Grand Jury Report 2023 Full Report

San R-3: The Grand Jury April 1, 2024 The San Bernardino City Bernardino recommends that the Council Animal Services Animal Services does not Department develop a currently have a uniform written checklist checklist that all for ACOs to check and ACOs may use to ensure that the yard is inspect the yard secure. A copy of the of an offending checklist is to be given to owner of a stray the owner. or biting dog. This is needed 32 Sa n Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report for consistency of documenting the encounter and putting the owner on notice to remediate the problem area.

Currently, R-5a: The Grand Jury September 1, 2024 The San Bernardino City ACOs do not recommends that SBCAS Council have assigned divide the city into areas (beats) of separate beats of the city responsibility and require ACOs to cover within the City of just that portion of the city San Bernardino. each day. If SBCAS assigned different R-5b: The Grand Jury September 1, 2024 beats to each recommends the City of ACO, it would San Bernardino provide save time and animal care training to the fuel, provide a public twice annually. Each quicker response, ACO is to provide training and increase time for pet owners in his/her for educating the beat via online or in- pet owners and person. public who reside San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 33 in the ACO’s area.

One of the R-7: The Grand Jury September 1, 2024 The San Bernardino City biggest reasons recommends the SBAS Council for the continued reach out and educate the spike in dog public in the City of San attacks/bites in Bernardino about the the City of San benefits of Bernardino is due spaying/neutering dogs. to the number of Education to be delivered non- in-person and other forms spayed/neutered of media. animals in the city. REQUIRED RESPONSES San Bernardino City Council INVITED RESPONSES Kristine Watson, Director of City of San Bernardino Animal Services 34 Sa n Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report GLOSSARY The following Glossary was created by the Grand Jury to provide context and information to terms used in this report. 1. American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA): A not-for-profit association of veterinarians that provide continued education, publications and other resources about animals to the public. 2. Animal Control Officers: The staff of San Bernardino City Department of Animal Services who are responsible for responding to the public’s calls and dealing with dogs, and other animals, in the city limits. 3. Beat: An assigned area of responsibility for each Animal Control Officer. 4. Euthanasia: The medical process of ending the life of an animal. 5. Foster care for animals: The temporary care of an animal pending a successful permanent adoption. 6. RCAFS: Rancho Cucamonga Animal Field Services. 7. SBCDAS: San Bernardino City Department of Animal Services. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 35 This Page Left Intentionally Blank 36 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report OMNITRANS: THE WHEELS ON THE BUS KEEP GOING ROUND AND ROUND San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 37 SUMMARY Safety issues on public transportation have been in the news a great deal since the outbreak of COVID-19. In Los Angeles County, serious injuries and attacks on coach operators, (bus drivers, drivers) passengers and innocent by-standers have been reported multiple times in 2022-23. There have been reports of people dying nationally on public transportation. Based on these headlines, the 2023 San Bernardino Civil Grand Jury (Civil Grand Jury, Grand Jury, GJ) decided to investigate whether these safety issues are evident on OmniTrans (OT) coaches within San Bernardino County. The County of San Bernardino contracts with OmniTrans, and has made this partnership a Joint Power of Authority. (JPA: see Glossary). The 2023 San Bernardino County Civil Grand Jury began to investigate safety issues on the coaches of OmniTrans. Safety problems concerning the Grand Jury at OT were twofold: the safety of the coach operators and the passengers. The investigation focused on the time frame of January 2022 to the present. The Civil Grand Jury found that, although some safety problems have been addressed by OmniTrans, more can be done to ensure that coach operators and passengers are safe while riding on the buses. BACKGROUND OmniTrans was established in 1976 through a joint power’s agreement. (See the summary of the law below). The agreement is a contract between OmniTrans (a private company), and various cities within the County of San Bernardino. OmniTrans is the largest transit operator in San Bernardino County (SBC). Their main office is located at: 1700 West Fifth Street in the City of San Bernardino. Although ridership has declined in recent years, OmniTrans still services over four million riders per year and currently has an operating budget of $90M+ a year. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report All OT buses are equipped with accessibility features like lifts or ramps to board wheelchairs and other mobility devices. The coach operator will assist these passengers with boarding the bus, if needed. They may be used by persons with disabilities who cannot use the steps to board the bus, including riders using the following devices: • Wheelchairs • Scooters • Orthopedic strollers or similar mobility devices • Walkers • Canes • Crutches • Portable oxygen units1 OmniTrans also offers free fares for school students, making public transportation more affordable for, and accessible to, them. Newly hired coach operators go through classroom training and then behind-the-wheel training. Once students have successfully completed their training, OmniTrans assists them with obtaining their Commercial Driver's License (CDL). OmniTrans designed and installed custom-made plexiglass barriers in all its buses to protect against the air-borne virus during the Covid 19 Pandemic. The barriers are magnetized to securely snap into position. The OmniTrans website states that “this added layer of protection has been deemed adequate for division between drivers and passengers”.2 However, these dividers were installed to protect coach operators from sick passengers. These dividers were never meant for protection against aggressive or violent passengers. New, expanded dividers made from harder material are now needed so that the drivers can be physically protected while they are operating the coaches.3 (Note: Evidence revealed that new dividers were installed in 2022. However, it is unclear if all buses are equipped with these new safety dividers.) San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 39 Other safety measures are also needed to protect coach operators and their precious cargo: the passengers. The purpose of this report is to suggest additional safety measures that may be implemented. THE LAW JPA Agreement This joint power authority (JPA) is a contract between a local government and a transit company that outlines the terms of their partnership toward public transit.4 This includes details regarding what roles and responsibilities each party undertakes per the contract. For example, the transit company agrees to run certain pre-determined routes in exchange for a monetary sum from the participating government agencies. The purpose of the joint participation agreement is to ensure that both parties understand and acknowledge the obligations they assume under the terms of the contract. This protects their legal interests and promotes an amicable relationship between the two. See the reference section of this report for the current agreement from 2016. PC §925a and §933.1 “JPAs can be created in three different formats: as a joint power's authority (an entity), as a joint powers agency (also an entity), or as a joint power's agreement (a contract). Regardless of the format, JPAs all have one thing in common: they involve two or more local agencies coming together to share their independent powers towards accomplishing a mutual goal. Civil Grand Juries have the authority to investigate all local JPAs, with the caveat that they do not have jurisdiction to investigate policy issues. When investigating a joint powers authority or agency, a Grand Jury can focus on the JPA operations and make recommendations on how those could be improved. In this case the Grand Jury would require the governing boards of the JPA members to respond to the recommendations.”5 40 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report When investigating a joint powers agreement, a Grand Jury may focus on whether and to what extent the parties to the agreement are performing in accordance with the agreement. The Grand Jury’s findings and recommendations would be directed to the board; in this case it would be the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors. OmniTrans Board of Directors The Board of Directors for the County of San Bernardino and OmniTrans: John Dutrey (Chair) City of Montclair Frank Navarro City of Colton Supervisor Curt Hagman County, Fourth District Supervisor Joe Baca Jr. County, Fifth District Supervisor Dawn Rowe County, Third District Supervisor Jesse Armendarez County, Second District Eunice Ulloa City of Chino Cynthia Moran City of Chino Hills Bill Hussey City of Grand Terrace John B. Roberts, Jr. City of Fontana Penny Lilburn City of Highland Alan Wapner City of Ontario Ron Dailey City of Loma Linda Denise Davis City of Redlands Rafael Trujillo City of Rialto Kristine Scott City of Rancho Cucamonga Helen Tran City of San Bernardino San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 41 Bill Velto City of Upland Bobby Duncan City of Yucaipa METHODOLOGY The 2023 San Bernardino County Civil Grand Jury read multiple documents about OmniTrans. These documents included organizational charts, manuals, handbooks, records, budgets, incident reports and passenger complaints. The Grand Jury interviewed several employees, including administrators, directors, supervisors, coach operators and field supervisors. The Grand Jury members visited the OmniTrans operational center and toured the grounds. The members also took part in a training class for coach operators. The Grand Jury members rode on a coach to observe a coach operator and some passengers in the City of San Bernardino. DISCUSSION The reason for the 2023 Grand Jury investigation into OmniTrans was to look at both coach operator and passenger safety. Safety on public transportation is not just an issue in San Bernardino County. To strengthen security and efficiency for both veteran and prospective riders of L.A.'s public trains and buses, Los Angeles Metro has hired at least 300 ‘transit ambassadors.’ These ambassadors are to assist passengers with any issues and report unwanted passenger behavior on the buses and subways, which allows the operator to do the job for which they were hired: to drive the bus safely. This could be an option for OmniTrans since they are planning to extend bus services to Pomona, California, which is in Los Angeles County. In the County of San Bernardino, the Victor Valley Sheriffs’ Department has contracted with, and will now have, a team comprised of one sergeant and four deputies, assigned to the Victor Valley Transit Authority. The one sergeant and four deputies will enhance the safety of passengers and drivers. Passengers will see deputies randomly riding different buses, as 42 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report well as monitoring activity at bus stops and the Victor Valley Transportation Center.6 Neighboring Riverside County Transit Agency, according to their website, still relies on their coach operators to directly inform their dispatchers of safety issues and requesting assistance. There are no sheriffs or transit ambassadors in neighboring Riverside County.7 The 2023 San Bernardino County Civil Grand Jury has many concerns for the safety of the public and the coach operators while riding/operating any OT bus in San Bernardino County. According to OmniTrans, “Our values are the shared beliefs that represent what are most important to us as an organization.” The OmniTrans website goes on to state, “Our Strategic Plan maintains strategic continuity with the previous Strategic Plan and features several new strategic directions that will drive our work over the next five years. We will: • SECURE our finances long-term and explore new funding sources • EXPAND our customer base • ENHANCE our role in providing mobility and connectivity to the community • ENGAGE in local and regional planning to promoting transit as a part of sustainable development • STRENGTHEN our communication with all our stakeholders • BE bold, entrepreneurial and innovative” Not one of the statements above from OmniTrans’ five-year strategic plan specifically mentions the safety of coach operators or their passengers. Evidence revealed that a coach is a $2 million machine that carries the most precious cargo.8 Safety Record OmniTrans does not have a particularly good record when it comes to the safety of their drivers or their ridership. Yet their plan is to increase the number of coach operators and their customer base over the next five years, placing more people at risk. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 43 well as monitoring activity at bus stops and the Victor Valley Transportation Center.6 Neighboring Riverside County Transit Agency, according to their website, still relies on their coach operators to directly inform their dispatchers of safety issues and requesting assistance. There are no sheriffs or transit ambassadors in neighboring Riverside County.7 The 2023 San Bernardino County Civil Grand Jury has many concerns for the safety of the public and the coach operators while riding/operating any OT bus in San Bernardino County. According to OmniTrans, “Our values are the shared beliefs that represent what are most important to us as an organization.” The OmniTrans website goes on to state, “Our Strategic Plan maintains strategic continuity with the previous Strategic Plan and features several new strategic directions that will drive our work over the next five years. We will: • SECURE our finances long-term and explore new funding sources • EXPAND our customer base • ENHANCE our role in providing mobility and connectivity to the community • ENGAGE in local and regional planning to promoting transit as a part of sustainable development • STRENGTHEN our communication with all our stakeholders • BE bold, entrepreneurial and innovative” Not one of the statements above from OmniTrans’ five-year strategic plan specifically mentions the safety of coach operators or their passengers. Evidence revealed that a coach is a $2 million machine that carries the most precious cargo.8 Safety Record OmniTrans does not have a particularly good record when it comes to the safety of their drivers or their ridership. Yet their plan is to increase the number of coach operators and their customer base over the next five years, placing more people at risk. Safety Incidents The following graphs show safety incidents for 2022. The data was provided by OmniTrans as reported to the Grand Jury. (Data source provided by OmniTrans; chart created by Grand Jury) 44 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report (Data source provided by OmniTrans; chart created by Grand Jury) (Data source provided by OmniTrans; chart created by Grand Jury) (Data source provided by OmniTrans; chart created by Grand Jury) (Data source provided by OmniTrans; chart created by Grand Jury) San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 45 Safety Measures Plexiglass Barriers Plexiglass barriers had been installed on all OmniTrans buses for the Covid-19 pandemic to help slow the spread of germs. These plexiglass shields are still in place, even though Covid-19 numbers had been dwindling in San Bernardino County. The evidence has shown that the plexiglass is not enough to protect drivers from verbal threats, spitting, getting urine thrown on them, assaults, gun threats and fights between passengers. (Photo of Coach Operator’s Cabin with Plexiglass partition) OmniTrans has implemented several safety procedures: • Multiple cameras have been placed on all coaches (inside and out) • Coach operators have been instructed to quote the fare but not to argue if a rider refuses to pay • Coach operators are instructed not to leave their seats • Coach operators are instructed to pull over safely and open both sets of doors in case of conflicts/problems • Coach operators are instructed not to use their cell phones • Coach operators are instructed to press the index button which 46 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report bookmarks the point in the recording where an incident occurs, and to press either the dispatch or the panic button, depending upon the situation However, the Grand Jury found that: • Drivers need additional training in de-escalation and handling passengers with mental health issues Safety Measures Plexiglass Barriers Plexiglass barriers had been installed on all OmniTrans buses for the Covid-19 pandemic to help slow the spread of germs. These plexiglass shields are still in place, even though Covid-19 numbers had been dwindling in San Bernardino County. The evidence has shown that the plexiglass is not enough to protect drivers from verbal threats, spitting, getting urine thrown on them, assaults, gun threats and fights between passengers. (Photo of Coach Operator’s Cabin with Plexiglass partition) OmniTrans has implemented several safety procedures: • Multiple cameras have been placed on all coaches (inside and out) • Coach operators have been instructed to quote the fare but not to argue if a rider refuses to pay • Coach operators are instructed not to leave their seats • Coach operators are instructed to pull over safely and open both sets of doors in case of conflicts/problems • Coach operators are instructed not to use their cell phones • Coach operators are instructed to press the index button which bookmarks the point in the recording where an incident occurs, and to press either the dispatch or the panic button, depending upon the situation However, the Grand Jury found that: • Drivers need additional training in de-escalation and handling passengers with mental health issues • Plexiglass barriers need to be extended and/or replaced with dividers made of stronger material (Note: some buses are now being equipped with dividers made of stronger material) • An additional mirror is needed so that drivers can see directly behind them since the operator cannot see passengers in handicapped seats • Install a camera on the rear of the coach looking out so that drivers can back-up safely Budget The chart below shows OmniTrans operating expenses. (Data source provided by OmniTrans; graph created by Grand Jury) Approved Budget (in Millions) Variance Variance FY 2022-23 FY 2023-24 ($) (%) Sources Revenue (Opera�ng Funds) $90.60 $103.00 $12.40 13.70% Reserves (Capital Funds) $158.70 $47.00 -$111.70 -70% San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 47 Less Capital Budget Used for Opera�ng -$4.60 -$14.30 -$9.70 209% Total Source of Funds $244.70 $135.70 -$109.00 -44.6% Uses Salaries & Benefits $50.40 $55.00 $4.70 9% Services $6.90 $8.10 $1.20 17% Supplies $6.80 $9.80 $3.00 44% Occupancy $5.40 $6.30 $0.90 17% Casualty & Liability $9.60 $10.00 $0.40 4% Capital Expenditures $10.30 $12.20 $1.90 18% Misc & Leases $0.30 $0.80 $0.50 147% • Plexiglass barriers need to be extended and/or replaced with dividers made of stronger material (Note: some buses are now being equipped with dividers made of stronger material) • An additional mirror is needed so that drivers can see directly behind them since the operator cannot see passengers in handicapped seats • Install a camera on the rear of the coach looking out so that drivers can back-up safely Budget The chart below shows OmniTrans operating expenses. (Data source provided by OmniTrans; graph created by Grand Jury) Approved Budget (in Millions) Variance Variance FY 2022-23 FY 2023-24 ($) (%) Sources Revenue (Opera�ng Funds) $90.60 $103.00 $12.40 13.70% Reserves (Capital Funds) $158.70 $47.00 -$111.70 -70% Less Capital Budget Used for Opera�ng -$4.60 -$14.30 -$9.70 209% Total Source of Funds $244.70 $135.70 -$109.00 -44.6% Uses Salaries & Benefits $50.40 $55.00 $4.70 9% Services $6.90 $8.10 $1.20 17% Supplies $6.80 $9.80 $3.00 44% Occupancy $5.40 $6.30 $0.90 17% Casualty & Liability $9.60 $10.00 $0.40 4% Capital Expenditures $10.30 $12.20 $1.90 18% Misc & Leases $0.30 $0.80 $0.50 147% 48 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report • Plexiglass barriers need to be extended and/or replaced with dividers made of stronger material (Note: some buses are now being equipped with dividers made of stronger material) • An additional mirror is needed so that drivers can see directly