Trinity County Grand Jury • 2000-2001

Committee Roster Judicial Committee Education Committee Jacqueline Rogers Dwight Glass

Published: June 12, 2001 220 pages

View Original PDF

⚠️ 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 1 findings

TheReport ofStation Information for the Hayfork Transfer Station and Title 14 ofthe California Code ofRegulations, plus the SolidWaste Operation Permit require the following: Title 14 - Article 6.2 Section 17409.5 requires load checking uponentering the facility. Title 14 -Article 6.35 Section 17418.1 Site Security, statesthatthe County must discourage access to the site after operational hours. Title 14 -Article 6.35 Section 17418.2 Site Security, statesthatthe facility shall have an attendant present during operational hours.

Related Recommendations (1)

Citizen Complaint. "Rules and regulations asstatedin finding numberone shouldbe adhered to eliminating preferential treatment." Response: We agree in part. The part we agree to is that the Grand Jury has correctly stated the regulations regarding the operation of the facility. The Grand Jury's narrow interpretation of the rules does not account for contracted services and the right of entry for the services.

Additional Recommendations 17

These recommendations are not explicitly linked to specific findings.

R2

Citizen Complaint. "Allow all septic service businesses equal access to transfer sites in order to provide equal business opportunity." Response: We disagree wholly with the recommendation; it will not be implemented because it is not warranted noradhere to the California Code of Regulation sections quoted above. Plus the committee misleads the reader. They clearly state the applicable codes, however the issue of access is misstated. The disposal site is open six days aweek, for 9 hours each day. The complainant has access during those hours. The current key holder provides and has provided contracted service to that site for many years. The code allows for contracted service providers access after hours. For the past seven years the keyholder's septage disposal logs and their customer logs for the amount septage removed have matched, and payments for disposal have been made on time. With the complainant, this is not the case. His disposal logs and his customer logs do not match. This matter has been turned over to the Environmental Health Department who has jurisdiction. The committee's conclusion is also flawed; there is no equal opportunity question here and no preferential treatment. If a health and safety emergency existed, County would accommodate disposal. The fact that the complainant says there is one does not constitute any health and safety risk or equal opportunity issue. He, like the key holder, should at all times schedule his disposal needs around the site hours of operation. We request that this response be published. (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) rr~-I`;i -I-f ,T TT r~ I': ~T ire /fj11 OFFICE OF THE COUNTYADMINISTRATOR Administration - HumanResources-Risk Management GrantManagement -Information &Technology P. O. Box1613 Weaverville, CA 96093-1613 County AdministratorPhone: (530)623-1382 Human ResourcesPhone(530) 623-1325 FAX(530) 623-4222 JEANNIENIX-TEMPLE, County Administrative Officer TO: The Honorable John K. Letton, RECEIVED Presiding Judge ofthe Superior Court FROM: eannie Nix-TempCounty Administrative Officer SUPrERIOR COURT JUDGE'S CHAMBERS SUBJEC Response to Recommendations of2000-01 GrandJury Development and Environment Committee Final Report Citizen Complaint - Department ofGeneral Services DATE: September 14, 2001 The Grand Jury Development and Environment Committee has requested a written response to their final report on the Citizen Complaint concerning the Hayfork Transfer Station. In my capacity as County Administrative Officer my response is a follows:
R3

"General Services shoulddetermine what steps are necessary to acquire a minimum oftwo orthree bids. This might include advertising in additional locations outside ofTrinity County. Hopefully actions such as notification ofthe Shasta Builders Exchange and additional advertising will achieve the need foradditional bids." Response: We disagree. There is no requirement to get a minimum of two or three bids. General Services has made every effort to extend our search for bidders; we use the Shasta -153- Builders Exchange, advertise in the Trinity Journal and in the Record Searchlight when the project warrants it. The recommendation to require 2 or 3 bids before accepting a proposal is not consistentwith current contracting requirements and will not be implemented. The size of a project, its' complexity, location, markets, and the availability of contractors determines how many bids will be received. Because only one bid was received is an indication of the market.
R4

"This GrandJurybelieves it is unacceptable forthe BOS to have to declare an "emergency"on a somewhat routine project because of expected winter rains. In this case, better coordination between the Hospital and General Services could have averted this "emergency". Since bids were neverreceived itis impossible to determine ifthe cost exceeded what could have incurred by competitive bidding. The County shouldimprove the planning and foresight regarding public improvement projects to avoid routine projects becoming "emergency"situations." Response: We disagree with the finding; the recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or reasonable. The Grand Jury's belief that this project was routine is inaccurate when one considers that it also includes the design and construction of the new clinic building at the hospital. Weather is a major factor; it can delay a project and drive up costs. The statement that "Since bids were never received it is impossible to determine if the cost exceeded what could have incurred by competitive bidding" is inaccurate. The cost could be determined, Hoy & Son Construction were doing similar work on the Juvenile Detention Facility, and the cost estimates done by Lawrence and Associates were in line with costs associated with this competitively bid project. The break down by bidders are: J.F. Shea $638,213, Herk's Backhoe $627,523, and Hoy & Son $534,490. When one takes the cost for each task described in the Juvenile Detention Facility bid and compares them with the parking lot tasks, it can be determined whether or not the costs are competitive. I would suggestthat the Grand Jury check the
R5

