The Sutter County Board of Supervisors - Filed 09-30-2015

| The Board of Supervisors disagrees with Finding #1. County Administration and Department Management have not received evidence that promotional practices within the Division are not solely based upon merit; that managers have given special assignments and promotions to those who seemingly curry personal favor; or that disciplinary actions are not applied fairly and consistently to all employees. During fiscal year 2014-15, County Administration and or the County Human Resources Department received three complaints from three employees in the Sutter County Welfare/Social Services Division. These complaints were handled pursuant to the SUTTER COUNTY PERSONNEL RULES AND REGULATIONS. Three of these complaints were investigated by an independent investigator employed by a law firm. The results of the investigations are contained in three recent reports. The investigations included interviews with various employees and review of documentation. None of the allegations were sustained by the evidence. County Counsel remains available to review these reports with the Grand Jury upon request. County employees are provided substantial opportunities to object to actions taken by their employer through the employee grievance process. Non-Merit System Services (MSS) can file a grievance with an employee’s immediate supervisor (Step 1); and if not resolved appealed to supervisor’s manager (Step 2); and if not resolved appealed to the department head (Step 3); and if not resolved appealed to the Human Resources Manager/County Administrative Officer (Step 4); and if still not resolved referred to an arbitrator with the final decision made by the Board of Supervisors. At any point in the process all employees are entitled to representation in the preparation and presentation of his/her grievance. The non-MSS grievance process is detailed in Section 20 of the SUTTER COUNTY PERSONNEL RULES AND REGULATIONS. Merit System Services Employees can file a grievance with an employee’s immediate supervisor and if not resolved informally a written grievance may be prepared and shall be submitted to the immediate supervisor for a written response (1st Level of Review ); and if not resolved appealed to the second line supervisor or administrator or the agency personnel office (Second level of review); and if not resolved appealed to the appointing authority (Department Head) (Third level of Review) and if still not resolved referred to the local governing Board for the final administrative remedy (Final level of Review). The Grievance process for MSS employees is detailed in section 17572 of the LOCAL AGENCY PERSONNEL STANDARDS (LAPS). All employees are entitled to representation in the preparation and presentation of his/her grievance. Sutter County Board of Supervisors Response to 2014-15 Grand Jury Report County employees can also file discrimination, harassment, or retaliation complaints with their department head or the County Human Resources Department under Section 23 of the SUTTER COUNTY PERSONNEL RULES AND REGULATIONS or under section 17153, 17551, 17575, 17576 and 17581 of the LOCAL AGENCY PERSONNEL STANDARDS. In some cases these complaints are investigated by the department, in other cases, in order to avoid a potential conflict of interest, they are investigated by an outside investigator. The selection of an outside investigator is usually arranged for by the Human Resources Department in consultation with County Counsel. Welfare/Social Services Division employees also have the option to file a complaint through the Cal-HR because they are part of the State Merit System Services. This is an additional avenue of appeal available to employees in this Division. Additionally, County employees may file a complaint with the Fair Employment and Housing Commission (FEHC) regarding a claim of discrimination, harassment, or retaliation. This option has been exercised by a few County employees in the past and the opportunity to file a complaint with DFEH is identified in the SUTTER COUNTY PERSONNEL RULES AND REGULATIONS. These rules specify that employees shall not be subject to retaliation for filing a complaint with FEHC. To date, the Department has not had an adverse ruling. County employees can also file a complaint regarding a claim of discrimination, harassment, or retaliation with the Equal Employment and Opportunities Commission (EEOC). This option has also been exercised by some County employees in the past and the opportunity to file a complaint with EEOC is also identified in the SUTTER COUNTY PERSONNEL RULES AND REGULATIONS. Again, the rules specify that employees shall not be subject to retaliation for filing a complaint with the EEOC. To date, the Department has not had an adverse ruling. Finally, like anyone else, County employees have recourse to file a lawsuit with the courts. As can be seen, there are a number of avenues for an employee’to file a complaint. The options are identified in the County Personne] Rules and Regulations and the Local Agency Personnel Standards (LAPS). Generally, public sector employees are more unionized than private sector employees and have more protections built into their agreements with public sector agencies. Sutter County Board of Supervisors Response to 2014-15 Grand Jury Report

The Board of Supervisors disagrees with Finding #2. County rules state that Department Heads are required to make a recommendation for consideration to the CAO in order to implement alternate work schedules.!. The Department Head has done this. The County Rules regarding alternate work schedules are the result of the negotiations between the County and the Employees Association. The alternative work schedule in question was approved by the Board of Supervisors as part of the MOU with the employees Association on January 11, 2000. The Human Services Department - Welfare/Social Services Division received approval from the Board of Supervisors to implement alternate work schedules on March 13, 2001. Desired changes to negotiated items are regularly raised as part of the negotiations process between the County and the Employees Association. Currently, the Human Services Department is complying with the Rules Governing Employee Compensation, Benefits and Working Conditions. Requests for permanent alternate work schedules have been denied based on County rules which state that the alternate work schedule is authorized based on the Department Head’s recommendation and the approval of the CAO and that the Department Head or CAO have the unconditional right to cancel an alternate work schedule. The county has established rules around alternate work schedules. These have been established through the meet and confer process, which are reflected in the Rules Governing Employee Compensation, Benefits and Working Conditions. These rules state: “Except as otherwise provided below, the official work week for full time employees shall be forty (40) hours and shall begin on each Saturday and end with the following Friday” “Employees may be assigned to work a schedule consisting of four 10-hour work days in a work week, i.e. four (4) 10-hour days on duty and three (3) days off. Department heads are required to make a

The Board of Supervisors partially disagrees with Finding #3. It is agreed that the allegations of employees being exposed to asbestos were false. There is significant documentation on this subject that was provided to the Cal OSHA District Office in October of 2013. This information was also posted at the 190 Garden Highway office on October 22, 2013. This information, on file with Cal OSHA, was made available to the Grand Jury. This information provides factual information on the work that was done on the building, the materials used, and the methods used in removing asbestos. At no time was Welfare/Social Services staff subject to an unsafe environment. The Board of Supervisors disagrees with the finding that staff were not informed in a timely manner of the construction to take place. This item has been discussed with Welfare & Social Services Division management staff. Management provides employees information on construction projects as soon as management staff are notified by County Building and Maintenance.

The Board of Supervisors partially disagrees with Finding #4. It is agreed that an employee’s post on Facebook should not be placed in the supervisor’s desk file for that employee. It is also agreed that management should not monitor an employee’s off-duty social media communications. This item has been discussed with Welfare & Social Services Division management staff. Administration believes that this matter also highlights the importance of discretion and the responsibility of employees as it concerns workplace information. It should be noted, however, that if management were to be made aware that an employee disclosed confidential client information or, in the case of the Health and Mental Health Divisions, protected health information, the Department would be obligated to take appropriate action.

The Board of Supervisors disagrees with Finding #5. This item has been discussed with Welfare & Social Services Division management staff. The Department reports that, despite the allegations that there is no proper documentation or accountability of hours worked, the time sheets used by the Human Services Department have been used as documentation in State and Federal audits. During numerous audits that are conducted annually by State and Federal auditors, time sheets have been required to verify time spent by staff in various programs. The Sutter County Board of Supervisors Response to 2014-15 Grand Jury Report Department is responsible to the Board of Supervisors and accountable to the agencies that provide funding for its programs. - The allegation that there is no proper documentation or accountability of hours worked is not supported by the fact that multiple State and Federal agencies use employee time cards as documentation for hours worked.