Grand Jury Report 2006-2007

That you agree with the finding.

That you disagree 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 for disagreement. How to Report Action in Response to Recommendations Recommendations by the Grand Jury require action (Penal Code 933.05). The responding person or entity must report action on all recommendations in one of four ways: 1. The recommendation has been implemented, with summary of the implemented action.

The recommendation requires further analysis. If the person or entity reports in this manner, the law requires an explanation of the analysis or studies in a time frame not to exceed six months.

The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation. If either a finding or recommendation deals with budgetary or personnel matters of a county department headed by an elected officer, both the elected officer and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if the Grand Jury so requests, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel matters over which it has some decision-making authority. Requirement to Respond No later than 90 days after the Grand Jury submits a final report on the operations of any public agency subject to its reviewing authority, the governing body of the public agency (includes departments) shall comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body, and every elected county officer or agency head for which the Grand Jury has responsibility pursuant to Section 914.1 shall comment within 60 days to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court, with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors, on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of that county officer or agency head and any agency or agencies which that officer or agency head supervises or controls. All of these comments and reports shall forthwith be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court who impaneled the Grand Jury. Distribution List The final report of the 2006-2007 Plumas County Grand Jury will be distributed to the following individuals and agencies: The Honorable Judge Ira Kaufman The Honorable Judge Janet Hilde Plumas County Grand Jury for 2006-2007 Plumas County Grand Jury for 2007-2008 Plumas County Board of Supervisors Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Plumas County Administrative Officer Plumas County Auditor/Controller Plumas County Building Department Plumas County Clerk Plumas County Counsel Plumas County Department of Animal Services Plumas County Department of Human Resources Plumas County Department of Social Services/Public Guardian Plumas County Development Commission Plumas County District Attorney Plumas County Facility Services Department Plumas County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Plumas County Information and Technology Department (Website) Plumas County Jail Plumas County Libraries Plumas County Office of Emergency Services (OES) Plumas County Planning Department Plumas County Probation Department Plumas County Public Health Agency Plumas County Sheriff Plumas County Unified School District California State Archivist California Attorney General’s Office City of Portola All Special Districts (47) Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) Fire Departments Feather River College California Grand Jurors Association Plumas County Court Executive Officer 7 PLUMAS COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Statement of Function (Quoted from the Plumas County Budget Book) The Plumas County Board of Supervisors (BOS) is established by State law and is comprised of five elected representatives. Each member represents a geographic area in the County equal to approximately 20% of the population as determined in the last decennial census. Board members are considered non-partisan and are elected to four year, staggered terms. The Board of Supervisors is responsible for the enactment of ordinances and resolutions, the adoption of the annual budget for County departments and dependent special districts, for which they sit as the governing Board of Directors, for approval of new programs and grants, and the adoption of land use and zoning plans. The Board of Supervisors is the policy-making body with the County, not including schools and independent special districts. The budget adopted by the Board each fiscal year includes 90-95% state mandated programs. Reason for Review The Grand Jury conducted its review as a result of the BOS reluctance to address some of previous years’ recommendations. Further, because of the nature and scope of their responsibility, the Grand Jury has deemed that a yearly review is necessary. Procedure Followed All Supervisors were interviewed. The County Administrative Officer, the Administrative Assistant, Clerk of the Board, County Risk Manager and the Auditor were also interviewed. Travel and other expense claims for each BOS member were reviewed. Based upon the facts gathered in this process, the following Findings and Recommendations have been made: Finding #1 A thorough review of expense claims submitted by the BOS revealed that some members consistently fail to follow the Policies and Procedures regarding travel and other expenditures. This is evidenced in part by: • Use of the County credit card to purchase personal items. • Exceeding the County established allowance for restaurant meals within the County. • Submission of claim forms that are incomplete and/or lack necessary supporting documents. Some claims were unsigned by the claimant. • Travel and expense claims are being authorized by the Board Clerk. Recommendation #1 All Supervisors should receive instruction in the laws governing the use and misuse of government-issued credit cards. Instruction should include the correct procedure for completion of claims, including submission with their own signature. All claims should be authorized by the Chairman of the Board and submitted to the Auditor. The Clerk of the Board should retain copies of all claims for a period of at least three years. This practice would facilitate requests from the public to review Board members’ travel and other expenditures. Finding #2 The County expends more than $100,000 a year to a professional lobbying group in Washington D.C. Some Supervisors have engaged in independent lobbying activities at additional cost to the County. Such activities may be duplicative.