"Planning for future use ofthe existing Weaverville Airport site (after a new airport is constructed) was called for by the 1999-2000 GrandJury. Based on the lack ofany visible progress this GrandJurystrongly recommends that the BoardofSupervisors intensify thiseffort and include more specific due dates for apreliminary report." Response: We disagree with the finding. The General Services Director was neverasked questions about ourstrategic plans forthe airport property, however staff provided the committee with the binder that contains all the minutes and background information of the Strategic Planning Committee. Had the committee asked specific questions, they would have better understood the information provided on the airport relocation, hospital relocation and construction planning, discussion forthe site ofthe newjuvenile hall facility, property purchasesfrom the BLM of lands surrounding the old airport, solid waste transfer facility, office/maintenance building and the newly remodeled alcohol and -173- (cid:9)(cid:9) other drug services facility. The Strategic Planning Committee meets monthly and is comprised of department heads and supervisors, who review and discuss all the plans prior to implementation.
R6

"The GrandJury believes that the portion ofthe Solid Waste expenditures for the sewer line should not exceed the costs had the sewerlinebeen extended from the Five-Cent gulch trailer Park with the minimum sized line. Those expenses in excess ofthat cost should be borne by the County GeneralFund or otherappropriate users. In other words all other costs for upsized lines, easements, etc., would be from funds other than Solid Waste." Response: We disagree with the committee's findings. Once again, this was addressed in my response to the committee's draft report. Repayment over time will come from users hooking up to the line, in the form of a line charge through the Sanitary District hookup fees. All capital investment takes time to be repaid. Why the committee has such a narrow view on this issue leaves me to wonder what their real motives are.
R7

"This GrandJury believes that the BOS and CountyAdministrative Officer(CAO) need to takesteps to guarantee that County employees follow the State and County laws regarding contracting andcontractingauthority. Creating a County contracting office should be considered in theinterest ofimproving theadministration ofcounty contracts and complying with California State contracting laws. Summary: 1. The Grand Jury has found that Public Projectcontracts have been awarded without competitive bids requiredby California law. 2. The Grand Jury hadfoundthat Trinity County has used Solid Waste funds derivedfrom Solid Waste disposal Fees and Tipping Fees forpurposes other than Solid Waste. The Solid Waste Fund needs to be reimbursed forthe improper use ofthose fees." Response: We disagree with the recommendations and the summarization. The creation of another department to deal will contracts is not necessary and will add to the overhead costs for projects. Contracting guidelines and tracking protocol were set in place by the CAO, and reiterated in a memo dated 7/31/00. The committee's recommendations have been in place since then, and to suggest otherwise is misleading. As we have stated elsewhere, protocols are in place to reimburse the County's capital investment. Summary: The grandjury's summation is narrow in focus and prejudicial. It does not take into account the circumstances surrounding the implementation of work for these projects or the value gained. The uses of Solid Waste funds have not been misdirected and capital investment assurances have been made through other funding mechanisms. We request that this response be published. (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) rif rim 0 31TT,16111,117 `t'I w OFFICE OF THE COUNTYADMINISTRATOR Administration -Human Resources-Risk Management GrantManagement-Information & Technology P. O. Box 1613 Weaverville, CA 96093-1613 County AdministratorPhone: (530) 623-1382 HumanResourcesPhone (530) 623-1325 FAX (530) 623-4222 JEANNIENIX-TEMPLE, CountyAdministrative Officer RECEIVED TO: The Honorable John K. Letton, v:.IPERIOR COURT residing Judge ofthe Superior Court j L)G'S CHAMBERS FROM: Jeannie Nix-Temple, County Administrative Officer SUBJEC Response to Recommendations of2000-01 Grand Jury Special Investigation Committee-Landfill Closure/Sewer Line Construction DATE: September 14, 2001 The Grand Jury Special Investigation Committee has requested a written response to their final report on the Landfill Closure/Sewer Line Construction. In my capacity as County Administrative Officer, my response is a follows:
R8

The Grand Jury commends the Auditor/Controller for improving the cashiering procedures but recommends that the new procedure, ifnot yet adopted, be required ofall the county departments that receive cash payments, effective immediately. SUMMARY: The Grand Jury recommends thatthe accounting records ofthe county be improved to obtain future Independent Auditor's Reportsthat donot contain qualifications. The GrandJury recommends that action be takentoobtain Independent Auditor Reports on a moretimely basis. The GrandJury recommends that immediate attention be given tothe completeness and accuracy ofthe financial statements for the Enterprise Fund accounts. TheGrandJury recommends thatthe estimated landfill closure and post- closure maintenance costsbe reviewed. The GrandJury commends the Auditor/Controller and the Auditor/Controller Departmentfor improvements inthe recording and classification offunds. The GrandJury commends the Auditor/Controller for his efforts to reduce the interest costs ofequipment leases. RESPONSE REQUESTED FROM: Trinity County Board ofSupervisors, Trinity County Administrative Officer, Trinity County Auditor/Controller. (cid:9) (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) IV( Wwli3 X A lkaiokloil)xzl_7 Lar X BRIAN E. MUIR, COUNTY AUDITOR-CONTROLLER P.O. BOX 1230, WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 96093-1230 PHONE(530)623-1317 FAX(530) 623-1323
R9

