2005-af-01 Animal Control Services

Recommendations 30

• R1

  Page 15
  The Grand Jury recommends that the City Council, the City Manager, and city employees establish and implement procedures to insure that pertinent inspections, work write-ups, contracts, permits, and invoices are reviewed and verified.
• R1a

  Page 1
  The Grand Jury recommends that the Cast Boards create a leadership position
• R1b

  Page 1
  The Grand Jury recommends that a Deputy District Attorney with experience in and a commitment to CAST fill the leadership position.
• R1c

  Page 1
  The Grand Jury recommends the DA request additional clerical support staff positions from the Board of Supervisors.
• R1d

  Page 1
  The Grand Jury recommends the Board of Supervisors authorize the DA to hire additional clerical support staff.
• R2

  Page 13
  County Counsel should ensure that each county contract include provisions for a specific county department to be accountable in a measurable way and include a provision for a specific department to have oversight responsibility for the contract.
• R2a

  Page 1
  The Grand Jury recommends the DA continue and expand regularly-scheduled meetings with law enforcement to inform them of cases rejected for lack of information and/or evidence.
• R2b

  Page 1
  The Grand Jury recommends the DA’s office produce regularly-scheduled reports for law enforcement showing the disposition of each case. These reports must contain all relevant information regarding each case from inception to final resolution.
• R2c

  Page 1
  The Grand Jury recommends that the DA’s office confer with law enforcement agencies to ensure the reports contain the information they need.
• R3

