2014-2015 Grand Jury Comprehensive Report

Conclusions 38

• CL1 Page 79
  Why did the agency decide to fast track the acquisition process?
• CL2 Page 79
  Why was the property not included in the Capital Improvement Program’s Strategic Priorities prior to the acquisition process and approval of purchase agreements?
• CL3 Page 79
  Who benefited from the purchase and why?
• CL4 Page 79
  Why did the purchase of the property take priority over other projects listed in the Capital Improvement Program? 79
• CL5 Page 80
  Why was there no public explanation prior to the purchase of the property of how the land acquisition fit into the larger scheme of the agency’s mission and vision?
• CL6 Page 80
  Why was there no public justification on whether the purchase price and terms of payment were a proactive use of agency reserves in relation to other strategic priorities?
• CL7 Page 80
  How was the property purchase justified as fiscally responsible, innovative, proactive, and environmentally sensitive? Integrity: Zone 7’s website states, “We practice the highest ethical standards and maintain open, honest communications at all levels of the organization at all times.” The Grand Jury believes that the board of directors failed to maintain high standards of organizational integrity throughout the property acquisition process. For example: ◊ Prior to approval of the 2013-14 annual budget, there was a lack of opportunity for public scrutiny or comment of how the allocation and budgeting of funds for purchasing the property was decided. ◊ The board of directors failed to make a public case to support and justify the land purchase prior to initiating a process to acquire the property. ◊ The board of directors appeared to be rushing to insert a watershed management resolution into its Capital Improvement Program Strategic Planning Priorities after the purchase price and terms of payment were established and the property was acquired. Fiscally Responsible: Zone 7’s website states, “We will operate in a productive, cost effective, transparent and efficient manner to ensure sound financial stability.” The board of directors failed to provide for appropriate disclosures and 80
• CL8 Page 29
  The Grand Jury believes good governance is demonstrated when decision making is done in a fair and transparent manner. Policy decisions should be implemented by county professional staff in an equitable and effective manner without political 29
• CL9 Page 30
  interference. Members of the public seeking permits and approvals deserve impartial treatment. Staff should be insulated from backroom political pressure applied by elected officials directly, or by their staff, to ensure a fair process. The Grand Jury concludes that county department heads being dependent on and subordinate to the board of supervisors invites unethical interference into day-to- day operations by board members. It puts inappropriate pressure on county staff to acquiesce and abandon good judgment and the objective of fairly administering county policies, rules, and regulations. Alameda County’s organizational chart depicts the county administrator’s position as a buffer protecting department staff from the type of meddling by county supervisors revealed by the Grand Jury’s investigation. The Grand Jury has documented several examples of inappropriate conduct that damaged the county’s reputation and caused it to suffer direct economic losses. This inappropriate conduct was also responsible for indirectly damaging Alameda County residents and business owners who appeared to be punished because they followed the rules. To protect against damaging conduct, many public agencies have rules in place forbidding political interference. Unfortunately, Alameda County does not. The Grand Jury believes that developing and implementing robust anti-interference and conflict-of-interest policies would best serve Alameda County. Finally, the Board of Supervisors should immediately take steps to enforce the conflict policies within the county charter by investigating questionable practices and taking swift action to deter undue political interference. 30
• CL10 Page 44
  The Grand Jury concludes that the board of the Newark Unified School District routinely and continuously violated its own rules of governance and behavior during the 2013-2014 school year. Such misconduct had escalated over several years. Some trustees regularly bypassed, and therefore undermined, the superintendent by directly interacting with and directing administrators and staff. Board members also violated terms of the Brown Act. Although the board in 2012 adopted a revised Governance Team Handbook that is a model for board behavior, some trustees habitually ignored its guidelines and policies. 44
• CL11 Page 45