TheGrandJury recommends thatthe BOS eliminate longevity based increases for elected officials inTrinity County. TheGrandJury recommends thatsalaries ofelected officials be based solely onthe duties and responsibilitiesofthe office. When determining salaries, due consideration should be given tothe salaries ofthe elected and appointed officials inTrinity County, the salaries ofofficials in the sameoffice in similar counties, and prevailing local wages. This recommendation should not be construed as a recommendation for a salary decrease for any elected Trinity County official thatmay have received a longevity based salary increase.
R10

TheGrand Jury enthusiastically endorses the Job Classification and Compensation Study as a means ofcorrecting any compensation inequities that may be identified.
R11

The Grand Jury believes that a spirit ofcooperation between various offices within the County government is in the best interest ofthe citizens ofthiscounty. To this end it is recommended thatall Department Heads actively pursue respectful and cooperative relationships with other departments and departmentheads. It is understood thatmany personalities are involved, however, relationships should beconducted professionally. The citizens ofthe County should expect no less. TheGrand Jury further recommendsthat individual members ofthe BOS that are concerned aboutthe performance ofany department or departmenthead personallyvisit thatdepartmentfor a first hand review. SUMMARY: D The citizens ofTrinity County have been and are being well served bythe Treasurer/Tax Collector Dept. D The Treasurer/Tax CollectorDepartment operations werehampered byhigh rateofemployee turnover, but essential services were not adversely affected. D TheTreasurer/Tax Collector Department employee morale is good and the workforce appears to have stabilized. D The Treasurer/Tax Collector has anongoing interest in improving efficiency and integrity oftreasury and tax collection operations. Numerous improvements have been made and others are underconsideration bythe Treasurer/Tax Collector and other related departments. D The Treasurer/Tax Collector is severely underpaid and the GrandJury recommends immediate increases. -69- D The Grand Jury recommends abandonment of longevity based salary increases for elected officials and thatitbe replaced with a reasonableprocess to keep the salary ofelected officials in paritywith similar positions. RESPONSE REQUESTED FROM: Trinity County Board ofSupervisors, Trinity County Administrative Officer, Trinity CountyAuditor/Controller, Trinity County Treasurer/Tax Collector, Trinity County Superintendent of Schools (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) n - [~\ TT rm rf T ~PfT" T BRIANE. MUIR, COUNTYAUDITOR-CONTROLLER P.O.BOX 1230,WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 96093-1230 PHONE(530)623-1317 FAX (530) 623-1323 RECEIVED JUN 1 8 2001 SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE'S MEMORANDUM CHAMBERS DATE: June 14, 2001 TO: John K. Letton, Presiding Judge ofthe Superior Court FROM: Brian Muir, Auditor /Controller SUBJECT: 2000-2001 Trinity County Grand Jury Report Trinity County Treasurer/ Tax Collector DepartmentandRelated County Operations The following response is provided as requested inthe above report:
R12

Does Hospital Management create an atmosphere which encourages and provides opportunity for GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT? Virtually Always 0 © 0 ® 33 0 0 Virtually Never (Thegrowth and (Employee growthand developmental needsof developmental needs all employees are areeitherignored or recognizedandacted acteduponina upontothegreatest haphazard orbiased extentpossible.) manner.) Comments: (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) (cid:9) (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) AttachmentA
R13

Doesthe Hospital Management Team provide OBJECTIVE, FAIR, AND ACCURATE EVALUATIONS ofRank-and-File performance? Virtually Always 70 © 50 ® 30 22 Ol Virtually Never (Rank-and-File employee (Rank-and-File performance evaluations employeeperformance arealwaysthorough, evaluations areall too accurate andobjective.) oftenweak,biasedand unsubstantiated.) Comments:
R14

To what degree is the Hospital Management Team COMMITTED TO SERVING THE NEEDS OF PATIENTS? Maximally 0 © 0 ® 30 0 Minimally (Thepersonalactionsof (Thepersonal actionsof all members ofthe theManagementTeam ManagementTeam members reflect aclear reflect anunwavering absence ofaservice service orientation.) orientation.) Comments: (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) Attachment A
R15

To what degree are Rank-and-File employees COMMITTED TO SERVING THE NEEDS OF PATIENTS? Maximally 0 © 0 ® 0 0 0 Minimally (Thepersonalactions of (Thepersonal actionsof all Rank-and-File manyRank-and-File employees reflect an employees reflect aclear unwaveringservice absence ofaservice orientation.) orientation.) Comments:
R16

What is the overall LEVEL OF TEAMWORK between the Hospital Management Team and the Rank-and-File employees? Very United © L] ® 0 n 10 Very Divided (TheManagementTeam (Few,ifany, ofthe and theRank-and-File ManagementTeam employees consistently members andtheRank- worktogethertosolve and-Fileemployees are mutual problems and committed toworking achieve commongoals togethertosolvemutual andobjectives.) problemsandmeet common goals.) Comments: (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) Attachment A
R17

What is the QUALITY OF LEADERSHIP displayed by the Hospital Management Team? Very Effective 70 © OS ® 30 2 10 Very Ineffective (The Management (The Management Team consistently Team frequently triesto assumes personal blame others for their responsibility for their actions, failsto consider actions, considers the the needsofthe needsofthe Hospital Hospital and their andtheir subordinates subordinates before beforetaking action, takingaction, and allto and provides positive, often, provides negative, fair and effective biased and ineffective leadership.) leadership.) Comments:
R18