behind them since the operator cannot see passengers in handicapped seats • Install a camera on the rear of the coach looking out so that drivers can back-up safely Budget The chart below shows OmniTrans operating expenses. (Data source provided by OmniTrans; graph created by Grand Jury) Approved Budget (in Millions) Variance Variance FY 2022-23 FY 2023-24 ($) (%) Sources Revenue (Opera�ng Funds) $90.60 $103.00 $12.40 13.70% Reserves (Capital Funds) $158.70 $47.00 -$111.70 -70% Less Capital Budget Used for Opera�ng -$4.60 -$14.30 -$9.70 209% Total Source of Funds $244.70 $135.70 -$109.00 -44.6% Uses Salaries & Benefits $50.40 $55.00 $4.70 9% Services $6.90 $8.10 $1.20 17% Supplies $6.80 $9.80 $3.00 44% Occupancy $5.40 $6.30 $0.90 17% Casualty & Liability $9.60 $10.00 $0.40 4% Capital Expenditures $10.30 $12.20 $1.90 18% Misc & Leases $0.30 $0.80 $0.50 147% Other Expenses $0.80 $0.90 $0.10 6% Total Expenditures/ Designa�ons $90.50 $103.10 $12.70 14% Vehicle purchases/improvements will decrease by $14 million in 2023-24. OT budgeted to pay $113 million to a third-party entity in 2022-23; the purpose for this payment is unclear. There is no expected payment to a third-party entity in the subsequent fiscal year. OT is expected to spend $6 million on radio/information technology in the subsequent fiscal year to increase communication between drivers, field supervisors and dispatchers. However, the Grand Jury found that much more money needs to be going toward security on the most high-risk bus routes and at all stations. Salaries and benefits are expected to increase by 9% in the subsequent fiscal year. However, the GJ found evidence that in the past, salary increases have not been equitable. The current budget does not delineate exactly who will receive these salary increases. The Grand Jury found coach operators and field supervisors need increases in pay and/or additional incentives to both recruit and retain employees in these positions because of high turnover and retention problems. Higher salaries and San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 49 increased benefits may help attract additional applicants and retain employees. It would reduce turnover because those hired may stay longer to reap those benefits. Training OmniTrans offers initial training for new applicant coach operators so they can test for, and obtain, their Commercial Driver’s License. The training lasts six weeks and is comprised of mostly lecture format in the classroom. Some of this training is in PowerPoint or in the form of a video. Some of the six-week training period is out on the coaches with instructors. The instructors may change from week to week. Evidence showed that because the instructor changes, the training from week to week may be inconsistent. The GJ also found that the amount of hands-on training is inconsistent from instructor to instructor. Training varies for each applicant because of this inconsistency. The Grand Jury found that having one trainer for the entire six-week training period would be beneficial to the trainees and would help with the consistency of the training. Evidence revealed the simulator, virtual and interactive training is very important so the students can learn in a real-life situation. Without interactive scenarios presented to the trainees, the students may receive their CDL, but may still be unprepared for situations that come up when they are driving their routes. The simulator currently in the training Other Expenses $0.80 $0.90 $0.10 6% Total Expenditures/ Designa�ons $90.50 $103.10 $12.70 14% Vehicle purchases/improvements will decrease by $14 million in 2023-24. OT budgeted to pay $113 million to a third-party entity in 2022-23; the purpose for this payment is unclear. There is no expected payment to a third-party entity in the subsequent fiscal year. OT is expected to spend $6 million on radio/information technology in the subsequent fiscal year to increase communication between drivers, field supervisors and dispatchers. However, the Grand Jury found that much more money needs to be going toward security on the most high-risk bus routes and at all stations. Salaries and benefits are expected to increase by 9% in the subsequent fiscal year. However, the GJ found evidence that in the past, salary increases have not been equitable. The current budget does not delineate exactly who will receive these salary increases. The Grand Jury found coach operators and field supervisors need increases in pay and/or additional incentives to both recruit and retain employees in these positions because of high turnover and retention problems. Higher salaries and increased benefits may help attract additional applicants and retain employees. It would reduce turnover because those hired may stay longer to reap those benefits. Training OmniTrans offers initial training for new applicant coach operators so they can test for, and obtain, their Commercial Driver’s License. The training lasts six weeks and is comprised of mostly lecture format in the classroom. Some of this training is in PowerPoint or in the form of a video. Some of the six-week training period is out on the coaches with instructors. The instructors may change from week to week. Evidence showed that because the instructor changes, the training from week to week may be inconsistent. The GJ also found that the amount of hands-on training is inconsistent from instructor to instructor. Training varies for each applicant because of this inconsistency. The Grand Jury found that having one trainer for the entire six-week training period would be beneficial to the trainees and would help with the consistency of the training. Evidence revealed the simulator, virtual and interactive training is very important so the students can learn in a real-life situation. Without interactive scenarios presented to the trainees, the students may receive their CDL, but may still be unprepared for situations that come up when they are driving their routes. The simulator currently in the training classroom is outdated and cannot be repaired. OmniTrans has no virtual learning program that can teach the students how to react in real-life situations. The Grand Jury recommends that OmniTrans purchase a virtual program and/or a new simulator for use in the training classrooms. The Grand Jury found that the trainees benefitted from the time spent teaching the prospective drivers out on the buses in person. If one instructor and three or four students went out on routes in real coaches, the teacher could model safe driving, and then the trainees could each take turns driving the bus with the instructor guiding them. Evidence showed that 50 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report the students would benefit greatly from this type of interactive training. OmniTrans also reteaches current coach operators annually to refresh their training. These classes are taught on PowerPoint or videos with little student interaction. At the end of the class, coach operators play an interactive game in ‘Jeopardy!’ style format. The class participants were much more involved in the learning at that point. Interactive methods are encouraged as much as possible. Train the Trainers Pilot Program “Research indicates that the shelf life for skills may be five years or less. We are in a cycle of near constant upskilling and reskilling of the workforce. Train the Trainer programs equip trainers and instructional designers with the skills they need to provide the best learning experience to employees. Train the Trainers facilitators need to have strong leadership skills, effective communication capabilities, exceptional listening skills, and emotional intelligence.”9 The Grand Jury has learned teaching adults who have personal experiences and opinions is a difficult task and not just anyone can jump into this role. The evidence revealed that the trainers need: • to be qualified and proficient in teaching to all learning styles • more planning and team-building times • time to work with one another so the delivery of the material to coach operators is consistent • consistency in delivering the same material • one instructor for the initial six-week period of training class • a “train the trainers” program, for consistency in instruction De-escalation Training Evidence revealed that coach operators (new trainees and experienced drivers) at OmniTrans would be better prepared and equipped if the training included ideas on how to de-escalate a situation that arises on the coaches and at stops. Drivers who know exactly how to de-escalate a confrontation, argument and other situations can then draw from their training ideas and put them into use while out on their routes. Probationary trainees, as well as seasoned drivers, need the best ideas for de-escalation so that small classroom is outdated and cannot be repaired. OmniTrans has no virtual learning program that can teach the students how to react in real-life situations. The Grand Jury recommends that OmniTrans purchase a virtual program and/or a new simulator for use in the training classrooms. The Grand Jury found that the trainees benefitted from the time spent teaching the prospective drivers out on the buses in person. If one instructor and three or four students went out on routes in real coaches, the teacher could model safe driving, and then the trainees could each take turns driving the bus with the instructor guiding them. Evidence showed that the students would benefit greatly from this type of interactive training. OmniTrans also reteaches current coach operators annually to refresh their training. These classes are taught on PowerPoint or videos with little student interaction. At the end of the class, coach operators play an interactive game in ‘Jeopardy!’ style format. The class participants were much more involved in the learning at that point. Interactive methods are encouraged as much as possible. Train the Trainers Pilot Program “Research indicates that the shelf life for skills may be five years or less. We are in a cycle of near constant upskilling and reskilling of the workforce. Train the Trainer programs equip trainers and instructional designers with the skills they need to provide the best learning experience to employees. Train the Trainers facilitators need to have strong leadership skills, effective communication capabilities, exceptional listening skills, and emotional intelligence.”9 The Grand Jury has learned teaching adults who have personal experiences and opinions is a difficult task and not just anyone can jump into this role. The evidence revealed that the trainers need: • to be qualified and proficient in teaching to all learning styles • more planning and team-building times • time to work with one another so the delivery of the material to coach operators is consistent • consistency in delivering the same material • one instructor for the initial six-week period of training class • a “train the trainers” program, for consistency in instruction De-escalation Training Evidence revealed that coach operators (new trainees and experienced drivers) at OmniTrans would be better prepared and equipped if the training included ideas on how to de-escalate a situation that arises on the coaches and at stops. Drivers who know exactly hSoanw B etorn adredi-neos Ccoaulnattye G ara ncdo Jnufrryo Fnintaalt Rioenpo, rt 51 argument and other situations can then draw from their training ideas and put them into use while out on their routes. Probationary trainees, as well as seasoned drivers, need the best ideas for de-escalation so that small classroom is outdated and cannot be repaired. OmniTrans has no virtual learning program that can teach the students how to react in real-life situations. The Grand Jury recommends that OmniTrans purchase a virtual program and/or a new simulator for use in the training classrooms. The Grand Jury found that the trainees benefitted from the time spent teaching the prospective drivers out on the buses in person. If one instructor and three or four students went out on routes in real coaches, the teacher could model safe driving, and then the trainees could each take turns driving the bus with the instructor guiding them. Evidence showed that the students would benefit greatly from this type of interactive training. OmniTrans also reteaches current coach operators annually to refresh their training. These classes are taught on PowerPoint or videos with little student interaction. At the end of the class, coach operators play an interactive game in ‘Jeopardy!’ style format. The class participants were much more involved in the learning at that point. Interactive methods are encouraged as much as possible. Train the Trainers Pilot Program “Research indicates that the shelf life for skills may be five years or less. We are in a cycle of near constant upskilling and reskilling of the workforce. Train the Trainer programs equip trainers and instructional designers with the skills they need to provide the best learning experience to employees. Train the Trainers facilitators need to have strong leadership skills, effective communication capabilities, exceptional listening skills, and emotional intelligence.”9 The Grand Jury has learned teaching adults who have personal experiences and opinions is a difficult task and not just anyone can jump into this role. The evidence revealed that the trainers need: • to be qualified and proficient in teaching to all learning styles • more planning and team-building times • time to work with one another so the delivery of the material to coach operators is consistent • consistency in delivering the same material • one instructor for the initial six-week period of training class • a “train the trainers” program, for consistency in instruction De-escalation Training Evidence revealed that coach operators (new trainees and experienced drivers) at OmniTrans would be better prepared and equipped if the training included ideas on how to de-escalate a situation that arises on the coaches and at stops. Drivers who know exactly how to de-escalate a confrontation, argument and other situations can then draw from their training ideas and put them into use while out on their routes. Probationary trainees, as well as seasoned drivers, need the best ideas for de-escalation so that small problems do not become huge problems while they are trying to operate their coaches. The Grand Jury recommends that OmniTrans hire de- escalation experts to teach the best and most current methods for de- escalation so that drivers can feel confident with the tools they learn. Qualified vendors can be sought and hired to be guest speakers/trainers during classes. A qualified third-party trainer to instruct the coach operators in dealing with passengers who have mental illness issues would also benefit the drivers and give them more training in how to deal with some of the passengers they encounter on a regular basis. The operators could draw from their training to use ideas to deal with these passengers in a safe and non- confrontational way. Use of Simulators “Transit bus driver training simulators have been successfully used to increase proficiency throughout the transportation industry. Simulators/virtual methods used in training programs simplify periodic retraining, improve customer service, and help transit operators to learn to better manage the stresses associated with passenger issues on fixed routes. This would also ease the transition to Electric Vehicle (EV) buses. With simulation-based bus operator training transit agency will get entry- level drivers their commercial driver’s license more quickly and retain them longer.”10 “Driving simulators allows learners to experience the consequences of their actions in an almost unlimited range of driving situations without risk of material damage and/or injury.”11 According to an expert company who manufactures simulators: “Most importantly, when using a bus driving simulator, you can reap all these benefits at any hour, in any weather, with absolutely no risk to 52 Sa e n q B u e i r p n m ard e in n o t , C w ou o n r t k y e G r r s an , d p J a u s ry s e Fi n na g l e Re rs p , o r o t r the community.”12 problems do not become huge problems while they are trying to operate their coaches. The Grand Jury recommends that OmniTrans hire de- escalation experts to teach the best and most current methods for de- escalation so that drivers can feel confident with the tools they learn. Qualified vendors can be sought and hired to be guest speakers/trainers during classes. A qualified third-party trainer to instruct the coach operators in dealing with passengers who have mental illness issues would also benefit the drivers and give them more training in how to deal with some of the passengers they encounter on a regular basis. The operators could draw from their training to use ideas to deal with these passengers in a safe and non- confrontational way. Use of Simulators “Transit bus driver training simulators have been successfully used to increase proficiency throughout the transportation industry. Simulators/virtual methods used in training programs simplify periodic retraining, improve customer service, and help transit operators to learn to better manage the stresses associated with passenger issues on fixed routes. This would also ease the transition to Electric Vehicle (EV) buses. With simulation-based bus operator training transit agency will get entry- level drivers their commercial driver’s license more quickly and retain them longer.”10 “Driving simulators allows learners to experience the consequences of their actions in an almost unlimited range of driving situations without risk of material damage and/or injury.”11 According to an expert company who manufactures simulators: “Most importantly, when using a bus driving simulator, you can reap all these benefits at any hour, in any weather, with absolutely no risk to equipment, workers, passengers, or the community.”12 (Photo of Non-operable Simulator at OmniTrans) “At most agencies, simulators are used to train new drivers and specifically to teach defensive driving techniques, to “show them what they don’t know.” These training sessions equated to relatively short durations in the simulators of around 10-20 minutes per driver. Simulators are viewed as worthwhile for demonstrating techniques like “rock and roll,” in which the trainee checks blind spots. Simulators offer the opportunity for drivers to see what they would miss by not implementing the technique. Several agency representatives mentioned the case of pedestrians in a blind spot as a particular situation which is effectively conveyed to drivers using a simulator.”13 “Bus driving simulators are widely used throughout the transit industry to support driver training. Drivers generally find them credible and useful in learning important driver safety techniques and principles. However, space must be provided to store and operate systems and funding sources must be identified to provide the necessary resources to maintain the operation of a driving simulator.”14 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 53 “Transit bus driver training simulators have been successfully used to increase throughput in training programs, simplify periodic retraining, improve customer service, help transit operators to learn to better manage the stresses associated with passenger issues on fixed routes, and ease the transition to EV buses. With simulation-based bus operator training your transit agency will get entry-level drivers their commercial driver’s license (CDL) quickly and retain them longer.”15 Coach Operator Safety During the Grand Jury investigation into OmniTrans safety practices, the GJ discovered that installing plexiglass barriers between the operator and passengers worked well during Covid-19 because they were installed to prevent the spread of disease rather than for security risks. However, (Photo of Non-operable Simulator at OmniTrans) “At most agencies, simulators are used to train new drivers and specifically to teach defensive driving techniques, to “show them what they don’t know.” These training sessions equated to relatively short durations in the simulators of around 10-20 minutes per driver. Simulators are viewed as worthwhile for demonstrating techniques like “rock and roll,” in which the trainee checks blind spots. Simulators offer the opportunity for drivers to see what they would miss by not implementing the technique. Several agency representatives mentioned the case of pedestrians in a blind spot as a particular situation which is effectively conveyed to drivers using a simulator.”13 “Bus driving simulators are widely used throughout the transit industry to support driver training. Drivers generally find them credible and useful in learning important driver safety techniques and principles. However, space must be provided to store and operate systems and funding sources must be identified