San Bernardino County Grand Jury
• 2006-2007
Administrative Committee Administrative Committee Back – JoAnn Miller, Roy Nierman-Chair, Elias Valdez, Gary Moran
⚠️ 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 7 findings
F1
The available information determined that the decision to retire was voluntarily made by the former County Counsel. The available information did reveal that a few days prior to the resignation the former Chairman of the Board of Supervisors had berated the County Counsel in an open workshop meeting, concerning the County Counsel's failure to follow Board direction and also made comments to the effect that outside use of legal counsel was being considered. The inability to satisfy each Supervisor’s needs and the discord between Supervisors was one of the deciding factors leading to the decision to retire by the County Counsel.
No recommendations for this finding
F2
The former Chairman of the Board of Supervisors recommended and Supervisors approved of an Interim County Counsel, which was a proper procedure under County Charter: Article 2, Section 7, which states, "Any vacancy in a County office other than that of supervisor, shall be filled by the Board of Supervisors by appointment for the unexpired term." There was a concern as to the Supervisors’ decision to bypass the Assistant County Counsel and the effect that the decision would have on the Colonies Partners Limited pending litigations by bringing in an Interim County Counsel with questionable knowledge of the critical litigation issues. There is no requirement in a County appointed position that the assistant to that department head automatically become the head or interim of the department. This concern became a moot issue when the Board of Supervisors disregarded the expenditure of County funds already spent on outside legal representation, all legal counsel advice and settled the suit in favor of Colonies Partners Limited, L.P.
No recommendations for this finding
F3
The available information at this time supports the premise that the Board of Supervisors’ monetary settlement in favor of the Colonies Partners Limited, L.P. was a decision made by three of the five Supervisors after consideration of the available alternatives. The Board of Supervisors has the authority to make the final decision on this civil lawsuit. The Board of Supervisors can consider, but were not required to follow, legal advice in this civil matter.
No recommendations for this finding
F4
The purchase of the Maranatha jail facility and the subsequent Gumport report has been reviewed and disclosed no violations of law. The overall examination of the issues involved with the Maranatha facility purchase and information contained in the Gumport report did result in some positive actions by the Board of Supervisors. The first action was to renegotiate the Platinum Advisory contract to allow the CAO to terminate the contract at any time. There was also a reporting requirement to the County by the Platinum lobby contract when an issue of possible conflict arose. The lobbyist, who was a central issue in the Gumport report, although still employed by Platinum, is not representing San Bernardino County. A second positive result was the acquiring of a 700-bed jail 6 facility needed by the Sheriff. The facility was placed into service in a relatively short time and at a substantially reduced cost considering the cost to build a new jail facility. New additions to the facility are in the planning stages.
No recommendations for this finding
F5
The area concerning release of confidential information to the news media was reviewed, however the person or persons responsible for the releases were not ascertained. The available information does support the premise that the discord between members of the Board of Supervisors may have contributed to the release of confidential information.
No recommendations for this finding
F6
Partisan politics in County government, although not legally allowed, cannot be proven to exist or discounted.
No recommendations for this finding
F7
The major area of concern was the dysfunctional display of interaction by some members at Board of Supervisor meetings, negative comments that made their way into the news media and release of confidential information with the intent to place another in a negative position. These actions were clearly not in the best interest of the citizens of the County. One of the reasons for the dysfunction of the Board was the failure of some members to place their personal feelings aside when debating an issue and the failure to recognize that others may not view the issue in the same way. The failure to resolve these long-standing differences further added to the dysfunctional perception of the Board. When the available information is viewed in totality the blame for allowing the dysfunctional operation of the Board of Supervisors lies squarely on the shoulder of the former Chairman of the Board who was, at the time, the elected leader. The leadership did not take the necessary steps to resolve the issues that were the source of conflict between Board members. The remaining Board of Supervisors also share in the blame for the dysfunctional operation due to their failure to take a leadership role in the conflict when the former Chairman did not take action to defuse or resolve the dysfunctional operation. As a result of the overall inaction by the Board of Supervisors there was a continuing failure of cooperation, trust and communication between Supervisors; thus the dysfunctional perception. This perception continued until there was a change in the Chairman of the Board leadership in 2007. COMMENDATION The present Board of Supervisors, despite differences of opinion that may arise on County matters, appears to be functioning as a cohesive unit of County government for the benefit of the people. Credit for this positive change appears to be the new leadership and the manner in which he is able to listen and communicate with Board members. The positive change is also a credit to the cooperation exhibited by all Board members. The vast reduction in the amount of negative press by the news media concerning the Board of Supervisors is also a credit to them. The Board of Supervisors is also positively credited with the implementation of the new COUNTY VISION site on the County website, which will open up the avenues of information and may reduce the distrust of county government due to the lack of information. The commendation to the Board of Supervisors is meant to be construed as a reminder that they are the elected representatives of the people, charged to act in the best interest of the citizens in their respective districts, and a dysfunctional Board of Supervisors is not in the best interest of the citizens of San Bernardino County. COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
Related Recommendations (27)
R07-01
COUNTY AGENCIES CONDUCT THEIR OWN ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEYS BEFORE THE PURCHASE OF ANY LAND OR BUILDING.
