Napa County Grand Jury
• 2014-2015
• Agency Response
Review of 2014 2015 Responses
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 2 findings
F1
Page 21
Some respondents to the 2014-2015 Grand Jury reports were tardy with their responses. These responses varied in lateness from one or two days to three weeks.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
Page 6
The Grand Jury recommends that the Chief Probation Office expedite by the end of FY 2015, the process of purchasing and installing upgraded video equipment in the Control Center consistent with current state-of-the-art equipment. Chief Probation Officer Response: The recommendation will be implemented. Staff from Juvenile Hall, Public Works and ITS began evaluating the upgrades in 2014. However workload resulting from Earthquake damages to facilities throughout the County has required that the video system upgrade be delayed. The Department will resume this effort during the final quarter of FY 2014-2015 and plans to have new equipment installed in the Control Center within the next year.
F2
Page 21
Some respondents to the 2014-2015 Grand Jury reports have accepted
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
Page 6
The Grand Jury recommends that the Chief Probation Officer expedite by the end of FY 2015, the process of adding extra cameras in the exercise yard to ensure that there are no blind spots within the yard or along the perimeter of the yard. Chief Probation Officer Response: The recommendation will be implemented. Staff from Juvenile Hall, Public Works and ITS began evaluating the upgrades in 2014. However workload 6 resulting from Earthquake damages to facilities throughout the County has required that the video system upgrade be delayed. The Department will resume this effort during the final quarter of FY 2014-2015 and plans to have cameras installed to cover blind spots within the facility and along the perimeter of the yard within the next year.
Observations 1
-
OB1 Page 5A. Timeliness Of the twelve responses received to the six 2014-2015 Grand Jury reports, seven were received on time. The other five varied in lateness from a one or two days to about three weeks. Details of the dates final reports were delivered and the dates of responses to them are shown in Table 1. Table 1. 2014-15 Grand Jury Reports and Responses Responses Report Date Issued Replies Required Due Date Sent Days Late Juvenile Hall 2/18/15 Chief Probation Officer 4/19/15 3/24/15 On Time HHS Agency 3/30/15 Board of Supervisors 6/28/15 6/9/15 On Time Groundwater 6/2/15 Board of Supervisors 8/31/15 8/11/15 On Time Sanitation District Board 8/31/15 8/5/15 On Time City of Napa 8/31/15 9/24/15 24 Fire Department 5/13/15 Napa County Fire Chief 7/12/15 7/14/15 2 Volunteer Fire Chiefs 8/11/15 8/31/15 20 Napa County Executive 7/12/15 7/14/15 2 Board of Supervisors 8/11/15 7/14/15 On Time Napa County Treasurer 7/12/15 7/13/15 1 Wineries 5/18/15 Board of Supervisors 8/16/15 8/11/15 On Time Napa County Jail 5/15/15 Board of Supervisors 8/13/15 7/14/15 On Time B. Response Content Altogether, the 2014-2015 Grand Jury made 30 recommendations, to which 37 responses were made by County officials or agencies. Twenty of these responses accepted the Grand Jury’s recommendation. Of these, twelve were either already implemented, in progress, or scheduled for implementation; three were accepted with the notation that implementation would be delayed indefinitely by earthquake damage; and seven were accepted with no information given about 5 implementation. Seventeen responses either rejected the recommendation or stated that it needed further study. A recap of the responses received is given in Table 2 in the Appendix. II. REVIEW OF RESPONSES TO THE 2014-15 GRAND JURY REPORT ON ITS ANNUAL JUVENILE HALL REVIEW