📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report
This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.
Napa County Grand Jury
• 2015-2016
Review of Responses to the 2015-2016 Grand Jury Reports
⚠️ 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 1 findings
F1
Some respondents to the 2015-2016 Grand Jury reports, being tardy with their responses or ignoring them completely, are not meeting their legal responsibilities.
Recommendations 6
-
R1The County Board of Supervisors should commend the Public Works and Information Technology Services Departments for the post-earthquake recovery work they performed. Board of Supervisors Response. The recommendation has been implemented.
-
R2The County Board of Supervisors should direct the County Executive Officer to compile a list of contracts for the maintenance of critical equipment and services and to institute a policy that RFPs for replacement contracts be distributed at least 60 days in advance of the expiration dates of such contracts. This policy should be in place by December 31, 2016. Any deviations from this policy should be approved by the County Executive Officer on a case-by-case basis. Board of Supervisors Response. The Board of Supervisors disagrees with this recommendation. The recommendation will be implemented as follows: It is the responsibility of the Director of Public Works to establish departmental policies, procedures and goals. A policy will be in effect by May 31, 2016, which will provide for the timely contracting of maintenance services. The Public Works Department has compiled a list of contracts for the maintenance of critical equipment and services, including: 1. Elevators: Awarded to KONE, Inc. on April 19, 2016. 2. Generators: Awarded to Peterson Power Systems, Inc. on April 19. 2016. 3. Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC): Awarded to Bell Products, Inc. on May 10, 2016. 4. Fire alarms and sprinklers: Expected award date is August 2, 2016. The Director of Public Works will annually review services provided beginning in June 2017, and will track changes to equipment that may impact the scope of work included in the contract, and will develop a timeline to ensure that a request for proposal process will be undertaken and a new contract will be in place at least 60 days prior to expiration of the existing service contract. III. REVIEW OF RESPONSES TO THE 2015-2016 GRAND JURY REPORT ON ITS ANNUAL JUVENILE HALL REVIEW
-
R3The County should upgrade the website search function. County Executive Officer Response: The County Executive Officer and Chief Information Officer agree with this recommendation. In the RFP for a new CMS software system, the enhanced search tool is a key requirement. This RFP is planned to be posted during the first quarter of Fiscal Year 2016-17. Board of Supervisor’s Response: The Board of Supervisors agrees with the response of the County Executive Officer and the Chief Information Officer.
-
R4The Grand Jury recommends that the County form an expert user group to share best practices and new web functionality among divisions. County Executive Officer Response: The County Executive Officer and director of Library Services and Community Outreach agree with this recommendation. A bi- weekly drop in session is available to content providers to work one on one with the Webmaster. The Webmaster meets with departments individually when needed and is constantly is reviewing analytics, website chat data and seasonal/scheduled events to enhance the user's experience. Until further resources become available, a recommendation by department heads to the Director of Library Services and Community Outreach to realign the content providers into two distinct users groups will be implemented in Fiscal Year 2016-17. Representatives from each department will serve on the Users Experience (UX) group to ensure County-wide consistency in the user experience from department to department. A group of application experts will also be convened. The application experts will work closely with the department's UX contributor to assure that any changes made are done with the end user in mind. Board of Supervisor’s Response: The Board of Supervisors agrees with the response of the County Executive Officer and the Director of Library Services and Community Outreach.
-
R5Recognize the website’s importance as a communication, productivity, and service tool, by providing sufficient up front resources to department/division managers and to Information Technology Services to enable implementation of all systems enhancements that can be cost justified through improvements in productivity and customer service. County Executive Officer Response: County Executive Officer and Chief Information Officer agrees with the recommendation. The information Technology Services Division works on a bi-monthly basis with a countywide ITS Leadership Committee 10 (made up of a representative set of county department directors) to prioritize projects that cross the entire County. This committee has already made the improvement of the County website a top priority. Funding is provided in the Fiscal Year 2016-17 budget for improvement and once the RFP responses have been reviewed the contract for a new CMS will be brought to the Board of Supervisors for approval. Board of Supervisor’s Response: The Board of Supervisors agrees with the response of the County Executive Officer and the Chief Information Officer.
