Madera County 2007-2008 Grand Jury Final Report Book

Maintenance District 95 ……………………………………………………………………… 1 2. Madera County Water Advisory Commission ………………………………………………. 7 3. Flood Control Maintenance, Money, and Accountability …………………………………… 30 4. Great Wall of Coarsegold ……………………………………………………………………. 64 5. Grant Writing Process ……………………………………………………………………….. 82 6. Environmental Health Department (Hazardous Waste) ……………………………………... 90 7. Environmental Health Services ……………………………………………………………… 98 8. Oakhurst Incorporation ……………………………………………………………………… 101 9. Chowchilla City Fire Department …………………………………………………………… 105 10. Madera City Fire Department, Station #6 …………………………………………………… 108 11. Madera County Fire Department, Station #8 ………………………………………………... 111 12. Chowchilla Police Department and Jail ……………………………………………………… 113 13. Central California Women’s Facility ………………………………………………………… 117 14. Madera County Sheriff’s Office; Coroner’s Office ………………………………………….. 122 i 15. Madera Cemetery District ……………………………………………………………………. 126 16. Madera County Mosquito and Vector Control District ………………………………………. 157 17. Chawanakee Academy ……………………………………………………………………….. 160 18. James Monroe Elementary School …………………………………………………………… 162 19. North Fork Elementary School ……………………………………………………………….. 170 20. Spring Valley School …………………………………………………………………………. 172 21. Citizen Complaint …………………………………………………………………………….. 174 22. Madera Ranch, Inc. …………………………………………………………………………... Addendum 1. Responses to 2006-2007 Grand Jury Investigations ………………………………………….. 189 • Central California Women’s Facility • Madera County Libraries • Valley State Prison for Women • Oakhurst Water Treatment Facility • RMA POSSE Round Up ii 2007-2008 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY PHOTO Seated: Mitzi Layne, Sergeant at Arms; Richard Hoffman, Ed.D., Pro Tem; Linda Dominguez, Foreperson; Donald Holley, Recording Secretary; Charlotte Wayne, Treasurer Standing: James Haze, Gary Foust, James Ferguson, Charlie Ketter, Robert Martin, Barry Crow, John Pelowski, Carol Redmon, Frank Bradford, Brenda Perreira, Lee Blackstone, Edward Redmon Not pictured: Carolyn Buckles, Lewis Honeycutt iv 2007-2008 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT v 2007-2008 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT The 2007-2008 Madera County Grand Jury Wishes to thank These officials for their continued assistance The Honorable Edward P. Moffat Grand Jury Presiding Judge Lynda Pierini Court Supervisor, Jury Division Ray Beach RMA Director Joel Moses Assistant Planning Director John Anderson Sheriff/ Coroner vi Charlotte Wayne Madera vii 2007-2008 Madera County Grand Jury Members Resigned During Term Louis Donaldson Eugene Thurber Madera Madera Robert Olson Raymond Warner Madera Chowchilla Michelle Treckeme Madera viii The History of Grand Juries J uries were first created under the law of Etherel II, who reigned during the Anglo-Saxon period of A.D. 978-1016. By AD 1368, Juries had evolved to include the Grand Jury, or Grand Inquest, formed by Edward III. Most of us have heard the term, “Grand Jury”, but most of us have little knowledge of what a Grand Jury actually does. The Grand Jury system in America began in 1635, becoming a full legal body with the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states, “No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces of in the Militia, when in actual service time of War, or public danger...” The Grand Jury system has been in existence in California since 1879 when the State Constitution was adopted. Every county in California has at least one Grand Jury, and in some cases, larger counties have more than one. Santa Clara County, for example, has one Grand Jury that deals with civil issues, and another Grand Jury for criminal issues. On rare occasions, the Grand Jury may also handle Coroner Inquests. Madera County has one Grand Jury handling both civil and criminal cases. In criminal cases, the Madera County Grand Jury is presented with evidence of a crime, and works together to determine if enough evidence exists to issue an indictment. Most Grand Jury members are drawn from the regular petit jury pool. Letters are sent to a random group from the jury pool, and those responding with interest are invited to participate in an interview process. From this group, nineteen jurors and several alternates are selected, and are impaneled in July to serve for one year. The nineteen individuals impaneled as jurors make a commitment to do this important work that includes conducting investigations, writing reports on those investigations, attending meetings, and making recommendations. Some Grand Jury investigations are triggered by public concerns. These complaints maybe brought to the Grand Jury through letters, phone calls, or email. These issues and concerns are then brought before the Grand Jury panel in order