Plumas County Grand Jury
2007-2008
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 (10)
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
10 findings
F1:
– Timely posting of minutes of meetings held by the Plumas County Board of Supervisors. California Government Code Section 25150 requires the Board Of Supervisors to publish a fair statement of all of its proceedings within ten (10) days of each The current policy and procedures of the Plumas County Board of meeting. Supervisors, with regard to posting of minutes, are not in compliance with this statute.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
– Timely posting of minutes of meetings held by the Plumas County Board of Supervisors. It is this jury's recommendation that The Plumas County Board Of Supervisors take immediate steps to implement policies and procedures necessary to bring posting of minutes into conformance with California Government Code Section 25150.
F2:
– Communication Consistent and reliable communication among the Fair Board, the Fair Manager and the Board of Supervisors is lacking. > Consistent and reliable communications are the cornerstone of good management practice. Ill feelings among some members of The Board of Supervisors, The Fair Board, and the Fair Manager exist. A culture of mistrust has developed that tends to exacerbate an existing communications gap between them. This has had an adverse effect on the operation of the fairgrounds. The Fair Manager has not communicated effectively with the Fair Board and the Board of Supervisors. All significant information should be equally shared among all parties. Several members of the Fair Board complained of learning about significant Fair issues in the local newspaper, not from the Board of Supervisors or the Fair Manager. This problem is directly related to the poorly defined chain of command as outlined in Finding No. 1.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
- Plumas LAFCo - Relationships with Constituent Agencies The Commissioners should immediately establish a schedule to meet with officials of the City of Portola and with board members of a representative cross-section of the special services districts in Plumas County, without the presence of the Executive Officer, to listen to candid feedback regarding their relationship with Plumas LAFCo and the Executive Officer. Based upon this feedback, the Commissioners should determine whether there is a reasonable likelihood that the relationship between Plumas LAFCo and its constituents can be satisfactorily mended under the present Executive Officer. If so, a specific plan of action to resolve the matter should be undertaken and should become a key part of the Executive Officer's performance evaluation going forward. If not, the Commission should take appropriate action to resolve the issue.
F3:
– Facilities Planning and Maintenance There is no evidence of a Facilities and Maintenance Master Planning Document associated with the future development of facilities at the fairgrounds. > The only document presented to the Grand Jury was an aerial photograph that had been provided by the Plumas County Museum in conjunction with a proposed historical project to be housed at the fairgrounds. There are signs of disrepair associated with many of the facilities observed during a tour of the fairgrounds by members of the Grand Jury. Buildings need repair and repainting (with the exception of the Tulsa Scott building and the Mineral Building). One member of the jury leaned against a metal railing at the racetrack grandstands and the railing gave way due to deterioration of the concrete holding the support post. ➤ The Plumas County Fairgrounds' yearly operational budget is not sufficient for the maintenance operation to proceed at more than a minimal level. An active fundraising mechanism is listed as a goal in the existing Policy Manual. This would be accomplished through grants and charitable donations. There is no evidence that an active effort exists in this area.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
-Plumas LAFCo Financial Audit It is recommended that the Commissioners publish a Request for Proposal to be sent to Certified Public Accounting firms in Northern California to initiate steps to obtain an independent financial audit.
F4:
– Equipment and Supplies No consistent system for tracking of equipment and supplies purchased by the fairgrounds exists. ➤ Having no consistent system for the inventory and tracking of equipment and supplies, creates an atmosphere with the potential for misuse of public funds. > Previous fair managers established a verbal policy that stated, items purchased, having a value of less than $100 dollars were classified as consumables.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
Special Districts and Plumas LAFCo While it is recognized that the board members of the special districts are primarily volunteers and have numerous commitments for their time, it is imperative that the various districts, perhaps through the Plumas Special Districts Association, make the effort to better understand the purposes, powers, limitations and mission of Plumas LAFCo as they affect the ability of the districts to effectively and efficiently deliver services to their constituents. The Plumas County Special Districts Association and the Boards of the individual Special Districts in Plumas County need to become much more pro-active with Plumas LAFCo, whether, or not, they decide to join and appoint 2 Commissioners.
F5:
– Management Practices The yearly audit of the County's finance and management practices, conducted by the Accounting Firm of Smith and Newell revealed numerous deficiencies associated with the Fairgrounds accounting practices. Some of these items have been recurrent issues that were not dealt with by previous managers. The five (5) general areas identified were; Statement of Operations, Accounting for Capital Assets, Admission Revenue, Bank Reconciliation, and Cash On Hand. > The Statement of Operations is a report required by the State of California Department of Agriculture, supplying information about the state of the County Fair. It is necessary to file this report on time in order to receive State funds. The fairgrounds accounting technician is in the process of developing a financial tracking system to bring the fairgrounds into compliance with requirements of the Audit Report. No such system was in place prior to the hiring of the new management staff.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
– Management Practices 1. Finish the development of a reliable fiscal tracking program. 2. Ensure that all issues identified with the audit management report be corrected. 3. The Board of Supervisors should ensure the timely filing of the Statement of Operations with the State Department of Agriculture.
F6:
The Director of Emergency Services has not sought reimbursement from the state and federal governments for Hazardous Spills, Fire Fighting efforts by the Special District responders, or for the Claremont Dynamite incident in Quincy.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
The Director of Emergency Services should seek reimbursement through the State and Federal Governments and follow the procedures set forth in the document that was adopted by the Plumas County Board of Supervisors on September 13, 2005 by Resolution No. 05-7200.
F7:
The Director of Emergency Services has left the grant seeking process to individual departments.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
The Director should also be responsible for the coordination of grant writing activities for the different departments to insure that all needs are being addressed.
F8:
The new communication system at the Sheriff's Office is truly state of the art. The system is hooked up to all agencies in California so that help can be requested quickly. The Communication Center is fully staffed with eight operators. They have two people on duty 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Currently they are working on: • The reverse 911 system • Voting receivers that will select the strongest receiver signal automatically · Wireless broadband communications
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
Plumas County Counsel.
F9:
Four separate user groups of fairgrounds facilities. Members of the Grand Jury attended multiple sessions of the Board Of Supervisors and the Fair Board meetings. Research was conducted concerning the legislation that governs the operation of county fairs in California and the recent financial history of the Plumas-Sierra County Fair as reported in the Plumas County Budget Book. The findings contained in this report are a direct result of the correlation of evidence obtained through the interviews, research and first-hand observations by members of the Grand Jury.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9:
Four separate user groups of fairgrounds facilities. Members of the Grand Jury attended multiple sessions of the Board Of Supervisors and the Fair Board meetings. Research was conducted concerning the legislation that governs the operation of county fairs in California and the recent financial history of the Plumas-Sierra County Fair as reported in the Plumas County Budget Book. The findings contained in this report are a direct result of the correlation of evidence obtained through the interviews, research and first-hand observations by members of the Grand Jury.
F17:
American Red Cross 18. Plumas District Safety Officer 19. City of Portola Administrator 20. Director of Plumas County Office of Emergency Services California State Government Code, Section 8613 states that “Should an accredited disaster council fail to comply with the rules and regulations of the Office of Emergency Services in any material degree, the office may revoke its certification”. The Plumas County Office of Emergency Services, working with the Plumas County Environmental Health Department is responsible for overall pre- emergency planning and coordination among the various emergency responders. This includes coordination of emergency assistance between contiguous jurisdictions. The State and Federal Governments help local jurisdictions cover the cost of disasters. To get this help, Plumas County must declare a local emergency within 10 days of the actual occurrence of a disaster. The County must then assess damages, and apply for aid within 60 days after the Proclamation of a Local Emergency and contact the State Office of Emergency Services for assistance information. Federal aid, coordinated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), is given at the request of the Governor. The Office of Emergency Services is responsible for assisting the various county departments in the preparation and tracking of such claims, and should coordinate the filing of claims. As with all mandated government activities an adequate level of funding is critical. During the interview process it became apparent that there are many funding gaps in the Plumas Office of Emergency Services. The various agencies have been left to seek their own funding through grants, special district allocations and fund raising efforts. During the Grand Jury interview process the interviewees were asked if the Office of Emergency Services has conducted full, "in the field" countywide preparedness drills to test the system. The general response was that “the personnel in each department are responsible to make sure that their own departments are safe, properly trained, know the OES rules, and know their responsibilities in emergency situations”. Apparently there was a "table top" OES exercise conducted within the past two years when the only full field exercise was cancelled because of inclement weather. It should be noted that on March 11, 2008 the Plumas County Board of Supervisors accepted the resignation of the Director of the Plumas OES and also his resignation as the County Fire Marshall. Findings and Recommendations Finding #1 The Plumas County Organizational Chart obtained from the Human Resources Department by the Grand Jury, dated June 12, 2007 does not include the Plumas Office of Emergency Services, which calls into question the historical chain of command and the extent of the OES assimilation into Plumas County operations.
Additional Recommendations
3
Not linked to specific findings.
R95-96:
Agriculture Commissioner Airport Operations Alcohol and Drug
R98-99:
X X X X X X X X Juvenile Hall X X Library
R99-00:
X X Fair X X Farm Advisor X Feather River College Inc. X X Fire Departments X F/U Health Dept./Env. Health Hospital Districts X Housing and Comm. Development
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
8 findings
F1:
– Timely posting of minutes of meetings held by the Plumas County Board of Supervisors. California Government Code Section 25150 requires the Board Of Supervisors to publish a fair statement of all of its proceedings within ten (10) days of each meeting. The current policy and procedures of the Plumas County Board of Supervisors, with regard to posting of minutes, are not in compliance with this statute. 10
F2:
– Communication Consistent and reliable communication among the Fair Board, the Fair Manager and the Board of Supervisors is lacking. Consistent and reliable communications are the cornerstone of good management practice. Ill feelings among some members of The Board of Supervisors, The Fair Board, and the Fair Manager exist. A culture of mistrust has developed that tends to exacerbate an existing communications gap between them. This has had an adverse effect on the operation of the fairgrounds. The Fair Manager has not communicated effectively with the Fair Board and the Board of Supervisors. All significant information should be equally shared among all parties. Several members of the Fair Board complained of learning about significant Fair issues in the local newspaper, not from the Board of Supervisors or the Fair Manager. This problem is directly related to the poorly defined chain of command as outlined in Finding No. 1.
