Chamberlain Creek and Parlin Fork Conservation Camps

Conclusions 1

• CL1
  According to the professional judgment of the Fire Chief, Brooktrails manager, peace officers, and the majority of other political and safety officials, the parked and or abandoned cars, boats, and motor homes would not significantly interfere with fire fighting equipment and pose no danger to fire safety in Brooktrails. Response Required Board of Supervisors Brooktrails Township Board of Directors Brooktrails Fire Chief Brooktrails Manager County Sheriff Response Requested California Highway Patrol 51 CHAMBERLAIN CREEK AND PARLIN FORK CONSERVATION CAMPS The Grand Jury is required by Penal Code Section §919 to oversee all prisons in Mendocino County. Method of Investigation The Grand Jury conducted a visit at both camps. The Grand Jury interviewed California Department of Corrections (CDC) and California Department of Forestry (CDF) Officers, on site instructors and several inmates.

Comments 9

• CO1
  The Ukiah Valley population is likely to continue to grow and the need for water for domestic, business and agricultural use will increase proportionately. Any increase in availability of water by storage behind the Coyote Valley Dam or other means is problematic and speculative. Raising the dam, even if possible could not be accomplished in less than ten years. There is an immediate need for a water conservation plan for the Ukiah Valley, which would limit water use by water consumers by providing penalties for over-use. Fines and shut-offs would be necessary. The Mendocino County Water Agency would be responsible for water-use policies and regulation enforcement. A comprehensive program with a futuristic approach to our water usage is needed. 30 31 Technical Terms Appendix One Acre Foot (AF) is a measure of water volume and is defined as one acre of area covered one foot deep by water, thus 43,560 cubic feet. One Acre Foot (AF) is 325.850 gallons of water. One Million Gallons is 3.07 AF (3,0689) One cubic foot per second of flow (CFS) is 646,315 gallons. That amounts to nearly 2 AF (1.98) per 24-hour day. At a rate of one gallon per second, it would take about 3 3/4 days to run out an acre foot (3.7714 days). 32 Distribution List Response Required: Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Russian River Flood Control District Calpella County Water District City of Ukiah Utilities District Hopland Public Utilities District Millview County Water District Redwood Valley County Water District Willow County Water District Response Requested: California State Water Resource Control Board Report release date: June 4, 2003 33 Animal Care and Control Department Introduction The Grand Jury received specific complaints from citizens and past employees of the Animal Care and Control Department (AC&CD). The Grand Jury has oversight of all departments of Mendocino County. Methods of Investigation The Grand Jury visited both the inland and coastal Animal Control facilities. The Grand Jury interviewed the director of the AC&CD, the manager and two employees of the Animal Care Facility, the clerk in charge of licensing, a shelter staff member, and one current and three former Animal Control Officers. The Grand Jury visited with officials of both the City of Fort Bragg who has a contract for services with the AC&CD, and City of Ukiah officials who explained the relationship between them and the AC&CD. In addition, the Grand Jury interviewed a citizen who is interested in the care given to the animals kept at the animal care facility, an officer with the local humane society, and the head of the County Human Resources Department. The Grand Jury made a trip to Healdsburg and was given a thorough guided tour of the Healdsburg Animal Control and Humane Society facility that euthanizes animals, and interviewed the officer in charge. The members of the Grand Jury were also given a complete overview of the microdot device reader and were given a demonstration of how it works. The Grand Jury reviewed the following legal documents: the Mendocino County Animal Care and Control Policy and Procedures Manual; California State codes relating to how animals are to be handled during capture, care, and disposal by AC&CD’s within the state; and legal agreements between the City of Ukiah and Mendocino County. The Grand Jury examined 34 publications by the State Humane Association of California (a non-profit organization) regarding the curriculum and training of euthanasia instructors, the financial report of the AC&CD, and the Care-A-Van pamphlet about the mobile vaccination and neutering service for animals in rural Mendocino County.
