the recommendations. Child welfare and safety is a priority of the Board. The Board supports the agency’s efforts in advocating for a different state rate payment schedule. Agency staff training will include guidelines for various checks to ensure physical and material needs are met. In addition, on June 11, 2004, the Board approved the addition of nine employees to the Child Welfare division to provide better response to the community. A number of other measures are being taken by the Human Services Agency which includes taking the lead role in facilitating and sponsoring a children’s summit, publishing and distributing a booklet on sexual abuse, developing a program to improve communication and education regarding the issue of sexual abuse, working with Mental Health to develop a therapeutic foster parent program, working with the Foster Parent Association to improve relations and boost recruitment efforts, meeting with law enforcement officials for cross training of staff, and meeting with the educational community to improve collaborative efforts. Due to laws governing confidentially of some child welfare information, all information cannot be communicated and thus staff may sometimes appear unresponsive. Although many responses have been via telephone, staff now responds in writing in order that proper documentation is available. Although the employer of record is the entity responsible for training their own mandated reporters, the Board encourages Human Services Agency to assist school, where feasible, with appropriate training and assessments for mandated reporters. The Board appreciates the Grand Jury’s commendation to the Child Welfare Services for developing a Human Services Agency Profile 2003/2004, for providing training to teachers at the school sites and for sponsoring and participating in the Merced County Children’s Summit. OTHER ISSUES Under the section relating to various other concerns of the Grand Jury, several recommendations were put forth that would save time, money, and better assist the Grand Jury in their duties. The recommendations included modifying the Merced County Grand Jury website to present important information to potential Grand Jury applicants, advertising in local newspapers to increase public awareness and to provide an avenue for prospective Grand Jurors to apply, to obtain a dedicated space to create and house essential handbooks, training manuals, policies and procedures of various county departments, past Grand Jury reports, and other resources, to facilitate a dedicated phone line and email address to improve the public’s communications with the Grand Jury, to update all the forms used by the Grand Jury and provide the forms on the Merced County Grand Jury website for download, and to increase the budget allocation for printing and distributing the final report. The Board of Supervisors is committed to ensuring that the Grand Jury is provided with the resources necessary to effectively perform their duties. To improve accessibility, the Information Systems Department has created an e-mail address specifically for use by the Grand Jury, has made available various new forms and the 2002/2003 and 2003/2004 Grand Jury Reports on the Merced County website, and has provided the Grand Jury Foreperson with a cellular phone. Grand Jury Follow-up: Grand Jury accepts the response. MERCED COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT SANDY MUSH CORRECTION FACILITY MANDATED INSPECTION Grand Jury recommendation: The Sheriff should work with the Board of Supervisors to have additional funds allocated for operational expenses. The Grand Jury recognizes that there are County-wide budgetary concerns, but the Sheriff and the Board should exercise diligence and creativity in pursuing alternate funding sources, including seeking federal, state, and private grants. Overcrowding has peaked to a crisis level. It is beyond our comprehension that ill inmates are sleeping on the floor while others are sleeping in the shower. A committee should be formed to generate a plan to build on to the existing facility and finance the project. Staffing should be a priority. Many concerns could be resolved if there was sufficient staff. Adequate staff, including female correctional officers, should be hired and maintained to avoid any further staffing crises. A portion of the funds expended to pay overtime could be used to cover the cost of additional employees. Another officer should be assigned to the work furlough program to assist with onsite supervision. The employer should not be solely responsible for the supervision of the furloughed inmates. There should be a more secured area for prisoner visitation. All panels on cell doors in the maximum-security area should be repaired or replaced. Random cell searches should be routinely conducted. A camera should be installed at or near the intercom just outside of the entrance. This will allow the staff inside the facility to view visitors at all times before entry. There is an existing camera monitoring visitors near the entrance. Once they enter the foyer, staff cannot see them. They can only be heard through the intercom. Bulletproof glass should be installed between the reception area and the receiving officer. A law library should be considered, because the new Juvenile Hall facility will be opening soon, where court sessions will be conducted. The Board of Supervisors