R07-02
THAT COUNTY COUNSEL INSURE ALL ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEYS ARE COMPLETED BY THE COUNTY BEFORE AGREEING TO “AS IS” OR “WITH ALL FAULTS” PURCHASES.
R07-03
THAT COUNTY COUNSEL PURSUE REIMBURSEMENT FOR COUNTY ABATEMENT COSTS OF: a. ASBESTOS REMOVAL $637,647 b. LEAD-BASE PAINT REMOVAL $360,432. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
R07-04
CONTINUE THE “SERVICE FIRST” WORKSHOP PRESENTATIONS FOR ALL NEW EMPLOYEES.
R07-05
TO INSURE THE SAFETY AND INTEGRITY OF THE COUNTY, EVERY EMPLOYEE WHO RECEIVES A PAYMENT FROM THE COUNTY BE REQUIRED TO PASS A BACKGROUND CHECK, INCLUDING PUBLIC OFFICE APPOINTEES AND BOARD OF SUPERVISORS STAFF.
R07-06
THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER CONTINUE TO MONITOR THE BUSINESS PLANS OF ALL DEPARTMENTS. HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
R07-07
THE HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT CONTINUE TO IMPLEMENT THE PROGRAM THAT GIVES EACH COUNTY EMPLOYEE A YEARLY AND TIMELY WORK PERFORMANCE EVALUATION (WPE).
R07-08
THE HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT CONTINUE TO MAKE A CONCERTED EFFORT TO IMPLEMENT A “STANDARD BACKGROUND CHECK” AND MOVE THE POLICY TO THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER AND TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IN A TIMELY MANNER.
R07-09
THE HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT CONTINUE TO REVISE AND IMPLEMENT THE (1) STANDARDIZED DRESS AND GROOMING PROGRAM; (2) DRUG TESTING AND ALCOHOL TESTING; AND (3) THE REVISIONS OF THE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES AS INDICATED ABOVE. INFORMATION SERVICES DEPARTMENT
R07-10
DETERMINE FEASIBILITY AND COST FACTORS TO IMPLEMENT A COUNTYWIDE DIGITAL RADIO COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM.
R07-11
IMPLEMENT A DIALOG WITH CONCERNED DEPARTMENTS USING THE COUNTY ANALOG COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM TO DISCUSS ANALOG ISSUES, PREPARE A PLANNED COURSE OF ACTION AND DETERMINE AVAILABLE FUNDING RESOURCES TO CONVERT TO A COUNTYWIDE DIGITAL COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM AT A FUTURE DATE.
R07-12
REVIEW THE CURRENT ONE-WAY PAGER, BLACKBERRY/GOODLINK COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS TO DETERMINE NEED, USAGE AND COST EFFECTIVENESS. PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT ANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL
R07-13
COMBINE THE EXISTING MULTIPLE ANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL FACILITIES IN THE CENTRAL VALLEY INTO A LARGER REGIONAL FACILITY BY USING JOINT POWERS AGREEMENTS (JPA) OF NEIGHBORING COMMUNITIES INCLUDING THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO.
R07-14
EMPLOY A FULL-TIME VETERINARIAN TO PROVIDE CARE, SPAY AND NEUTERING AT A REGIONALIZED CONTROL CENTER.