-
R6The Board of Supervisors should challenge department and division managers to identify opportunities to improve productivity and/or customer service through the use of technology and provide the necessary up front resources to implement those opportunities that can then be justified based on cost/benefit analyses. County Executive Officer’s and Chief Information Officer’s Response: County Executive officer and Chief Information Officer agree with this recommendation. Board of Supervisor’s Response: The Board of Supervisors agrees with the response of the County Executive Officer and the Chief Information Officer. VI. REVIEW OF RESPONSES TO THE 2015-2016 GRAND JURY REPORT ON COUNTY FINANCIAL HEALTH
Conclusions 3
-
CL1The Grand Jury inquiry has found a dedicated well-trained CWS staff that strives to fulfill its responsibilities in protecting children and rendering support to families. Given the multitude of issues that family and children face today, the Jury recognizes Napa County’s Child Welfare Services, including the Hotline, is poised to meet the challenges necessary to insure the health and safety of our children The Grand Jury respectfully submits the Findings and Recommendations below for consideration and implementation.
-
CL2It is clear to the Grand Jury that the Napa County Fairgrounds has been the victim of long term neglect, both in terms of the maintenance of the on-site facilities and in terms of the lack of direction in the purposes to which the site is put. Over decades, the County Board of Supervisors 4 Source: Napa County Fairgrounds Association operating budget statements for 2014 and 2015 and April 30, 2016 Summary of Operations for 2016 has given little attention to the site, its development, or the uses to which it is put. Instead, the Board has delegated that responsibility to a private organization through a long succession of five-year contracts that give that organization neither the incentive nor the power to do the systematic maintenance and long term development that such a facility requires. For all its good intentions, the Napa County Fairgrounds Association is unable to do more than maintain current operations while incurring an ever-growing backlog of deferred maintenance.
-
CL3In many interviews, the Grand Jury found that knowledgeable individuals had the mistaken assumption that the NVTA’s responsibilities were limited to just providing public transit bus services and not as a congestion management agency. The NVTA has not educated the community (nor even convinced some of its own Board members) that it serves functions other than managing buses and building bike trails. In fact, lack of communication is even seen on its website. When checking the website in June 2017, the last press releases were from 2015 and 2016. In addition, the Grand Jury found the website cumbersome when trying to locate agendas and minutes from NVTA meetings. There also were no public updates on plans, actions, and progress in reducing traffic congestion. The Vision 2040 document with its 400+ pages doesn’t offer an actual plan of how these goals and objectives will be achieved. The transportation solutions NVTA has proposed are to improve transportation infrastructure to make it easier for workers to access jobs, which include: Develop alternative transportation options for commuters (Travel Demand Management) Improve highway and road infrastructure making it more effective to reduce congestion and auto emissions Promote Priority Development Areas (PDAs) Planning efforts Developments that bring jobs closer to housing Infrastructure improvements that improve traffic flow and encourage walking and biking Missing in these solutions are any measurable regional traffic congestion reduction goals, plans, and quantifiable tracking of actions and results. The public needs a local county task force that will address all the essential issues and develop a plan that will address traffic congestion, economic development, high-value job creation, and affordable housing with a comprehensive approach and a simple scorecard for review. 7 Transdev is the same company that operates The Vine Bus system for NVTA. One of their divisions has developed autonomous shuttles.
Commendations 5
-
CM1The Jail kitchen staff for receiving an "A" rating from the Department of Health.
-
CM2The Jail management and Correctional Officers for striving towards excellence in safety and security during challenging circumstances of physical restoration and upgrading of the Jail facilities.