to determine if an investigation should be completed. All Grand Jury business is conducted in secret, and all information and discussions are considered highly confidential. This secrecy is required to: ...protect the innocent accused, who is exonerated by and through the investigation ...ensure the utmost freedom to the Grand Jury in its’ deliberations ...prevent subordination of perjury or tampering with witnesses ...encourage untrammeled disclosures by persons with information relevant to an investigation ...prevent the escape of those whose indictment may be contemplated ix Superior Court of the State of California County of Madera Edward P. Moffat 209 W. YosemiteAvenue Judge Madera, Ca 93637 Phone: 559-661-3001 Fax: 559-675-0701 June 20, 2008 To: Residents of the County of Madera Each year in July the County of Madera impanels a Grand Jury to examine and investigate the activities of government agencies. The Grand Jury is a part of the judicial branch of government but operates as a separate and independent body. The Madera County Grand Jury is selected at random from the trial court's list of qualified trial jurors. The 2007-2008 Grand Jurors served from July 2007 through June 2008. During their tenure in office the Grand Jury conducted numerous investigations and inquires into the operation of the state and local government. The 2007-2008 Grand Jury worked effectively and efficiently in addressing the concerns presented to them and offered reasoned recommendations addressing the issues presented to them. I feel extremely fortunate to have had the opportunity to work with such a group of dedicated citizens who gave freely of their time and their expertise. With the outstanding leadership of Foreperson Linda Dominguez this Grand Jury was able to accomplish their goal of providing service to the community of Madera and complying with their solemn duty to do their utmost in being conscientious, complete, and correct. The 2007-2008 Grand Jury was diligent and performed their duties impartially. As citizens of Madera you should be very proud of what the Grand Jury accomplished as evidenced by the reports contained in this Final Report. I want to personally thank each and every member of the 2007-2008 Madera Grand Jury for their selfless dedication to duties as Grand Jurors. You did excellent work for the citizens of Madera County and the Superior Court. Foreperson’s Letter June 30, 2008 Honorable Judge Edward P. Moffat Supervising Judge of the Superior Court State of California, County of Madera Dear Judge Moffat: It is an honor and a pleasure to present to you, in accordance with applicable California law, the 2007/2008 Madera County Grand Jury’s final report. This report is an accumulation of reports issued throughout the Grand Jury year of July 1, 2007 through June 30, 2008. The 2007/2008 Grand Jury accepted our duties by taking an oath on July 2, 2007; since then, all 19 members of this Grand Jury have diligently performed the required duties, while maintaining confidentiality and respect for all involved. Our commitment, objectivity, professionalism, and integrity helped ensure that the citizens of Madera County were being provided the most effective, efficient and responsive governmental services. This Grand Jury would like to thank you for your tireless and continued support, guidance, and encouragement throughout our term of service. It has been our privilege to serve on this Grand Jury, and working together with you has made the experience especially rewarding. Respectively submitted, Linda R. Dominguez Foreperson 2007/2008 Madera County Grand Jury xi Secretary’s Letter May 16, 2008 Citizens of Madera County: Your 2007-2008 Madera County Grand Jury is made up of as diverse a group of individuals as you might find anywhere. Each is selected from the community at large and they come from all walks of life and each with his or her own diverse background. I am proud to have served on this Grand Jury and have the opportunity to work with people selected to do the same. We all had a learning curve to contend with and training along with the experiences of returning Jury members helped achieve this. Be they new or experienced, there was a common goal to be obtained and that was to meet our responsibilities as a ‘watchdog’ for the taxpayers of our community. It required, in total secrecy, for us to investigate every aspect of our County and City Government. Additionally, we investigated citizen complaints and assisted in criminal indictments. Witnesses brought in were required to take an oath and admonished never to discuss with anyone what transpired in an interview. Nor could the Grand Jury members discuss an investigation with anyone other than fellow panel members, not even their spouses. When an investigation report was completed and approved by majority vote of the panel it would then be reviewed by our