should make annual visits to the facility. The Sheriff should conduct monthly staff meetings with the correctional officers at the facility. Commendations: Management and staff showed great concern in regards to the existing problems they face on a daily basis. Many employees work countless hours of overtime to meet the demands of staffing levels. The facility maintains a clean environment. Even with staffing issues and overcrowding, the facility works hard at maintaining organization. Response: Grand Jury Follow-up: MERCED COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER Mandated Inspection Grand Jury recommendation: Vocational Training needs to be incorporated into the curriculum. Demolish the current facility. It is outdated and would cost a considerable sum to refurbish. Commendations: The Chief Probation Officer and Division Manager have educational credentials appropriate for their positions. The department functions well even at minimal state staffing levels. Several members of the Grand Jury attended the grand opening of the new facility. The department is commended for making the construction of such a wonderful facility a priority and for completing it in a timely manner. Response: Contained within the Grand Jury’s Report is a section on the mandated inspection of the Merced County Juvenile Detention Center, otherwise known as the Juvenile Hall. That report contains eight “Findings”, relative to the current Juvenile Hall, eleven “Findings”, relative to the new Iris Garrett Juvenile Justice Correctional Complex, and two “Recommendations”. Following is this Department’s response to these “Findings” and “Recommendations”, as required pursuant to sections 933 and 933.05 of the California Penal Code. Below, each of the “Findings” relative to the current and new facility will be responded to in the order in which they were presented in the Grand Jury’s Report with comment on the two “Recommendations” made by the Grand Jury. AT the outset of the report it is mentioned that juveniles are under the age of 18 and are classified as “status offenders”. This in part is true in that being under the age of 18 gives them the status of juveniles. However, Probation Departments, when referring to status offenders are usually referring to Welfare and Institutions Code section 601 minors who are described as runaways, out-of-control or truant minors. By virtue of this description there status imparts their crime and if they were adults they could not be in charged with any wrong doing. Findings – Juvenile Hall 1. Finding One, is accurate with reference to the current facility and it’s condition. 2. As clarification to Finding Two, it is important to note the rated capacity of 42 for the Juvenile Hall is set by the State board of Corrections. The maximum capacity of 50 was set by this writer in consultation with the Superior Court Judges and takes into account the safety of both 54 the employees who work at the facility, the minors incarcerated therein, and the requirements set forth in the California Administrative Code. The staffing ratios are correct at noted. 3. Finding Three is accurate relative to minors going through the court process. It is also correct that most youngsters serve only one third of any court ordered commitment at the facility, the remaining two thirds of the commitment is served at home on an electronic monitoring program or in an alternative program. 4. This writer concurs with the information in Finding Four. 5. This writer concurs with the information in Finding Five. 6. Finding Six notes that the “west wing was built in 1984 and is the most up to date.” As clarification the most recently built and up to date wing would be south wing II. Relative to the other three wings (south I, east and west) all have up to two rooms with toilets, however the other rooms without toilet or sinks require that minors be taken to a central restroom facility. This will not be the case in the new facility where each room has a toilet, sink and drinking fountain. 7. This writer concurs with the information in Finding Seven. 8. The information contained in Finding Eight is accurate. Findings – Iris Garrett Juvenile Justice Correctional Complex 1. Relative to Finding One it should be noted the total cost for the new Iris Garrett Juvenile Justice Correctional Complex was $23 million which included planning, assessments, Architectural fees, Engineering fees, Construction Management fees and the cost of actual construction. 2. As clarification to Finding Two, the new facility comprises 58300 square feet contained within three buildings. In addition, the “booking area” for law enforcement officers is not located off the main entrance, but in a secure location on the western side of the Administration/Intake building. 3. This writer concurs with the information in Finding Three. 4. This writer concurs with the information in Finding Four. 5. Finding Five refers to “10 self-contained living units”. There are in fact eight self contained living units or “pods”. Other information in this finding is accurate. 6. The information is correct in Finding Six. In addition, it should be noted this same area will provide parking for the Juvenile Court Commissioner and the entrance and area of delivery for minors being admitted to the facility by law enforcement officers. 7. This writer concurs with the information in Finding Seven. 