Placer County Grand Jury
2014-2015
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 (22)
Findings & Recommendations
4 findings
F1:
In December 2014, the homeless people camping at the DeWitt campus in harsh weather conditions represented an urgent, unmet need for temporary shelter.
F2:
The Barracks seemed to be in acceptable condition and relatively simple to convert to a temporary emergency shelter for homeless individuals.
F3:
In January and February 2015, the BOS began to address the issue by calling a special meeting and a public hearing.
F4:
The need for a permanent solution to the homeless situation continues.
Additional Recommendations
5
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
An evaluation of the use of the DeWitt Barracks as emergency homeless housing should be conducted at the end of the 90-day period for the conditional-use permit, and on a recurring schedule thereafter.
R2:
The BOS and county staff should promptly review Marbut Consulting’s final report to determine its impact on the need for a temporary emergency shelter. In addition, the BOS should monitor the implementation of the Strategic Action Plan referred to in the final report.
R3:
The 2015-2016 Grand Jury continue to monitor the BOS progress on implementing a more permanent solution to the homeless issue in Placer County. Responses Recommendations Requiring Response Mr. David Boesch R1, R2 Placer County CEO Placer County Board of Supervisors R1, R2 __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ - 138 - __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ - 139 - __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ - 140 - __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ - 141 -
R4:
If it is determined that the ADRC model is not appropriate as a five-year plan for Placer County, then the county should implement another model for providing necessary single points of entry into a long-term support and services system for older adults and people with disabilities. __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ - 142 -
R5:
Provide a time frame for the implementation of these recommendations in accordance with subdivision (b)(2) of Penal Code § 933.05. Responses Recommendations Requiring Response Placer County Board of Supervisors R1 – R5 Mr. David Boesch R1 – R5 Placer County CEO __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ - 143 - __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ - 144 - __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ - 145 -
Findings & Recommendations
5 findings
F1:
The interview room known as the “soft room”, while having a comfortable appearance, was uncomfortably chilly.
F2:
On the day of the inspection, cleanliness issues were noted that included fecal matter on the toilet seat in the men’s lobby restroom.
F3:
Notable stains and scratches on the door trim in the hallway were observed.
F4:
On the day of the inspection, what appeared to be blood stains were noted on the exterior stairway entrance/exit to the building. The jurors also observed bodily fluids on the exterior stairway entrance/exit to the building.
F5:
The lack of an epi-pen and defibrillator puts the detainees at risk in case of a medical emergency.
Additional Recommendations
14
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
Funds be allocated for the purchase of at least one epi-pen and defibrillator for the premises, including the training of personnel.
R2:
The APD monitor the temperature in the “soft room” to ensure comfort during interviews.
R3:
The APD monitor the public restrooms to alleviate health hazards.
R4:
A fresh coat of paint be applied over stains and scratches on the door trim in the hallway.
R5:
Staff more closely monitor cleanliness of the exterior stairway entrance/exit to the building. Responses Recommendations Requiring Response Mr. John Ruffcorn R1 – R5 Police Chief, City of Auburn __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ - 181 - __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ - 182 - __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ - 183 - __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ - 184 -
R6:
Improve the emergency public announcement (PA) system, so it is site-wide. __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ - 185 -
R7:
Increase the security of the sally port and lock up the flares stored there.
R8:
Train and supply staff with epi-pens, in case of emergency.
R9:
Repair the heating system.
R10:
Increase the security of the storage of evidence.
R11:
Implement changes to make the facility more ADA-compliant. South Placer Main Jail Recommendations:
R12:
Assign responsibility for the cracks in the concrete flooring and repair them. South Placer Minimum Security Facility Recommendations:
R13:
Provide more opportunity for work hours for the female inmates. Auburn Main Jail Recommendations:
R14:
Repair the numerous, on-going ceiling water leak problems inside the facility. Responses Recommendations Requiring Response Mr. Edward Bonner R1 – R14 Placer County Sheriff-Coroner-Marshal Mr. David Boesch R1 – R14 Placer County CEO __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ - 186 - __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ - 187 - __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ - 188 -
Findings & Recommendations
2 findings
F1:
The Rocklin Police Department is to be commended for its upkeep of its modern facility.
F2:
The RPD is also to be commended for its willingness to make this facility available to fire department personnel as well.
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
Roseville City Council
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
7 findings
F5:
Improperly functioning fire hydrants are a threat to public health and safety.
F6:
Despite the lack of standardization, the Grand Jury did not identify any area in which hydrants are not kept operational.
F7:
The local water and fire districts seem to work well together to see that hydrants are maintained.
F8:
Some water and fire districts serving a given geographic area have entered into formal written agreements.
F9:
In some areas, there are less formal agreements between the fire and water agencies’ respective management teams.
F10:
Generally, the fire district does inspection and light maintenance and the water districts do the heavier maintenance and repairs. Staff seemed to think that that arrangement makes sense in that it takes advantage of the skills of each agency’s employees.
F11:
The Grand Jury did not find any specific inadequacies in the operation of fire hydrants.
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
The Placer County CEO should consider whether a fire hydrant inspection and maintenance program be established to ensure uniformity throughout the county. - 30 - August 24, 2015 Placer County CEO 175 Fulweiler Avenue Auburn, CA 95603 Copies Sent to: Fire Districts Newcastle Fire Protection District P.O. Box 262 Alta Fire Protection Department Newcastle, CA 95658 33950 Alta Bonnynook Rd. Alta, CA 95701 North Tahoe Fire Protection District P.O. Box 5879 Auburn City Fire Department Tahoe City, Ca 96145 1225 Lincoln Way Auburn, CA 95603 Northstar Community Services District 910 Northstar Drive California Department of Forestry Truckee, CA 96161 2840 Mt. Danaher Rd. Camino, CA 95709 Penryn Fire Protection District P.O. Box 219 Colfax City Fire Department Penryn, CA 95663 P.O. Box 1233 Colfax, CA 95713 Placer County Fire Protection Districts 13760 Lincoln Way Foresthill Fire Protection District Auburn, CA 95603 P.O. Box 1099 Foresthill, CA 95631 Placer Hills Fire Protection District P.O. Box 350 Lincoln City Fire Department Meadow Vista, Ca 95722 126 Joiner Parkway Lincoln, CA 95648 Rocklin City Fire Department 4060 Rocklin Road Loomis Fire Protection District Rocklin, CA 95677 P.O. Box 606 Loomis, CA 95650 - 31 - Oak Street #402 Roseville, CA 95678 South Placer Fire Protection District 6900 Eureka Road Granite Bay, Ca 95746 Squaw Valley Public Services District P.O. Box 2522 Olympic Valley, CA 96146 Truckee Fire Department P.O. Box 2768 Truckee, CA 96160 Public Water Agencies Alpine Springs County Water District City of Roseville Water Department 270 Alpine Meadows Rd. Vernon Street Alpine Meadows, CA 96146 Roseville, CA 95678 Auburn Valley Community Service District Donner Summit Public Utility District P.O. Box 8138 P.O. Box 610 Auburn, Ca 95604 Soda Springs, CA 95728 Christian Valley Park Community Service District Foresthill PUD P.O. Box 3138 P.O. Box 266 Auburn, Ca 95604 Foresthill, CA 95631 City of Lincoln Georgetown Public Utility District Water Department P.O. Box 4240 600 Sixth Street Georgetown, CA 95634 Lincoln, CA 95648 Meadow Vista County Water District P.O. Box 278 Heather Glen Community Service District Meadow Vista, CA 95722 P.O. Box 715 Applegate, CA 95703 - 32 - P.O Box 5249 Meadow Vista, CA 95722 Tahoe City, CA 96145 North Tahoe Public Utility District Truckee Donner Public Utility District P.O. Box 139 11570 Donner Pass Road Tahoe Vista, CA 96148 Truckee, CA 96161-4947 PCWA P.O. Box 6570 Auburn, CA 95604 Sierra Lake County Water District P.O. Box 1039 Soda Springs, CA 95728 San Juan Water District P.O. Box 2157 Granite Bay, Ca 95746 South Tahoe PUD 1275 Meadow Crest Drive South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150 Squaw Valley Public Services District P.O. Box 2026 Olympic Valley, Ca 96145-2026 Suburban Pines Community Service District P.O. Box 576 Colfax, CA 95713 - 33 - - -2015 Final Report Human Trafficking
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
13 findings
F1:
PCWA is a well-managed special district agency and uses its water and electrical assets to the advantage of its rate payers.