  The Grand Jury believes that both sides share responsibility for the breakdown in leadership, but most of it resides with school trustees. They intruded into administrative affairs, fueling the crisis. Trustees have the ultimate power – they hire and can fire the superintendent. Voters can remove trustees, but usually only when they are up for election. The Grand Jury believes that it behooves the board to be conscious of and to respect the separation of powers implicit in school governance. To intrude into the administrator’s domain is to weaken and, in the worst circumstances, usurp the powers of its chosen chief executive. Such impositions inject confusion and division into the governing equation and can create leadership crises akin to what occurred in Newark. Trustees must avoid undermining the chief executive. When the superintendent was hired, Newark’s trustees led him to believe that they didn’t want to micromanage the district and intervene in daily affairs. He tried to call the board on its interference a year or so later, but without success. Some board members were unable – or unwilling – to curb such behavior. A witness testified that efforts to rein in rogue conduct were like “blowin’ in the wind.” It all amounted to petty power politics. And, the outcome is a culture of interference that creates a dysfunctional working environment that is churlish, hostile, immature, anxiety-ridden, disruptive, and ultimately destructive. While the district’s governance handbook was designed to foster teamwork and cooperation, day-to-day operations were governed by conflict and disagreement. As a result, the Grand Jury believes NUSD must take it upon itself to establish - and abide by - clearer, firmer boundaries of separation between the board and superintendent. Governing team members are supposed to heed the guidance written into the handbook. Instead, trustee interference with the superintendent’s authority as district administrator prompted him to resign, and spawned a summer of turmoil. 45
• CL12 Page 46
  The atmosphere became so toxic that one member of the board resigned under public pressure and another decided not to run for re-election. Three members of the old board remain in place and the superintendent has resumed his duties, but tensions clearly remain. Extra measures are needed to keep NUSD board members - future and present - from interfering in administrative affairs. False assumptions, intervention, usurpation of power, mistrust, and dysfunction have been key ingredients in the district’s board/superintendent relationships during the tenure of at least three administrators. The Newark Unified School District’s governing team needs to treat its handbook as a guide for day-to-day operations. The Grand Jury believes more needs to be done. A. The district needs to be much more explicit about the separation of powers between the board and superintendent. Being vague hasn’t worked. Board members have erased well-defined lines of separation and intruded into the superintendent’s domain far too often. The bylaws and handbook must be amended to erect stronger boundaries between NUSD’s legislative and executive branches. We recommend that the board adopt a policy similar to the city of Oakland’s section 218, “Non-interference in Administrative Affairs.” It would require that board members not get involved in executive affairs without first going through the superintendent. That includes contacting the superintendent before visiting campuses and interacting with members of the district staff and faculty on school issues. B. The board needs to follow its recently adopted policy enabling a majority of board members to censure members when they violate laws, rules, or regulations. 46
• CL13 Page 47
  C. Both the school board and superintendent need to abide by the roles and responsibilities outlined in the governance handbook. Rather than addressing educational issues and ongoing financial problems, the board and superintendent became bogged down in petty politics. It didn’t help when the superintendent gave trustees permission to discuss school affairs directly with district employees, even executive cabinet members, whenever they wanted. That act amounted to a forfeiture of administrative power in the eyes of some trustees, encouraging misconduct. The Grand Jury believes that the citizens of Newark need to pay close attention to the governance and management of their school district. The same people who formulated, wrote, and approved the governance handbook were also the foremost offenders of its rules, regulations, and guidelines. Four of the five members of the 2013-2014 school board were also trustees when the handbook was passed in 2005 and amended in 2012. They ignored their own rules. 47
• CL14 Page 68
  Beginning in July 2013, the Alameda Health System faced very serious cash flow issues due to a difficult transition to new health records and financial billings systems and the acquisition of two struggling hospitals. It also faced ongoing structural financial issues, but some of the financial damage was self-inflicted as the AHS board failed to perform sufficient due diligence of the San Leandro Hospital acquisition. The Grand Jury is concerned that the AHS board relied on executive staff recommendations and was swayed by political leaders regarding the acquisition of San Leandro Hospital, without demanding the due diligence it had earlier requested. This resulted in AHS’ board of trustees finalizing the acquisition without fully understanding the negative financial consequences. Failures in the channels of communication between AHS executive staff and its board, and also between AHS and the Alameda County Board of Supervisors, exacerbated the financial problems. These breakdowns in communication also became barriers that delayed both agencies from crafting comprehensive solutions, in effect preventing both boards from carrying out their mandated 68