-
CM3Napa County for implementing plans for a new $16.72 million Re-entry Facility which is fully funded and planned for the County property south of the State Hospital. The facility will provide 72 beds for inmates nearing release and will focus on programs to facilitate their transition back to the community and to reduce recidivism. Reports issued by the Grand Jury do not identify individuals interviewed. Penal Code section 929 requires that reports of the Grand Jury not contain the name of any person or facts leading to the identity of any person who provides information to the Grand Jury. Appendix A Schedule of Napa County Jail Activities Appendix B New Solano County Jail Education Facilities Source: Solano County Sheriff's Department Appendix C THE PHYSICAL JAIL INSPECTION The Grand Jury visited the jail on November 10, 2016 and March 30, 2017. On the first visit in November, members were met by the Director and Assistant Director and were given a brief history of the jail, and a tour of the following components of the facility: Initial Booking Area Sally Port Holding Cells Court Holding Area Observation Cells General Population Holding Areas Maximum Security: Single and multi-inmate cells Mental Health Cells Visitation Area Kitchen Laundry Medical Unit/Nurse's Station Control Room Control Room for the Tunnel Exercise Yard Correctional Officer's Break/Office Area During the first visit: At each segment of the inspection, the members were told how each area worked and what type of inmates were housed. Members could see single and multi- inmate cells, including the male and female day rooms, holding cells for inmates going to and from court, and the "Tunnel". The tunnel is a secured underground area between the jail and courts. At one point the members observed an inmate being escorted back from court by two officers. In another area of the jail were several televisions -telephone stations where inmates could talk to and see family members, their attorney, or Mental Health Professionals. The exercise yard was closed during the Grand Jury's visit. The cells appeared clean. Graffiti was noticed in the older section of the jail and in the exercise yard. Correctional staff appeared to be keeping up on the removal of graffiti when noticed. Several "boat beds" were observed being used in the holding cell area. Boat beds are used in units temporarily when cells are overcrowded and not enough permanent beds are available. Kitchen Area The kitchen area appeared clean. During the inspection, the jail staff and inmates were cleaning up after the lunch meal. Dinner bag meals were on carts waiting delivery to inmates in their cells. The Health Department's rating for the Jail's Kitchen in 2016 was an "A". The Grand Jury was told that one or the main freezers needed repair. The Kitchen staff should be commended for their hard work for obtaining an "A" rating from the Health Department. Laundry Area Inmates were working in the laundry during our visit. Inmate uniforms, clothing, blankets, and bedding were being washed, dried and folded for delivery. All items appeared serviceable. Medical Unit/nurse's Station During the inspection, the members observed the Medical Unit, and talked to medical personnel. It was noted that there was a nurse on duty. General Condition of Jail The interiors of both the 1976 and 1989 jail sections appeared to be in good condition. There was still noticeable earthquake damage visible. All "yellow tagged" areas are now open and major repairs are running on schedule. All safety concerns regarding the old section of the jail have been met. The third-floor area is open and occupied. The cells in all areas appeared clean and free of graffiti. Bedding for inmates appeared serviceable. Education/Job Training was slowly being brought back. AA, NA, Bible study were by request. The basement project to convert it to a two-person cell unit was also running on time. During the first inspection, it was noticed that the electrical and plumbing fixtures were being installed. DOCUMENTS REVIEWED California Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) 2014-2016 inspection of jails. Napa County Department of Corrections (NCDC) Adopted Budget Fiscal Year 2015-2016 and 2016-2017. Napa County Performance Measurement Report (January 2016) Napa County Adult Correctional System Master Plan Senate Bill (SB) 863Construction Funding Application-Napa County Phase 1 (August 2015) Napa County Board of Supervisors Agenda Placement: 9C option to