F2:
The ongoing reality of drought and reduced water inflows into all water districts serving Placer County residents and businesses is requiring PCWA to reevaluate how all county residents are served with water.
F3:
During the ongoing drought PCWA may benefit from utilizing advisory councils as provided by the Act. - 55 - -2015 Final Report
F4:
The lack of document information, including posting dates and sunset dates, decreases confidence in the validity of data found on the websites.
F5:
Some meeting minutes are not being posted in a timely manner.
F6:
It is generally more difficult to distinguish the minutes when they are embedded in agendas or in videos, rather than posted separately.
F7:
Posting of summarized minutes (abstracts), or a summary of actions taken, would improve the public’s experience in trying to understand what governance actions were taken, or what decisions were made or deferred.
F8:
Video recordings of proceedings are beneficial to the public’s understanding of their representatives actions in council and board meetings.
F9:
The ability to locate current financial results is improved when financial performance reports are directly posted on the website. - 65 - -2015 Final Report
F10:
Lack of consistency in posting of bid opportunities and awards on websites makes it difficult for the public to discern available contracting opportunities and what awards have been approved.
F11:
The public’s access to operating policies, applying to elected officials and employees, would be enhanced if these documents were available through the website.
F12:
A link on the website to fill out CPRA document requests improves the public’s ability to submit requests.
F13:
A link to the Grand Jury website where the Grand Jury complaint form “Confidential Citizen Complaint” is available enables public access for registering a confidential complaint on line.
Additional Recommendations
11
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
A significant portion of revenue from the sale of surplus water and some of the net revenues from the sale of electricity be used to extend delivery of potable water to neighborhoods and communities not currently served by PCWA.
R2:
Consideration be given to potential or emergency needs of existing underserved areas within Placer County in the Water Master Plan being prepared by PCWA.
R3:
For public water systems not currently served by PCWA, the Water Master Plan should include the opportunity to connect their water service to PCWA. PCWA should make emergency financial aid available for this purpose.
R4:
PCWA form zone advisory councils pursuant to PCWA Act § 81-15.2. Request for Responses: Recommendations Requiring Response Response Due Date PCWA Board of Directors R1 – R4 September 22, 2015 Placer County Water Agency P. O. Box 6570 Auburn, CA 95604 Mr. Joseph Parker R1 – R4 September 22, 2015 Director of Financial Services Placer County Water Agency P. O. Box 6570 Auburn, CA 9560 - 56 - - -2015 Final Report Review of Placer County Government and Special District/Agency Websites
R5:
All city and special districts webpages should include current written minutes, which include a summary of actions taken and decisions made.
R6:
Posting of complete video recordings of meetings should be investigated to determine if it is economically feasible.
R7:
All websites should include direct links to financial reports, including on-going progress and performance reports on financial results versus budgets. - 66 - -2015 Final Report
R8:
Placer County, City of Auburn, City of Colfax, and all special district/agency websites should include access to the policy, process, and posting of current contracting opportunities. Results of bid awards should also be posted.
R9:
Current operating policies covering travel and use of entity owned assets, including vehicles, cell phones, computers, and credit cards should be available on websites or by online CPRA requests.
R10:
Placer County, Auburn and Colfax, along with all special districts, should incorporate into their websites a link to make CPRA Public Records Requests.
R11:
Websites should include a link to the Grand Jury website where the public can access the Grand Jury complaint form“Confidential Citizen Complaint”. Tables 3 and 4 on the following pages specify which recommendations are applicable to each surveyed entity. Attachment A demonstrates the linkages between the multiple facts, findings and recommendations in this report. - 67 - – Recommendations for County, Cities and Towns Recommendations
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
5 findings
F1:
The interview room known as the “soft room”, while having a comfortable appearance, was uncomfortably chilly.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
Funds be allocated for the purchase of at least one epi-pen and defibrillator for the premises, including the training of personnel.
F2:
On the day of the inspection, cleanliness issues were noted that included fecal matter on the toilet seat in the men’s lobby restroom.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The APD monitor the temperature in the “soft room” to ensure comfort during interviews.
F3:
Noteable stains and scratches on the door trim in the hallway were observed.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The APD monitor the public restrooms to alleviate health hazards.
F4:
On the day of the inspection, what appeared to be blood stains were noted on the exterior stairway entrance/exit to the building. The jurors also observed bodily fluids on the exterior stairway entrance/exit to the building.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
A fresh coat of paint be applied over stains and scratches on the door trim in the hallway.
F5:
The lack of an epi-pen and defibrillator puts the detainees at risk in case of a medical emergency. Conclusion The Grand Jury was generally satisfied with the operation of the Auburn Police Department facility, although there were some health and cleanliness concerns.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
Staff more closely monitor cleanliness of the exterior stairway entrance/exit to the building. Request For Responses: Recommendations Requiring Response Response Due Date Mr. John Ruffcorn R1- R5 August 24, 2015 Police Chief, City of Auburn 1215 Lincoln Way Auburn, CA 95603 Copies sent to: Mr. Tim Rundel Auburn City Manager 1225 Lincoln Way Auburn, CA 95603 Mr. Keith Nesbitt Auburn City Mayor 1225 Lincoln Way Auburn CA 95603
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
3 findings
F1:
The 2x2 meetings were held to disseminate information regarding the RJUHSD conditions of approval of the lunch contract in advance of the EUSD Board meeting.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
Informational 2x2 meetings between EUSD staff and Board of Trustee members should never include a common Board member present at all the meetings.
F2:
EUSD understood that there would be no contract if there were any dissenting Board votes or any negative comments made at the EUSD public board meeting at which the EUSD-RJUHSD school lunch contract was considered.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The EUSD staff should arrange an annual training seminar on the Brown Act provisions for all Board members and executive staff.
F3:
The presence of a common Board member at all 2x2 briefing meetings between EUSD staff and one other Board member is a violation of the serial meeting provisions of the Brown Act. Conclusion Each informational meeting contained only two members of the five-member board. Therefore, there was no meeting as defined in Government Code § 54952.2(a). In other words, there was no majority. The Grand Jury finds that having a common Board member in all of the informational meetings is the type of serial meeting Government Code § 54952.2(b) addresses.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
11 findings
F1:
Inspection and maintenance of hydrants within the county is not uniform. If a fire hydrant needs repair, replacement, etc., the responsiveness is not consistent.