• CL15 Page 69
  responsibility to oversee the finances of the massive and complicated organization. The Alameda Health System Board of Trustees must now make very difficult decisions to remedy structural financial problems. To ensure that AHS stays on track, the Alameda County Board of Supervisors must demand detailed and regular financial reporting from AHS. This will help the board of supervisors reestablish its oversight of the health system. The board of supervisors must also mandate that the Alameda Health System implement a sustainable financial model with clearly defined performance-related metrics to ensure that public funds are spent in a prudent and responsible manner. Finally, both organizations must ensure that the public has access to such information in order to help rebuild confidence in the viability of this essential county service. 69
• CL16 Page 90
  Government agencies rely heavily on the use of email communications to transact the public’s business. The Grand Jury believes all government agencies should be open and transparent. Emails must therefore be retained as public records and must be accessible for public review when warranted. The city of Fremont purges most email records after 30 days, depriving citizens access to vital information about how and why public policy, regulations, and laws are formulated. Given the growth and evolution of the internet and computer technology in the past 20 years, rules and regulations classifying emails as preliminary drafts are both antiquated and inadequate. The city of Fremont must overhaul its email retention/purge policy, thereby responding to the need for public transparency. The Grand Jury also believes the state of California could resolve this matter by integrating its retention statute into the Public Records Act. The absence of uniform guidelines means government emails will continue to be treated inconsistently across jurisdictions. Destroying emails prematurely not only prevents public access to vital information, but also impedes investigations of wrongdoing. For example, the PG&E pipeline explosion in San Bruno was mired in scandal as a result of emails being uncovered between PG&E staff and the state Public Utilities Commission. The inappropriate conduct of public officials involved in this case would not have become known had it not been for the retention of emails that enabled the public to uncover wrongdoing and demand accountability. 90
• CL17 Page 91
  Two other examples are found within this 2014-2015 Grand Jury report. These examples, like the PG&E case, further illustrate that access to email communications is essential to ensure that government business is conducted in an ethical manner. Emails were often key to determining whether there was misconduct by government agencies. The Grand Jury concludes that the city of Fremont’s interpretation of California statutes cited in this report is contrary to the spirit of open and transparent government and must be changed. 91
• CL18 Page 97
  The Grand Jury believes that local public governing boards have a fiduciary responsibility to ensure that public money is used for the benefit of the public. Two Oakland Housing Authority commissioners expended a considerable amount of money and time traveling. This appeared to be a direct contradiction to the primary objective of OHA’s mission. The Grand Jury believes this indicates a failure of the board of commissioners to rein-in fellow commissioners who exploit the system. Limited travel may be necessary for networking or training on the part of the commissioners, however, their specific oversight responsibilities are more heavily weighted to understanding budgets and financial reports, evaluating the operations of the Oakland Housing Authority, and setting and enforcing policy within the framework set by the Federal Government. 97
• CL19 Page 98
  The Grand Jury acknowledges that the main travel offender has left the OHA board, and the Grand Jury commends staff for their efforts to now report board travel more transparently. However, the board and not the staff are responsible to self-police such matters. To avoid actual or perceived misuse of public funds, commissioners must have a firm understanding of and a conviction to enforce their own rules and policies. Ethical considerations must be applied at all times to ensure the public trust. Public participation and oversight of boards such as OHA is understandably limited. It is therefore incumbent on the board itself and the mayor of Oakland, who appoints the board members, to be mindful that taxpayer funds should be spent judiciously in furthering the mission of the Oakland Housing Authority. 98
