Wheatland Police Department

Recommendations 14

• R1
  Provide funding for a fence to be erected on the southeast side of the campus between the olive orchard and the playground to reduce the potential for intruders entering the grounds or students exiting the grounds without permission.
• R2
  Construct an alternative exit from room 14, the classroom at the end of the sixth grade hallway.
• R3
  Install sound damping panels to reduce noise that affects student learning in classrooms
• R4
  Assign a full-time administrator when enrollment increases at Foothill School.
• R5
  Make alterations to the Foothill Intermediate School main building in order to provide and maintain a safe and high-quality learning environment at Foothill School while the district is looking for a new location for the school.
• R6
  Assign priority to the installation of the Foothill security cameras as soon as the DSA application is approved. Request for Responses: Pursuant to Penal Code section 933.05, the Grand Jury requests responses as follows:  MJUSD Superintendent  MJUSD Superintendent of Business Services  MJUSD Board of Trustees The governing bodies indicated above should be aware that the comment or response of the governing body must be conducted in accordance with Penal Code 933(c) and subject to the notice, agenda and open meeting requirements of the Brown Act. Wheatland Elementary School Wheatland Elementary School Summary: The 2013-14 Grand Jury is conducting an investigation of the safety and security of elementary schools in the county. The Grand Jury elected to extend that investigation to include Wheatland School District (WSD) elementary schools. Introduction and background: The Wheatland School District has three schools within their jurisdiction with approximately 1300 enrolled students. Wheatland Elementary School (WES) has an enrollment of 325 students. The Elementary School was re-opened in 2012 after having been closed in 2009 due to a low enrollment. Due to a high number of military dependents enrolled, WES receives impact aid from the federal government. This program is for military students whose families live and work on military installations. Methodology and Approach: The Grand Jury conducted a tour of the school provided by the principal. During the visit school staff answered questions, and provided documents for review. The Grand Jury developed a school visitation plan for touring schools, ensuring that the same areas were observed at all schools visited in Yuba County. All areas were observed that had relevance to students and staff safety and security. The Grand Jury also inquired into support available for students. Documents:  Wheatland Elementary School’s website can be accessed at: http://wes.wheatlandsd.com/index.html  The Wheatland School District Calendar is available at: http://www.wheatlandsd.com/documents/Copy%20of%20District%20Calendar%202013- 14%20with%20Dates.pdf  The free school breakfast program is described at: http://www.wheatlandsd.com/documents/Free%20Breakfast%20Letter.pdf  A description and video of the door safety device used at Wheatland Elementary School can be found on the manufacture’s website at: http://globalinnovationsco.com/ Site visits: The Grand Jury toured Wheatland Elementary School on February 13, 2014. Wheatland Elementary School Discussion and Narrative: The Grand Jury visited Wheatland Elementary School on February 13, 2014. At the time of the visit there were 325 students enrolled with a waiting list for intra-district transfers. The school accommodates Kindergarten to Third grade students as well as a Special Day Class (SDC). A Kindergarten/First grade classroom had just been added in January 2014. Currently there are fifteen regular-education teachers and one SDC teacher. The school had just been reopened in 2012 due to overcrowding at Bear River School. It was decided to make Wheatland Elementary a K-3 campus, and Bear River a 4-8 campus. There were the following student support staff and services:  A Health Clerk is on campus from 10AM-1PM daily.  A counselor is available on Wednesdays and Fridays.  The large library has a full-time librarian.  VICTOR (Victim Witness Program) supports students as needed.  There is an after school program that includes a Homework Club until 6PM.  Each child receives a daily free breakfast, with some of the cost absorbed by the district.  A Family Resource Center (FRC). Figure 1. The inexpensive door security device installed on Wheatland Elementary School’s door jams. Most school doors open to the outside and can be locked with a key only from the outside, a risky action in the event of a school invasion emergency. To use this device, the door is kept locked from the outside. When the device is in the position shown on the left, the door, closing from the right, is held slightly ajar and, therefore, does not latch. When the device is flipped to the position shown on the right, the door can be pulled completely closed and latched. Wheatland Elementary School Upon entry to the school, each visitor must sign in. After a certain time all entrances are locked, except the office, requiring any visitors to come through that entrance. Each teacher has a key for the outside locks. Thirteen outside surveillance cameras are in operation, and there are plans to upgrade the system. Monthly fire drills are conducted, as well as yearly lock-down drills. Currently no inside window coverings are in the classrooms, but the windows are tinted. Tests have been done during lock-downs to see if students can be seen and they cannot. The principal has placed a seven-dollar device on every door to make it possible for the doors to be secured from the inside. (See figure 1, above.) Wheatland Elementary places an emphasis on community relations through parent involvement. A large housing development is adjacent to the rear of the school campus. This provides the school with extra awareness from parents who regularly walk their children to and from school. The modernized kitchen serves balanced meals based on State of California nutritional guidelines. The large gymnasium/cafeteria, with a capacity of 500, also serves as a community meeting center. Figure 2. The low fence on the north side of the bus loop. Some of the school’s solar panels are visible in the background. Wheatland Elementary School The Grand Jury observed solar panels that have recently been installed. Other upgrades were also observed, such as new wrought iron fencing around the entrance area. Upgraded play areas with new enclosures were installed on the playground. Although the grounds are completely fenced, some of the fences were of insufficient height to provide adequate security. (See figure 2, above.) It was stated that changes for safety are an ongoing process, and that there is complete support from the Wheatland School District.