F2:
Cost is often a factor for smaller private services such as those provided by homeowners associations and the like.
F3:
Availability of functioning hydrants is a primary factor in Insurance Standards Organization (ISO) ratings which determine property owners’ fire insurance rates. This gives local districts an additional incentive to insure that their hydrants are maintained.
F4:
There is disagreement among some fire and water districts as to who actually owns the fire hydrants in some jurisdictions. Some water district personnel interviewed indicated that the hydrants are owned by the fire department, while some fire department personnel indicated that hydrants are owned by the water agencies.
F5:
Improperly functioning fire hydrants are a threat to public health and safety.
F6:
Despite the lack of standardization, the Grand Jury did not identify any area in which hydrants are not kept operational.
F7:
The local water and fire districts seem to work well together to see that hydrants are maintained.
F8:
Some water and fire districts serving a given geographic area have entered into formal written agreements.
F9:
In some areas, there are less formal agreements between the fire and water agencies’ respective management teams.
F10:
Generally, the fire district does inspection and light maintenance and the water districts do the heavier maintenance and repairs. Staff seemed to think that that arrangement makes sense in that it takes advantage of the skills of each agency’s employees.
F11:
The Grand Jury did not find any specific inadequacies in the operation of fire hydrants.
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
The Placer County CEO should consider whether a fire hydrant inspection and maintenance program be established to ensure uniformity throughout the county. Request for Responses: Recommendations Requiring Response Response Due Date Mr. David Boesch R1 August 24, 2015 Placer County CEO 175 Fulweiler Avenue Auburn, CA 95603 Copies Sent to: Fire Districts Newcastle Fire Protection District P.O. Box 262 Alta Fire Protection Department Newcastle, CA 95658 33950 Alta Bonnynook Rd. Alta, CA 95701 North Tahoe Fire Protection District P.O. Box 5879 Auburn City Fire Department Tahoe City, Ca 96145 1225 Lincoln Way Auburn, CA 95603 Northstar Community Services District 910 Northstar Drive California Department of Forestry Truckee, CA 96161 2840 Mt. Danaher Rd. Camino, CA 95709 Penryn Fire Protection District P.O. Box 219 Colfax City Fire Department Penryn, CA 95663 P.O. Box 1233 Colfax, CA 95713 Placer County Fire Protection Districts 13760 Lincoln Way Foresthill Fire Protection District Auburn, CA 95603 P.O. Box 1099 Foresthill, CA 95631 Placer Hills Fire Protection District P.O. Box 350 Lincoln City Fire Department Meadow Vista, Ca 95722 126 Joiner Parkway Lincoln, CA 95648 Rocklin City Fire Department 4060 Rocklin Road Loomis Fire Protection District Rocklin, CA 95677 P.O. Box 606 Loomis, CA 95650 Roseville City Fire Department 401 Oak Street #402 Roseville, CA 95678 South Placer Fire Protection District 6900 Eureka Road Granite Bay, Ca 95746 Squaw Valley Public Services District P.O. Box 2522 Olympic Valley, CA 96146 Truckee Fire Department P.O. Box 2768 Truckee, CA 96160 Public Water Agencies Alpine Springs County Water District City of Roseville Water Department 270 Alpine Meadows Rd. Vernon Street Alpine Meadows, CA 96146 Roseville, CA 95678 Auburn Valley Community Service District Donner Summit Public Utility District P.O. Box 8138 P.O. Box 610 Auburn, Ca 95604 Soda Springs, CA 95728 Christian Valley Park Community Service District Foresthill PUD P.O. Box 3138 P.O. Box 266 Auburn, Ca 95604 Foresthill, CA 95631 City of Lincoln Georgetown Public Utility District Water Department P.O. Box 4240 600 Sixth Street Georgetown, CA 95634 Lincoln, CA 95648 Meadow Vista County Water District P.O. Box 278 Heather Glen Community Service District Meadow Vista, CA 95722 P.O. Box 715 Applegate, CA 95703 Midway Heights County Water District Tahoe City Public Utility District P.O. P.O Box 5249 Meadow Vista, CA 95722 Tahoe City, CA 96145 North Tahoe Public Utility District Truckee Donner Public Utility District P.O. Box 139 11570 Donner Pass Road Tahoe Vista, CA 96148 Truckee, CA 96161-4947 PCWA P.O. Box 6570 Auburn, CA 95604 Sierra Lake County Water District P.O. Box 1039 Soda Springs, CA 95728 San Juan Water District P.O. Box 2157 Granite Bay, Ca 95746 South Tahoe PUD 1275 Meadow Crest Drive South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150 Squaw Valley Public Services District P.O. Box 2026 Olympic Valley, Ca 96145-2026 Suburban Pines Community Service District P.O. Box 576 Colfax, CA 95713
Findings & Recommendations
11 findings
F1:
Long-term placement for child victims of sex trafficking in Placer County is problematic.
F2:
An advocate, who has worked with victims for 15 years, uses stringent software to test for boundaries and sexual propensities (Diana Screening) in potential safe houses for victims. This advocate says that the use of this more extensive software could improve the probability of human trafficking victims to find a safe home.
F3:
In ten months, and as of the time of this interview, one facility had turned away 79 victims due to lack of beds.
F4:
Child victims are usually sent out of their local area for their own safety.
F5:
Law enforcement commented that monetary fines on massage parlors are not severe enough to stop the rotation of female victims. When law enforcement questions these females, they frequently have scripted answers (“just visiting from out of town, staying with a friend”, etc.) When law enforcement conducts follow-up investigations on the same businesses within a short period of time, those employees have moved on to new locations. New female employees have the same scripted responses to questions.
F6:
Law enforcement has much less control or power to protect adult victims since they are over 18, and unless charged with a crime, they can’t hold them.
F7:
Establishment of state-wide tracking systems for victims already identified by law enforcement is necessary. Conclusion Although Placer County does have instances of human trafficking, it is not on the scale of larger areas within California. The Grand Jury would like to commend Placer County Children’s System of Care and its partners in developing the CSEC task force. Although CSEC is a new task force, their research, services, and partnerships with other county services appear promising. Continued training for all County officials working with families is crucial for CSEC to fully realize its potential to identify risky situations, enforce the extensive laws already in place and to best assess and fulfill the needs of the victims.
F8:
Some water and fire districts serving a given geographic area have entered into formal written agreements.
F9:
In some areas, there are less formal agreements between the fire and water agencies’ respective management teams.
F10:
Generally, the fire district does inspection and light maintenance and the water districts do the heavier maintenance and repairs. Staff seemed to think that that arrangement makes sense in that it takes advantage of the skills of each agency’s employees.
F11:
The Grand Jury did not find any specific inadequacies in the operation of fire hydrants. _________________________________________________ - 10 - _________________________________________________ Findings and Recommendations -2015 Final Report
Additional Recommendations
3
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
Health and Human Services continues to seek up to date information and state-of-the-art programs for human trafficking victim assistance.
R2:
The CSEC continue “active” coordination of all agencies involved in identifying and tracking human trafficking incidents in Placer County.