presiding judge for approval before being sent to all responding individuals and/or departments. Forty eight hours later it would be released to the press for public consumption. We never knew how it would be received; however, we were confident the report contained accurate, factual and substantiated content. The 2007-2008 Grand Jury came together in a responsible manner, learning more about our local Government then we anticipated, and challenged with expectations while achieving results we are proud of. It has been a privilege and honor to have served you and them. As my final act as Secretary for the 2007-2008 Madera County Grand Jury, I hereby state that all completed and approved final reports created by the 2007-2008 Madera County Grand Jury are incorporated in this year-end final report, and represent all of the completed and approved investigations and work performed on behalf of the citizens of Madera County. Respectively, ________________________ Donald Holley Secretary xii Citizen Complaint Process Madera County Grand Jury The Grand Jury receives complaints from Madera County citizens concerning a variety of issues. These complaints are reviewed by the Grand Jury Panel to determine appropriate action. The Grand Jury may decline to act on a complaint particularly if the matter is under judicial review, appears to be more appropriate for action by another agency, or it is out of the jury’s purview. Committee investigations reports regarding complaints are submitted to the entire jury with recommendations for action which must be endorsed by a quorum of 12 jury members. Some complaints may remain open for action by the following years’ Grand Jury as appropriate. Submission of Complaints Complaints should be in writing and legible. After all normal attempts to resolve the problems have been taken; a complaint form should then be prepared and submitted. Complaint forms may be obtained from the Grand Jury office, on online at www.Madera-County.com. Content of Complaint The complaint form is designed to help an individual supply pertinent data regarding the reason for the complaint. It is easy to complete, and asks for information that is vital in helping the Grand Jury resolve the problem.

Identify the nature of your complaint.

Identify all of the people involved and how we may contact them.

If appropriate, include the location of the incident that lead to your complaint.

Furnish documentation in support of your allegation.

Specifically describe in reporting the reasons for your claim.

Specifically describe the action you would like the Grand Jury to take. xiii Citizen Complaint Form Madera County Grand Jury PO Box 534 Madera Ca 93639 (559) 662-0946 Person or agency about which this complaint is made: Name: _________________________________________________________________________ Address: _______________________________________________________________________ Telephone: _____________________________________________________________________ Nature of Complaint: Describe the events in the order they occurred as concisely as possible; attach any correspondence or documents in your possession. Attach extra pages if necessary. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Complaint Contacts: What other persons or agencies have you contacted about this problem? Name of Agency Address Date of Contact ________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ________________________ Grand Jury Contacts: Who do you believe the Grand Jury should contact about this matter? Name of Agency Address Phone Number ________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ________________________ Action Required: Describe the action you wish the Grand Jury to take. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Complainant: Name: _________________________________________________________________________ Address: _______________________________________________________________________ Telephone: _____________________________________________________________________ The information presented in this form is true, correct, and complete to the best of my knowledge. ___________________________________________ ____________________________ Signature of Complainant Date xiv CONTACT INFORMATION MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY P.O. Box 534 Madera, CA 93637 559-662-0946 Internet Address: www.MaderaGrandJury.org Email: info@ maderagrandjury.org complaints@ maderagrandjury.org foreman@ maderagrandjury.org xv 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEMBERS OF THE BOARD COUNTY OF MADERA FRANK BIGELOW VERN MOSS MADERA COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER RONN DOMINICI 200 WEST FOURTH STREET/MADERA, CALIFORNIA 93637 MAX RODRIGUEZ (559) 675-7700/ FAX (559) 673-3302 / TOO (559) 675-8970 TOM WHEELER TANNA G. BOYD, Chief Clerk of the Board FileNo: 08161 Date: January 8, 