Grand Jury Report 2011-2012

Note: Missing finding numbers detected: F7, F8, F9, F10, F11, F12, F13, F14, F15, F16, F17, F18, F19, F20, F21, F22, F23, F24, F25, F26, F27, F28, F29, F30, F31, F32, F33, F34, F35, F36, F37, F38, F39, F40, F41, F42, F43, F44, F45, F46, F47, F48, F49, F50, F51, F52, F53, F54, F55, F56, F57, F58, F59, F60, F61, F62, F63, F64, F65, F66, F67, F68, F69, F70, F71, F72, F73, F74, F75, F76, F77, F78, F79, F80, F81, F82, F83, F84, F85, F86, F87, F88, F89, F90, F91, F92, F93, F94, F95, F96, F97, F98, F99, F100, F101, F102, F103, F104, F105, F106, F107, F108, F109, F110, F111, F112, F113, F114, F115, F116, F117, F118, F119, F120, F121, F122, F123, F124, F125, F126, F127, F128, F129, F130, F131, F132, F133, F134, F135, F136, F137, F138, F139, F140, F141, F142, F143, F144, F145, F146, F147, F148, F149, F150, F151, F152, F153, F154, F155, F156, F157, F158, F159, F160, F161, F162, F163, F164, F165, F166, F167, F168, F169, F170, F171, F172, F173, F174, F175, F176, F177, F178, F179, F180, F181, F182, F183, F184, F185, F186, F187, F188, F189, F190, F191, F192, F193, F194, F195, F196, F197, F198, F199, F200, F201, F202, F203, F204, F205, F206, F207, F208, F209, F210, F211, F212, F213, F214, F215, F216, F217, F218, F219, F220, F221, F222, F223, F224, F225, F226, F227, F228, F229, F230, F231, F232, F233, F234, F235, F236, F237, F238, F239, F240, F241, F242, F243, F244, F245, F246, F247, F248, F249, F250, F251, F252, F253, F254, F255, F256, F257, F258, F259, F260, F261, F262, F263, F264, F265, F266, F267, F268, F269, F270, F271, F272, F273, F274, F275, F276, F277, F278, F279, F280, F281, F282, F283, F284, F285, F286, F287, F288, F289, F290, F291, F292, F293, F294, F295, F296, F297, F298, F299, F300, F301, F302, F303, F304, F305, F306, F307, F308, F309, F310, F311, F312, F313, F314, F315, F316, F317, F318, F319, F320, F321, F322, F323, F324, F325, F326, F327, F328, F329, F330, F331, F332, F333, F334, F335, F336, F337, F338, F339, F340, F341, F342, F343, F344, F345, F346, F347, F348, F349, F350, F351, F352, F353, F354, F355, F356, F357, F358, F359, F360, F361, F362, F363, F364, F365, F366, F367, F368, F369, F370, F371, F372, F373, F374, F375, F376, F377, F378, F379, F380, F381, F382, F383, F384, F385, F386, F387, F388, F389, F390, F391, F392, F393, F394, F395, F396, F397, F398, F399, F400, F401, F402, F403, F404, F405, F406, F407, F408, F409, F410, F411, F412, F413, F414, F415, F416, F417, F418, F419, F420, F421, F422, F423, F424, F425, F426, F427, F428, F429, F430, F431, F432, F433, F434, F435, F436, F437, F438, F439, F440, F441, F442, F443, F444, F445, F446, F447, F448, F449, F450, F451, F452, F453, F454, F455, F456, F457, F458, F459, F460, F461, F462, F463, F464, F465, F466, F467, F468, F469, F470, F471, F472, F473, F474, F475, F476, F477, F478, F479, F480, F481, F482, F483, F484, F485, F486, F487, F488, F489, F490, F491, F492, F493, F494, F495, F496, F497, F498, F499, F500, F501, F502, F503, F504, F505, F506, F507, F508, F509, F510, F511, F512, F513, F514, F515, F516, F517, F518, F519, F520, F521, F522, F523, F524, F525, F526, F527, F528, F529, F530, F531, F532, F533, F534, F535, F536, F537, F538, F539, F540, F541, F542, F543, F544, F545, F546, F547, F548, F549, F550, F551, F552, F553, F554, F555, F556, F557, F558, F559, F560, F561, F562, F563, F564, F565, F566, F567, F568, F569, F570, F571, F572, F573, F574, F575, F576, F577, F578, F579, F580, F581, F582, F583, F584, F585, F586, F587, F588, F589, F590, F591, F592, F593, F594, F595, F596, F597, F598, F599, F600, F601, F602, F603, F604, F605, F606, F607, F608, F609, F610, F611, F612, F613, F614, F615, F616, F617, F618, F619, F620, F621, F622, F623, F624, F625, F626, F627, F628, F629, F630, F631, F632, F633, F634, F635, F636, F637, F638, F639, F640, F641, F642, F643, F644, F645, F646, F647, F648, F649, F650, F651, F652, F653, F654, F655, F656, F657, F658, F659, F660, F661, F662, F663, F664, F665, F666, F667, F668, F669, F670, F671, F672, F673, F674, F675, F676, F677, F678, F679, F680, F681, F682, F683, F684, F685, F686, F687, F688, F689, F690, F691, F692, F693, F694, F695, F696, F697, F698, F699, F700, F701, F702, F703, F704, F705, F706, F707, F708, F709, F710, F711, F712, F713, F714, F715, F716, F717, F718, F719, F720, F721, F722, F723, F724, F725, F726, F727, F728, F729, F730, F731, F732, F733, F734, F735, F736, F737, F738, F739, F740, F741, F742, F743, F744, F745, F746, F747, F748, F749, F750, F751, F752, F753, F754, F755, F756, F757, F758, F759, F760, F761, F762, F763, F764, F765, F766, F767, F768, F769, F770, F771, F772, F773, F774, F775, F776, F777, F778, F779, F780, F781, F782, F783, F784, F785, F786, F787, F788, F789, F790, F791, F792, F793, F794, F795, F796, F797, F798, F799, F800, F801, F802, F803, F804, F805, F806, F807, F808, F809, F810, F811, F812, F813, F814, F815, F816, F817, F818, F819, F820, F821, F822, F823, F824, F825, F826, F827, F828, F829, F830, F831, F832, F833, F834, F835, F836, F837, F838, F839, F840, F841, F842, F843, F844, F845, F846, F847, F848, F849, F850, F851, F852, F853, F854, F855, F856, F857, F858, F859, F860, F861, F862, F863, F864, F865, F866, F867, F868, F869, F870, F871, F872, F873, F874, F875, F876, F877, F878, F879, F880, F881, F882, F883, F884, F885, F886, F887, F888, F889, F890, F891, F892, F893, F894, F895, F896, F897, F898, F899, F900, F901, F902, F903, F904, F905, F906, F907, F908, F909, F910, F911, F912, F913, F914, F915, F916, F917, F918, F919, F920, F921, F922, F923, F924, F925, F926, F927, F928, F929, F930, F931, F932, F933, F934, F935, F936, F937, F938, F939, F940, F941, F942, F943, F944, F945, F946, F947, F948, F949, F950, F951, F952, F953, F954, F955, F956, F957, F958, F959, F960, F961, F962, F963, F964, F965, F966, F967, F968, F969, F970, F971, F972, F973, F974, F975, F976, F977, F978, F979, F980, F981, F982, F983, F984, F985, F986, F987, F988, F989, F990, F991, F992, F993, F994, F995, F996, F997, F998, F999, F1000, F1001, F1002, F1003, F1004, F1005, F1006, F1007, F1008, F1009, F1010, F1011, F1012, F1013, F1014, F1015, F1016, F1017, F1018, F1019, F1020, F1021, F1022, F1023, F1024, F1025, F1026, F1027, F1028, F1029, F1030, F1031, F1032, F1033, F1034, F1035, F1036, F1037, F1038, F1039, F1040, F1041, F1042, F1043, F1044, F1045, F1046, F1047, F1048, F1049, F1050, F1051, F1052, F1053, F1054, F1055, F1056, F1057, F1058, F1059, F1060, F1061, F1062, F1063, F1064, F1065, F1066, F1067, F1068, F1069, F1070, F1071, F1072, F1073, F1074, F1075, F1076, F1077, F1078, F1079, F1080, F1081, F1082, F1083, F1084, F1085, F1086, F1087, F1088, F1089

Conclusions 6

• CL1 Page 75
  The report states that the City only purchased homes with its funds. It should be noted the City purchased, rehabbed, and then provided soft seconds to qualified buyers.
• CL2 Page 75
  With permission from the State, the City purchased only one home from an area outside the primary NSP identified areas; Habitat for Humanity purchased several in Target Area 3 that were very inexpensive and required extensive rehab, which was their primary intent.
• CL3 Page 75
  Before starting this program, local real estate offices listed in local telephone books and online were contacted to attend an NSP orientation. City Council meetings, the local television Channel 96, local newspaper and electronic messages were used for outreach as well. Once a realtor attended an orientation workshop or made contact with staff for an individual orientation, they were placed on an NSP email list. If this type of program is offered in the future, staff will add direct mailing to their list of communication resources.
• CL4 Page 75
  The Redevelopment Agency (RDA) Director, NSP Advisor, and one local broker were involved in the hiring of the real estate agent; the City Manager was not involved in the hiring of the real estate agent. 74
• CL5 Page 76
  Regarding the hiring of a local realtor, the City released an invitation to respond following Federal guidance pertaining to the Small Purchase Procurement Method. The State HCD Representative advised the City to solicit at least ten (10) to fifteen (15) realtors. The "Invitation to Respond" was emailed on July 26, 2010 to REALTORS, as identified on CAR website, who had attended an NSP orientation and/or expressed interest in providing services for the City. Of the fifty-six (56) realtors found in Los Banos, eighteen (18) were sent an email invitation to respond, and of those, eight (8) responded. Screening was performed at the Merced County Association of Governments (MCAG) office by MCAG staff using five basic questions. Jeanette Garcia, MCAG; a broker with Coldwell Banker Kaljian; and Elaine Post, RDA Director, comprised the review panel. The broker's employer was not considered in the selection. The consideration given to the broker was due to their experience as a broker and the respect given form other local realtors. Had there been a conflict of interest as implied, the broker would have been asked to step down from the process. Following the careful review of the top two candidates, it was decided both were excellent candidates and it was left up to City staff to decide which of the two would be selected. Of the two, the other was also a broker and extremely busy; there was concern that NSP related work might be handed off to support staff rather than the personal attention desired. Ultimately, the realtor that the City chose had already participated in the NSP program, thereby offering tangible experience and had received recommendations from home buyers regarding their care and attention.