• CL20 Page 103
  While PCCD has improved travel and reimbursement policies based on a previous Grand Jury’s recommendations, there is still a need for improvement and better enforcement of the policies. Adherence to policies must apply equally to all, including the trustees, the chancellor, and employees. Better training is needed to prevent erroneous reimbursements. The $25 per day incidental payment needs to be eliminated. The Grand Jury is concerned that the current practices have fostered a culture of entitlement that benefits the individual and not the college as a whole. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS None RESPONSES REQUIRED None 103
• CL21 Page 104
  [This page intentionally left blank] 104
• CL22 Page 105
  EMERY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT PARCEL TAX MEASURE Executive Summary Like the municipality defining it, the Emery Unified School District (EUSD) is comparatively small; it consists of two schools: one elementary school and one secondary school. Within the last dozen years, Emeryville voters approved school parcel tax initiatives. The current one (Measure K) passed in 2007 and more recently was extended until 2037. Measure K authorizes the expenditure of funds earmarked for defined EUSD educational programs. In addition, the measure mandates the formation of a citizens’ oversight committee that is charged with monitoring district compliance with Measure K purposes. In June 2014, the Grand Jury received a complaint alleging that EUSD revenue from Measure K was not being spent according to the measure’s intended purpose. The complainant also questioned whether an oversight committee existed to monitor the disbursements of Measure K funds. As a result of its investigation, the Grand Jury found that the EUSD is in compliance in its spending of parcel tax revenue as intended by Measure K and a citizen’s oversight committee does exist, but it has not followed the Brown Act and its transparency guidelines.
• CL23 Page 108
  The Grand Jury recognizes that the measure does not specify how its particular parcel tax funds are to be allocated, and the Grand Jury did not find that the Emery Unified School District improperly used those funds. The district is in compliance as described in the measure. The Grand Jury strongly suggests that the oversight committee follow the guidelines of the Brown Act for noticing and conducting public meetings, which includes publicizing agendas and reporting to the public the results of meetings. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS None RESPONSES REQUIRED None 108
• CL24 Page 109
  JAIL INSPECTIONS IN ALAMEDA COUNTY The Grand Jury is required by California Penal Code section 919(b) to inspect jails and holding facilities within Alameda County. In order to determine which facilities to inspect, the Grand Jury chose jails that had not been recently inspected or that required reinspection due to deficiencies. During fiscal year 2014-2015, the Alameda County Grand Jury inspected Camp Wilmont Sweeney, the Oakland Police Department Juvenile Holding Area, the Albany Police Department Jail, the Pleasanton Police Department Jail, and the Rene C. Davidson Courthouse Jail. The Grand Jury’s reports are on the following pages. 109
• CL25 Page 110
  [This page intentionally left blank] 110
• CL26 Page 111
  CAMP WILMONT SWEENEY Introduction On October 7, 2014, the Grand Jury inspected Camp Wilmont Sweeney, which is located in San Leandro, adjacent to the Alameda County Juvenile Justice Center. Camp Sweeney is a 24-hour, 60-bed minimum-security program for 15-18 year- old males. It is a local alternative residential rehabilitation program for juvenile offenders operated by the Alameda County Probation Department. On the day of the Grand Jury’s inspection, 43 males were in residence. Inspection Camp Sweeney’s superintendent and a licensed clinical social worker accompanied the Grand Jury on its inspection. The Grand Jury also heard testimony from two staff members of the Alameda County Probation Department. The Grand Jury learned that Camp Sweeney operates its program with a probation philosophy adapted from successful models from other juvenile institutions. Camp Sweeney staff work with incarcerated youth to develop individualized treatment plans which include goals related to specific behavioral and educational needs. It also works in conjunction with numerous community- based organizations to assist youths while in custody and after release. Camp Sweeney Observations The open style dormitory was clean, the communal showers, sinks and toilets were operable (with the exception of one sink), and the beds were neatly made. Pre-packaged meals are heated in an on-site kitchen and detainees have access to vending machines. There are recreational facilities consisting of basketball courts 111
• CL27 Page 112
  and open spaces for other activities. There is a library, but the staff expressed a need for additional books. Overall, the Grand Jury observed that the facility is old and dilapidated. The Grand Jury was informed that structurally the campus is seismically deficient by current standards. Funds have been allocated to build a new facility, but no location has been finalized because of seismic concerns. There is one large dormitory with video surveillance. However, the grounds lack audio or video monitoring. The Grand Jury was informed the lack of outdoor surveillance and sufficient security make it difficult to prevent contraband from being hidden on the grounds by visitors. The Grand Jury was informed that there are no funds available to pay for these security measures. Basic health care is provided at the facility in a small medical office. If more than basic health care is required, youth are taken to the adjacent Juvenile Justice Center clinic, where medical personnel are on duty on a 24-hour basis, or to Oakland’s UCSF Benioff Children’s Hospital if needed. Camp residents attend classes taught by the Alameda County Office of Education unless they have already received their high school diploma or General Education Development (GED) certificate. In the classrooms the Grand Jury visited, the youth appeared engaged and the teachers appeared enthusiastic regarding the subject matter. The Grand Jury observed camp residents who have graduated from high school or obtained their GED, but did not appear to have structured activities or supervision while other detainees attended class. Through testimony, the Grand Jury confirmed that the camp lacks post-high school vocational or educational programs during school hours. Staffing Issues During the Grand Jury’s term, we heard allegations of staffing issues and other potential problems with Camp Sweeney. 112
• CL28 Page 113
  The Grand Jury heard testimony that during the 2013-2014 fiscal year, a number of staff members were working excessive overtime, totaling $454,098. Of this, $119,014 was for overtime costs to cover for staff on administrative leave. In response to an inquiry to the probation department, the Grand Jury was advised that a total of 24.5 full-time equivalent employees were budgeted for Camp Sweeney, and that as of December 19, 2014, the camp was fully staffed. The amount of overtime spent at Camp Sweeney appears to conflict with the probation department’s claim that Camp Sweeney is fully staffed. The Grand Jury heard testimony that one cause of excessive overtime is the length of time required to complete investigations of employees on administrative leave for suspected wrongdoing. As of November 6, 2014, data provided by the probation department indicated that it was taking from 52 to 291 working days to complete these investigations. To meet the staffing requirements during the investigations, the Grand Jury was informed that many staff members work excessive overtime, including double shifts, to make up for absences attributed to administrative leave. This has resulted in staff burnout and increased workers’ compensation claims. Additionally, the Grand Jury was very troubled in that the probation department was unable to provide data regarding the recidivism rate of juveniles supervised by the probation department.
• CL29 Page 113
  While the Grand Jury realizes that Alameda County has plans and is taking steps to replace Camp Wilmont Sweeney, the camp currently needs to improve security to address problems that have existed for years. Camp Sweeny should have exterior cameras on the camp entrances and parking lots. The Grand Jury learned that contraband enters the camp through these areas. It is the opinion of the Grand Jury that this equipment should be installed as soon as possible. 113
• CL30 Page 114
  The Grand Jury concludes that Camp Sweeney staffing is problematic due in part to the extended periods of administrative leave. The Grand Jury is concerned about the more than $400,000 in annual overtime costs for Camp Sweeney, and the over $4 million in overtime paid by the probation department as a whole. The Grand Jury believes that the probation department should shorten administrative leave investigation times. The Grand Jury believes that vocational or educational programs should be established for camp residents who have completed their high school requirements. These programs should be available when other camp residents are attending high school level classes. Finally, the Grand Jury suggests that the Alameda County Probation Department collect data that would enable the evaluation of the benefits and successes of the department’s programs, as well as the recidivism rates of juvenile offenders. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS None RESPONSES REQUIRED None 114
• CL31 Page 115