2008 In the Matter of CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESPONSE TO THE 2007-2008 GRAI\JD JURY FINAL REPORT ON THE "MADERA COUNTY WATER ADVISORY COMMISSION", ADMINISTRATIOI\J DEPARTMENT. Upon motion of Supervisor Moss, seconded by Supervisor Rodriguez, it is ordered that the attached be and it is hereby adopted as shown. I hereby certify that the above order was adopted by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Supervisors Bigelow, Moss, Dominici and Rodriguez. I\JOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Supervisor Wheeler. Distribution: ATTEST: TANNA G. BOYD, CLERK ~oA~qfF S~UPE~VI~,QRS CAO Y " )} , " f) \ \ " Grand Jury ,,- \......./LcttfLtJ..../ I Ct.Jl/~i_ Madera County Water Advisory Commission Deputy Clerk Honorable John DeGroot Committee Binder ._--...----- -"....--- "..--1 ~-"-'-"" \ I \ 23 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF MADERA MADERA COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER 200 4TH STREET, MADERA, CALIFORNIA 93637 MEMBERS OF THE BOARD (559) 675-7700 ! FAX (559) 673-3302 ! TDD (559) 675-8970 FRANK BIGELOW VERN MOSS RONN DOMINICI MAX RODRIGUEZ TOM WHEELER Tanna Boyd, Clerk of the Board January 8, 2008 The Honorable John DeGroot Presiding Judge Madera County Superior Court 209 West Yosemite Avenue Madera, California 93637 Subject: Response to the 2007-08 Grand Jury Final Report on the "Madera County Water Advisory Commission." Dear Honorable Judge DeGroot: In accordance with Penal Code Section 933, the Madera County Board of Supervisors submits this response to the Final Report of the Grand Jury. The Grand Jury has requested a response to Recommendations in the 2007-08 Madera County Grand Jury Final Report on the ~~Madera County Water Advisory Commission." (See Attachment #1) . The Final Report of the Grand Jury includes ~~Findings,r which we believe requires a response. The Board will respond to each assertion before addressing the recommendations of the Jury (See Attachment #1, pages 1 through 5) ~'-Grant Finding approved for Integrated Regional Water Management Plan. Response: The stated finding is accurate, but the Integrated Regional Water Management Plan has little or nothing to do with the Commission. While the Commission will receive reports on the project, it does not have any input into the process which was initiated and nearing completion before the Commission was seated. Page -1­ 24 r Finding "B"-Commission Mission Statement adopted by the Board of Supervisors. Response: The finding is accurate as to the adopted resolution establishing a Mission Statement for the Commission. Finding "C"-Commission Policy Statement adopted by the Board of Supervisors. Response: The finding is accurate as to the adopted resolution establishing a Policy Statement for the Commission. Finding "D"-Commissioner Qualifications adopted by Board of Supervisors. Response: The finding is accurate to the extent quoted for adoption of qualifications by the Board of Supervisors. However, the resolution states that (appointment as a Water Commissioner may be based on one, all or a combination of the above qualifiers.) Finding "E"-Members of the former Water Advisory and Flood Control Boards were summarily dismissed. Response: This finding is without factual support. The issue of the Water Commission was discussed with the Madera County Water Advisory Committee, Eastern Madera County Water Advisory Committee and the Madera County Flood Control and Water Conservation Advisory Committee before the concept or ordinance was presented to the Board for adoption. All of the committees approved of the concept and the original Commission was to have 17 members from those committees. However, due to a conflict between East County and West County that iteration failed adoption. Staff was tasked to come back to the board with recommendations. It was these recommendations which were finally adopted. Every member of every former committee received a personal letter of appreciation signed by the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors with a personal invitation to apply for a position on the Commission. Finding "F"-Members of the former advisory Commission were not consulted. Response: This finding is without factual support. The County Counsel and Chairman of the Board of Supervisors consulted with all three former committees at their regularly scheduled meetings. The response was positive and suggested changes to the proposed Page -2­ 25 ordinance were made. Individuals from the committees also spoke during the numerous hearings before the Board of Supervisors. Finding "G"- Appointed members of the Commission are not qualified. Response: This finding is without factual support. While the report indicates that only one of the appointed members has political experience in water issues (enough to qualify under the resolution), none are