Madera County Grand Jury
• 2019-2020
• Agency Response
Response to:
Environmental Health Department
"Madera County Food Safety/Food Inspections"*
⚠️ 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 4 findings
F1
The MCGJ finds that current staffing levels, determined by permit fee income, leave inspection requirement goals unattainable. Response Respondent agrees with the finding per California Penal Code 933.05 (a) (1).
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
The MCGJ recommends that, beginning fiscal year 21-22, the EHD study the fee structure and elements of inspection (#Inspections*Inspection and Travel time + fee = Budgetary Allotment). The calculation will provide the number of staff and time required to complete all inspections. Further, if funding is inadequate, request funding from the general fund or raise fees to complete all required FSP inspections on a timely basis. Response The recommendation requires further analysis. Under separate cover, the Deputy Director of Public Works, Environmental Health Division has responded to this recommendation and stated: "EHD will review its fee structure and fee schedule to make the necessary recommendations to our Board of Supervisors, if needed. Most EHD staff are Registered Environmental Health Specialist (REHS), even though staff are assigned to a specific EHD program, staff will be required to assist in other programs as needed to protect public health and safety." The response of the Deputy Director of Public Works, Environmental Health to the above recommendation is considered appropriate and is submitted as the Board of Supervisors' response.
F2
The MCGJ finds that the lack of available vehicles hinders timely inspections. Response Respondent disagrees with the finding per California Penal Code 933.05 (a) (2). Under separate cover, the Deputy Director of Public Works, Environmental Health Division has responded to this finding and stated: "EHD staff works together to make sure county vehicles are available for staff that are scheduled for field inspections. EHD has been working with Madera County Central Garage and can access pool vehicles when needed." The response of the Deputy Director of Public Works, Environmental Health to the above finding is considered appropriate and is submitted as the Board of Supervisors' response. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 200 West4th Street • Madera, CA 93637 • 559.675, 7700 • madec3/11.74n • maderacounty com
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
The MCGJ recommends that, beginning fiscal year 21-22, the EHD work within the department to set up a schedule for vehicle use assignments. Response The recommendation has been implemented.
F3
The MCGJ finds that the FSP does not assign "risk" categories for establishments with repeated infractions. Response Respondent agrees with the finding per California Penal Code 933.05 (a) (1).
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
The MCGJ recommends that, beginning fiscal year 21-22, EHD assign risk categories to establishments with inspection failures and impose fines. Response The recommendation has not yet been implemented but will be implemented in fiscal year 2021-22.
F4
The MCGJ finds that the online food inspection program scheduled for January 2020 has not been implemented. Response Respondent agrees with the finding per California Penal Code 933.05 (a) (1).
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
The MCGJ recommends that, beginning fiscal year 21-22, EHD post online food inspection report results on the EHD website. Response The recommendation has not yet been implemented but will be implemented in fiscal year 2021-22. The Board acknowledges the Grand Jury's review and time involved in this matter and appreciates the opportunity to respond to the findings and recommendations. Sincerely, ay V Robert L. Poythress Chairman of the Board of Supervisors
* This report's PDF did not contain easily extractable text and required Optical Character Recognition (OCR) for analysis. There may be minor errors in the extracted findings and recommendations due to OCR limitations with scanned documents.