• CO2
  While recognizing that State governing codes do not impose requirements of over- sight upon the County, they do give authorization to both the Board of Supervisors and the Auditor-Controller’s office to take action when things are amiss. Because there were so many indications that things were going wrong, the County must take some of the responsibility for the problems and the loss of funds. This sentiment was verbalized by a number past trustees interviewed. In other words the County has let the Cemetery District down. 41
• CO3
  The Grand Jury acknowledges and especially commends the County Library Director for her skills, energy and leadership in moving the Library and Library services to levels not supported by the County budget. The Grand Jury also applauds the staff, the Friends of the Library and all volunteers for their extraordinary roll in providing such a diverse, high quality library system in spite of severe monetary constraints. Over the last few years, many major accomplishments have been achieved through strong leadership, dedicated and competent staff, and momentous community support. 48 Response Required Mendocino Board of Supervisors Mendocino County Administrator Response Requested Mendocino County Library Director Mendocino County Library Advisory Board 49 Dangerous Fire Hazards in Brooktrails? The Grand Jury received a complaint signed by seventeen residents of Brooktrails regarding their concern about cars parked on the roads. The complainants claimed that the parked vehicles would endanger their safety by interfering with fire emergency vehicles attempting to respond to a fire call. The Grand Jury interviewed the main author of the complaint, the business manager, and a member of the Brooktrails board, a sheriff deputy of Mendocino County who lives in Brooktrails, a CHP officer who also lives in Brooktrails and the Fire Chief of Brooktrails. The Grand Jury also attended a public meeting for all residents of the district where the subject of cars that are illegally parked was on the agenda. The Grand Jury made a tour of Brooktrails roads to observe cars and other vehicles parked on roads and private property.
• CO4
  Chamberlain Creek and Parlin Fork Conservation Camps are well-organized, functional units. They have proven to be a beneficial program in Mendocino County and the State of California. Response Requested California Department of Corrections California Department of Forestry 53 MENDOCINO COUNTY JAIL The Mendocino County Jail (MCJ) is located in Ukiah, California and is staffed by The Sheriff Department with a staff of 49 officers. The Grand Jury is mandated to inspect the facility each year. METHOD OF INVESTIGATION The Grand Jury reviewed the California Code of Regulation §1027. The Grand Jury interviewed: kitchen staff, jail inmates, the Sheriff, a jail supervisor, a laundry worker and classroom councilors. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The Grand Jury is charged with conducting an oversight of the Jail annually. (California Penal Code §919). The Jail operated by the Sheriff, holds a maximum for 296 inmates.
• CO5
  Inmates need more motivation to study and move on to higher education they should be encourage to be involved in personal improvement activities. 55 RESPONSE REQUIRED Board of Supervisors Mendocino County Sheriff RESPONSE REQUESTED Jail Commander of Mendocino County Report completion date: 13 June 2003 56 Racial Profiling in the Willits Unified School District and in the City of Willits Police Department. Reason for the Investigation The Grand Jury received complaints from four families that Willits High School and Willits Police Department were engaged in racial profiling due to concerns about gang activities in Willits. The major complaint was that students, parents and Willits High School staff adopted a dress code. Procedure The Grand Jury interviewed the complainants, the Willits Chief of Police, a captain on the Willits Police force, and the school principals at Willits High School and Baechtel Grove Middle School. The Grand Jury also interviewed the Willits School District Superintendent of Schools. The Grand Jury interviewed two students of Willits High School and their fathers. The Grand Jury attended a news conference promoted by three parents and some of their children. 57
• CO6
  The Grand Jury commends the Willits Police Department and Willits School Administrators. The Grand Jury urges all parents, who are concerned about any difficulties their children are experiencing in schools, to address these problems and to work cooperatively with the schools.
• CO7
  The Grand Jury commends the city government and citizenry of Point Arena on its completion and adoption of its General Plan, its efforts to establish its emergency services program, its successful petroleum and solid waste recycling program, its support of the Safe Passages program, and its sound fiscal management. The Grand Jury applauds the dedication of the virtually unpaid elected officials of the city and the dedication of its salaried employees as well. Misinformation and lack of communication between various factions of the citizenry and City government is endemic. The public does not regularly attend City Council meetings. The City Council in the past has had to appoint members because of lack of interest. The Grand Jury would remind the citizenry of Point Arena that “you get the government you deserve.” Supplemental Comments The Grand Jury attended the special joint meeting of the City of Point Arena and the Redwood Coast Fire Protection District on February 19, 2003 in which Point Arena considered the following positive steps to begin resolving the public safety issues in the Arena cove area. (1) The owners of the Wharfmaster’s Inn and Coast Guard House B&B agreed to upgrade their water storage to approximately 20,000 gallons with fire equipment access and hose connection access. 