Score: +12
(57/77/45)
Orange County Grand Jury
• 2011-2012
The Dissolution of Redevelopment:
Published: February 17, 2012
32 pages
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 10 findings
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
No recommendations for this finding
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
F4
The Orange County Auditor Controller has an expanded role in managing the tax- increment revenue. The implementation of ABX1 26 includes a requirement that all former redevelopment agencies in the county be audited to determine the accuracy of the information supporting agency claimed enforceable obligations. It has been determined that the County will contract with external auditors to accomplish this task under the direction of the Auditor- Controller.
No recommendations for this finding
F5
The Orange County Board of Supervisors has an expanded role in the management of the transition of redevelopment. They have a responsibility to make appointments to all oversight boards in the County. Ultimately, in 2016, there will be a single oversight board over all successor agencies in the County. The Board is also responsible to approve and oversee the external audit contracts to be managed by the Auditor-Controller.
No recommendations for this finding
F6
It is highly likely that new legislation will pass expanding the scope of the low to moderate income housing programs and ultimately a replacement program for redevelopment itself. Local governments should take a proactive approach in planning and shaping its return.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
F7
Ending redevelopment changes the distribution of property tax revenues among local agencies, but not the amount of tax revenues raised.
No recommendations for this finding
F8
Prior to the dissolution of redevelopment, some agencies encumbered debt to their cities, thereby creating questionable enforceable obligations.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
F9
Some former RDAs (such as Brea and Buena Park) have incentive payments to commercial entities as enforceable obligations.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
F10
The city of Garden Grove failed to adequately address citizen concerns in the pursuit of development of the parking area on Grove Street, west of historic Main Street.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6
The city of Garden Grove should resume negotiations with the Downtown Business Association to come to an agreement on the scope of the Grove Street Condominium Project including the availability of a suitable number of convenient public parking spaces to meet the needs of the downtown merchants. (See F10) REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS: The California Penal Code §933 requires any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the agency. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court); except that in the case of a report containing
Agency Responses 73
Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.
▶
City of Anaheim City School District 8/20/12, 1.43M
August 20, 2012
•
3 pages
• 8 responses
•
Score: +1
(+2, 0, -1)
View Details ▾
8 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
ACSD agrees with this finding. Each District Susan Preus within Orange County may use different student data information systems James Vanderbilt and procedures to track and document bullying or harassment incidents. Regardless of the system used to record bullying or harassment, all incidents prior to July 1, 2012, should have been coded under Education Code section 48900(r). With the implementation of AB 1156, Education Code section 48900(r) provides a common definition of the term "bullying" and therefore enables districts to accurately and consistently identify and document incidences of b...
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
Should the OCDE spearhead a conversation among districts regarding the feasibility of transitioning to a county-wide compatible information system, The Anaheim City School District will certainly participate in that discussion. As a cost saving measure, perhaps an investigation into how we can use our current data systems to accurately report incidents of bullying and gather data across districts would be preferable. The Anaheim City School District currently uses the AERIES student data system to document and track incidents of bullying and harassment. Investigations are documented by site ad...
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The Anaheim City School District agrees that AB 1156 provides a broader and more specific definition of "bullying" than was provided in previous legislation. Finding 3: Education Code section 234.1 requiring posting of antibullying/anti-harassment policies in prescribed areas was not 1001 S. East Street evident in all schools visited. Anaheim, CA 92805-5749 ^
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The Anaheim City School District is required by law to apply the definition of "bullying" contained in Education Code section 48900(r) in suspending and expelling students. The District has also committed to using this definition of "bullying" for investigating and tracking complaints of bullying that are sustained. Recommendation 3: Each district review standardized procedures to protect a bully, victim and bystanders' confidentiality as stated in Education Code section 234.1
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
The Anaheim City School District disagrees with Phone: 714-517-7500 this finding as it relates to our district. Prior to July 1, 2012, all ACSD Fax: 714-517-8538 schools consistently posted anti-discrimination/anti-harassment policies in ^ required areas. In response to the implementation of Education Code www.acsd.k12.ca.us 234.1, all ACSD schools had anti-bullying/harassment
policies posted in all school offices in English and Spanish, all classrooms, staff lounges and pupil government meeting rooms by July 1, 2012. Finding 4: Based on witness testimony, confidentiality was not maintained i...
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The Anaheim City School District implemented this recommendation on July 16, 2012 by assigning each employee of the district an online video course requiring the review of Board Policy 5131.2 and the accompanying Administrative Regulations. The AR states, in part, "The Principal/Coordinator shall keep the complaint and allegations confidential except as necessary to carry out the investigation or take other subsequent action." Additionally, all school site administrators were trained in July and August 2012 by the District Coordinator regarding investigation of allegations and the importance o...
F4
The Orange County Auditor Controller has an expanded role in managing the tax- increment revenue. The implementation of ABX1 26 includes a requirement that all former redevelopment agencies in the county be audited to determine the accuracy of the information supporting agency claimed enforceable obligations. It has been determined that the County will contract with external auditors to accomplish this task under the direction of the Auditor- Controller.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
Though the Grand Jury did find that confidentiality was breached regarding a bullying incident in an unidentified school district, The Anaheim City School District regularly provides training to all administrators regarding investigation of harassment and all disciplinary incidents as well as the importance of maintaining confidentiality of students involved. The most recent training was held August 14, 2012. Awareness and prevention of bullying is a priority for all schools. Each school will receive ongoing training and support to fully implement the new bullying policy. Recommendation 1: Rec...
R6
The city of Garden Grove should resume negotiations with the Downtown Business Association to come to an agreement on the scope of the Grove Street Condominium Project including the availability of a suitable number of convenient public parking spaces to meet the needs of the downtown merchants. (See F10) REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS: The California Penal Code §933 requires any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presi...
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
Should a county-wide system of reporting incidents of bullying be explored, The Anaheim City School District will participate in the planning process. Currently, ACSD utilizes
the AERIES student data system to document and track incidents of bullying and harassment. Investigations and resolutions are documented by site administrators, and by the District Complaint Officer when an allegation is brought to the district level. Recommendation 7: All schools post anti-bullying/anti-harassment policy in offices, staff lounges and student government meeting areas as prescribed in Education Code sect...
▶
City of Buena Park Police Department 6/12/12, 370KB
June 12, 2012
•
1 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of BUENA PARK SCHOOL DISTRICT
September 27, 2012
•
3 pages
• 5 responses
•
Score: +2
(+3, 1, -1)
View Details ▾
5 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
Rhodia Shead Orange County's K-12 public schools have implemented policies and/or Member Trustee Area 1 guidelines around the use of different AI platforms in varying and inconsistent ways. Some prohibit Al's use; others allow it: and some don't have policies or guidelines governing AI at all. Dr. Julienne Lee Superintendent The District agrees with the finding. SYNK SCHOOLOG Orange County Grand Jury September 9, 2024 the Passion to
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The District agrees partially with this finding. The District agrees that not all Orange County schools use the same technology and procedures to record bullying or harassment incidents. Different districts use different databases and internal procedures to track bullying complaints. With regard to the codes used to record bullying or harassment incidents, prior to July 1, 2012, Education Code section 48900(r) defined bullying by reference to sexual harassment (Education Code section 48900.2), hate violence (Education Code section 48900.3), and harassment, threats and intimidation (Education C...
R1
Dr. Julienne Lee By June 30, 2025, Orange County's K-12 schools should implement policies Superintendent and guidelines regarding the appropriate use of AI. These may be provided at the district level or within individual schools through the adoption of an Acceptable Use Policy, Code of Ethics, or other written directives addressing the use of Al. The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future. BUEN SCHOOLO Orange County Grand Jury September 9, 2024 he Pas...
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
This recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted and is not reasonable. While all districts will comply with Statemandated reporting, such as the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS), it is not necessary that each district use the same internal procedures and technology to record reported incidents of bullying. Recommendation 2: Recommend all county-wide schools agree upon the same definition of bullying.
F2
Superintendents provide varying levels of support in implementing AI 6885 Orangethorpe Ave. policies and/or guidelines in their respective school districts. Buena Park, California 90620 The District agrees with this finding. (714) 522-8412 www.bpsd.us
Response: Agree
Score: +1
</b> The District agrees that AB 1156 provides a broader definition of "bullying" than was contained in prior law. <sup>1</sup> The Orange County Superintendent of Schools has been directed to respond to Recommendations 4 and 5. M
Finding 3: Education Code section 234.1 requiring posting of anti-bullying/antiharassment policies in prescribed areas was not evident in all schools visited.
F3
There are many resources to guide educators in using Al. Several are Governing Board available at the local level through the Orange County Department of Education, Orange County Board of Education, CEO Leadership Alliance Tharwa Ahmad President Orange County, and Orange Unified School District Technology Department, Trustee Area 3 to name a few. However, utilization and even awareness of the availability Jason Chong of such resources is highly variable across school districts. Clerk/President P...
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The District cannot comment on what policies are posted in all schools throughout Orange County, but can respond only on behalf of the District itself. In regard to the finding that the District failed to post its anti-harassment policies in prescribed areas, the District agrees with this finding. Finding 4: Based on witness testimony, confidentiality was not maintained in a bullying incident as prescribed in California Education Code section 234.1
R3
K-12 students should be trained on the appropriate use of Al. 6885 Orangethorpe Ave. Buena Park, California The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented 90620 in the future. (714) 522-8412 www.bpsd.us The District has not yet implemented this recommendation but will implement this recommendation by June 30, 2025, with the following action plan: Governing Board Park School Buena District will have full implementation of this recommendation, which will include developme...
Response: Will Implement
Score: +1
The District will implement this recommendation by January, 2013. The District has recently adopted new policy 5131.2 Bullying which addresses requirements regarding retaliation and confidentiality. The District has reminded its school administrators of this policy in a memorandum dated September 26, 2012. Recommendation 6: Recommend each district explore the development of a countywide standard information system for recording incidents of bullying.
2 .....................................
▶
City of Anaheim 10/29/12, 892K
October 29, 2012
•
3 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Anaheim 9/11/12, 7.08M
September 11, 2012
•
18 pages
• 3 responses
•
Score: -1
(+1, 0, -2)
View Details ▾
3 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
The City of Anaheim wholly disagrees with this finding. We disagree with Finding #1 based upon two key points.
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
As the fire departments evolved into emergency medical departments, the model for operating the fire department has not radically changed. The fire departments have simply absorbed the emergency medical responses into their departments under their old "fire response" model. The City of Anaheim wholly disagrees with this finding. Anaheim Fire and Rescue has embraced the call to respond to those in need and has played an integral role in growth and expansion of Orange County emergency medical services system. In fact, in can be argued that the fire service has resources in place to provide the m...
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
Economic recessions have forced local fire department boards of directors and city councils to re-evaluate their models for providing fire and emergency medical responses. While this brings to the fore issues of staffing, response times, public safety, training, consolidations, union rules and privatization of their various services, it also spotlights the model used for all emergency responses. The City of Anaheim agrees with this finding. > In a very short period of time, many factors have come into play to create the shift we are experiencing and witnessing today. The economic downturn has ...
▶
City of Anaheim Community Development 9/18/12, 2.19MB
September 18, 2012
•
2 pages
• 3 responses
•
Score: +3
(+3, 0, 0)
View Details ▾
3 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
- "As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABXI 26". As reported by the Grand Jury, Anaheim agrees with this finding.
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
- "Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code". As reported by the Grand Jury, Anaheim agrees with this finding.
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
- "Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt". As reported by the Grand Jury, Anaheim agrees with this finding.
▶
City of Anaheim (Human Resources Department) 10/12/12, 239K
October 12, 2012
•
1 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
CITY OF BREA
September 18, 2012
•
1 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Brea 02/05/13, 711K
February 05, 2013
•
2 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Brea 12/20/12, 982K
December 20, 2012
•
3 pages
• 8 responses
•
Score: +2
(+3, 0, -1)
View Details ▾
8 responses to findings and recommendations
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
Based upon the provided example in Appendix D, the City agrees with the Grand Jury's finding.
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Unknown
Scheduled: Fiscal Year 2012-13
Score: 0
With the Fiscal Year 2012-13 reporting of budgeted EXECUTIVE Compensation Costs, the above recommendations have been implemented. However, a majority of executives and managers reported are not subject to overtime. Therefore, amounts are not listed. Budgeted costs for managers who are subject to overtime are not reported because overtime is not budgeted at the individual level, rather at the department/division level. Furthermore, budgeted insurance premiums for positions are reported along with other City paid benefits including Medicare, workers' compensation, and life insurance. City Counci...
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
Based upon the provided example in Appendix D, the City agrees with the Grand Jury's finding.
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
</u> With the 2012-13 reporting of budgeted EMPLOYEE Compensation Costs, the above recommendations have been implemented. Budgeted overtime costs are not reported because it is not budgeted at the individual level, rather at the department/division level. Furthermore, budgeted insurance premiums for positions are reported along with other City paid benefits including Medicare, workers' compensation, and life insurance. <u>
F4
The Orange County Auditor Controller has an expanded role in managing the tax- increment revenue. The implementation of ABX1 26 includes a requirement that all former redevelopment agencies in the county be audited to determine the accuracy of the information supporting agency claimed enforceable obligations. It has been determined that the County will contract with external auditors to accomplish this task under the direction of the Auditor- Controller.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City agrees with the Grand Jury's finding.