• R7
  The Administrator discuss with the Marysville Police Department, at their monthly safety meetings, an appropriate notification plan for potentially dangerous activity within its neighborhood.
• R8
  The District provide funding for the construction or purchase of adequate cafeteria storage. Cedar Lane Elementary School: The Grand Jury recommends:
• R9
  Security cameras be installed in strategic outside locations.
• R10
  The District consult with the Public Works Department and install proper signage, sidewalks and crosswalks in the bus pickup/drop off locations. Request for Responses: Pursuant to Penal Code section 933.05, the Grand Jury requests responses as follows:  MJUSD Board of Trustees  Superintendant, MJUSD  Principal, Arboga Elementary R1-R3  Principal, Covillaud Elementary R4-R8 Marysville Unified Elementary Schools Safety and Security  Principal, Cedar Lane Elementary R9-R10 The governing bodies indicated above should be aware that the comment or response of the governing body must be conducted in accordance with Penal Code section 933(c) and subject to the notice, agenda and open meeting requirements of the Brown Act. Conflict of Interest (Perceived) in Marysville Joint Unified School District Conflict of Interest (Perceived) in Marysville Joint Unified School District Summary: As a result of a citizen’s complaint, an investigation by the Yuba County Grand Jury has found that a perceived conflict of interest exists in the Marysville Joint Unified School District (MJUSD). Introduction and background: The Grand Jury received a citizen’s complaint regarding questionable activity in the MJUSD concerning the hiring procedures for the current Facilities Manager (formerly the MJUSD Senior Project Manager) and how that position was filled. The complaint stated that the Facilities Manager is married to an employee of an architectural company whose firm received a substantial portion of the MJUSD architectural contracts. The Grand Jury discussed this complaint and elected to proceed with an investigation. After an investigation, the Grand Jury found that the MJUSD Senior Project Manager was hired to act as a liaison with architectural firms, including one that received approximately sixty percent of the MJUSD’s architectural contracts. The MJUSD Senior Project Manager has a spousal relationship with an employee of the architectural firm, which is perceived as influential. The Grand Jury found that the MJUSD allowed established board by-laws to be violated by hiring employees with known affiliations or connections to district contractors, and therefore, appears to have conflict of interest (Board By-Laws 9270). The Grand Jury also found that the MJUSD violated State of California Government Code 1090, Contractual Conflicts of Interest; All Contracts, quoted below: “Members of the Legislature, state, county, district, judicial district, and city officers or employees shall not be financially interested in any contract made by them in their official capacity, or by any body or board of which they are members. Nor shall state, county, district, judicial district, and city officers or employees be purchasers at any sale or vendors at any purchase made by them in their official capacity.” Upon investigation, the Grand Jury found that the MJUSD advertised the Facilities Manager position in one professional trade journal. The MJUSD did not advertise the position in any other public forum. The Grand Jury determined that the MJUSD Facilities Manager is involved in all aspects of the contract bidding process, including preliminary discussions, negotiations, compromises, reasoning or selection of projects, and the drawing of plans or specifications. The Facilities Manager is apparently not involved in the solicitation of contract bids. However, the Grand Jury determined that the Facilities Manager has important discretionary functions in MJUSD’s contract bidding process; this not a mere clerical or administrative position. The Grand Jury found that the position of Facilities Manager of MJUSD has no written formal or Conflict of Interest (Perceived) in Marysville Joint Unified School District established job duties, job description or responsibilities. It was reported to the Grand Jury that there have been no personnel performance evaluations conducted for the Facilities Manager from the date of hiring to the present. The Facilities Manager formerly reported directly to the previous Superintendant of Business Services, who resigned in December 2013. The Grand Jury also found that the MJUSD Facilities Manager is married to a principal employee in an architectural firm that does substantial business with MJUSD, thus creating at least the appearance of a conflict of interest. Methodology and Approach: The Grand Jury interviewed three MJUSD administrators, a manager in the MJUSD, two current board members, the Yuba County Deputy County Counsel and the Yuba County District Attorney. In addition to the interviews, the Grand Jury asked for and received multiple documents related to the investigation and performed public records searches via the internet and accessible databases. Documents: Public Documents  Marysville Joint Unified School District 9000 Board Bylaws 9270, accessible at http://www.mjusd.k12.ca.us/board/policies  Government Code Section 1090 (http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi- bin/displaycode?section=gov&group=01001-02000&file=1090-1099)  Conflict of Interest Form 700 for employees within the