identified with any employment or lay experience. In truth all of the commissioners have years of experience through work on extensive water infrastructure projects and farming endeavors to more than qualify under the resolution. It must be pointed out that the qualifications for water commissioner are disjunctive. In other words, no commissioner need meet all three of the criteria, as one category is sufficient. This section of the qualification resolution was omitted from the Grand Jury Report (see Response to Finding "D"). Miscellaneous Finding - Commission vs. Advisory Board-Grand Jury questions use of the title "Commission. II Response: The Board of Supervisors has many committees and boards which on some level report to the board on specific issues. But as the Jury recognizes, the issue of water is extremely important to the citizens of Madera County. It was for that reason that the board elected to entitle the new advisory panel on water as a "commission." The word commission does not, as the Jury states, mean the body is policy making. Indeed all commission means is that it is a body charged with a mission. (See, Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 10th edition, p231 [an authorization or command to act in a prescribed manner or to perform prescribed acts.].) In this case the Commission is to act in a prescribed manner as advisors only. The commission has no policy making authority. The following are the Grand Jury's recommendations within their Final Report, and the Board's response to each recommendation: Grand Jury Recommendation #1 "Since the County has spent $770,000 to obtain the Integrated Regional Water Management Plan, the Grand Jury recommends the Board of Supervisors move forward with the presentation of the IRWMP fact-based Page -3­ ~----~---~~.._--------------------~.__._------------­ 26 information to the citizens of Madera County according to the original plan: Circulate the draft report in November 2007, the final report in December 2007, and adopt the IRWMP plan in January 2008." Board of Supervisors' Response to Grand Jury Recommendation #1 This recommendation will not be implemented as there is no current connection between the Commission and the Plan which would change the board's intentions regarding this issue. Grand Jury Recommendation #2 ~~The Grand Jury recommends the appropriate district supervisor immediately remove each unqualified appointee (see Exhibit1, , 13.06.100 vacancies; removal from office) . Board of Supervisors' Response to Grand Jury Recommendation #2 This recommendation will not be implemented. Since each of the current commissioners is qualified for the position, they will remain as seated member of the Commissioners. Grand Jury Recommendation #3 ~~ The Grand Jury recommends the Board of supervisors create a search committee to recruit qualified candidates in compliance with Resolution No. 2007-193 section entitled Qualifications for Appointment of Water Commissioner, (see Exhibit 2 ) . Board of Supervisors' Response to Grand Jury Recommendation #3 This recommendation will not be implemented as there are qualified members sitting on the Commission. Grand Jury Recommendation #4 The Grand Jury recommends the Board of Supervisors welcome the participation of citizen action groups ­ stakeholders - discussion of vital water management issues. Page -4­ -~-----~~._~------_.~--~-----~~~-~--~~ --------­ 27 Board of Supervisors' Response to Grand Jury Recommendation #4 This recommendation will not be implemented as the Board has always solicited and taken input on all issues related to water. Moreover, the Commission policy statement clearly states that the Commission is to listen to all interested parties. Grand Jury Recommendation #5 "Finally, the Grand Jury recommends the Board of Supervisors acknowledge the many years of service of the volunteer members of the previous advisory committees, waters boards, and councils that have been abruptly dismissed. " Board of Supervisors' Response to Grand Jury Recommendation #5 This recommendation will not be implemented as this has already been completed. Sincerely, /~ ,;1~l/,i,_'1 _,_~,_ " _ 2,1/1',/,'1 /'o/"[;;,/L ;,.~--~ 1~- f/ .Y Ronn 'Dominici Chairman Madera County Board of Supervisors Attachments Page -5­ .