Overall, I would ratethe HOSPITAL OPERATION as: Outstanding 0ENN©MBE©E©E0 Very Poor Comments: (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) COMBINED RESPONSES P1 Q2--F3 Q4 Q5 6 Q7 Q8 Q9 410 Q11 Q12 Q13 14 15 Q16 Q17 18 Management 1 4.91 5.415.331 4]3.441 3.9 3.1 3.2 4 4.6 4.5 3.8 4.2 6 6.413.89F-3757-4.5 Medical Staff 12.73 13.13 4.48 2.87 2.06 2.31 1.58 1.77 2.67 3.06 2.66 2.43 3.19 4.14 5.71 2.43 2.32 3.26 uupportStaff 1 2.513.061 4.5_L2.3911.72 2....12858221118111 2 2.29 1.94 2.44 4.28 5.89 1.94 2.18 3 (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) COMBINED RESPONSE AVERAGES --~ '--~--~-T----~---~----~----~---~--.-.. --'- -- T . . . . . . . . . . .` . . __ __ .............. ;------ . . . . . . . . . __ __~ -- ------ ------ ------ --- -~ . . . . ~ -- - ' ' ~- ~ ----- / . ' ~ _ '~---~~-----------'W--' F-A !------ - . . . . . 1 ~ «» Management - + - Medical Staff * Support Staff (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) TRINITY HOSPI BOARD OF DIRECTORS AServiceofTrinityCounty RECEIVED July20,2001 HonorableJohn K.Letton, PresidingJudge JUL 2 5 2001 TrinityCounty Superior Court SUPERIOR COURT P.O.Box 1258 JUDGE'S CHAMBERS Weaverville, CA 96093 Re: 2000-2001 TrinityCounty GrandJury Report HealthCommittee-Hospital Survey DearJudgeLetton: The purposeofthis correspondence is to comply withCalifornia Penal Code Sections 933and933.050,that in pertinent part require written response to the findings and recommendations of the 2000-2001 Trinity CountyGrandJury Report. This response is on behalfoftheTrinityHospital BoardofDirectors. GENERALOVERVIEW: The Hospital Administrator, in a joint replywith the hospital board of directors, challenged the Grandjury

Conclusions 46

CL1

Citizen Complaint: A letterofAugust 18, 2001 signed by the DirectorofGeneral Services states that the complainant's competitorhas been given a key and "grand-fathered in"; giving the competitorunlimited access. Response: (cid:9) We agree in part and disagree in part. Grand Jury takes a phrasefrom a letter, and misconstrues the meaning and content of that letter. The letterwas written to the complainant, and quotes the regulations for site security and site permitting. The letter states that the key-holder was "grand-fathered in" to provide contracted services, which is the same service they supplied to our sites through Timberline Disposal.
CL2

The SAT provides a means ofcomparison ofstudents preparing for college. SAT scores are intended to supplement the secondary school records and help admissions officers put local data- suchas course work, grades, and class rank - ina national perspective. SAT scores are the single most important indicator used indetermining admission atmost highly regarded universities. SAT testsare usually takenonly by students considering attending a college or university; and a high SAT score is essentially a requirement atmany universities. Average NPR's forthe PSAT and SAT for the Trinity County high school students thattook thosetests in the year 2000 are summarized in Table3. As shown inTable 3 the average NPR ofTrinity County students thattook the SAT test ranged from 47 atHayfork High School to 58 at both Trinity High School and So. Trinity HighSchool. TheNPR's of58 indicate thatthe average student score at Trinity High School and So. TrinityHigh School was abovethe 50ht percentile nationwide. Looking at the SAT scores from the perspective ofthe high scores necessary for admission to colleges and universities which admit only a small percentage of applicants, nine Trinity County students had SAT NPR's between 80and 89, and one student had a SAT NPRbetween 90 and 100.
CL3

aril Recommendation#4: The Board agrees with the findings and therewas no recommendation.
CL4

National PercentileRank (NPR) is avaluable indicator ofstudent and school performance, but certain limitations need to be taken into consideration when drawing conclusions. First, the Stanford 9testis not perfectly aligned with California state curriculum standards. Most school officials in Trinity County do not consider this to be amajor problem and consider Stanford 9 to be a good, ifimperfect, performance indicator. Second, average scores for small schools can be misleading because when few students takethe test the absence or addition ofone or more particularly high or low scoring students can significantly affectthe average score ofthe school. Greatcare must therefore be taken inreaching conclusions based on average scores for aparticular year in avery small school. Third, conclusions aboutschools should not be basedoncursory examinations of scores and their relationships should not bereached without due considerationofthe complexities ofgeographies, demographics, and economics. There is broadacceptance ofthebeliefthat socio-economic factors (such as local culture, family income, family stability and guidance, and exposure to drugsand alcohol) all affect student performance but are beyond the schools' control. Despitethe above mentioned limitations, test results ofnationallynormedtests such as Stanford 9 are beingused inTrinity County public schools and are enthusiastically endorsed bysome school administrators and teachers. Expressions of supportfor the Stanford 9 testswerefound atsome ofthe schools with the lowesttest scores because ofthe beliefthattest scores help identifyweaknessesthatcanbe corrected. The Grand Jury found significant variation inthe interest ofthe school district trustees inthe NPR results ofthe nationally normedtests. It is believed thatthis is at least partially attributableto the emphasis onAPI scores and the associated monetary awards. Similarly, parents of students are reportedly more aware and interested inAPI scores and the corresponding ranking ofCalifornia schoolsthan inNPR's; though parent interest inNPR is increasing asthe parents become more aware ofand familiar with the significance ofusing NPRto interpret test results.
CL5