  OAKLAND POLICE DEPARTMENT JUVENILE HOLDING AREA On October 21, 2014, the Grand Jury inspected the Oakland Police Department’s juvenile holding area on the 4th floor of the police services building in Oakland. The area is used to temporarily hold suspected juvenile offenders immediately after arrest. The juveniles may be interviewed, fingerprinted, and photographed at the facility prior to their transfer to either the Alameda County Juvenile Justice Center or to parental control, as deemed appropriate. An Oakland police lieutenant, who was responsible for managing the area, escorted and answered questions for the Grand Jury during the inspection. The Grand Jury was told that juveniles stay at this facility for an average of 90 minutes. However, on occasion, if there is an ongoing off-site investigation relating to the detention, a juvenile may stay for up to four hours. Based on department policy, detentions in excess of six hours require a written report by the investigating officers to the lieutenant in charge justifying the stay. Outside the holding area on the fourth floor are weapons storage lockboxes where officers secure their firearms before entering the holding area. There is a corridor where detainees are fingerprinted and photographed. The corridor includes a windowed holding area with benches, an open cell with a sink and toilet, and four cells. Male and female detainees are held separately. There is an additional cell currently being used as a storage area. The Grand Jury was told that the holding area that was inspected has been earthquake retrofitted. The narrow entry corridor precludes processing wheelchair-bound detainees. The Grand Jury was told that those individuals are taken directly to the Juvenile Justice Center for processing. 115
• CL32 Page 116
  Detention cell use is generally limited to times when multiple detainees are present who must be separated. When locked cells are used, a safety check is made every 30 minutes. The cells are close enough to the processing area to allow detainees to be heard by staff. If food or drink is required, granola bars or bottled water are made available. Oakland Police Department policy requires that detainees be immediately transferred to Highland Hospital if any serious medical issues arise. Staff allows parents or guardians to deliver required medication. The entire secure area other than the inside of the cells is visible from a separate windowed area where officers are stationed. Officers have access to a First Aid Kit. There was no Automatic External Defibrillator (AED) located on the floor, which is an issue that should be addressed by Oakland. The Grand Jury was offered copies of current procedures for review and was told that the policies were being updated. Aside from the wheelchair accessibility limitations and the lack of a readily accessible AED, the Grand Jury found this facility to be well run, clean, and in serviceable condition. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS None RESPONSES REQUIRED None 116
• CL33 Page 117
  ALBANY POLICE DEPARTMENT JAIL On September 30, 2014, the Grand Jury inspected the Albany Police Department Jail, located at 1000 San Pablo Avenue in Albany, California. The jail consists of several cells and a holding area. This facility is used to temporarily hold both juvenile and adult detainees before release or transfer to county facilities. An Albany police lieutenant, responsible for managing the jail, escorted and answered questions for the Grand Jury during the inspection. Weapons storage lockboxes are located outside the secured holding area. Inside the secured area is a main holding room where detainees are processed. Adjacent to the main room are two cells, one used for storage and one with a bench, but no toilet or sink. There is also a holding room, with a window, that can be monitored remotely by staff. When detainees must be separated for safety issues or due to investigative needs, this windowed holding room is used. There are two additional cells located down a hallway. The Grand Jury was informed that these two cells are rarely needed, and typically used only for detainees who are unable to care for their own safety due to drug or alcohol intoxication. The Grand Jury found that one of the toilets in the more remote cells was not working, but was informed that at the time of the writing of this report it had been repaired. A physical check on detainee status is performed every 30 minutes by staff any time these cells are in use. Detainees ordinarily remain at the Albany Jail for only 20-30 minutes. They typically are held longer than 30 minutes when no vehicle is available to transfer the detainee to a booking facility, or for juveniles if no parent is immediately available for release to their custody. 117
• CL34 Page 118
  Bottled water is available to detainees, and the police department purchases food from a local McDonald’s if needed. The Albany Fire Department is located in an adjacent building and is called for assistance if any serious medical issues arise with detainees. A First Aid Kit and an external defibrillator device are available inside the secured main holding area. The Grand Jury was shown recently updated policies and procedures. The Grand Jury found the Albany Jail facility to be generally clean and well run. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS None RESPONSES REQUIRED None 118
• CL35 Page 119
  PLEASANTON POLICE DEPARTMENT JAIL On November 4, 2014, the Grand Jury inspected the Pleasanton City Jail, located at 4833 Bernal Avenue in Pleasanton. A police sergeant escorted the jurors during the inspection. The Pleasanton City Jail serves the Pleasanton Police Department as a temporary holding facility. The jail has one processing cell and four holding cells for adult detainees. On the day of the Grand Jury’s inspection, no detainees were being held at the facility. Most arrestees are held only for a short time at this jail, then transferred to another facility or released. The maximum holding time at this facility is usually six to eight hours. The Pleasanton Police Department reports that the average daily population is one detainee, but there are many occasions when there are no detainees in custody. There are three juvenile holding cells at the Pleasanton Jail. Juveniles are under constant observation by officers until they are released to a parent or guardian, or transferred to the Alameda County Juvenile Justice Center in San Leandro. Upon entry to the jail, staff medically screens detainees. Jail staff is trained to perform basic first aid as necessary. The Grand Jury confirmed that policies exist to deal with detainees who have medical or prescription drug needs. Detainees with more significant health needs are either transferred to Santa Rita Jail in Dublin or to a medical facility. The jail utilizes fire department paramedics for emergency medical evaluation of detainees, if necessary. The Grand Jury was advised that staff is trained and has access to First Aid Kits and automated external defibrillators. The cells, toilets, and sinks at the Pleasanton Jail appeared clean and well maintained. Jail staff conducts regular safety checks of detainees every 15-30 minutes. The Grand Jury observed functioning cameras throughout the facility with video observation in the booking area. 119
• CL36 Page 120
  Detainees at the Pleasanton Jail are provided food as needed. Food is purchased from vending machines on-site or, if necessary, outside the facility from local stores. Detainees needing interpreting services are connected with police department staff fluent in the needed language. If an interpreter is not available, AT&T language services are utilized. The Grand Jury confirmed the existence of jail regulations that contain policies and procedures to follow in the event of emergencies, as well as various security measures for jail operations. Also observed were the forms used when booking and the jail’s detainee health questionnaire. Police weapons are secured in lockers prior to entry into the jail facility. Additionally, the jail maintains a log to record prisoner complaints. The Grand Jury found the Pleasanton Police Department Jail to be clean, well- managed and efficient. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS None RESPONSES REQUIRED None 120
• CL37 Page 121
  RENE C. DAVIDSON COURTHOUSE JAIL On November 12, 2014 the Grand Jury inspected the Rene C. Davidson Courthouse Jail in Oakland, accompanied by staff that included a captain, a lieutenant, and two sergeants from the Alameda County Sheriff’s Office. The jail, although large, does not function as a traditional jail, but instead is a daytime holding area for defendants appearing in court on that day. As such, there are no overnight stays. The Rene C. Davidson Courthouse has 13 courtrooms that are served by this facility. Detainees arrive by van or bus in the morning from other jails in the county and enter through an underground sally port from where they are taken by a special jail elevator to the top floor. This special elevator is partitioned to separate the detainees from the elevator operator and any accompanying officers. The detainees are not booked at this facility, but are checked into a holding area. The average length of a prisoner’s stay is less than six hours. The average number of detainees per day ranges from 60-70. Prisoner accommodations include several single cells, but there are also multi-person dayrooms with TV and reading options. The cells have benches but no mattresses. Lunches, as well as any needed medications, are brought with the prisoners when they arrive in the morning. Phone calls are not allowed. The courthouse jail is under camera surveillance and appeared to be well staffed. The Grand Jury observed that the facilities were clean and well maintained. However, the Grand Jury learned that the Alameda County Sheriff’s Office supplemented the county-provided jail janitorial services with its own janitorial services. 121
• CL38 Page 122
  Jail staff is trained in first aid and CPR and have access to First Aid Kits as well as automated external defibrillators. The policies and procedures manuals were up to date and readily available to staff. The Grand Jury found the Rene C. Davidson Courthouse Jail to be well run and efficient. The Grand Jury observed that staff had pride in the over 80-year-old facility. There were several remarks made about how solidly everything was built and how the old equipment still worked well. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS None RESPONSES REQUIRED None 122

No Responses Found 1

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