purchase property at 2300 Napa Valley Highway (10-15/2013) Napa County Adult Correctional System Master Plan Organization Charts NCDC personnel/ tenure roster Training Records Incident Reports Personnel Complaints NCDC Operational Procedures Manual California Forensic Medical Group (CFMG) Contract Assembly Bills (AB) 109 and 117 The Public Safety Realignment Act (October 2011) NCDC (8244)/ Solano Sheriff (SO 0494) Professional Services Agreement The National Institute of Corrections Information Center (NICIC) REGIONAL JAILS NCDC Correctional Officer Recruitment Data (2014-2017) Napa County Human Resources Correctional Officer Recruitment Fliers Napa County Grand Jury Reports for 2010-2011, 2011-2012, 2012-2013, 2013-2014, 2014-2015, and 2015-2016 Newspaper Articles Napa Valley Register NAPA COUNTY GRAND JURY 2016-2017 June 30, 2017 FINAL REPORT NAPA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AGENCY VISION 2040 PLAN County Traffic Problems Need a Comprehensive Plan with Measurable Results NAPA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AGENCY VISION 2040 PLAN County Traffic Problems Need a Comprehensive Plan with Measurable Results SUMMARY The Napa Valley Transportation Authority (NVTA) is responsible for providing a realistic and executable traffic management plan for the county. Published in 2015, the NVTA Vision 2040 (V2040) transportation plan is not a comprehensive plan, nor does it contain measureable goals by which progress can be monitored. This 400+ page document should be the guide for planning and funding of Napa County transportation needs for the next 25 years, but it does neither. The Grand Jury found that the V2040 proposed highway improvements list, bike lanes, and new buses are inadequate to truly solve Napa County’s traffic congestion problems. Moreover, their long list of proposed improvements can’t be fully executed due to a shortfall in funding. The Jury also found that the NVTA has no way to measure annual traffic congestion relief. Specifically, neither the NVTA Board nor the public has a way of determining progress toward the NVTA stated goals.
-
CM4The NVTA management, staff and Board members for being very helpful and responsive with all Grand Jury requests to discuss the issues, and for quickly providing all additional information upon request.
-
CM5The NVTA for its progress in proving how a unique public- private partnership can work to develop and implement the Napa Valley Vine Trail. DISCLAIMER Reports issued by the Grand Jury do not identify individuals interviewed. Penal Code section 929 requires that reports of the Grand Jury not contain the name of any person or facts leading to the identity of any person who provides information to the Grand Jury. APPENDIX A – V2040 CAC CONGESTION MITIGATION RECOMMENDATIONS APPENDIX B Results of the Fehr & Peers Travel Behavior Study: To summarize the travel behavior of visitors, employees, residents, and students who make work and non-work trips in Napa County: 55% internal (within Napa County) trips: O Work, recreational or non-work based 45% external (outside Napa County) trips, of which: O 36% imported/exported, 9% pass-through O 25% of external trips are generated by workers commuting into Napa County O Approximately 20,000 imported work trips per day. The workforce is largely dependent on the wine and tourism industry for jobs (40% of labor force). The top five fastest growing job sectors in Napa County, which will account for 63% of the projected job growth, are low wage earning job sectors. The fastest-growing job sectors in the County are in the hospitality and retail industries which generally pay lower wages. There are approximately 71,000 jobs in Napa County and 55,000 housing units. The cost of housing (relatively high cost) and the nature of employment (relatively low wage) in the County contribute to Napa workers living in more affordable housing elsewhere. O A person needs to earn $95,000/year to purchase a median-priced $606,000 home. Napa County annual median income of Napa’s workforce is $38,168. O The housing/income mismatch will result in more vehicle miles traveled and the inevitable associated congestion on Napa’s roads. If projections are accurate, this could result in 30,000 workers commuting into Napa each day by 2040 – a 45% increase, and an additional 2,000 outbound-commuters or a total of 16,000 daily trips leaving the County for work over this same time period. APPENDIX C TABLE 3: MTC; PLAN BAY AREA PERFORMANCE TARGETS (JULY 2013)