R07-15
PROVIDE MORE SPACE IN AN ADOPTION CENTER WHERE PEOPLE/FAMILIES CAN INTERACT WITH PROSPECTIVE ADOPTIVE PETS. VECTOR CONTROL PROGRAM BACKGROUND Among the services provided by the San Bernardino County Department of Public Health is the Vector Control Program of the Environmental Health Services Division. (Vector has been defined as a carrier). Vector Control denotes control of vectors and vector-borne diseases by any insect or animal that could cause health hazards to humans or other animals. The Vector Control Program is both proactive and reactive. There are two components of the program important to the control of vectors and vector-borne diseases throughout the County. 1. The program has a comprehensive surveillance plan that routinely performs surveys of mosquito, rodent and tick populations. It further evaluates the prevalence of diseases such as West Nile, encephalitis, plague, Hantavirus, Lyme, and others. 2. The program also provides prompt response to County residents’ requests. Visits were made to Vector Control facilities to get an overview of the department. The Vector Control Program has an administrative office in the County Government Center and a field office on Fifth Street in San Bernardino. The field office is what drew our attention. FINDINGS The field office facility was designed to accommodate a staff of eight and currently serves a staff of 21. It is extremely crowded. A Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for a new facility has been prepared and is going through the process. A new site near freeway access would reduce unnecessary travel time. The department is adequately staffed with trained professionals supplemented with seasonal staff when needed. The seasonal staff mostly comes from colleges and universities. There is no plan to add more staff at this time. The 5,000 square foot building includes offices, laboratory, equipment storage, locker room with a changing area shared by men and women, conference room, indoor parking/garage and supply storage. An additional 5,000 square foot of outdoor space is taken up by four Sea Train shipping containers; two are modified to accommodate offices and two for storage of chemicals and fuel. These containers are not compliant with the American Disabilities Act. On site is a chicken flock and hatchery tubs for mosquito fish. There is no space at this site for expansion of any kind. The construction of a new facility will allow for future expansion of the program and added staff to accommodate the expected population growth and to better respond to the concerns regarding vectors and vector-borne diseases from County residents. Testing is done in the field and in an onsite lab manned by the Vector Ecologist. Testing is also contracted out to University of California, Davis, and University of California, Riverside, facilities. The San Bernardino Vector Control lab is crowded. Sometimes lunches and lab specimens end up in the same refrigerator. There is an exit door in the lab going directly outside; this could compromise the integrity of the lab. The Vector Control Program includes County lands and West End cities served by Special Districts. Communication is good between public and private agencies, which results in no duplication of Vector Control services. State grants are available; some desert cities did apply for grants up to $20,000 each while others have not applied for grants. Vehicles and equipment are parked outside. Though there is an effort to put sensitive equipment indoors at night, there is not always room. Vandalism in the past has caused some loss of fuel and equipment. RECOMMENDATIONS
R07-16
IMPLEMENT THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CIP) IMMEDIATELY TO ACQUIRE A NEW CENTRALIZED SITE WITH FREEWAY ACCESS TO CUT DOWN ON TRAVEL TIME FROM THE FACILITY TO THE JOB SITE(S).
R07-17
THE FACILITY INCLUDE SEPARATE DRESSING ROOMS AND SHOWERS FOR MEN AND WOMEN STAFF.
R07-18
PROVIDE MORE SPACE FOR PERSONNEL, SPECIMENS, STORAGE AND SENSITIVE EQUIPMENT, IN THE LAB.
R07-19
IN THE INTEREST OF PUBLIC HEALTH, THE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT DEVELOP A PROGRAM TO ENCOURAGE DESERT CITIES TO BECOME MORE ACTIVE IN VECTOR CONTROL ACTIVITIES TO SAFEGUARD THE CITIZENS BY APPLYING FOR AVAILABLE STATE GRANTS.
R07-20
SECURE INDOOR PARKING OF VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH SPRAYERS, AND OTHER EQUIPMENT. RISK MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
R07-21
RISK MANAGEMENT REMAIN A SEPARATE DEPARTMENT REPORTING DIRECTLY TO THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER.
R07-22
THE NEW RISK MANAGEMENT “USER-FRIENDLY” WEBSITE FOR USE BY COUNTY EMPLOYEES BE MAINTAINED AND CONTINUED.
