Grand Jury Final Report 2006-2007

The new fire station at Burson has yet to be completed. The planning and procurement process has raised the following questions: The district’s original cost and scheduling plan is outdated and needs to be revised to reflect current conditions and costs. This has resulted in a disorganized approach to building the new station. The fragmented process of letting bids for construction raises questions about bidding and final cost estimates. The bidding process should comply with the Public Contract Code. Because of pervasive ambiguities throughout the bidding process, many of the district’s contractual rights may have been waived or diminished. (Civil Code §1654)

While planning, bidding, and building Station #1 in Burson, the district failed to follow the Public Contract Code (PCC) regarding proper 5 procedure for soliciting and posting of construction contract bids (PCC § 20813). In addition, provisions requiring analysis of the project impact on the environment as required in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) were not followed (Public Resources Code § 21000). Noncollusion Certificates were not submitted nor executed as required under § 7106 of the PCC. Public construction contracts generally include indemnification requirements (PCC § 20103.6) and the securing of performance and payment bonds (Civil Code § 2819). FFPD did not include indemnification requirements in any of the contracts executed and did not secure any performance or payment bonds.

The Grand Jury found the following administrative deficiencies: 1. An incomplete policies and procedures manual. 2. No comprehensive training plan. 3. No existing comprehensive long-range plan. 4. No Fire Chief

Station 2 is not only inadequate to house equipment and administration, but does not appear to meet county building code standards. In a site visit it was noted that a major portion of a cinder block wall was removed for a vehicle pass-through with no header and post bracing. The Grand Jury could find no record of a permit being issued to have this wall removed. This may constitute a safety hazard to the people working in the building and the public attending meetings. Further investigation revealed the initial permits for expansion of the building have not received final approval.

FFPD is shorthanded of volunteer fire fighters. Currently there is an insufficient number of drivers with a Class B drivers license required to operate four of the larger fire apparatus.

Management and building deficiencies within the district have been exacerbated by lack of funding. Without a full time fire chief, there has been a legacy of last minute planning and personnel problems. A shoestring approach to the completion of the much-needed new Station #1 has contributed to the district’s existing problems. How well the district will serve its current and future residents will depend on the implementation of long range fiscal planning now. Although planned development and assessed valuation increases within the district can answer some of the district financial shortcomings, there may not be sufficient increases in funding for the district to catch up with projected growth and infrastructure requirements.

On most agendas for regular meetings the board indicated that it would go into closed session to discuss pending litigation. There is no pending litigation. 20

The Calaveras County Animal Services Facility is in need of developing and revising their Policies and Procedures Manual, job descriptions, methods for training and 60 evaluating its staff and volunteers. Animal Services has mentioned implementing a new tracking software program to maintain a more effective database. Animal Services management intends to have all the above items completed and in place by January 2007.

There are significant increases in police activity during the Calaveras Frog Jump Celebration and other special events that put a demand on crime enforcement infrastructure. These costs are born by county taxpayers. Ironically, taxpayers recently rejected an increase in the Transient Occupancy Tax, which could have reduced this burden of visitor-related stress to law enforcement infrastructure. RESPONSE FROM THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO FINDINGS 5 THROUGH 9 The Board does not dispute the observations, conclusions, and concerns expressed by the Grand Jury in these findings. SUMMARY OF INVESTIGATION, 2005-2006 As with any type of public infrastructure, a “bottleneck” or “choke point” will limit the ability of that agency to be effective. Within the law enforcement infrastructure, the choke point is the jail. With current population increases and projections based on development within the County, the law enforcement infrastructure is inadequate to meet the current or projected needs of the population. Increasing personnel within the Sheriff’s Department can only partially deter crime increases. The impact on the law enforcement infrastructure caused by population growth has been woefully ignored. State funding from grants, revenue from bonds, or tax increases are necessary in order to meet the urgent need for a new jail. We find it difficult to agree with county approvals for increased development without a plan to upgrade the infrastructures to support that growth. Under the current financial climate within state government, the likelihood of a grant for a small voting block such as Calaveras County is, at best, weak. Further delays in securing a new jail only increase the eventual cost and time needed for construction. 71 2005-2006 GRAND JURY RECOMMENDATION Calaveras County Board of Supervisors should immediately plan to fund a new jail facility, including taking the unpopular possibility of a bond measure to the voters. Further plans for development within the County should be curtailed pending plans to bring the law enforcement infrastructure up to a level able to support additional population growth. RESPONSE FROM THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Board of Supervisors concurs that the existing Calaveras County Jail Facility is outdated and in need of replacement. The Board also agrees regarding the urgency of the need to identify sources of funding for that new facility. The Board has instructed county staff, in conjunction with the Sheriff’s Department, to explore all of the funding methods mentioned by the Grand Jury, including state funds, bond measures, and fees on new development. For example, the Board is working with a firm to develop facilities fees for new development, a key component for jail funding. The Board will continue to work with the Sheriff’s office to obtain state and/or federal funding to help build a new facility. In addition, the Board, in cooperation with the Sheriff, will consider going to the voters for a bond to help with building a new facility. GRAND JURY DETERMINATION 2006-2007 The 2006-2007 Grand Jury does not accept the Board of Supervisors’ response to the 2005-2006 report on the Jail as part of the Law Enforcement Infrastructure. In essence, the board has rejected the recommendation to curtail further development until a plan to increase or replace the inadequate county jail facility is implemented. The Board has discussed and studied the jail inadequacy and ordered a preliminary proposal be drafted. In January 2007 authorization to make funds available for a definitive plan on which to base funding proposals is to be submitted for approval. Voter approval will be necessary to complete the funding for a new jail. Funding sources have been studied including Mello-Roos taxes, new construction facilities fees, state grants, and a sales tax increase. There are not enough funds available from new and proposed building fees to reach the goal. Even with a substantive grant from the state, matching funds will be required. GRAND JURY RECOMMENDATION 2006-2007 The Grand Jury recommends the board approve the estimated $230,000-$250,000 required to draft a jail concept and to complete a plan on which to base grant and 72 funding proposals. In addition, this plan should project costs well into the future to include immediate as well as long-range costs for the project. The Grand Jury recommends the proposal be completed so funding requirements can be presented to the voters by November 2007. The Grand Jury has determined the jail facility is already inadequate to meet the current needs for public safety. Delays in a remedy can only make the costs more grievous. As part of the General Plan update, we also recommend Law Enforcement Infrastructure be included in all considerations which will influence future land use decisions. RESPONSE REQUESTED Calaveras County Board of Supervisors 73 RESPONSE FROM MURPHYS SANITARY DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND CALAVERAS COUNTY LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION TO GRAND JURY REPORT 2005-2006 REASON FOR INVESTIGATION Two complaints were received by the Grand Jury alleging violations of Public Trust through poor management practices within Murphys Sanitary District (MSD), including board interactions with staff and public, the day-to-day policies and procedures, and Brown Act violations.