Fiscal Year 2011 to 2012 Grand Jury Report

Recommendations 48

• R00-01
  $322,674.36 $134,863.90
• R1
  That DBH continue and enhance where possible, programs such as WIN, WRAP® and CIT.
• R2
  Every district surveyed develop and adopt a plan to ensure continued compliance with ethics training requirement of AB 1234. The following failed to respond to that recommendation: Biggs West-Gridley Water District Drainage District #200 Butte Water District Durham Recreation & Park District Chico Area Park & Recreation Feather River Park & Recreation District District Drainage District #1 Paradise Recreation & Park District Drainage District #100 Rock Creek Reclamation District Earlier during the 2010-2011 investigation, these agencies either claimed exemption from the ethics training or claimed that they were in compliance with the requirements. However, a formal response to the final report is required by law. It should also be noted that the recommended ethics training is available free of charge via the internet. The requirements of AB 1234 are that officials renew the training every two years, so the request that agencies develop a plan for continued compliance was a reasonable one. xiii (This page intentionally left blank.) 2011 – 2012 Butte County Grand Jury Reports (This page intentionally left blank.) FOREPERSON’S OVERVIEW OF THE FY 2011-2012 GRAND JURY REPORT The FY 2011-2012 Grand Jury has served during a particularly challenging time for local government. The financial challenges of the 21st century have been considerable, including the deepest recession since the Great Depression. The budget challenges at the federal, state and local levels have been ongoing for so long that negative impacts, which have not previously been seen by most persons living today, are being experienced. In Butte County, the results can be seen throughout the cities and towns. There are rental signs on residential and commercial properties. There are fewer jobs and ever-larger numbers of homeless individuals and families. Growing numbers of people are using hospital emergency departments as a primary source of health care. The result of these circumstances is a greater demand for services from the public and nonprofit social organizations. Early in the term the FY 2011-2012 Grand Jury identified three areas of focus. These were: • The potential impact on the community of the State realignment of the criminal justice, behavioral health, public health and social services programs; • Follow-up on previous grand jury investigations where the responses by the agencies investigated were inadequate or identified remediation's had not been confirmed; • Complaints from citizens received or passed on by the previous Grand Jury. It soon became apparent that all three of these areas of interest overlapped. The first four reports in this section focus on two of the realigned departments: Behavioral Health and the Sheriff's Office. As these reports are read it becomes clear that the problems identified affect more than these two departments. They impact other health and human services programs in the county, both public and private, including hospitals. Many of these problems are due to a lack of staff after years of declining funding. Many attempts by agencies to cope with funding shortfalls have simply transferred the cost elsewhere. A reduction of resources in one agency forces persons in need to other agencies, which in turn have to find additional funding often by moving resources from one service to another to meet the additional need. This creates yet another gap in services. The Grand Jury is not convinced that our County lacks the professional and financial resources to meet the needs of the community. However, it will be necessary to change the approach to these problems. Consequently, many of the Grand Jury reports recommend expanding the scope of and participation in planning and coordination efforts. Butte County has a $4 billion economy supported largely by agriculture, manufacturing, higher education, health care and government spending. The Grand Jury was given with technical assistance by the Center for Economic Development (CED) at California State University, Chico which allowed a better understanding of the components of the County's economy. Data was provided to show the economic stimulus to the County's economy of spending by the County of Butte and the proportion of that spending made up by the three health and human service departments (Behavioral Health, Public Health, and Employment and Social Services). The stimulus provided by the County’s spending was compared to that provided by manufacturing and healthcare. The results of this study show that the entire county economy produces 94,733 jobs while generating a total of $4,158,000,000 in labor income. Of this total, 6700 jobs and $366,000,000 in labor income is created by the budget spending of the County of Butte. By way of comparison, manufacturing in the county accounts for 7600 jobs and $363,000,000 in labor income. Analysis of spending by the three health and human service departments of the County shows they account for 51% of the County of Butte budgetary spending and 72% of the total economic impact generated by the County of Butte. Healthcare spending throughout the county accounts for 19,363 jobs (20.4% of the total county jobs) and $1,016,000,000 in labor income (24.4% of the total county labor income). Of the total healthcare spending in the county, 4800 jobs and $252,000,000 in labor income, is generated by the spending of the three County health and human services departments. Even though a great deal of money is being spent, lack of coordination and planning between the public and private sectors hinders efficient use of the funding available. The Grand Jury's report on Recreation and Parks Districts suggests a model for correcting the health services issues described in the first four reports. The Recreation and Parks Districts have also been affected by the downturn of the economy. However, they have generally done a much better job of cooperating with other private and nonprofit organizations to meet the missions of their districts. There are two Grand Jury reports on cities, Oroville and Gridley, which had been investigated by previous grand juries. The FY 2011-2012 Grand Jury was impressed with the progress of Oroville in improving the manner in which they conduct their business despite these difficult financial times. Gridley continues to make progress, but many issues remain to be addressed by their leadership. Kenneth Fleming, Foreperson 2011-2012 Grand Jury 2 2011-2012 BUTTE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT BUTTE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF BEHAVIORAL HEALTH
• R3
  That DBH implement policies that make long term planning a priority. As a part of the planning procedure DBH identify gaps in services, needs for prevention/education, staffing and financial resources.
• R4
  That DBH design and implement procedures for conducting a psychological autopsy following the death of a consumer. 18
• R5
  That DBH improve working relationships with area hospitals, especially with regard to the use of emergency departments by those in mental health crisis situations. That DBH review of the function of the Mobile Crisis Team and expand its availability and response capability.
• R6
  That DBH, together with area hospitals and the Board of Supervisors, develop a policy that will allow emergency department physicians to release 5150 holds.
• R7
  That alternatives for those entering the mental health system in crisis be explored, including the possibility of establishing a central intake facility.
• R8
  That as part of an improving relationship between the DBH and Enloe Hospital, opportunities for better use of the Enloe Behavioral Health be explored.
• R9
  That opportunities for the expansion of drug and alcohol treatment programs be explored.
• R10
  That DBH work with corrections officials and any other involved agencies to establish procedures to insure that those being released from incarceration are connected with out- patient mental health services in a timely manner.
• R11
  That DBH and all area law enforcement agencies work together so that policies and practices concerning the application Section 5150 are appropriate.
• R12
  That DBH continue efforts to fully implement the AVATAR system, including the training and supervision of all appropriate staff.
• R13
  That DBH continue efforts to minimize the need for costly out-of-area placement of youth and adults needing in-patient care. DBH may need to provide the leadership necessary to initiate discussions with nearby counties to establish a facility to provide in- patient treatment for youth.
• R14
  That DBH explore, with area hospitals and other entities, the possibility of the establishment of a facility for treatment of geriatric patients with mental health issues.
• R15
  That DBH publicize its programs to increase public awareness and support for its work and the services it provides. This should include placing meeting notices in newspapers, on appropriate websites, on community calendars, and utilization of other media as appropriate. 19
• R16
  That before the 2012-2013 budget is adopted, the City Administrator and the Finance Officer follow through on actions taken in the 2011-2012 budget to resolve the Planning Department budget allocation issue as it relates to the 2030 General Plan update by making appropriate inter-fund budget transfers.
• R17
  That the City research, reconstruct, and attain an accurate record of the events, inclusive of expenditures and inter-fund transfers, that have either contributed to or caused the on- going allocation of funds issue pertaining to the Planning Department budget.
• R18
  That the property owner reimbursement plan for the Eagle Meadows Maintenance Assessment District be implemented by summer of 2012, and that past and present Eagle Meadows subdivision owners be notified by the City of Gridley with an explanation of the details of the reimbursement plan.
• R19
  That in order to best serve the public, the plan for reimbursement of Eagle Meadows Maintenance Assessment District overcharged assessment fees be a product of very close coordination between the City Council, City Attorney, City Administrator and City Finance Officer.
• R20
  That the City continue, and intensify, efforts to obtain an adequate response from AT&T, which will allow the City to determine a course of action to bring the outstanding AT&T bill issue to a conclusion.
• R21
  That the City not address its correspondence seeking information from AT&T “To Whom it May Concern,” but instead address correspondence to a specific named point of contact. 70
• R22
  That the City establish a General Fund reserve for contingencies with a goal of containing and maintaining not less than an amount which would cover contingency cost expectations based upon previous annual General Fund expenditures.
• R23
  That the City Administrator establish and implement procedures that will inform City staff of reasons for inter-fund transfers and changes in budget allocations as they occur.
• R24
  That department heads and Finance Department staff receive additional MOMS training.
• R25
  That prior to providing utility connections and services to businesses, the City properly formalize all connections and services agreements, and create and enter the proper billing codes into the City financial management system.
• R26
  That the City identify, evaluate and apply available alternative funding sources to offset RDA funding losses.
• R27
  That the City install a technologically appropriate and efficient sludge flow measuring/monitoring unit with backup at the juncture of the City’s sewer system waste water intake point and the waste water outlet point of any party suspected of discharging sludge into the City sewer system.
• R28
  That in the event the City determines the offending party responsible for excessive sludge discharge into the City sewer system, the City seek full reimbursement of all costs incurred by the City.
• R29
  That the Gridley BID continue to pursue reinstatement of its corporate status with the Office of the California Secretary of State.
• R30
  That the Gridley BID expeditiously submit a request to the Internal Revenue Service for a copy of the letter or document which grants the Gridley Business Improvement District non-profit status in compliance with section 501(c)(6) of the United States Internal Revenue Code.
• R31
  That as long as the Mayor of the City of Gridley is concurrently serving as both Mayor and as the paid/salaried Executive Director of the Gridley BID, the Mayor avoid all proceedings, actions and decisions relating to interface between the City and the Gridley BID. 71
• R01-02
  $325,411.61 $137,963.07
• R02-03
  $345,085.90 $145,796.06
• R03-04
  $587,200.26 $157,510.04
• R04-05
  $405,874.21 $171,231.68 $20,150.20
• R05-06
  $438,062.73 $184,911.38 $20,150.20
• R06-07
  $476,097.85 $200,332.98
• R07-08
  $513,277.89 $214,810.24
• R08-09
  $538,171.17 $225,224.63
• R10-11
  $238,444.93 $5,920,223.33 $2,877,039.33 $40,300.40 $9,606.37 The information in this table was supplied by the DRPD Manager. This information has been kept for the past 19 years on a bulletin board in the District office showing the current and cumulative totals of the funds taken from the District. The first column is the fiscal year. The second column denotes the 1% from County property taxes that DRPD should have received each year. The third column indicates the amounts withheld for ERAF each year by the State, which DRPD was entitled. The fourth column shows additional amounts withheld in those years for ERAF. The last column notes the only funds reimbursed under ERAF. 103
• R93-94
  $235,615.96 $96,329.00
• R94-95
  $261,165.37 $106,775.00
• R95-96
  $269,583.98 $110,235.00
• R96-97
  $277,637.14 $114,884.00
• R97-98
  $294,686.01 $122,886.00
• R98-99
  $303,571.04 $127,160.00
• R99-00
  $326,107.85 $131,635.28 $9,606.37