to provide the necessary resources to maintain the operation of a driving simulator.”14 “Transit bus driver training simulators have been successfully used to increase throughput in training programs, simplify periodic retraining, improve customer service, help transit operators to learn to better manage the stresses associated with passenger issues on fixed routes, and ease the transition to EV buses. With simulation-based bus operator training your transit agency will get entry-level drivers their commercial driver’s license (CDL) quickly and retain them longer.”15 Coach Operator Safety During the Grand Jury investigation into OmniTrans safety practices, the GJ discovered that installing plexiglass barriers between the operator and passengers worked well during Covid-19 because they were installed to prevent the spread of disease rather than for security risks. However, today’s safety issues aboard public transportation have advanced well beyond the spread of germs. Drivers need an unobstructed view all around the bus from their coach operator area (both inside and outside of the bus) with adjustable barriers around the driver’s area, to avoid physical confrontations with passengers. The plexiglass operator barriers, which OmniTrans installed at the beginning of Covid-19, were an improvement, but passengers can still reach around it to physically contact the driver. Extended barriers made of harder material are needed for the safety of the coach operators. The Grand Jury learned it would be beneficial to have a class on how to deal with people and how to use de-escalation techniques. Instructors can use more interactive training about how to handle aggressive and upset passengers. Some people get angry, so a third-party professional should come in and explain to the drivers how to deal with such situations and behavioral issues. There are some people with mental disabilities that coach operators must deal with on a routine basis. OmniTrans instructors can train with these expert professionals in using more interactive scenarios (without drivers leaving their seats or physically confronting anyone) and dealing with people with mental illness, since societal issues 54 Sahna Bveern carhdainnog Ceodun otyv Gerra nthde Ju yrye Fainrsal. R eport Passenger Safety The transit center in the City of San Bernardino is the only transit center owned by OmniTrans and provides their own security. OmniTrans contracts with Allied United Security for security at other transit centers. OmniTrans contracts with Allied United Security for three years with two-year renewal options. OmniTrans does not control the security at any other stations. The Grand Jury learned OmniTrans does not own the transit center in Fontana. It is a very busy transit center, and the City of Fontana maintains that property and provides security. Therefore, there is no consistency in security at the various transit centers. The Grand Jury discovered most safety incidents happen between passengers. Sometimes these incidents begin at the station and then continue onto the bus. All buses are equipped with multiple video cameras that also records sound. The coach operators do not have access to the videos. Usually, the PA (public announcement) system is used by coach operators to try to de-escalate arguments. OmniTrans currently has a $90M+ budget, and they are required to spend two percent of that on security annually. The Grand Jury found that several bus stops have been turned into homeless encampments, so passengers tend to stand away from the actual bus stop while waiting for a bus. Therefore, the driver may pass up a stop. There was evidence that solar lighting could be installed at all bus stops as a deterrent and to discourage homeless people from loitering, sleeping and today’s safety issues aboard public transportation have advanced well beyond the spread of germs. Drivers need an unobstructed view all around the bus from their coach operator area (both inside and outside of the bus) with adjustable barriers around the driver’s area, to avoid physical confrontations with passengers. The plexiglass operator barriers, which OmniTrans installed at the beginning of Covid-19, were an improvement, but passengers can still reach around it to physically contact the driver. Extended barriers made of harder material are needed for the safety of the coach operators. The Grand Jury learned it would be beneficial to have a class on how to deal with people and how to use de-escalation techniques. Instructors can use more interactive training about how to handle aggressive and upset passengers. Some people get angry, so a third-party professional should come in and explain to the drivers how to deal with such situations and behavioral issues. There are some people with mental disabilities that coach operators must deal with on a routine basis. OmniTrans instructors can train with these expert professionals in using more interactive scenarios (without drivers leaving their seats or physically confronting anyone) and dealing with people with mental illness, since societal issues have changed over the years. Passenger Safety The transit center in the City of San Bernardino is the only transit center owned by OmniTrans and provides their own security. OmniTrans contracts with Allied United Security for security at other transit centers. OmniTrans contracts with Allied United Security for three years with two-year renewal options. OmniTrans does not control the security at any other stations. The Grand Jury learned OmniTrans does not own the transit center in Fontana. It is a very busy transit center, and the City of Fontana maintains that property and provides security. Therefore, there is no consistency in security at the various transit centers. The Grand Jury discovered most safety incidents happen between passengers. Sometimes these incidents begin at the station and then continue onto the bus. All buses are equipped with multiple video cameras that also records sound. The coach operators do not have access to the videos. Usually, the PA (public announcement) system is used by coach operators to try to de-escalate arguments. OmniTrans currently has a $90M+ budget, and they are required to spend two percent of that on security annually. The Grand Jury found that several bus stops have been turned into homeless encampments, so passengers tend to stand away from the actual bus stop while waiting for a bus. Therefore, the driver may pass up a stop. There was evidence that solar lighting could be installed at all bus stops as a deterrent and to discourage homeless people from loitering, sleeping and San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 55 today’s safety issues aboard public transportation have advanced well beyond the spread of germs. Drivers need an unobstructed view all around the bus from their coach operator area (both inside and outside of the bus) with adjustable barriers around the driver’s area, to avoid physical confrontations with passengers. The plexiglass operator barriers, which OmniTrans installed at the beginning of Covid-19, were an improvement, but passengers can still reach around it to physically contact the driver. Extended barriers made of harder material are needed for the safety of the coach operators. The Grand Jury learned it would be beneficial to have a class on how to deal with people and how to use de-escalation techniques. Instructors can use more interactive training about how to handle aggressive and upset passengers. Some people get angry, so a third-party professional should come in and explain to the drivers how to deal with such situations and behavioral issues. There are some people with mental disabilities that coach operators must deal with on a routine basis. OmniTrans instructors can train with these expert professionals in using more interactive scenarios (without drivers leaving their seats or physically confronting anyone) and dealing with people with mental illness, since societal issues have changed over the years. Passenger Safety The transit center in the City of San Bernardino is the only transit center owned by OmniTrans and provides their own security. OmniTrans contracts with Allied United Security for security at other transit centers. OmniTrans contracts with Allied United Security for three years with two-year renewal options. OmniTrans does not control the security at any other stations. The Grand Jury learned OmniTrans does not own the transit center in Fontana. It is a very busy transit center, and the City of Fontana maintains that property and provides security. Therefore, there is no consistency in security at the various transit centers. The Grand Jury discovered most safety incidents happen between passengers. Sometimes these incidents begin at the station and then continue onto the bus. All buses are equipped with multiple video cameras that also records sound. The coach operators do not have access to the videos. Usually, the PA (public announcement) system is used by coach operators to try to de-escalate arguments. OmniTrans currently has a $90M+ budget, and they are required to spend two percent of that on security annually. The Grand Jury found that several bus stops have been turned into homeless encampments, so passengers tend to stand away from the actual bus stop while waiting for a bus. Therefore, the driver may pass up a stop. There was evidence that solar lighting could be installed at all bus stops as a deterrent and to discourage homeless people from loitering, sleeping and camping at the bus stops. Solar lighting is more practical than electric lighting as you do not have to install electricity at the bus stop. ® WeTip WeTip was founded in 1972 to aid law enforcement and provide anonymous reporting resources and empowerment to citizens. Through We Tip’s success, crime incidents have dramatically reduced in both communities and schools nationwide. Since its inception, WeTip has led to over 1.2 million crimes reported, 16,000 arrests, and 8,000 convictions. OmniTrans, San Bernardino Sheriff’s Department and San Bernardino International Airport have utilized this program for years. WeTip is advertised at the OmniTrans office in San Bernardino for drivers to use, if needed. At one time, there were WeTip notices on the backs of passenger's seats as well as at the front of each coach, for passengers to access. The Grand Jury learned that many passengers have torn these off. Perhaps displaying only the QR code could help. WeTip provides a dedicated telephone number with dedicated hotlines and QR Codes. Reports are always anonymous. They also offer confidential text message reporting. Passengers often use WeTip to report complaints16. The Grand Jury found that passengers need easy access to the WeTip information at many locations on the bus and not just at the front of the bus. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report Field Supervisors With so many issues that coach operators must face, the Grand Jury also investigated the role of field supervisors and how they assist coach operators with safety issues. Bus drivers are to radio dispatch if there is a problem, and the drivers are also responsible for writing up incident reports, but they are not allowed to call 911. Field supervisors will receive a call from dispatch if there is a bus camping at the bus stops. Solar lighting is more practical than electric lighting as you do not have to install electricity at the bus stop. ® WeTip WeTip was founded in 1972 to aid law enforcement and provide anonymous reporting resources and empowerment to citizens. Through We Tip’s success, crime incidents have dramatically reduced in both communities and schools nationwide. Since its inception, WeTip has led to over 1.2 million crimes reported, 16,000 arrests, and 8,000 convictions. OmniTrans, San Bernardino Sheriff’s Department and San Bernardino International Airport have utilized this program for years. WeTip is advertised at the OmniTrans office in San Bernardino for drivers to use, if needed. At one time, there were WeTip notices on the backs of passenger's seats as well as at the front of each coach, for passengers to access. The Grand Jury learned that many passengers have torn these off. Perhaps displaying only the QR code could help. WeTip provides a dedicated telephone number with dedicated hotlines and QR Codes. Reports are always anonymous. They also offer confidential text message reporting. Passengers often use WeTip to report complaints16. The Grand Jury found that passengers need easy access to the WeTip information at many locations on the bus and not just at the front of the bus. Field Supervisors With so many issues that coach operators must face, the Grand Jury also investigated the role of field supervisors and how they assist coach operators with safety issues. Bus drivers are to radio dispatch if there is a problem, and the drivers are also responsible for writing up incident reports, but they are not allowed to call 911. Field supervisors will receive a call from dispatch if there is a bus incident in their area (East or West Valley). These supervisors will assess the situation and then determine if his or her presence is required for that incident, depending on the severity of the situation. Field supervisors will determine whether to call the local law enforcement immediately or not at all. They will later go over the videos from the coach and write a report which is then disseminated to various departments at OmniTrans. Evidence revealed that there are an insufficient number of field supervisors to cover the area and number of routes serviced by OmniTrans, since there is only one field supervisor per shift, per area. It also impacts efficiency and shortens the field supervisors’ response times. Additional supervisors must be hired to ensure the safety of OT coach operators and passengers as well as the vehicles. Hiring and Retention of Staff San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 57 Evidence shows that a high turnover of staff is a problem for OmniTrans. The Grand Jury found that multiple administrative positions have been unfilled for long periods of time. OmniTrans requires that existing staff perform those jobs, so many employees are wearing multiple hats. Employees are stretched so thin that it is difficult to perform the duties of multiple positions. Consequently, time management becomes a concern. Additionally, OmniTrans is having difficulty hiring and retaining coach operators. OmniTrans has implemented some incentive programs to retain and reward its staff. However, the Grand Jury finds that additional programs and incentives would be beneficial. Some coach drivers apply at OmniTrans, go through coach driver training and receive their CDL only to leave soon afterwards for higher paying jobs or jobs with better incentives. The Grand Jury discovered some drivers are pressured to work additional days beyond their tour-of-duty. If they fail to come in and work, there are negative consequences, such as earning demerits. Reaching 100 demerits on a driver’s record can result in automatic termination. Coach operators may end up working seven days a week for an extended period. The Grand Jury has found this affects their performance and morale. It is evident that burnout would affect the safety of the driver, passengers, pedestrians and the bus. The Future of OmniTrans Safety Victor Valley Transit Authority The Grand Jury has learned that the Victor Valley Transit Authority (VVTA) has partnered with the San Bernardino County Sherriff’s Department (SBCSD) to enhance the safety of its passengers and coach operators. This partnership, which consists of one sergeant and four deputies, was created mid-year to help improve the sense of security and well-being incident in their area (East or West Valley). These supervisors will assess the situation and then determine if his or her presence is required for that incident, depending on the severity of the situation. Field supervisors will determine whether to call the local law enforcement immediately or not at all. They will later go over the videos from the coach and write a report which is then disseminated to various departments at OmniTrans. Evidence revealed that there are an insufficient number of field supervisors to cover the area and number of routes serviced by OmniTrans, since there is only one field supervisor per shift, per area. It also impacts efficiency and shortens the field supervisors’ response times. Additional supervisors must be hired to ensure the safety of OT coach operators and passengers as well as the vehicles. Hiring and Retention of Staff Evidence shows that a high turnover of staff is a problem for OmniTrans. The Grand Jury found that multiple administrative positions have been unfilled for long periods of time. OmniTrans requires that existing staff perform those jobs, so many employees are wearing multiple hats. Employees are stretched so thin that it is difficult to perform the duties of multiple positions. Consequently, time management becomes a concern. Additionally, OmniTrans is having difficulty hiring and retaining coach operators. OmniTrans has implemented some incentive programs to retain and reward its staff. However, the Grand Jury finds that additional programs and incentives would be beneficial. Some coach drivers apply at OmniTrans, go through coach driver training and receive their CDL only to leave soon afterwards for higher paying jobs or jobs with better incentives. The Grand Jury discovered some drivers are pressured to work additional days beyond their tour-of-duty. If they fail to come in and work, there are negative consequences, such as earning demerits. Reaching 100 demerits on a driver’s record can result in automatic termination. Coach operators may end up working seven days a week for an extended period. The Grand Jury has found this affects their performance and morale. It is evident that burnout would affect the safety of the driver, passengers, pedestrians and the bus. The Future of OmniTrans Safety Victor Valley Transit Authority The Grand Jury has learned that the Victor Valley Transit Authority (VVTA) has partnered with the San Bernardino County Sherriff’s Department (SBCSD) to enhance the safety of its passengers and coach operators. This partnership, which consists of one sergeant and four deputies, was created mid-year to help improve the sense of security and well-being 58 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report among the commuters. The Grand Jury has tried several times to contact VVTA and verify their data, findings, and progress on this program. That effort was unsuccessful. However, the Grand Jury recommends that the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors and OmniTrans look at this partnership as a litmus test to evaluate its implementation. Victor Valley Transit Authority could be a model for a pilot program for OmniTrans to cover its riskier routes.17 COMMENDATIONS • OmniTrans invested in acquiring zero emission buses (ZEBs); for example, hydrogen fueled coaches • OT currently has 4 electric buses • OmniTrans has an agreement to add 18 additional electric buses • the Grand Jury was pleased to discover multiple compliments from passengers about helpful and friendly drivers • OmniTrans is making efforts with driver and passenger safety • free Fares for School Program is a great idea • OT’s willingness to work with the Grand Jury, providing requested documents and making it possible for employees to come in for interviews • OmniTrans listens to and welcomes coach operator safety suggestions • police officers and firefighters ride for free on all OmniTrans buses if they are wearing their uniform CONCLUSION OmniTrans does show concern for safety issues aboard their buses, but the Grand Jury sees the need for more improvement. OmniTrans bus stops still need to be cleared of sleeping people and the amount of trash left behind according to evidence received. Installing solar lights at stops may deter people who are homeless from camping there. OmniTrans is understaffed and struggles with employee retention. For example, some driver applicants are hired, trained, receive a commercial driver’s license at OmniTrans’ expense but then immediately leave for San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 59 higher-paying jobs elsewhere. OmniTrans would benefit from setting up a better incentive plan whereby attendance and retention bonuses are paid at certain short milestones when employees continue their employment with OmniTrans. The Grand Jury believes that OmniTrans will address these concerns and continue “moving” in the right direction, so that the wheels on the bus will keep going round and round—safely. among the commuters. The Grand Jury has tried several times to contact VVTA and verify their data, findings, and progress on this program. That effort was unsuccessful. However, the Grand Jury recommends that the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors and OmniTrans look at this partnership as a litmus test to evaluate its implementation. Victor Valley Transit Authority could be a model for a pilot program for OmniTrans to cover its riskier routes.17 COMMENDATIONS • OmniTrans invested in acquiring zero emission buses (ZEBs); for example, hydrogen fueled coaches • OT currently has 4 electric buses • OmniTrans has an agreement to add 18 additional electric buses • the Grand Jury was pleased to discover multiple compliments from passengers about helpful and friendly drivers • OmniTrans is making efforts with driver and passenger safety • free Fares for School Program is a great idea • OT’s willingness to work with the Grand Jury, providing requested documents and making it possible for employees to come in for interviews • OmniTrans listens to and welcomes coach operator safety suggestions • police officers and firefighters ride for free on all OmniTrans buses if they are wearing their uniform CONCLUSION OmniTrans does show concern for safety issues aboard their buses, but the Grand Jury sees the need for more improvement. OmniTrans bus stops still need to be cleared of sleeping people and the amount of trash left behind according to evidence received. Installing solar lights at stops may deter people who are homeless from camping there. OmniTrans is understaffed and struggles with employee retention. For example, some driver applicants are hired, trained, receive a commercial driver’s license at OmniTrans’ expense but then immediately leave for higher-paying jobs elsewhere. OmniTrans would benefit from setting up a better incentive plan whereby attendance and retention bonuses are paid at certain short milestones when employees continue their employment with OmniTrans. The Grand Jury believes that OmniTrans will address these concerns and continue “moving” in the right direction, so that the wheels on the bus will keep going round and round—safely. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report (Banner hangs in the OmniTrans Headquarters) FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS – 90-Day Response Requested: REQUIRED RESPONSES 1. San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors 2. OmniTrans Board of Directors INVITED RESPONSES 1. Erin Rogers - CEO and General Manager of OmniTrans San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 61 FINDINGS RECOMMENDATIONS REQUIRED RESPONSE IMPLEMENTATION DATE

R-8: 1.OmniTrans Board of Expert third-party training Implement de-escalation Directors in de-escalation training from outside September techniques is needed. experts. 2024 2. SB County Board of Supervisors

R-9: 1. OmniTrans Board of Directors The bus simulator used Purchase a new bus September for coach operator training simulator for use in training 2024 is outdated and coach operator students. 2. SB County Board of unrepairable and has not Supervisors been used by any new hires in the last few years. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 63 GLOSSARY The following Glossary was created by the Grand Jury to add context and information to the report above. 1. Commercial Driver's License (CDL): a driver's license required in the United States to operate large and heavy vehicles (including trucks, buses and trailers) or a vehicle of any size that transports hazardous materials or more than 15 passengers (including the driver). 2. Coach Operator: Person who drives large passenger vehicles, known as coaches, for tours, charters and other scheduled services. Coach operators transport passengers. 3. Joint Powers Authority (JPA): The OmniTrans Joint Powers Authority is a California public agency formed pursuant to the Joint Exercise of Powers Act, Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 6500 of Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code) through those certain joint powers’ agreement titled “Amended and Restated Joint Powers Agreement between the County of San Bernardino and the Cities of Chino, Chino Hills, Colton, Fontana, Grand Terrace, Highland, Loma Linda, Montclair, Ontario, Rancho Cucamonga, Redlands, Rialto, San Bernardino, Upland and Yucaipa, creating a county wide transportation authority to be known as ‘OmniTrans’, dated July 1, 2016 (referred to as the “Joint Powers Authority”). 4. OmniTrans: the largest public transportation agency in San Bernardino County. Established in 1976. It covers approximately 480 square miles. 5. Route: a way or course taken in getting from a starting point to a destination. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report REFERENCES A. California Penal Code §933 This law requires the governing body of any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court). Additionally, in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g., District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such elected County official shall comment on the findings and recommendations pertaining to the matters under that elected official’s control within 60 days to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code Section 933.05 specifies the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made as follows: (a) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding. (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding; in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor. (b) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefore. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 65 (c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. Comments to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in compliance with Penal Code §933.05 are required and requested from B. See below a recent job posting for the Field Supervisor position at OmniTrans: 2023 Field Supervisor Recruitment from OmniTrans Salary $62,667.96 - $94,002.00 Annually Location San Bernardino, CA Job Type Full Time Job Number 1307 Department Operations Opening Date 07/20/2023 Closing Date 8/4/2023 11:59 PM Pacific 66 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report JOB DESCRIPTION The Job: Ride OMNITRANS to a satisfying career that lets you make a difference in the San Bernardino Valley. OmniTrans, provider of public mass transit for the San Bernardino Valley in Southern California is seeking a highly skilled professional to join our award-winning team. The ideal Candidate hired will supervise, coach and mentor the Agency's coach operators, ensuring efficient and courteous service. Examples of Duties The duties listed below are intended only as illustrations of the various types of work that may be performed. The omission of specific statements of duties does not exclude them from the position if the work is similar, related, or a logical assignment to this position: Monitors the daily performance/operation of fixed routes, including efficiency, system safety and on time performance; makes recommendations for adjustments. Develops routes for detours and special events. • Monitors motor coaches on the road and determines location of bus stops, zones, and amenities. Research service and makes recommendations. • Supervises and monitors operator performance including on-board ride checks and overall compliance with rules, regulations, and safety requirements. • Issues fare evasion citations and code enforcement. • Assists operators with passenger relations. Investigates customer complaints and acts as liaison for the Agency with the general public and public works/safety personnel. • Responds to, investigates, and submits reports on accidents, incidents and claims involving Agency vehicles and personnel. • Maintains, monitors, and analyzes logs and records relative to coach operator efficiency and performance such as attendance, on time performance, and disciplinary records. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 67 • Evaluates and documents work performance and counsels' subordinates, recommending and implementing disciplinary actions as required. • Monitors on street performance of contract operated services and vehicles. • Acts as an emergency responder for natural and man-made disasters that involve public mass transit services. • Assists the dispatch office, providing dispatch relief for meetings, breaks, emergency coverage or other duties. • Enforces and rates on a scale coach operator safety performance including rules and regulations compliance and implements corrective action. • Other duties may be assigned. SUPERVISORY RESPONSIBILITIES Directly supervises coach operators in the Operations Department. Carries out supervisory responsibilities in accordance with the organization's policies and applicable laws. Responsibilities include planning, assigning, and directing work; appraising performance; rewarding employees; addressing complaints and resolving problems. The Requirements To perform this job successfully, an individual must be able to perform each essential duty satisfactorily. The requirements listed below are representative of the knowledge, skill, and/or ability required. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. Education and/or Experience Possession of two years post high school education and four years of recent transit operational experience or a minimum of two years of relevant supervisory experience; or an equivalent combination of education and supervisory experience. Must be familiar with current business operating systems, software, and programs. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report Knowledge of Transit operations and applicable laws and regulations; Union contracts, rule books and progressive disciplinary procedures; basic accident investigation procedures; and two-way radio functions. Ability to prepare reports; handle pressure and emergency situations; establish and maintain effective working relationships with a variety of individuals, departments, outside agencies and the employees' labor union. Certificates, Licenses, Registrations Possession of or ability to obtain a valid California Class A or B driver's license, no air brake restrictions, with passenger endorsements and a valid Medical Examiner's Certificate.18 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 69 C. San Bernardino County 2016 Joint Powers Authority 70 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 71 72 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 73 74 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 75 76 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 77 78 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 79 80 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 81 82 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 83 84 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 85 86 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 87 88 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 89 90 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 91 92 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 93 94 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 95 96 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 772 1 www.omnitrans.org 2 www.omnitrans.org 3 https://bbklaw.com/resources/the-ins-and-outs-ofjooint-powers-authority-in-california 4 https://bbklaw.com/resources/the-ins-and-outs-ofjooint-powers-authority-in-california 5 www.law.justia.com 6 https://sbcentinel.com/2023/06/deputies-to-ride-vvta-buses 7 https://www.riversidetrannsit.com 8 www.omnitrans.org 9 www.mytd.org 10 https://www.faac.com/simulation-training/transportation/bus-driver-training/ 11 www.viragesimulation.com 12 https://www.faac.com/simulation-training/transportation/bus-driver-training/ 13 www.its.dot.gov/index.htm 14 www.its.dot.gov/index.htm 15 https://www.faac.com/simulation-training/transportation/bus-driver-training/ 16 www.wetip.com 17 Victor Valley Daily News 6/7/2023 & Mass Transit publication 6/1/2023 18 https://www.governmentjobs.com/careers/omnitrans/jobs/4130802/field-supervisor San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 97 TRONA: HOPE FOR THE FUTURE 98 Sa n Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report SUMMARY In response to a complaint, the 2023 San Bernardino County Civil Grand Jury (GJ, Grand Jury, Civil Grand Jury) decided to investigate the Trona Joint Unified School District (TJUSD, the school district, district). The district currently consists of one K-12 school. Although it is a small district, the teachers, staff, administrators and School Board are all very passionate about giving the students the best education possible. Unfortunately, there are some big hills to climb. In 2019, Trona was devastated by two earthquakes, registering 6.4 and 7.1 respectively, that severely damaged the city and the high school, which housed students from grades 6-12. The high school was damaged to the point that several buildings have been red tagged, (see Glossary) making them uninhabitable. Fortunately, the elementary school did not have to be closed and is now being used as an elementary and high school site. Although the high school students are still being taught at the elementary school campus, they are missing some important facilities. They no longer have science labs, or trade school classes, like wood shop or welding. They do not have their own cafeteria and the gym needs to be replaced. For these reasons, a study was conducted to determine the feasibility of repairing the existing structures. State architectural engineers and others determined that building a new high school would be more cost-effective than trying to repair the old one. The new high school will be right sized for the population and will have all the necessary facilities required for a successful high school program. The Grand Jury’s evidence showed that many in the school district agreed with this course of action. Plans have been approved and funds have been allocated. The bidding to select a contractor is currently underway. Unfortunately, building a new high school will not solve all the challenges faced by this school district. A good school is more than a building. It encompasses motivated parents, students, dedicated teachers, staff and a collaborative school board. The 2023 San Bernardino County Civil Grand Jury has found some deficiencies in these areas. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 99 BACKGROUND The 2023 San Bernardino County Civil Grand Jury received a complaint concerning the Trona Joint Unified School District and funding for the construction of a new high school. The Grand Jury decided to interview the complainant. After the interview, the Grand Jury began an investigation into the Trona Joint Unified School District and its School Board. The investigation uncovered the following areas of concern: • lack of transparency of the School Board • questions about the plans to build a new high school • absence of trust between the community of Trona and its School Board • lack of trust between the teachers of the Trona Joint Unified School District and its School Board • unavailability of virtual School Board meetings • lack of policy and procedure manuals for School District Administration and Staff • “Vote of No Confidence” in the School Board by the Trona Teachers’ Association • lack of adequate staff/administration for the schools • appearance of cronyism and nepotism • poor communication between School Board, community residents, teachers and staff • no written or formal complaint procedure for the teachers and the community to provide feedback and receive prompt answers to their complaints • low participation of parents and students in the community regarding school board meetings and school site council meetings • the funding to the School District from the mining royalties is not guaranteed • lack of properly credentialed teachers • staff assigned to special projects for which they have not been trained Therefore, the investigation was expanded to not just examine the financing of the building of the new high school, but to investigate these other issues. This report reflects the findings and recommendations regarding the Grand Jury investigation. METHODOLOGY 100 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report The 2023 San Bernardino County Civil Grand Jury received a complaint regarding the Trona Joint Unified School District. After subsequent interviews, the Grand Jury decided to investigate the Trona School District and its School Board. The Grand Jury researched numerous documents including budgets, meeting agendas, meeting minutes and public documents from California Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES, see Glossary). The Grand Jury read multiple reports on the building of the proposed new high school. The history of the area of Trona was researched. The Grand Jury interviewed multiple witnesses including teachers, administrators, administration staff, community members, School Board personnel and school staff. Finally, the Grand Jury made a visit to the area of Trona and observed the Trona Schools and the site for the potential new high school. View of Trona (Photo Taken 09/05/2023) other issues. This report reflects the findings and recommendations regarding the Grand Jury investigation. METHODOLOGY The 2023 San Bernardino County Civil Grand Jury received a complaint regarding the Trona Joint Unified School District. After subsequent interviews, the Grand Jury decided to investigate the Trona School District and its School Board. The Grand Jury researched numerous documents including budgets, meeting agendas, meeting minutes and public documents from California Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES, see Glossary). The Grand Jury read multiple reports on the building of the proposed new high school. The history of the area of Trona was researched. The Grand Jury interviewed multiple witnesses including teachers, administrators, administration staff, community members, School Board personnel and school staff. Finally, the Grand Jury made a visit to the area of Trona and observed the Trona Schools and the site for the potential new high school. View of Trona (Photo Taken 09/05/2023) San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 101 Searls Valley Mineral Inc. (Photo Taken 09/05/2023) Searls Valley Mineral Inc. (Photo Taken 09/05/2023) DISCUSSION DISCUSSION History of Trona History of Trona • Trona is an unincorporated area in the high desert of San Bernardino • C T o r u o n n ty a , i ( s “ S a p n e u c n ia in l c d o is rp tr o ic r t a ,“ t s e e d e a G re l a o s in sa t r h y e ) . h T ig h h e d to e w se n r t t a o k f e S s a i n ts B n e a r m na e r dino from the mineral trona, abundant in the Searles Valley lakebed. County, (“Special district,“see Glossary). The town takes its name Historically, (1914) Trona came into existence as workers from the from the mineral trona, abundant in the Searles Valley lakebed. nearby plant of the American Trona Company began to mine potash, Historically, (1914) Trona came into existence as workers from the borax and mineral salts from the dry lake at Searles Valley. A nearby plant of the American Trona Company began to mine potash, mineral-rich layer of salts was discovered about 100 feet beneath the borax and mineral salts from the dry lake at Searles Valley. A lakebed surface and operations have concentrated on recovering the mineral-rich layer of salts was discovered about 100 feet beneath the brine ever since. lakebed surface and operations have concentrated on recovering the • Trborninae weavse re ssitnacbeli.s hed as a self-contained company town wholly • op T e ro ra n t a e d w b a y s i e ts s t r a e b s l i i d sh e e n d t m as in a in g se c lf o - m co p n a ta n i y n e to d h c o o u m s p e a e n m y p to lo w y n e e w s h . o T l h ly e mining company also built a library, a grocery store, a school and operated by its resident mining company to house employees. The recreation facilities. The Trona Railway was built to provide the town mining company also built a library, a grocery store, a school and with a rail connection at Searles, and the railway still operates today. recreation facilities. The Trona Railway was built to provide the town • thwei tThr oan raa ipl lcaonntsn eacrteio nno awt oSweanreleds b, ya nSde athrlee sra Vilawlaleyy sMtililn oepraelrsa,t eInsc t.o day. • ba th s e e d T r in o n O a v p e l r a la n n ts d a P re a r n k o , w Ka o n w s n a e s , d a b n y d S is e a o r w le n s e V d a b l y le t y h M e i I n n e d r ia a n ls , Inc. company Nirma. It is the town’s largest employer. The company based in Overland Park, Kansas, and is owned by the Indian produces borax, boric acid, soda ash, salt cake and salt. As a raw company Nirma. It is the town’s largest employer. The company material, soda ash is vital to the production of certain types of detergents and cleaning agents, types of adhesives and sealants, chemical fertilizers and dyes. Potash is a key ingredient of gun powder. (Kerr – McGee Chem. Corp. 1989 brochure, see Glossary) • Mineral