El Dorado County Grand Jury 2013-2014 Allegation of Conflict of Interest in Facilities Department Unfounded Case Number

Recommendations 3

• R1
  The Grand Jury recommends that the Facilities Department enter into an agreement with Comfort King that they not bid or procure any contract with the county while Mr. Harrell is an employee of the county and has any association with the company. That agreement should be done in writing and filed with the County. 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 Facilities Department and the Board of Supervisors. The Presiding Judge of the El Dorado County Superior Court additionally requests that the responses be sent electronically as a “Word” file or “PDF” file to facilitate the economical and timely distribution of such responses. Please email responses to the El Dorado County Grand Jury at: [email protected]
• R2
  Investigate staff turnover rates; review adjacent area compensation levels and other retention tools as needed.
• R3
  County Health and Human Services should focus on providing local placement, in the form of board and care residences, for patients in need of further supervision after being discharged from PUHF. RESPONSES Responses to both findings and recommendations to 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 addressed to the El Dorado Department of Health and Human Services for review and response, and provided to the El Dorado County Board of Supervisors. The Presiding Judge of the El Dorado County Superior Court additionally requests that the responses be sent electronically as a “Word” file or “PDF” file to facilitate the economical and timely distribution of such responses. Please email responses to the El Dorado County Grand Jury at: [email protected] -09 REASON FOR REPORT A citizen complaint of alleged county fiscal negligence as well as ongoing media attention prompted the El Dorado County Grand Jury to investigate and assess the status of the county’s animal control shelter facility. The investigation led the Grand Jury to review the current county real estate acquisition and leasing process. SUMMARY The 2006 animal control site purchase and development plan decisions resulted in wasted public funds. New focus and procedures initiated by the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) have the potential for more professionally qualified individuals and a more responsive facilities function in the county. The new animal control facility is an example of the effectiveness of those new procedures in that it will open this fall on-time and on-budget and at a reasonable cost to tax-payers. ACTIONS  Documents reviewed: o Purchase contract County/Shinn Ranch dated May 9, 2006 o Purchase contract for current project dated December 12, 2012 o County Facilities Division planning grids, and lease schedules. o County Procedures o County BOS Records  The complainant and associated witnesses were interviewed.  Current and former employees of Department of Transportation, Facilities Division, Procurements and Contracts Division, Chief Administrative Office (CAO) and Surveyor’s Department were interviewed.  The new animal control site and building were inspected.  The Grand Jury made inquiries as to the practices in other California counties regarding leases and acquisitions.