71 (2) The City of Point Arena and the owners of the aforementioned lodging establishments agreed to improve the secondary vehicle access to the Wharfmaster’s Inn. (3) The City of Point arena agreed to upgrade the main water transmission line supplying the Arena cove area, to assure adequate water pressure and volume. The plans are to be completed by August 19, 2003. (4) The City of Point Arena is to aggressively procure funding to complete the new water line. 72 MENDOCINO COUNTY RISK MANAGEMENT DIVISION As a part of the Grand Jury’s routine oversight responsibilities as mandated by the California Penal Code, the 2002-2003 Grand Jury selected the Risk Management Division of the County of Mendocino Administrative Office. The primary, but not exclusive, focus of this review was to survey the various insurance and reinsurance programs managed by the Risk Management Office, review related and supporting programs, and look at the adverse impact of budgetary constraints on all areas of operations including staffing. Special emphasis was given to the General Liability Self-Insured Program. The Grand Jury did not review the administration of the Health Insurance Program. METHODS OF INVESTIGATION In accomplishing it’s review of the County Risk Management Division, the Grand Jury interviewed the County Risk Manager, The County Administrator, County Counsel, and selected Risk Management Staff. In addition, the Grand Jury reviewed the February 2002 County of Mendocino Actuarial Review of the Self Insured Liability Program, the December 2002 County of Mendocino Actuarial Review of the Self-Insured Liability Program (Forecast for Policy Year 2003-2004), the most recent Liability Claim Audit of July 8, 2000, the most recent Budget Narrative, the March 2002 Workers’ 73 Compensation Claims Audit, the Return to Work Program, Policy Notebook, Property Schedule/Valuations Notebook, (CSAC) Insurance Program Notebook, CSAC Broker Activity Report, CSAC Excess Insurance Authority Board of Directors Meeting Agenda Book, CSAC Excess Insurance Authority Executive Committee Tentative Agenda Book, The Mendocino County Safety Manual, The 2002-2003 Division Budget, and applicable Mendocino County Ordinances. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The Risk Management Division is currently staffed with 6 persons including, the Risk Manager, one part time and one full time Safety Officers, a Return to Work Coordinator, a Safety Coordinator, and, a Benefit Specialist. Two positions remain vacant due to lack of funding. They are the Risk Management Analyst and the Staff Assistant I. The Risk Manager is appointed by the County Administrator, and reports to the County Administrator through an assigned liaison staff member at the County Administrators Office. The “Mission Statement” outlines the general functions of this division in saying, “The Risk Management Division of the County of Mendocino Administrative Office shall identify and measure all risks (uncertainty of loss) of the County of Mendocino by developing and implementing appropriate techniques for assessing and resolving these exposures via risk assumption, risk reduction, risk retention, risk transfer or the purchase of insurance”.
• CO8
  The positive results of an effective Risk Management program can be often directly measured by cost savings directly attributable to specific programs designed to reduce risk and loss costs. All too often, however, the cost savings are difficult to measure, especially when large (expensive) and unusual adverse events simply do not take place because of the efforts of the Risk Management Division Staff. While it could be appropriate claims management, or the prevention of a large and unusual loss, the County Supervisors should view their investment in risk management activities as essential to the financial protection of the residents and taxpayers of Mendocino County. Additionally, the Grand Jury wishes to acknowledge the tremendous professionalism and commitment of the Risk Manager and her staff. Given budget constraints and a resultant staffing shortage, they function at an extremely high 82 level given generally staggering workloads. The County can not realistically expect this to continue indefinitely, and must eventually make decisions regarding just what services they will require from the Risk Management Division, and how they will pay for those services. The Risk Manager is a tremendous asset to the County. RESPONSE REQUIRED Mendocino County Administrator Mendocino County Counsel Mendocino County Supervisors 83 THE MENDOCINO COUNTY EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION As a part of the Grand Jury’s oversight responsibilities, as mandated by the California Penal Code, the 2002-2003 Grand Jury selected the Mendocino County Employees Retirement Association, (MCERA or “the association”), for a review of operations, cost structure, and asset development, including the large unfunded actuarial accrued liability, (UAAL). METHODS OF INVESTIGATION In accomplishing its review of the County Retirement Association, the Grand Jury interviewed the County Treasurer, the Association’s Certified Public Accountant, the Association’s actuarial firm in San Francisco, and independent investment advisors, and, also attended County Board of Supervisors and County Retirement Board meetings. In addition, the Grand Jury reviewed the 3 most recent actuarial reports, the Financial Statements for the last 3 years, the County of Mendocino Audit Report of June 30, 2001, the Association’s By Laws, the County Treasurer’s Financial and Statistical reports, the “Mission Statement and Departmental Functions” for the Treasurer-Tax Collector, the planned 2002-2003 County Budget for the administration of the retirement system, Resolution No. 1999/2000-2 of the Mendocino County Employees Retirement Association Board of Retirement Establishing Investment Policies, MCERA Performance Measurement Report for the Period Ending 6/30/02, the prospectus for the 1996 County of Mendocino 84 Taxable Pension Obligation Bonds and the related “Funding Agreement” between the County of Mendocino and the Mendocino County Employees Retirement Association, Minutes from the Association Board meetings for the last several years, the California Constitution, applicable state government codes, and the County Employees Retirement Law of 1937, as amended. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The Employees Retirement Association was formed in 1948 and operates pursuant to the County Employees Retirement Law of 1937, and, as subsequently amended. This law provides the option for Counties to establish and manage their own “defined benefit pension plan”. Such plans, including the Mendocino County Employees Retirement Association, are totally controlled and operated by a “Retirement Board”. MCERA’s board consists of nine members, four are appointed by the County Board of Supervisors, two are elected by general county employees, one is elected by county retirees, one is elected by county safety employees, and one is the County Treasurer, (ex-officio), and who is also the administrator of the retirement system. All functions must also be conducted in accordance with California State Constitution, California Government Codes, and other governing policies such as the Association’s “By Laws”. Article 16 § 17(a) of the California Constitution clearly articulates the responsibilities of the Retirement Board by stating: “The retirement board of a public pension or retirement system shall have the sole and exclusive fiduciary responsibility over the assets of the public pension or retirement system. The retirement board shall also have sole and exclusive responsibility to administer the system in a manner that will assure prompt delivery of benefits and related services 85 to the participants and their beneficiaries. The assets of a public pension or retirement system are trust funds and shall be held for the exclusive purposes of providing benefits to participants in the pension or retirement system and their beneficiaries and defraying reasonable expenses of administering the system”. Under Article 16 § 17(b) the Constitution goes on to say that, “A retirement board’s duty to its participants and their beneficiaries shall take precedence over any other duty”. In accordance with Section 31584 of the County Employees Retirement Law of 1937, the County Board of Supervisors is obligated to make payments to the Retirement Association for amounts arising as a result of retirement benefits accruing to members of the Association. MCERA is a “cost sharing multiple employer plan” that includes not only employees of the County of Mendocino, but also the Cemetery District of the Redwoods, and the Russian River Cemetery District. As of June 30, 2001, there were 2,450 total active plan members. Of this number, 683 are retirees and beneficiaries receiving benefits, 316 are plan members entitled to receive benefits but who are not yet doing so, and 1,451 are active (working) plan members. It is beyond the scope and time available to this Grand Jury to analyze all the administration and investment expenses, both soft and hard, incurred in maintaining an independent retirement system, and compare the overall performance to other alternatives such as CALPERS with a concomitant comparison of asset performance and service to retirees and beneficiaries. 86
• CO9
  By continuing to carry an ongoing and increasing UAAL, the Board of Supervisors, whether intentional or not, is effectively subsidizing the County’s fiscal budget with monies that should have been allocated each year to adequately fund the Retirement Association. 94 Additionally, it would seem that while another Pension Obligation Bond would solve the Board of Supervisors funding problem in the near term, it is only a band-aid that does not address all the forces that are driving the UAAL ever higher. It should also be noted that in so doing, the County Board of Supervisors would, again, be shifting the financial burden for past (retirement fund) liabilities to future generations of taxpayers with no guarantee that accrued future benefits would be funded on a “pay as you go”, or incurred basis. While this kind of financial “logic” is common practice at the Federal level, the Grand Jury feels that the notion of constantly pushing the payment of past obligations, (accrued benefits), into the future is a financial philosophy that is not sound for the plan participants or the Mendocino County taxpayers. Special Note: The Grand Jury wishes to acknowledge the current actions of the Pension Administrator, the Pension Board, the County Board of Supervisors and many others in defining and working toward resolving the difficult and complex problem of Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability. This “work in progress” is not only taking place as this report is being written, but will, of necessity, require continuing attention on an annual basis. Additionally, it is probable that by the time this report is published, there may be significant changes in the status of the problems identified and potential solutions. 95 RESPONSE REQUIRED Mendocino County Board of Supervisors Mendocino County Employees Retirement Association Board Mendocino County Counsel RESPONSE REQUESTED Association Investment Advisor Association Actuarial Firm 96 Mendocino County Juvenile Hall The Mendocino County Juvenile Hall (MCJH), under the direction of the Probation Department, provides for the physical and emotional care of incarcerated youth in Mendocino County. The Grand Jury reviewed the recent changes involving youth classified as Code I (maximum security), Code II (medium security), and Code III (committed a violent crime). Method of investigation The Grand Jury (GJ) interviewed the Superintendent, several staff members (male and female), made a complete tour of the facilities and reviewed the California Code of Regulations: Minimum Standards for Juveniles Facilities Title 15, Section 1313, 1371 and 1488, Building Standard Title 14.

No Responses Found 4

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