Royalties: As it operates on Bureau of Land Management 102 San Berna(rBdiLnMo C)o luenatsy eGdra nladn Judr,y tFhinea lS Reepaorrltes Valley Minerals, Inc. (mining company) pays royalties (money) each year to the federal and state governments. Much of the royalties cover expenses of the local school district and had been set at 6%. • effective January 1st, 2021, to compete with global production Congress and the BLM devised a 10-year plan to cut the 6% royalties to 2%. The intention was to: counter the Chinese and Turkish expansion o encourage investment and job expansion by U.S. Industry o increase U.S. mineral development o give greater economic certainty to make immediate and long- o term investments to strengthen the industry The population of Trona, though once booming, has been on a steady decline since the 1970 United States Census Bureau Report (US Census). Conceived in 1914, Trona appeared for the first time in the 1920 US Census. The population was reported to be 724. By the 1970 US Census, the reported population increased to 10,065, an increase from the 1960 US Census recording of 5,698. The beginning of the decline was set in motion by the strike between the unions and the then owners of the plant, Kerr-McGee, in March 1970. The strike lasted 150 days and by the time it concluded in July 1970, the town of Trona was severely crippled. Kerr-McGee had laid off 75% of their workforce, neighbors turned on each other, and several acts of violence had been committed, including 21 bombings of homes, businesses, and sewer lines. (Source: https://www.trona-ca.com/trona-strike-in-1970). By the 1980 US Census, Trona’s population decreased to 4,285. The population counts recorded for each US Census thereafter continued to decrease substantially-from “Boom to Bust” in two decades. produces borax, boric acid, soda ash, salt cake and salt. As a raw material, soda ash is vital to the production of certain types of detergents and cleaning agents, types of adhesives and sealants, chemical fertilizers and dyes. Potash is a key ingredient of gun powder. (Kerr – McGee Chem. Corp. 1989 brochure, see Glossary) • Mineral Royalties: As it operates on Bureau of Land Management (BLM) leased land, the Searles Valley Minerals, Inc. (mining company) pays royalties (money) each year to the federal and state governments. Much of the royalties cover expenses of the local school district and had been set at 6%. • effective January 1st, 2021, to compete with global production Congress and the BLM devised a 10-year plan to cut the 6% royalties to 2%. The intention was to: counter the Chinese and Turkish expansion o encourage investment and job expansion by U.S. Industry o increase U.S. mineral development o give greater economic certainty to make immediate and long- o term investments to strengthen the industry The population of Trona, though once booming, has been on a steady decline since the 1970 United States Census Bureau Report (US Census). Conceived in 1914, Trona appeared for the first time in the 1920 US Census. The population was reported to be 724. By the 1970 US Census, the reported population increased to 10,065, an increase from the 1960 US Census recording of 5,698. The beginning of the decline was set in motion by the strike between the unions and the then owners of the plant, Kerr-McGee, in March 1970. The strike lasted 150 days and by the time it concluded in July 1970, the town of Trona was severely crippled. Kerr-McGee had laid off 75% of their workforce, neighbors turned on each other, and several acts of violence had been committed, including 21 bombings of homes, businesses, and sewer lines. (Source: https://www.trona-ca.com/trona-strike-in-1970). By the 1980 US Census, Trona’s population decreased to 4,285. The population counts recorded for each US Census thereafter continued to decrease substantially-from “Boom to Bust” in two decades. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 103 Trona’s population now stands at approximately 1,600 residents. The nearest city, Ridgecrest, is 24 miles away and has a population of over 28,000 (according to Google). According to TJUSD’s 2020-21 School Accountability Report Card (SARC), the entire high school student population was 128, down from the peak years when approximately 350 graduated from high school yearly. Trona High School Office (Photo Taken 09/05/2023) 104 Sa n Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report Trona High School Gym (Photo Taken 09/05/2023) San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 105 Trona High School Gym (Photo Taken 09/05/2023) History of the Trona Joint Unified School District The Trona School District was established on October 23,1916. The high school was founded in 1940 in a company-provided building that was also used for recreational purposes. For the 1941-42 school year the 11th & 12th grades were added to the new building. The high school had eight teachers and a principal, who taught one class. Fourteen students graduated at the end of that school year. (www.trona-ca.com/trona-schools) The town was still using the high school for recreational and community purposes until the earthquake. The high school has a football team, the Trona Tornados. This is the only team in the country playing on a dirt field. Evidence shows that the community congregates around its sports teams and is proud of the field. Trona’s population ups and downs were reflected by the number of players on its football team. After the earthquakes in 2019, both Trona High School and the district offices were deemed unsafe for occupancy, but the football field continues to be used. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report Trona High School Football Field (Photo Taken 09/05/2023) The Earthquakes Because the earthquakes destroyed much of Trona and the Trona Joint Unified School District, Trona was declared to be a local emergency area. Between July 5th and August 20th of 2019, responding governmental agencies and the residents dealt with the situation. On July 8th medical and mental health services were provided at Trona High School, as well as portable showers and bottled water. On July 10th 2019, a town hall meeting was held at Trona High School, and San Bernardino County opened a local assistance center. A 4.2 magnitude earthquake was registered on that date. and the district offices were deemed unsafe for occupancy, but the football field continues to be used. Trona High School Football Field (Photo Taken 09/05/2023) The Earthquakes Because the earthquakes destroyed much of Trona and the Trona Joint Unified School District, Trona was declared to be a local emergency area. Between July 5th and August 20th of 2019, responding governmental agencies and the residents dealt with the situation. On July 8th medical and mental health services were provided at Trona High School, as well as portable showers and bottled water. On July 10th 2019, a town hall meeting was held at Trona High School, and San Bernardino County opened a local assistance center. A 4.2 magnitude earthquake was registered on that date. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 107 On July 11th water service was restored when it was piped in from Ridgecrest. The Trona High School was the center of emergency services including distribution of water, medical supplies, information, showers and the meeting place for the town of Trona immediately after the two earthquakes. The school suffered extensive structural damage (exterior and interior walls, cracking to concrete slabs and walkways, flooring, electrical – see Cal OES brief enclosure # 1) Also, due to hazardous soil conditions (liquefaction), the school needed to be relocated. Eventually the high school was also red tagged (see Glossary) which deemed it “uninhabitable”. (Cal OES brief enclosure # 1) The Question of Building a New High School After the 2019 earthquakes, the Grand Jury discovered that Cal OES prepared a Damage Survey Report. The original estimate to repair the high school was over $48 million. After surveys from the architect, engineers and geologists, it was determined that the existing structure was damaged beyond repair and the location was unacceptable for multiple reasons. The cost for new construction was approximately $71 million. The Trona School Board requested funding for the replacement and relocation of the high school. The funding was approved in March 2023. (Cal OES 3/14/23 Brief) 108 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report New Highschool Site (Photo Taken 09/05/2023) New Highschool Site (Photo Taken 09/05/2023) San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 109 Proposed Trona High School Artist Rendition (Photo Taken 09/05/2023) New Highschool Site (Photo Taken 09/05/2023) Proposed Trona High School Artist Rendition (Photo Taken 09/05/2023) F unding The Trona School District previously functioned on an annual budget of roughly $5.58 million; $4.11 million came from the royalties. A portion of the royalties has been used for competitive salaries for teachers and to assist in recruitment to the Trona area. The average salary for teachers in Trona is $77,782 as listed below in the school statistics. The current royalties are being held by the school district to provide for their 25% portion of the cost to build the new high school. For the 2020-21 School Year, Trona Joint Unified School District received $7.3 million in funds from governmental entities. TJUSD is now receiving $1.37 million in royalties from the nearby mine, and the district is struggling to educate its 260 students. A new high school was deemed cost effective because the cost to repair the old high school exceeded 50% of the cost estimate to build a new high school. The School District was able to obtain outside financing from governmental agencies totaling $78.6 million of the entire estimate amount of $80 million. The district’s share of the new high school financing was estimated to be $1.4 million. Evidence shows that community members expressed a desire for a new high school for multiple reasons. The community members felt the high schoolers needed their own school to allow for social activities. Additionally, they noted that the high school served the purpose as a gathering place for the community. SaTnr Boenrnaa rHdinigo hC oSuncthy oGoraln dS Jtuartyi sFitniacl sRe port Trona High School includes grades 7-12 and is located at 83600 Trona Road, in Trona CA. The total enrollment for 2021-22 was 116 students as recorded by the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (CAASPP) and for 2020-21 the student enrollment was 128 as reported in the 2020-21 School Accountability Report Card. The demographics are as follows: • 49.2% White • 33.6% Hispanic Funding The Trona School District previously functioned on an annual budget of roughly $5.58 million; $4.11 million came from the royalties. A portion of the royalties has been used for competitive salaries for teachers and to assist in recruitment to the Trona area. The average salary for teachers in Trona is $77,782 as listed below in the school statistics. The current royalties are being held by the school district to provide for their 25% portion of the cost to build the new high school. For the 2020-21 School Year, Trona Joint Unified School District received $7.3 million in funds from governmental entities. TJUSD is now receiving $1.37 million in royalties from the nearby mine, and the district is struggling to educate its 260 students. A new high school was deemed cost effective because the cost to repair the old high school exceeded 50% of the cost estimate to build a new high school. The School District was able to obtain outside financing from governmental agencies totaling $78.6 million of the entire estimate amount of $80 million. The district’s share of the new high school financing was estimated to be $1.4 million. Evidence shows that community members expressed a desire for a new high school for multiple reasons. The community members felt the high schoolers needed their own school to allow for social activities. Additionally, they noted that the high school served the purpose as a gathering place for the community. Trona High School Statistics Trona High School includes grades 7-12 and is located at 83600 Trona Road, in Trona CA. The total enrollment for 2021-22 was 116 students as recorded by the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (CAASPP) and for 2020-21 the student enrollment was 128 as reported in the 2020-21 School Accountability Report Card. The demographics are as follows: • 49.2% White • 33.6% Hispanic • 10.9% Black/African American • 0.08% Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander • 0.08% American Indian or Alaska Native • 4.7% Other Races Class Size and Teacher Credentials As of the 2022-23 school year, the average class size for Trona High School is 17 students in each subject with a graduation rate of 78.30%. The total average number of fully credential teachers is 4.1. The number of teachers without credentials and in misassignments (not teaching the subject for which they are credentialed by the state) is 4.5. The number of credential teachers assigned out of field is .01, and the number of unknown credentialed teachers (unknown meaning missing, incomplete, incorrect and/or unidentified information about the status of the credential) is 1.5 for a total of 10.3 teaching positions (The demographics, class size, graduation rate and credentialed teachers are reported in the 2020-21 SARC.) Teacher Salary As of the 2022-23 school year, one of the concerns the Grand Jury found is the difficulty the Trona Joint Unified School District has in hiring teachers who are willing to relocate to the Trona or Ridgecrest area. The salaries offered to teachers for Trona High School is very competitive. The average annual teacher’s salary at Trona High School is $77,782. The average annual teacher salary in California is $71,544. (Salaries from California Department of Education report for 2020-21 .) As of the time of this report, the Grand Jury found that the Trona teachers had received a 10% raise in salary. This may have attracted more San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 111 applicants for the 2023-24 school year. Evidence revealed that the High School has filled all its teaching vacancies. • 10.9% Black/African American • 0.08% Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander • 0.08% American Indian or Alaska Native • 4.7% Other Races Class Size and Teacher Credentials As of the 2022-23 school year, the average class size for Trona High School is 17 students in each subject with a graduation rate of 78.30%. The total average number of fully credential teachers is 4.1. The number of teachers without credentials and in misassignments (not teaching the subject for which they are credentialed by the state) is 4.5. The number of credential teachers assigned out of field is .01, and the number of unknown credentialed teachers (unknown meaning missing, incomplete, incorrect and/or unidentified information about the status of the credential) is 1.5 for a total of 10.3 teaching positions (The demographics, class size, graduation rate and credentialed teachers are reported in the 2020-21 SARC.) Teacher Salary As of the 2022-23 school year, one of the concerns the Grand Jury found is the difficulty the Trona Joint Unified School District has in hiring teachers who are willing to relocate to the Trona or Ridgecrest area. The salaries offered to teachers for Trona High School is very competitive. The average annual teacher’s salary at Trona High School is $77,782. The average annual teacher salary in California is $71,544. (Salaries from California Department of Education report for 2020-21 .) As of the time of this report, the Grand Jury found that the Trona teachers had received a 10% raise in salary. This may have attracted more applicants for the 2023-24 school year. Evidence revealed that the High School has filled all its teaching vacancies. State Testing Results for 2018-2022 For the school year of 2021-22, Trona High School results in English Language Arts (ELA) 37.51% of students tested met or exceeded ELA standards. For Mathematics (Math) 16.13% met or exceeded standards. For the school year of 2020-21 Trona High School results in ELA 30.61% of students tested met or exceeded the ELA standards. For Math 10.20% met or exceeded standards. For the school year of 2019-20 for Trona High School there are no State test results due to Covid19. For the school year of 2018-19, Trona High School results in ELA 43.08% of students tested met or exceeded ELA standards. For Math 21.31 % met or exceeded the standards. (All test results are reported from CAASPP for each school year.) TRONA HIGH SCHOOL TEST RESULTS 2018-2022 School Year 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 ELA 43.08%  30.61% 37.51% Math 21.31%  10.20% 16.13% The scores above are the percentage of students who met or exceeded the state standards. California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (CAASPP) https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/ca/  Indicates score was not reported due to COVID19. School Test Result Comparisons 112 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report At first glance, the Trona High School test results appear to be very low. Two high schools were randomly selected to compare State test results. The schools selected are both in San Bernardino County and the test score comparisons are from 2021-22. The Trona State scores are compared to Bloomington High School in Colton Unified School District and Eisenhower High School in Rialto Unified School District. Trona High School 37.51% of those tested exceeded or met the ELA standard; Math 16.13% exceeded or met the standard. State Testing Results for 2018-2022 For the school year of 2021-22, Trona High School results in English Language Arts (ELA) 37.51% of students tested met or exceeded ELA standards. For Mathematics (Math) 16.13% met or exceeded standards. For the school year of 2020-21 Trona High School results in ELA 30.61% of students tested met or exceeded the ELA standards. For Math 10.20% met or exceeded standards. For the school year of 2019-20 for Trona High School there are no State test results due to Covid19. For the school year of 2018-19, Trona High School results in ELA 43.08% of students tested met or exceeded ELA standards. For Math 21.31 % met or exceeded the standards. (All test results are reported from CAASPP for each school year.) TRONA HIGH SCHOOL TEST RESULTS 2018-2022 School Year 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 ELA 43.08%  30.61% 37.51% Math 21.31%  10.20% 16.13% The scores above are the percentage of students who met or exceeded the state standards. California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (CAASPP) https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/ca/  Indicates score was not reported due to COVID19. School Test Result Comparisons At first glance, the Trona High School test results appear to be very low. Two high schools were randomly selected to compare State test results. The schools selected are both in San Bernardino County and the test score comparisons are from 2021-22. The Trona State scores are compared to Bloomington High School in Colton Unified School District and Eisenhower High School in Rialto Unified School District. Trona High School 37.51% of those tested exceeded or met the ELA standard; Math 16.13% exceeded or m et the standard. Bloomington High School 37.62% of those tested exceeded or met the ELA standard; Math 7.36% exceeded or met the standard. Eisenhower High School 33.14% of those tested exceeded or met the ELA standard, Math 14.34% exceeded or met the standard. COMPARISON OF HIGH SCHOOL TEST RESULTS 2021-2022 High School Trona HS Bloomington Eisenhower HS HS ELA 31.75% 37.62% 33.14% Math 16.13% 7.36% 14.34% The scores above are the percentage of students who met or exceeded the state standard English Language Arts (ELA) and Mathematics (Math). California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (CAASPP) https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/ca/ After comparing two other high schools in the San Bernardino County, regardless of the demographics and number of students attending, the scores do not reveal a significant difference. It does not appear that the displacement of high school students to the elementary school affected the overall state scores. Problems With the Trona Teachers’ Association After the earthquakes, the School Board began retaining royalty funds in anticipation of building the new high school. In the 2022-23 school year, the teachers’ association and School Board engaged in contract negotiations. The association felt that some of the $9 million accumulated San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 113 in reserves should be used for teacher raises; the school board felt they should continue to