8. At the time of the Grand Jury’s inspection the information in Finding Eight was accurate. However, as of this writing the dates for occupying and opening this new facility have changed. The Department took possession of the new facility on June 7, 2004, for the purposes of furniture set up. On June 21, 2004, the Department was given authorization to begin using the facility to conduct training, and therefore, the first week long training session with employees began. Those training sessions have been taking place every week since that date. It appears all is in order for the facility to begin operating in mid August 2004. At that time the Administration/Intake and first residential living unit will open for the purpose of holding youngsters in detention while they go through the Juvenile Court process. This residential living unit is rated by the Board of Corrections to hold 60 minors n detention. In January of 2005, it is now anticipated the first 30rooms of the second residential living unit will be opened and staffed allowing for minors to serve time on court ordered commitments and to provide the beginning for the new R.E.T.U.R.N. commitment program. This program will be aimed at youngsters who need time away from the community in order to restructure their lives before being released to attempt to live a delinquency free lifestyle. This program will be evaluated and adjusted to respond to the minors committed to it over the first six to nine months of its trial period. In September of 2005, it is anticipated this program will go fully operational. This will mean that the last 30 rooms in the second residential living unit will open bringing that building to a rated capacity of 60 rooms of which 15 will be used for short court ordered commitments and 45 will be used for the R.E.T.U.R.N. program. When fully operational the facility will house up to 120 minors. 9. This writer concurs with the information in Finding Nine. 10. This writer concurs with the information in Finding Ten. 11. This writer is convinced and hopes the information in Finding Eleven will prove to be true. Only operation of the new facility will bear this finding out. Recommendations 1. The information contained in Recommendation One has been forwarded on to the Director of the school program for the new facility. Planning for vocation education has been in the planning stages for some months with a component to hopefully allow practical application of the skills learned. 2. The disposition of the current facility will be made by the Board of Supervisors. Once all functions of the current facility are moved to the new Iris Garrett Juvenile Justice Correction Complex this Department will no longer occupy, operate or maintain the facility. Cc: Deidre Kelsey, Chairperson, Merced County Board of Supervisors Demitrios Tatum, County Executive Officer James Brown, Assistant County Executive Officer Grand Jury Follow-up: Grand Jury accepts the response. Merced County Human Resources Complaint # 03-04-14 Grand Jury recommendation: The Grand Jury recommends that applicants be informed that all questions will be rated equally. The Grand Jury recommends that Resolution # 91-32 be revised by the end of Fiscal Year 2005. Commendations: The Grand Jury commends the employees of the Department of Human Resources for their assistance and cooperation during this investigation. The Grand Jury commends Stephen Jones for supplying us with all requested documents in a timely manner. Response: Human Resources completed a review of the Merced County 2003-2004 Grand Jury Report and in response to the findings and recommendations for Complaint #03-04-14 are the following comments.
Findings & Recommendations
7 findings
F1:
The Committee found that the complaint had merit. As of January 17, 2005, the complainant still had not received the final death certificate.
F2:
Cases pending final death certificates are identified with an orange circle label. Upon issuance of the final amended death certificate, the peel-off label is removed
F3:
The Coroner’s Office has over 100 pending cases covering a two year period. The oldest case has been outstanding for over two years. The pathologist report had been received, yet the case was still without the final cause of death.
F4:
Evidence of systematic review and follow up were not apparent in the files. It was difficult to determine the last time a file had been reviewed and/or what action had been taken.
F5:
There was an inordinate amount of responsibility assigned to a sole employee.
F6:
The review of the official records and their record keeping practice demonstrated a drastic need for improvement. It is a contributing factor to a much greater problem. Utilization of a manual system versus up-to-date technology delayed a chronological updating of pending and final reports.
F7:
It was also noted that the cost of the contracted pathologist had increased substantially over the years.
Findings & Recommendations
19 findings
F1:
The County has a Zero-Tolerance Anti-Harassment and Discrimination Policy for every county employee and elected official; however, any decisions made can be overridden by the Board of Supervisors.
F2:
New employees review an 18-minute orientation video on Sexual Harassment. They are required to acknowledge that they have received and read a written copy of the policy.
F3:
A complainant has up to 300 days from the alleged violation to file a complaint with the EEOC.
F4:
A complainant has up to 365 days from the alleged violation to file a complaint with the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH). 29
F5:
Although it is recommended that an employee file through the supervisor and continue through the chain of command, the complainant can file directly with the EEOC or the DFEH.
F6:
There are five federally-trained human resource analysts who investigate complaints within the County, or the County can choose to contract with an outside investigating party.
F7:
The Director of the EEOC may choose to investigate a complaint, or may excuse himself from the investigation if a conflict of interest arises.
F8:
After conducting an investigation, the findings are reported to County Counsel and the County Executive Officer who determine whether the complaint is substantiated.
F9:
In 2004, there were 18 complaints filed. Twelve of the complaints were against supervisors and/or managers. Of the 18 complaints, nine were closed and nine are still pending investigation.
F10:
Of the nine closed cases, six were substantiated, thee were not substantiated.
F11:
Two of the nine closed cases were investigated and substantiated by county investigators. One was issued a written reprimand the other was given a three-day suspension. Both of the substantiated complaints were against regular county employees, not management.
F12:
Six of the nine closed cases were not substantiated by the county and/or hired investigators.
F13:
Seven of the nine unsubstantiated, closed cases were against a member of management, Board of Supervisors, or County Counsel.
F14:
One of the unsubstantiated complaints was determined to have some merit due to the lack of professionalism displayed by the supervisor toward the employee. As a result, the Board of Supervisors ordered “Team Building” training to be attended by both parties.
F15:
The Board of Supervisors indicated that they are not bound by the Code of Ethics and Policies Regarding Workplace Conduct that applies to all county employees.
F16:
AB 1825 requires that all supervisors receive harassment, discrimination, and retaliation training by January 1, 2006. Retraining is required every two years. New supervisors must receive the training within six months of employment.
F17:
The county administered this training to all of its supervisory employees on April 13 & April 28, 2005. This training was conducted by an outside legal firm.
F18:
The county will have four or five employees trained by an outside legal firm to administer in-house training as needed.
F19:
The current complaint & investigatory practice does not allow for an unbiased, objective process because the EEOC investigators are county employees themselves and they ultimately report to some of the very people against whom the complaints originate.
Findings & Recommendations
2 findings
F1:
The Merced County Human Services Agency operated within legal guidelines.
F2:
The policies and procedures manual had not been updated for approximately 10 years.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
12 findings
F1:
The complex is a state of the art facility. It is projected to be fully operational in October 2005.
F2:
The Department hired Brian Cooley as the new chief. An assistant chief position was created. The position of Division Director was vacant and had not been filled.
F3:
The new facility will house 120 juvenile offenders and the county is committee to having them serve the full sentence. 13
F4:
A total of 74 full-time staff are anticipated when the facility becomes fully operational. There is one full-time correctional officer for every ten juveniles during the day and evening shifts. There is one correctional officer on duty for every 30 juveniles during the graveyard shift, 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.
F5:
There are three buildings that consist of approximately 40,000 square feet. One building house administrative functions. The other two house juvenile inmates. The main entrance has a metal detector and booking area. There is a control center manned 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, with bulletproof glass.
F6:
There are four wings with 10 cells per wing in each building. The cells are furnished with two beds, a sink and toilet. Each wing has a separate classroom. The Merced County Office of Education provides a vice-principal, teachers, and curriculum for the students. Teachers rotate among the classrooms to provide specific subject area instruction.
F7:
The facility also includes a medical examination room and a nurses station where pharmaceuticals can be dispensed.
F8:
There is a “state of the art” courtroom complete with computers and closed circuit TVs, clerks’ officers, and judge’s chambers. The average number of cases presided over each day ranges from 45 to 50. Hearings are conducted on a daily basis.
F9:
Juveniles are detained while awaiting sentencing, which takes approximately 14 days.
F10:
At any given time, there are approximately 37 juveniles waiting to serve their sentences. This is a vast improvement over last year when there were 100 cases at any given time. Juveniles are segregated by their gang affiliation, gender, and the seriousness of their transgressions.
F11:
A quarter mile track serves as the main recreation areas. There are also covered basketball courts to allow for exercise during inclement weather.
