⚠️ 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 15 findings
F1
substances, hazardous air emissions, and facilities that produce hazardous materials within a quarter mile of a school. The HMR architectural study makes no reference to the co-generation plant located
F2
at the Sierra Pacific Industries site.
F3
The Grand Jury found that no study was done regarding the safety hazards of either the Pioneer or Quincy Elementary Schools campuses.
F4
The Grand Jury found no evidence that any specific safety study had been done regarding the co-generation plant. The PUSD/PCOE entered into an agreement with the California School Boards
F5
Association (CSBA) to recruit candidates for the position of Superintendent. The recruiting agreement cost the district over $14,000. The Grand Jury found no evidence that a pre-employment background investigation
F6
was completed by the CSBA. There was a failure by the PUSD/PCOE to verify the background information of the
F7
Superintendent, and no information regarding a background investigation was on file at the district offices. The Grand Jury found no policy in place requiring the vetting of information and
F8
holding of permanent records by the PUSD/PCOE. The Grand Jury found no existing policies for hiring a Superintendent.
F9
F10. The Grand Jury found that the DAC/7-11 Committees took on huge tasks and did an incredible job. Plumas Unified School District Report
F10
Better business Bureau report HDR Engineering rating of A+
F11
State of California Water Board - Treatment Plant
F12
Plumas County Flood Control District - Treatment Plant
F13
Department of Fish and Game - Poisoning of Lake Davis
F14
Portola: The First Fifty Years 1909-1959 by Ray Donnenwirth
F15
State Water Project http://www.water.ca.gov/swp/history.cfm APPENDIX A Proposition 218 More than 30 years ago California voters approved Proposition 13, which imposed severe restrictions on local governing bodies' ability to increase property taxes, their most important source of revenue. Subsequently, many cities and counties began to rely on other revenue sources such as assessments, fees related to property, and general purpose taxes on business licenses, hotel occupancy, and utility users. Increases in these revenue sources were not subject to voter approval. Over the next 18 years, opposition to steady increases in these taxes and fees led to voter approval of Proposition 218, which makes it much more difficult for local governments to increase revenue, and forbids the use of property- related fees for general government services. Proposition 218 shifted powers over taxation and revenue to residents and property owners, and away from local governing bodies. Elected officials found themselves in the difficult position of being responsible for spending, but with extremely limited authority to raise funds. Some local governing boards solved their dilemma by looking the other way. They simply ignored the constraints imposed by Proposition 218. In the years since Proposition 218 was enacted, a number of lawsuits have been brought against local governments for failure to comply with its requirements. Decisions have generally favored the plaintiffs. APPENDIX B Enterprise Fund An enterprise fund establishes a separate accounting and financial reporting mechanism for municipal services for which a fee is charged in exchange for goods or services. Under enterprise accounting, the revenues in expenditures of services are separated into separate funds with its own financial statements, rather than commingled with the revenues and expenses of all other government activities. Enterprise funds may be established, "for a utility, health care, recreational transportation facility." Examples of which include the following:
Recommendations 15
-
R1The Plumas County Grand Jury recommends that the PUSD/PCOE Board, utilizing the District Human Resources staff and legal counsel, formulate a policy meeting all the legal requirements for hiring a Superintendent.
-
R2The Grand Jury further recommends that the PUSD/PCOE Board accomplish this task of the issuance of this report, and before the hiring of a new superintendent.
-
R3The Board of Supervisors must install a STRONG leader in the CAO position; a leader of strong moral charter who can stay above and not be swayed by the politics of public office.
-
R4The County needs to adopt a new Sick Leave policy for its employees. A policy that has a "Cap" to the amount an employee can accrue or save over time. This benefit should be used for being sick, not as an additional perk to an employee's retirement plan. The benefit should be canceled when an employee retires or leaves their job. The County needs to set up a separate Extended Sick Leave policy for its employees. A
-
R5policy that can accumulate over time to be used for long term illnesses. The benefit should be canceled when an employee retires or leaves their job. The Board of Supervisors should initiate long term Strategic Planning Workshops.
-
R6The Board of Supervisors must take steps to work together as a cohesive and functional unit.
-
R7The Grand Jury requests and expects a response for each recommendation herein from the Plumas County Board of Supervisors as per Pinal Code Section 933(c) PLUMAS COUNTY'S FINANCIAL STATUS
-
R8Gallina LLP Audit Company Audit report 2010-2011 Clean Audit
-
R9HDR Engineering report 2011 Water rate study
-
R10Better business Bureau report HDR Engineering rating of A+
-
R11State of California Water Board - Treatment Plant
-
R12Plumas County Flood Control District - Treatment Plant
-
R13Department of Fish and Game - Poisoning of Lake Davis
-
R14Portola: The First Fifty Years 1909-1959 by Ray Donnenwirth
-
R15State Water Project http://www.water.ca.gov/swp/history.cfm
* This report's PDF did not contain easily extractable text and required Optical Character Recognition (OCR) for analysis. There may be minor errors in the extracted findings and recommendations due to OCR limitations with scanned documents.