retain the money in reserve in case of possible cost increases for the construction of the new high school. Eventually, the contract negotiations reached an impasse (see Glossary); the School District started the 2023-24 school year with only one high school teacher held over from the prior year. The other teachers and many of the staff either resigned or retired. Bloomington High School 37.62% of those tested exceeded or met the ELA standard; Math 7.36% exceeded or met the standard. Eisenhower High School 33.14% of those tested exceeded or met the ELA standard, Math 14.34% exceeded or met the standard. COMPARISON OF HIGH SCHOOL TEST RESULTS 2021-2022 High School Trona HS Bloomington Eisenhower HS HS ELA 31.75% 37.62% 33.14% Math 16.13% 7.36% 14.34% The scores above are the percentage of students who met or exceeded the state standard English Language Arts (ELA) and Mathematics (Math). California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (CAASPP) https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/ca/ After comparing two other high schools in the San Bernardino County, regardless of the demographics and number of students attending, the scores do not reveal a significant difference. It does not appear that the displacement of high school students to the elementary school affected the overall state scores. Problems With the Trona Teachers’ Association After the earthquakes, the School Board began retaining royalty funds in anticipation of building the new high school. In the 2022-23 school year, the teachers’ association and School Board engaged in contract negotiations. The association felt that some of the $9 million accumulated in reserves should be used for teacher raises; the school board felt they should continue to retain the money in reserve in case of possible cost increases for the construction of the new high school. Eventually, the contract negotiations reached an impasse (see Glossary); the School District started the 2023-24 school year with only one high school teacher held over from the prior year. The other teachers and many of the staff either resigned or retired. The GJ found that multiple sources did not believe that the TJUSD needed to retain $9 million or to build a school that was the size of the proposed new building. The population of Trona, which has been declining for years, does not warrant the large size of a new high school. Eventually the Trona Teachers’ Association and the School Board reached an impasse on negotiations. Consequently, multiple teachers either resigned or retired at the end of the 2022-23 school year. The TJUSD Teachers’ Association asked for a 15% Cost-of-Living Adjustment (COLA) raise for the 2022-23 school year, and the School District offered 2%. The Teachers’ Association disagreed with this offer. The bickering between the Teachers’ Association and the school district seems to come out of frustration and misunderstanding. The Grand Jury learned when going into contract negotiations, TJUSD was trying to show teachers they did not have the funds to provide raises. The Teachers’ Association saw there was money held in reserve, which, they believed, could go toward raises. Therefore, there was a misunderstanding because this reserve money was held to help Trona pay its portion of building a new high school. Detention At the high school level, there was little to no accountability for students. In the 2022-23 school year, there was no detention program at the high school level. While recognizing that detention will not solve all student behavior issues, the ability to discipline students for infractions could be helpful for deterring students from misbehaving. The Grand Jury notes, 114 Sa“nd Beetrennartdioinno, Caonudnt yo tGhraenrd p Juurnyi Ftiivneal Rmepeoarstures, like suspensions and expulsions, can contribute to other issues, such as recidivism among students, despite harsher or longer punishments. These measures have the potential to increase apathy and defiance.” (edutopia.org) The Grand Jury found that there is still no detention as of the date of this report. The GJ found that multiple sources did not believe that the TJUSD needed to retain $9 million or to build a school that was the size of the proposed new building. The population of Trona, which has been declining for years, does not warrant the large size of a new high school. Eventually the Trona Teachers’ Association and the School Board reached an impasse on negotiations. Consequently, multiple teachers either resigned or retired at the end of the 2022-23 school year. The TJUSD Teachers’ Association asked for a 15% Cost-of-Living Adjustment (COLA) raise for the 2022-23 school year, and the School District offered 2%. The Teachers’ Association disagreed with this offer. The bickering between the Teachers’ Association and the school district seems to come out of frustration and misunderstanding. The Grand Jury learned when going into contract negotiations, TJUSD was trying to show teachers they did not have the funds to provide raises. The Teachers’ Association saw there was money held in reserve, which, they believed, could go toward raises. Therefore, there was a misunderstanding because this reserve money was held to help Trona pay its portion of building a new high school. Detention At the high school level, there was little to no accountability for students. In the 2022-23 school year, there was no detention program at the high school level. While recognizing that detention will not solve all student behavior issues, the ability to discipline students for infractions could be helpful for deterring students from misbehaving. The Grand Jury notes, “detention, and other punitive measures, like suspensions and expulsions, can contribute to other issues, such as recidivism among students, despite harsher or longer punishments. These measures have the potential to increase apathy and defiance.” (edutopia.org) The Grand Jury found that there is still no detention as of the date of this report. S chool Site Council TJUSD schools hold School Site Coun cil (SSC) meetings, one for the elementary level and one for the high school level, that are poorly attended. Attendance is voluntary for parents. Perhaps one or two parents may attend, and possibly, two to three teachers. The Grand Jury would like to see the school district strengthen its SSC meetings. “California Education Code 52852 stipulates that a School Site Council is to be established at every school that participates in the Title I program (see Glossary). This team is to be comprised of the principal, teachers, other staff members, and selected parents, and community members. In high schools, students may participate as well.(https: //ww.cde.ca.gov/Re/tr/cl) “The School Site Council looks at student data and information, identifies student needs and areas for improvement and participates in the writing of the Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA). The SPSA is the school’s blueprint for what will be carried out to improve school and student achievement. The SSC also monitors the plan to see that these actions have occurred, that the funding has been spent and, lastly, they evaluate these activities at the end of the school year. Participation by teachers, staff members, administrators and community members are very important, since these selected persons participate in significant decision making that can bring positive benefits to students.” (scuds.edu) All SSC meetings are public meetings. The Grand Jury researched and learned everyone working together can create a more positive teaching and learning atmosphere at schools. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 115 Distrust Between the Administration, School Board and Teachers Evidence showed that, in the past, teachers felt when they went to administration with problems, the administration failed to take any action to help. The Grand Jury also found that the elimination of certain extracurricular programs seemed to happen to teachers who had complained to administration. Additionally, administration eliminated its detention policy. The detention program was discontinued by the 2022-23 School Site Council TJUSD schools hold School Site Council (SSC) meetings, one for the elementary level and one for the high school level, that are poorly attended. Attendance is voluntary for parents. Perhaps one or two parents may attend, and possibly, two to three teachers. The Grand Jury would like to see the school district strengthen its SSC meetings. “California Education Code 52852 stipulates that a School Site Council is to be established at every school that participates in the Title I program (see Glossary). This team is to be comprised of the principal, teachers, other staff members, and selected parents, and community members. In high schools, students may participate as well.(https: //ww.cde.ca.gov/Re/tr/cl) “The School Site Council looks at student data and information, identifies student needs and areas for improvement and participates in the writing of the Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA). The SPSA is the school’s blueprint for what will be carried out to improve school and student achievement. The SSC also monitors the plan to see that these actions have occurred, that the funding has been spent and, lastly, they evaluate these activities at the end of the school year. Participation by teachers, staff members, administrators and community members are very important, since these selected persons participate in significant decision making that can bring positive benefits to students.” (scuds.edu) All SSC meetings are public meetings. The Grand Jury researched and learned everyone working together can create a more positive teaching and learning atmosphere at schools. Distrust Between the Administration, School Board and Teachers Evidence showed that, in the past, teachers felt when they went to administration with problems, the administration failed to take any action to help. The Grand Jury also found that the elimination of certain extracurricular programs seemed to happen to teachers who had complained to administration. Addition ally, administration eliminated its detention policy. The detention program was discontinued by the 2022-23 school year due to lack of space for detention to be held, and the lack of school year due to lack of space for detention to be held, and the lack of teacher coverage to oversee detention. teacher coverage to oversee detention . T he Grand Jury also found that school administration seldom observed The Grand Jury also found that school administration seldom observed individual classrooms to verify how the teachers were teaching and if any individual classrooms to verify how the teachers were teaching and if any recommendations for improvement, or positive comments, could be offered recommendations for improvement, or positive comments, could be offered to teachers. to teachers. In 2018 there was an altercation between a student and a staff member; In 2018 there was an altercation between a student and a staff member; there were differences in the way the school board and the school staff there were differences in the way the school board and the school staff advocated handling the situation. As a result, a member of school advocated handling the situation. As a result, a member of school administration was demoted. administration was demoted. Lack of Communication Lack of Communication Findings show that the school board meetings were held in two parts: Findings show that the school board meetings were held in two parts: closed session and open session. The school board held the closed session closed session and open session. The school board held the closed session of meetings at 3:30 p.m. and the open session at 6:00 p.m. and were not of meetings at 3:30 p.m. and the open session at 6:00 p.m. and were not convenient for the teaching staff as most teachers lived in Ridgecrest, 24 convenient for the teaching staff as most teachers lived in Ridgecrest, 24 miles away. Many teachers were off work at about two or three in the miles away. Many teachers were off work at about two or three in the afternoon and a long drive at 6:00 p.m. meant a drive back to Trona within afternoon and a long drive at 6:00 p.m. meant a drive back to Trona within an hour or two of leaving their workday. While the board meetings were an hour or two of leaving their workday. While the board meetings were open to all community members, not all were able to attend. open to all community members, not all were able to attend. Emergency (special) meetings did not require as much notice to the Emergency (special) meetings did not require as much notice to the community, with the potential of lower attendance due to less notice. community, with the potential of lower attendance due to less notice. Evidence showed there were many emergency meetings held in the 2022- Evidence showed there were many emergency meetings held in the 2022- 23 school year. Also, for school site council meetings, some parents were 23 school year. Also, for school site council meetings, some parents were specifically invited, but parental participation was very low. During the specifically invited, but parental participation was very low. During the Covid pandemic, school board meetings were virtual, but that was Covid pandemic, school board meetings were virtual, but that was discontinued after Covid. The virtual meetings have not resumed. discontinued after Covid. The virtual meetings have not resumed. Lack of Adequate and Qualified Administrative Staff 116 SaLna Bcekrn aordf iAnod Ceoquuntay tGer aannd dJu Qry uFianalil fRieepdo rAt dministrative Staff Trona is a small desert community. The population of the town is Trona is a small desert community. The population of the town is approximately 1,600 and the nearest town of 28,000 is half an hour away. approximately 1,600 and the nearest town of 28,000 is half an hour away. school year due to lack of space for detention to be held, and the lack of teacher coverage to oversee detention. The Grand Jury also found that school administration seldom observed individual classrooms to verify how the teachers were teaching and if any recommendations for improvement, or positive comments, could be offered to teachers. In 2018 there was an altercation between a student and a staff member; there were differences in the way the school board and the school staff advocated handling the situation. As a result, a member of school administration was demoted. Lack of Communication Findings show that the school board meetings were held in two parts: closed session and open session. The school board held the closed session of meetings at 3:30 p.m. and the open session at 6:00 p.m. and were not convenient for the teaching staff as most teachers lived in Ridgecrest, 24 miles away. Many teachers were off work at about two or three in the afternoon and a long drive at 6:00 p.m. meant a drive back to Trona within an hour or two of leaving their workday. While the board meetings were open to all community members, not all were able to attend. Emergency (special) meetings did not require as much notice to the community, with the potential of lower attendance due to less notice. Evidence showed there were many emergency meetings held in the 2022- 23 school year. Also, for school site council meetings, some parents were specifically invited, but parental participation was very low. During the Covid pandemic, school board meetings were virtual, but that was discontinued after Covid. The virtual meetings have not resumed. Lack of Adequate and Qualified Administrative Staff Trona is a small desert community. Th e population of the town is approximately 1,600 and the nearest town of 28,000 is half an hour away. Thus, Trona is limited in its hiring options. Evidence has shown that job applicants for non-educator positions are often lacking all the necessary qualifications and skillsets to perform the jobs for which they are hired. The GJ found that the school district is one of the larger employers in the area but there has been some degree of turnover in some para-professional positions. In some cases, the person is hired to fill a position in which the previous occupant left before their replacement has been hired. There is no one with direct knowledge of what a job entails within the school district. The Grand Jury found that for multiple positions there are no manuals (such as policy, procedural or training) or materials to assist in training people filling these positions. Thus, the new hire must figure out how to do the job without what would be considered the necessary prerequisites, any on-the-job training from the person they are replacing or any training materials. The GJ determined that some of these employees, who have been in this position, have had additional duties assigned to them. The Grand Jury found that this been a cause of stress in the working environment. The Grand Jury discovered that there are funds to train non-educator staff. However, there is no “in-house” training specific to the school district’s procedures so the training would have to be obtained from outside vendors. Teacher Credentialing Problems The GJ found that the School District has used non-credentialed instructors to teach some classes it provides, which is allowed by law. However, that requires a waiver and is certainly not the best practice. The School District does not offer onsite training or classes to assist those instructors in obtaining their credentials. The Grand Jury found that there is some confusion concerning the usage of school district funds for outside training for educators. Evidence has shown there were funds available for training. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 117 Thus, Trona is limited in its hiring options. Evidence has shown that job applicants for non-educator positions are often lacking all the necessary qualifications and skillsets to perform the jobs for which they are hired. The GJ found that the school district is one of the larger employers in the area but there has been some degree of turnover in some para-professional positions. In some cases, the person is hired to fill a position in which the previous occupant left before their replacement has been hired. There is no one with direct knowledge of what a job entails within the school district. The Grand Jury found that for multiple positions there are no manuals (such as policy, procedural or training) or materials to assist in training people filling these positions. Thus, the new hire must figure out how to do the job without what would be considered the necessary prerequisites, any on-the-job training from the person they are replacing or any training materials. The GJ determined that some of these employees, who have been in this position, have had additional duties assigned to them. The Grand Jury found that this been a cause of stress in the working environment. The Grand Jury discovered that there are funds to train non-educator staff. However, there is no “in-house” training specific to the school district’s procedures so the training would have to be obtained from outside vendors. Teacher Credentialing Problems The GJ found that the School District has used non-credentialed instructors to teach some classes it provides, which is allowed by law. However, that requires a waiver and is certainly not the best practice. The School District does not offer onsite training or classes to assist those instructors in obtaining their credentials. The Grand Jury found that there is some confusion concerning the usage of sch ool district funds for outside training for educators. Evidence has shown there were funds available for training. However, the School District was not reimbursing some teachers for the cost of training and of classroom materials purchased. Lack of input from the community Evidence indicates parent attendance and participation at School Board meetings is very poor and hinders the opportunity to express concerns. Trona School Board meets on the second Thursday of each month and are generally open sessions. The meeting agendas, calendar, minutes and School Board policies are available on their website. The meetings are recorded and available to the public for viewing, by request. Virtual meetings were held during the Covid pandemic however, this method of communication was discontinued when pandemic restrictions were repealed, and in-person meetings resumed. There is no system for anonymous complaints in such a small, close-knit community. Financial problems Evidence supports that Trona School District’s financial stability is heavily dependent on revenues received from Searle’s Mining company. Evidence also shows that these revenues have been decreasing over the years, requiring legislative intervention to mitigate total loss of these funds. Furthermore, the evidence shows there are no other resources available to replace these