  Page 13
  The County must assure that county departments adequately track contract expirations, so that a competitive bid process or at least negotiations can be initiated in time to insure cost-effective services without a break. Grand Jury Report #2005-CD-01 An Investigation into the First Time Home Buyer and Housing Rehabilitation Programs in the City of Rio Dell Executive Summary The Grand Jury finds that the First Time Home Buyer and Housing Rehabilitation Programs are not being adequately monitored by the City of Rio Dell. In July 2002, the city entered into a contract with state and federal agencies to establish a revolving loan fund of $500,000 to be loaned to low-income families to purchase a first home. The funds were also available for home rehabilitation loans. The loans are to be repaid to make the funds available for others. Although the contract states specific responsibilities for all parties, the City failed to meet the contractual responsibilities. The City contracted with Redwood Community Action Agency to administer the funds and manage the projects for a fee. The City Council authorized three First Time Home Buyer loans, one a combination of both the First Time Home Buyer and Housing Rehabilitation programs. Problems with this combination project became apparent very soon. Alarming structural and safety issues were ignored in favor of superficial cosmetic repairs. An investigation by the Grand Jury revealed that the program was not being monitored. For example, termite and structural reports were not being appropriately analyzed and corrective action was not taken. Serious health and safety issues were not addressed. Construction was done without an approved set of plans or a permit. The contract specifically requires both. While it is understandable that the small city finds it necessary to contract for the services of a project manager, it is essential for the city to maintain supervision of this third party. The Grand Jury recommends that the City of Rio Dell meet its oversight responsibilities as well as establish and implement procedures which will assure that health and safety issues take precedence in all home purchases and rehabilitation projects using public funds. Who Shall Respond: Pursuant to California Penal Code Section 933 and 933.05, responses to the Findings and Recommendations of Grand Jury Report #2005-CD-01 shall be provided as follows: (cid:127) Rio Dell City Council shall respond to Findings and Recommendations 1, 2, 3, and 4 (cid:127) Rio Dell City Manager shall respond to Findings and Recommendations 1, 2, 3, and 4 Report In response to a citizen complaint, the 2004-2005 Grand Jury conducted an investigation into the First Time Home Buyer/Rehabilitation Programs specifically in Rio Dell. The problems the Grand Jury found in Rio Dell could occur in First Time Home Buyer/Rehabilitation Programs similarly administered 12 throughout Humboldt County. The City of Rio Dell signed a contract with the state Department of Housing and Community Development and the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development. This agreement was in force from July 15, 2002, until March 31, 2005. The City Manager recently announced the city’s application for a new contract with these agencies. The contract provided for a revolving loan fund in the amount of $500,000. The funds were to be loaned to low-income families to permit them to purchase and rehabilitate homes for themselves. The program could benefit both the families and communities involved. Rio Dell is small, and most city employees serve in a number of capacities. The city hired Redwood Community Action Agency (RCAA), an outside non-profit agency, to administer the program. From then on, the City of Rio Dell allowed work to be done without plans or building permits, did not require timely inspections, failed to monitor progress of the project, and dispersed funds with virtually no oversight, approving without adequate review whatever the RCAA project manager proposed. Unfortunately, as a representative of RCAA later admitted, RCAA did not have sufficient experience to perform the tasks required. RCAA assigned a long-time employee, a Housing Programs Manager, as project manager. This individual had managed the two previous First Time Home Buyer projects, as well as several previous Housing Rehabilitation projects done in Rio Dell. A representative of RCAA later pointed out that their Housing Programs Manager had never supervised a project combining both programs. Everyone involved underestimated the complexity of this combined project. The project manager approved the house for the combined program and helped facilitate the purchase, indicating that the problems of the building would be corrected under the Housing Rehabilitation program. The buyer occupied the home as planned during the rehabilitation. A termite inspection was done on July 22, 2003. The project manager did two work write-ups. The first, done on July 24, 2003, was for the buyer. The project manager sent the second to the Office of Historic Preservation, a division of Department of Parks and Recreation, state of California, on September 29, 2003, for approval of the rehabilitation of the historic dwelling. The write-ups do not mention the extensive termite and dry-rot repair recommended by the termite report. The City of Rio Dell ignored this important inspection, which directly relates to health and safety issues. Cosmetic issues were the focus of both write-ups. Both include work on siding, paint, windows, doors, wiring, floor coverings, and replacing the water heater, as well as restoring a functioning bathroom and kitchen. In the Historic Preservation write-up, installation of a heating system was included for the first time. Other than the 2003 termite inspection, no structural inspection was ordered until August of 2004. The structural inspection revealed that many of the problems in the house were long-standing: overstressed beams, a failing post and pier foundation within the perimeter foundation, dry rot, and recurring water damage. The house had actually been moved once in its seventy-year history. Had an adequate investigation been done prior to the beginning of the project, the house would never have been accepted for the program. According to a report dated September 21, 2004, from the state CDBG (Community Development Block Grants) Program of the Community Development Section of the Department of Housing and Community Development of the State of California, “…if RCAA staff had done all their due diligence at the beginning of the project, then it could not have been approved by the city loan committee.” Increasingly aware of health and safety issues which were not being addressed, the home buyers agitated for further action. At their insistence, an inspection and investigation was done by two inspectors from the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) on September 16 and 17, 2004. As required by HUD’s investigation, the City of Rio Dell was directed to advance up to $50,000 as a grant to the home buyers above the amount loaned. These funds were designated to clear the problems in the lead-based paint report, clear the problems in the termite report, replace existing floor coverings, repair the roof, install vents, install a sump pump with surface drain line, finish or repair the waste vent, and install a forced air heating system. The grant also included the cost of an independent project manager, all permits required by Humboldt County rather than Rio Dell, and relocation costs for the home-buying family to vacate the house for thirty days during major repair work. This situation would not have arisen had the City of Rio Dell required and analyzed adequate inspections prior to approving the loan. While this action resolved problems for the home buyer, these funds were taken from the revolving loan fund as a grant. These funds will not be paid back; therefore, the funds will not be available for others in the community. The funds available through these state and federally-funded programs can make a tremendous difference to low-income families in Humboldt County. They need to be administered judiciously. The Grand Jury investigation determined that the City of Rio Dell did not exercise due diligence in the oversight of the First Time Home Buyers and Housing Rehabilitation programs. Such oversight is required by the contract: “Obligations of Grantee (the City) With Respect to Certain Third Party Relationships The Grantee (the City) shall remain fully obligated under the provisions of this agreement notwithstanding its designation of any third party or parties for the undertaking of all or any part of the program with respect to which assistance is being provided under this agreement to the Grantee."
• R3a

  Page 1
  The Grand Jury recommends the DA’s office, in cooperation with the Victim Witness Office, develop a written policy stating who shall promptly respond to inquiries. Prompt response is especially important to victims of crime.
• R3b

  Page 1
  The Grand Jury recommends the DA’s office immediately develop a small, quickreference office manual which includes how to handle correspondence and telephone calls so they will be dealt with in a timely manner. This would be especially useful for new hires.
• R3c

  Page 1
  The Grand Jury recommends the DA personally provide a good example by responding to inquiries quickly.
• R4

  Page 15
  The Grand Jury recommends that the City Council, the City Manager, and appropriate staff periodically review these projects and maintain proper records as required by the contract. If it is necessary to hire an outside agency to administer project, a representative of that agency should report regularly to the City Council and the City Manager. Oversight of these projects must be a priority. Grand Jury Report #2005-CD-02 Manila Community Services District
• R5
  The Grand Jury recommends that MCSD adopt a plan to reduce and eventually eliminate the debt owed by recreation and park funds to the water and sewer fund.
• R5a

  Page 1
  The Grand Jury recommends that the Big Lagoon Charter School Network pay all its employees directly, deducting appropriate federal and state taxes and CalPERS, and paying premiums for state unemployment compensation and state workers’ compensation insurance.
• R5b