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
</u> As of December 12, 2012, the City posted their annual pension contribution rates for both Safety and Miscellaneous employee groups.
F5
The Orange County Board of Supervisors has an expanded role in the management of the transition of redevelopment. They have a responsibility to make appointments to all oversight boards in the County. Ultimately, in 2016, there will be a single oversight board over all successor agencies in the County. The Board is also responsible to approve and oversee the external audit contracts to be managed by the Auditor-Controller.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
The City disagrees wholly with the Grand Jury's finding. The City is required to post fiscal year information. Therefore, it provides fiscal year budgeted costs for salaries and benefits. Budgeted overtime costs are not reported because it is not budgeted at the individual level, rather at the department/division level. It is almost impossible to post overtime costs for individual positions based on fiscal year.
2011-2012 Grand Jury Report Compensation Study of Orange County Cities | Page 3
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The State Controller's Office-Division of Accounting and Reporting requires the City to annually report employee compensation. Included in the City of Brea's 2011 calendar year data are the annual overtime costs for individual positions. An inquirer can easily search this information at the following website: http://www.sco.ca.gov/compensatiom. 2011 information should be posted by January 2013. The City of Brea greatly appreciates the opportunity to respond to the Grand Jury Report and acknowledges the work of the 2011-12 Orange County Grand Jury, to determine whether abusive compensation exis...
▶
City of Brea 9/24/12, 2.66M
September 24, 2012
•
7 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Costa Mesa 8/23/12, 2.18M
August 23, 2012
•
5 pages
• 6 responses
•
Score: -1
(+1, 3, -2)
View Details ▾
6 responses to findings and recommendations
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
. All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by AB X1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1) Response - The recommendation has been implemented by the Successor Agency to the Costa Mesa Redevelopment Agency pursuant to the Dissolution Act, in particular through each Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule (ROPS), ...
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
the Health and Safety Code. Response - The City and Successor Agency agree with F2 as Costa Mesa has had, and continues to have, a citizen involvement committee called the Redevelopment and Residential Rehabilitation (3R) Committee that includes stake-holders as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3) Response - The recommendation has been implemented, as noted by the actions taken by the Successor Agency and the Oversight Board in the chart above.
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
the successor agency debt. Response - The City of Costa Mesa disagrees with F3 that external oversight over redevelopment has been missing as there have been several groups that have provided continuous oversight to redevelopment outside the Redevelopment Agency including the 3R Committee, the Planning Commission, and the City Council.
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8) Response - The recommendation has been implemented. The Successor Agency and the Oversight Board have evaluated what the former Costa Mesa Redevelopment Agency owes to the City of Costa Mesa, which loan was initially established within two years of creation of the Agency with the proceeds intended and expended for the Agency's start-up costs and establishing and implementing the Downtown Project Area. Pursuant to Section 34...
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9) Response - The recommendation is not applicable to the Successor Agency and thus will not be implemented. There are no outstanding enforceable obligations that require monies to be paid to commercial entities, so none are listed on the ROPS. However, there are outstanding covenant agreements listed on the ROPS that include maintenance, management and/or use covenants that will require monitoring for comp...
▶
City of Costa Mesa (Extension) 8/30/12, 334K
August 30, 2012
•
1 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Cypress 6/27/12, 1.33M
June 27, 2012
•
4 pages
• 10 responses
•
Score: 0
(+0, 10, 0)
View Details ▾
10 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The City of Cypress agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of Cypress, the report indicates that the City is at 8%. While we don't know where this figure comes from or what is included, it should be noted that the Cypress Redevelopment Agency and Successor Agency submitted a ROPS higher than the DOF has approved Leroy Mills, Mayor Todd W. Seymore, Mayor Pro Tem Doug Bailey, Council Member Phil Luebben, Council Member Prakash Narain, M.D., Council Member
Page 2 of 4 that could cause the perce...
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City of Cypress agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of Cypress, the report indicates that the City is at 8%. While we don't know where this figure comes from or what is included, it should be noted that the Cypress Redevelopment Agency and Successor Agency submitted a ROPS higher than the DOF has approved Leroy Mills, Mayor Todd W. Seymore, Mayor Pro Tem Doug Bailey, Council Member Phil Luebben, Council Member Prakash Narain, M.D., Council Member
Page 2 of 4 that could cause the perce...
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The City of Cypress agrees in part with this finding. We do not know the status of other Redevelopment Agencies and having citizen involvement committees. In regards to the City of Cypress, when the project areas were established and when specific plans were established in these project areas, there were citizen involvement committees used for input. However, the City does not maintain an on-going committee subsequent to the plans being approved.
F.3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performan...
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City of Cypress agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of Cypress, the report indicates that the City is at 8%. While we don't know where this figure comes from or what is included, it should be noted that the Cypress Redevelopment Agency and Successor Agency submitted a ROPS higher than the DOF has approved Leroy Mills, Mayor Todd W. Seymore, Mayor Pro Tem Doug Bailey, Council Member Phil Luebben, Council Member Prakash Narain, M.D., Council Member
Page 2 of 4 that could cause the perce...
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The City of Cypress agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of Cypress, the report indicates that the City is at 8%. While we don't know where this figure comes from or what is included, it should be noted that the Cypress Redevelopment Agency and Successor Agency submitted a ROPS higher than the DOF has approved Leroy Mills, Mayor Todd W. Seymore, Mayor Pro Tem Doug Bailey, Council Member Phil Luebben, Council Member Prakash Narain, M.D., Council Member
Page 2 of 4 that could cause the perce...
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt. Response: The City of Cypress disagrees partially with this finding, as far as it applies to the City of Cypress, since we cannot answer for other Redevelopment Agencies. We do not agree that external oversight has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment compl...
F4
The Orange County Auditor Controller has an expanded role in managing the tax- increment revenue. The implementation of ABX1 26 includes a requirement that all former redevelopment agencies in the county be audited to determine the accuracy of the information supporting agency claimed enforceable obligations. It has been determined that the County will contract with external auditors to accomplish this task under the direction of the Auditor- Controller.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The City of Cypress agrees in part with this finding. We do not know the status of other Redevelopment Agencies and having citizen involvement committees. In regards to the City of Cypress, when the project areas were established and when specific plans were established in these project areas, there were citizen involvement committees used for input. However, the City does not maintain an on-going committee subsequent to the plans being approved.
F.3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performan...
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City of Cypress agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of Cypress, the report indicates that the City is at 8%. While we don't know where this figure comes from or what is included, it should be noted that the Cypress Redevelopment Agency and Successor Agency submitted a ROPS higher than the DOF has approved Leroy Mills, Mayor Todd W. Seymore, Mayor Pro Tem Doug Bailey, Council Member Phil Luebben, Council Member Prakash Narain, M.D., Council Member
Page 2 of 4 that could cause the perce...
F5
The Orange County Board of Supervisors has an expanded role in the management of the transition of redevelopment. They have a responsibility to make appointments to all oversight boards in the County. Ultimately, in 2016, there will be a single oversight board over all successor agencies in the County. The Board is also responsible to approve and oversee the external audit contracts to be managed by the Auditor-Controller.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The City of Cypress agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of Cypress, the report indicates that the City is at 8%. While we don't know where this figure comes from or what is included, it should be noted that the Cypress Redevelopment Agency and Successor Agency submitted a ROPS higher than the DOF has approved Leroy Mills, Mayor Todd W. Seymore, Mayor Pro Tem Doug Bailey, Council Member Phil Luebben, Council Member Prakash Narain, M.D., Council Member
Page 2 of 4 that could cause the perce...
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City of Cypress agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of Cypress, the report indicates that the City is at 8%. While we don't know where this figure comes from or what is included, it should be noted that the Cypress Redevelopment Agency and Successor Agency submitted a ROPS higher than the DOF has approved Leroy Mills, Mayor Todd W. Seymore, Mayor Pro Tem Doug Bailey, Council Member Phil Luebben, Council Member Prakash Narain, M.D., Council Member
Page 2 of 4 that could cause the perce...
▶
City of Cypress 8/13/12, 944K
August 13, 2012
•
3 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Cypress – Follow Up Response 5/06/13, 1.83M
May 06, 2013
•
7 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Fountain Valley 7/17/12, 5.73M
July 17, 2012
•
16 pages
• 6 responses
•
Score: 0
(+0, 6, 0)
View Details ▾
6 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
: Accessibility Ratings for Cities, Special Districts and JPAs
While the City of Fountain Valley was rated, "good", we partially disagree with this finding. The City has maintained a link entitled "salaries and benefits" on the front page of the site for the last year. This link takes you directly to our "Transparency" webpage which contains all the information on employee compensation and benefits as well as the Grand Jury recommended reporting format. In response to the Grand Jury's finding however the City has moved the "Salaries and Benefits" hyperlink to the top of the Quicklinks section...
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
Recommendation 1: Access for Compensation Costs Transparency The Grand Jury recommended action has been implemented.
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
Recommendation 2: Content and Clarity of Executive Compensation Costs The Grand Jury recommended action has been implemented.
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
Recommendation 3: Content and Clarity of Employee Compensation Costs The Grand Jury recommended action has been implemented.
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
Recommendation 4: Transparency of Employer Pension Contribution Rates The Grand Jury recommended action has been implemented.
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
Recommendation 5: Transparency of Overtime Pay and On-Call Pay in Employee Compensation Cost Reporting The Grand Jury recommended action has been implemented.
▶
City of Fullerton 11/13/12, 2.74M
November 13, 2012
•
7 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Fullerton 8/8/12, 1.2M
August 08, 2012
•
3 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Fullerton 9/18/12, 2.19MB
September 19, 2012
•
6 pages
• 2 responses
•
Score: 0
(+0, 2, 0)
View Details ▾
2 responses to findings and recommendations
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R1 has been implemented through the ROPS process and State Department of Finance procedures for review and approval/denial.
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R2 has been implemented as required by statute.
▶
City of Fullerton (Extension) 9/14/12, 221K
September 14, 2012
•
1 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
August 28, 2012
•
4 pages
• 3 responses
•
Score: 0
(+0, 3, 0)
View Details ▾
3 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
Mental health training for law enforcement officers in Orange County exceeds the State's requirements, resulting in law enforcement applying these skills to better evaluate and handle mental health calls for service. Response: The City of Garden Grove agrees with the above finding. The recommendation has been implemented. The Garden Grove Police Department is fully committed to ongoing mental health training. Currently, the Commission on Peace Officers Standards and Training (POST) requires offi...
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26. The City agrees with this finding based on the information provided in the Grand Jury Report. Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a
F2:
citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code. The City agree...
F2
Law enforcement agencies in Orange County have developed unique ways to deal with mental health calls in their communities based on their particular needs and budgets, enabling law enforcement to better serve their communities. Response: The City of Garden Grove agrees with the above finding. The recommendation has been implemented. The City of Garden Grove was the first City in the County to implement both full-time Be Well crisis counselors and a part-time Psychiatric Emergency Response Team (...
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code. The City agrees with this finding based on the information provided in the Grand Jury Report. However, while there was not a requirement for agencies to have citizen involvement committees, the City of Garden Grove did form and maintain Project Area Committees in 1992, 1998 and 2002 when it was processing amendments to its redevelopment project area. These committees remained in place for several years. 11222 Acacia Parkway • P.O.Box 3070 • Garden Grove, CA 928...
F3
Law enforcement collaboration with County PERT clinicians and Be Well mobile response units has been an effective tool when responding to mental health calls for service. Response: The City of Garden Grove agrees with the above finding. The recommendation has been implemented. Furthermore, the City of Garden Grove has been a pioneer in mental health services and was the first City in Orange County to have both Be Well crisis counselors and PERT clinicians simultaneously.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt. The City disagrees partially with this finding. External oversight mechanisms have been effective in monitoring compliance and performance of the Garden Grove Agency for Community Development (Agency). Redevelopment agency business was routinely conducted through open meetings and public hearing processes, and through publicly noticed neighborhoo...
▶
CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
August 28, 2012
•
6 pages
• 3 responses
•
Score: 0
(+1, 1, -1)
View Details ▾
3 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
Mental health training for law enforcement officers in Orange County exceeds the State's requirements, resulting in law enforcement applying these skills to better evaluate and handle mental health calls for service. Response: The City of Garden Grove agrees with the above finding. The recommendation has been implemented. The Garden Grove Police Department is fully committed to ongoing mental health training. Currently, the Commission on Peace Officers Standards and Training (POST) requires offi...
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
Fire Departments that once primarily responded to calls for fire emergencies now have become emergency medical response departments primarily responding to medical emergencies. This evolution has occurred since the onset of "9-1-1" call where all emergency calls are received at one place. The City of Garden Grove partially disagrees with this finding. In October 1926, the Garden Grove County Fire Protection District No. 1, also called the Garden Grove Volunteer Fire department was formed. The new department protected 1,700 people and property with an assessed value of $278,000 and an area of a...
F2
Law enforcement agencies in Orange County have developed unique ways to deal with mental health calls in their communities based on their particular needs and budgets, enabling law enforcement to better serve their communities. Response: The City of Garden Grove agrees with the above finding. The recommendation has been implemented. The City of Garden Grove was the first City in the County to implement both full-time Be Well crisis counselors and a part-time Psychiatric Emergency Response Team (...