funds in the event of total loss. Low test scores One of the concerns reviewed by the GJ was the low state test scores for the students at Trona High School. The potential reasons researched were the earthquakes, which caused the displacement of high school classes to 118 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report the elementary school, uncredentialed teachers and lack of detention as discipline. However, evidence revealed the test scores of high school students at Trona are not significantly lower or higher than the other high schools However, the School District was not reimbursing some teachers for the cost of training and of classroom materials purchased. Lack of input from the community Evidence indicates parent attendance and participation at School Board meetings is very poor and hinders the opportunity to express concerns. Trona School Board meets on the second Thursday of each month and are generally open sessions. The meeting agendas, calendar, minutes and School Board policies are available on their website. The meetings are recorded and available to the public for viewing, by request. Virtual meetings were held during the Covid pandemic however, this method of communication was discontinued when pandemic restrictions were repealed, and in-person meetings resumed. There is no system for anonymous complaints in such a small, close-knit community. Financial problems Evidence supports that Trona School District’s financial stability is heavily dependent on revenues received from Searle’s Mining company. Evidence also shows that these revenues have been decreasing over the years, requiring legislative intervention to mitigate total loss of these funds. Furthermore, the evidence shows there are no other resources available to replace these funds in the event of total loss. Low test scores One of the concerns reviewed by the GJ was the low state test scores for the students at Trona High School. The potential reasons researched were the earthquakes, which caused the displacement of high school classes to the elementary school, uncredentialed teachers and lack of detention as discipline. However, evidence revealed the test s cores of high school students at Trona are not significantly lower or higher than the other high schools compared earlier. Trona High School test scores were randomly compared to Bloomington and Eisenhower High Schools. The comparisons were done for the 2021-22 school year and reported to the California Department of Education. (see School Statistics section above) The Appearance of Nepotism The Grand Jury found that in the small unincorporated town of Trona many of the school administration, staff and school board members have family relations. Evidence revealed many in the community and the School District do not believe a non-nepotism policy is necessary in the district. When necessary, some staff members automatically recuse themselves when dealing with a family relative. There could be, however, the appearance of favoritism to people who live outside of Trona (and especially to those considering applying for a position within the TJUSD). Several family members are on the School Board, in administration, in charge of discipline and are policy makers and manage funds within the School District. It could be perceived that those applicants may enjoy an unfair advantage and be hired just because they are related to others in the School District or on the School Board, even though possibly less qualified. The Grand Jury found it would benefit the School District to create and implement a procedure to address the hiring and selection practices to avoid the appearance of favoritism. The procedure would clearly state the steps required to ensure the appearance of transparent hiring practices and criteria. Such a non-nepotism process would promote public trust within the community and benefit the School District, its employees, its students and encourage those outside of Trona to potentially apply for positions there. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 119 Hope for the Future Evidence revealed the Trona School District has many problems in need of solutions. What can the School Board and the employees do to help the compared earlier. Trona High School test scores were randomly compared to Bloomington and Eisenhower High Schools. The comparisons were done for the 2021-22 school year and reported to the California Department of Education. (see School Statistics section above) The Appearance of Nepotism The Grand Jury found that in the small unincorporated town of Trona many of the school administration, staff and school board members have family relations. Evidence revealed many in the community and the School District do not believe a non-nepotism policy is necessary in the district. When necessary, some staff members automatically recuse themselves when dealing with a family relative. There could be, however, the appearance of favoritism to people who live outside of Trona (and especially to those considering applying for a position within the TJUSD). Several family members are on the School Board, in administration, in charge of discipline and are policy makers and manage funds within the School District. It could be perceived that those applicants may enjoy an unfair advantage and be hired just because they are related to others in the School District or on the School Board, even though possibly less qualified. The Grand Jury found it would benefit the School District to create and implement a procedure to address the hiring and selection practices to avoid the appearance of favoritism. The procedure would clearly state the steps required to ensure the appearance of transparent hiring practices and criteria. Such a non-nepotism process would promote public trust within the community and benefit the School District, its employees, its students and encourage those outside of Trona to potentially apply for positions there. Hope for the Future Evidence revealed the Trona School D istrict has many problems in need of solutions. What can the School Board and the employees do to help the district they care about and in which they are deeply invested? The Grand Jury investigation points to some suggestions: • open communication between the teachers and the Administration needs improvement • open communication between the Administration, School Board and parents would benefit everyone in the School District • a plan to secure additional funding, in the event, the royalties from the Mineral Plant are reduced or eliminated • a Policy and Procedures Manual would help the Administrative staff do their jobs more effectively • School Board meetings, including special sessions, need to be accessible to all members of the community in virtual form, in order to increase transparency and accessibility • Superintendent and School Board members need to observe in the classroom on a regular basis • proper credentialing, including teachers instructing in their credentialed fields of expertise, to ensure better learning • institute a written formal complaint process whereby teachers, students, parents and community members can voice concerns and ask questions (online also) and receive prompt answers from the Superintendent and the School Board • a system needs to be developed to solicit input from the community, teachers, parents and students regarding all proposed major projects If the School Board and the Administration of TJUSD want to gain trust in the eyes of the teachers and the community, consideration needs to be given to the Recommendations below. COMMENDATIONS The Grand Jury commends the community of Trona for answering requests for interviews, documents and observations promptly. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report district they care about and in which they are deeply invested? The Grand Jury investigation points to some suggestions: • open communication between the teachers and the Administration needs improvement • open communication between the Administration, School Board and parents would benefit everyone in the School District • a plan to secure additional funding, in the event, the royalties from the Mineral Plant are reduced or eliminated • a Policy and Procedures Manual would help the Administrative staff do their jobs more effectively • School Board meetings, including special sessions, need to be accessible to all members of the community in virtual form, in order to increase transparency and accessibility • Superintendent and School Board members need to observe in the classroom on a regular basis • proper credentialing, including teachers instructing in their credentialed fields of expertise, to ensure better learning • institute a written formal complaint process whereby teachers, students, parents and community members can voice concerns and ask questions (online also) and receive prompt answers from the Superintendent and the School Board • a system needs to be developed to solicit input from the community, teachers, parents and students regarding all proposed major projects If the School Board and the Administration of TJUSD want to gain trust in the eyes of the teachers and the community, consideration needs to be given to the Recommendations below. COMMENDATIONS The Grand Jury commends the community of Trona for answering requests for interviews, documents and observations promptly. The School Board, Administration, teachers and residents are also commended for their obvious passion towards Trona, the school district and its students. The passion shines t hrough, and willingness to change may help the entire area and School District through these trying times. CONCLUSION In conclusion, the 2023 San Bernardino County Civil Grand Jury found issues of serious concern while investigating the Trona Joint Unified School District and its School Board. Evidence shows there is much distrust in the entire School District, among the Superintendent’s office, the School Board, school employees and the community it is meant to serve. It should be noted: as of September 5, 2023, evidence revealed the communication between the community/school district staff and the Administration/School Board is beginning to improve. There were many new staff hired. These newly hired staff seem happy and motivated to communicate openly with the Administration. Trust is beginning to be restored. The Administration is again visiting classrooms. To continue open communication and restore trust, the Grand Jury presents the following findings and recommendations: San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 121 IMPLEMENTATION FINDINGS RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSES DATE

The R-10: In the future, the April 30, 2024 Required: District had little School Board to ensure Trona Joint Unified feedback from that every high-level, School Board the community relevant and important regarding the decision impacting Trona Invited: building of the and its School District be San Bernardino new high openly and transparently County Board of school. discussed and input Education solicited by all impacted F10a: The parties before a major current system change is made. in place does not solicit the public for input from the community as it pertains to relevant issues of importance within the School District. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 127 IMPLEMENTATION FINDINGS RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSES DATE

School R-12: Create and April 30, 2024 Required: Site Council implement a system to let Trona Joint Unified meetings are parents, students, teachers School Board poorly planned, and administrators know poorly attended the date of every School Invited: and are not Site Council meeting with San Bernardino scheduled meetings regularly County Board of regularly. scheduled for the same Education time every month. Sa n Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report GLOSSARY The following Glossary was created by the Civil Grand Jury to provide context and clarification for some terms used in this report. 1. California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (CAASPP): The California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (CAASPP) System was established on January 1, 2014. The CAASPP System replaced the Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) Program, which became inoperative on July 1, 2013. 2. Impasse: a situation in which no progress is possible. 3. Liquefaction: conversion of soil into a fluidlike mass during an earthquake or other seismic event. 4. Searles Valley Minerals, Inc.: Searles Valley Minerals Inc. processes brine solutions. The Company offers products such as borax, boric acid, soda ash, and sodium sulfate. Searles Valley Minerals, Inc. operates in Trona, CA. 5. Nepotism: when an employer uses its influence or power to hire, transfer, or promote an applicant or employee because of a personal relationship, without regard to the qualifications/skills of the applicant. 6. Cal Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES): this is an agency of the state government that supervises civil defense, disaster planning and emergency medical services. 7. Royalties: Royalties are a legally binding payment made to an individual or company for the ongoing use of their assets, including copyrighted works, franchises, and natural resources. 8. School Site Council (SSC): The School Site Council is intended to be a decision-making body that represents all stakeholders of the school community. The school principal, teachers, other school personnel, parents, and students (secondary level) make up this group. Their primary responsibility is to identify common goals and assist the leadership team in establishing a plan to achieve the goals. The key to a successful SSC depends upon a good working relationship among all members of the San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 129 Council. Each member of the Council shares their unique perspective and knowledge of the school’s needs, as they affect all students, during SSC meetings. 9. Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA): a document that represents a school’s cycle of continuous improvement of student achievement. 10. Special District: Public agencies/limited purpose local government created to provide one or more specific services to a community, such as water service, sewer service, parks, fire protection and others. REFERENCES August 21, Cal OES provided the following link: https://www.oesnews.com/where-to-go-for-california-earthquake- assistance/. August 26, The SBA announced it would close the Trona Disaster Loan Outreach Center on August 29. For more information contact: https://www.sba.gov/offices/disaster/dfocw/resources/1647366. School Board Accountability Report Card (SARC) www.sia.us.com and DataQuest (CA Dept of Education) California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (CAASPP) https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/ca/ California Department of Education-Cohort Graduation Statistics https://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/ad/acgrinfo.asp Definition of Soda Ash/Potash https://trona_ca.com_ State Funding EdData - District Profile - Trona Joint Unified (ed-data.org) Cal OES GOVERNOR’S OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES: https://www.CalOES.ca.gov. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report This Page Left Intentionally Blank San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 131 RESTORE THE PUBLIC TRUST 132 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report The Yucaipa City Council has lost the trust of many citizens. The purpose of this report is to shine a light on the actions of members of the Yucaipa City Council that have agitated and divided this once sleepy town and to make findings and recommendations to the Yucaipa City Council to help regain the trust of the citizens of Yucaipa. SUMMARY Yucaipa is a small but vibrant community nestled in a valley of the San Bernardino mountains, about 70 miles east of Los Angeles. It incorporated in 1989 and formed a City Manager – City Council type of government. For more than 30 years it flourished and grew in harmony. Then, following the 2022 elections, a new City Council took office, and through its non- transparent method of replacing the long-time city manager came resident disdain, resentment, and anger, to replace the pride, civility, and harmony that the city relished. Can the Yucaipa City Council restore that trust? The City itself shows the way in its Yucaipa Code of Conduct: “IT ALL COMES DOWN TO RESPECT • Respect for one another as individuals • Respect for the validity of different opinions • Respect for the democratic process • Respect for the community that we serve” *(From the Yucaipa Code of Conduct for City Council, - see references, from the Yucaipa City Website, https://yucaipa.org) The 2023 San Bernardino County Civil Grand Jury (GJ, CGJ, Grand Jury, Civil Grand Jury) has some suggestions as well: • Form a watchdog committee to provide oversight of the City Council; to report to the public on the operations of city government; to ensure compliance with general ethics principles and with campaign finance, contracting, lobbying, conflicts of interest, and other laws and regulations; and with government transparency guidelines. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 133 • Implement a formal written and on-line complaint process whereby citizens may ask questions or voice concerns about the actions of the City Council. • Develop an effective training policy in all city government transparency policies, as well as in the state statutes and regulations related to city government, such as the Brown Act, the Fair Political Practices Commission regulations about conflicts of interest, and the Yucaipa Code of Conduct. • Update the Yucaipa Code of Conduct for City Council (current copy is 2019). • Implement transparent procedures that give time for council members and the community to provide input before the council solicits applications and appoints high-level city employees. • Implement a Procedural Audit to take place every other year The City Council’s efforts to rezone the North Bench district created an uproar among Yucaipa citizens and spawned raucous City Council meetings. A Citizen’s Group, [named] the Coalition to Save Yucaipa, filed a recall notice seeking to remove three City Council members, one of them the mayor. The City Clerks’ office immediately filed a lawsuit to halt the recall, naming as defendants each citizen who signed the petition. Recall law requires that each petitioner must include his/her address. Subsequently, anonymous letters were sent to each signer, informing them that their information would be published in the local newspaper. The lawsuit filed by the Office of the City Clerk, and the anonymous letters, intimidated many Yucaipa residents, especially those who had their names on the petition, and therefore on the lawsuit. Many Yucaipa citizens are incensed. They do not believe the City Council demonstrated adequate concern for their objections to the possible rezoning of the North Bench and to the approval of the Serrano Estates Project; they did believe that the Council acted with a lack of transparency when it replaced the former city manager and city attorney, with pre-selected people, without much notice to or input from the community. The anonymous letters sent only to the recall petition signers did not help the public perception of the City Council. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report The following recommendations may guide the way towards a new start for the City of Yucaipa and its City Council. These measures will go a long way towards rebuilding community support, building a more effective City Council and restoring the lost public trust. BACKGROUND Yucaipa is nestled beneath the San Bernardino Peak of the San Gorgonio Mountains. It is known as Yucaipa’t in the language of the Serrano Native American tribe that formerly occupied this land. It has a population of 54,542 according to the 2020 census. In the 2010 census, Yucaipa’s population was determined to be 51,367. Yucaipa has a council-manager form of government. Under this arrangement the residents elect the City Council and the City Council then appoints the City Manager. In this form of government, the City Manager is responsible for carrying out the administrative policies of the City Council and serves at the pleasure of the Council. The City Council can terminate the City Manager’s employment by a majority vote. (see Glossary). Timeline • On August 17, 2022, the Planning Commission voted 4 to 2 against approval of the Serrano Estates Project. (see Glossary) Immediately thereafter, the applicant appealed the decision to the City Council. • On September 12, 2022, the former City Council voted to deny the applicant’s appeal. • On January 9, 2023, the new City Council was installed. • On January 9, 2023, two months after the election of the three new (City Council) members, the City Council called a special session. Although the agenda had brought attention to the fact that this meeting would be used to discuss personnel issues, the public knew no San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 135 particulars. While these actions were permissible, they lacked transparency. During this meeting, (although the present and soon-to- be former city manager's contract was renewed in October 2022, by a 5 to 0 vote) the City Manager resigned. The council immediately appointed a new City Manager to replace him. The newly elected City Council then promptly removed the current City Attorney and installed a new one. When the full meeting continued, constituents were informed of the new appointees. Public outcry ensued. Residents complained they had no input into the changes. The lack of transparency was evident. The selected appointees waited outside in the parking lot, knowing that they would be installed. • On March 15, 2023, the Serrano Estates Project applicant made changes to the plan in accordance with suggestions made by the new City Council, and the council approved it despite the objections of many citizens. • The Grand Jury found that some residents viewed the appointment of the City Council’s choice for City Manager and City Attorney as a move to assure that the Council could approve the Serrano Estates Project. • In March 2023, opposition in the community continued to grow after the Yucaipa City Council approved the project. Opponents expressed their concerns at the City Council meetings and in the local paper. According to meeting minutes and media reports, opposition to the project grew with each City Council meeting. At one of the heated City Council meetings where the council discussed the Serrano Estates Project, a Council Member responded to citizens voicing their concerns by saying, “Blah, blah, blah.” In fairness, the Civil Grand Jury has evidence that many citizens were rude in their addresses to the council. Some members of the public were disruptive; some violated the rules of the meeting; others were name-calling during their speaking time. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report Regarding the public complaints that the Yucaipa City Council has navigated this project opaquely and with little consideration for some of the objections of the public, the San Bernardino County Civil Grand Jury found: • City Council members have prior and current personal and business relationships with entitlement and/or development companies that want to redevelop the North Bench area. • The GJ discovered there was a prior business relationship with a member of the Planning Commission and the City Council. The businesses were real estate sales and development. The procedure complied with the law regarding consideration or approval of the Serrano Estates Project. However, the rule of law is only half of the City Council’s mandate for governing. The voice of the people is the other and perhaps paramount. The 2023 San Bernardino County Civil Grand Jury was prompted to investigate the Yucaipa City Council from complaints filed by residents of Yucaipa. The original complaint was that there was a violation of the Brown Act (see Glossary). The Grand Jury found no violation. However, there appears to be a violation of the public’s trust. The Grand Jury found that: • Some in the Yucaipa City Council paid scant attention to those opposed to the Serrano Estates Project • Some members of the Yucaipa City Council ignored public outcry, the lack of transparency and public input in the removal of the former City Manager and City Attorney • Some members of the Yucaipa City Council ignored the historic tradition of slow development • Many citizens in the community questioned the possibility of financial gain among the voting City Council without recusal San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 137 • Some voting constituents were so angry that they initiated a recall of three serving members of the City Council, including the mayor • The Office of the City Clerk filed a lawsuit, which is a permissible action, against the residents who had signed the recall petition • The petitioners received anonymous letters • Lawsuits and counter lawsuits between the recall group and the City of Yucaipa have been initiated Reason for Investigation The 2023 San Bernardino County Civil Grand Jury received multiple complaints citing misbehavior on the part of the Yucaipa City Council. Complaints alleged concerns of conflict of interest, Brown Act violations, ethics violations, the unexplained terminations/resignations of executive level staff and the lack of transparency in hiring new executive level staff. The number of complaints received and the ongoing discord between citizens and the City Council compelled the Grand Jury to move forward with this investigation. METHODOLOGY Materials Reviewed • Agendas, minutes and videos of Yucaipa City Council Meetings 2022- 23 • Applicable California codes and regulations • Yucaipa Municipal Codes • Executive Staff Employment Contracts • Executive Staff Separation Agreements • Fair Policial Practices Commission Filings • California Attorney General’s Office website • City of Yucaipa website 138 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report • California Fair Policial Practices Commission website • Yucaipa/Calimesa News Mirror Newspaper: articles and letters to the Editor Interviews Conducted The Grand Jury conducted numerous interviews in person which included: • Current City Council Members • Current City Staff • Complainants • Yucaipa citizens Site Visited • Yucaipa City Council meeting DISCUSSION City Council Meeting of January 9, 2023 For many years, Yucaipa relied on its long-serving City Manager for governance and on its long-serving City Attorney for legal advice. In late 2022 the City Council unanimously renewed the City Manager’s contract. Within a month of taking office in 2023, though, a newly elected City Council decided that the city needed a change. At a closed session it voted to accept the resignation of the City Manager despite the contract renewal just a few months earlier. The reasons for this resignation are unknown to the Grand Jury. At the same closed session, the Council immediately replaced the City Manager with its pre-selected choice. The Council didn’t require applicant vetting; indeed, it didn’t require any applicants at all. The Council didn’t interview other qualified applicants; there were no other applicants to be considered for such an important decision. Some City Council members believed that the applications, vetting and Interviewing took place during the previous council term, and that their only function now was to approve the choices. The evidence showed that some of the council members had not met these pre-chosen candidates until the San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 139 meeting during which the Council appointed them. Even before the City Council vote, the soon-to-be appointed new City Manager (and City Attorney) waited in the parking lot outside the council chambers, to be called into the meeting and introduced to the Council. These City Council actions blindsided many residents; their outrage followed, soon to be fueled by additional questionable actions. New Projects Proposed One project, rejected by the prior City Council only three months earlier, was revived by the new Council: the Serrano Estates Project. (see Glossary) For years local residents opposed the Serrano Estates Project, and the prior City Council and planning commission rejected it. But the new Council nevertheless voted to approve the project. For years North Bench residents enjoyed the serenity of its rural setting. It was zoned RL-1, one home on each one-acre lot. The new City Council proposed rezoning the North Bench to allow “cluster housing,” more housing on less land (up to four homes on each one-acre lot and multi-resident units such as condos and apartments). Many residents believe that the approval of the Serrano Estates Project provided a gateway to the rezoning of the North Bench later because the Serrano Estates Project is immediately adjacent to the North Bench area. Many North Bench residents and some other district residents opposed the change. The proposal, the residents asserted, would deprive Yucaipa of a rural residential and open- space region and instead would create a congested sprawl with insufficient infrastructure. Anger swelled, then ballooned when residents learned that a Council Member was a real estate agent, had a property listed in the North Bench district and possibly stood to reap a substantial financial gain upon Council approval of this proposal and subsequent sale of the listing. Despite the apparent financial conflict of interest and lack of transparency, no Council Member deemed it prudent to recuse himself. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report Angered and frustrated once again, citizens responded. Dozens spoke at City Council meetings. The public opposed the Council’s actions, but they were more upset by the process that the Council used to attain the results. During City Council meetings devoted to the Serrano Estates project and the North Bench rezoning, residents were in an uproar and the council meetings were raucous. Where usually a dozen or so residents showed up for these meetings, attendance was estimated to be over 100. Speaking time at one meeting, normally three minutes per speaker, was reduced to two minutes, and still the time was insufficient, as many more wanted to be heard. The Council prudently postponed the vote on the North Bench rezoning; it still hasn’t scheduled a vote. The Council, though, voted to approve the Serrano Estates project. City Council Conduct How did the City Council react to the public outcry? Not with the courtesy and decorum urged by the City in its Rules of Procedure for Council Meetings. (Resolution 2023-07): It is up to the Council “to create an atmosphere where the members of the body and the members of the public can attend to business efficiently, fairly and with full participation.” (from Yucaipa’s code above) The Resolution concludes with Special Notes about Public Input: The rules state (with particular emphasis for the Mayor): “It is wise to remember three special rules that apply to each agenda item: Rule One: Tell the public what the body will be doing. Rule Two: Keep the public informed while the body is doing it. Rule Three: When the body has acted, tell the public what the body did.” San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 141 The Council did not follow its own city code. When residents spoke at public meetings, a member of the Council responded: “All I hear is blah, blah, blah.” When residents complained about Council conduct, a member replied: “I can’t hear you.” Although not spoken by all City Council members, the residents perceived these comments to be the voice of the Council. Recall Petition and Lawsuit With this sort of reception, what followed seemed inevitable: residents filed petitions to recall three City Council Members; other residents filed a lawsuit in Superior Court to stop the development of the Serrano Estates project; still others filed complaints with the Grand Jury, requesting that it do something, anything, to restore transparent government; many inundated the local newspaper with letters to the editor protesting the Council’s actions. The City filed an answer to a Serrano Estates lawsuit. Although the City Council approved the project, the lawsuit remains pending and the project effectively has stalled. The City of Yucaipa reacted to the recall petition. The Office of the City Clerk accepted the recall petition, as it must, but then immediately filed a petition in Superior Court, as it may, for a Writ of Mandate, requesting that the court reject the recall petitions on the grounds that they were misleading. Another hearing about the recall was scheduled in court for August 24. At the August 24 hearing, the recall had expired, and the judge entered a Minute Order: “Court notes that there are no recall documents submitted. Matter is deemed moot.” (from the Court Access Portal: cap.sb-court.org) On August 31, the recall petitioners’ attorney filed a motion to dismiss the Petition for Writ of Mandate filed by the Yucaipa City Clerk’s Office. The judge set a hearing on that petition for October 12. As of the writing of this 142 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report report, the Office of the City Clerk had not agreed to dismiss the Petition for Writ of Mandate, despite the fact that the judge deemed the matter moot. Nevertheless, the Office of the Yucaipa City Clerk, with retained counsel, decided to move forward with the lawsuit. If the City Clerk’s office continues on this path, Yucaipa likely will spend thousands of dollars in attorney fees and the defendants, residents who had signed the recall petitions, may spend thousands more on their own attorney fees. These actions may further erode the public trust and the Yucaipa City Council itself must share some of the blame. Lack of Adequate Additional Training Some Council Members do not have the knowledge necessary for effective governance. While the City Council makes available various training opportunities, it fails to ensure that Council Members avail themselves of those opportunities and fails to follow up to ensure that the members assimilate and retain that information. The Council Members may receive the Codes, Procedures, and Policies in written form which they sometimes do not read. At times the Council Members train on-line, which uses lecture format. The training is not done in person (with the exception of an option for taking the Brown Act Training). While on-line training is permissible, the Grand Jury recognizes that this is not the best practice for long term retention. Additional training is needed to supplement the required on-line training provided currently, since evidence shows this training needs to be interactive and in person to help improve long term retention. This lack of effective training has led to a lack of understanding by City Council Members of their responsibilities to Yucaipa citizens, which led to the appearance of lack of transparency in the process of city government, which led ultimately to citizen distrust of city officials. Code of Conduct How does the City Council overcome that resident disdain; how does it regain the public trust? San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 143 The city government itself points the way, in its Code of Conduct for City Council; it devotes an entire section to Principles of Proper Conduct: Proper Conduct Is (among 13 principles): • Showing empathy • Holding onto ethical principles under stress • Listening attentively • Keeping integrity intact Proper Conduct Is Not: • Showing antagonism or hostility • Deliberately lying or misleading • Speaking recklessly • Spreading rumors • Stirring up bad feelings, divisiveness • Acting in a self-righteous manner The Yucaipa Code of Conduct concludes: “It All Comes Down to Respect” It all comes down to respect - for the individuals, for the opinions of others, for the democratic process, for the community. This Code of Conduct should be required reading, certainly for the Council members, and perhaps by the public. It would benefit the City Council to read it aloud annually at an early council meeting by the council members themselves, reinforcing the council’s commitment to the respect that the public is due and its commitment to transparent government. The City Council members can help themselves restore the public trust by asking the questions as stated in the Yucaipa Code of Conduct: 144 San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report • Will my decision/statement/action violate the trust, rights or good will of others? • What are my interior motives and the spirit behind my actions? • If I have to justify my conduct in public tomorrow, will I do so with pride or shame? • How would my conduct be evaluated by people whose integrity and character I respect? • Even if my conduct is not illegal or unethical, is it done at someone else’s painful expense? • Will it destroy their trust in me? • Will it harm their reputation? • Is my conduct fair? Just? Morally right? • If I were on the receiving end of my conduct, would I approve and agree, or would I take offense? • Does my conduct give others reason to trust or distrust me? • Am I willing to take an ethical stand when it is called for? • Am I willing to make my ethical beliefs public in a way that makes it clear what I stand for? • Do I exhibit the same conduct in my private life as I do in my public life? • Can I take legitimate pride in the way I conduct myself and the example I set? • Do I listen to and understand the views of others? • Do I question and confront different points of view in a constructive manner? • Do I work to resolve differences and come to mutual agreement? • Do I support others and show respect for their ideas? • Will my conduct cause public embarrassment to someone else? If the present City Council had considered these precepts before it acted on replacing the City Manager and City Attorney and voting on the Serrano Estates project, would it have received the same reactions from the public? The resulting votes and appointments may have been the same. However, if the process had been a transparent one, the reactions of the public may have been different. At the very least, the citizens would have had an opportunity to offer feedback. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 145 The Future of Yucaipa Yucaipa already has the physical attributes that make it a vibrant community: location, at the foot of the San Bernardino Mountains; amenities, such as parks and recreational activities, an arts pavilion and cultural activities; shopping plazas; schools; accessible public services such as a library and a community center. What it lacks now is the support and trust of its residents, initiated by the actions of its new City Council. Since the new council term began in 2023, the Yucaipa City Council has developed a reputation among many residents of ignoring the concerns of the public and of fostering an atmosphere of mistrust, disdain, anger, resentment, lack of transparency and appearances of conflicts of interest. Regaining the residents’ trust is paramount, and it can be done. • A first step could be for Council members to consider why they sought office in the first place: not as a quest for profit, influence, fame or power, but instead as a desire to promote the welfare of their community’s residents • A second step could be for Council members to consider the principles and precepts formulated in the city’s Code of Conduct, and in the state laws and regulations relating to city governance • A third step could be for the council to establish an outreach program, encouraging council members to meet informally with their constituents to discuss any matter that seems significant to them, and which relate to the city and its government • A fourth step could be for the city to establish a watchdog commission to oversee the city’s elected officials. The evidence shows that such a commission would be beneficial: it would reduce resident distrust and would create a local guide for council actions Other steps can be found in the Grand Jury’s findings and proposed recommendations for the City Council. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report CONCLUSION The Civil Grand Jury commends the Yucaipa City Council members for cooperating with the investigation. The Grand Jury applauds the attempts of some City Council members to make things right with the community. The Grand Jury has several conclusions: • The Yucaipa City Council members need additional training in government and principles of transparency practices • The City Council and the entire community of Yucaipa would benefit from a more transparent City government. Transparency methods need to be established. • The City of Yucaipa would benefit from an independent watchdog committee to oversee the City Council • A new formal complaint process would go a long way to help establish communication with the public, since the citizens will have an easy method of providing feedback • A Procedural Audit done by an independent agency annually and reported on the website and at a City Council meeting will help restore trust. (see Glossary) If the Yucaipa City Council truly wants the trust of its citizens restored, the Council must work hard to regain it. Ultimately, it will be up to the residents of Yucaipa, through voting, to decide who best represents them in a transparent and open way. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 147 IMPLEMENTATION REQUIRED FINDINGS RECOMMENDATIONS DATE RESPONSE