Ingeneral, the GrandJury finds that smaller school and class size is anadvantage, upto a point. In Trinity County the elementary schools in particularappear tobenefit from smaller school and class size. A full complement ofcollege preparatory classes are not generally offered by the smaller high schools, thereby placing an additionalburden on individual students who plan to attend a college or university. In most areas, extra classes are offered throughjunior college or college extension programs. The problem of availability ofcollege preparatory classes is recognized by the smaller Trinity County high schools, and effortis beingexerted to mitigate the problem.
CL6

The GrandJury finds indications ofpossible inaccuracies inthe cost apportionment ofsalaries ofcounty officials that perform the duties ofmorethan one office.
CL7

A new cashiering procedure requiring unique Auditor/Controller assigned receipt numbers for cash receipts has been adopted bythe County. Thenew procedure provides improved accountability ofcash received by the County, which became effective inthe Treasurer/Tax Collector's office onApril 2, 2001. TheGrand Jury has not been able to confirm thatthe new procedure has been adopted by all the county government departments. -48-
CL8

We agree in part and disagree in part with the finding. Longevity based increases were developed through a salary survey and they are not uncommon, and are beneficial in several avenues.
CL9

A contract has been awarded for aTrinity County GovernmentJob Classification and Compensation Study. This study, which is scheduled for completion inApril, 2002 will coverthe complete range ofcounty governmentjobs from elected officials, including the BOS, to entrylevel positions. During the Grand Jury's review and investigation ofthe Treasurer/Tax Collector's salary, the GrandJury found indications ofprobable inequities inthe salariesofother Trinity County GovernmentDepartment Heads and the BOS. The Grand Jury did not -68- conduct an investigation sufficienttojustify a specific recommendation regarding those perceived inequities.
CL10

We agree with the finding.
CL11

Does Hospital Management create an atmosphere which encourages and provides opportunity for GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT? Virtually Always 0 © 0 ® 33 0 0 Virtually Never (Thegrowth and (Employee growthand developmental needsof developmental needs all employees are areeitherignored or recognizedandacted acteduponina upontothegreatest haphazard orbiased extentpossible.) manner.) Comments: (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) (cid:9) (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) AttachmentA
CL12

Doesthe Hospital Management Team provide OBJECTIVE, FAIR, AND ACCURATE EVALUATIONS ofRank-and-File performance? Virtually Always 70 © 50 ® 30 22 Ol Virtually Never (Rank-and-File employee (Rank-and-File performance evaluations employeeperformance arealwaysthorough, evaluations areall too accurate andobjective.) oftenweak,biasedand unsubstantiated.) Comments:
CL13

To what degree is the Hospital Management Team COMMITTED TO SERVING THE NEEDS OF PATIENTS? Maximally 0 © 0 ® 30 0 Minimally (Thepersonalactionsof (Thepersonal actionsof all members ofthe theManagementTeam ManagementTeam members reflect aclear reflect anunwavering absence ofaservice service orientation.) orientation.) Comments: (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) Attachment A
CL14

To what degree are Rank-and-File employees COMMITTED TO SERVING THE NEEDS OF PATIENTS? Maximally 0 © 0 ® 0 0 0 Minimally (Thepersonalactions of (Thepersonal actionsof all Rank-and-File manyRank-and-File employees reflect an employees reflect aclear unwaveringservice absence ofaservice orientation.) orientation.) Comments:
CL15

What is the overall LEVEL OF TEAMWORK between the Hospital Management Team and the Rank-and-File employees? Very United © L] ® 0 n 10 Very Divided (TheManagementTeam (Few,ifany, ofthe and theRank-and-File ManagementTeam employees consistently members andtheRank- worktogethertosolve and-Fileemployees are mutual problems and committed toworking achieve commongoals togethertosolvemutual andobjectives.) problemsandmeet common goals.) Comments: (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) Attachment A
CL16

What is the QUALITY OF LEADERSHIP displayed by the Hospital Management Team? Very Effective 70 © OS ® 30 2 10 Very Ineffective (The Management (The Management Team consistently Team frequently triesto assumes personal blame others for their responsibility for their actions, failsto consider actions, considers the the needsofthe needsofthe Hospital Hospital and their andtheir subordinates subordinates before beforetaking action, takingaction, and allto and provides positive, often, provides negative, fair and effective biased and ineffective leadership.) leadership.) Comments:
CL17

