… the name of any person, or facts that lead to the identity of any person who provided information to the grand jury,

Staff believe AB 109 inmates continue to negatively impact jail operations.

Staff believe Inmates with mental health issues, as well as older and homeless inmates are an ongoing problem.

Additional space is needed where inmates can meet with their attorneys.

Vendors may not have always been paid in a timely manner.

More security cameras and intercoms are needed. NO RECOMMENDATIONS El Dorado County Jails Inspections 3 RESPONSES Responses to both findings and recommendations in this Report are required by law in accordance with California Penal Code §933 and §933.05. Address responses to: The Honorable Suzanne N. Kingsbury Presiding Judge of the El Dorado County Superior Court 1354 Johnson Blvd. South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150 This Report has been provided to the El Dorado County Sheriff. The Presiding Judge of the El Dorado County Superior Court requests that responses be sent electronically as a Word or PDF file to facilitate economical and timely distribution. Please email responses to the El Dorado County Grand Jury at: [email protected] 4 El Dorado County Jails Inspections E D C G J 2014-2015 L ORADO OUNTY RAND URY EL DORADO HILLS CSD AND CC&R ENFORCEMENT Case GJ-14-03 The El Dorado Hills Community Services District (CSD) receives a $10 annual tax from each parcel in the district for Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R) enforcement. However, many parcels in the district are organized into discrete Home Owner Associations (HOAs) that enforce their own CC&R without assistance from the CSD. Some of those HOA homeowners complained they do not receive any specific service in return for that tax. BACKGROUND The El Dorado Hills Community Services District (CSD) has an elected board of directors to oversee CSD management and operations providing parks, recreation and limited Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R) enforcement. CC&Rs are contractual limitations on a property owner’s rights such as architectural design and ongoing maintenance. Those restrictions are placed on the property deed, recorded with the county, and made a condition of purchase by subsequent owners. The CSD Board of Directors adopted a resolution on July 21, 1983, placing a voter initiative, “Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions Enforcement - Measure B,” on the Nov. 8, 1983, General District Election ballot. Measure B authorized the CSD “…to adopt and levy a special tax, of up to $10 per year, on each parcel of land within the District, to be used for any costs or expenses incurred by the District in carrying out said purposes …” Measure B was passed by the voters. Both the CSD resolution and the original 1983 Measure B ballot description stated that the $10 fee was for the specific purpose of enforcing CC&R compliance. METHODOLOGY  CSD management and a current board member were interviewed.  Representatives of seven HOAs were interviewed.  The Official Ballot from Nov. 8, 1983, general election was reviewed.  A letter from the CSD Board President was reviewed.  A list of current HOA addresses and contact information was reviewed.  A list of HOAs that enforce their own CC&Rs and those serviced by the CSD was reviewed. El Dorado Hills CSD and CC&R Enforcement 5 DISCUSSION In a letter to the Grand Jury, CSD management stated that the $10 levy “is a “Special Tax”…” and that “[T]here need not be a direct benefit tied to the property owner or taxpayer.” but that it “…can be used to pay for public services and/or facilities that provide general benefits.” They acknowledged that “[A] special parcel tax is a charge for specific purposes against a landowner…” [Emphasis added.] At the same time, they seemed to ignore the 1983 Board resolution and ballot measure which authorized the levy as a special tax for the specific purpose of enforcing CC&R for each tract within the district boundaries. The taxes collected for this specific purpose of CC&R enforcement have been and continue to be used for other purposes. There are 27 HOAs within the El Dorado Hills CSD. Of those, 19 enforce their own CC&Rs. Documentation supplied by the CSD shows that the remaining eight rely on the CSD for CC&R enforcement. Representatives of seven of the HOAs who enforce their own CC&Rs were selected for interview. None of those interviewed was aware of the tax. They enforce their own CC&Rs without receiving any compensation from the CSD for doing so. All stated they could use those funds for their own CC&R enforcement. There is no agreement or memorandum of understanding between the CSD and HOAs for CC&R enforcement; likewise, there is none for the CSD to compensate these HOAs from the tax funds it receives for services it does not provide. The CSD encompasses more than 15,500 parcels. The 19 HOAs that enforce their own CC&R constitute almost 8,200 parcels — slightly more than half of the total. Each of those 8,200 parcels pays $10 annually, yielding about $82,000 in revenue to the CSD. Although it may be argued that the CSD does provide a variety of benefits to the region as a whole using those funds, the money is not being used for the purposes authorized by the voters when they adopted Measure B. FINDINGS 1. A special per parcel tax was adopted in 1983 for the specific purpose of enforcing CC&R.

The Placerville south exercise area is in disrepair and no longer in use. Other outdoor areas provide sufficient exercise space.

Staff provides a grievance form to address complaints.

At the present time the existing room capacity is adequate due to the low population of wards.

Employees fear that a complaint submitted to the HR Department will not be kept confidential and they may be subject to retaliation. The HR Director acknowledged that this a reasonable fear, based upon past behavior.

Inexperience causes the HR department to willingly defer handling of HR issues to County Counsel. This results in HR issues being handled from a defense oriented posture rather than in a proactive solution-seeking management effort. The Grand Jury observed that complaints filed with HR were investigated solely from the point of view of whether unlawful discrimination occurred while ignoring poor management practices.

Investigations of discrimination or harassment complaints frequently reveal poor management practices or other employee misbehavior, but investigative reports are not shared with department directors. Managers are not informed of these issues when they are brought to light in the course of an investigation and, therefore, are unable to take remedial action. 2 6 Board of Supervisors Neglects Human Resources 12. Because County Counsel is acting as de facto HR Director, legal work that could be handled in house is contracted out. Complaints of discrimination or harassment are often submitted to private law firms for investigation at significant cost to the county. There is no policy setting forth criteria or procedures for when an investigation will be handled by county staff or contracted out. While it is reasonable that the investigation of certain sensitive complaints, such as those against the CAO or the HR Department itself, be contracted out, it is unreasonably expensive to contract out the investigation of most complaints. These should be handled by HR staff.

The County spends significant sums of money on outside consultants and attorneys for HR related issues.

The County has spent significant sums of money on private consultants identifying personnel issues but has taken only the initial steps towards resolving the issues identified.

Human Resources and Risk Management were separated to allow the HR Director to develop her skills in human resources management. The two functions are closely integrated and their separation is inefficient.

The County does not have an organization chart accurately reflecting County organization. CONCLUSIONS El Dorado County’s HR Department continues to suffer from rapid and excessive turnover of the Human Resources Director and fails to follow best practices for human resources management. This has made the county unable to recruit and retain the best qualified staff. The County is exposed to significant risk of liability for failure to comply with federal and state employment law requirements.