⚠️ Aviso de traducción: Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings 11 findings
F1
By changing the employment relationship for the revised OIR’s Executive Director and professional staff from independent contractor to County employee, the Board of Supervisors appears to have made the 2015 version of the Office of Independent Review less independent of the Board and more vulnerable to the Board exerting politically- motivated influence on the five covered agencies and/or their leadership through the OIR.
F2
Some members of the Board of Supervisors were dissatisfied with the OIR’s performance from 2008-2015. Some of the dissatisfaction appeared to be the result of a mismatch between Supervisors’ expectations and the OIR mandate as described in the 2008 OIR ordinance and the OIR Executive Director’s contract.
F3
Although the 2015 OIR ordinance calls for the OIR to “conduct substantive systemic audits and reviews,” there is no explicit provision of authority or resources for the OIR to conduct them independently, a recurring supervisorial expectation. Without the authority or resources to conduct its own independent audit investigations, the 2015 version of the OIR 2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Office of Independent Review: What’s Next? would have to act only as reviewer of audits and reviews performed by Performance Audit, and/or Internal Audit, and/or the agencies themselves.
F4
The OIR could easily cost upwards of $3 million/year due to expansion to five agencies plus jail monitors.
F5
It will be a challenge to find and retain a permanent staff with the qualifications and sufficient subject matter expertise to identify best practices and to review the broad range of services provided by the five agencies identified in the 2015 ordinance.
F6
The increase in OIR purview from the 2008 ordinance to the 2015 amended ordinance, from just the OCSD to the OCSD plus four other agencies, is so large in the breadth of services offered by the five agencies, the number of County employees covered, and the number of OIR staff to be hired, that a phased implementation will be required.
F7
The strenuous opposition of the OCDA to its inclusion in the OIR’s purview could pose a serious threat to the ability of the OIR to provide an effective review of the OCDA as required by the 2015 ordinance.
F8
The willingness of the OCSD to work cooperatively with the OIR was crucial to allowing the original 2008 OIR to be effective as an independent reviewer of OSCD’s internal investigations.
F9
With the OIR’s newly-expanded role to review the policies and practices of the OCSD and recommend reforms consistent with evolving best practices, the OCSD has an opportunity to take advantage of the new OIR to assist the OCSD in recovering from the current jailhouse informant controversy. This would require the continued voluntary cooperation of the OCSD with the new OIR.
F10
With the OIR’s newly-expanded role to review the policies and practices of the OCDA and recommend reforms consistent with evolving best practices, the OCDA has an opportunity to take advantage of the new OIR to assist the OCDA in recovering from the current jailhouse informant controversy, and in particular, implementing IPPEC recommendation #2. This would require the voluntary cooperation of the OCDA with the new OIR.
F11
The assurance of confidentiality, through attorney-client privilege between the five relevant County agencies and the OIR, is essential to the effective implementation of the 2015 OIR ordinance. Still, even attorney-client privilege may be insufficient for allowing access to some confidential documents, like juvenile records and personnel files that are very tightly controlled by the courts. 2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Office of Independent Review: What’s Next?
Recommendations 1
-
R8The OCDA should add an OIR staff attorney as an “outside” or independent member of the OCDA’s Confidential Informant Review Committee, in keeping with IPPEC
Conclusions 1
-
CL1The Grand Jury is cautiously optimistic that the OIR will return in fiscal year 2016-2017, but it remains to be seen whether the new OIR will get the cooperation it needs from the OCDA. Moreover, the revised 2015 OIR ordinance lacks details on program design, duties, key performance indicators (KPIs), and outcome measures. The County has yet to develop a detailed vision of exactly what this iteration of the OIR will look like or achieve. Much work remains to fill out the details and reestablish the OIR. 2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Page 35 Office of Independent Review: What’s Next? On balance, the Grand Jury believes the original OIR was a worthwhile addition to County government to ensure that the Sheriff’s Department’s internal investigations and responses to in- custody deaths or serious injuries were thorough, fair, and effective. It suffered, however, from expectations by the Board that were not supported by the founding ordinance. This created tension between the Board and the OIR throughout the past eight years. Now the Board has put the original OIR to rest and started building its replacement with new provisions more closely, but still not perfectly, matched to the Board’s expectations of independent and pro-active investigation as well as review. Obviously, it is too early to judge how effective the new OIR may be. Based on its investigation, the Grand Jury is providing a number of findings and recommendations in this report. They are directed to the Board for its consideration as it fills in the details of the new OIR, and to the five agencies called out in the 2015 ordinance. The hope of the Grand Jury is that the new OIR will apply the lessons learned from the successes and struggles of the original OIR, and fulfill its mandate as an independent watchful eye ensuring thorough, fair, and effective law enforcement for the citizens of Orange County.
Agency Responses 2
Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.