Overall, I would ratethe HOSPITAL OPERATION as: Outstanding 0ENN©MBE©E©E0 Very Poor Comments: (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) COMBINED RESPONSES P1 Q2--F3 Q4 Q5 6 Q7 Q8 Q9 410 Q11 Q12 Q13 14 15 Q16 Q17 18 Management 1 4.91 5.415.331 4]3.441 3.9 3.1 3.2 4 4.6 4.5 3.8 4.2 6 6.413.89F-3757-4.5 Medical Staff 12.73 13.13 4.48 2.87 2.06 2.31 1.58 1.77 2.67 3.06 2.66 2.43 3.19 4.14 5.71 2.43 2.32 3.26 uupportStaff 1 2.513.061 4.5_L2.3911.72 2....12858221118111 2 2.29 1.94 2.44 4.28 5.89 1.94 2.18 3 (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) COMBINED RESPONSE AVERAGES --~ '--~--~-T----~---~----~----~---~--.-.. --'- -- T . . . . . . . . . . .` . . __ __ .............. ;------ . . . . . . . . . __ __~ -- ------ ------ ------ --- -~ . . . . ~ -- - ' ' ~- ~ ----- / . ' ~ _ '~---~~-----------'W--' F-A !------ - . . . . . 1 ~ «» Management - + - Medical Staff * Support Staff (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) TRINITY HOSPI BOARD OF DIRECTORS AServiceofTrinityCounty RECEIVED July20,2001 HonorableJohn K.Letton, PresidingJudge JUL 2 5 2001 TrinityCounty Superior Court SUPERIOR COURT P.O.Box 1258 JUDGE'S CHAMBERS Weaverville, CA 96093 Re: 2000-2001 TrinityCounty GrandJury Report HealthCommittee-Hospital Survey DearJudgeLetton: The purposeofthis correspondence is to comply withCalifornia Penal Code Sections 933and933.050,that in pertinent part require written response to the findings and recommendations of the 2000-2001 Trinity CountyGrandJury Report. This response is on behalfoftheTrinityHospital BoardofDirectors. GENERALOVERVIEW: The Hospital Administrator, in a joint replywith the hospital board of directors, challenged the Grandjury findings to the 1999-2000 Grand Jury final report on the basis that the findings lacked objectivity, and methods used to evaluate management failed to includealargeenough ordiverseenough samplegroup. The GrandJury Health Committee obtained and modified a survey instrument designed to measure eighteen aspectsor dimensions ofthemanagement process. FINDINGS: Weneitheragreenordisagreewith thefindings. Theinformation presentedin thesurvey results hasalmost no positive comments.To becompletely objective therawdata should be presented.
CL18

Safeguarding ofPrincipal
CL19

-=NotApplicable 3. "AVE"=MeanPercentile ofall Trinity student scores (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) TABLE 2 TRINITY COUNTY SCHOOLS TEST RESULTS STANFORD 9 SCORES, SPRING 2000 NATIONAL PERCENTH.E RANK (NPR) SUBJECT Social SCHOOL Reading Math Language Spelling Science Science ALLTRINITY COUNTY SCHOOLS (1698) 54 60 55 48 56 56 TRINITYHIGH(347) 51 61 55 -- 62 62 HAYFORKHIGH(128) 45 49 53 -- 52 53 SOUTHERNTRINITYHIGH(42) 41 54 50 -- 52 49 WEAVERVILLE ELEMENTARY(349) 60 65 58 51 -- -- HAYFORK VALLEYELEMENTARY(243) 53 52 46 43 -- -- DOUGLAS CITYELEMENTARY(118) 59 69 61 42 -- -- LEWISTON ELEMENTARY(98) 47 51 50 41 -- -- VANDUZENELEMENTARY(89) 57 66 51 51 -- -- JUNCTION CITYELEMENTARY(63) 69 64 70 52 -- -- BURNTRANCHELEMENTARY(61) 55 57 55 49 -- -- TRINITY CENTERELEMENTARY(35) 72 74 76 58 -- -- HOAGLINZENIAELEMENTARY(22) 68 71 68 58 -- -- COXBARELEMENTARY(14) 52 77 62 48 -- -- HYAMFOMELEMENTARY(10) 65 62 56 43 -- -- COFFEE CREEKELEMENTARY(5), See Note4 -- -- -- -- NOTES: 1. -- = NotApplicable 2.( ) = Total students tested
CL20

Scores shown are the meanNPRofTrinity students
CL21

Test results for Coffee Creek Elementary are not included because ofthe limited number of studentstested and the unavailability oflanguage and spelling scores from that school.
CL22

Our office will addressNPR in our Annual Report to thePublic.
CL23

Doesthe Hospital Management Team ROUTINELY SOLICIT INPUT from Rank- and-File employees on issues and problems affecting their day-to-day operations? Virtually Always 0 © F51 ® 30 F21 Fil Virtually Never Comments: (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) AttachmentA
CL24

Our office meets several times per yearwith school officials to review counseling in the schools, and concur that it is increasingly important for effective transition to adultlife. Sincerely, c: Bob Lowden, THS Joan Hair, MVUSD David Albee, STJUSD im French rinity County Supt. Of Schools JamesB.French,TdnHyCountySuperintendentofSchools P.O.Box 1256" 201 MemorialDrive"Weaverville California96093-1256" (530)623-2861 Fax (530)623-4489 (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) BOARD OF SUPERVISORS P.O. Drawer 1613 (630) 623-1217 WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 96093 DeroB. Forslund, Clerk TO: The Honorable John K. Letton, Jeannie Nix-Temple, CountyAdministrative Officer Presiding Judge ofthe Superior Court RECEIVED FROM: Trinity County BoardofSupervisors DEC 1 1 2001 SUBJECT: Response to Recommendations of2000-01 GrandJury EducationCommittee Report SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE'S CHAMBERS Public Education in Trinity County DATE: November 13, 2001 The Grand JuryEducation Committee has not requested a written response to theirFinal Report onPublic Education inTrinity County, however, to be thorough inits responses to the Grand Jury's efforts the Board ofSupervisors responds as follows: Finding #1 and Recommendation #1 : TheBoard agrees with the findings andtherewas norecommendation. Finding #2and Recommendation #2: TheBoardagrees withthe findings and there was norecommendation. Finding #3 and Recommendation #3: TheBoardagrees withthe findings and supports the GrandJury recommendation that schooladmudstrators and teachers continue to emphasize to students and parents the need forhighperformance (on standardized performance tests) bythose students intending to attend majorcolleges anduniversities. Finding #4 aril Recommendation#4: The Board agrees with the findings and therewas no recommendation. Finding #5 and Recommendation #5: The Board agrees withthe findings and
CL25