R3:
The CSEC develop human trafficking awareness programs to educate parents and children, with a special emphasis on foster parents and foster children.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
21 findings
F1:
Long-term placement for child victims of sex trafficking in Placer County is problematic.
F2:
An advocate, who has worked with victims for 15 years, uses stringent software to test for boundaries and sexual propensities (Diana Screening) in potential safe houses for victims. This advocate says that the use of this more extensive software could improve the probability of human trafficking victims to find a safe home. - 38 - -2015 Final Report
F3:
In ten months, and as of the time of this interview, one facility had turned away 79 victims due to lack of beds.
F4:
Child victims are usually sent out of their local area for their own safety.
F5:
Law enforcement commented that monetary fines on massage parlors are not severe enough to stop the rotation of female victims. When law enforcement questions these females, they frequently have scripted answers (“just visiting from out of town, staying with a friend”, etc.) When law enforcement conducts follow-up investigations on the same businesses within a short period of time, those employees have moved on to new locations. New female employees have the same scripted responses to questions.
F6:
Law enforcement has much less control or power to protect adult victims since they are over 18, and unless charged with a crime, they can’t hold them.
F7:
Establishment of state-wide tracking systems for victims already identified by law enforcement is necessary. Conclusion Although Placer County does have instances of human trafficking, it is not on the scale of larger areas within California. The Grand Jury would like to commend Placer County Children’s System of Care and its partners in developing the CSEC task force. Although CSEC is a new task force, their research, services, and partnerships with other county services appear promising. Continued training for all County officials working with families is crucial for CSEC to fully realize its potential to identify risky situations, enforce the extensive laws already in place and to best assess and fulfill the needs of the victims. - 39 - -2015 Final Report
F8:
Smart phones have blurred the lines between cell-phone and technology use policies.
F9:
Management oversight and monitoring of technology usage is an evolving challenge.
F10:
The extent of personal computer and tablet usage varies with the number of employees.
F11:
Management approach and policies on technology vary. Contracting, Bidding and Purchasing Policies Facts • Contracting and bidding practices vary but conform to state laws, regulations and appeared adequate. - 46 - -2015 Final Report Findings
F12:
All entities have adequate policies on contracting and bidding. Management and Administration of Policies Facts • Training policies and practices, both initial and recurring, vary. • All operational policies apply to elected officials as well as employees. • Not all policies were current and in writing. • Not all policies were organized and indexed. • Only Placer County has internal auditors on staff. • Roseville does not have an internal auditor but is considering adding this role. • Colfax has a policy and a complaint form for whistleblower reports. All others rely on Federal Law protecting whistleblowers but do not have a policy or form for written whistleblower reports. Findings
F13:
Policies are not being updated in a timely fashion.
F14:
Some, but not all, policies identified the original date of issue or date of review.
F15:
Issuance dates, recurring reviews and approvals of operational policies were only completed by Placer County, Colfax and Roseville. Other entities revised policies on an “as necessary” basis.
F16:
Complete standardized numbered policies were only available from Placer County and Roseville.
F17:
Initial training on operational policies is completed for newly elected officials and new employees in a variety of ways.
F18:
Recurring training policies can be improved.
F19:
Management of technology innovations requires an inter-disciplinary approach.
F20:
On-going internal auditing serves to monitor internal controls and minimize non- compliance and abuse. The addition of internal auditors would be valuable for the larger cities.
F21:
Providing forms for employees to submit whistleblower reports in writing would be of value. - 47 -
Additional Recommendations
3
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
Health and Human Services continues to seek up to date information and state-of-the-art programs for human trafficking victim assistance.
R2:
The CSEC continue “active” coordination of all agencies involved in identifying and tracking human trafficking incidents in Placer County.
R3:
The CSEC develop human trafficking awareness programs to educate parents and children, with a special emphasis on foster parents and foster children.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
21 findings
F1:
Policies for travel seemed appropriate and adequate while recognizing the wide differences in size of the workforce and responsibilities. Colfax has policies, but they are not in writing.
F2:
Travel controls for all entities are adequate. Vehicle Policies Facts County and all local governments have government vehicles. The majority of vehicle use is by public safety and public service departments. The use of personal vehicles for official travel is reimbursed at the IRS approved mileage rate. The Board of Supervisors and other elected local government officials are not assigned government owned vehicles. Elected officials receive set allowances to compensate for transportation expenses. Colfax does not have a written policy on vehicle use. Findings
F3:
Vehicle policies for all jurisdictions are satisfactory, although Cofax’s policy is not in writing. Credit Card Policies Facts The county and all cities use credit cards. The number of cards in use varies; for example, Loomis has only one credit card, while Roseville has over 300 credit cards. Managers or department heads are responsible for approving the issuance of cards and monitoring appropriate use. Typical credit card use includes: Travel expenses such as airfare and conference fees payable in advance Purchases for emergency repairs Numerous other authorized routine field expenses Credit card expenses are reviewed and approved prior to payment. Monitoring of credit card expenses is routinely done by staff and, proactively by the issuing credit card banks. Findings
F4:
Each government body has different policies and procedures for issuance and use of credit cards.
F5:
Credit cards are widely used by Placer County, Rocklin and Roseville. Use in other jurisdictions is more limited.
F6:
Monitoring and control of credit card use is adequate. Cell-Phone Polices Facts All entities issue and use cell-phones for employee use. The bulk of cell-phone use is by public safety and public service employees. Elected officials generally use their own cell-phones and are reimbursed or have allowances covering such use. Placer County and Roseville department heads authorize cell-phone issuances. Placer County and Roseville IT departments have responsibility for negotiating cell- phone contracts. Findings
F7:
Monitoring cell phone usage continues to be an on-going challenge for management. Technology Policies Facts All entities have a wide variety of hardware and software. Placer County, Auburn, Rocklin,and Roseville have inter-disciplinary groups to assess technology changes, their application and their costs. Some agencies monitor Internet access to preclude personal use. Rocklin has a social media policy. Roseville has e-mail and remote e-mail policies that employees must read, acknowledge and understand before signing. Roseville incorporates technology training in yearly ethics training. Cyber security insurance is purchased by Roseville. Auburn has a technical procedures policy that employees must sign. deleted Findings
F8:
Smart phones have blurred the lines between cell-phone and technology use policies.
F9:
Management oversight and monitoring of technology usage is an evolving challenge.
F10:
The extent of personal computer and tablet usage varies with the number of employees.
F11:
Management approach and policies on technology vary. Contracting, Bidding and Purchasing Policies Facts Contracting and bidding practices vary but conform to state laws, regulations and appeared adequate. Findings
F12:
All entities have adequate policies on contracting and bidding. Management and Administration of Policies Facts Training policies and practices, both initial and recurring, vary. All operational policies apply to elected officials as well as employees. Not all policies were current and in writing. Not all policies were organized and indexed. Only Placer County has internal auditors on staff. Roseville does not have an internal auditor but is considering adding this role. Colfax has a policy and a complaint form for whistleblower reports. All others rely on Federal Law protecting whistleblowers but do not have a policy or form for written whistleblower reports. Findings
F13:
Policies are not being updated in a timely fashion.
F14:
Some, but not all, policies identified the original date of issue or date of review.