R07-23
EVERY COUNTY EMPLOYEE BE REQUIRED TO PASS A STANDARD BACKGROUND CHECK. SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT BACKGROUND During a Grand Jury investigation of a citizen complaint concerning a city’s use of environmental mitigation funds (EMF), several areas of concern came to our attention. These concerns related to Solid Waste Management Memorandums of Understanding (MOU’s) with various cities in which San Bernardino County landfills are located. FINDINGS The Solid Waste Management Division has entered into many MOU’s with various cities concerning landfills that are located within that city’s boundaries or sphere of influence. Each city is paid the following amounts: LANDFILL CITY RATE PER TON Mid Valley Fontana $2.69 Rialto $2.69 San Timoteo Redlands $1.00 Colton Colton $1.00 Victorville Victorville $ .50 Barstow Barstow $ .50 29 Palms 29 Palms $ .50 Landers Yucca Valley no fee Mid Valley pays tonnage rates more than five times greater than other landfills. These MOU’s provide for: 1. Distribution of money from the Environmental Mitigation Fund. 2. Eligibility for funding. 3. Criteria for funding. 4. Funding formula. 5. Payment method. 20 6. The Nexus Test (A project satisfies the “Nexus Test” if the project’s primary purpose and effect is to alleviate or to reduce the magnitude or the significance of an adverse condition affecting the city. This adverse condition must result from the presence of the current and/or expanded landfill). All monies from the EMF paid to a city must be used by that city relative to the criteria established under the “Nexus Test”. All cities warrant that they will use fees only on projects that meet the “Nexus Test”. The cities of Rialto and Fontana are presently each paid approximately $2 million per year. Rialto was prepaid $14 million in 1998 in order to build a new police station. That police station has never been built. Rialto has been prepaid for tonnage until approximately 2012. The MOU’s with all cities except Fontana and Rialto require that: 1. The city keeps records necessary to establish the use of EMF monies for five years after use. 2. All use of EMF monies is subject to audit by the County, as it deems necessary. If a city fails to satisfy the “Nexus Test”, the funds are to be returned to the County for placement in the EMF until a project to use the funds meets the “Nexus Test”. Solid Waste Management has never conducted or requested an audit, has no procedure for requesting an audit, and has no knowledge of whether any city is misusing EMF monies. RECOMMENDATIONS
R07-24
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SET UP A PROCEDURE TO AUDIT THE USE OF EMF FUNDS.
R07-25
IF CITIES ARE NOT USING EMF FUNDS PURSUANT TO THE MOU, SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT REQUEST THAT THOSE FUNDS BE RETURNED TO THE COUNTY PURSUANT TO THE MOU. 21
R07-26
IF FONTANA AND RIALTO CANNOT MEET THE “NEXUS TEST”, THEN SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT RENEGOTIATE THE TONNAGE RATES PAID TO FONTANA AND RIALTO IN LIEU OF REQUIRING THOSE CITIES TO MEET THE “NEXUS TEST”.
R07-27
THE COUNTY COUNSEL’S OFFICE INCLUDE IN ALL ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION FUNDS MOU’S THE REQUIREMENT THAT EACH CITY KEEP RECORDS FOR FIVE YEARS AND THAT THE COUNTY CAN AUDIT THE EMF MONIES AS IT DEEMS NECESSARY. 22
Commendations 3
-
CM1 Page 9The present Board of Supervisors, despite differences of opinion that may arise on County matters, appears to be functioning as a cohesive unit of County government for the benefit of the people. Credit for this positive change appears to be the new leadership and the manner in which he is able to listen and communicate with Board members. The positive change is also a credit to the cooperation exhibited by all Board members. The vast reduction in the amount of negative press by the news media concerning the Board of Supervisors is also a credit to them. The Board of Supervisors is also positively credited with the implementation of the new COUNTY VISION site on the County website, which will open up the avenues of information and may reduce the distrust of county government due to the lack of information. The commendation to the Board of Supervisors is meant to be construed as a reminder that they are the elected representatives of the people, charged to act in the best interest of the citizens in their respective districts, and a dysfunctional Board of Supervisors is not in the best interest of the citizens of San Bernardino County. 8
-
CM2 Page 15The Animal Shelter is located in a rural area; the security measures taken with higher fences, security cameras and a full-time security guard make the shelter a safer 14
-
CM3 Page 16place for staff and animals. The department and County are to be commended for implementing safety and security recommendations of the 2004-05 Grand Jury.
No Responses Found 2
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors
Elected County Office