F12:
The Division Manager has completed a new procedural manual for the facility staff.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
11 findings
F1:
Before the tour of the facility began, we were given a quick presentation by Officer Blodgett regarding the Work Release Program. He presented a graph that demonstrated a savings to the County of almost $3 million from the efforts of 180 work-in-lieu participants.
F2:
Officer Griffith gave a quick oral overview of the Home Arrest Program and how the detained are tracked with a Global Positioning System (GPS) and the Internet. The Home Arrest Program saved the County $320,000 the first year.
F3:
The ratio of correctional officers to inmates is critically low. Currently, on any given shift, there are at least six, but no more than seven correctional officers on the grounds. The facility houses 514 inmates (full capacity) on a consistent basis. A large percentage of these inmates are charged with serious and violent felonies. The low staffing levels are at issue due to the danger both to the staff and the inmates.
F4:
There is a grave shortage of correctional officers, particularly females. There must be a female officer on duty at all times. Because of this shortage, female officers are regularly denied requests for time off, which is essential in this high-stress position. The mental health of all officers are affected. 11
F5:
There is excessive overtime due to the staff shortages.
F6:
The facility operates at maximum capacity throughout the year. Annually, hundreds of inmates are released prematurely to allow space for incoming inmates to be housed.
F7:
There is no library available for inmate use. The former library is currently under renovation to be converted into a dorm to house more prisoners.
F8:
The Sheriff does not consistently visit the facility to meet with all levels of personnel.
F9:
The staff are not adequately prepared or equipped to house inmates with varying degrees of mental illness.
F10:
The 2003-2004 Grand Jury recommendation to install bullet proof glass between the reception area and the receiving officer was not implemented.
F11:
There are no correctional officers in the kitchen while the inmates are preparing meals. The cook who oversees the process is not qualified to supervise inmates who have access to knives and other dangerous implements.
Findings & Recommendations
6 findings
F1:
The Main Jail was built in 1968. Renovations were completed in 1991 and 1994. The current capacity of the facility is 199 inmates.
F2:
Condensation on the walls of the facility, caused by the poor ventilation system, formed pools of water in the walkways. This poses a safety issue to both inmates and staff.
F3:
The staffing allocations remain inadequate. The correctional officers work an excessive amount of overtime due to the shortage of human resources. Overwork can have physiological and psychological consequences.
F4:
The recreation area had fencing designed to separate inmates as required. The fencing had been extended upward to prevent the inmates from climbing over and initiating contact with each other.
F5:
The medical and dental sections of the facility were adequate for care, but the beds in the exam room were torn and in need of repair.
F6:
The inmates are identified by gang affiliation through the use of colored uniforms. They are housed separately in order to prevent altercations. 9
Findings & Recommendations
6 findings
F1:
The Law and Justice Committee found that the complaint had merit. 16
F2:
The complainant called and complained to a Sergeant, but did not file a formal complaint under Section 1020 with the police department.
F3:
The Merced Police Department has no written uniform policy and procedures to address the removal of a child from a home.
F4:
Not all incidents had reports filed.
F5:
There was no court order awarding custody to either parent at the time of removal.
F6:
The officer’s actions in the removal of the child were not erroneous.
Findings & Recommendations
11 findings
F1:
The City of Merced has a population of 73,000. There are 81 sworn and 39 non-sworn officers. MPD offers some bi-lingual services in Hmong and Spanish. There are currently 5 sworn officers positions open.
F2:
.Section 1020 relates to the following:
F3:
The purpose of the procedure.
F4:
The procedures for filing.
F5:
The various types of dispositions: sustained, not sustained, unfounded, exonerated.
F6:
Documentation of each finding.
F7:
Corrective Actions taken and
F8:
The Merced City Police department has revised their complaint procedures to allow for an informal resolution prior to filing a formal complaint.
F9:
In 2004, there were 17 complaints, seven were generated by the public. This is a reduction from the previous year when 27 formal complaints were filed.
F10:
Complaint form 19 is provided in English only.
F11:
In order for a full investigation to be conducted, the complainant must submit an official complaint form. 45
Additional Recommendations
2
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
Complaint form 19 should be made available in additional languages to reflect the diversity of the community.
R2:
Citizens complaint procedure handout should be changed to clearly define the process. 46