Lake County Grand Jury • 2013-2014

Zlkcnjlisj LLaakkee CCoouunnttyy CCiivviill GGrraanndd JJuurryy

Published: October 14, 2014 80 pages Consolidated Report

Ver PDF original

⚠️ Aviso de traducción: Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.

⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.

Findings 14 findings

There are no major problems with the procedures in the Office of the Assessor-Recorder. The delay in corresponding with the property owner in Complaint number 17 was a result of the seasonally heavy workload and the absence of a key employee. This committee does not see a pattern of slow response to public inquires. 2013-2014 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report 3

The shortage of manpower in the Community Development Department has caused delays in performing Code Enforcement duties in spite of revised and simplified procedures.

Marijuana ordinance enforcement is the responsibility of the Sheriff’s Department. During 2013, Code Enforcement in cooperation with the Sheriff’s Office was called between two and three times a month to inspect and tag indoor marijuana grow houses. Delays occur when it is necessary to coordinate the schedules of law enforcement and the Code Enforcement personnel.

California Health and Safety Code Section: §11469 states that, “Law enforcement is the principal objective of forfeiture.” The monies obtained by asset forfeiture of marijuana abatements is currently shared between the state, the District Attorney, and the law enforcement agencies involved in the abatement per California Health and Safety Code Section: §11489. This section of the code is specific in the ways the money can be utilized: It is for law enforcement agencies, which precludes using it to fund the code enforcement support of marijuana abatement activities.

There is a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the District Attorney and Sheriff’s Office detailing the distribution of seized and forfeited property.

Lake County Sheriff’s Policy 606 clearly defines the handling of asset forfeiture cases.

The Committee verified that the Sheriff’s Office is organized and efficient in its handling and processing of asset forfeiture monies in a timely manner.

The District Attorney’s Policy Manual does not address asset forfeiture.

The Board of Supervisors (BOS) is waiving permit fees as an enticement to increasing jobs in Lake County. There is no evidence that waiving permit fees is a factor in the decision of individuals or companies regarding initiating a project in Lake County.

F10

State of California standards are enforced by the State Department of Public Health, Sonoma County branch. The personnel regularly perform sampling, laboratory analysis, and inspection of drinking water facilities in the county.

F11

When there is a violation of the law with water quality or a processing system there is a range of enforcement options used depending upon the urgency and/or threat to public safety.

F12

In addition to legal enforcement, there are financial incentives used to achieve compliance in the form of grants and loans to privately managed systems and state funds for public water systems. This approach is taken when the problem is the result of old and outdated equipment or inadequate infrastructure of the water system.

F13

Special Districts, California Department of Public Health, Drinking Water Division, and Lake County of Lake Public Health Department, express confidence in the high degree of safety and quality of public drinking water supplied to county residents.

F14

The Grand Jury is concerned about future drinking water demands. With increased population and ongoing drought conditions, the question becomes ‘will there be enough for all?’ 2013-2014 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report 38

Recommendations 1

R1

The Grand Jury has found the Public Defender Program and its Oversight Committee are performing efficiently and competently. Therefore, the Committee recommends that the Public Defender Program and its Oversight Committee continue to function at the current level of performance. 2013-2014 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Final Report 12 End Notes: 1. Indigent Criminal Legal Defense Services Agreement between The County of Lake and Lake Legal Defense Services, Inc. Copies of the entire contract can be obtained from the office of the County Administrator 2. California Rules of Court, Title 10 Judicial Administrative Rules, Division 4, Chapter 13, Rule 10.952: Meetings concerning the criminal court system.

No Responses Found 1

Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.

Lake County County