---------------­ 28 ATTACHMENT #1 P. O. Box 534, Madera, CA 93639 Tel. 559-662-0946 November 14, 2007 MaderaCountyChiefAdministrative Officer 200 West Fourth Street Madera, CA 93637 Gentlemen: Enclosed is a copy ofthe 2007-2008 Madera County Grand Jury report entitled "MADERA COUNTY WATER ADVISORY COMMISSION". Pursuant to California Penal Code Section 933.05(f), a copy ofthe report is being provided to you two working days prior to the report's public release. The public release of this report is scheduled for November 16,2007. Please note that under Penal Code section 933.05 (f):'[no] officer, agency, department, or governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report prior to the public release of the final report". In accordance with California Penal Code Section 933.05(a) and (b), please respond to the findings and recommendations in this report that address subjects under your control. ./ According to Penal Code Section 933(c), you have 90 days to submit your responses to the recommendations contained in this report. Accordingly, the date on which the responses must be submitted is February 16, 2008. Please send your responses to: Madera County Grand Jury P.O. Box 534 Madera, CA 93639 ThankYO~~ 'V\ / ~DOminguez RECEIVED Cl V NOV 142007 Foreperson, 2007-2008 Madera County Grand Jury ADMINISTRATIVE: OFFICE 29 30 31 32 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEMBERS OF THE BOARD COUNTY OF MADERA FRANK BIGELOW VERN MOSS MADERA COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER RONN DOMINICI 200 WEST FOURTH STREET/MADERA, CALIFORNIA 93637 MAX RODRIGUEZ (559) 675-7700 I FAX (559) 673-3302/ TDD (559) 675-8970 TOM WHEELER TANNA G. BOYD, Chief Clerk of the Board File No: 08161 Date: April 15, 2008 . In the Matter of CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESPONSE TO THE 2007-2008 GRAND JURY REPORT ON THE "MAINTENANCE OF THE FLOOD CONTROL WATERWAYS AS AGREED TO IN 1977", ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT. Upon motion of Supervisor Wheeler, seconded by Supervisor Rodriguez, it is ordered that the attached be and it is hereby adopted as shown. I hereby certify that the above order was adopted by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Supervisors Bigelow, Moss, Dominici, Rodriguez and Wheeler. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. Distribution: ATTEST: TANNA G. BOYD, CLERK BOARD OF S~PE./'VISORS ~ ~yf":L~ CAO Engineering vGrand Jury Deputy Clerk Madera County Water Advisory Commission Resource Management Agency CA Reclamation Board Chowchilla Water District US Army Corps of Engineers 33 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF MADERA MADERA COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER 200 4TH STREET, MADERA, CALIFORNIA 93637 MEMBERS OF THE BOARD (559) 675-7700 I FAX (559) 673-3302 I TDD (559) 675-8970 FRANK BIGELOW VERN MOSS RONN DOMINICI MAX RODRIGUEZ TOM WHEELER Tanna Boyd, Clerk of the Board April 15, 2008 The Honorable John DeGroot Presiding Judge Madera County Superior Court 209 West Yosemite Avenue Madera, California 93637 Subject: Response to the 2007-08 Grand Jury Final Report on the UMaintenance of the Flood Control Waterways as Agreed to in 1977." Dear Honorable Judge DeGroot: In accordance with Penal Code Section 933, the Madera County Board of Supervisors submits this response to the Final Report of the Grand Jury. The Grand Jury has requested a response to Recommendations in the 2007-08 Madera County Grand Jury Final Report on the ~Maintenance of the Flood Control Waterways as Agreed to in 19977." See Attachment #1. The following are the Grand Jury's recommendations within their Final Report, and the Board's response to each recommendation: Grand Jury Recommendations ~The Grand Jury recommends that the Agency follow the correction plan submitted to the Reclamation Board~" ~The Grand Jury recommends that the Agency be directed to review existing agreements with the Reclamation Board, the Chowchilla Water District, and the Army Corps of Engineers and take immediate action to comply with the provisions of said agreements." Page -1­ ----------- ------------- 34 Board of Supervisors' Response to Grand Jury Recommendation The response of County Counsel is considered appropriate and is submitted as the Board of t Supervisors response to this Recommendation. (See Attachment #2) SincerelYt ~ . Chairman Madera County Board of Supervisors Attachments --------------- ---- 35 ATTACHMENT #1 FILED JAN 24 2008 p.nBox534.~m.~ MADE:HA COUNTY BOARD Tel 559-662-0946 OF SUPERVISORS Madera County Board ofSupemsors 200 West 4th Street Madera, CA 93637 RE: Grand Jury Final Report" Flood Control Gentlemen: Enclosedis acopy oftheMaderaCountyGrand JUlY report entitled. "'2007/2008 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT. MAINTENANCE OFTIIE FLOOD CONTROL WATERWAYS AS AGREED TO IN 1977-• Pursuant to CaliforniaPenalCodeSection933.05(f),a copy ofthereportisbeingprovided to you two working days priorto the report's public release. The public release ofthis report is scheduled for January 23, 2008. Please note that under Penal Code section 933.05 (f),"[no] officer,agency,department, orgoverningbodyofapublicagencyshalldiscloseany contentsofthereportpriortothepublicrelease ofthefinal report". In accordance with California Penal Code Section 933.05(a) and (b), please respond to the findings andrecommendationsinthisreportthataddresssubjectsunderyourcontrol. Accordingto Penal Code Section 933(c), you have 90 days to submityour responses to the recommendations contained in this report Accordingly, the date on which the responses must be submitted is April 21, 2008. Please send your responsesto: Madera County Grand Jury P.O. Box 534 Madera.. CA 93639 Q~ Regaros: IJ~Do~ez ~ C Foreperson, 2007-2008 Madera County Grand Jury • ._ .._~--------~~---._~._----------- 36 ATTACHMENT #2 County ofMadera Office ofthe County Counsel INTER-DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION DATE: March 27, 2008 TO: Stanley Koehler, Chief A sistant Administrative Officer D . FROM: RE: Response to 2007/2008 Madera County Grand Jury Final Report Maintenance of Water Ways as Agreed To In 1977 This memorandum, as noted, is responsive to the recent Grand Jury Final Report regarding flood control. As you are aware, this office has been working on a legal opinion regarding the complicated issues surrounding the flood control obligations ..-of .the County vs. Madera County Flood Control and Water Conservation Agency and other public agencies within the County of Madera. • These issues are complicated and require a difficult legal analysis and the review of a multitude of documents far beyond that reviewed by the Grand Jury. With that in mind, I must respond that any information that I have regarding the flood control obligations of the County or any other entity within the County of Madera is within the attorney-client privilege and I am thus unable to respond to the Grand Jury Report. DAP:ich S:\Admin\CountyCounsel\CC\Memos\memo to stan koehler re resp to grandy jury report 2007 2008.doc 37 At:t:achrTlsnt: #3 o. P. Box 534, Madera, CA 93639 Tel. 559-662-0946 June 12, 2008 Ronn Dominici Chair, County of Madera Board of Supervisors 200 West 4th Street Madera, California 93637 Dear Supervisor Dominici: After extensive review, the Madera County Grand Jury has found the Board of Supervisors response to the Grand Jury final report entitled, "2007/2008 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT, MAINTENANCE OF lHE FLOOD CONTROL WATERWAYS AS AGREED TO IN 1977" to be unsatisfactory. The Grand Jury is unclear whether County Counsel is concerned with privilege or conflict As to Privilege: Communications, not issues, are privileged. Privilege would only be involved ifthe grand jury were asking for disclosure of the content of a communication between the client and the attorney. Ifthis is the case, please explain why privilege exists, and respond directly to the Grand Jury, perhaps with the assistance of another lawyer not so encumbered. InCalifornia the attorney-client privilege is a creature of statute (the Evidence Code), and is expressly not assertable against a grand jury (Evid.Code 300.) As to Conflict: Ifthe problem is conflict, (based on County Counsel representing competing agencies, including the Grand Jury), we recommend each respondent agency respond by itself or with the assistance of a different attorney. The Grand Jury report was published on Jan. 21, 2008; even though the issue is complicated, the responsibility of each respondent under Penal Code 933.05(b)(3) provides that each may have up to six months from the date of publication to appropriately respond. Page two June 12, 2008 California Penal Code 933.05(b)(3): The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. 1bis timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report. In summary, the Grand Jury at this time finds no grounds for privilege; however we do appreciate the potential conflict of interest issue this report may represent for the Board of Supervisors and other agencies within the County. 1bis potential conflict does not eliminate the obligation to respond to the Grand Jury report as described above. We await your response to the above mentioned report by July 21, 2008. Regards, Linda R. Dominguez Foreperson, 2007/2008 Chowchilla Water District * * Post Ojfice Box 905 327 S. ChawchiTla B7vd. Chowchilla, CA 93610 * * Phone (559) 665-3747 Fax (559) 665-3740 Email [email protected] Board of Directors Dan Maddalena ~ Michael Mandala ~ Vince Taylor ~ Kole M Upton ~ Mark Wolfshorndl March 26, 2008 Madera County Grand Jury P.O. Box 534 Madera, CA 93639 Subject: Response to the 2007-2008 Grand Jury report entitled "2007/2008 MA.D£RA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT, MAINTENANCE OF THE FLOOD CONTROL WATERWAYS AS AGREE TO IN 1977" Dear Members ofthe Grand Jury: The Chowchilla Water District agrees with thefmdings,conclusions and recommendations of the subject Grand Jury report. It is imperative that the Madera County Flood Control and Water Conservation Agency (Agency) take the necessary steps to fulfill its responsibility to operate and maintain the flood control facilities of the Chowchilla River System. The Chowchilla Water District is prepared to cooperate with the Agency to fulfill its responsibilities. Sincerely, General Manager 