Trinity County Grand Jury
• 2011-2012
Investigation into the Code Enforcement System: Codes, Cannabis and Confusion
⚠️ 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 5 findings
F1
Complete documentation of policies and procedures for the "System" does not exist. It is recognized, however, that concepts are being evaluated and that there was mention of creating such a document.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
The Planning Department in cooperation with the Sheriffs Office should develop "System" policy and procedures documentation including at a minimum: a) concise "Officer" job description. b) clear definition of the chain of command for the "Officer". c) requirements for initial and ongoing "Personnel" training. d) "Personnel" safety procedures (including officer backup requirements and equipment checklist). e) processing procedures for code violations that define the progression from increasing fines and to prosecution by the District Attorney in the event of non-compliance. f) definition of a hearing system that handles appeals. g) procedures for collecting fines.
F2
Although implementation of documented "System" policies and procedures is incomplete, there are provisional practices in place for code enforcement. 6
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
The Planning Department should: a) implement the process for collecting fines. b) enroll the "Officer" in code enforcement training. c) eliminate the inequity in the non-refundable $1,050 appeals filing fee policy by refunding a substantial percent of this fee if the appeal is granted. d) evaluate cost effectiveness and improved impartiality of using non-attorney officers for the code violation protest hearings.
F3
The procedure to track the effectiveness of the "System" is incomplete.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
The Planning Department should establish a "System" assessment procedure that tracks at a minimum: a) costs b) fines collected c) code violation types (e.g., health, building, marijuana) d) compliance e) "Personnel" time-logs f) compliance follow-up visits
F4
There are not sufficient resources of time, money, equipment and personnel to efficiently carry out safe code enforcement. The safety of the "Officer" was enhanced by providing trained backup peace officers. It is recognized that due to lack of personnel, the Sheriff and Undersheriff served as backup in 2011. The "Officer" uses an unmarked vehicle.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
In the future, it would be more efficient to rely on less senior peace officers for backup support. The safety of the "Officer" can be enhanced by using a marked vehicle. The Sheriff's office in cooperation with the Planning Department should budget funds to provide a) a marked vehicle to substantially enhance safety b) additional equipment (e.g., laptop computer, efficient measuring devices) c) cost effective and time efficient support for the "Officer" by assigning 1-2 peace officers whose priority is to accompany the "Officer" on visits during the months of marijuana harvest season. A pool of peace officers could be provided by part-time retired peace officers or reserve deputies. 7
F5
The current "Officer" has pioneered a new position in an admirable fashion. The code enforcement training provided to the "Officer" was insufficient.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5
The current "Officer" should be recognized for the "Officer's" pioneering effort. Provide the "Officer" ongoing code enforcement training consistent with other law enforcement agencies in the state.
No Responses Found 1
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
Trinity County Sheriff
Elected County Office