F15:
Issuance dates, recurring reviews and approvals of operational policies were only completed by Placer County, Colfax and Roseville. Other entities revised policies on an “as necessary” basis.
F16:
Complete standardized numbered policies were only available from Placer County and Roseville.
F17:
Initial training on operational policies is completed for newly elected officials and new employees in a variety of ways.
F18:
Recurring training policies can be improved.
F19:
Management of technology innovations requires an inter-disciplinary approach.
F20:
On-going internal auditing serves to monitor internal controls and minimize non- compliance and abuse. The addition of internal auditors would be valuable for the larger cities.
F21:
Providing forms for employees to submit whistleblower reports in writing would be of value. Conclusions The Grand Jury’s review of the operating policies of the county and cities indicates they are appropriate. There are actions that the Grand Jury would consider best practices that should be instilled. Current policies apply equally to elected officials, appointed management and employees. Significant variability exists in the level of detail included in the operating policies of the county and various cities. As the size of the government entity and number of employees increases, more reliance is placed on managerial control.
Additional Recommendations
11
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
A written policy for travel and vehicle use be developed.
R2:
A regular schedule be established for reviewing all policies to assure they are current.
R3:
All policies should include, approval, adoption, and review dates. Policies should be indexed for improved access.
R4:
Cell phone policies be documented.
R5:
Computer and internet policies be documented.
R6:
Technology policies include computer, tablet, internet and email use.
R7:
Consideration should be given to the development of a Technology Resources Policy including a schedule of reviews and employee acknowledgements.
R8:
Consideration be given to procuring cyber security insurance.
R9:
Require that employees on a recurring schedule verify that they understand and acknowledge, by signature, operational policies and any changes thereto.
R10:
A whistleblower policy and reporting form be developed.
R11:
Consideration be given to adding one or more internal auditors to staff. Table 1 – Recommendations Recommendations
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
5 findings
F1:
The JDF was clean and well maintained.
F2:
The design of the outdoor grass area at the JDF facility is inherently flawed.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The Grand Jury recommends that the Juvenile Detention Facility:
Seek funding from the Placer County Executive office to address the fencing security and staffing issues relating to the use of the grassy outdoor area.
F3:
The JDF Staff exhibited a good rapport with the detainees. They have implemented a merit/point system and their focus is preparing the detainees for release with a view to minimizing the recidivism rate.
F4:
The JDF Staff appear to run a good program for detainees who are there for a short time (i.e., days to weeks). However, certain aspects of the program, namely the repetition of class offerings and limited access to the grass field could be detrimental to detainees held for a longer period of time (i.e., months to years).
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The Grand Jury recommends that the Juvenile Detention Facility:
Provide additional behavior and social development classes for detainees who have already taken the basic courses. Request for Responses: Recommendations Requiring Response Response Due Date Mr. Marshall Hopper R1, R2 August 24, 2015 Chief Probation Officer Placer County Probation Department 2929 Richardson Drive, Suite B Auburn, CA 95603 Mr. David Boesch R1 August 24, 2015 Placer County CEO 175 Fulweiler Ave. Auburn, CA 95603 Copies Sent To: Placer County Board of Supervisors 175 Fulweiler Avenue Auburn, CA 95603 Mr. Jeffery Cann Superintendent, Placer County Juvenile Detention Center 11260 B Avenue Auburn, CA 95603
F5:
The JDF Staff stated that serving food in the dayroom rather than the cafeteria saves time, and limits security risks caused by traveling back and forth. This procedure also allows detainees more time to eat in a more relaxed atmosphere. Conclusion The Grand Jury found the JDF to be clean, well maintained, and well-staffed with trained personnel.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
3 findings
F1:
PCWA is a well-managed special district agency and uses its water and electrical assets to the advantage of its rate payers.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
A significant portion of revenue from the sale of surplus water and some of the net revenues from the sale of electricity be used to extend delivery of potable water to neighborhoods and communities not currently served by PCWA.
F2:
The ongoing reality of drought and reduced water inflows into all water districts serving Placer County residents and businesses is requiring PCWA to reevaluate how all county residents are served with water.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
Consideration be given to potential or emergency needs of existing underserved areas within Placer County in the Water Master Plan being prepared by PCWA.
F3:
During the ongoing drought PCWA may benefit from utilizing advisory councils as provided by the Act.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
For public water systems not currently served by PCWA, the Water Master Plan should include the opportunity to connect their water service to PCWA. PCWA should make emergency financial aid available for this purpose.
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R4:
PCWA form zone advisory councils pursuant to PCWA Act § 81-15.2. Request for Responses: Recommendations Requiring Response Response Due Date PCWA Board of Directors R1 – R4 September 22, 2015 Placer County Water Agency P. O. Box 6570 Auburn, CA 95604 Mr. Joseph Parker R1 – R4 September 22, 2015 Director of Financial Services Placer County Water Agency P. O. Box 6570 Auburn, CA 9560
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
4 findings
F1:
During interviews, school district personnel indicated that they either have implemented, or are implementing, mechanisms for the safe reporting of bullying and cyber-bullying.
F2:
Some schools do not have a means for anonymous reporting.
F3:
Schools are measuring the effectiveness of the programs, but with a few exceptions, do not yet have enough data to draw statistically valid conclusions.
F4:
Schools are utilizing PBIS to collect behavior data that includes bullying incidents.
Additional Recommendations
4
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
Schools should continue to develop and refine mechanisms for the safe reporting of bullying and cyber-bullying.
R2:
Schools with no provisions for the anonymous reporting of bullying should create them. As part of their response, all schools are to provide a copy of their anonymous bullying reporting policy.
R3:
Schools should continue to measure the effectiveness of their anti-bullying policies and utilize that data to improve school climate, including creating a safe environment for all.
R4:
Schools utilizing PBIS should continue its use and foster its expansion to other schools as training is available. - 94 - -2015 Final Report
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
13 findings
F1:
The websites provide a large variety of information, making many documents readily available to the public without necessitating a CPRA request or physical visit. This information includes data such as: locations services business hours governance fees taxes licenses annual financial reports and other governmental or special agency procedures.
F2:
Due to the lack of consistency between websites, locating similar information on different websites is time consuming and exasperating.
F3:
The inclusion of outdated information on the website, besides being of limited value, clutters the website and calls into question other postings on the website. An example is that one website includes labor force statistics and economic reports from 2006.
F4:
The lack of document information, including posting dates and sunset dates, decreases confidence in the validity of data found on the websites.
F5:
Some meeting minutes are not being posted in a timely manner.
F6:
It is generally more difficult to distinguish the minutes when they are embedded in agendas or in videos, rather than posted separately.
F7:
Posting of summarized minutes (abstracts), or a summary of actions taken, would improve the public’s experience in trying to understand what governance actions were taken, or what decisions were made or deferred.
F8:
Video recordings of proceedings are beneficial to the public’s understanding of their representatives actions in council and board meetings.
F9:
The ability to locate current financial results is improved when financial performance reports are directly posted on the website.
F10:
Lack of consistency in posting of bid opportunities and awards on websites makes it difficult for the public to discern available contracting opportunities and what awards have been approved.
F11:
The public’s access to operating policies, applying to elected officials and employees, would be enhanced if these documents were available through the website.
F12:
A link on the website to fill out CPRA document requests improves the public’s ability to submit requests.
F13:
A link to the Grand Jury website where the Grand Jury complaint form “Confidential Citizen Complaint” is available enables public access for registering a confidential complaint on line.
Additional Recommendations
11
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
A website best-practices guide be considered for development in the next 12 months by representatives from Placer County and the Cities of Auburn, Colfax, Lincoln, Rocklin, Roseville and the town of Loomis.
R2:
All Special Districts/Agencies should assure that their websites, at a minimum, meet the best- practices checklist from the Special District Leadership Foundation.
R3:
All website information should be subject to annual reviews to ensure information is still pertinent.
R4:
All documents have a posting and sunset (required removal) date that triggers an automatic archiving of the document.
R5:
All city and special districts webpages should include current written minutes, which include a summary of actions taken and decisions made.
R6:
Posting of complete video recordings of meetings should be investigated to determine if it is economically feasible.
R7:
All websites should include direct links to financial reports, including on-going progress and performance reports on financial results versus budgets.
R8:
Placer County, City of Auburn, City of Colfax, and all special district/agency websites should include access to the policy, process, and posting of current contracting opportunities. Results of bid awards should also be posted.
R9:
Current operating policies covering travel and use of entity owned assets, including vehicles, cell phones, computers, and credit cards should be available on websites or by online CPRA requests.
R10:
Placer County, Auburn and Colfax, along with all special districts, should incorporate into their websites a link to make CPRA Public Records Requests.
R11:
Websites should include a link to the Grand Jury website where the public can access the Grand Jury complaint form“Confidential Citizen Complaint”. Tables 3 and 4 on the following pages specify which recommendations are applicable to each surveyed entity. Attachment A demonstrates the linkages between the multiple facts, findings and recommendations in this report. Table 3 – Recommendations for County, Cities and Towns Recommendations
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
2 findings
F1:
The Rocklin Police Department is to be commended for its upkeep of its modern facility.
F2:
The RPD is also to be commended for its willingness to make this facility available to fire department personnel as well. Conclusion The Rocklin city jail and holding cells appeared to be well-managed and maintained by staff.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
1 findings
F1:
There are maintenance issues at the secondary entrance. Conclusion This jail continues to serve a valuable use to local police providing a unique program (SPP) for low-level non-violent offenders that continue to utilize the cells. These detainees check in and out of the jail at varying times through a specific designated outside entrance. The jails and holding cells are well-managed and maintained by staff. The Grand Jury concludes that the Roseville jail performs an important function in this community.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The Roseville Police Department conduct regular maintenance of the secondary entrance door area. Request For Responses: Recommendations Requiring Response Response Due Date Mr. Daniel Hahn R1 August 24, 2015 Chief of Police Roseville Police Department 1051 Junction Blvd Roseville, CA 95678 Roseville City Council R1 September 22, 2015 311 Vernon St Roseville, CA 95678
Findings & Recommendations
12 findings
F2:
Due to the lack of consistency between websites, organization of information on the various R1. A website best practices guide be locating similar information on different websites is websites. considered for development in the next 12 time consuming and frustrating. months. by representatives from Placer County and the Cities of Auburn, Colfax, Lincoln, Although the websites vary, some of them Rocklin, Roseville and the town of Loomis. have more of a focus on general community information (i.e. visitor info, weather, schools, etc.) than on government
F3:
The inclusion of outdated information on the website, besides being of limited value, clutters the website and calls into question other postings on the website. An example is that one website includes labor force statistics and economic reports from 2006.
F4:
The lack of document information, including posting dates and sunset dates, decreases confidence in the validity of data found on the websites.
F5:
Some minutes are not being posted in a timely manner.
F6:
It is generally more difficult to distinguish the One agency website does not have minutes when they are embedded in agendas or in current agenda and minutes. videos, rather than posted separately .
F7:
Posting of summarized minutes (abstracts), or a Some of the sites provide video records of summary of actions taken, would improve the public’s meetings. experience in trying understand what governance actions were taken, or what decisions were made . Only the Placer County website contains a summary of actions approved by the Board.
F8:
Video recordings of proceedings are beneficial to R6. Posting of complete video recordings of Some of the sites provide video records of the public’s understanding of their representatives meetings should be investigated to determine if meetings. actions in council and board meetings it is economically feasible . Video recordings of county board and city council meetings allow the public to view the entire proceeding. - 74 - Attachment A . The ability to locate current financial results is R7. All websites should include direct links to financial results versus budgets are improved when operating reports and financial financial reports, including on-going progress generally only available as agenda performance reports are directly posted on the and performance reports on financial results exhibits. website. versus budgets . Only four websites provide on-going operating reports regarding expenditures vs. budget.
F9:
The ability to locate current financial results is improved when operating reports and financial performance reports are directly posted on the website.
F10:
Lack of consistency in posting of bid All but three sites provide access to special district/agency web sites should include opportunities and awards, on websites, makes it opportunities to bid on contracts. There is access to the policy, process and posting of difficult for the public to discern available contracting no consistency in displaying bid awards. current contracting opportunities. Results of opportunities and what awards have been approved. bid awards should also be posted. None of the websites include current F11. The public’s access to operating policies, R9. Current operating policies covering travel operating policies, such as employee and applying to elected officials and employees, would be and use of entity owned assets including elected officials travel, use of government enhanced if these documents were available through vehicles, cell-phones, computers, and credit owned vehicles, computers, cell-phones the website. cards should be available on websites or by on- and credit cards; nor do they include line CPRA requests. policies on purchasing and contract bidding processes.
F11:
The public’s access to operating policies, applying to elected officials and employees, would be enhanced if these documents were available through the website.
F12:
A link on the website to fill out CPRA document R10. Placer County, Auburn and Colfax Only two of the websites included access requests, improves the public’s ability to submit should incorporate into their websites a link to to make public CPRA document requests. requests. make CPRA Public Records Requests. - 75 - Attachment A . A link to the Grand Jury website where the GJ R11. Websites should include a link for the a link to the Grand Jury website to allow complaint form “Confidential Citizen Complaint” is public to make a Grand Jury complaint. easy access to the Grand Jury complaint available enables public access for registering a form “Confidential Citizen Complaint”. confidential complaint on line. - 76 - - by the Board of Supervisors (BOS). In 2004 the Placer Consortium on Homeless and Affordable Housing Committee presented to the BOS a ten-year plan to end homelessness in Placer County. As of December of 2014, there was no temporary emergency homeless shelter in Auburn. Faced with the prospect of people living out in the open during a cold and wet winter, immediate action for a shelter, even if temporary, appeared in order. A number of citizens stepped forward with offers of resources and a proposal to repurpose two buildings on the DeWitt Center Campus as a temporary shelter. These buildings, which had recently been used to house minimum-security prisoners, appeared to be a ready solution to provide temporary shelter for the homeless. When the issue appeared to stall before the BOS in December 2014, the Grand Jury decided to investigate. During the course of the investigation, the BOS held a special meeting in which they requested an expedited review and analysis by County staff. At the time of this writing, the BOS has given approval for a temporary shelter at the DeWitt Center with a conditional use permit for ninety (90) days. The need for a permanent solution remains. Background In September 2014, the BOS commissioned a study to identify the needs of the homeless in Placer County. The study, expected in March 2015, would not come in time to help the homeless people. In December 2014, the homeless were camped in the fields and parking lot adjacent to the DeWitt Government Center in North Auburn. As of this writing, numerous homeless people are camped in the DeWitt Center fields, parking lots, and under buildings. During December 2014, a month with record rainfall, the homeless had no choice but to huddle together under the awnings and decks of the DeWitt buildings in a vain attempt to stay dry. - 78 -
F13:
A link to the Grand Jury website where the GJ complaint form “Confidential Citizen Complaint” is available enables public access for registering a confidential complaint on line.
Additional Recommendations
11
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
A website best practices guide be considered for development in the next 12 months. by representatives from Placer County and the Cities of Auburn, Colfax, Lincoln, Rocklin, Roseville and the town of Loomis.
R2:
All Special Districts/Agencies should CPRA information. assure that their websites, at a minimum, meet the best practices checklist from the Special District Leadership Foundation. The Special District Leadership Foundation has developed a best practices checklist for what information should be included on a Special District/Agency website. The GJ was unable to locate any similar guide for cities and counties. Some sites contain extensive historical information such as economic reports, statistical information on labor forces, housing, business, etc. Some sites include outdated information. F3. The inclusion of outdated information on the R3. All website information should be subject website, besides being of limited value, clutters the to annual reviews to ensure information is still website and calls into question other postings on the pertinent. website. An example is that one website includes labor force statistics and economic reports from 2006. - 73 - Attachment A . The lack of document information, including R4. All documents have a posting and sunset sunset dates on information or posted posting dates and sunset dates, decreases confidence (required removal) date that triggers an documents. in the validity of data found on the websites. automatic archiving of the document. All sites include agendas, minutes of F5. Some minutes are not being posted in a timely R5. All city and special districts webpages meetings, budgets and financial reports. manner. should include current written minutes, which include a summary of actions taken and decisions made.
R3:
All website information should be subject to annual reviews to ensure information is still pertinent.
R4:
All documents have a posting and sunset (required removal) date that triggers an automatic archiving of the document. All sites include agendas, minutes of meetings, budgets and financial reports.
R5:
All city and special districts webpages should include current written minutes, which include a summary of actions taken and decisions made.
R6:
Posting of complete video recordings of meetings should be investigated to determine if it is economically feasible . Video recordings of county board and city council meetings allow the public to view the entire proceeding.
R7:
All websites should include direct links to financial reports, including on-going progress and performance reports on financial results versus budgets . Only four websites provide on-going operating reports regarding expenditures vs. budget.
R8:
Placer County, Auburn and Colfax and all
R9:
Current operating policies covering travel and use of entity owned assets including vehicles, cell-phones, computers, and credit cards should be available on websites or by on- line CPRA requests. Only two of the websites included access to make public CPRA document requests.
R10:
Placer County, Auburn and Colfax should incorporate into their websites a link to make CPRA Public Records Requests.
R11:
Websites should include a link for the public to make a Grand Jury complaint.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
4 findings
F1:
In December 2014, the homeless people camping at the DeWitt campus in harsh weather conditions represented an urgent, unmet need for temporary shelter.
F2:
The Barracks seemed to be in acceptable condition and relatively simple to convert to a temporary emergency shelter for homeless individuals.
F3:
In January and February 2015, the BOS began to address the issue by calling a special meeting and a public hearing.
F4:
The need for a permanent solution to the homeless situation continues. Conclusion In ten years of attempting to address the homeless situation, Placer County has not produced a permanent solution to this compelling issue. In September 2014 the BOS commissioned a study to , identify the needs of the homeless in Placer County. The results of the study were presented to the Board of Supervisors on April 7, 2015. However, in December 2014, the homeless population needed immediate shelter due to inclement weather. At the time of this writing, the BOS gave approval for a temporary shelter on the DeWitt campus with a temporary conditional use permit for ninety (90) days. The need for a permanent solution remains. Through the good work of Right Hand Auburn, Volunteers of America and others, it appears that tangible work on a temporary housing solution for the homeless has begun. The Grand Jury commends these organizations for stepping up to assist our homeless citizens by providing a safe, warm place to stay. The Grand Jury acknowledges the BOS for their actions on this matter and, in particular, the county staff for their expedited efforts.
Additional Recommendations
3
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
An evaluation of the use of the DeWitt Barracks as emergency homeless housing should be conducted at the end of the 90-day period for the conditional-use permit, and on a recurring schedule thereafter.
R2:
The BOS and county staff should promptly review Marbut Consulting’s final report to determine its impact on the need for a temporary emergency shelter. In addition, the BOS should monitor the implementation of the Strategic Action Plan referred to in the final report.
R3:
The 2015-2016 Grand Jury continue to monitor the BOS progress on implementing a more permanent solution to the homeless issue in Placer County. Request for Responses: Recommendations Requiring Response Response Due Date Mr. David Boesch R1, R2 August 24, 2015 Placer County CEO 175 Fulweiler Ave. Auburn, CA 95603 Placer County Board of Supervisors R1, R2 September 22, 2015 175 Fulweiler Ave. Auburn, CA 95603 Copies Sent to: Ms. Mary Dietrich Placer County Director of Facility Services 11476 C Ave. Auburn CA 95603
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
6 findings
F1:
Seniors First provides Placer County senior and disabled citizens with the following services at no or reduced costs for the following services: Assisted Living Placement Door-to-Door Rides for shut-in citizens for medical/dental appointments, food shopping, and other out-of-home appointments Friendly Visitor Program for shut-ins Senior nutrition at senior cafes throughout the county Health Express for hospital needs Handy Person Program assist for home repairs Information and referrals to other programs serving disabled and senior residents
F2:
Seniors First contracts for funding with the California Area 4 Agency on Aging and other Community Foundations. They also solicit donations and hold fundraisers. A majority of their services are offered free of charge to the citizens they serve. This population consists primarily of persons who are disabled, or seniors in need. Many are shut-ins without other family in the area or families unable to provide for their needs. These clients have little political advocacy or presence in the county.
F3:
Seniors First relocated from their offices at the DeWitt Center due to the cancellation of their lease. In absorbing the costs of the relocation, they have $29,000 less to spend serving seniors, including the disabled and shut-ins. Additionally, their monthly rental payments have increased from $708.92 to $1,129.80 a month at their new location.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
Placer County considers reimbursing Seniors First for their out-of pocket costs ($29,000) expended in their forced relocation. Request for Responses: Recommendations Requiring Response Response Due Date Ms. Mary Dietrich R1, R2 August 24, 2015 Placer County Director of Facility Services 11476 C Ave, Auburn CA 95603 Placer County Board of Supervisors R1, R2 September 22, 2015 175 Fulweiler Ave. Auburn, CA 95603 Copies Sent to: Mr. David Boesch Placer County CEO 175 Fulweiler Ave. Auburn, CA 95603 Seniors First 12183 Locksley Lane, Suite 205 Auburn, CA 95603
F4:
The reclassification of the DeWitt Center Enterprise funds to the PCGC-ISF does not obviate the recommendation of the 2013-2014 Grand Jury that these funds might be used to offset the costs of relocation for Seniors First.
F5:
Placer County Officials indicated that the revenues from the DeWitt Government Center are dedicated exclusively to the county government offices. All income derived from external leases on the DeWitt Government Center Campus (Home Depot, as an example) are earmarked for DeWitt Government Center growth, maintenance, and building needs.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
Income generated by the DeWitt Government Center be considered to be available to the people of Placer County and not just dedicated to DeWitt Government Center needs.
F6:
The Grand Jury views county government and the Board of Supervisors as stewards of the DeWitt Government Center for the people of Placer County. The income earned through management of that asset may be used in any manner at their discretion.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
Income generated by the DeWitt Government Center be considered to be available to the people of Placer County and not just dedicated to DeWitt Government Center needs.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
4 findings
F1:
In December 2014, the homeless people camping at the DeWitt campus in harsh weather conditions represented an urgent, unmet need for temporary shelter.
F2:
The Barracks seemed to be in acceptable condition and relatively simple to convert to a temporary emergency shelter for homeless individuals.
F3:
In January and February 2015, the BOS began to address the issue by calling a special meeting and a public hearing.
F4:
The need for a permanent solution to the homeless situation continues. Conclusion In ten years of attempting to address the homeless situation, Placer County has not produced a permanent solution to this compelling issue. In September 2014 the BOS commissioned a study to , identify the needs of the homeless in Placer County. The results of the study were presented to the Board of Supervisors on April 7, 2015. However, in December 2014, the homeless population needed immediate shelter due to inclement weather. At the time of this writing, the BOS gave approval for a temporary shelter on the DeWitt campus with a temporary conditional use permit for ninety (90) days. The need for a permanent solution remains. Through the good work of Right Hand Auburn, Volunteers of America and others, it appears that tangible work on a temporary housing solution for the homeless has begun. The Grand Jury commends these organizations for stepping up to assist our homeless citizens by providing a safe, warm place to stay. The Grand Jury acknowledges the BOS for their actions on this matter and, in particular, the county staff for their expedited efforts. - 81 - -2015 Final Report
Additional Recommendations
5
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
An evaluation of the use of the DeWitt Barracks as emergency homeless housing should be conducted at the end of the 90-day period for the conditional-use permit, and on a recurring schedule thereafter.
R2:
The BOS and county staff should promptly review Marbut Consulting’s final report to determine its impact on the need for a temporary emergency shelter. In addition, the BOS should monitor the implementation of the Strategic Action Plan referred to in the final report.
R3:
The 2015-2016 Grand Jury continue to monitor the BOS progress on implementing a more permanent solution to the homeless issue in Placer County. Request for Responses: Recommendations Requiring Response Response Due Date Mr. David Boesch R1, R2 August 24, 2015 Placer County CEO 175 Fulweiler Ave. Auburn, CA 95603 Placer County Board of Supervisors R1, R2 September 22, 2015 175 Fulweiler Ave. Auburn, CA 95603 Copies Sent to: Ms. Mary Dietrich Placer County Director of Facility Services 11476 C Ave. Auburn CA 95603 - 82 - -2014 Grand Jury Investigation - 83 - -2014 Grand Jury Investigation
R4:
If it is determined that the ADRC model is not appropriate as a five-year plan for Placer County, then the county should implement another model for providing necessary single points of entry into a long-term support and services system for older adults and people with disabilities.
R5:
Provide a time frame for the implementation of these recommendations in accordance with subdivision (b)(2) of Penal Code § 933.05. - 87 - – R5 September 22, 2015 175 Fulweiler Ave. Auburn, CA 95603 Mr. David Boesch R1 - R5 August 24, 2015 Placer County CEO 175 Fulweiler Ave. Auburn, CA 95603 Copies Sent to: Mr. Jeff S. Brown Director, Placer County Health and Human Services 3091 County Center Dr. #290 Auburn, CA, 95603 - 88 - -2014 Report - 89 - -2014 Report
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
4 findings
F1:
In general, all six Placer County jails and holding facilities are clean, well-maintained, and well-managed. It is clear that all staff is proud of the facilities.
F2:
The Burton Creek Substation Jail/Holding Facility is functional and well-coordinated, especially, considering its age.
F3:
The South Placer Main Jail and the Auburn Main Jail are the most impacted by AB109, which creates overcrowding, as discussed in the Summary section. Long-term rehabilitation and extended medical services are now more vital for those with longer sentences. County facilities were not built to accommodate this AB109 mandate.
F4:
Proposition 47 places a burden on the correctional system because of the sudden surge in petitions for inmates to have their classifications and sentences reduced. Future plans to build a second minimum-security facility on the South Placer property may help alleviate the increase in population of those with lesser sentences, but this is just a small step toward a more permanent solution. Conclusion All Placer County jails and holding cells are well-managed and maintained, in spite of the recent significant legislative challenges. While the State has allocated some funds to the counties to help defray the costs of realignment, the impact highlights the degree to which additional services need to be added. The need to increase staff at both main jails is critical and should be a county budget priority. - 115 - -2015 Final Report
Additional Recommendations
14
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
The Grand Jury recommends that the county make the following improvements:
Obscure the glass in Dept. 1, so inmates cannot see into the judge’s office area.
R2:
The Grand Jury recommends that the county make the following improvements:
Train and supply staff with epi-pens in case of emergency (bee stings, mosquito bites, food allergies, etc.)
R3:
The Grand Jury recommends that the county make the following improvements:
Install security cameras in the back parking lot (a recurring Grand Jury recommendation from the 2013-2014 Grand Jury Report).
R4:
The Grand Jury recommends that the county make the following improvements:
Adjust the sensitivity of the metal detector in the lobby, so it is not triggered by the movement of the elevator.
R5:
The Grand Jury recommends that the county make the following improvements:
Install bars on the window in the stairwell that the inmates utilize.
R6:
The Grand Jury recommends that the county make the following improvements:
Improve the emergency public announcement (PA) system, so it is site-wide. Burton Creek Recommendations:
R7:
The Grand Jury recommends that the county make the following improvements:
Increase the security of the sally port and lock up the flares stored there.
R8:
The Grand Jury recommends that the county make the following improvements:
Train and supply staff with epi-pens, in case of emergency.
R9:
The Grand Jury recommends that the county make the following improvements:
Repair the heating system.
R10:
The Grand Jury recommends that the county make the following improvements:
Increase the security of the storage of evidence.
R11:
The Grand Jury recommends that the county make the following improvements:
Implement changes to make the facility more ADA-compliant. South Placer Main Jail Recommendations:
R12:
The Grand Jury recommends that the county make the following improvements:
Assign responsibility for the cracks in the concrete flooring and repair them. South Placer Minimum Security Facility Recommendations:
R13:
The Grand Jury recommends that the county make the following improvements:
Provide more opportunity for work hours for the female inmates. - 116 - -2015 Final Report Auburn Main Jail Recommendations:
R14:
The Grand Jury recommends that the county make the following improvements:
Repair the numerous, on-going ceiling water leak problems inside the facility. Request for Responses: Recommendations Requiring Response Response Due Date Mr. Edward Bonner R1-R14 August 24, 2015 Placer County Sheriff-Coroner-Marshal 2929 Richardson Drive Auburn, CA. 95603 Mr. David Boesch R1-R14 August 24, 2015 Placer County CEO 175 Fulweiler Avenue Auburn, CA 95603 Copies sent to: Placer County Board of Supervisors 175 Fulweiler Avenue Auburn, CA 95603 - 117 - - -2015 Final Report Placer County Juvenile Detention Facility Annual Inspection