How effective is the LEVEL OF COMMUNICATION between the Hospital Management Team and Rank-and-File employees? Very Effective 70 © 50 ® 30 20 il Very Ineffective (Open,honest, andfree- (Guarded, cautious,and flowing.) suppressed.) Comments: (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) (cid:9) (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) AttachmentA
CL26

Are SPECIAL ASSIGNMENTS made fairly and impartially by the Hospital Management Team? Virtually Always 7I © OS ® 30 20 Hl Virtually Never (Allappointments are (Fewappointments are basedsolely onthebest basedsolelyonthe possiblefitbetween the degreetowhichthe assignmentandthe employeefitsthe employee, considering assignment;instead, onlyfactors suchasthe personalities, politics, qualifications ofthe andfavoritismplaya employee, andtheneeds disproportionately large oftheHospital.) roleinthese appointments.) Comments:
CL27

Does the Hospital Management Team RECOGNIZE AND GIVE CREDIT to Employees for accomplishments? Is your work appreciated? Virtually Always 70 © 5~ ® 30 20 10 Virtually Never (TheManagementTeam (TheManagementTeam nearly alwaysprovides rarely, ifever, prompt recognition for acknowledgeseventhemost employee significant employee accomplishments. Great accomplishments. careistakentoassure Individualeffort isoften thatindividualsreceive overlookedand major appropriate credit for achievementsmay gototally theirachievements. My unrecognized. Mypersonal personalefforts are efforts arenotwell highly appreciated.) appreciated.) Comments: (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) Attachment A
CL28

Does the Hospital Management Team routinely provide ASSISTANCE AND GUIDANCE to Rank-and-File employees? Virtually Always 7 © 5~ ® L] 20 0 Virtually Never (TheManagementTeam (TheManagement nearly alwaysanticipates Teamrarely, ifever, theneedfor, and recognizestheneedfor, providesthoughtful, and/or provides helpful helpful, and valuable assistanceand assistanceandguidance guidance, evenwhen toall employees.) employees actively solicit it.) Comments:
CL29

Finding #5 We concur and recognize the need for a written vote counting policy.
CL30

I would add the followingto sentence #2, " the need for high performance by all students", not just thoseattending major colleges and universities. The majority of our students do not attend major colleges and universities. They attend Shasta College, Chico, and Humboldt State.
CL31

What is the LEVEL OF CONSISTENCY among members ofthe Hospital Management Team inthe application ofpolicy and procedure? Very High 70 © 5] ® 30 02 10 Very Low (Members ofthe (TheManagement ManagementTeamare Teamdisplays awide veryconsistentintheir variationamong interpretationand members inthe applicationofpolicyand interpretation and procedure.) application ofpolicy andprocedure.) Comments: (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) Attachment A
CL32

Return on Invested Funds. The Treasurer/Tax Collector has complied with these objectives. As ofMarch 31,2001 a total ofapproximately $25 million was invested, ofwhich approximately $21 million was invested with the State ofCalifornia LocalAgency Investment Funds (LAIF) and approximately $3 million was invested inmoney market accounts and mutual funds. At thattime the average annual yield on investment wasapproximately 5.8%. There have been no realized losses ofinvestment principal. TheGrand Jury concludes thatthe -64- Treasurer/Tax Collector has managedthe investment ofcounty funds wisely and in accordance with legal requirements with the exception ofthe previously mentioned delay in formation ofthe Trinity County Treasury Oversight Committee.
CL33

Are DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS AND ENFORCEMENT OF POLICIES AND PROCEDURES conducted fairly and impartially by the Hospital Management Team? Virtually Always 0 © 51 ® 30 2 Fil Virtually Never (Disciplinary action is (Disciplinaryaction is consistently metedout in rarelymetedout ina auniform andimpartial uniform andimpartial manner, regardlessof manner;personalities theperson(s) involved; take precedenceover all policies and fairnessandprocedures proceduresareapplied arefrequentlyapplied fairlyandconsistently, inanarbitraryand withrespectto all inconsistent manner.) employees.) Comments:
CL34

We have metwith the county treasurer and the auditor to explore the possibility ofelectronic transfer of warrants: Our systems are not currently compatible for easy transfer. We will continue to meet to explore reasonable alternatives to address the treasurer's concerns, which theauditor and our' office view as less than high priority currently. No other recommendations directly affect our office. Than.k you. _78 _. JamesIIFrench,TrinityCountySuperintendentofSchools P.O. Box 1256"201 Memorial Drive"WeavervMeCalifornia 96093-1256 " (530)623-2361 Fax(S30)623-4439 Too /TOOFj 3M.L 69MZ90C9 X1+3 09 :9i 10/81/60 (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) BOARD OF SUPERVISORS P.O. Drawer 1613 (530) 623-1217 WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 96093 Dero B. Forslund, Clerk Jeannie Nix-Temple, County Administrative Officer TO: TheHonorable John K. Letton, Presiding JudgeSfthe SuperJior Court FROM: R. Berry St6waf, Chairman Trinity County Board of Supervisors SUBJECT: Response to Recommendations of2000-01 Grand Jury Finance and Administrative Committee Report Trinity County Treasurer/Tax Collector Department and Operations DATE: September 14, 2001 The Grand Jury Finance and Administrative Committee has requested a written response to their Final Report onthe Trinity County Treasurer/Tax Collector Department and Operations. In my capacity as Chairman, my response on behalf of the Board of Supervisors is as follows: Finding & Conclusion#1: We agree with the finding.
CL35