F3:
– Facilities Planning and Maintenance There is no evidence of a Facilities and Maintenance Master Planning Document associated with the future development of facilities at the fairgrounds. The only document presented to the Grand Jury was an aerial photograph that had been provided by the Plumas County Museum in conjunction with a proposed historical project to be housed at the fairgrounds. There are signs of disrepair associated with many of the facilities observed during a tour of the fairgrounds by members of the Grand Jury. Buildings need repair and repainting (with the exception of the Tulsa Scott building and the Mineral Building). One member of the jury leaned against a metal railing at the racetrack grandstands and the railing gave way due to deterioration of the concrete holding the support post. The Plumas County Fairgrounds’ yearly operational budget is not sufficient for the maintenance operation to proceed at more than a minimal level. An active fundraising mechanism is listed as a goal in the existing Policy Manual. This would be accomplished through grants and charitable donations. There is no evidence that an active effort exists in this area.
F4:
– Equipment and Supplies No consistent system for tracking of equipment and supplies purchased by the fairgrounds exists. 18 Having no consistent system for the inventory and tracking of equipment and supplies, creates an atmosphere with the potential for misuse of public funds. Previous fair managers established a verbal policy that stated, items purchased, having a value of less than $100 dollars were classified as consumables.
F5:
– Management Practices The yearly audit of the County’s finance and management practices, conducted by the Accounting Firm of Smith and Newell revealed numerous deficiencies associated with the Fairgrounds accounting practices. Some of these items have been recurrent issues that were not dealt with by previous managers. The five (5) general areas identified were; Statement of Operations, Accounting for Capital Assets, Admission Revenue, Bank Reconciliation, and Cash On Hand. The Statement of Operations is a report required by the State of California Department of Agriculture, supplying information about the state of the County Fair. It is necessary to file this report on time in order to receive State funds. The fairgrounds accounting technician is in the process of developing a financial tracking system to bring the fairgrounds into compliance with requirements of the Audit Report. No such system was in place prior to the hiring of the new management staff.
F6:
The Director of Emergency Services has not sought reimbursement from the state and federal governments for Hazardous Spills, Fire Fighting efforts by the Special District responders, or for the Claremont Dynamite incident in Quincy.
F7:
The Director of Emergency Services has left the grant seeking process to individual departments.
F8:
The new communication system at the Sheriff’s Office is truly state of the art. The system is hooked up to all agencies in California so that help can be requested 44 quickly. The Communication Center is fully staffed with eight operators. They have two people on duty 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Currently they are working on: • The reverse 911 system • Voting receivers that will select the strongest receiver signal automatically • Wireless broadband communications
Additional Recommendations
8
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
The recommendation has been implemented, with summary of the implemented action.
R2:
The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation.
R3:
The recommendation requires further analysis. If the person or entity reports in this manner, the law requires an explanation of the analysis or studies in a time frame not to exceed six months.
R4:
The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation. If either a finding or recommendation deals with budgetary or personnel matters of a county department headed by an elected officer, both the elected officer and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if the Grand Jury so requests, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel matters over which it has some decision-making authority. Requirement to Respond No later than 90 days after the Grand Jury submits a final report on the operations of any public agency subject to its reviewing authority, the governing body of the public agency (includes departments) shall comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body. Every elected county officer or agency head for which the Grand Jury has responsibility pursuant to Section 914.1 shall comment within 60 days to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court, with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors, on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of that county officer or agency head and any agency or agencies which that officer or agency head supervises or controls. All of these comments and reports shall forthwith be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court who impaneled the Grand Jury. DISTRIBUTION LIST The final report of the 2007-2008 Plumas County Grand Jury will be distributed to the following individuals and agencies: The Honorable Judge Ira Kaufman The Honorable Judge Janet Hilde Plumas County Grand Jury for 2007-2008 Plumas County Grand Jury for 2008-2009 Plumas County Board of Supervisors Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Plumas County Administrative Officer Plumas County Auditor/Controller Plumas County Building Department Plumas County Clerk Plumas County Counsel Plumas County Department of Animal Services Plumas County Department of Human Resources Plumas County Department of Social Services/Public Guardian Plumas County Development Commission Plumas County District Attorney Plumas County Facility Services Department Plumas – Sierra County Fair Plumas County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Plumas County Information and Technology Department (Website) Plumas County Jail Plumas County Libraries Plumas County Office of Emergency Services (OES) 8
R5:
– Management Practices 1. Finish the development of a reliable fiscal tracking program. 2. Ensure that all issues identified with the audit management report be corrected. 3. The Board of Supervisors should ensure the timely filing of the Statement of Operations with the State Department of Agriculture. 19
R6:
The Director of Emergency Services should seek reimbursement through the State and Federal Governments and follow the procedures set forth in the document that was adopted by the Plumas County Board of Supervisors on September 13, 2005 by Resolution No. 05-7200.
R7:
The Director should also be responsible for the coordination of grant writing activities for the different departments to insure that all needs are being addressed.
R8:
Plumas County Counsel.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
8 findings
F1:
– The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) The Memorandum Of Understanding (MOU) dated April 10, 2001 is poorly drawn and is a primary cause of the disagreements and tensions that currently exist between the Plumas-Sierra Fair Board and the Plumas County Board of Supervisors. There are concerns with the following: There is no clear chain of command with regard to the operation of the facilities or the supervision of the Fair Manager. Confusion exists with regard to who is responsible for personnel issues at the fairgrounds. This is particularly evident in association with personnel policies involving the Fair Manager. This confusion also affects the fair users, who stated in interviews that they did not know who was in charge of the decision making processes associated with the management of facilities. The authority to negotiate and execute contracts is not clearly defined. There is confusion as to the relationship between the two boards. At times the Fair Board has operated as a managerial body and at other times they have functioned as an advisory body to the Board of Supervisors. The Board of Supervisors, by virtue of Section 7 of the current Memorandum of Understanding, “assumes no responsibility in connection with the fair” while at the same time they claim control over most, if not all aspects of the operation of the fairgrounds. The Policy and Procedures Manual being used by the Fair has never been approved and accepted by the Board of Supervisors.
F2:
– Communication Consistent and reliable communication among the Fair Board, the Fair Manager and the Board of Supervisors is lacking. Consistent and reliable communications are the cornerstone of good management practice. Ill feelings among some members of The Board of Supervisors, The Fair Board, and the Fair Manager exist. A culture of mistrust has developed that tends to exacerbate an existing communications gap between them. This has had an adverse effect on the operation of the fairgrounds. The Fair Manager has not communicated effectively with the Fair Board and the Board of Supervisors. All significant information should be equally shared among all parties. Several members of the Fair Board complained of learning about significant Fair issues in the local newspaper, not from the Board of Supervisors or the Fair Manager. This problem is directly related to the poorly defined chain of command as outlined in Finding No. 1.
F3:
– Facilities Planning and Maintenance There is no evidence of a Facilities and Maintenance Master Planning Document associated with the future development of facilities at the fairgrounds. The only document presented to the Grand Jury was an aerial photograph that had been provided by the Plumas County Museum in conjunction with a proposed historical project to be housed at the fairgrounds. There are signs of disrepair associated with many of the facilities observed during a tour of the fairgrounds by members of the Grand Jury. Buildings need repair and repainting (with the exception of the Tulsa Scott building and the Mineral Building). One member of the jury leaned against a metal railing at the racetrack grandstands and the railing gave way due to deterioration of the concrete holding the support post. The Plumas County Fairgrounds’ yearly operational budget is not sufficient for the maintenance operation to proceed at more than a minimal level. An active fundraising mechanism is listed as a goal in the existing Policy Manual. This would be accomplished through grants and charitable donations. There is no evidence that an active effort exists in this area.
F4:
– Equipment and Supplies No consistent system for tracking of equipment and supplies purchased by the fairgrounds exists. 18 Having no consistent system for the inventory and tracking of equipment and supplies, creates an atmosphere with the potential for misuse of public funds. Previous fair managers established a verbal policy that stated, items purchased, having a value of less than $100 dollars were classified as consumables.
F5:
– Management Practices The yearly audit of the County’s finance and management practices, conducted by the Accounting Firm of Smith and Newell revealed numerous deficiencies associated with the Fairgrounds accounting practices. Some of these items have been recurrent issues that were not dealt with by previous managers. The five (5) general areas identified were; Statement of Operations, Accounting for Capital Assets, Admission Revenue, Bank Reconciliation, and Cash On Hand. The Statement of Operations is a report required by the State of California Department of Agriculture, supplying information about the state of the County Fair. It is necessary to file this report on time in order to receive State funds. The fairgrounds accounting technician is in the process of developing a financial tracking system to bring the fairgrounds into compliance with requirements of the Audit Report. No such system was in place prior to the hiring of the new management staff.
F6:
The Director of Emergency Services has not sought reimbursement from the state and federal governments for Hazardous Spills, Fire Fighting efforts by the Special District responders, or for the Claremont Dynamite incident in Quincy.
F7:
The Director of Emergency Services has left the grant seeking process to individual departments.
F8:
The new communication system at the Sheriff’s Office is truly state of the art. The system is hooked up to all agencies in California so that help can be requested 44 quickly. The Communication Center is fully staffed with eight operators. They have two people on duty 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Currently they are working on: • The reverse 911 system • Voting receivers that will select the strongest receiver signal automatically • Wireless broadband communications
Additional Recommendations
9
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
- Plumas LAFCo Cost Structure It is recommended that the Commission, independent of the Executive Officer, review alternative approaches to the operation of Plumas LAFCo to reduce the operating costs to a level that can be funded without significant reliance on application and other fees. Government Code Section 56380 states that, “the commission may choose to contract with any public agency or private party for personnel and facilities.” Since the problem of properly funding LAFCo is not limited to Plumas County, it is suggested that the Commission take the initiative to contact other rural counties to determine the feasibility of jointly contracting with a provider to operate several county LAFCos in a geographically manageable area.
R2:
- Plumas LAFCo - Relationships with Constituent Agencies The Commissioners should immediately establish a schedule to meet with officials of the City of Portola and with board members of a representative cross-section of the special services districts in Plumas County, without the presence of the Executive Officer, to listen to candid feedback regarding their relationship with Plumas LAFCo and the Executive Officer. Based upon this feedback, the Commissioners should determine whether there is a reasonable likelihood that the relationship between Plumas LAFCo and its constituents can be satisfactorily mended under the present Executive Officer. If so, a specific plan of action to resolve the matter should be undertaken and should become a key part of the Executive Officer’s performance evaluation going forward. If not, the Commission should take appropriate action to resolve the issue.
R3:
-Plumas LAFCo Financial Audit It is recommended that the Commissioners publish a Request for Proposal to be sent to Certified Public Accounting firms in Northern California to initiate steps to obtain an independent financial audit.
R4:
Special Districts and Plumas LAFCo While it is recognized that the board members of the special districts are primarily volunteers and have numerous commitments for their time, it is imperative that the various districts, perhaps through the Plumas Special Districts Association, make the effort to better understand the purposes, powers, limitations and mission of Plumas LAFCo as they affect the ability of the districts to effectively and efficiently deliver services to their constituents. The Plumas County Special Districts Association and the Boards of the individual Special Districts in Plumas County need to become much more pro-active with Plumas LAFCo, whether, or not, they decide to join and appoint 2 Commissioners.
R5:
– Management Practices 1. Finish the development of a reliable fiscal tracking program. 2. Ensure that all issues identified with the audit management report be corrected. 3. The Board of Supervisors should ensure the timely filing of the Statement of Operations with the State Department of Agriculture. 19
R6:
The Director of Emergency Services should seek reimbursement through the State and Federal Governments and follow the procedures set forth in the document that was adopted by the Plumas County Board of Supervisors on September 13, 2005 by Resolution No. 05-7200.
R7:
The Director should also be responsible for the coordination of grant writing activities for the different departments to insure that all needs are being addressed.
R95-96:
X Guardian Treasurer/Tax Collector 98-99 Veteran's Services 95-96 X Key F/U Follow up Inc. Incomplete 51
R98-99:
X X X X X X X X Juvenile Hall
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
8 findings
F1:
- Plumas LAFCo Cost Structure The current operational costs of Plumas LAFCo substantially exceed the funding provided by Plumas County and the City of Portola. The fee schedule developed to fund the resulting gap is substantially higher than that of other county LAFCos surveyed. Application fees for LAFCo proceedings are to some degree a function of county growth rates and real estate activity. If that source of fee revenue declines, Plumas LAFCo will increasingly rely on fees charged to special districts for Municipal Service Reviews and Sphere of Influence studies to meet its budget deficit. These fee payments come from special district general funds. This places an undue financial burden on special districts.
F2:
- Plumas LAFCo - Relationships with Constituent Agencies Grand Jury interviews and observations indicate that the current Executive Officer, in over six years on the job, has failed to establish a positive liaison and rapport with officials of the City of Portola and many of the special districts within Plumas County. The establishment of a positive relationship with the county, city and special district personnel is a critical part of the intent of the LAFCO legislation and is a key component of the Executive Officer’s employment contract. 36
F3:
- Plumas LAFCo - Financial Audit LAFCO legislation contains no requirement for annual financial statements of actual operating results to be submitted to State or County authorities. This lack of a mandated financial oversight potentially exposes the taxpayers, the Commission and the LAFCo staff to unnecessary concerns and risk.
F4:
- Special Districts and Plumas LAFCo Each year, the Executive Officer of Plumas LAFCo, as required by the CKH legislation, has provided, to each special district board in the county, a copy of the proposed preliminary and final proposed budget for Plumas LAFCo for the coming fiscal year. This provides an opportunity for the special districts to make their concerns and comments known. On May 12, 2008, the regular publicly noticed meeting of the Commission was held to consider adoption of the 2008-9 Plumas LAFCo budget. The public attendance at that meeting included just one board member from one of the approximately 55 special districts in the county. 37
F5:
On June 30, 2007 there was a 22-railcar derailment that released toxic chemicals and residents were ordered to evacuate. The Emergency Command Center was not activated nor was the Plumas County Emergency Operations Plan implemented. As a result, post evacuation care was not provided as required by the Plumas County Emergency Operations Plan. 43
F6:
The Director of Emergency Services has not sought reimbursement from the state and federal governments for Hazardous Spills, Fire Fighting efforts by the Special District responders, or for the Claremont Dynamite incident in Quincy.
F7:
The Director of Emergency Services has left the grant seeking process to individual departments.
F8:
The new communication system at the Sheriff’s Office is truly state of the art. The system is hooked up to all agencies in California so that help can be requested 44 quickly. The Communication Center is fully staffed with eight operators. They have two people on duty 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Currently they are working on: • The reverse 911 system • Voting receivers that will select the strongest receiver signal automatically • Wireless broadband communications
Additional Recommendations
9
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
- Plumas LAFCo Cost Structure It is recommended that the Commission, independent of the Executive Officer, review alternative approaches to the operation of Plumas LAFCo to reduce the operating costs to a level that can be funded without significant reliance on application and other fees. Government Code Section 56380 states that, “the commission may choose to contract with any public agency or private party for personnel and facilities.” Since the problem of properly funding LAFCo is not limited to Plumas County, it is suggested that the Commission take the initiative to contact other rural counties to determine the feasibility of jointly contracting with a provider to operate several county LAFCos in a geographically manageable area.
R2:
- Plumas LAFCo - Relationships with Constituent Agencies The Commissioners should immediately establish a schedule to meet with officials of the City of Portola and with board members of a representative cross-section of the special services districts in Plumas County, without the presence of the Executive Officer, to listen to candid feedback regarding their relationship with Plumas LAFCo and the Executive Officer. Based upon this feedback, the Commissioners should determine whether there is a reasonable likelihood that the relationship between Plumas LAFCo and its constituents can be satisfactorily mended under the present Executive Officer. If so, a specific plan of action to resolve the matter should be undertaken and should become a key part of the Executive Officer’s performance evaluation going forward. If not, the Commission should take appropriate action to resolve the issue.
R3:
-Plumas LAFCo Financial Audit It is recommended that the Commissioners publish a Request for Proposal to be sent to Certified Public Accounting firms in Northern California to initiate steps to obtain an independent financial audit.
R4:
Special Districts and Plumas LAFCo While it is recognized that the board members of the special districts are primarily volunteers and have numerous commitments for their time, it is imperative that the various districts, perhaps through the Plumas Special Districts Association, make the effort to better understand the purposes, powers, limitations and mission of Plumas LAFCo as they affect the ability of the districts to effectively and efficiently deliver services to their constituents. The Plumas County Special Districts Association and the Boards of the individual Special Districts in Plumas County need to become much more pro-active with Plumas LAFCo, whether, or not, they decide to join and appoint 2 Commissioners.
R5:
In the event of future occurrences, the Office of Emergency Services should activate the Emergency Command Center and implement the Plumas County Emergency Operations Plan. A reception and care site should be activated to provide evacuees with information on the incident and directions to temporary housing. The Director of Emergency Services should contact the displaced county residents to mitigate their evacuation expenses and to keep them apprised of the current situation concerning the cleanup of the site and when it is safe to return to their residences.
R6:
The Director of Emergency Services should seek reimbursement through the State and Federal Governments and follow the procedures set forth in the document that was adopted by the Plumas County Board of Supervisors on September 13, 2005 by Resolution No. 05-7200.
R7:
The Director should also be responsible for the coordination of grant writing activities for the different departments to insure that all needs are being addressed.
R95-96:
X Guardian Treasurer/Tax Collector 98-99 Veteran's Services 95-96 X Key F/U Follow up Inc. Incomplete 51
R98-99:
X X X X X X X X Juvenile Hall
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
1 findings
F1:
– Timely posting of minutes of meetings held by the Plumas County Board of Supervisors. California Government Code Section 25150 requires the Board Of Supervisors to publish a fair statement of all of its proceedings within ten (10) days of each meeting. The current policy and procedures of the Plumas County Board of Supervisors, with regard to posting of minutes, are not in compliance with this statute. 10
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
– Timely posting of minutes of meetings held by the Plumas County Board of Supervisors. It is this jury’s recommendation that The Plumas County Board Of Supervisors take immediate steps to implement policies and procedures necessary to bring posting of minutes into conformance with California Government Code Section 25150.
Findings & Recommendations
4 findings
F1:
- Plumas LAFCo Cost Structure The current operational costs of Plumas LAFCo substantially exceed the funding provided by Plumas County and the City of Portola. The fee schedule developed to fund the resulting gap is substantially higher than that of other county LAFCos surveyed. Application fees for LAFCo proceedings are to some degree a function of county growth rates and real estate activity. If that source of fee revenue declines, Plumas LAFCo will increasingly rely on fees charged to special districts for Municipal Service Reviews and Sphere of Influence studies to meet its budget deficit. These fee payments come from special district general funds. This places an undue financial burden on special districts.
F2:
- Plumas LAFCo - Relationships with Constituent Agencies Grand Jury interviews and observations indicate that the current Executive Officer, in over six years on the job, has failed to establish a positive liaison and rapport with officials of the City of Portola and many of the special districts within Plumas County. The establishment of a positive relationship with the county, city and special district personnel is a critical part of the intent of the LAFCO legislation and is a key component of the Executive Officer’s employment contract. 36
F3:
- Plumas LAFCo - Financial Audit LAFCO legislation contains no requirement for annual financial statements of actual operating results to be submitted to State or County authorities. This lack of a mandated financial oversight potentially exposes the taxpayers, the Commission and the LAFCo staff to unnecessary concerns and risk.
F4:
- Special Districts and Plumas LAFCo Each year, the Executive Officer of Plumas LAFCo, as required by the CKH legislation, has provided, to each special district board in the county, a copy of the proposed preliminary and final proposed budget for Plumas LAFCo for the coming fiscal year. This provides an opportunity for the special districts to make their concerns and comments known. On May 12, 2008, the regular publicly noticed meeting of the Commission was held to consider adoption of the 2008-9 Plumas LAFCo budget. The public attendance at that meeting included just one board member from one of the approximately 55 special districts in the county. 37
Additional Recommendations
4
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
- Plumas LAFCo Cost Structure It is recommended that the Commission, independent of the Executive Officer, review alternative approaches to the operation of Plumas LAFCo to reduce the operating costs to a level that can be funded without significant reliance on application and other fees. Government Code Section 56380 states that, “the commission may choose to contract with any public agency or private party for personnel and facilities.” Since the problem of properly funding LAFCo is not limited to Plumas County, it is suggested that the Commission take the initiative to contact other rural counties to determine the feasibility of jointly contracting with a provider to operate several county LAFCos in a geographically manageable area.
R2:
- Plumas LAFCo - Relationships with Constituent Agencies The Commissioners should immediately establish a schedule to meet with officials of the City of Portola and with board members of a representative cross-section of the special services districts in Plumas County, without the presence of the Executive Officer, to listen to candid feedback regarding their relationship with Plumas LAFCo and the Executive Officer. Based upon this feedback, the Commissioners should determine whether there is a reasonable likelihood that the relationship between Plumas LAFCo and its constituents can be satisfactorily mended under the present Executive Officer. If so, a specific plan of action to resolve the matter should be undertaken and should become a key part of the Executive Officer’s performance evaluation going forward. If not, the Commission should take appropriate action to resolve the issue.
R3:
-Plumas LAFCo Financial Audit It is recommended that the Commissioners publish a Request for Proposal to be sent to Certified Public Accounting firms in Northern California to initiate steps to obtain an independent financial audit.
R4:
Special Districts and Plumas LAFCo While it is recognized that the board members of the special districts are primarily volunteers and have numerous commitments for their time, it is imperative that the various districts, perhaps through the Plumas Special Districts Association, make the effort to better understand the purposes, powers, limitations and mission of Plumas LAFCo as they affect the ability of the districts to effectively and efficiently deliver services to their constituents. The Plumas County Special Districts Association and the Boards of the individual Special Districts in Plumas County need to become much more pro-active with Plumas LAFCo, whether, or not, they decide to join and appoint 2 Commissioners.
Quick View
Full Details →
Additional Recommendations
4
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
The recommendation has been implemented, with summary of the implemented action.
R2:
The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation.
R3:
The recommendation requires further analysis. If the person or entity reports in this manner, the law requires an explanation of the analysis or studies in a time frame not to exceed six months.
R4:
The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation. If either a finding or recommendation deals with budgetary or personnel matters of a county department headed by an elected officer, both the elected officer and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if the Grand Jury so requests, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel matters over which it has some decision-making authority. Requirement to Respond No later than 90 days after the Grand Jury submits a final report on the operations of any public agency subject to its reviewing authority, the governing body of the public agency (includes departments) shall comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body. Every elected county officer or agency head for which the Grand Jury has responsibility pursuant to Section 914.1 shall comment within 60 days to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court, with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors, on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of that county officer or agency head and any agency or agencies which that officer or agency head supervises or controls. All of these comments and reports shall forthwith be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court who impaneled the Grand Jury. 7
Findings & Recommendations
8 findings
F1:
The Plumas County Organizational Chart obtained from the Human Resources Department by the Grand Jury, dated June 12, 2007 does not include the Plumas Office of Emergency Services, which calls into question the historical chain of command and the extent of the OES assimilation into Plumas County operations.
F2:
While numerous individual emergency responder agencies in Plumas County possess high levels of training, skill and performance capabilities, there is a lack of inter-agency communication and coordination training. This is in direct violation of the Office of Emergency Services State mandate. The director and the assistant director have not met on a regular basis with the effect that the assistant director is not always advised of the current situations. 42
F3:
The Multi Agency Coordination Group, which is the local disaster council, does not meet on a regular basis. It is the responsibility of the Director of Emergency Services to schedule these meetings.
F4:
There is a serious retention issue concerning the HAZMAT responders. After these responders are trained, they are often recruited by outside agencies that provide better compensation.
F5:
On June 30, 2007 there was a 22-railcar derailment that released toxic chemicals and residents were ordered to evacuate. The Emergency Command Center was not activated nor was the Plumas County Emergency Operations Plan implemented. As a result, post evacuation care was not provided as required by the Plumas County Emergency Operations Plan. 43
F6:
The Director of Emergency Services has not sought reimbursement from the state and federal governments for Hazardous Spills, Fire Fighting efforts by the Special District responders, or for the Claremont Dynamite incident in Quincy.
F7:
The Director of Emergency Services has left the grant seeking process to individual departments.
F8:
The new communication system at the Sheriff’s Office is truly state of the art. The system is hooked up to all agencies in California so that help can be requested 44 quickly. The Communication Center is fully staffed with eight operators. They have two people on duty 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Currently they are working on: • The reverse 911 system • Voting receivers that will select the strongest receiver signal automatically • Wireless broadband communications
Additional Recommendations
7
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
The Plumas County Organizational Chart should be amended to reflect the proper chain of command.
R2:
The Office of Emergency Services, in conjunction with the Environmental Health Department, should conduct regular disaster exercises with all response agencies and with voluntary participation of business representatives. The Director and Assistant Director should meet as frequently as necessary to insure that the assistant director is fully advised of all situations.
R3:
The Multi Agency Coordination Group should meet on a regular basis. The Director of Emergency Services should schedule these meetings.
R4:
HAZMAT responders who are trained through Plumas County should receive a pay differential to maintain certification. In addition, they should be required to sign a contractual agreement stating that they will serve the county for a minimal time period or reimburse the county for training expenses.
R5:
In the event of future occurrences, the Office of Emergency Services should activate the Emergency Command Center and implement the Plumas County Emergency Operations Plan. A reception and care site should be activated to provide evacuees with information on the incident and directions to temporary housing. The Director of Emergency Services should contact the displaced county residents to mitigate their evacuation expenses and to keep them apprised of the current situation concerning the cleanup of the site and when it is safe to return to their residences.
R6:
The Director of Emergency Services should seek reimbursement through the State and Federal Governments and follow the procedures set forth in the document that was adopted by the Plumas County Board of Supervisors on September 13, 2005 by Resolution No. 05-7200.
R7:
The Director should also be responsible for the coordination of grant writing activities for the different departments to insure that all needs are being addressed.
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R95-96:
X Guardian Treasurer/Tax Collector 98-99 Veteran's Services 95-96 X Key F/U Follow up Inc. Incomplete 51
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
5 findings
F1:
– The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) The Memorandum Of Understanding (MOU) dated April 10, 2001 is poorly drawn and is a primary cause of the disagreements and tensions that currently exist between the Plumas-Sierra Fair Board and the Plumas County Board of Supervisors. There are concerns with the following: There is no clear chain of command with regard to the operation of the facilities or the supervision of the Fair Manager. Confusion exists with regard to who is responsible for personnel issues at the fairgrounds. This is particularly evident in association with personnel policies involving the Fair Manager. This confusion also affects the fair users, who stated in interviews that they did not know who was in charge of the decision making processes associated with the management of facilities. The authority to negotiate and execute contracts is not clearly defined. There is confusion as to the relationship between the two boards. At times the Fair Board has operated as a managerial body and at other times they have functioned as an advisory body to the Board of Supervisors. The Board of Supervisors, by virtue of Section 7 of the current Memorandum of Understanding, “assumes no responsibility in connection with the fair” while at the same time they claim control over most, if not all aspects of the operation of the fairgrounds. The Policy and Procedures Manual being used by the Fair has never been approved and accepted by the Board of Supervisors.
F2:
– Communication Consistent and reliable communication among the Fair Board, the Fair Manager and the Board of Supervisors is lacking. Consistent and reliable communications are the cornerstone of good management practice. Ill feelings among some members of The Board of Supervisors, The Fair Board, and the Fair Manager exist. A culture of mistrust has developed that tends to exacerbate an existing communications gap between them. This has had an adverse effect on the operation of the fairgrounds. The Fair Manager has not communicated effectively with the Fair Board and the Board of Supervisors. All significant information should be equally shared among all parties. Several members of the Fair Board complained of learning about significant Fair issues in the local newspaper, not from the Board of Supervisors or the Fair Manager. This problem is directly related to the poorly defined chain of command as outlined in Finding No. 1.
F3:
– Facilities Planning and Maintenance There is no evidence of a Facilities and Maintenance Master Planning Document associated with the future development of facilities at the fairgrounds. The only document presented to the Grand Jury was an aerial photograph that had been provided by the Plumas County Museum in conjunction with a proposed historical project to be housed at the fairgrounds. There are signs of disrepair associated with many of the facilities observed during a tour of the fairgrounds by members of the Grand Jury. Buildings need repair and repainting (with the exception of the Tulsa Scott building and the Mineral Building). One member of the jury leaned against a metal railing at the racetrack grandstands and the railing gave way due to deterioration of the concrete holding the support post. The Plumas County Fairgrounds’ yearly operational budget is not sufficient for the maintenance operation to proceed at more than a minimal level. An active fundraising mechanism is listed as a goal in the existing Policy Manual. This would be accomplished through grants and charitable donations. There is no evidence that an active effort exists in this area.
F4:
– Equipment and Supplies No consistent system for tracking of equipment and supplies purchased by the fairgrounds exists. 18 Having no consistent system for the inventory and tracking of equipment and supplies, creates an atmosphere with the potential for misuse of public funds. Previous fair managers established a verbal policy that stated, items purchased, having a value of less than $100 dollars were classified as consumables.
F5:
– Management Practices The yearly audit of the County’s finance and management practices, conducted by the Accounting Firm of Smith and Newell revealed numerous deficiencies associated with the Fairgrounds accounting practices. Some of these items have been recurrent issues that were not dealt with by previous managers. The five (5) general areas identified were; Statement of Operations, Accounting for Capital Assets, Admission Revenue, Bank Reconciliation, and Cash On Hand. The Statement of Operations is a report required by the State of California Department of Agriculture, supplying information about the state of the County Fair. It is necessary to file this report on time in order to receive State funds. The fairgrounds accounting technician is in the process of developing a financial tracking system to bring the fairgrounds into compliance with requirements of the Audit Report. No such system was in place prior to the hiring of the new management staff.
Additional Recommendations
4
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
The Board of Supervisors should demand that the Fair Board be given a full measure of courtesy by fair management with regard to sharing of information, correspondence, proposals, and any and all negotiations involving use of fairgrounds facilities.
R2:
The Board of Supervisors should endeavor to create a more cooperative atmosphere with the Fair Board. This includes more clearly defined channels of communication and adoption of a less combative attitude by certain members of the Board of Supervisors when dealing with the Fair Board. 17
R3:
The Board of Supervisors should ensure the timely filing of the Statement of Operations with the State Department of Agriculture. Conclusions The Memorandum Of Understanding (MOU) dated April 10, 2001 is poorly drawn and is a primary cause of the disagreements and tensions that currently exist between the Plumas-Sierra Fair Board and the Plumas County Board of Supervisors. Consistent and reliable communication among the Fair Board, the Fair Manager and the Board of Supervisors is lacking. There is no evidence of a Facilities and Maintenance Master Planning Document associated with the future development of facilities at the fairgrounds. No consistent system for tracking of equipment and supplies purchased by the fairgrounds exists. The yearly audit of the County’s finance and management practices, conducted by the Accounting Firm of Smith and Newell revealed numerous deficiencies associated with the Fairgrounds accounting practices. The responsibility for correcting these issues lies with the Plumas County Board of Supervisors, the Plumas-Sierra County Fair Board of Directors and the Fair Manager. 20
R5:
– Management Practices 1. Finish the development of a reliable fiscal tracking program. 2. Ensure that all issues identified with the audit management report be corrected. 3. The Board of Supervisors should ensure the timely filing of the Statement of Operations with the State Department of Agriculture. 19
* This report's PDF did not contain easily extractable text and required Optical Character Recognition (OCR) for analysis. There may be minor errors in the extracted findings and recommendations due to OCR limitations with scanned documents.