• CL6 Page 76
  While it was not intentional, we do understand that the public may perceive preference was given in the hiring of the NSP realtor. To prevent this type of misunderstanding in the future, City staff will work to ensure co- workers are not used on interview panels when hiring contractors of this sort. Sincerely, Elaine Post Redevelopment Agency Director 75 Los Phone: (209) 827-7000 Banos City Hall Fax: (209) 827-7010 520 J Street www.losbanos.org Los Banos, CA 93635 July 22, 2011 The Honorable Marc Garcia Presiding Judge of the Civil Grand Jury Merced County Superior Court PO Box 2034 Merced, CA 95344 Subject: 2010-2011 Grand Jury Report — Los Banos Police Department and Jail Mandated Inspection Dear Honorable Judge Garcia, The City of Los Banos has received and reviewed the 2010-2011 Merced County Civil Grand Jury Report. The Police Department's Dispatch Center currently utilizes four (4) 48" flat screen televisions and twelve (12) 19" computer monitors. The televisions are used by all dispatch staff to monitor surveillance cameras and related intelligence programs. In addition, each of the three (3) dispatch stations currently house four (4) 19" computer monitors for dispatching duties. The Police Department continues to search for funding to replace the back-up power generator. Until that time, we inspect and test the generator twice monthly. Additionally, the Police Department employs a "Standby Power Systems" company every year to thoroughly inspect and "load test" the backup generator. Respectfully, Gary Krile Police Chief 76 Planada Elementary School Cesar E. Chavez 'diddle School Richard Lopez, Principal Ildefonso Nava, Principal 9525 E. Brodrick Street 161 S. Plainshurg Road Planada, CA 95365 Planada, CA 95365 (209) 382-0272 Fax (209)382-0113 (209) 382-0768 Fax (209)382-0775 September 11, 2011 The Honorable Marc Garcia Presiding Judge, Civil Grand Jury Merced County Superior Court P.O. Box 2034 Merced, CA 95344 Re: Response to Merced County Grand Jury Report 2010-2011 Dear Judge Garcia: Pursuant to Penal Code Section 933 and 933.05, the Governing Board of the Planada Elementary School District hereby responds to the findings regarding Complaint No. 10-11-02 in the Merced County Civil Grand Jury's Final Report for 2010-2011. Neither the Board nor District received a copy of the Report from the Grand Jury or Superior Court, but become aware of the Report through secondary sources. Notwithstanding this oversight, the Board responds as follows: Finding No. 1 The Civil Grand Jury finds that while the school board of trustees has the final decision concerning employment of individuals for the school district, the school superintendent recommends individuals for employment. This is done following completion of application forms, written tests and interviews. The board members do not participate in the selection process. When a prospective employee, or an employee to be released from a position, is related to a board member, that board member abstains from voting. Response to Finding No. 1 The District agrees that this finding generally describes the employment process in the District. In employment situations uniquely affecting a relative of a board member, the District follows Education Code section 35107(e) which requires that the board member abstain from voting. In addition, there are particular situations involving the employment of a spouse of a board member which prevent the board from acting at all pursuant to Government Code section

Commendations 10

• CM1 Page 10
  The Civil Grand Jury recognizes the extreme amount of work that the Merced County Department of Child Support Services does. The department has a difficult time locating absent obligor parents. The heavy case load and budget cuts make the job more difficult. Credit is given to the case workers that must deal with this. DISCLAIMER Grand Jury reports are based on documentary evidence and the testimony of sworn or admonished witnesses, not on conjecture or opinion. However, the Grand Jury is precluded by law from disclosing such evidence except upon the specific approval of the Presiding Judge of 10 the Superior Court, or another judge appointed by the Presiding Judge (Penal Code Sections 911, 924.1(a) and 929). Similarly, the Grand Jury is precluded by law from disclosing the identity of witnesses except upon an order of the court for narrowly defined purposes (Penal Code Sections 924.2 and 929). 11 COMPLAINT #07-01-11 ILLEGAL HIRING AND RETENTION OF CORECTIONAL OFFICER Summary The 2011-2012 Merced County Civil Grand Jury decided to investigate the issue of whether an employee for the Merced County Sheriff’s Department was legally hired. We found that this employee was legally hired and hired under standards set above the minimum qualifications. We also found that information from a Background Investigation Unit trainee was leaked to department employees who should not need or have knowledge of this information. We requested, from the Merced County Sheriff’s Department, a copy of the minimum standards required by the Correctional Standards Authority (CSA) when hiring a Correctional Officer. On the day we picked up these documents from the Sheriff’s Department our committee received a call from the complainants that this employee was not hired under CSA standards but under Police Officers Standards and Training (P.O.S.T.) qualifications. The complainants would not have known of our request for this information unless someone leaked it within the department. We find that the issue of confidentiality was breached in the Background Investigation Unit, among co-workers, and either in the administrative or clerical division of the department. We recommend that all personnel within the department be given further training on the issue of confidentiality, especially within the Background Investigation Unit. All personnel should be informed of the consequences for breaches of confidentiality.
• CM2 Page 16
  The 2011-2012 Merced County Civil Grand Jury thanks all those involved in this investigation. We also would like to commend the Sheriff Department’s administrative personnel for their cooperation.
• CM3 Page 20
  The Grand Jury would like to recognize both the County Human Resources Department and the Sheriff's Department Director of Personnel for their assistance and cooperation during the course of this investigation. DISCLAIMER Grand Jury reports are based on documentary evidence and the testimony of sworn or admonished witnesses, not on conjecture or opinion. However, the Grand Jury is precluded by law from disclosing such evidence except upon the specific approval of the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court, or another judge appointed by the Presiding Judge (Penal Code Sections 911, 924.1(a) and 929). Similarly, the Grand Jury is precluded by law from disclosing the identity of witnesses except upon an order of the court for narrowly defined purposes (Penal Code Sections 924.2 and 929). 19 COMPLAINT #07-03-11 DOS PALOS POLICE DEPARTMENT Summary The 2011-2012 Merced County Civil Grand Jury received a complaint against the Dos Palos Police Department. The complainant stated a lack of supervision within the department, poor job performance from employees, and reports not filed according to the policy timeline of the department. During our investigation we determined that police reports generally are not filed according to the policies and procedures timelines established by this agency. Police reports are needed for verification for insurance purposes and need to be filed in a timely manner. The 2011-2012 Merced County Civil Grand Jury recommends that the department enforce established procedures to insure that reports are filed timely and according to the agency’s policies and procedures. Supervisors should implement a check system to insure that the process follows the standards set forth. The report writing process should be reviewed to determine if there might be a better process. We also recommend that officers receive interpersonal skills training.
• CM4 Page 22
  The 2011-2012 Merced County Civil Grand Jury recognizes the fact that the Dos Palos Police Department works very hard with limited resources. Budget cuts have diminished the department's ability to do some of the things they want or need to do. The department is striving to be a positive force in the community. DISCLAIMER Grand Jury reports are based on documentary evidence and the testimony of sworn or admonished witnesses, not on conjecture or opinion. However, the Grand Jury is precluded by law from disclosing such evidence except upon the specific approval of the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court, or another judge appointed by the Presiding Judge (Penal Code Sections 911, 924.1(a) and 929). Similarly, the Grand Jury is precluded by law from disclosing the identity of witnesses except upon an order of the court for narrowly defined purposes (Penal Code Sections 924.2 and 929). 21 COMPLAINT #07-04-11 MERCED IRRIGATION DISTRICT (MID)/BOARD OF DIRECTORS Summary The Merced County Civil Grand Jury received a complaint regarding activities of the Merced Irrigation District (MID) in the management and operation of water delivery. The complaint consists of refusing, on occasion, to deliver water through an irrigation pipe line referred to at Lateral 7.
• CM5 Page 26
  The Grand Jury would like to commend the Merced County Office of Education, the Merced County Human Services Department, and Merced Union High School District Transportation Division for their co-operation in this investigation. The Merced County Human Services Agency should further be commended for their efforts in putting together a comprehensive program for outlining mandated reporting requirements that can be used by other agencies such as law enforcement, churches, and other community agencies. DISCLAIMER Grand Jury reports are based on documentary evidence and the testimony of sworn or admonished witnesses, not on conjecture or opinion. However, the Grand Jury is precluded by law from disclosing such evidence except upon the specific approval of the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court, or another judge appointed by the Presiding Judge (Penal Code Sections 911, 924.1(a) and 929). Similarly, the Grand Jury is precluded by law from disclosing the identity of witnesses except upon an order of the court for narrowly defined purposes (Penal Code Sections 924.2 and 929). 25 Disposition of Other Complaints 26 Complaint #07-05-11 Los Banos USD Superintendent/School Board The Merced County Civil Grand Jury received a complaint to investigate Los Banos USD Superintendent/School Board. After investigation and study of complaint the Merced County Civil Grand Jury determined that the facts brought before the Grand Jury warrant no further investigation. The Grand Jury suggested that the complainant may be able to get some of their answers by looking through the minutes of the local school board meetings. Complaint #07-06-11 Family/Personal The Merced County Civil Grand Jury received a complaint to investigate a family and personal matter. The Merced County Civil Grand Jury declined to investigate the complaint because it did not fall within the jurisdiction of the duties of the grand jury. Complaint #07-07-11 Merced County Board of Supervisors/New Technology The Merced County Civil Grand Jury received a complaint to investigate the Merced County Board of Supervisors. The Merced County Civil grand Jury declined to investigate this complaint and advised the complainant to seek other avenues available for resolution. Complaint #07-08-11 City of Dos Palos/Animal Control The Merced County Civil Grand Jury Received a complaint to investigate the City of Dos Palos/ Animal Control. After review of the complaint the Merced County Civil Grand Jury declined to investigate this complaint. Complaint #07-09-11 County of Merced – Library The Merced County Civil Grand Jury Received a complaint to investigate the County of Merced/Library. After review of the complaint the Merced County Civil Grand Jury declined to investigate this complaint. 27 Complaint #07-10-11 City of Merced – Police Department The Merced County Civil Grand Jury Received a complaint to investigate the City of Merced – Police Department. After review of the complaint and the arrest report of the Merced Police Department the Merced Civil Grand Jury found that the Police Department acted within laws that govern them and found no wrong doing on their part. A claim form was obtained and sent to the complainants to file with the city if they feel that their property was damaged. Complaint #07-11-11 Merced County Planning/Code Enforcement The Merced County Civil Grand Jury received a complaint to investigate the Merced County Planning/Code Enforcement Department. After an initial review of the complaint and the area in question there was not enough information to proceed with an investigation and the Merced County Civil Grand Jury declined to proceed. Complaint #07-12-11 Merced County Sheriff’s Office – Civil Division The Merced County Civil Grand Jury received a complaint to investigate the Merced County Sheriff’s Office – Civil Division. After an initial review of the complaint the Merced County Civil Grand Jury declined to proceed as the Merced County Sheriff’s Office was following the order of the Court at the time. Complaint #07-13-11 Merced County Sheriff’s Office – Civil Division The Merced County Civil Grand Jury Received a complaint to investigate the Merced County Sheriff’s Office Civil Division. After an initial review of the complaint it was determined that the complainant was not the person that posted the bail bond in question, therefore, the Merced County Grand declined to proceed. Complaint # 01-02-12 Merced City School District (MCSD) The Merced County Civil Grand Jury received a complaint to investigate Merced City School District. The Civil Grand Jury declined to investigate the complaint because it concluded that all entities involved dealt with the claim according to written policies. 28 Mandated Inspections 29 Merced City School District (MCSD) Mandated Annual Inspection Introduction The 2011-2012 Merced County Civil Grand Jury members conducted an interview with the District Superintendent of Schools, and an on location visit of facilities, interviewing the principals and random staff of Cruickshank Middle School, Hoover Middle School, Rivera Middle School, and Tenaya Middle School.
• CM6 Page 33
  Staff and personnel at the Superintendent's Office, the District Human Resources Office, and all the school principal offices were very cordial, professional, and willing to provide any information requested without any hesitation. The interviewers asked a myriad of questions on many topics, there appeared no hesitation or reluctance to respond. 32 Merced County Detention and Law Enforcement Agencies Mandated Annual Inspection The California Penal Code sections 919(a)(b) requires the Grand Jury inquire into the Institutions management, safety and inmate security in the state and county facilities to ensure inmates are being treated in a humane manner. The 2011-2012 Grand Jury completed mandatory visits and inspections in the following institutions:  John Latorraca Correctional Center  Iris Garrett Juvenile Justice Correction Center  Merced City Police Department  Dos Palos City Police Department 33 JOHN LATORRACA CORRECTIONAL CENTER MANDATED ANNUAL INSPECTION Introduction The 2011-2012 Merced County Civil Grand Jury toured the John Latorraca Correction Center on January 26, 2012. California Penal Code Section 919(b) mandates that the Civil Grand Juries annually inspect correction facilities within their respective counties. The Merced County Sheriff’s Department, under the command of Sheriff Mark Pazin, is responsible for the operation of the Correctional Center and the main jail facility in downtown Merced.
• CM7 Page 39
  The 2011-2012 Merced County Civil Grand Jury commends the Sheriff’s Corrections Department for the implementation and execution of the electronic monitoring program. This process benefits some citizens in need of a program like this by allowing them to work and to provide a unified family environment. It also creates a financial savings to the county by not requiring incarceration. 38 Iris Garret Juvenile Correction Center Mandated Annual Inspection Introduction The Merced Civil Grand Jury toured the Iris Garrett Juvenile Justice Correction Center mandated by California Penal Code, Section 919(b). We met with Chief Probation Officer, Scott Ball; Assistant Chief Probation Officer, Jeff Kettering; Judge David Moranda; a Juvenile Institution Officer; a Licensed Vocational Nurse and a minor housed in the detention wing of the facility.
• CM8 Page 43
  The 2011-2012 Merced County Civil Grand Jury highly commends administrators and staff at the Iris Garrett Juvenile Correction Center for their accomplishments and concerns for the minors housed in the Juvenile Center. We also want to thank everyone who participated in providing information and for giving us such an informative tour around the facilities. Our sincere thanks go to Mr. Scott Ball, Mr. Jeff Kettering, Judge David Moranda and the Juvenile Institution Officer. 42 Merced City Police Department Mandated Annual Inspection Introduction The 2011-2012 Merced County Civil Grand Jury met with the Merced Police Department Administrative Office and toured the downtown facility located at 611 West 22nd Street, Merced, California. The Merced Police Department has seventy five officers and ten clerical members on staff. There are eleven to twelve officers per shift. An organizational chart was provided to us showing the chain of command as Chief, Lieutenant, Sergeant, Supervisors and Training Officers. There are only two (2) female officers currently employed by the Merced Police Department. Wages for officers are comparable to other cities of similar size.
• CM9 Page 47
  In light of budget and manning constraints the Merced Police Department stands above the rest and should be recognized as a source of pride in how limited resources can be put to the greatest use for the overall safety of the community. 46 Dos Palos Police Department Mandated Annual Inspection Introduction On February 8, 2012, the 2011-2012 Merced County Civil Grand Jury met with Dos Palos Police Chief, Barry Mann. The Grand Jury was there for a tour pursuant to California Penal code 925(a) and to review progress on two outstanding issues recommended by the 2010-2011 Grand Jury. We received satisfactory answers to our questions.
• CM10 Page 49
  Chief Mann was very cooperative, polite, and accommodating. The Merced County Civil Grand Jury commends the efforts of the Dos Palos Police Department in trying to keep the city of Dos Palos a clean and safe place to live. 48 RIDE-ALONG REPORTS 49 RIDE-ALONG MERCED CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT (a) A member of the 2011-2012 Merced County Civil Grand Jury recently participated in a Ride- Along program at the invitation of the Merced City Police Department. During the routine patrol with the officer providing the ride-along, several incidents occurred that demonstrated the overall effectiveness and outstanding work of the Police Department. These incidents included:  Response and investigation of a fatal shooting in which all on-duty police responded, as did several off-duty police officers who were called to the scene. The Merced County Sheriff's Office and Merced City Fire Units also responded.  A fight between two males, one of which was transported for booking into jail.  Investigation of a report by a homeless person that his collection of bottles and cans had been stolen.  Break-up of a domestic violence argument. Observations while on this ride-along showed a highly trained professional officer, with experience and determination to make Merced a safe place both day and night. They go about their business unseen by most of us, yet they are there when we need them, without hesitation. People that they come into contact with are treated with respect and dignity. It was impressive to see the coordinated teamwork displayed by all officers. Personnel of the Merced City Police Department should be commended and we, as a community, should say “Thank you to all of them”. The community should sleep better knowing that the City of Merced is under their watchful eye. 50 RIDE-ALONG MERCED CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT (b) A member of the 2011-2012 Merced County Civil Grand Jury recently participated in a Ride- Along program at the invitation of the Merced City Police Department. During the routine patrol with the officer providing the ride-along, several incidents occurred that demonstrated the overall effectiveness and outstanding work of the Police Department. These incidents included:  Thorough inspection of assigned vehicle to ensure all equipment functioned properly.  Response to possible theft reports, traffic stops for various vehicle violations (equipment issues, failure to stop at traffic lights, etc.), and possible suspicious persons.  There were two incidents where an arrest was made and in both cases, the individuals were treated courteously and respectfully, but firmly. In summary, the member of the Grand Jury had the opportunity to meet several Merced City Police Officers and was impressed with their professionalism and courtesy. Overall, the Grand Jury considers the Merced City Police Department a highly professional organization. 51 RIDE-ALONG MERCED CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT (c) A member of the 2011-2012 Merced County Civil Grand Jury recently participated in a Ride- Along program at the invitation of the Merced City Police Department. During the routine patrol with the officer providing the ride-along, several incidents occurred that demonstrated the overall effectiveness and outstanding work of the Police Department. These incidents included:  A dispute between neighbors over a broken chair.  A domestic dispute with an arrest for domestic violence. The wife was transported to the police station where the booking process was observed. She was then taken by another officer to the holding area at the John Latorraca Correctional Center.  Talking with under age children roaming the streets close to the 10:00 p.m. curfew.  Several traffic and pedestrian stops. Merced City Police officers are well trained to protect themselves while protecting the citizens of Merced. Good deeds of the Police Department are rarely praised while trouble within the department is publicized. The Merced City Police Department needs and solicits public support through many public awareness programs. The Grand Jury recommends that private citizens ride with an officer to observe the many varied daily activities of a routine patrol. 52 RIDE-ALONG MERCED CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT (d) A member of the 2011-2012 Merced County Civil Grand Jury recently participated in a Ride- Along program at the invitation of the Merced City Police Department. During the routine patrol with the officer providing the ride-along, several incidents occurred that demonstrated the overall effectiveness and outstanding work of the Police Department. These incidents included:  Observation of the K9 Unit and the specially trained officer assigned. Several burglar alarm calls were investigated.  A call for family disturbance where marijuana was involved. The husband had a medical marijuana card, and the wife was transported to the hospital.  Three stops to check out bike riders and pedestrians. The officer found one man was a parolee, and cited him for marijuana possession.  Officer observed an individual that could possibly be a gang member, however no arrest was made.  Stop for two gang members walking in the country area. The officer believed he saw one member throw a gun over a fence. Another officer was called but they could not find the gun. Officer was very good at the job, with a very nice attitude and always approached citizens with a greeting. All stopped, smiled and talked to the officer and did not have a negative attitude toward him. 53 RIDE-ALONG ATWATER CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT Two members of the 2011-2012 Merced County Civil Grand Jury recently participated in a Ride- Along program at the invitation of the Atwater City Police Department. During the routine patrol with the officer providing the ride-along, several incidents occurred that demonstrated the overall effectiveness and outstanding work of the Police Department. These incidents included:  Several stops were made relating to parole violations  Vehicle maintenance issues  Domestic disturbance incidents Although the Atwater City Police Department is a well disciplined, highly proficient agency with exceptionally well trained personnel, there are areas where improvement can and should be made. The Dispatch Division should have "Live Scan" capability available as soon as possible. This is a vital element to effective police work and would save time that is being expended to research files. Vehicles, trailers, and other equipment are stored in an unsecured area open to the public. Although there is camera surveillance, it cannot cover all areas of the parking lot and requires constant attention which distracts dispatch personnel. This can leave the area unsupervised in cases of intense activity. Additionally, a budget line item should be initiated to accumulate monies for the procurement of a trained drug dog with handler for the department. It is inconceivable that the City of Atwater has to rely on outside resources for the detection and control of dangerous drugs. We recommend Homeland Security grant money be applied for to purchase and install a "Live- Scan" system, and to finish enclosing the parking lot used for equipment storage. This could pose a very credible and dangerous threat to any emergency response if the vehicles had been vandalized. 54 RIDE-ALONG MERCED COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT Two members of the 2011-2012 Merced County Civil Grand Jury recently participated in a Ride- Along program at the invitation of the Merced County Sheriff Department. During the routine patrol with the deputy providing the ride-along, several incidents occurred that demonstrated the overall effectiveness and outstanding work of the Sheriff Department. These incidents included:  A joint effort executed with State, County and local agencies to close down an illegal drug operation.  Dispatched to a private residence in Merced to apprehend a suspect involved in illegal activities.  Observation of the booking process at the County Detention facility at John Latorraca Correctional Center. An onboard computer system provides instant details of activities. It also allows the officer to access data at their fingertips. The system allows for cross-talk between patrolling officers and immediate status of any occurring incident, which makes for quick back-up as required. Calls are coded, logged at Dispatch, and appear on the in-car screen in real time. Response and the number of officers can then be determined and acted upon. Sheriff Deputies are required to operate without the latest onboard computer technology. This technology would greatly enhance the outstanding current operations of the Sheriff Department. Staff are very professional, friendly and more than willing to answer all questions as they were presented. The camaraderie amongst the officers is commendable; the term "Got your back" is deeply respected and used to continually assist each other as needed. Although the Merced County Sheriff Department is a well disciplined, highly proficient agency with exceptionally well trained personnel, there are areas where improvement can and should be made. The Dispatch Division should have "Live Scan" capability available as soon as possible. This is a vital element to effective police work and would save time that is currently being expended to research files, a valuable tool when time is critical. Recommend Homeland Security grant money be applied for purchase and install a "Live Scan" system. 55 RESPONSES TO THE 2010-2011 FINAL REPORT 56 MID MERCED IRRIGATION DISTRICT WATER & POWER December 15, 2011 The Honorable Marc Garcia Presiding Judge of the Superior Court 670 West 22nd Street Merced, CA 95340 Re: Response to Grand Jury Report (2010 2011) Dear Presiding - Judge Garcia: The Merced Irrigation District ('District') recently received a copy of the 2010 - 2011 Merced County Civil Grand Jury Final Report. During the course of the Grand Jury's work over the past year, it received a complaint alleging the use of District resources to clean a portion of a privately owned ditch. During the growing season, it is important to ensure that water is made available where, and when it is needed. The District and all of its employees endeavors to be responsive to the time sensitive needs of its growers, and provide the best service to District ratepayers as is possible. While it is true that District resources were used to clean a small portion of this ditch, the revenue garnered through vital water sales in a water abundant year on this ditch greatly exceeded the minimal resources required to clean the ditch and safely convey water for sales revenue. Additionally, the ditch in reference is directly connected to a vital District canal and there were canal system safety concerns due to the weed over growth in the ditch in question. The Grand Jury report correctly concludes that no favoritism was afforded. 744 West 20th Street P.O. BOX 2288 Merced, California 57 Response to Grand Jury Report (2010 - 2011) Page 2 December 15, 2011 Efforts will be made to obtain reimbursement from the cleaning of the ditch in question. Efforts will also be made to keep landowners better informed of their individual responsibilities regarding private and District facilities to ensure prompt, reliable and safe water delivery service. Ultimately, the District services an area that encompasses more than 200 square miles in the Merced and Mariposa Counties. Much of this system is over 100 years old and public and private facility ownership overlaps throughout. It is a challenge to track right of way and easements with absolute accuracy. While challenges will continue to exist, the District will continue to work to ensure that the best possible service is provided to ratepayers in a fair, efficient and cost effective manner. In closing, I feel it important to note that the Grand Jury's report indicates that part of its investigation included MID Board member interviews. While the other Grand Jury investigation efforts appear accurate, its assertion that MID Board members was interviewed is untrue. The implication from the report is that the entire Board was interviewed, however none of the District's Board members recall ever being contacted, much less questioned in any way. I encourage the Grand Jury to schedule appointments with any of the District's Board members should there be any future investigations, and my office and staff would be happy to assist in making those arrangements. The District appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments and thanks the Grand Jury for its efforts and recommendations. Please feel free to contact me if there are any other questions or concerns. Respectfully submitted, John Sweigard General Manager Cc: Barbara Ellington, Merced County Grand Jury Foreman Larry T. Combs, County Executive Officer 58 Merced County Office of Education Steven E. Gomes, Ed. D., Superintendent Equal Opportunity Employer November 2, 2011 The Honorable Marc Garcia Presiding Judge, Civil Grand Jury Merced County Superior Court P.O. Box 2034 Merced, CA 95344 Re: Response to Merced County Civil Grand Jury Report 2010-2011 (Complaint 10-11-06) Dear Judge Garcia: This letter serves as the formal response of the Merced County Office of Education ("MCOE") to the findings from Complaint No. 10-11-06 in the Merced County Civil Grand Jury's Final Report for 2010-2011. I take the safety and well-being of Merced County's students very seriously and therefore appreciate the Grand Jury bringing to my attention the issue of improving child abuse reporting practices among the school districts in Merced County. After receiving the Grand Jury's letter, I met with the twenty school district superintendents in Merced County and the Director of the Merced County Human Services Agency to discuss developing protocols that would increase school employees' awareness of (1) their obligations as mandated reporters and (2) the procedures for reporting suspected child abuse or neglect. In the response below, some findings and recommendations that address a single, broad area of concern (e.g., inadequate training) are responded to collectively: I. Finding and Responses to Findings Finding No. 1 The Merced County Civil Grand Jury discovered that it is unclear to both the school administrators and to CPS just who is required to provide training for Mandated Reporters or 59 how much training should take place. Among some school district personnel, there is confusion regarding who constitutes a mandated reporter. Finding No. 2 The Civil Grand Jury discovered through interviews with the administrators and staff at schools throughout Merced County that there were inconsistencies in training available to all school staff designated as Mandated Reporters. Our interviews with administrators included all levels of education from elementary through high school. Finding No. 3 The training of Mandated Reporters in schools or elsewhere is not considered by Child Protective Services ("CPS") to be their responsibility. They do not contact the school administrators within Merced County to arrange for training session [sic] for the schools staff. They do conduct training sessions for a school if requested to do so. However, these training sessions are considered by some of the attendees to be too brief and/or unsatisfactory. Finding No. 4 The administrative staff in more than one school was unaware of their obligation to train their staff in Mandated Reporting. Many administrators require incoming staff to read and sign a document designating their responsibility as a Mandated Reporter. However, there are no explanations or guidance to help staff determine what to do, or even know the process to complete the report form. Response to Finding Nos. 1-4 The Grand Jury's report does not provide sufficient information to allow MCOE to agree or disagree with particular findings made regarding level of training in child abuse reporting provided at the various school districts in the County. However, MCOE agrees that all mandated reporters should be aware of their obligations and be sufficiently trained to recognize when a report must be made. As a result of the meetings I held with the school superintendents in Merced County and the Director of the Human Services Agency, we concluded that the most effective way to improve the training and establish consistent reporting protocols would be for MCOE and the Merced County Human Services Agency to collaborate in producing training materials for the County's school districts, such as a video on mandated reporter obligations and reporting procedures. Additionally, MCOE will make available to all school districts a wallet-sized reference card which lists mandated reporter requirements and contact information. At MCOE, we will 60 distribute the cards to employees with their paychecks to ensure that every mandated reporter receives a copy of this reference card. Finding No. 5 The Civil Grand Jury also learned that by state law, a Mandated Reporter must file a written report to CPS within 36 hours of making a verbal report. CPS in turn, and by law, must send a written report to the Mandated Reporter within 30 days of receiving the written report. The Civil Grand Jury determined that there are inconsistencies in responding by CPS caseworkers. Often a response to the Mandated Reporter by the caseworker is a printed form with a check list but no written response. Finding No. 6 The Jurors found through our interviews that CPS caseworkers are not willing to maintain contact with school staff CPS claims that confidentiality must be maintained. Response to finding nos. 5-6 MCOE does not have sufficient information to agree or disagree with these findings because the findings relate to the internal operating procedures of CPS, not MCOE. However, MCOE agrees that finding ways to improve CPS's reporting protocols and responsiveness is an important priority and will contact CPS to discuss these issues. Finding No. 7 One school district, where we interviewed, has contracted with a social worker who is available two days a week on the three school campuses. The school district contracts through Merced County Department of Education who contracts with the social workers. This program is paid for by the school district. The administration and staff believe that this program is beneficial to the students and to the school climate. The district also offers a parenting program to assist parents in working with their children. Response to Finding No. 7 The County Office does not have sufficient information to agree or disagree with this finding as the district in question is not identified in the Grand Jury's report. II. Recommendations and Responses to Recommendations Recommendation No. 1 61 The Merced Civil Grand Jury recommends that all school administrators in each school district within Merced County become familiar with the state laws regarding Mandated Reporters. We also suggest that they become knowledgeable in the complete realm of Child Protective Services. The administrators need to establish consistent and educational training sessions for all staff involved as Mandated Reporters. The Merced Civil Grand Jury extends these recommendations to all organizations that provide services to youth. Recommendation No. 2 The Mandated Reporters need to be better informed of their responsibilities. They need to be able to determine when to contact CPS, and they need to feel comfortable in completing the required written form. In order to achieve this goal, a GOOD training program needs implementation. Recommendation No. 3 Current training for Mandated Reporters is grossly inadequate. Child Protective Services is in a unique position to provide a comprehensive training program that follows state guidelines and should include updated and relevant videos, hands-on training, and other related materials. Response to Recommendation Nos. 1-3 As described in the Response to Finding Nos. 1-4, above, MCOE is in the process of implementing each of these recommendations. MCOE will encourage each school district within the county to monitor and enforce its mandated reporter obligations. Additionally, MCOE will collaborate with the Merced County Human Services Agency to encourage other organizations that provide services to youth to monitor and enforce its mandated reporter obligations. While MCOE can assist the individual school districts in improving their child abuse reporting, MCOE does not have the authority to enforce compliance by these districts. Recommendation No. 4 The Civil Grand Jury recommends that Child Protective Services personnel be more willing to communicate with the Mandated Reporters, especially those people who interact daily with the child involved. CPS must be more responsive to the Mandated Reporter without revealing confidential information. The check list is inadequate when the Mandated Reporter needs insight to help the child in the school environment. 62 Response to Recommendation No. 4 This recommendation is outside the scope of MCOE's jurisdiction to monitor or enforce. A response to this recommendation should properly come from CPS. Recommendation No. 5 The Civil Grand Jury requests that school district administrators in all of the county school districts consider contracting for an on campus social worker service. Services to families and children involved would be greatly improved by such a program. Also, implementing other programs, such as parent education, would be beneficial for parents and students of all ages. We realize there are severe budget cutbacks but perhaps grants or other funding is available. Response to Recommendation No. 5 The recommendation requires further analysis to determine the particular nature of the contract for the on-campus social worker, its cost, and its effectiveness as well as the cost of other programs such as parent education. In a time of diminished school district budgets, each individual school district would need to determine whether there are funds available for these programs and services and where those expenditures would fit within their individual budget priorities. MCOE is unaware of any grant funding available for such a purpose. III. Conclusion I appreciate the time and effort the Grand Jury has put into reviewing the effectiveness of the County's mandated reporter training and reporting protocols. The information provided by the Grand Jury will prove helpful in improving school employees' knowledge and ability to report suspected child abuse or neglect. If you have any questions or if I can be of any assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, STEVEN E. GOMES, Ed.D. Merced County Superintendent of Schools SEG/yc cc: Ana Pagan, Merced County Human Services Agency 63 Board of Supervisors John Pedrozo MERCED --COUNTY Supervisor, District One Hubert "Hub" Walsh. Jr. Supervisor. District Two September 27, 2011 Linn Davis Supervisor, District Three Deidre F. Kelsey The Honorable Brian McCabe Supervisor, District Four Presiding Judge of the Superior Court Jerry O'Banion Superior Court of California, County of Merced 670 West 22nd Street Supervisor, District Five Merced, CA 95340 Larry T. Combs RE: Board of Supervisors Grand Jury Response Dear Presiding Judge McCabe: County Executive Officer The Board of Supervisors appreciates the Merced County Grand Jury's responsibilities and commitment to public service. Pursuant to Penal Code 933, responses from elected and appointed officials have been received and appropriately forwarded. The following acknowledgements and information is respectfully submitted relating to matters under the Merced County jurisdiction of the Board of Supervisors. Administration Building 2222 "M" Street Mandated Inspections — John Latorraca Correctional Facility and Main Jail Merced, CA 95340 (209) 385-7366 The Grand Jury conducted an inspection of the John Latorraca Correctional Facility at 2584 (209) 726-7977 Fax www.co.merced.ca.us W Sandy Mush Road and Main Jail at 700 West 22nd Street. both located in Merced. The Grand Jury recommended filling a vacant commander position, assigning two officers per Equal Opportunity Employer shift to duty in the control room, updating some monitoring equipment and for the Board of Supervisors to consider funding to replace or renovate the current dorms. Due to local economic conditions, Merced County has been experiencing financial challenges which have significantly affected all areas of county services. For the Fiscal Year 2011/2012, the County Executive Office budget instructions included a 20% reduction of General Fund for all county departments. In order to achieve this reduction, the Sheriffs plan included closing the Main Jail facility which had a capacity of 170 beds. An alternative was developed that kept open two cell blocks (80 beds) of the Main Jail which the Board approved on August 9, 2011. The Merced County Board of Supervisors respects the men and women who serve in Corrections for their dedication, and the Board understands the needs of the County public safety agencies, particularly during these difficult fiscal times. The current fiscal situation is very serious for the County of Merced and public safety departments have been affected as well as other county services. The Board intends to continue working with the Sheriffs department to most efficiently provide the necessary services to County residents. Mandated Inspections — Iris Garrett Juvenile Justice Correctional Complex 64 Striving for Excellence The Grand Jury conducted a mandated inspection of the Iris Garrett Juvenile Justice Correctional Complex, located at 2840 W Sandy Mush Road, in Merced. The Grand Jury was satisfied with their visit to the facility. The Merced County Board of Supervisors commends the men and women who serve at the Juvenile Correctional Complex and is proud to have such dedicated public safety staff. Complaint 10-11-06 The Grand Jury investigated a complaint regarding Child Protective Services (CPS) and their services to children and mandated reporters. The Grand Jury reported that it was unclear to school administrators and to CPS as to who is responsible for providing training for mandated reporters and how much training should take place. The report also indicated that CPS caseworkers were not maintaining contact with school staff and that CPS staff should communicate more with mandated reporters. It was recommended that school administrators in each school district become familiar with the state regulations regarding mandated reporters and for those school administrators to become more knowledgeable of the realm of CPS Response Pursuant to California Penal Code Section 11166, teachers, school employees, as well as other professionals and lay persons are required to report known or suspected child abuse to the proper authorities. Penal Code Section 11166.5 further clarifies that the employer of the person entering employment is responsible for training the employee which means school employee training is the responsibility of the school district. Although confidentiality is requisite, CPS does provide feedback to mandated reporters after an investigation is completed or once it reaches final disposition through issuance of a State form. This permits mandated reporters to know that the matter has been looked into and services provided. The Board acclaims and respects the efforts of CPS caseworkers and other mandated reporters in their diligence to ensure the safety of children and in their cooperation with other agencies. Complaint 09-10-27 The Grand Jury investigated a complaint regarding the Merced County Fire Department and its management practices. The Grand Jury found some allegations to be unfounded and unsubstantiated but reported that there was not enough supervision, discipline and training being provided for a Division Chief. The Grand Jury recommended that management training be provided to all levels of County Fire supervisory positions, that specialized management skills training are a requirement for all newly appointed Chiefs and that continuing education be a requirement for veteran Chiefs. Response The Board of Supervisors encourages the County Fire Chief to work towards ensuring that the described management training needs are met and that management resources are made available as needed for department management. The Merced County Board of Supervisors commends the men and women who serve at the Merced County Fire Department and is proud to have dedicated public safety staff. 65

No Responses Found 2

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