MJUSD accessible through the MJUSD website (http://www.mjusd.k12.ca.us/board/policies)  Project summaries as provided by the Bond Oversight Committee of MJUSD (http://www.mjusd.k12.ca.us/district/bond_oversight_committee)  MJUSD Budgets for years 2012/2013 and 2013/2014 (http://www.mjusd.k12.ca.us/district/budget/) The Grand Jury also consulted the following documents that are not available to the public online:  Legal guidance citing precedent and justification from advisors to the Yuba county Grand Jury  Measures H and P Account Summary Balance sheets from 2006 to 2014  Payment histories for Architectural firms doing business with MJUSD Conflict of Interest (Perceived) in Marysville Joint Unified School District Site visits: The Grand Jury attended one meeting of the MJUSD Bond Oversight Committee and one meeting of the MJUSD Board of Trustees. No other site visits were conducted or deemed necessary. Discussion and Narrative: Through searches of public domain records and testimony by several individuals it was found and confirmed that, at the time of hiring, the current Facilities Manager for MJUSD was married to an employee of an architectural firm doing considerable contractual business with MJUSD. Of $16,237,028 spent on architectural contracts between 2004 and 2014, the firm in question received $8,730,340, or about 53.8% of all monies spent on architectural services. Nine other architectural firms received a combined total of $7,506,688 or about 46.2%. (See Figure 1, below.) The Facilities Manager for MJUSD was hired on May 9, 2007, directly from the architectural firm by the former Superintendent of Business Services. The Facilities Manager’s former employer received over half of the monies spent by MJUSD for architectural services for every year from 2007 to 2013. That same firm received just 3.7% of all the money spent by MJUSD for architectural services during the years 2004 – 2006, with over 96% going to other firms. Figure 1. Percentage of MJUSD’s total expenditures for architectural services by year. The blue segment of the bars represents the percentage received by the Facilities Manager’s former Conflict of Interest (Perceived) in Marysville Joint Unified School District employer. The green portion represents the percentage received by nine other architectural firms combined. It was reported to the Grand Jury during interviews that measures were taken inside the architectural firm to compartmentalize this employee, the spouse of the Facilities Manager, away from all aspects of business relations and contracts with the MJUSD. Whether or not the Facilities Manager’s spouse participated in business relationships with MJUSD is not the issue. The spouse obviously has a financial interest in the success of the architectural firm, and there is at least the appearance of a conflict of interest in the Facilities Manager’s participation in the process of contracting with that architectural firm. The MJUSD board of trustees has the final say in who is hired by the District. Of the two board members interviewed, one member knew of the Facilities Manager’s spousal relationship with the employee of the architectural firm, and one did not know. Upon recommendation by the former business manager for MJUSD, this individual was hired as Director of Design, and then later promoted to Facilities Manager. The Director of Design was a new position initiated in 2006 by the District, for which no formal written job description existed. This position was classified as having a regular probationary employee on track for permanent status. At that time, the former MJUSD Business Services Superintendent directed the person holding this position’s duties. At the time of the Grand Jury investigation, no formal written job description delineating duties or responsibilities had ever existed for this position. The Grand Jury has found that the opening for the position of Director of Design was advertised in a trade journal and that four applicants applied for the job, with two being selected for further consideration. Upon resignation of the prior Facilities Manager, the new Director of Design was promoted into the higher paying vacancy. The position of Director of Design was then eliminated. No yearly employee evaluations have been submitted to the Personnel Department for any of the positions held by the current Facilities Manager.
• R11
  Ensure that SWITRS and the City of Marysville data, particularly for injury and fatal collisions, are concordant.
• R12
  The Airport Manager fill the positions vacated by the two employees who retired, in order to maintain airport operations.
• R13
  The Golden West Air Show improve publicity and marketing.
• R14
  Airport funding for improvements be obtained through a combination of grants, federal, state and county funds. Commendations: C1. The Grand Jury commends the Airport Manager for contracting a local farmer to provide the equipment and labor to cut a perimeter fire break around the airport in exchange for agricultural use of some of the airport land. Request for Responses: Pursuant to Penal Code section 933.05, the Grand Jury requests responses as follows:  Yuba County Airport Manager  Yuba County Administrative Services Director  Yuba County Supervisors The governing bodies indicated above should be aware that the comment or response of the governing body must be conducted in accordance with Penal Code 933(c) and subject to the notice, agenda and open meeting requirements of the Brown Act.