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
As the fire departments evolved into emergency medical departments, the model for operating the fire departments has not radically changed. The fire departments have simply absorbed the emergency medical responses into their departments under their old "fire response" model. The City of Garden Grove disagrees wholly with this finding. The City of Garden Grove Fire Department is a full service organization providing fire suppression, fire prevention, hazardous materials response, rescue, public education and emergency medical services. This multi-function capability capitalizes on fire fighting...
F3
Law enforcement collaboration with County PERT clinicians and Be Well mobile response units has been an effective tool when responding to mental health calls for service. Response: The City of Garden Grove agrees with the above finding. The recommendation has been implemented. Furthermore, the City of Garden Grove has been a pioneer in mental health services and was the first City in Orange County to have both Be Well crisis counselors and PERT clinicians simultaneously.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
Economic recessions have forced local fire department boards of directors and city councils to re-evaluate their models for providing fire and emergency medical responses. While this brings to the fore issues of staffing, response times, public safety, training, consolidations, union rules and privatization of their various services, it also spotlights the model used for all emergency responses. The City of Garden Grove agrees with this finding. Federal, State, and local governments are struggling with the economic effects of Policy makers across the country are evaluating the the Great Recess...
▶
City of Huntington Beach 9/20/12, 5.62MB
September 20, 2012
•
10 pages
• 8 responses
•
Score: -4
(+0, 3, -4)
View Details ▾
8 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
, the Grand Jury misstates how the "administrative cost allowance" allocable to successor agencies actually works. Compliance with the 5% administrative cost cap for Fiscal Year 2011-2012, and the 3% administrative cost cap for Fiscal Years 2012-2013 and after, is automatic. A successor agency will not receive a distribution from the County Auditor-Controller for successor agency administrative expenses in excess of the allowable The debt is not "successor agency debt," but the debt of the dissolved redevelopment agency. The Successor Agency has no debt. Auditor-Controller errs because the max...
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Implemented
Scheduled: Fiscal Year 2011-2012
Score: 0
"As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26." The Huntington Beach City Council disagrees wholly with this Response: Finding. (Penal Code §933.05(a)(2).) The Finding encapsulates the deficiencies in the Grand Jury Report in that it mixes up two different laws that apply at two different times to two different entities. It implies wrongly-there was a 5% administrati...
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
Finding. (Penal Code §933.05(a)(2).) The Finding encapsulates the deficiencies in the Grand Jury Report in that it mixes up two different laws that apply at two different times to two different entities. It implies wrongly-there was a 5% administrative cost cap applicable to redevelopment agencies prior to their dissolution. In fact, the 12% administrative figure accountable for the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency included both administrative and project administration costs. Prior to the enactment of AB1x 26, there was no administrative cost cap in the CRL that applied to redevelopment ...
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Scheduled: Fiscal Year 2011-2012
Score: 0
"Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code." Response: The Huntington Beach City Council disagrees wholly with this Finding. (Penal Code §933.05(a)(2).) The implication in this Finding is that Huntington Beach was somehow deficient or violated the CRL because the Huntington Beach RDA failed to have a "citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee." The City does have the Southeast Coastal Project Area, a...
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
Finding. (Penal Code §933.05(a)(2).) The Finding encapsulates the deficiencies in the Grand Jury Report in that it mixes up two different laws that apply at two different times to two different entities. It implies wrongly-there was a 5% administrative cost cap applicable to redevelopment agencies prior to their dissolution. In fact, the 12% administrative figure accountable for the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency included both administrative and project administration costs. Prior to the enactment of AB1x 26, there was no administrative cost cap in the CRL that applied to redevelopment ...
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Implemented
Scheduled: Fiscal Year 2011-2012
Score: 0
"Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical valuation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt." The Huntington Beach City Council disagrees wholly with this Response: Finding. (Penal Code §933.05(a)(2).) The premise of this Finding is wrong insofar as the Grand Jury is blaming local redevelopment agencies and cities for a lack of oversight or ineffective monitoring. In...
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
not warranted and is not reasonable. (Penal Code §933.05(b)(4).) This Recommendation as applied to Huntington Beach, presumes Huntington Beach's successor agency and oversight board are failing to fulfill their respective legal duties under AB1x 26/AB 1484. There is no evidence to support such a premise. As noted in Huntington Beach's response to Recommendation R.3, the Grand Jury does not appear to be aware of the legal duties imposed on successor agencies and oversight boards under ABx1 26/AB 1484. Huntington Beach's successor agency and oversight board have fulfilled their respective duties...
F5
The Orange County Board of Supervisors has an expanded role in the management of the transition of redevelopment. They have a responsibility to make appointments to all oversight boards in the County. Ultimately, in 2016, there will be a single oversight board over all successor agencies in the County. The Board is also responsible to approve and oversee the external audit contracts to be managed by the Auditor-Controller.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
Finding. (Penal Code §933.05(a)(2).) The Finding encapsulates the deficiencies in the Grand Jury Report in that it mixes up two different laws that apply at two different times to two different entities. It implies wrongly-there was a 5% administrative cost cap applicable to redevelopment agencies prior to their dissolution. In fact, the 12% administrative figure accountable for the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency included both administrative and project administration costs. Prior to the enactment of AB1x 26, there was no administrative cost cap in the CRL that applied to redevelopment ...
▶
City of Irvine 8/2/12, 734KB
August 02, 2012
•
2 pages
• 1 response
•
Score: 0
(+0, 1, 0)
View Details ▾
1 response to findings and recommendations
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R3: Content & Clarity of Employee Compensation Costs This has been completed and posted.
▶
City of Irvine 8/2/12, 8.61M
August 16, 2012
•
15 pages
• 10 responses
•
Score: -7
(+1, 1, -8)
View Details ▾
10 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
Finding. (Penal Code §933.05(a)(2).) Finding F.1 encapsulates the deficiencies in the Grand Jury Report in that it mixes up two different laws that apply at two different times to two different entities. It implies- wrongly-there was a 5% administrative cost cap applicable to redevelopment agencies prior to their dissolution. Prior to the enactment of AB1x 26, there was no administrative cost cap in the CRL that applied to redevelopment agency operations.<sup>4</sup> Finding F.1 conflates the lack of administrative cost caps imposed on redevelopment agencies before they were dissolved with the...
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Will Not Implement
Scheduled: Fiscal Year 2011-2012
Score: -1
Code §933.05(b)(1)] because Irvine already complied with the totality of the Recommendation before the Grand Jury Report was released. As described in Irvine's response to Finding F.1, the Grand Jury misstates how the "administrative cost allowance" allocable to successor agencies actually works. Compliance with the 5% administrative cost cap for Fiscal Year 2011-2012, and the 3% administrative cost cap for Fiscal Years 2012-2013 and after, is automatic. A successor agency will not receive a distribution from the County Auditor-Controller for successor agency administrative expenses in excess ...
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
Finding. (Penal Code §933.05(a)(2).) Finding F.1 encapsulates the deficiencies in the Grand Jury Report in that it mixes up two different laws that apply at two different times to two different entities. It implies- wrongly-there was a 5% administrative cost cap applicable to redevelopment agencies prior to their dissolution. Prior to the enactment of AB1x 26, there was no administrative cost cap in the CRL that applied to redevelopment agency operations.<sup>4</sup> Finding F.1 conflates the lack of administrative cost caps imposed on redevelopment agencies before they were dissolved with the...
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Will Not Implement
Scheduled: Fiscal Year 2011-2012
Score: -1
Code §933.05(b)(1)] because Irvine already complied with the totality of the Recommendation before the Grand Jury Report was released. As described in Irvine's response to Finding F.1, the Grand Jury misstates how the "administrative cost allowance" allocable to successor agencies actually works. Compliance with the 5% administrative cost cap for Fiscal Year 2011-2012, and the 3% administrative cost cap for Fiscal Years 2012-2013 and after, is automatic. A successor agency will not receive a distribution from the County Auditor-Controller for successor agency administrative expenses in excess ...
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
Finding. (Penal Code §933.05(a)(2).) Finding F.1 encapsulates the deficiencies in the Grand Jury Report in that it mixes up two different laws that apply at two different times to two different entities. It implies- wrongly-there was a 5% administrative cost cap applicable to redevelopment agencies prior to their dissolution. Prior to the enactment of AB1x 26, there was no administrative cost cap in the CRL that applied to redevelopment agency operations.<sup>4</sup> Finding F.1 conflates the lack of administrative cost caps imposed on redevelopment agencies before they were dissolved with the...
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Implemented
Scheduled: Fiscal Year 2011-2012
Score: 0
"Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical valuation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt." The Irvine City Council disagrees wholly with this Response: Finding. (Penal Code §933.05(a)(2).) The premise of Finding F.3 is wrong insofar as the Grand Jury is blaming local redevelopment agencies and cities for a lack of oversight or ineffective monitoring. In Irvine, th...
F4
The Orange County Auditor Controller has an expanded role in managing the tax- increment revenue. The implementation of ABX1 26 includes a requirement that all former redevelopment agencies in the county be audited to determine the accuracy of the information supporting agency claimed enforceable obligations. It has been determined that the County will contract with external auditors to accomplish this task under the direction of the Auditor- Controller.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
"Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)." Response: The Recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted and is not reasonable. (Penal Code §933.05(b)(4).) At the outset it should be noted that Irvine was not asked to respond to Finding F.8 referred to in Recommendation R.4, yet is required to respond to Recommendation R.4. Recommendation R.4, like Recommendation R.3, as applied to Irvine, presumes Irvine's successor agency and oversight board a...
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Will Not Implement
Scheduled: Fiscal Year 2011-2012
Score: -1
Code §933.05(b)(1)] because Irvine already complied with the totality of the Recommendation before the Grand Jury Report was released. As described in Irvine's response to Finding F.1, the Grand Jury misstates how the "administrative cost allowance" allocable to successor agencies actually works. Compliance with the 5% administrative cost cap for Fiscal Year 2011-2012, and the 3% administrative cost cap for Fiscal Years 2012-2013 and after, is automatic. A successor agency will not receive a distribution from the County Auditor-Controller for successor agency administrative expenses in excess ...
F5
The Orange County Board of Supervisors has an expanded role in the management of the transition of redevelopment. They have a responsibility to make appointments to all oversight boards in the County. Ultimately, in 2016, there will be a single oversight board over all successor agencies in the County. The Board is also responsible to approve and oversee the external audit contracts to be managed by the Auditor-Controller.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
Finding. (Penal Code §933.05(a)(2).) Finding F.1 encapsulates the deficiencies in the Grand Jury Report in that it mixes up two different laws that apply at two different times to two different entities. It implies- wrongly-there was a 5% administrative cost cap applicable to redevelopment agencies prior to their dissolution. Prior to the enactment of AB1x 26, there was no administrative cost cap in the CRL that applied to redevelopment agency operations.<sup>4</sup> Finding F.1 conflates the lack of administrative cost caps imposed on redevelopment agencies before they were dissolved with the...
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Will Not Implement
Scheduled: Fiscal Year 2011-2012
Score: -1
Code §933.05(b)(1)] because Irvine already complied with the totality of the Recommendation before the Grand Jury Report was released. As described in Irvine's response to Finding F.1, the Grand Jury misstates how the "administrative cost allowance" allocable to successor agencies actually works. Compliance with the 5% administrative cost cap for Fiscal Year 2011-2012, and the 3% administrative cost cap for Fiscal Years 2012-2013 and after, is automatic. A successor agency will not receive a distribution from the County Auditor-Controller for successor agency administrative expenses in excess ...
▶
City of La Habra 6/26/12, 956KB
June 26, 2012
•
3 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of La Habra 6/5/12, 339
June 05, 2012
•
1 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of La Habra 7/26/12, 957KB
July 26, 2012
•
2 pages
• 4 responses
•
Score: 0
(+2, 0, -2)
View Details ▾
4 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
Agree with finding F1.
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
Agree with finding F2.
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible (see F3). Response: The recommendation has already been implemented with the ROPS being approved by the Department of Finance, State Controllers, and OC County Auditor. Further, the continued implementation of Dissolution Act and AB 1484 will wind down the debt of the agency as quickly as possible as proscribed by the law. R4. Successor agencies and oversight boa...
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
Disagree with finding F3.
▶
City of Lake Forest 9/12/12, 2M
September 12, 2012
•
5 pages
• 8 responses
•
Score: -4
(+0, 0, -4)
View Details ▾
8 responses to findings and recommendations
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
The City has no knowledge of the ability or desire of the 20 cities referenced in F2 to meet the Grand Jury's definition of an "excellent level." Without such a foundation from which to offer an informed opinion, the City respectfully disagrees with the finding.
F.3:
There is more opportunity for transparent reporting in the content and clarity of employee compensation costs reporting on local government websites. Response: The City has not reviewed the manner in which the 29 Orange County cities rated good, average, poor and nonexistent, disclose employee compensation costs on websites or t...
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
At this time, the City will not be implementing the Grand Jury's recommended reporting methodology. As referenced above, while the Grand Jury's efforts to provide leadership in the area of compensation reporting are notable, the City will continue to provide a web link to the State Controller's Database of Government Compensation in California as a consistent standard. We believe the State Controller's database enables a member of the public to compare compensation between agencies statewide through a common reporting method, reducing potential confusion generating from differing compensation ...
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
The City has not reviewed the manner in which the 29 Orange County cities rated good, average, poor and nonexistent, disclose employee compensation costs on websites or through other means. Without such a foundation from which to offer an informed opinion regarding the content and clarity of said information, the City respectfully disagrees with this finding. DRUG USE IS E ABUSE 25550 Commercentre Dr., Suite 100 www.lakeforestca.gov Lake Forest, CA 92630 Lake Forest, Remember the Past ~ Challenge the Future (949) 461-3400 Printed on Recycled Paper. City Hall Fax: (949) 461-3511
Page 2
F.4:
...
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The City makes no recommendations on what other cities should do. As for the City of Lake Forest, we currently report employee compensation information to the public in an easily accessible manner, as discussed in our response to R.2. At this time, the City will not be implementing the Grand Jury's recommended reporting methodology. As referenced above, while the Grand Jury's efforts to provide leadership in the area of compensation reporting are notable, the City will continue to provide a web link to the State Controller's Database of Government Compensation in California as a consistent sta...
F4
The Orange County Auditor Controller has an expanded role in managing the tax- increment revenue. The implementation of ABX1 26 includes a requirement that all former redevelopment agencies in the county be audited to determine the accuracy of the information supporting agency claimed enforceable obligations. It has been determined that the County will contract with external auditors to accomplish this task under the direction of the Auditor- Controller.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
The City has not independently reviewed the websites of all 34 Orange County cities to verify this finding. Without such a foundation from which to offer an informed opinion, the City respectfully disagrees with this finding.
F.5:
Inclusion of overtime and on-call pay in employee compensation costs for employees, executives, and elected officials are missing from compensation cost reporting. Response: Without reviewing the websites of all 34 Orange County cities, the City cannot verify the existence of a "de facto" standard for compensation reporting throughout Orange County. It is unclear f...
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The City makes no recommendations on what other cities should do. Further, whether information is displayed "prominently and transparently" on a website is highly subjective and varies from person to person. The City recognizes that there is always room for growth and improvement, and to this end the City regularly reviews and updates the content and design of the City's web pages. The City's employer pension contribution rate is disclosed in the Annual Operating Budget, which is posted on the City's website. However, during the next review period, the City will consider posting the City's emp...
F5
The Orange County Board of Supervisors has an expanded role in the management of the transition of redevelopment. They have a responsibility to make appointments to all oversight boards in the County. Ultimately, in 2016, there will be a single oversight board over all successor agencies in the County. The Board is also responsible to approve and oversee the external audit contracts to be managed by the Auditor-Controller.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
Without reviewing the websites of all 34 Orange County cities, the City cannot verify the existence of a "de facto" standard for compensation reporting throughout Orange County. It is unclear from the Orange County Grand Jury's finding whether data for overtime pay and on-call pay should be reported as projected pay for the year based upon budgets, or actual pay, which would need to be calculated retroactively. Without such a foundation from which to offer an informed opinion, the City respectfully disagrees with this finding. Recommendations:
R.2:
Content & Clarity of Executive Compensation...
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The recommendation as written by the Orange County Grand Jury is unclear as to how "overtime pay" is defined. Overtime pay can be
Page 5 reported proactively as budgeted, based upon projections for a fiscal year, or retroactively, based upon actual usage. In any given fiscal year, the discrepancy between the proactive and retroactive data points has the potential to be extreme. Nevertheless, the City will not take action to implement this recommendation at this time unless this information is requested by the State Controller as part of its Database of Government Compensation in California. T...
▶
City of La Palma 10/11/12, 2.4M
October 11, 2012
•
4 pages
• 2 responses
•
Score: 0
(+0, 2, 0)
View Details ▾
2 responses to findings and recommendations
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R-2: The recommendation has been implemented.
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R-3: The recommendation has been implemented.
▶
City of La Palma 8/7/12, 113KB
August 07, 2012
•
3 pages
• 8 responses
•
Score: 0
(+0, 8, 0)
View Details ▾
8 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The City of La Palma agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of La Palma, the report indicates that La Palma's Redevelopment Administrative costs as a 16.71% of tax increment revenue. We do not know how the Grand Jury arrived at this figure or what is included in it. On a going forward basis, we note that the La Palma Successor Agency submitted an Oversight Board approved ROPS to the DOF reflecting an Administrative Cost Allowance of the minimum $250,000 as authorized by AB1X 26. F.2 Of the ag...
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City of La Palma agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of La Palma, the report indicates that La Palma's Redevelopment Administrative costs as a 16.71% of tax increment revenue. We do not know how the Grand Jury arrived at this figure or what is included in it. On a going forward basis, we note that the La Palma Successor Agency submitted an Oversight Board approved ROPS to the DOF reflecting an Administrative Cost Allowance of the minimum $250,000 as authorized by AB1X 26. F.2 Of the ag...
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The City of La Palma agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of La Palma, the report indicates that La Palma's Redevelopment Administrative costs as a 16.71% of tax increment revenue. We do not know how the Grand Jury arrived at this figure or what is included in it. On a going forward basis, we note that the La Palma Successor Agency submitted an Oversight Board approved ROPS to the DOF reflecting an Administrative Cost Allowance of the minimum $250,000 as authorized by AB1X 26. F.2 Of the ag...
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City of La Palma agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of La Palma, the report indicates that La Palma's Redevelopment Administrative costs as a 16.71% of tax increment revenue. We do not know how the Grand Jury arrived at this figure or what is included in it. On a going forward basis, we note that the La Palma Successor Agency submitted an Oversight Board approved ROPS to the DOF reflecting an Administrative Cost Allowance of the minimum $250,000 as authorized by AB1X 26. F.2 Of the ag...
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The City of La Palma agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of La Palma, the report indicates that La Palma's Redevelopment Administrative costs as a 16.71% of tax increment revenue. We do not know how the Grand Jury arrived at this figure or what is included in it. On a going forward basis, we note that the La Palma Successor Agency submitted an Oversight Board approved ROPS to the DOF reflecting an Administrative Cost Allowance of the minimum $250,000 as authorized by AB1X 26. F.2 Of the ag...
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City of La Palma agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of La Palma, the report indicates that La Palma's Redevelopment Administrative costs as a 16.71% of tax increment revenue. We do not know how the Grand Jury arrived at this figure or what is included in it. On a going forward basis, we note that the La Palma Successor Agency submitted an Oversight Board approved ROPS to the DOF reflecting an Administrative Cost Allowance of the minimum $250,000 as authorized by AB1X 26. F.2 Of the ag...
F5
The Orange County Board of Supervisors has an expanded role in the management of the transition of redevelopment. They have a responsibility to make appointments to all oversight boards in the County. Ultimately, in 2016, there will be a single oversight board over all successor agencies in the County. The Board is also responsible to approve and oversee the external audit contracts to be managed by the Auditor-Controller.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The City of La Palma agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of La Palma, the report indicates that La Palma's Redevelopment Administrative costs as a 16.71% of tax increment revenue. We do not know how the Grand Jury arrived at this figure or what is included in it. On a going forward basis, we note that the La Palma Successor Agency submitted an Oversight Board approved ROPS to the DOF reflecting an Administrative Cost Allowance of the minimum $250,000 as authorized by AB1X 26. F.2 Of the ag...
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City of La Palma agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of La Palma, the report indicates that La Palma's Redevelopment Administrative costs as a 16.71% of tax increment revenue. We do not know how the Grand Jury arrived at this figure or what is included in it. On a going forward basis, we note that the La Palma Successor Agency submitted an Oversight Board approved ROPS to the DOF reflecting an Administrative Cost Allowance of the minimum $250,000 as authorized by AB1X 26. F.2 Of the ag...
▶
City of Mission Viejo 11/16/12, 1.65M
November 16, 2012
•
5 pages
• 4 responses
•
Score: 0
(+0, 4, 0)
View Details ▾
4 responses to findings and recommendations
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R2 - Content and Clarity of Executive Compensation Cost This recommendation has been implemented.
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R3 - Content & Clarity of Employee Compensation Costs This recommendation has been implemented.
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R4 - Transparency of Employer Pension Contribution Rates This recommendation has been implemented.
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R5 - Transparency of Overtime Pay and On-Call Pay in Employee <b>Compensation Cost Reporting</b> This recommendation has been implemented.
▶
City of Mission Viejo 6/29/12, 469KB
June 29, 2012
•
2 pages
• 2 responses
•
Score: 0
(+0, 2, 0)
View Details ▾
2 responses to findings and recommendations
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R1, the recommendation has been implemented.
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R2, the recommendation has been implemented.
▶
City of Orange 10/1/12, 1.81M
October 01, 2012
•
4 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Orange 9/18/12, 2.39MB
September 18, 2012
•
4 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Placentia 7/18/12, 891KB
July 18, 2012
•
2 pages
• 10 responses
•
Score: +4
(+4, 4, 0)
View Details ▾
10 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City agrees with the finding. Finding F2: Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a project area committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code. City Response: The City agrees with the finding. Finding F3: Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The new formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and man...
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City agrees with the finding. Finding F2: Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a project area committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code. City Response: The City agrees with the finding. Finding F3: Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The new formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and man...
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City agrees with the finding. Finding F2: Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a project area committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code. City Response: The City agrees with the finding. Finding F3: Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The new formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and man...
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City agrees with the finding. Finding F2: Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a project area committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code. City Response: The City agrees with the finding. Finding F3: Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The new formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and man...
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City agrees with the finding. Finding F2: Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a project area committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code. City Response: The City agrees with the finding. Finding F3: Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The new formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and man...
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City agrees with the finding. Finding F2: Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a project area committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code. City Response: The City agrees with the finding. Finding F3: Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The new formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and man...
F5
The Orange County Board of Supervisors has an expanded role in the management of the transition of redevelopment. They have a responsibility to make appointments to all oversight boards in the County. Ultimately, in 2016, there will be a single oversight board over all successor agencies in the County. The Board is also responsible to approve and oversee the external audit contracts to be managed by the Auditor-Controller.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City agrees with the finding. Finding F2: Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a project area committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code. City Response: The City agrees with the finding. Finding F3: Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The new formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and man...
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City agrees with the finding. Finding F2: Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a project area committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code. City Response: The City agrees with the finding. Finding F3: Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The new formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and man...
F8
Prior to the dissolution of redevelopment, some agencies encumbered debt to their cities, thereby creating questionable enforceable obligations.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted. The City did not encumber debt to the City prior to the dissolution of the agency. Recommendation R5: Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Payment Obligation Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9) City Response: The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted. The Agency did not have any incentive payments to commercial entities. Thank you for affording us this opportunity to comment upon the finds and re...
F9
Some former RDAs (such as Brea and Buena Park) have incentive payments to commercial entities as enforceable obligations.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted. The Agency did not have any incentive payments to commercial entities. Thank you for affording us this opportunity to comment upon the finds and recommendations of the Grand Jury's study. Should you have any questions or need clarification regarding the City's responses contained herein, please do not hesitate to contact our City Administrator at (714) 993-8117. Sincerely, houng Jeans for Jeremy B. Yamaguchi Mayor City Council C: City Administrator
▶
City of Placentia 8/7/12, 370KB
August 07, 2012
•
2 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of San Clemente 6/26/12, 640KB
June 26, 2012
•
2 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of San Clemente 7/27/12, 596M
July 27, 2012
•
2 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Santa Ana 10/11/12, 615K
October 11, 2012
•
2 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Santa Ana 9/20/12, 1.10MB
September 20, 2012
•
3 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Santa Ana (Extension) 9/26/12, 328KB
September 26, 2012
•
1 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Seal Beach
September 18, 2012
•
1 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Seal Beach
September 11, 2012
•
2 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Stanton 01/16/13, 674K
January 16, 2013
•
2 pages
• 7 responses
•
Score: -2
(+1, 3, -3)
View Details ▾
7 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
redevelopment the Stanton Consolidated Redevelopment Agency was in compliance with the recognized limits of administrative costs per Redevelopment Subsequent to the dissolution of the redevelopment, the Stanton Law. Consolidated Redevelopment Agency continues to be in compliance. The Stanton Consolidated The respondent disagrees with the finding.
F2:
Redevelopment Agency created a Project Area Committee as part of its Amendment 2011 to the Stanton Consolidated Redevelopment Project. The City of Stanton can neither agree or disagree with this finding. The State of
F3:
California created red...
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R1:
The recommendation has been implemented.
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
Redevelopment Agency created a Project Area Committee as part of its Amendment 2011 to the Stanton Consolidated Redevelopment Project. The City of Stanton can neither agree or disagree with this finding. The State of
F3:
California created redevelopment agencies as public agencies with mechanisms to provide annual reports to state agencies. In addition, in the case of the Stanton Consolidated Redevelopment Agency, the Stanton City Council also served as the Redevelopment Agency Board. The City Council serving as the Agency Board was voted into office by the electorate. As a representative de...
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
Redevelopment Agency created a Project Area Committee as part of its Amendment 2011 to the Stanton Consolidated Redevelopment Project. The City of Stanton can neither agree or disagree with this finding. The State of
F3:
California created redevelopment agencies as public agencies with mechanisms to provide annual reports to state agencies. In addition, in the case of the Stanton Consolidated Redevelopment Agency, the Stanton City Council also served as the Redevelopment Agency Board. The City Council serving as the Agency Board was voted into office by the electorate. As a representative de...
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
California created redevelopment agencies as public agencies with mechanisms to provide annual reports to state agencies. In addition, in the case of the Stanton Consolidated Redevelopment Agency, the Stanton City Council also served as the Redevelopment Agency Board. The City Council serving as the Agency Board was voted into office by the electorate. As a representative democracy form of government, the electorate had the ability to signal their approval or disapproval of projects and management of the agency as a whole through their right to vote. 7800 Katella Avenue • Stanton, California 9...
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
The recommendation will not be implemented as it is not warranted.
R5:
The recommendation will not be implemented as it is not warranted. The Stanton Consolidated Redevelopment Agency did not provide incentives to commercial entities. The City of Stanton appreciates the opportunity to respond to the Grand Jury's report. While the City feels that the State's decision to eliminate redevelopment was myopic and to the detriment of the residents of the City of Stanton and of the State, we have complied with all requirements of State Law. If you have any further questions or comments, please feel ...
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
The recommendation will not be implemented as it is not warranted. The Stanton Consolidated Redevelopment Agency did not provide incentives to commercial entities. The City of Stanton appreciates the opportunity to respond to the Grand Jury's report. While the City feels that the State's decision to eliminate redevelopment was myopic and to the detriment of the residents of the City of Stanton and of the State, we have complied with all requirements of State Law. If you have any further questions or comments, please feel free to contact me at (714) 890-4277. Sincerely, James A. Box City Manage...
▶
City of Stanton 12/11/12, 672K
December 11, 2012
•
2 pages
• 6 responses
•
Score: +5
(+5, 0, 0)
View Details ▾
6 responses to findings and recommendations
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City of Stanton agrees with the finding.
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
implemented in February 2013. The City of Stanton was not able to respond in a timely manner due to a miscommunication. It appears that the direction taken from the former City Manager was to implement the recommendations to the 2012 future reporting and no responses were required.
F4
The Orange County Auditor Controller has an expanded role in managing the tax- increment revenue. The implementation of ABX1 26 includes a requirement that all former redevelopment agencies in the county be audited to determine the accuracy of the information supporting agency claimed enforceable obligations. It has been determined that the County will contract with external auditors to accomplish this task under the direction of the Auditor- Controller.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City of Stanton agrees with the finding. 7800 Katella Avenue • Stanton, California 90680 • (714) 379-9222 M
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Will Implement
Score: +1
The recommendation has not yet been implemented but will be implemented in February 2013. The City of Stanton was not able to respond in a timely manner due to a miscommunication. It appears that the direction taken from the former City Manager was to implement the recommendations to the 2012 future reporting and no responses were required.
F5
The Orange County Board of Supervisors has an expanded role in the management of the transition of redevelopment. They have a responsibility to make appointments to all oversight boards in the County. Ultimately, in 2016, there will be a single oversight board over all successor agencies in the County. The Board is also responsible to approve and oversee the external audit contracts to be managed by the Auditor-Controller.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City of Stanton agrees with the finding.
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Will Implement
Score: +1
The recommendation has not yet been implemented but will be implemented in February 2013. The City of Stanton was not able to respond in a timely manner due to a miscommunication. It appears that the direction taken from the former City Manager was to implement the recommendations to the 2012 future reporting and no responses were required. Sincerely, ares of i Jamés A. Box City Manager Cc: City Council
▶
City of Tustin 10/17/12, 1.56MB
October 17, 2012
•
4 pages
• 11 responses
•
Score: +5
(+5, 4, 0)
View Details ▾
11 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City acknowledges that before January 1, 2012, the former Redevelopment Agency's administrative costs exceeded five percent (5%). Effective January 1, 2012 and in accordance with California Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 34171(a) & (b), the City acting as the Successor Agency to the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency ("Successor Agency") has prepared administrative budgets that restrict the administrative cost allowances payable from property tax revenues to five percent (5%) for the period of January 1, 2012 through June 30, 2012 and three percent (3%) for the subsequent periods....
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City acknowledges that before January 1, 2012, the former Redevelopment Agency's administrative costs exceeded five percent (5%). Effective January 1, 2012 and in accordance with California Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 34171(a) & (b), the City acting as the Successor Agency to the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency ("Successor Agency") has prepared administrative budgets that restrict the administrative cost allowances payable from property tax revenues to five percent (5%) for the period of January 1, 2012 through June 30, 2012 and three percent (3%) for the subsequent periods....
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City acknowledges that before January 1, 2012, the former Redevelopment Agency's administrative costs exceeded five percent (5%). Effective January 1, 2012 and in accordance with California Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 34171(a) & (b), the City acting as the Successor Agency to the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency ("Successor Agency") has prepared administrative budgets that restrict the administrative cost allowances payable from property tax revenues to five percent (5%) for the period of January 1, 2012 through June 30, 2012 and three percent (3%) for the subsequent periods....
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City acknowledges that before January 1, 2012, the former Redevelopment Agency's administrative costs exceeded five percent (5%). Effective January 1, 2012 and in accordance with California Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 34171(a) & (b), the City acting as the Successor Agency to the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency ("Successor Agency") has prepared administrative budgets that restrict the administrative cost allowances payable from property tax revenues to five percent (5%) for the period of January 1, 2012 through June 30, 2012 and three percent (3%) for the subsequent periods....
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City acknowledges that before January 1, 2012, the former Redevelopment Agency's administrative costs exceeded five percent (5%). Effective January 1, 2012 and in accordance with California Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 34171(a) & (b), the City acting as the Successor Agency to the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency ("Successor Agency") has prepared administrative budgets that restrict the administrative cost allowances payable from property tax revenues to five percent (5%) for the period of January 1, 2012 through June 30, 2012 and three percent (3%) for the subsequent periods....
F4
The Orange County Auditor Controller has an expanded role in managing the tax- increment revenue. The implementation of ABX1 26 includes a requirement that all former redevelopment agencies in the county be audited to determine the accuracy of the information supporting agency claimed enforceable obligations. It has been determined that the County will contract with external auditors to accomplish this task under the direction of the Auditor- Controller.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City acknowledges a Project Area Committee (PAC) did not exist at the time of dissolution. While a PAC was not in existence, the former Redevelopment Agency was in complete compliance with the HSC as it related to Redevelopment and PACs. F3) Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt. City Response: While the City ...
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City acknowledges that before January 1, 2012, the former Redevelopment Agency's administrative costs exceeded five percent (5%). Effective January 1, 2012 and in accordance with California Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 34171(a) & (b), the City acting as the Successor Agency to the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency ("Successor Agency") has prepared administrative budgets that restrict the administrative cost allowances payable from property tax revenues to five percent (5%) for the period of January 1, 2012 through June 30, 2012 and three percent (3%) for the subsequent periods....
F5
The Orange County Board of Supervisors has an expanded role in the management of the transition of redevelopment. They have a responsibility to make appointments to all oversight boards in the County. Ultimately, in 2016, there will be a single oversight board over all successor agencies in the County. The Board is also responsible to approve and oversee the external audit contracts to be managed by the Auditor-Controller.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City acknowledges that before January 1, 2012, the former Redevelopment Agency's administrative costs exceeded five percent (5%). Effective January 1, 2012 and in accordance with California Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 34171(a) & (b), the City acting as the Successor Agency to the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency ("Successor Agency") has prepared administrative budgets that restrict the administrative cost allowances payable from property tax revenues to five percent (5%) for the period of January 1, 2012 through June 30, 2012 and three percent (3%) for the subsequent periods....
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City acknowledges that before January 1, 2012, the former Redevelopment Agency's administrative costs exceeded five percent (5%). Effective January 1, 2012 and in accordance with California Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 34171(a) & (b), the City acting as the Successor Agency to the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency ("Successor Agency") has prepared administrative budgets that restrict the administrative cost allowances payable from property tax revenues to five percent (5%) for the period of January 1, 2012 through June 30, 2012 and three percent (3%) for the subsequent periods....
F8
Prior to the dissolution of redevelopment, some agencies encumbered debt to their cities, thereby creating questionable enforceable obligations.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The recommendation has been implemented. The Successor Agency and Oversight Board are critically reviewing each and every enforceable obligation, including debt owed to the City of Tustin. Debt owed to the City and qualifying as enforceable obligations has been listed on the ROPS and submitted to DoF. These enforceable obligations are in compliance with HSC Section 34171(d)(2) as well as with page 3 of the ROPS III (January 2013 through June 2013) instructions posted on DoF's website. As noted before, the Oversight Board is committed to fulfilling its fiduciary responsibilities to holders of e...
F9
Some former RDAs (such as Brea and Buena Park) have incentive payments to commercial entities as enforceable obligations.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The recommendation has been implemented. Prior to dissolution, the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency was not providing incentive payments to commercial entities. As a result, the First, Second and Third ROPS approved by the Oversight Board and the First and Second ROPS approved by the California Department of Finance ("DoF") did not list any incentive payments to commercial entities as an enforceable obligation. The Third ROPS is currently being reviewed by DoF. Unless there are amendments to the current legislation, the Successor Agency cannot enter into new agreements that require incent...
▶
City of Tustin 8/2/12, 1.31M
August 02, 2012
•
4 pages
• 7 responses
•
Score: +3
(+3, 4, 0)
View Details ▾
7 responses to findings and recommendations
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City agrees with this finding. While the City has provided a variety of executive compensation data on the City's website for many years, according to the Grand Jury's criteria, the City has room for improvement. F.3: There is the most opportunity for more transparent reporting in the Content and Clarity of Employee Compensation Cost reporting on local government websites. Only five of thirty-four cities (15%) were rated excellent for Employee Compensation Cost Content and Clarity. Response: The City agrees with this finding. While the City has provided a variety of employee compensation d...
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
This recommendation has been implemented. The City has prepared a total compensation summary that lists all compensation paid to all employees over the last fiscal year. We have also included a data definition summary that specifies all compensation items that are included in each column. This
Page 3 information is available on the City's "Transparency in City Government" website (accessible from the City's website home page) as well the City's Human Resources department website. R.3: The Grand Jury recommends that the County of Orange and all Orange County cities, districts, and joint power ...
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City agrees with this finding. While the City has provided a variety of employee compensation data on the City's website for many years, according to the Grand Jury's criteria, the City has room for improvement. Mayor John Nielsen • Mayor Pro Tem Al Murray • Jerry Amante • Deborah Gavello • Rebecca "Beckie" Gomez 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 • (714) 573-3010 • www.tustinca.org
Page 2 F.4: Many Orange County local government web sites do not generally post their employer pension annual contribution rates prominently to their web sites as part of their compensation cost disclosure f...
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
This recommendation has been implemented. The City has prepared a total compensation summary that lists all compensation paid to all employees over the last fiscal year. We have also included a data definition summary that specifies all compensation items that are included in each column, including overtime pay, on-call pay, and pension costs. This information is available on the City's "Transparency in City Government" website (accessible from the City's website home page) as well the City's Human Resources department website. R.4: The Grand Jury recommends that all Orange County cities, dist...
F4
The Orange County Auditor Controller has an expanded role in managing the tax- increment revenue. The implementation of ABX1 26 includes a requirement that all former redevelopment agencies in the county be audited to determine the accuracy of the information supporting agency claimed enforceable obligations. It has been determined that the County will contract with external auditors to accomplish this task under the direction of the Auditor- Controller.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City agrees with this finding. While the City has provided the employer-paid member contribution amounts in the labor contracts on the City's website for many years (and the employer contribution rates have long been available on the CalPERS website), according to the Grand Jury's criteria, the City has room for improvement. F.5: The Orange County "de facto" standard for CCT in the county, cities, districts, and JPA now contains all employees, including a page for executives and all elected officials. Two key categories are missing from compensation cost reporting. They are overtime pay an...
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
This recommendation has been implemented. The City's retirement contribution rates are listed by bargaining group for the last two fiscal years on a single page document. This information is available on the City's "Transparency in City Government" website (accessible from the City's website home page) as well as the City's Human Resources department website. R.5: The Grand Jury recommends that all Orange County cities, districts, and joint power authority, as well as the County of Orange, include overtime pay and on-call pay in compensation cost reporting on their employees' compensation page...
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
This recommendation has been implemented. The City has prepared a total compensation summary that lists all compensation paid to all employees over the last fiscal year. We have also included a data definition summary that specifies all compensation items that are included in each column, including overtime pay and on-call pay. This information is available on the City's "Transparency in City Government" website (accessible from the City's website home page) as well the City's Human Resources department website.
Page 4 The City of Tustin offers our thanks to the Grand Jury volunteers for thei...
▶
City of Tustin 9/13/12, 938K
September 13, 2012
•
2 pages
• 4 responses
•
Score: -4
(+0, 0, -4)
View Details ▾
4 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
disagrees wholly" with findings F1, F2, F3, and F4, and reports that recommendations R1, R2 and R3 will not be implemented because they are not warranted.
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
disagrees wholly" with findings F1, F2, F3, and F4, and reports that recommendations R1, R2 and R3 will not be implemented because they are not warranted.
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
disagrees wholly" with findings F1, F2, F3, and F4, and reports that recommendations R1, R2 and R3 will not be implemented because they are not warranted.
F4
The Orange County Auditor Controller has an expanded role in managing the tax- increment revenue. The implementation of ABX1 26 includes a requirement that all former redevelopment agencies in the county be audited to determine the accuracy of the information supporting agency claimed enforceable obligations. It has been determined that the County will contract with external auditors to accomplish this task under the direction of the Auditor- Controller.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
disagrees wholly" with findings F1, F2, F3, and F4, and reports that recommendations R1, R2 and R3 will not be implemented because they are not warranted.
▶
City of Westminster 12/3/12, 1.12M
December 03, 2012
•
3 pages
• 8 responses
•
Score: +3
(+3, 0, 0)
View Details ▾
8 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City of Westminster agrees with the Grand Jury finding that there is room for improvement such that a great number of Cities, Special Districts, and JPAs receive a rating of excellent in future reviews. Since the issuance of this report the City's website has undergone a complete redesign to make information more accessible to the user. Finding F.2: Content & Clarity Rating for Executive Compensation Cost Response: The City of Westminster agrees with the Grand Jury finding that there is more potential improvement possible; and Orange County cities can collectively achieve greater than a 41...
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The City of Westminster agrees with the Grand Jury finding that there is room for improvement such that a great number of Cities, Special Districts, and JPAs receive a rating of excellent in future reviews. Since the issuance of this report the City's website has undergone a complete redesign to make information more accessible to the user. Finding F.2: Content & Clarity Rating for Executive Compensation Cost Response: The City of Westminster agrees with the Grand Jury finding that there is more potential improvement possible; and Orange County cities can collectively achieve greater than a 41...
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City of Westminster agrees with the Grand Jury finding that there is more potential improvement possible; and Orange County cities can collectively achieve greater than a 41% excellent rating for this reporting item.
114 City of Westminster Response: "Transparency Breaking Up Compensation Fog - But Why Hide Pension Costs?" Finding F.3: Content & Clarity Rating for Employee Compensation Cost Rating <b>Response:</b> The City of Westminster agrees with the Grand Jury finding that greater than 15% (5 of 34) of Orange County cities can achieve a rating of excellent in this rating category. Sin...
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The City of Westminster is in the process of implementing this recommendation as part of review and overhaul of the City's current website. This update will include single click dropdown menus and text box search functions to assist the user in locating needed information. This update is scheduled to "go-live" in late January and will be in compliance with State reporting requirements. Recommendation R.3: Content and Clarity of Employee Compensation Costs
City of Westminster Response: "Transparency Breaking Up Compensation Fog - But Why Hide Pension Costs?" Response: The City of Westminster i...
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
"Transparency Breaking Up Compensation Fog - But Why Hide Pension Costs?" Dear Judge Borris: The City of Westminster is in receipt of the 2011-2012 Orange County Grand Jury Compensation Cost Transparency Study Report. The City has reviewed the documents and is hereby responding to the findings and recommendations of the Grand Jury in accordance with California Penal Code Section 033 and 933.05. As directed, the City has responded to Findings F.1 through F5 and Recommendations R.1 through R.5. Finding F.1: Accessibility Rating for Cities, Special Districts and JPAs Response: The City of Westmin...
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The City of Westminster is in the process of implementing this recommendation as part of review and overhaul of the City's current website. This update will include single click dropdown menus and text box search functions to assist the user in locating needed information. This update is scheduled to "go-live" in late January and will be in compliance with State reporting requirements. Recommendation R.5: Transparency of Overtime Pay and On-Call Pay in <b>Employee Compensation and Cost Reporting</b> Response: The City of Westminster is in the process of implementing this recommendation as part...
F5
The Orange County Board of Supervisors has an expanded role in the management of the transition of redevelopment. They have a responsibility to make appointments to all oversight boards in the County. Ultimately, in 2016, there will be a single oversight board over all successor agencies in the County. The Board is also responsible to approve and oversee the external audit contracts to be managed by the Auditor-Controller.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City of Westminster agrees with the Grand Jury finding that there is room for improvement such that a great number of Cities, Special Districts, and JPAs receive a rating of excellent in future reviews. Since the issuance of this report the City's website has undergone a complete redesign to make information more accessible to the user. Finding F.2: Content & Clarity Rating for Executive Compensation Cost Response: The City of Westminster agrees with the Grand Jury finding that there is more potential improvement possible; and Orange County cities can collectively achieve greater than a 41...
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The City of Westminster agrees with the Grand Jury finding that there is room for improvement such that a great number of Cities, Special Districts, and JPAs receive a rating of excellent in future reviews. Since the issuance of this report the City's website has undergone a complete redesign to make information more accessible to the user. Finding F.2: Content & Clarity Rating for Executive Compensation Cost Response: The City of Westminster agrees with the Grand Jury finding that there is more potential improvement possible; and Orange County cities can collectively achieve greater than a 41...
▶
City of Westminster 9/12/12, 1MB
September 12, 2012
•
3 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
CITY OF YORBA LINDA
September 18, 2012
•
3 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of CYPRESS SCHOOL DISTRICT
August 14, 2012
•
4 pages
• 6 responses
•
Score: 0
(+2, 1, -2)
View Details ▾
6 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
Orange County's K-12 public schools have implemented policies and/or guidelines around the use of different AI platforms in varying and inconsistent ways. Some prohibit AI's use; others allow it: and some don't have policies or guidelines governing AI at all. The Cypress School District partially disagrees with the finding. The district does not have direct knowledge of the policies and/or guidelines other school districts have in place concerning the use of AI platforms and, therefore, cannot a...
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The District agrees partially with this finding, as not all Orange Human Resources/ County schools use the same technology and procedures to record bullying or Instruction harassment incidents. Different districts use different databases and internal procedures to track bullying complaints. With regard to the codes used to record bullying or harassment incidents, prior to July 1, 2012, Education Code section 48900(r) defined Directors bullying by reference to sexual harassment (Education Code section 48900.2), hate Lenette Brown violence (Education Code section 48900.3), and harassment, threat...
R1
By June 30, 2025, Orange County's K-12 schools should implement policies and guidelines regarding the appropriate use of AI. These may be provided at the district level or within individual schools through the adoption of an Acceptable Use Policy, Code of Ethics, or other written directives addressing the use of AI. The recommendation has not yet been implemented but will be implemented during the 2025/26 school year through revisions to the district's Acceptable Use Agreement as well as its sta...
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
This recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted and is not reasonable. The District tracks incidents of bullying as follows: complaints of discrimination, harassment, intimidation and bullying reported to the District are maintained at the District office in a file. Each site administrator also maintains files on all bullying incidents. Suspendable offenses are recorded in the Student Information System. <sup>2</sup> Educ. Code § 234.1(d).
Page Three August 14, 2012 However, different districts use different technology and procedures that reflect the unique needs of ea...
F2
Superintendents provide varying levels of support in implementing AI policies and/or guidelines in their respective school districts. The Cypress School District partially disagrees with the finding. The district does not have direct knowledge of how other superintendents support AI policies and/or guidelines in their school districts and, therefore, cannot agree or wholly disagree with this finding. As it pertains to the Cypress School District, the superintendent is responsible for implementin...
Response: Agree
Score: +1
</b> The District agrees that AB 1156 provides a broader definition of "bullying" than was contained in prior law. Principals M.J. Beatty <sup>1</sup> The Orange County Superintendent of Schools has been directed to respond to Recommendations 4 and Carol Erbe 5. Denine Kelly Jeannette Lohrman Jane Ann Snyder Jacki Teschke
Page Two August 14, 2012 Finding 3: Education Code section 234.1 requiring posting of anti-bullying/antiharassment policies in prescribed areas was not evident in all schools visited.
R2
Superintendents should ensure that their schools have policies that cover, at a minimum: the scope, guiding principles, and training regarding the responsible use of AI tools by students and teachers; any prohibited uses or special considerations regarding AI tools; and related security, privacy, and safety considerations. The recommendation has not yet been implemented but will be implemented during the 2025/26 school year through revisions to the district's Acceptable Use Agreement as well as ...
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The District has no legal authority to obligate other school districts, however, it should be noted that the District is required by law to apply the definition of "bullying" contained in Education Code section 48900(r) in suspending and expelling students and has done so in Board Policy 5131.2. The District also intends to use this definition of "bullying" in tracking complaints of bullying that are sustained. Recommendation 3: Each district review standardized procedures to protect a bully victim and bystanders' confidentiality as stated in Education Code section 234.1
F3
There are many resources to guide educators in using AI. Several are available at the local level through the Orange County Department of Education, Orange County Board of Education, CEO Leadership Alliance Orange County, and Orange Unified School District Technology Department, to name a few. However, utilization and even awareness of the availability of such resources is highly variable across school districts. The Cypress School District partially disagrees with this finding. The district doe...
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
This finding combines the requirement to post antidiscrimination/anti-harassment policies in prescribed areas with the requirement to post anti-bullying policies. The requirement for school districts to post their anti-bullying policy in all schools and offices, including staff lounges and pupil government meeting rooms, is new as of July 1, 2012.<sup>2</sup> Thus, the District disagrees with Finding 3 to the extent it reflects on the District's practice in regard to posting its anti-bullying policy in prescribed areas prior to July 1, 2012. In regard to the finding that the District failed to...
R3
K-12 students should be trained on the appropriate use of AI. The recommendation has not yet been implemented but will be implemented during the 2025/26 school year. As an elementary school district, student training will be age-appropriate and integrated within the district's digital citizenship student training program. Cypress School District's Response Use of Artificial Intelligence in Public Schools (K-12) September 6, 2024
Response: Will Implement
Score: +1
The District will implement this recommendation by August 31, 2012. The District has reviewed policy concerning this finding and provides for confidentiality as follows: The identity of a complainant alleging discrimination, harassment, intimidation, or bullying shall remain confidential as appropriate within the dual contexts of the District's legal obligation to ensure a learning environment free from discrimination, harassment, intimidation and bullying and the right of the accused to be informed of the allegations. Some level of disclosure may be necessary to ensure a complete and fair inv...
▶
City of FOUNTAIN VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT
September 20, 2012
•
3 pages
• 6 responses
•
Score: -1
(+2, 1, -3)
View Details ▾
6 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
Orange County's K-12 public schools have implemented policies and/or guidelines around the use of different Al platforms in varying and inconsistent ways. Some prohibit Al's use; others allow it: and some don't have policies or guidelines governing AI at all. The District partially disagrees with the finding. The District cannot comment on other districts' policies and/or guidelines around the use of Al platforms. As it pertains to Fountain Valley School District, we have multiple existing polic...
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The District agrees partially with this finding. The District agrees that not all Orange County schools use the same technology and procedures to record bullying or harassment incidents. Different districts use different databases and internal procedures to track bullying complaints. With regard to the codes used to record bullying or harassment incidents, prior to July 1, 2012, Education Code section 48900(r) defined bullying by reference to sexual harassment (Education Code section 48900.2), hate violence (Education Code section 48900.3), and harassment, threats and intimidation (Education C...
R1
By June 30, 2025, Orange County's K-12 schools should implement policies and guidelines regarding the appropriate use of Al. These may be provided at the district level or within individual schools through the adoption of an Acceptable Use Policy, Code of Ethics, or other written directives addressing the use of Al. The district has implemented this recommendation through the application of existing Acceptable Use Policies (BP 4040 - Employee Use of Technology/Acceptable Use Policy, BP 6163.4 - ...
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
This recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted and is not reasonable. The District tracks incidents of bullying using the Aeries student information system. Different districts use different technology and procedures that reflect the unique needs of each district. While all districts will comply with State-mandated reporting, such as the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS), it is not necessary that each district use the same internal procedures and technology to track reported incidents of bullying. Recommendation 2: Recommend all county-wid...
F2
Superintendents provide varying levels of support in implementing Al policies and/or guidelines in their representative school districts. The District partially disagrees in that it cannot comment on the superintendents' level of support in implementing AI policies and/or guidelines in other districts. As it pertains to Fountain Valley School District, the Superintendent has played an active leadership role in gathering information related to Al policies and/or guidelines and has engaged in nume...
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The District agrees that AB 1156 provides a broader definition of "bullying" than was contained in prior law. Finding 3: Education Code section 234.1 requiring posting of anti-bullying/antiharassment policies in prescribed areas was not evident in all schools visited. <sup>1</sup> The Orange County Superintendent of Schools has been directed to respond to Recommendations 4 and 5.
R2
Superintendents should ensure that their schools have policies that cover, at a minimum: the scope, guiding principles, and training regarding the use of Al tools by students and teachers; any prohibited uses of special considerations regarding Al tools; and related security, privacy, and safety considerations. The District determined that this recommendation requires further analysis as the knowledge base of staff continues to grow and AI technologies continue to quickly advance. As District st...
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
The District will not implement this policy because it is not warranted and is not reasonable. The District has no legal authority to obligate other school districts. However, it should be noted that the District is required by law to apply the definition of "bullying" contained in Education Code section 48900(r) in suspending and expelling students. The District also intends to use this definition of "bullying" in tracking complaints of bullying that are sustained. Recommendation 3: Each district review standardized procedures to protect a bully victim and bystanders' confidentiality as state...
F3
There are many resources to guide educators in using Al. Several are available at the local level through the Orange County Department of Education, Orange County Board of Education, CEO Leadership Alliance Orange County, and Orange Unified School District Technology Department, to name a few. However, utilization and even awareness of the availability of such resources is highly variable across school districts. The District does not have firsthand information regarding the utilization and awar...
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
The District cannot comment on what policies are posted in all schools throughout Orange County, but can respond only on behalf of the District itself. Finding 3 combines the requirement to post anti-discrimination/anti-harassment policies in prescribed areas with the requirement to post anti-bullying policies. The requirement for school districts to post their anti-bullying policy in all schools and offices, including staff lounges and pupil government meeting rooms, is new as of July 1, 2012.<sup>2</sup> Thus, the District disagrees with Finding 3 to the extent it reflects on the District's ...
R3
K-12 students should be trained on the appropriate use of Al. The District determined that this recommendation requires further analysis as the knowledge base of staff continues to grow and AI technologies continue to quickly advance. As District staff and site teams continue to engage in professional learning related to AI, the teams will be working collaboratively to develop training for students ns regarding the use of Al tools. The District's newly-identified Al Lead will serve as the point ...
Response: Will Implement
Score: +1
</b> The District will implement this recommendation by The District has adopted policies in regard to retaliation and September 28, 2012. confidentiality. Those policies state: The identity of a complainant alleging discrimination, harassment, or bullying shall remain confidential as appropriate within the dual contexts of the District's legal obligation to ensure a learning environment free from discrimination, harassment, intimidation, and bullying, and the right of the accused to be informed of the allegations. (BP 5131.2(d)) Any student, including a student with disabilities, may be subje...
▶
City of Fountain Valley School District – Follow Up Response 4/25/13, 1.17M
April 25, 2013
•
2 pages
• 1 response
•
Score: +1
(+1, 0, 0)
View Details ▾
1 response to findings and recommendations
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Will Implement
Score: +1
(Dated 9/20/12): The District will implement this recommendation by September 28, 2012. The District has adopted policies in regard to retaliation and confidentiality. Those policies state: The identity of a complainant alleging discrimination, harassment, or bullying shall remain confidential as appropriate within the dual contexts of the District's legal obligation to ensure a learning environment free from discrimination, harassment, intimidation, and bullying, and the right of the accused to be informed of the allegations. (BP 5131.2(d)) Any student, including a student with disabilities, ...
▶
Fullerton Joint Union High School District – Follow Up Response 4/26/13, 1.17M
April 26, 2013
•
2 pages
• 1 response
•
Score: +1
(+1, 0, 0)
View Details ▾
1 response to findings and recommendations
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Will Implement
Score: +1
(August 12, 2012): The District will implement this recommendation by July 1, 2012. The District has adopted policies in regard to retaliation and confidentiality. AR 5642 Anti-Bullying states: "The District prohibits bullying as defined in this Administrative Regulation. This includes, but is not limited to, discrimination, harassment, intimidation, and bullying based on the actual or perceived characteristics set forth in Penal Code Section 422.55 and Education Code Section 220, and disability, gender, gender identity, gender expression, nationality, race or ethnicity, religion, sexual orien...
▶
City of Fullerton Police Department 8/09/12, 198KB
August 09, 2012
•
2 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Fullerton Police Department 9/24/12, 343K
September 24, 2012
•
1 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Fullerton School District 1/21/13, 1.37M
January 21, 2012
•
4 pages
• 5 responses
•
Score: -1
(+2, 0, -3)
View Details ▾
5 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
Orange County's K-12 public schools have implemented policies and/or guidelines around the use of different AI platforms in varying and inconsistent ways. Some prohibit AI's use; others allow it; and some don't have policies or guidelines governing AI at all. The District agrees with this finding and notes that it is the responsibility of each district to develop their own guidelines and policies related to the use of AI platforms unless and until there is legislation mandating a singular approa...
Response: Agree
Score: +1
Not all Orange County schools use the same technology, procedure and codes to record bullying or harassment incidents. Fullerton School District does not have enough information to agree or disagree with this finding. The schools of this District use the same technology, procedures and codes to record incidences of bullying or harassment. The definition of bullying currently used was developed from Education Code 48900(r) and Education Code sections referenced therein.
Finding 2:
New legislation takes effect July 1, 2012, and broadens the definition of "Bullying." Fullerton School District a...
R1
Orange County's K-12 schools should implement policies and guidelines regarding the appropriate use of AI. These may be provided at the district level or within individual schools through the adoption of an Acceptable Use Policy, Code of Ethics, or other written directives addressing the use of AI. The Recommendation was implemented before the release of the Grand Jury report as the student Digital Responsibility Agreement has been rewritten for the 24-25 school year.
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
Recommend a countywide compatible information system for reporting incidents of bullying be explored by all school districts. Fullerton School District will not implement this recommendation because it is not warranted or reasonable. The District tracks incidents of bullying as follows: It is the District's policy that any staff member observes, overhears, witnesses, or receives a report of bullying (including cyber-bullying), harassment, or intimidation must take prompt and appropriate action to stop the behavior or any further reoccurrences. The principal of each school or their designee is ...
F2
Superintendents provide varying levels of support in implementing AI policies and/or guidelines in their respective school districts. The District disagrees partially with the Finding. Fullerton School District can only speak to the work of our Superintendent has been a leader in utilizing AI in an innovative way and encourages others to do the same. He is providing appropriate support and guidance for the District's schools. We know the County has many Superintendents who serve as strong educat...
Response: Agree
Score: +1
New legislation takes effect July 1, 2012, and broadens the definition of "Bullying." Fullerton School District agrees that AB 1156 provides a broader definition of "bullying" than was contained in prior law.
Finding 3:
Education Code 234.1 requiring posting of anti-bullying/anti-harassment policies in prescribed areas was not evident in all schools visited. Fullerton School District cannot comment on the policies that are posted in all schools throughout Orange County. The schools of this District have posted anti-harassment policy in prescribed areas for many years. District Superintendent...
F3
There are many resources to guide educators in using AI. Several are available at the local level through the Orange County Department of Education, Orange County Board of Education, CEO Leadership Alliance Orange County, and Orange Unified School District Technology Department, to name a few. However, utilization and even awareness of the availability of such resources is highly variable across school districts The District agrees with the Finding. We would assume that utilization and awareness...
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
Education Code 234.1 requiring posting of anti-bullying/anti-harassment policies in prescribed areas was not evident in all schools visited. Fullerton School District cannot comment on the policies that are posted in all schools throughout Orange County. The schools of this District have posted anti-harassment policy in prescribed areas for many years. District Superintendent, Dr. Robert Pletka Ed.D. Proud Member of the 1401 W. Valencia Drive, Fullerton, CA 92833 Trustees: Beverly Berryman, Janny Meyer, Chris Thompson, Lynn Thornley, Hilda Sugarman | ph 714.447.7400 • www.fsd.k12.ca.us Fullert...
R3
K-12 students should be trained on the appropriate use of AI. The Recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future. In November the district is hosting an all-teacher professional learning day based on AI. While we will be instructing these teachers on how to teach their students about the appropriate use of AI, in the earlier grades (Tk-2) we will be focusing on teaching students how to ask the best questions as it would not be reasonable for students at TK-2 t...
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
Each district review standardized procedures to protect a bully victim and bystanders' confidentiality as stated in Education Code section 234.1. Fullerton School District has implemented policies regarding retaliation and confidentiality. Principals were trained and provided materials for site staff training. Those policies specify the confidentiality requirements and staff that may have access to information. The policies also require timely follow up to ensure that the involved parties have not been subjected to any adverse repercussions or conduct in regards to a report or complaint of bul...
▶
City of IRDEN GROVE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
September 24, 2012
•
4 pages
• 6 responses
•
Score: 0
(+0, 1, 0)
View Details ▾
6 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
Orange County's K-12 public schools have implemented policies and/or guidelines around the use of different AI platforms in varying and inconsistent ways. Some prohibit AI's use; others allow it: and some don't have policies or guidelines governing AI at all. Response: The District partially disagrees with the finding. The District cannot comment on other districts' policies and/or guidelines around the use of AI platforms. As it pertains to the Garden Grove Unified School District, we as such, ...
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The district agrees partially with this finding. The district agrees that not all Orange County schools use the same technology and procedures to record bullying or harassment incidents. Different districts use different databases and internal procedures to track bullying complaints. With regard to the codes used to record bullying or harassment incidents, prior to July 1, 2012, Education Code Section 48900(r) defined bullying by reference to sexual harassment (Education Code Section 48900.2), hate violence (Education Code section 48900.3), and harassment, threats, and intimidation (Education ...
R1
By June 30, 2025, Orange County's K-12 schools should implement policies and guidelines regarding the appropriate use of AI. These may be provided at the district level or within individual schools through the adoption of an Acceptable Use Policy, Code of Ethics, or other written directives addressing the use of AI. Response: The District will implement this recommendation by June 30, 2025, and is actively working toward this goal with a clear action plan. First, the GGUSD, in collaboration with...
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The district agrees partially with this finding. The district agrees that not all Orange County schools use the same technology and procedures to record bullying or harassment incidents. Different districts use different databases and internal procedures to track bullying complaints. With regard to the codes used to record bullying or harassment incidents, prior to July 1, 2012, Education Code Section 48900(r) defined bullying by reference to sexual harassment (Education Code Section 48900.2), hate violence (Education Code section 48900.3), and harassment, threats, and intimidation (Education ...
F2
Superintendents provide varying levels of support in implementing AI policies and/or guidelines in their respective school districts. Response: The District partially disagrees with the finding. The District partially disagrees in that it cannot comment on the superintendent's level of support in implementing AI policies and/or guidelines in other districts. As it pertains to The Garden Grove Unified School District, the Superintendent is committed to ensuring that the integration of Artificial ...
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The district cannot comment on what policies are posted in all schools throughout Orange County, but can respond only on behalf of the district itself.
R2
Superintendents should ensure that their schools have policies that cover, at a minimum: the scope, guiding principles, and training regarding the responsible use of AI tools by students and teachers; any prohibited uses of special considerations regarding AI tools; and related security, privacy, and safety considerations. Response: The recommendation requires further analysis. The District is committed to developing and implementing policies that ensure the responsible use of AI in schools by a...
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The district has no legal authority to obligate other school districts. However, it should be noted that the district is required by law to apply the definition of "bullying" contained in Education Code Section 48900(r) in suspending and expelling students. The district also intends to use this definition of "bullying" in tracking complaints of bullying that are sustained.
F3
There are many resources to guide educators in using AI. Several are available at the local level through the Orange County Department of Education, Orange County Board of Education, CEO Leadership Alliance Orange County, and Orange Unified School District Technology Department, to name a few. However, utilization and even awareness of the availability of such resources is highly variable across school districts. Response: The District partially disagrees with the finding. The District does not ...
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
, formal complaints subject to the district Bullying policy are received and investigated pursuant to the Board policy and administrative regulation governing Uniform Complaint Procedures. All elements of the district Bullying policy and related complaint process were reviewed with all district elementary school principals on August 28, 2012; with all intermediate and high school principals on August 23, 2012;
and with all intermediate and high school assistant principals on September 17, 2012. District policies governing Bullying, Sexual Harassment, Uniform Complaint Procedures, and Non-Disc...
R3
K-12 students should be trained on the appropriate use of AI. Response: The recommendation requires further analysis. The District's further analysis regarding this recommendation will be completed and reviewed by the District's superintendent, who will inform the governing board before December 13, 2024. The Honorable Maria D. Hernandez Presiding Judge, Orange County Superior Court September 12, 2024 The District recognizes the importance of training TK-12 students on the appropriate and respon...
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
Reflecting state law, the issues of retaliation and confidentiality are addressed in the Board of Education policy governing Bullying and the Board policy and administrative regulation governing Uniform Complaint Procedures. As noted in the district's Response to
▶
City of Irvine Police Department 10/15/12, 736K
October 15, 2012
•
2 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Irvine Police Department (Extension) 10/03/12, 204K
October 03, 2012
•
1 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of La Habra City School District
September 20, 2012
•
8 pages
• 6 responses
•
Score: -1
(+2, 1, -3)
View Details ▾
6 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
Orange County's K-12 public schools have implemented policies and/or guidelines around the use of different AI platforms in varying and inconsistent ways. Some prohibit AI's use; others allow it: and some don't have policies or guidelines governing AI at all. The District agrees with the finding. The District cannot comment on other districts' policies and/or guidelines around the use of AI platforms. As it pertains to the La Habra City School District, we have updated our Students and Families ...
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The District agrees partially with this finding. The District agrees that not all Orange County schools use the same technology and procedures to record bullying or harassment incidents. Different districts use different databases and internal procedures to track bullying complaints. With regard to the codes used to record bullying or harassment incidents, prior to July 1, 2012, Education Code section 48900(r) defined bullying by reference to sexual harassment (Education Code section 48900.2), hate violence (Education Code section 48900.3), and harassment, threats and intimidation (Education C...
R1
By June 30, 2025 Orange County's K-12 schools should implement policies and guidelines regarding the appropriate use of AI. These may be provided at the district level or within individual schools through the adoption of an Acceptable Use Policy, Code of Ethics, or other written directives addressing the use of AI. The recommendation has been partially implemented and will be fully implemented for the 2025-26 school year. The District has partially implemented this recommendation but will implem...
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
This recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted and is not reasonable. The District tracks incidents of bullying as follows: The District tracks complaints of discrimination, harassment, intimidation and bullying, and their resolution both on paper and in the AERIES system. Different districts use different technology and procedures that reflect the unique needs of each district. While all districts will comply with State-mandated reporting, such as the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS), it is not necessary that each district use the same i...
F2
Superintendents provide varying levels of support in implementing AI policies and/or guidelines in their respective school districts. The Honorable Maria D. Hernandez Presiding Judge, Orange County Superior Court Date The District partially disagrees with the finding. The District partially disagrees in that it cannot comment on the superintendent's level of support in implementing AI policies and/or guidelines in other districts. As it pertains to the La Habra City School District, the Superint...
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The District agrees that AB 1156 provides a broader definition of "bullying" than was contained in prior law. Finding 3: Education Code section 234.1 requiring posting of anti-bullying/antiharassment policies in prescribed areas was not evident in all schools visited.
R2
Superintendents should ensure that their schools have policies that cover, at a minimum: the scope, guiding principles, and training regarding the responsible use of AI tools by students and teachers; any prohibited uses of special considerations regarding AI tools; and related security, privacy, and safety considerations. The recommendation has been partially implemented and will be fully implemented for the 2025-26 school year. The District has partially implemented this recommendation as foll...
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
The District will not implement this policy because it is not warranted and is not reasonable. The District has no legal authority to obligate other school districts. However, it should be noted that the District is required by law to apply the definition of "bullying" contained in Education Code section 48900(r) in suspending and expelling students. The District also intends to use this definition of "bullying" in tracking complaints of bullying that are sustained. Recommendation 3: Each district review standardized procedures to protect a bully victim and bystanders' confidentiality as state...
F3
There are many resources to guide educators in using AI. Several Are available at the local level through the Orange County Department of Education, Orange County Board of Education, CEO Leadership Alliance Orange County, and Orange Unified School District Technology Department, to name a few. However, utilization and even awareness of the availability of such resources is highly variable across school districts. The District partially disagrees with the finding. The District does not have first...
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
The District cannot comment on what policies are posted in all schools throughout Orange County, but can respond only on behalf of the District itself. Finding <sup>1</sup> The Orange County Superintendent of Schools has been directed to respond to Recommendations 4 and 5.
3 combines the requirement to post anti-discrimination/anti-harassment policies in prescribed areas with the requirement to post anti-bullying policies. The requirement for school districts to post their anti-bullying policy in all schools and offices, including staff lounges and pupil government meeting rooms, is new as of...
R3
K-12 students should be trained on the appropriate use of AI. The recommendation has not been implemented, but will be implemented in the future. The District has partially implemented this recommendation but will implement this recommendation with the following action plan: La Habra City School District will update our student internet safety training to include information on the safe use of Artificial Intelligence for the 2025-26 school year.
Response: Will Implement
Score: +1
The District will implement this recommendation by July 1, 2012. The District has adopted policies in regard to retaliation and confidentiality. Those policies state: <sup>2</sup> Educ. Code § 234.1(d).
In accordance with Board Policy 5131.2, the District prohibits retaliation against complainants. The District intends to remind its employees of these policies as follows: To remind District employees of the District's policies on retaliation and confidentiality, the District will include the information in the Employee Handbook and provide the information in staff development training yearly....
▶
City of Orange
August 16, 2012
•
16 pages
• 3 responses
•
Score: +2
(+2, 1, 0)
View Details ▾
3 responses to findings and recommendations
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
r 1, 2012, Assembly Bill (AB) 109 was implemented in the state of California.
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Will Implement
Scheduled: within 60 days
Score: +1
is requested from Orange County Health Agency (Public Health). REQUIRED RESPONSES ―In accordance with California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05, the 2011-2012 Grand Jury requires responses from each agency affected by the Findings and Recommendations presented in this section. The responses are to be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court. 2011-2012 Orange County Grand Jury Page 134
NESI/ASCON STUDY "Not 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 ...
F9
Some former RDAs (such as Brea and Buena Park) have incentive payments to commercial entities as enforceable obligations.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
Office of Independent Review F6 R6 OC Board of Supervisors F6 R6 2011-2012 Orange County Grand Jury Page 151
DETENTION FACILITIES REPORT - PART II - JUVENILE ORANGE COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION AND TREATMENT FACILITIES GRAND JURY 2011-2012 2011/2012 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY
Detention Facilities Report - Part II - Juvenile Orange County Juvenile Detention and Treatment Facilities SUMMARY At the beginning of 2012, the OC Probation Department operated five juvenile detention and/or correctional facilities in Orange County. Because of the increase in demand for adult jail beds by the Sheriff's Depa...
▶
City of Placentia Police Department 12/19/12, 463K
December 19, 2012
•
1 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Santa Ana Police Department - Follow Up Response 12/17/12, 2.3MB
December 17, 2012
•
8 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Seal Beach Police Department 10/1/12, 465K
October 01, 2012
•
1 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Westminster School District – Follow Up Response 3/1/13, 1.17M
March 01, 2013
•
1 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of San Juan Capistrano 02/05/13, 1.37MB
February 05, 2013
•
3 pages
• 3 responses
•
Score: +1
(+1, 2, 0)
View Details ▾
3 responses to findings and recommendations
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Implemented
Scheduled: Fiscal Year 2012-13
Score: 0
.
R2.
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1) City Response This recommendation has been implemented. The Successor Agency's administrative budget for the administrative costs (Administrative Cost Allowance) for February 1, 2012, through June 30, 2012, was $250,000 ...
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Scheduled: Fiscal Year 2012-13
Score: 0
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1) City Response This recommendation has been implemented. The Successor Agency's administrative budget for the administrative costs (Administrative Cost Allowance) for February 1, 2012, through June 30, 2012, was $250,000 or appro...
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt. City Response The City acknowledges that the Grand Jury's Report indicates that local external oversight may have been missing or ineffective. However, the State of California had created mechanisms responsible for overseeing the activities of redevelopment agencies. These in...
▶
City of Lake Forest 9/18/12, 2.31MB
September 18, 2012
•
5 pages
• 5 responses
•
Score: +4
(+4, 0, 0)
View Details ▾
5 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City of Lake Forest cannot agree or disagree with this finding of the Orange County Grand Jury pertaining to every city in Orange County with a redevelopment agency. The information provided in the Orange County Grand Jury Report was compiled through a survey distributed by the Orange County Grand Jury to each Orange County city with a redevelopment agency. Furthermore, the results were analyzed independently by the Orange County Grand Jury and not available for review by the City of Lake Forest. Consequently, we cannot offer an opinion on the finding. DRUG USE Is. 7B www.lakeforestca.gov ...
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The Lake Forest Successor Agency remains in full compliance with State law. Additionally, the administrative costs of the Successor Agency are
Page 4
R.2.
R.4.
R.5.
monitored by staff. However, given the unprecedented complications of the State's actions, the early stages of the dissolution process have proven to be a significant undertaking. The Successor Agency will continue working toward reducing its administrative costs, but will charge appropriately those expenditures related directly to the dissolution of the former Agency. Additionally, the Lake Forest Successor Agency was require...
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
With respect to Lake Forest, the administrative allocation estimate provided by the Lake Forest Successor Agency exceeded the cost allocation prescribed in AB1X 26 as indicated by the Orange County Grand Jury. However, it should be noted that the State Department of Finance ("DOF") required the ROPS to include the first six months of calendar year 2012 (January to June). As a result, the ROPS includes one month (January 2012) in which the former Lake Forest Redevelopment Agency ("Agency") remained active. Expenditures for the month of January reflect all typical operating expenditures of the f...
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
During its existence, the Agency made extensive efforts to communicate its activities to the community. As required, all board meetings, forums, workshops, and public hearings were conducted consistent with the public noticing and hearing requirements of State law. Additionally, the Agency consistently provided information to the community through its website and newsletter and sought public input regarding its projects. Because of these efforts, the Agency was the recipient of a California Redevelopment Association award for its communication efforts during the El Toro Road Widening Project. ...
F5
The Orange County Board of Supervisors has an expanded role in the management of the transition of redevelopment. They have a responsibility to make appointments to all oversight boards in the County. Ultimately, in 2016, there will be a single oversight board over all successor agencies in the County. The Board is also responsible to approve and oversee the external audit contracts to be managed by the Auditor-Controller.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City of Lake Forest cannot agree or disagree with this finding of the Orange County Grand Jury pertaining to every city in Orange County with a redevelopment agency. The information provided in the Orange County Grand Jury Report was compiled through a survey distributed by the Orange County Grand Jury to each Orange County city with a redevelopment agency. Furthermore, the results were analyzed independently by the Orange County Grand Jury and not available for review by the City of Lake Forest. Consequently, we cannot offer an opinion on the finding. DRUG USE Is. 7B www.lakeforestca.gov ...
▶
City of Fountain Valley 8/21/12, 1.07M
August 21, 2012
•
3 pages
• 6 responses
•
Score: +1
(+2, 3, -1)
View Details ▾
6 responses to findings and recommendations
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
This recommendation has been implemented. The successor agency administrative costs will be limited as provided in ABX1 26. R2. Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of project and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. Response: This recommendation has been implemented. The successor agency will review the ROPS to retire enforceable obligation debt as provided in ABX1 26. It should be noted that ABX1 26 and AB 1484 restrict how quickly debt obligation...
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City of Fountain Valley agrees with the finding; however it should be noted the former Industrial Area Redevelopment Plan had no | residential uses or areas that were subject to Health and Safety Code 33385.
Honorable Thomas J. Borris August 21, 2012 Page 2 F3. Historically, external oversight over development has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt. Response: D...
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
This recommendation has been implemented. The successor agency will review the ROPS to retire enforceable obligation debt as provided in ABX1 26. It should be noted that ABX1 26 and AB 1484 restrict how quickly debt obligations, such as bonds and certificates of participations, can be paid off. This limitation can actually cost taxpayers more money due to the amount of interest that is paid over an extended amortization period. R4. Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the City. ...
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
Disagree. While the oversight boards are granted some discretionary review authority, the State Department of Finance has the absolute power and can override the oversight board's decisions. This erodes local control. R1. All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce those costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-13. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. Response: Thi...
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
This recommendation has been implemented. City debt was evaluated for payment by Fountain Valley's successor agency and oversight board consistent with ABX1 26 and AB1484. R&. Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities.
Honorable Thomas J. Borris August 21, 2012 Page 3 This recommendation has been implemented. Only incentive payments to commercial entities that were approved by contract or similar agreement prior to the approval of ABX1 26 have been inclu...
F5
The Orange County Board of Supervisors has an expanded role in the management of the transition of redevelopment. They have a responsibility to make appointments to all oversight boards in the County. Ultimately, in 2016, there will be a single oversight board over all successor agencies in the County. The Board is also responsible to approve and oversee the external audit contracts to be managed by the Auditor-Controller.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City of Fountain Valley agrees with the finding; however it should be noted the former Industrial Area Redevelopment Plan had no | residential uses or areas that were subject to Health and Safety Code 33385.
Honorable Thomas J. Borris August 21, 2012 Page 2 F3. Historically, external oversight over development has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt. Response: D...
▶
City of Buena Park 7/31/12, 612KB
July 31, 2012
•
3 pages
• 5 responses
•
Score: 0
(+0, 5, 0)
View Details ▾
5 responses to findings and recommendations
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
This recommendation has been implemented. The administrative budget was approved by our Oversight Board and Successor Agency in accordance with ABX1 26.
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
.
F3.
F9, The respondent agrees with the finding. However, this response is based solely on research performed by the Grand Jury as our city staff is not certain what other cities are doing. The respondent agrees with the finding. Again, this response is based on research performed by the Grand Jury as we are unaware what other cities are doing. The respondent disagrees partially with this finding. Decisions made by the former Redevelopment Agency were made in public, in accordance with Brown Act provisions, and all meetings were lawfully noticed in accordance with public noticing requiremen...
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
F9, The respondent agrees with the finding. However, this response is based solely on research performed by the Grand Jury as our city staff is not certain what other cities are doing. The respondent agrees with the finding. Again, this response is based on research performed by the Grand Jury as we are unaware what other cities are doing. The respondent disagrees partially with this finding. Decisions made by the former Redevelopment Agency were made in public, in accordance with Brown Act provisions, and all meetings were lawfully noticed in accordance with public noticing requirements estab...
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
RS. This recommendation has been implemented. The Oversight Board met and approved the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule as required by law. This recommendation has been implemented. The Successor Agency and Oversight Board have reviewed the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule and no debt is owed to the City. The recommendation has not been implemented but will be implemented. In the next year, the Successor Agency and Oversight Board will critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. The Successor Ag...
F9
Some former RDAs (such as Brea and Buena Park) have incentive payments to commercial entities as enforceable obligations.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
, The respondent agrees with the finding. However, this response is based solely on research performed by the Grand Jury as our city staff is not certain what other cities are doing. The respondent agrees with the finding. Again, this response is based on research performed by the Grand Jury as we are unaware what other cities are doing. The respondent disagrees partially with this finding. Decisions made by the former Redevelopment Agency were made in public, in accordance with Brown Act provisions, and all meetings were lawfully noticed in accordance with public noticing requirements establi...
No Responses Found 2
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
Orange County
County
San Juan Capistrano
City