2012/2013 Shasta County Grand Jury

While the hiring process is lengthy and cumbersome, a revision of current procedures and/or the lowering of current standards could result in the hiring of less qualified correctional officers.

Applicants were not fully informed of the length of time necessary to complete the recruitment/hiring process.

The delay in opening the third floor of the jail was due to the lack of adequate correctional officer staffing and the extensive recruitment/hiring process.

The WSRCD website is out-of-date and fails to provide the public with necessary information.

Sugar Pine provides rehabilitation, education and training opportunities that can be beneficial to the inmates. Summary of 2012-2013 Grand Jury Activities Agencies, Departments and Facilities Toured 14 Autopsies Attended 3 Committee Meeting Held 228 Complaints Received 44 Criminal Hearings Held 0 Interviews Conducted During Course of Investigation 87 Final Reports Issues 7 Government Board Meeting Attended 13 Indictments Issued 0 Joint Audit Committee Meetings Attended 3 Meetings of the Full Grand Jury 28 18 City Of Redding Employee Conduct and Honesty Policy SUMMARY The City of Redding currently has in place an Employee Conduct and Honesty Policy which has not been revised since 1987.While the policy addresses violations for accepting a gift, it does not define a gift, nor does it adequately detail the consequences of a violation. Interviews with city employees indicated a lack of understanding of what constitutes a gift and what is a violation of this policy. A well-defined gift policy would provide guidance for employees, and adherence would lessen the potential for a conflict of interest. Department heads or direct supervisors should review all reports of an employee receiving gifts. BACKGROUND In August, 2012, a City of Redding official forwarded to the Grand Jury information regarding allegations of misconduct made against a former employee. One allegation concerned the acceptance of gifts. After reviewing the Employee Conduct and Honesty Policy, we found that the section referring to gifts is vague and subject to misinterpretation. We also discovered that there was no procedure in place for management review of documentation regarding gifts received by city employees. APPROACH The Grand Jury reviewed:  the Employee Conduct and Honesty Policy;  Fair Political Practice Commission (FPPC) Limitations and Restrictions on Gifts, Honoraria, Travel and Loans – FPPC Gift Reporting Pamphlet;  FPPC Statement of Economic Interest ( Form 700) which includes Gift Report- ing Schedules D and E;  California Government Code 87200;  Redding Municipal Code, Chapter 2.90 (Conflict of Interest for Designated Po- sitions of the City).  elected City of Redding Officials;  City of Redding employees. DISCUSSION The only reference to gifts within the City of Redding Personnel Policies Manual, Employee Conduct and Honesty is: “C. CONFLICT OF INTEREST “Some examples of violations: “C2. When an employee accepts gifts, payments, entertainment, loans, services, or promises of future benefits from any concern doing business or seeking to do business with the City, except personal loans from banks or other lending institutions.” Some of the city employees interviewed interpreted the above referenced policy as a “zero tolerance” policy which prohibits employees from accepting any gifts. Other employees in- terviewed stated that some gifts were allowed. Among acceptable gifts listed by some of those interviewed were boxes of candy at Christmas, rounds of golf, pens and pencils, and other trinkets. California Government Code 87200 requires elected officials, other designated employees and consultants to file an annual FPPC 700 Form which lists gifts received to an allowable maximum of $420 per any single source in 2011 and 2012. The maximum was increased to $440 beginning January 1, 2013. While the majority of city employees are not required to file the FPPC 700 Form, all are ex- pected to comply with the current Conduct and Honesty Policy. The state policy allows ac- ceptance of gifts while the city policy does not allow gifts “from any concern doing business or seeking to do business with the City, except personal loans from banks or other lending institutions.” For the period January 1 through November 28, 2012, the City Clerk’s office had received 232 FPPC 700 Forms. Ten employees, none of whom was an elected official, filed FPPC 700 Forms reporting gifts received in excess of $50. This violated the city policy. The City of Redding Personnel Policies Manual, Page No. 17.14, “MISCELLANEOUS: POLICY – EMPLOYEE CONDUCT AND HONESTY” states: “1. Violation of this policy will subject any employee to disciplinary action, up to and including discharge. In addition, supervisors and management who knowingly allow others to engage in acts of misconduct are subject to appropriate disciplinary action…” City officials and staff members interviewed were unaware of any disciplinary action ever taken against employees violating this policy. Current city practice requires management review of FPPC 700 Forms only if a reported gift is over $440. FINDINGS