  Page 1
  The Grand Jury recommends that the Big Lagoon Charter School Network check with the Federal and State Internal Revenue Services and the Federal and State Departments of Labor to verify the legal definitions of “employee,” “independent contractor,” and “volunteer” to determine who shall have taxes and retirement deductions made, and for whom premiums should be paid for unemployment and workers’ compensation insurance.
• R5c

  Page 1
  The Grand Jury recommends that the Big Lagoon Charter School Network consult with CalPERS to determine the legitimacy of using a pass-through account to pay a person who is already retired and receiving retirement system benefits.
• R6
  The Grand Jury recommends that members of the Board of Directors take special training for board members of non-profit organizations. Training is available free or at minimal cost from both Humboldt Area Foundation and College of the Redwoods. Grand Jury Report #2005-HS-01 Visit to Humboldt County’s Family Connection Center Executive Summary: The Grand Jury interviewed employees and toured the Child Welfare Family Connections Center, a facility providing supervised visits for parents whose children are placed in temporary custody. The frequency and type of visits are determined by court order with transportation furnished by Child Welfare, if needed. Times of visits are arranged to meet children’s and parents’ schedules taking into consideration school and work. The facility is child-friendly, colorful, brightly-lit and welcoming. Books, activities, toys, craft supplies, games and comfortable furniture help provide a healthy atmosphere for the visits. Transportation of parents and children to the facility is sometimes inconvenient when car seats and cars are in two different locations. Who Shall Respond:
• R7
  The Grand Jury recommends that either the sponsoring agency (Big Lagoon Union Elementary District) or the Humboldt County Office of Education exercise vigilant oversight regarding the credentials held by teachers assigned to be the primary teachers of the core high school courses of English, Math, History, and Science. GRAND JURY REPORT # 2005-HS-05 A Review of Practices and Policies of Freshwater Charter Middle School Who Shall Respond:
• R8
  The Grand Jury recommends the DA refrain from firing Deputy DAs – except for cause - unless comparable replacement prosecutors are identified and are willing to work in Humboldt County.
• R9
  The Grand Jury recommends that a cross-file of shared cases be instituted so that APS and IHSS caseworkers have access to information and status of an individual’s case within the other division. DHHS RESPONSE TO R9: A formal written policy on cross-filing in each case file will be drafted and staff trained by March 31, 2005. (cid:127) The 2004-2005 Grand Jury received this update from DHHS: Workers and supervisors continue to confer and team cases in common. Written policies are in place and staff were trained and the policy was implemented in May 2005. REPORT 2004-HS-02 HUMBOLDT COUNTY’S FOSTER CARE PROGRAM NEEDS HELP NOW
• R9a

  Page 1
  The Grand Jury recommends that the DA develop and implement a system to provide job security for Deputy DAs protecting them from arbitrary firing. This should be done
• R9b

  Page 1
  The Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Supervisors be directly involved in working with the DA to develop and implement a system which provides job security for Deputy DAs.
• R10
  The Grand Jury recommends that the DA require that when a serious felony case is plea-bargained, the Prosecutor shall request the Court to order that the reasons for the plea bargain be reflected in the court minutes of the case. This will make the information readily available to the public and the media. Grand Jury Report #2005-LJ-03 Volunteer Patrols: A Boon to Law Enforcement Executive Summary The various volunteer police patrol organizations in Humboldt County provide valuable assistance to law enforcement. Each year the volunteers log many thousands of miles and provide many thousands of hours of volunteer time, saving the taxpayers many thousands of dollars. The Grand Jury urges interested citizens to contact the Sheriff’s department or their local police department to volunteer. Who Shall Respond:
• R11
  Engrave valuables for anyone who requests the service.
• R12
  Update law enforcement emergency-related information on businesses within the community.
• R13
  Assist in fingerprinting.
• R14
  Assist victims of natural disasters.
• R15
  Provide crime scene security. The Grand Jury finds that the various citizen patrol organizations provide a valuable service to their communities at very little cost. The Grand Jury recommends that all qualified Humboldt County citizens who are interested in serving as volunteers contact the Sheriff’s department or their local police department. They will be welcomed with open arms. Grand Jury Report #2005-PW-01 Code Enforcement Executive Summary The County of Humboldt would reap substantial benefits through the creation of a staff position for a Code Enforcement Officer. In the past, an extra-help employee for code enforcement actions brought in revenue to the county in excess of the cost of a full-time employee with benefits. Establishment of a Code Enforcement Unit within the county Department of Community Development Services, Economic Development Division, will generate much- needed revenue as well as discourage violations of building and planning code provisions. Note: since the Grand Jury did this investigation, but before publication of the report, the Board of Supervisors authorized and the Economic Development Division hired a full-time employee with benefits to do this work. The Grand Jury commends the Board of Supervisors for authorizing and the Economic Development Division for filling the position in Code Enforcement. WHO SHALL RESPOND: