Mono County Grand Jury
2018-2019
From the annual report
The consolidated year-end volume. The individual investigations it contains are listed separately below.
📑 Year-End Report
The full consolidated volume; individual reports are listed below.
Individual reports (8)
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
31 findings
F1:
Mono County Sheriff’s Office regarding Jail Cook Position Analysis: In the 2014-2015 report, that Grand Jury found that creating a relief cook position would avoid unnecessary overtime and/or illness/injury absence expenditures. At the time, the Sheriff’s office agreed with the finding and responded they would request the Board of Supervisors creation of an additional full or part time jail cook position. Methodology: A review letter was sent on September 27, 2017 to the Sheriff’s Office asking whether the
F2:
TOML Regarding the Collection of Transient Occupancy Tax Analysis: In the 2016-2017 Grand Jury report, that Grand Jury had several findings and recommendations regarding the collection of Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT). This included an estimate that 10%-40% of the TOT was uncollected, which the TOML dismissed; and the failure to perform any audits of TOT remitters, which the TOML concluded were cost prohibitive and that were not possible to accomplish with the current staff. Methodology: The 2017-2018 Grand Jury initiated a new investigation and sent inquiry letters on September 27, 2017 and again on November 7, 2017 regarding uncollected TOT and audits of remitters to both the Town Manager and Finance Director. Findings: In its response, the TOML advised that an audit of a “top 20 remitter” or one of the highest twenty payers of TOT tax, would take five to eight days to complete, with a cost of $2,048.00 -$4,842.00 and that an audit of a small remitter, one of the remaining approximately 720 rentals would cost between $823.00-$1,946.00 and take two to four days. TOML indicated that such audits would be both cost and staff prohibitive and therefore would not be conducted. We feel that the TOML’s declination to conduct an audit of any kind with respect to compliance by TOT remitters is not cost prohibitive. The Grand Jury finds that by conducting an audit, a standard business practice, the Town would be acting in the best interest of the community.
F3:
Registrar of Voters Processes and Procedures Analysis: In the 2016-2017 report, the Grand Jury noted numerous problems with accuracy, functioning, and efficiency during the June 2016 and November 2016 elections. The Mono County Board of Supervisors (BOS) provided a response to the Grand Jury findings in August 2017. Methodology: 5 The 2017-2018 Grand Jury initiated a new investigation and sent an inquiry letter to the County Registrar of Voters regarding the status and/or any action taken as a result of the responses by the BOS.
F4:
Registrar of Voters Processes and Procedures - Continued Findings: The County Clerk responded on October 3, 2017 that modifications in processes and procedures, as recommended by the Board of Supervisors, have been implemented. The elections in 2018 will determine if the current efforts prove sufficient.
F5:
Assessor’s Office morale, education and communication Analysis: The 2014-2015 Grand Jury had numerous findings and recommendations for the Assessor’s Office. Many of the findings focused on the poor morale, lack of education and communications within the office. Methodology: The current Grand Jury created a confidential online survey addressing the issues of concern that were submitted to the nine employees of the Assessor’s Office. The survey was a combination of multiple choice (select or rank by importance) and yes and no questions, several of which included room for comment. Findings: Seven members of the office responded. Answers indicated that both morale and job satisfaction have increased.
F6:
EMS COMPLAINT RECEIVED Analysis: The Grand Jury received a complaint from a member of the community regarding the failure of the County to reimburse emergency responders in the Tri-Valley area for Emergency Medical Services (EMS) responses. Methodology: The Grand Jury interviewed a Board of Supervisor member to confirm the circumstances. Findings: Based on that conversation it was learned that there was a recent hire of a new County EMS administrator and administrative assistant. Communication with the new EMS administrator indicated that the payments would be expedited. On January 16, 2018, the Grand Jury verified that the payments had been made so no further action is required.
F7:
PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST COMPLAINT RECEIVED Analysis: The Grand Jury received a citizen complaint from a resident alleging a violation of the California Public Records Act by the TOML where the individual felt that there was a failure to locate and release requested Airport records. Methodology: The Grand Jury reached out to the Complainant, Town Clerk, the Public Works Director and the Airport Manager separately to seek direct information in response to the complaint received. Copies of the paperwork supplied to the Complainant were supplied by the FAA and reviewed by the Grand Jury. Findings: While the Grand Jury investigated the complaint, we were unable to determine if there was a violation. The complainant had received the records that were requested. A letter was sent to the Complainant to that effect.
F8:
SAN QUENTIN INMATE COMPLAINT Analysis: A complaint was received from a San Quentin inmate regarding due process. The letter from the complainant was not specific to Mono County but was sent as part of what appeared to be a mass mailer to several grand juries throughout the State. Findings: This complaint is not within the purview of the Grand Jury
F9:
TOML Regarding the Collection of Transient Occupancy Tax Analysis: In the 2016-2017 Grand Jury report, that Grand Jury had several findings and recommendations regarding the collection of Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT). This included an estimate that 10%-40% of the TOT was uncollected, which the TOML dismissed; and the failure to perform any audits of TOT remitters, which the TOML concluded were cost prohibitive and that were not possible to accomplish with the current staff. Methodology: The 2017-2018 Grand Jury initiated a new investigation and sent inquiry letters on September 27, 2017 and again on November 7, 2017 regarding uncollected TOT and audits of remitters to both the Town Manager and Finance Director. Findings: In its response, the TOML advised that an audit of a “top 20 remitter” or one of the highest twenty payers of TOT tax, would take five to eight days to complete, with a cost of $2,048.00 -$4,842.00 and that an audit of a small remitter, one of the remaining approximately 720 rentals would cost between $823.00-$1,946.00 and take two to four days. TOML indicated that such audits would be both cost and staff prohibitive and therefore would not be conducted. We feel that the TOML’s declination to conduct an audit of any kind with respect to compliance by TOT remitters is not cost prohibitive. The Grand Jury finds that by conducting an audit, a standard business practice, the Town would be acting in the best interest of the community.
F10:
Registrar of Voters Processes and Procedures Analysis: In the 2016-2017 report, the Grand Jury noted numerous problems with accuracy, functioning, and efficiency during the June 2016 and November 2016 elections. The Mono County Board of Supervisors (BOS) provided a response to the Grand Jury findings in August 2017. Methodology: 5 The 2017-2018 Grand Jury initiated a new investigation and sent an inquiry letter to the County Registrar of Voters regarding the status and/or any action taken as a result of the responses by the BOS.
F11:
Registrar of Voters Processes and Procedures - Continued Findings: The County Clerk responded on October 3, 2017 that modifications in processes and procedures, as recommended by the Board of Supervisors, have been implemented. The elections in 2018 will determine if the current efforts prove sufficient.
F12:
Assessor’s Office morale, education and communication Analysis: The 2014-2015 Grand Jury had numerous findings and recommendations for the Assessor’s Office. Many of the findings focused on the poor morale, lack of education and communications within the office. Methodology: The current Grand Jury created a confidential online survey addressing the issues of concern that were submitted to the nine employees of the Assessor’s Office. The survey was a combination of multiple choice (select or rank by importance) and yes and no questions, several of which included room for comment. Findings: Seven members of the office responded. Answers indicated that both morale and job satisfaction have increased.
F13:
EMS COMPLAINT RECEIVED Analysis: The Grand Jury received a complaint from a member of the community regarding the failure of the County to reimburse emergency responders in the Tri-Valley area for Emergency Medical Services (EMS) responses. Methodology: The Grand Jury interviewed a Board of Supervisor member to confirm the circumstances. Findings: Based on that conversation it was learned that there was a recent hire of a new County EMS administrator and administrative assistant. Communication with the new EMS administrator indicated that the payments would be expedited. On January 16, 2018, the Grand Jury verified that the payments had been made so no further action is required.
F14:
PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST COMPLAINT RECEIVED Analysis: The Grand Jury received a citizen complaint from a resident alleging a violation of the California Public Records Act by the TOML where the individual felt that there was a failure to locate and release requested Airport records. Methodology: The Grand Jury reached out to the Complainant, Town Clerk, the Public Works Director and the Airport Manager separately to seek direct information in response to the complaint received. Copies of the paperwork supplied to the Complainant were supplied by the FAA and reviewed by the Grand Jury. Findings: While the Grand Jury investigated the complaint, we were unable to determine if there was a violation. The complainant had received the records that were requested. A letter was sent to the Complainant to that effect.
F15:
SAN QUENTIN INMATE COMPLAINT Analysis: A complaint was received from a San Quentin inmate regarding due process. The letter from the complainant was not specific to Mono County but was sent as part of what appeared to be a mass mailer to several grand juries throughout the State. Findings: This complaint is not within the purview of the Grand Jury
F16:
Registrar of Voters Processes and Procedures Analysis: In the 2016-2017 report, the Grand Jury noted numerous problems with accuracy, functioning, and efficiency during the June 2016 and November 2016 elections. The Mono County Board of Supervisors (BOS) provided a response to the Grand Jury findings in August 2017. Methodology: 5 The 2017-2018 Grand Jury initiated a new investigation and sent an inquiry letter to the County Registrar of Voters regarding the status and/or any action taken as a result of the responses by the BOS.
F17:
Registrar of Voters Processes and Procedures - Continued Findings: The County Clerk responded on October 3, 2017 that modifications in processes and procedures, as recommended by the Board of Supervisors, have been implemented. The elections in 2018 will determine if the current efforts prove sufficient.
F18:
Assessor’s Office morale, education and communication Analysis: The 2014-2015 Grand Jury had numerous findings and recommendations for the Assessor’s Office. Many of the findings focused on the poor morale, lack of education and communications within the office. Methodology: The current Grand Jury created a confidential online survey addressing the issues of concern that were submitted to the nine employees of the Assessor’s Office. The survey was a combination of multiple choice (select or rank by importance) and yes and no questions, several of which included room for comment. Findings: Seven members of the office responded. Answers indicated that both morale and job satisfaction have increased.
F19:
EMS COMPLAINT RECEIVED Analysis: The Grand Jury received a complaint from a member of the community regarding the failure of the County to reimburse emergency responders in the Tri-Valley area for Emergency Medical Services (EMS) responses. Methodology: The Grand Jury interviewed a Board of Supervisor member to confirm the circumstances. Findings: Based on that conversation it was learned that there was a recent hire of a new County EMS administrator and administrative assistant. Communication with the new EMS administrator indicated that the payments would be expedited. On January 16, 2018, the Grand Jury verified that the payments had been made so no further action is required.
F20:
PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST COMPLAINT RECEIVED Analysis: The Grand Jury received a citizen complaint from a resident alleging a violation of the California Public Records Act by the TOML where the individual felt that there was a failure to locate and release requested Airport records. Methodology: The Grand Jury reached out to the Complainant, Town Clerk, the Public Works Director and the Airport Manager separately to seek direct information in response to the complaint received. Copies of the paperwork supplied to the Complainant were supplied by the FAA and reviewed by the Grand Jury. Findings: While the Grand Jury investigated the complaint, we were unable to determine if there was a violation. The complainant had received the records that were requested. A letter was sent to the Complainant to that effect.
F21:
SAN QUENTIN INMATE COMPLAINT Analysis: A complaint was received from a San Quentin inmate regarding due process. The letter from the complainant was not specific to Mono County but was sent as part of what appeared to be a mass mailer to several grand juries throughout the State. Findings: This complaint is not within the purview of the Grand Jury
F22:
Assessor’s Office morale, education and communication Analysis: The 2014-2015 Grand Jury had numerous findings and recommendations for the Assessor’s Office. Many of the findings focused on the poor morale, lack of education and communications within the office. Methodology: The current Grand Jury created a confidential online survey addressing the issues of concern that were submitted to the nine employees of the Assessor’s Office. The survey was a combination of multiple choice (select or rank by importance) and yes and no questions, several of which included room for comment. Findings: Seven members of the office responded. Answers indicated that both morale and job satisfaction have increased.
F23:
EMS COMPLAINT RECEIVED Analysis: The Grand Jury received a complaint from a member of the community regarding the failure of the County to reimburse emergency responders in the Tri-Valley area for Emergency Medical Services (EMS) responses. Methodology: The Grand Jury interviewed a Board of Supervisor member to confirm the circumstances. Findings: Based on that conversation it was learned that there was a recent hire of a new County EMS administrator and administrative assistant. Communication with the new EMS administrator indicated that the payments would be expedited. On January 16, 2018, the Grand Jury verified that the payments had been made so no further action is required.
F24:
PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST COMPLAINT RECEIVED Analysis: The Grand Jury received a citizen complaint from a resident alleging a violation of the California Public Records Act by the TOML where the individual felt that there was a failure to locate and release requested Airport records. Methodology: The Grand Jury reached out to the Complainant, Town Clerk, the Public Works Director and the Airport Manager separately to seek direct information in response to the complaint received. Copies of the paperwork supplied to the Complainant were supplied by the FAA and reviewed by the Grand Jury. Findings: While the Grand Jury investigated the complaint, we were unable to determine if there was a violation. The complainant had received the records that were requested. A letter was sent to the Complainant to that effect.
F25:
SAN QUENTIN INMATE COMPLAINT Analysis: A complaint was received from a San Quentin inmate regarding due process. The letter from the complainant was not specific to Mono County but was sent as part of what appeared to be a mass mailer to several grand juries throughout the State. Findings: This complaint is not within the purview of the Grand Jury
F26:
EMS COMPLAINT RECEIVED Analysis: The Grand Jury received a complaint from a member of the community regarding the failure of the County to reimburse emergency responders in the Tri-Valley area for Emergency Medical Services (EMS) responses. Methodology: The Grand Jury interviewed a Board of Supervisor member to confirm the circumstances. Findings: Based on that conversation it was learned that there was a recent hire of a new County EMS administrator and administrative assistant. Communication with the new EMS administrator indicated that the payments would be expedited. On January 16, 2018, the Grand Jury verified that the payments had been made so no further action is required.
F27:
PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST COMPLAINT RECEIVED Analysis: The Grand Jury received a citizen complaint from a resident alleging a violation of the California Public Records Act by the TOML where the individual felt that there was a failure to locate and release requested Airport records. Methodology: The Grand Jury reached out to the Complainant, Town Clerk, the Public Works Director and the Airport Manager separately to seek direct information in response to the complaint received. Copies of the paperwork supplied to the Complainant were supplied by the FAA and reviewed by the Grand Jury. Findings: While the Grand Jury investigated the complaint, we were unable to determine if there was a violation. The complainant had received the records that were requested. A letter was sent to the Complainant to that effect.
F28:
SAN QUENTIN INMATE COMPLAINT Analysis: A complaint was received from a San Quentin inmate regarding due process. The letter from the complainant was not specific to Mono County but was sent as part of what appeared to be a mass mailer to several grand juries throughout the State. Findings: This complaint is not within the purview of the Grand Jury
F29:
PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST COMPLAINT RECEIVED Analysis: The Grand Jury received a citizen complaint from a resident alleging a violation of the California Public Records Act by the TOML where the individual felt that there was a failure to locate and release requested Airport records. Methodology: The Grand Jury reached out to the Complainant, Town Clerk, the Public Works Director and the Airport Manager separately to seek direct information in response to the complaint received. Copies of the paperwork supplied to the Complainant were supplied by the FAA and reviewed by the Grand Jury. Findings: While the Grand Jury investigated the complaint, we were unable to determine if there was a violation. The complainant had received the records that were requested. A letter was sent to the Complainant to that effect.
F30:
SAN QUENTIN INMATE COMPLAINT Analysis: A complaint was received from a San Quentin inmate regarding due process. The letter from the complainant was not specific to Mono County but was sent as part of what appeared to be a mass mailer to several grand juries throughout the State. Findings: This complaint is not within the purview of the Grand Jury
F31:
SAN QUENTIN INMATE COMPLAINT Analysis: A complaint was received from a San Quentin inmate regarding due process. The letter from the complainant was not specific to Mono County but was sent as part of what appeared to be a mass mailer to several grand juries throughout the State. Findings: This complaint is not within the purview of the Grand Jury
Additional Recommendations
5
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
Were responses received by the Presiding Judge within the legal time limits from the date of each final report's release (90 days for a public agency and 60 days for an elected official)?
R2:
If a response indicated that a recommendation had been implemented, did it include a summary of what was done?
R3:
If a response indicated that a recommendation would be implemented, did it include a summary and schedule for what would be done?
R4:
If a response indicated that a recommendation required further analysis or study, did it include an explanation of the scope, parameters, and timeframe of the proposed analysis or study?
R5:
If a response indicated that a recommendation would not be implemented because it was unwarranted or unreasonable, did the respondent include a reasoned explanation supporting that position? TABLE 1 – 2017-2018 Continuity Committee Report and Responses Date Issued Replies Required Comments Carryover Issues Mono County Sheriff’s September 2017 Mono County Response received; No further action Office – Holding Cell Sheriff required Mono County Sheriff’s September 2017 Mono County Response received; No further action Office – Jail Cook position Sheriff required Town of Mammoth Lakes - September 2017 Town Manager/ Recommendation made by 2017-2018 Grand TOT Finance Director Jury Mono County Registrar’s September 2017 Mono County Response received; No further action Office Registrar’s Office required Mono County Assessor’s January 2018 Mono County Response received; No further action Office Assessor Office required 3 • Mono County Sheriff’s Office regarding Holding Cell Analysis: In the 2014-2015 report, that Grand Jury found that the holding cell at the new Mammoth courthouse was un-usable due to poor design. This was one of the main reasons that was used to promote the need for a new courthouse. At the time, the Sheriff agreed with the finding and responded they would pursue solutions with the Judicial Council in 2015-2016. Methodology: A letter was sent to the Sheriff’s Office asking if there was a follow up to their response about following up the issue based on the previous GJ’s recommendation.
Findings & Recommendations
8 findings
F1:
The Grand Jury found at least one instance of inaccurate public noticing of MLT Board meetings and as such a violation of the Brown Act.
F2:
The MLT Board has not adopted requirements for its members to receive either Brown Act or Ethics Training.
F3:
Based on our inquiries and interview of the Board Chairman regarding the negotiations for air service, it was represented in the interview, that there is now a better definition of the responsibilities and expenditure authority of key MLT Staff, based on recently adopted guidelines. However, there still appears to be a lack of transparency and communication between the Executive Director, the Board and the public at large. It was represented that the Board is not provided any information regarding the actual contract.
F4:
Although not involved in the contract or negotiation of the contract to secure air service to Mammoth Lakes, MLT has committed to subsidizing those services on behalf of the Town. The actual negotiations are performed by Mammoth Mountain Ski Area, a private company.
F5:
That all staff and Board members of MLT be required to receive regular Brown Act and Ethics training.
F6:
That the Executive Director provide written updates to all MLT Board members on a monthly basis, or more often as circumstances dictate, of ongoing negotiations, decisions and issues.
F7:
In addition to the MLT Executive Director, that at least one Board member be involved in any negotiation that would result in a financial obligation above $10,000 to MLT, even if MLT is not a signatory to said agreement.
F8:
Any action that results in a financial obligation by MLT, based on a contract negotiated by others, must include a copy of said contract as part of the public record. 6
Additional Recommendations
8
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
The Grand Jury found at least one instance of inaccurate public noticing of MLT Board meetings and as such a violation of the Brown Act.
R2:
The MLT Board has not adopted requirements for its members to receive either Brown Act or Ethics Training.
R3:
Based on our inquiries and interview of the Board Chairman regarding the negotiations for air service, it was represented in the interview, that there is now a better definition of the responsibilities and expenditure authority of key MLT Staff, based on recently adopted guidelines. However, there still appears to be a lack of transparency and communication between the Executive Director, the Board and the public at large. It was represented that the Board is not provided any information regarding the actual contract.
R4:
Although not involved in the contract or negotiation of the contract to secure air service to Mammoth Lakes, MLT has committed to subsidizing those services on behalf of the Town. The actual negotiations are performed by Mammoth Mountain Ski Area, a private company. Recommendations:
R5:
That all staff and Board members of MLT be required to receive regular Brown Act and Ethics training.
R6:
That the Executive Director provide written updates to all MLT Board members on a monthly basis, or more often as circumstances dictate, of ongoing negotiations, decisions and issues.
R7:
In addition to the MLT Executive Director, that at least one Board member be involved in any negotiation that would result in a financial obligation above $10,000 to MLT, even if MLT is not a signatory to said agreement.
R8:
Any action that results in a financial obligation by MLT, based on a contract negotiated by others, must include a copy of said contract as part of the public record. 6
Findings & Recommendations
10 findings
F1:
The Grand Jury found that the Jail appeared clean and well maintained.
F2:
The Grand Jury found the food service area and process with inmate kitchen help seemed organized well for all.
F3:
While limited by space, the jail has made good use of what they have. o The facility must maintain areas to separate men, women, children, intoxicated or under the influence and those who must be assessed for the competency/ability to stand trial, as well as long and short term inmates and those of lesser vs. higher agitated crimes. ▪ At the time of the Grand Jury visit, there were 28 prisoners being held, of which 3 were female, 1 was in detox and 1 in assessment. Also, of the 28 prisoners, more than 80% were not Mono County residents.
F4:
At the time of the Grand Jury visit, the jail was slightly understaffed, and in the process of filling positions, which are in the current budget.
F5:
This facility houses both short-term inmates waiting trial or other processing as well as long-term inmates. o The long-term inmates are those who request to serve their time in Mono County Jail and are approved, for periods of up to 7 years. They do not accept those who have served sentences prior in a penitentiary or who have a history of agitated crimes or actions.
F6:
The Sheriff, Lieutenant and staff we interacted with were very forthright and showed enthusiasm and pride in their facility.
F7:
We were advised that all staff, including dispatch are ‘hybrid’ positions; able to carry a firearm and oversee inmates, not just dispatch. They also switched duties every 4 hours to ensure alertness
F8:
The prison control room also acts as the dispatch for all 911 Emergency Calls, Fire, Search and Rescue, Sheriff and Police.
F9:
Approval for a new facility has happened and it is anticipated in the next 5 years, approximately.
F10:
Inmate medical and medical transport needs were an area of discussion. The jail is equidistant between Mammoth and South Carson Medical Center. o They no longer have a contract with the Mammoth Hospital for medical services. They do work with the local Indian Tribe medical facility. 7
Findings & Recommendations
19 findings
F1:
Verified nor audited AmeriGas’s financial records to determine the accuracy of the 2% franchise fee, nor has TOML maintained on an annual basis a record of the methods of calculation of the franchise fee.
F2:
Ensured that the access fee imposed for pipeline use, and adjusted every 3 years, is the same for all suppliers who access the pipeline and that the fee shall not exceed the cost AmeriGas attributes to its own use.
F3:
Reviewed and/or verified the Capital Recovery Analysis (CRA) to justify the continued charge of 32 cents per gallon. The CRA was levied to offset Rock Creek Energy’s initial costs of system construction and maintenance.
F4:
Ensured that AmeriGas submit an Emergency Response Plan on an annual basis. 10
F5:
Required AmeriGas to provide updated as-built plans for utility lines they acquired during their purchase of the infrastructure.
F6:
Required AmeriGas to annually submit changes to plans and/or reports of their inventory of facilities to the Town Engineer.
F7:
Considered whether the Agreement has unfairly had an impact on competition for propane services, or whether the Agreement has had a negative impact on consumer interests.
F8:
The Town audit AmeriGas to ensure the proper calculation of the 2% franchise fee.
F9:
The Town notice and hold the appropriate hearing(s) to determine whether to re-negotiate or modify the Franchise Agreement, on terms designed to protect the Town’s citizens from a disruption of adequate propane service including noticing of rate changes.
F10:
The Town take provisions to ensure the health and safety of the citizens of Mammoth Lakes, and the various properties within or adjacent to the Town’s jurisdictions and/or any other authorized remedies along with promoting competition.
F11:
The TOML shall monitor and enforce all terms of the Franchise Agreement as outlined in the findings above for better fiscal management.
F12:
The TOML Accounts Payable / Finance Department shall refine its record keeping system so as to better monitor invoices, bills and contracts to ensure that it acts in the best interest of the businesses, residents and property owners within the town of Mammoth Lakes. Mono County Grand Jury Final Report for the Year 2017 – 2018 Investigation #5 Town of Mammoth Lakes Propane Billings Final Report by Grand Jury Investigative Committee Analysis: Reference Numerous citizen complaints have arisen over the last several years that AmeriGas, one of the two propane providers to the community of Mammoth Lakes, is increasing propane rates, contrary to the terms and provisions of existing written agreements between AmeriGas and those citizens and/or HOA’s all while asserting its compliance with such agreements. The Grand Jury has examined billings from AmeriGas to the Town of Mammoth Lakes from several Town facilities to see what TOML was paying for its propane. Methodology: AmeriGas invoices to TOML for five Town owned facilities were requested. The invoice periods were not specified except to cover at least four seasons. TOML staff remitted to the Grand Jury invoice statements for the period of 7/2016 through 2/2018 but stated that they could not locate some invoices. Consequently, Grand Jury members directly contacted the local AmeriGas office to acquire the missing invoices, with limited success. Billing rates in cost per gallon paid by TOML to AmeriGas are included in the Table below. In addition, cost per gallon paid by TOML to Eastern Sierra Propane for the Lake Mary at Lakeview Road intersection is included for comparative purposes. Blank spaces represent missing invoices or times of the year when deliveries may not have occurred. Findings:
F13:
Discrepancies in the monthly rate charges were noted between various sites. For example, in 12/2017 TOML rates varied from $1.94 to $5.02 per gallon between the four sites.
F14:
The TOML has not maintained complete records of its monthly bills.
F15:
The TOML does not appear to have a negotiated contract for rates for its propane purchases.
F16:
The TOML has shown no evidence of its actions to internally review, dispute, audit or negotiate propane rates.
F17:
The TOML has not been acting in the best interests of its citizens due to its lack of fiscal oversight. TABLE – RATES CHARGED BY AMERIGAS AND EASTERN SIERRA PROPANE TO THE TOWN OF MAMMOTH LAKES* Eastern Sierra Propane Cost Per Gallon paid by for Lakeview Rd @ TOML to Amerigas Lake Mary Rd Airport Invoice Town Community Terminal Old Police Date Yard Center (Two Meters) Dept. 7/2016 $2.63 8/2016 $2.64 9/2016 $2.79 $1.80 $2.23 10/2016 $2.79 $1.87 $1.87 11/2016 $3.15 $1.94 $1.93 $2.33 12/2016 $3.33 $1.96* $1.99-$2.02 $2.00 $2.43 1/2017 $3.63 $2.10-$2.17 $2.17 $2.63 2/2017 $3.94 $2.25* $2.29-$2.25 $2.25 $2.63 3/2017 $3.94 $2.26 $2.13 $2.63 4/2017 $3.94 $2.15 $2.63 5/2017 $3.94 $2.13* $2.15 $2.13 6/2017 $3.94 $2.06 7/2017 $4.08 8/2017 $2.43 9/2017 $2.58 $2.08 10/2017 $4.54 $2.18 $2.19 11/2017 $4.64 $2.28 $2.27 $2.30 12/2017 $5.02 $2.33 $2.33 $1.94 1/2018 $2.99 $2.38 $2.40-$2.38 $2.33 2/2018 $3.10 $2.37 $2.38-$2.38 $2.37* * Invoice received directly from AmeriGas Note: Blank cells = information was not available
F18:
The TOML proceed to negotiate its propane rates with all available propane providers.
F19:
The TOML Accounts Payable Department shall refine its record keeping system so as to better monitor invoices, bills and contracts to ensure that it acts in the best interest of the businesses, residents and property owners within the town of Mammoth Lakes. 13
Findings & Recommendations
7 findings
F1:
The CC found regarding Mammoth Lakes Tourism TOT #1314.03, the TOML responded to the 2018-19 letter of verification in a timely manner and indicated they had begun the audit program as previously recommended. The TOML Finance Department discovered a discrepancy in the initial audit and are in the process of collecting funds. In addition, they decided to expand on the GJ recommendation and are now conducting audits on a minimum of two large and two smaller lodging providers per year.
F2:
Staffing of officers assigned to the jail is currently operating at the minimum. However, since there are open positions, staff overtime is required, for example, for moving inmates to and from medical appointments and/or trial. The officers working in the jail are situated in a central room with cameras where they can observe inmates and manage 911 calls. A female officer is required to be one of those officers on each shift when women prisoners are housed in the jail.
F3:
There is a policy in place that allows all Sheriff department employees - who work in 12-hour shifts, to have an hour to work out during each shift upon approval of their supervisor. This has resulted in increased morale and better health of the members of the department.
F4:
Staff’s treatment of inmates appeared to be appropriate based on observation and interviews conducted with several inmates.
F5:
Cameras cover most of the jail facility, but there are blind spots that may pose potential risks.
F6:
Mono County Jail is currently the hub for the 911 dispatch center. In collaboration with Frontier Communications, the recently updated dispatch system can locate the origin of a call, which is extremely helpful in providing assistance in an emergency. Per a discussion with Mono County Sheriff staff, there are ongoing discussions within Mono and Inyo Counties for a possible regionalization of a 911 Emergency call center. Discussions include establishment of a possible Joint Powers Authority to manage the oversight of cooperative action among Mono County Sheriff’s Office, Inyo County Sheriff’s Office, Bishop Police Department, Mammoth Lakes Police Department, Local fire agencies (non-federal), Medical, DPW, etc.
F7:
Per discussion with Mono County Sheriff Staff, MCGJ members were informed that the most recent visit to the jail by members of the MC BOS was quite some time ago – April of 2016.
Additional Recommendations
7
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
The MC BOS and DPW should make every effort to progress the final planning and construction phases of the New Jail building to avoid cost overruns, provide the best possible long-term facility and be able to incorporate the health clinic for locals. Timeline: End of 2019. 2018 - 2019 Mono County Civil Grand Jury, Mono County Jail Inspection Final Report
R2:
The MC BOS should fund all open jail staff positions. Timeline: The next Fiscal Budget.
R3:
Sheriff Department Jail Staff should continue their current practices. Timeline: Ongoing.
R4:
Sheriff Department Jail Staff should continue their current practices and procedures. Timeline: Ongoing.
R5:
The Sheriff’s department is recommended to provide additional camera coverage for any potential blind spots within the current jail facility. Timeline: Within the next six months.
R6:
Continue discussions of a possible Joint Powers Authority to manage a new 911 system shared by Mono County and Inyo County and their appropriate emergency agencies (Police, Fire, Etc.) to provide improved and consistent services to the community. Timeline: Ongoing.
R7:
The MC BOS is recommended to make an annual visit/tour of the Mono County Jail. Timeline: Annual. 1. https://www.themarshallproject.org/2019/04/23/who-begs-to-go-to-prison-california-jail- inmates 2018 - 2019 Mono County Civil Grand Jury, Mono County Jail Inspection Final Report 2018-2019 MONO COUNTY GRAND JURY CONTINUITY COMMITTEE FINAL REPORT
Findings & Recommendations
1 findings
F1:
The overall condition of the jail is well maintained given its age. However, as indicated by Public Works staff, Department of Public Works (DPW) receives frequent call outs for maintenance requiring a lot of attention as the facility is beyond its useful life. Additionally, the current facility is not ADA compliant. The construction of the new Civic Center in Mammoth Lakes caused a shift in construction priorities, resulting in the jail construction being postponed. While there is a time limit for completion of the construction, (see the timeline in BSCC Grant application) Mono County Public Works indicates it is working with the BSCC to coordinate extensions, so the grant is not lost. However, the longer the delay the more the costs of construction will likely increase, and changes may need to be made in the overall plan to fit within the grant and matching funds budget. The BSCC Grant can be found at https://www.bscc.ca.gov/wp- content/uploads/Mono-County-SB-844-Proposal-Final-REDACTED.pdf 2018 - 2019 Mono County Civil Grand Jury, Mono County Jail Inspection Final Report
Additional Recommendations
2
Not linked to specific findings.
R7:
The Grand Jury recommends that the TOML and Mono County work together with local Departments of Public Works, the Task Force, lodging and like associations, Chambers of Commerce and Non-governmental Organizations throughout Mono County to develop programs to educate the public, especially visitors, about what we can all do to increase recycling and minimize solid waste. Timeline: January 1, 2020.
R8:
The Grand Jury recommends that Mono County staff support the Task Force website so that Mono County residents can be better informed about Task Force meetings and be able to engage in the process of creating solid waste policies. Timeline: October 1, 2019.
Findings & Recommendations
5 findings
F1:
The investigation found that the HCCSD has relied appropriately on advice and use of best practice from the Office of Mono County Counsel with regard to the bidding process. Additionally, HCCSD appears to be operating within an appropriate level of due diligence and oversight overall. F.2. The HCCSD has usually followed their own guidelines related to the dollar threshold or ceiling for third party contracts. However, they have been inconsistent in what available contracts have been offered for competitive bids and/or made as direct awards.
F2:
The HCCSD has usually followed their own guidelines related to the dollar threshold or ceiling for third party contracts. However, they have been inconsistent in what available contracts have been offered for competitive bids and/or made as direct awards. F3. The investigation discovered incomplete and/or out of date Policy and Procedure Documents. F4. The investigation discovered inconsistent delivery of information and bidding documents to interested third-party vendors. F5. The investigation discovered inconsistent posting of available contracts through various media sources i.e. the newspaper ads. 2018 - 2019 Mono County Civil Grand Jury, Hilton Creek Community Services Special District Committee Final Report RECOMMENDATIONS The following are the recommendations from the HCCSD Investigative Committee to improve the overall administration of Third-Party Contracts: R1. None R2. It is imperative that HCCSD administer their third-party contracts offerings in the same manner each and every time. Timeline: Beginning with next round of contract expirations and/or next competitive bid cycle. R3. The Committee recommends the HCCSD review and restructure policies and procedures to ensure adequate information is communicated to allow a level of competition and fairness and to avoid any appearance of impropriety. Timeline: By January 1, 2020. R4. Create and provide consistent bidding documentation and the delivery process of said documents to interested third-party service providers. Timeline: Beginning with next round of contract expirations and/or next competitive bid cycle. R5. HCCSD needs to improve its communication process and notifications for all future bidding by developing a template for the broadest possible communication to the public for any future available contracts. Timeline: Beginning with next round of contract expirations and/or next competitive bid cycle. 2018 - 2019 Mono County Civil Grand Jury, Hilton Creek Community Services Special District Committee Final Report 2018-2019 MONO COUNTY GRAND JURY MONO COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION FINAL REPORT SUMMARY Each year, the Mono County Grand Jury (Grand Jury) as a whole, discusses areas of investigation to be reviewed. One area of interest agreed upon by the Grand Jury was a review of the Mono County Office of Education (MCOE). As a result, the Grand Jury began an investigation with a review of policies, procedures, and responsibilities of the elected MCOE Board of Trustees (MCOE BOT) and MCOE management. BACKGROUND The MCOE Investigative Committee (Committee) of the 2018/2019 Grand Jury received a complaint concerning the MCOE Administration and actions regarding stipends from the charter school income, and the dismissal of staff. The Committee then learned the office of Mono County District Attorney (MCDA) had completed a full investigation of the same issues contained in the complaint. The MCDA determined that there was no criminality. In addition, the issues addressed by the complaint were not in the purview of the Committee but did lead to other questions and concerns regarding administrative practices. As a result, the Committee determined an overall investigation of the management of charter schools was warranted. Per the guidelines from the California Grand Jury Association for grand jury investigative committees concerning school districts, including charter schools, the Grand Jury can investigate the administration, the financial matters, and compliance with adopted procedures, but not the curriculum, policy choices or personnel decisions. The Committee also reviewed the contractual relationship between MCOE and a charter school operator located outside of Mono County, focusing on how it benefits the students of Mono County. METHODOLOGY The Committee conducted interviews with members of MCOE BOT and MCOE staff. In addition to scheduled interviews and a review of the MCDA investigation report, the Committee reviewed budget documents, policy & procedures manuals, and existing Charter School contracts as set forth in the list below: 2018 - 2019 Mono County Civil Grand Jury, Mono County Office of Education Final Report • Mono County District Attorney investigation report of MCOE complaint from 2017. • Office of Education Board of Trustees Agendas and Minutes from 2011 to present. • Mono County Office of Education, Financial Statements and Supplementary Information with Independent Auditors' Reports. Dated June 30, 2014, and June 30, 2018. (Charter Schools are exempt from this audit report). • California School Board Association Professional Governance Standards for The Individual Trustee and The Board Guidelines Recommended Guidelines for successful governing. • Submitted Governance Policy adopted by MCOE. • Local Control Accountability Plan and Annual Update (LCAP) • CCSESA Governance Policy & Statutory Functions of County Boards of Education & County Superintendents of Schools • California State Board Schedule of Training Events available for ongoing continuing education for all Board of Trustee members and Superintendents. • Mono County Board of Education "Policy and Procedures Manual" accepted as "Bylaws of the Board". (Drafted 2002) • Fiscal Crisis & Management Assistance Team (FCMAT) Report for 2017-2018 (Verification of Charter School Exemption of Audits.) • Urban Corps of San Diego County Charter School Contract dated June 2016 & Revised December 2018. • California Education Code Sections 1000-1042. • Mono County Revenue and Expenditure Report provided by MCOE Financial Department. DISCUSSION Over a period of several months, the Chair of the MCOE Investigative Committee scheduled interviews with selected MCOE personnel and MCOE BOT members from the district. The Committee sought guidance through Mono County Counsel (MCC) concerning questions of legal counsel for Grand Jury interviewees, MCOE BOT responsibilities, if and when subpoenas should be issued, etc. Throughout the interview process, it was apparent that the MCOE Board of Trustees did not understand their authority and duties in the management of the district. In addition, the MCOE BOT does not understand their statutory responsibilities concerning the MCOE’s overall budget. The MCOE BOT views their role as advisory in nature, despite a clearly defined set of responsibilities, as per the California Legislative Information Code, Title 1, Division 1, Part 2, Chapter 1, County Boards of Education [1001-1097]. ARTICLE 2. Duties and Responsibilities [1040 - 1042] (Article 2 enacted by Stats, 1976, Ch. 1010) “County boards of education shall… 2018 - 2019 Mono County Civil Grand Jury, Mono County Office of Education Final Report (c) Approve the annual budget of the county superintendent of schools before its submission to the County board of supervisors. (d) Approve the annual county school service fund budget of the county superintendent of schools before its submission to the Superintendent of Public Instruction. http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=EDC §ionNum=1041.&article=2.&highlight=true&keyword=County%20boards%20 of%20education Following the interviews, additional research concerning the State of California statutes and the Education Code, with respect to the duties and responsibilities for County boards of education, was needed. The Committee researched the California Education Code Article 2, Sections 1040 and 1042, and again sought a legal interpretation and clarification of those statutes from MCC. MCC advises that “county superintendents of schools do not have independent fiscal authority. Rather, boards of education are created in each county to, among other things, exercise fiscal oversight over superintendents through review and approval of budgets and revenue and expense estimates prepared by the superintendent. In the exercise of that oversight function, boards of education may request additional information from the superintendent, request changes to the budget and/or estimate (or any items within them) and ultimately, determine whether to approve or deny the budget and/or estimates.”(See Cal. Ed. Code §1040; and see Opinion of the California Attorney General at 58 Cal.Ops.Atty.Gen 90). Upon review of the documents within the Methodology, it was determined that neither the policies and procedures for MCOE staff nor the MCOE BOT have been addressed since 2012. There is no evidence the MCOE BOT has reviewed or approved the current procedural documents pertaining to the operation and administration of the MCOE. MCOE is currently in a contract with the Urban Corps of San Diego Charter School to remotely administrate a charter school in the San Diego area. MCOE staff indicated that said contract results in additional funds for MCOE schools to be used to improve student performance for Mono County students, with minimal MCOE staff time needed for the administration of the charter school program. There are no charter schools located inside Mono County boundaries at this time. FINDINGS F1. The Committee finds MCOE BOT has abdicated their oversight and budget responsibilities to the MCOE Staff. 2018 - 2019 Mono County Civil Grand Jury, Mono County Office of Education Final Report
F3:
The investigation discovered incomplete and/or out of date Policy and Procedure Documents.
F4:
The investigation discovered inconsistent delivery of information and bidding documents to interested third-party vendors.
F5:
The investigation discovered inconsistent posting of available contracts through various media sources i.e. the newspaper ads. 2018 - 2019 Mono County Civil Grand Jury, Hilton Creek Community Services Special District Committee Final Report
Additional Recommendations
4
Not linked to specific findings.
R2:
It is imperative that HCCSD administer their third-party contracts offerings in the same manner each and every time. Timeline: Beginning with next round of contract expirations and/or next competitive bid cycle.
R3:
The Committee recommends the HCCSD review and restructure policies and procedures to ensure adequate information is communicated to allow a level of competition and fairness and to avoid any appearance of impropriety. Timeline: By January 1, 2020.
R4:
Create and provide consistent bidding documentation and the delivery process of said documents to interested third-party service providers. Timeline: Beginning with next round of contract expirations and/or next competitive bid cycle.
R5:
HCCSD needs to improve its communication process and notifications for all future bidding by developing a template for the broadest possible communication to the public for any future available contracts. Timeline: Beginning with next round of contract expirations and/or next competitive bid cycle. 2018 - 2019 Mono County Civil Grand Jury, Hilton Creek Community Services Special District Committee Final Report 2018-2019 MONO COUNTY GRAND JURY MONO COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION FINAL REPORT
Findings & Recommendations
8 findings
F1:
The Grand Jury finds that TOML and its exclusive franchisee Mammoth Disposal consider an upgraded transfer station, at the current Mammoth Disposal owned site in Mammoth, will be adequate to meet the needs of the TOML once Benton Crossing Landfill closes.
F2:
The Committee finds MCOE staff also views the MCOE BOT only as an advisory body although as per Finding 1 and the California Education Code, the Board is not merely an advisory body, they are a policy board that must be fully engaged in the oversight and approval of the MCOE budget.
F3:
The Committee finds a lack of continuing education for the MCOE BOT. Interviewees said they were not aware of available Continuing Education with relevant courses from CSBA (California School Board Association) and had not received any special training.
F4:
The MCOE staff’s written policy and procedures manual needs an update.
F5:
The Committee finds the MCOE BOT has a general lack of oversight regarding the budget and contracts with charter schools. There is also a lack of transparency and accountability by MCOE staff concerning the income from the charter school and the related expenses to administer those contracts.
F6:
The Committee finds that while MCOE Staff indicates funds received (profit) from that contract are invested into Mono County students, they could not produce existing documents that quantify the funds. Such documents were prepared for the first time only upon request by the Committee. They also could not demonstrate how the involvement in charter schools improves student achievement in Mono County.
F7:
The budget for the charter agreement is currently represented as a single line item in the overall MCOE Budget with no detail of how expenditures are allocated. No profit/loss schedule exists to account for revenue versus actual expenses, staff time, or any related administrative costs.
F8:
Task Force meetings are posted to the Mono County website. However, when members of the Grand Jury signed up to subscribe to email updates through the link, nothing was ever received. Grand Jury members were also unable to find minutes of previous meetings and supporting documents listed as being posted on the site.
Additional Recommendations
9
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
We recommend that the TOML view the Mammoth Disposal transfer station as Phase One of their plan with Phase Two being a larger site which can accommodate the processing of industrial waste, green waste, and other programs which can be used to reduce landfill usage and reduce costs. Timeline: By January 1, 2023.
R1A:
MCOE BOT must implement the duties and responsibilities of the Board of Trustees as a whole and as individuals, shall embrace its oversight as detailed in the State of California statutes. The MCOE BOT must begin following the Bylaws for the Governing Board which defines its policy-making role. Timeline: Immediate. 2018 - 2019 Mono County Civil Grand Jury, Mono County Office of Education Final Report
R1B:
It is recommended that the MCOE BOT review the current budget at the next scheduled meeting and review budget updates on a quarterly basis, beginning with the fiscal year 2019-20. Timeline: By Sept. 30, 2019.
R2:
The Committee recommends that MCOE staff review the California Education Code and implement process and procedures to interact with the MCOE BOT as a policy board and that the MCOE BOT becomes fully engaged in the management oversight of the district MCOE budget. Timeline: By October 1, 2019.
R3:
The Committee recommends that MCOE BOT adopt a policy for Continuing Education classes as defined by California School Board Association Professional Governance Standards for The Individual Trustee and The Board Guidelines Recommended Guidelines For Successful Governing, as a priority for each board member. In addition, set a required minimum standard for MCOE BOT in order to maintain the proper skills required to carry out their governing duties. Timeline: Scheduling of Continuing Education classes to be completed no later than December 1, 2019.
R4:
The Committee recommends staff generate a complete and full update and revision of the MCOE Policy and Procedures Manual to 2019 standards for approval by the MCOE BOT. Timeline: By December 31, 2019,
R5:
The Committee recommends expenses administered for oversight and administration for the Charter School be defined with separate profit/loss sheet available to the public. Timeline: Beginning with the current 2018-19 fiscal year.
R6:
The Committee recommends the MCOE BOT and MCOE staff work together to develop a statement of purpose concerning charter schools and the benefits to Mono County. Timeline: By December 1, 2019.
R7:
The Committee recommends the MCOE staff set forth a detailed budget for the charter school, using General Accounting Principles (GAP), to include revenue, forecasted expenses, staff time, and/or any related administrative costs. The budget to be approved by MCOE BOT. Timeline: By December 31, 2019. 2018 - 2019 Mono County Civil Grand Jury, Mono County Office of Education Final Report 2018-2019 MONO COUNTY GRAND JURY SOLID WASTE COMMITTEE Final Report