40 Chowchilla Water District POST OFFICE BOX 905 - 327 S. CHOWCHILLA BLVD. CHOWCHILLA, CALIFORNIA 93610 TELEPHONE (559) 665-3747 FACSIMILE (559) 665-3740 E-MAIL [email protected] July 26, 2006 Stell Manfredi County Administrative Officer 333 W. Olive Avenue. Madera, CA 93637 Dear Mr. Manfredi: Enclosed is the "white paper" prepared by Chowchilla Water District that is our attempt to clarify the District's position as to the responsibilities of Chowchilla Water District, Madera 'County and the Madera County Flood Control & Water Conservation Agency in regards to operation and maintenance of the various flood control facilities associated with the Chowchilla River System. If you have any questions regarding the District's position, please call me. We look forward to hearing back from you and hopefully reaching a satisfactory conclusion to this matter. Sincerely, lJ "-----­ ~u asWelch CTeneralManager cc: CWD Directors Douglas Jensen Encis. FLOOD CONTROL RESPONSIBILITIES ASH SLOUGH AND BERBNDA SLOUGH MADERA COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION AGENCY COUNTY OF MADERA AND CHOWCIDLLA WATER DISTRlCT JULY 26, 2006 ISSUES: 1. WHAT ARE THE RESPONSlBILITIES OF MADERA COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION AGENCY ("Agency"), COUNTY OF MADERA ("County") OR CHOWCIDLLA WATER DISTRlCT ("District"), RESPECTIVELY, REGARDING ASH SLOUGH AND BERENDA SLOUGH PURSUANT TO AGREEMENTS TO WHICH AGENCY, COUNTY OR DISTRICT IS A PARTY? 2. WHAT, IF ANY, NEW ARRANGEMENTS OR AGREEMENT WOULD THE AGENCY, COUNTY AND DISTRICT BE WILLING TO UNDERTAKE? CONCLUSIONS: 1. A. County responsibilities were to clear sloughs in District pursuant to Madera County Contract No. 156-C-63 dated November 5, 1963 between County and District (the"1963 Contract"), whichprovides for County's cIeaning ofsloughs in the [District] for the purpose ofprotecting County roads, rights of way and easements." It also provided for District to reimburse the County for its costs offuel and equipment operator compensation, but not "any other costs or expenditures." The 1963 Contract was superseded when the Reclamation Board acquired easements for levees, the Army Corps ofEngineers constructed flood protection levees and the Agency accepted responsibility for operation and maintenance ofthe local project (flood channels) when the Agency entered into the 1970 Agreement with the Reclamation Board. B. Agency's responsibilities are: a. to maintain and operate the channel ofthe Chowchilla River to the bifurcation ofthe Ash and Berenda Sloughs in a manner that restores and preserves the channel capacity as of 1959, in accordance with the Agreement between the Agency and The Reclamation Board ofthe State of California ("Board") dated April 7, 1970 ("1970 Agreement") b. to maintain and operate the local project (Ash and Berenda Slough flood channels and levees from the Bifurcation Structure to the East Side By Pass) of2 ~;f"Apr., I'r111ntv 42 or any unit thereof upon completion of the project, substantially in accordance with the Maintenance Manual of the U. S. Army Corps ofEngineers for Chowchilla River: Ash and Berenda Sloughs Channel Improvement and Levee Construction ("Corps Manual") c. to provide local agency/interests assurances to the State of California, its Reclamation Board and the United States that will hold those government entities harmless from claims arising out ofthe project on the Chowchilla River and those sloughs, in accordance with the 1970 Agreement. d. to reimburse District for its maintenance ofthe bifurcation structure described in the Corps Manual per the Agreement between the Agency and District dated December 6, 1977 ("1977 Agreement"). C. District's responsibilities are: a. to accept title to, and operate, the bifurcation structure at the division of the Ash and Berenda Sloughs ("Sloughs") for flood control purposes in accordance with the Corps Manual, as set forth in the 1977 Agreement. b. to maintain that bifurcation structure, at the cost and expense of the Agency, in accordance with the 1977 Agreement. c. during flood periods, to patrol the banks of the levees along the Sloughs to detect breaks in those levees, and to the extent the District has personnel and equipment available, make emergency small repairs in those levees, all at the District's expense, in accordance with the 1977 Agreement. D. District's responsibilities do not include: a. long term maintenance, repair or replacement ofany portion of those levees, per the terms ofthe 1977 Agreement. b. any other obligation regarding the clearing, maintenance, repair or replacement of those levees or the slough channels. c. in spite ofDistrict's having made, on one or more occasions, a contribution of in-kind services to assist the Agency in its responsibility to maintain the sloughs, the District has no responsibility to make any similar contributions in the future.