What is the level ofcommitment to ORGANIZATIONAL PRIORITIES, GOALS, AND OBJECTIVES displayed bythe Hospital Management Team? Very Supportive 70 © 50 ® 30 W 10 Very Unsupportive (The Management (TheManagement Teamuniformly and Teammembers consistently setsan frequentlyandopenly example ofthe highest display anunmistakable commitmentto, and lackofcommitmentto, supportfor priorities, andsupportfor goals, andobjectives) priorities, goals,and objectives.) -105- Attachment A Comments: (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) (cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:9) Attachment A
CL36

TheBoardofDirectors and othermembers of each district.
CL37

What is the level ofcommitment to ORGANIZATIONAL PRIORITIES, GOALS? AND OBJECTIVES displayed by Rank-and-File employees? Very Supportive 7l © 50 04 r3l 20 Ol Very Unsupportive (Rank-and-File (Rank-and-File employees uniformly and employees frequently consistently set an andopenlydisplayan example ofthehighest unmistakablelackof commitmentto, and conunitment to, and supportfor, priorities, support for,priorities, goals, and objectives) goals,andobjectives.) Comments:
CL38

Please ratethe LEVEL OF TRUSTbetween the Hospital Management Team and Rank-and-File employees. Very Positive 71 © 50 ® 3 2© 10 Very Negative (There is averyhigh (There isminimal degree ofconfidenceand confidenceandtrust trustbetween the between the ManagementTeamand ManagementTeamand the Rank-and-File Rank-and-File employees;ideasand employees;free concernsareopenlyand expressionofideasand freelyexchanged.) concernsisseverely limitedbyoverreaction and/orfearofreprisal.) Comments:
CL39

LocalAgency Formation Commission(LAFCO).
CL40

Community interaction.
CL41

Grand Jury. Special Districts servethe needs ofthe people as an extension ofCounty government. Grand Jury members may seek to examine records ofa District, which are by definition, public record. TheDistrict Attorney, CountyCounsel and the Superior Court Judge serve as advisors tothe Grand Jury. METHODS OF INVESTIGATION: Aquestionnaire was sentto all 17 Special Districts in Trinity County. Copies of the most current audit for each Special District, ifavailable, were obtained and reviewed. TheTrinity CountyAuditor/Controller was interviewed. Members ofthe Grand Jury Special District Committee attended meetings of sixteen ofseventeen Special DistrictBoards ofDirectors meetings. A list ofquestions thatwere prepared byGrandJury members wasused to interview each Special District Boardat meetings attended. FINDING & CONCLUSION #1: TheGrand Jury findsthat all sixteen Special Districts ofTrinity County are complying withthe rules and regulations as set forth byGovernment Codes, with the following exceptions. TheGrandJury members were unable to attendthe Post Mt. C.S.D. due to schedulingdifficulties ofthe GrandJury members. No determination could be made regarding Post Mt. C.S.D.'s compliancewith the rules and regulations and noreasons for concern have been found. Thecommittee reviewed fourteen audits provided by the Special Districts. All of these audits were acceptable, with one exception which was a lack ofinventory accounting. The remaining three Special Districts who did not present an audit are Greater Hayfork Valley Park &Recreation District, Salyer Community Service Districtand Lewiston Community Service District. TheLewiston C.S.D. did not have an audit prepared as all oftheir financial records were burned and lost during theLowden Fire. Theyhave not yet been able to reconstruct theserecords. However, members ofthe Grand Jury learned from the Lewiston C.S.D. they have been in compliance inthe past and intend to be inthe future. Theremaining two Special Districts are not, at this time, in compliance with Section 26909 ofthe California Government Code. It is the responsibility ofthe County Auditor/Controller to oversee these audits orwhere no audit has been completedto arrange for one tobe completed.
CL42

Mismanagement ofthe elderly persons funds, specifically a $14,000.00 inheritance.
CL43

Mismanagement ofthe property ofthe elderly person and sale ofher home.
CL44

Abuse ofthe elderly person by not allowing incoming or outgoing phone calls.
CL45

METHOD OF INVESTIGATION: Members ofthe Social Services Committee ofthe GrandJury interviewed County officials, the elderly persons attorney, the conservator in question, the complainant and a citizen who wrote a supportingletter tothe original complaint. The Committee also obtained court records to assist in determining the validityofthe complaint. FUNDING #1: Investigation revealed thatthe inheritance wasused for the purchase ofaburial plot, the paymentofback propertytaxes and mortgage payments, utility bills, trailer registration, repairs and maintenance, house hold expenses, numerous incidentals and an elective cart. These expenditures, were made in an effort to keep the elderly person inthe home as long as possible.
CL46

Therewas no mismanagement ofthe elderly person's fundsor property and no attempt to keep anyone from contacting the elderly person concerned. TheCounty Conservator is to be commended for her record keeping and her genuine concern forthe welfare ofthe elderly person. 2000/2001 TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY