⚠️ 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 23 findings
F1
The transition plan was completed on October 28, 1992.
No recommendations for this finding
F2
The transition plan would be implemented over five years beginning in fiscal year 1993-1994.
No recommendations for this finding
F3
The cost of removing the barriers was estimated to be $298,300.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
The City of Arcata budget sufficient funds to complete their transition plan. EUREKA:
F4
The transition plan showed how the barrier would be removed and the projected date that the barriers would be removed.
No recommendations for this finding
F5
The transition plan lists sixty-five barriers.
No recommendations for this finding
F6
Thirty-three of the barriers have been removed to date.
No recommendations for this finding
F7
The grand jury did not receive any information regarding the date that the barriers were removed. EUREKA :
No recommendations for this finding
F8
The transition plan was completed in March of 1994.
No recommendations for this finding
F9
The transition plan lists fifty barriers.
No recommendations for this finding
F10
Ten of the barriers have been removed to date.
No recommendations for this finding
F11
The transition plan did not show how the barriers would be removed.
No recommendations for this finding
F12
The projected cost of removing the barriers was $776,500.
Related Recommendations (2)
R2
The City of Eureka budget sufficient funds to complete their transition plan. FORTUNA:
R3
The City of Fortuna budget sufficient funds to complete their transition plan. RESPONSES THE FOLLOWING RESPONSES TO REPORT 01-17 ARE REQUIRED PURSUANT TO P.C. AND THE STANDARD FORMAT FOR RESPONSES. 1. The City of Arcata respond to findings F-1 through F-7 and recommendation R-1. 2. The City of Eureka respond to findings F-8 through F-15 and recommendation R-2. 3. The City of Fortuna respond to findings F-16 through F-23 and recommendation R-3.
F13
The transition plan projected that the cost of removing the barriers would increase five percent per year.
No recommendations for this finding
F14
The transition plan showed that all barriers would be removed by 1998.
No recommendations for this finding
F15
The City of Eureka plans to remove the remaining barriers during the year 2001. FORTUNA:
No recommendations for this finding
F16
The transition plan is dated June 21, 1993.
No recommendations for this finding
F17
The transition plan does not show how the barriers will be removed.
No recommendations for this finding
F18
The transition plan does not show the date the barriers would be removed.
No recommendations for this finding
F19
The transition plan identified forty-eight barriers that needed to be removed.
No recommendations for this finding
F20
Thirty of the barriers have been removed to date.
No recommendations for this finding
F21
Twenty-three of the barriers were removed in 1994.
No recommendations for this finding
F22
The date that seven barriers were removed is not known.
No recommendations for this finding
F23
Eighteen of the barriers in the transition plan have not been removed. CONCLUSIONS ARCATA: C-1 The City of Arcata did not effectively comply with Section 35.150 of Title II of the ADA. EUREKA: C-2 The City of Eureka did not effectively manage, budget, or comply with Section 35.150 of Title II of the ADA. FORTUNA: C-3 The City of Fortuna did not effectively comply with Section 35.150 of Title II of the ADA. RECOMMENDATIONS THE HUMBOLDT COUNTY GRAND JURY RECOMMENDS THE FOLLOWING: ARCATA:
No recommendations for this finding
Conclusions 1
-
CL1 Page 2ARCATA: C-1 The City of Arcata did not effectively comply with Section 35.150 of Title II of the ADA. EUREKA: C-2 The City of Eureka did not effectively manage, budget, or comply with Section 35.150 of Title II of the ADA. FORTUNA: C-3 The City of Fortuna did not effectively comply with Section 35.150 of Title II of the ADA.