📋
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.

Los Angeles County Grand Jury • 2016-2017

V Recommendations

Published: June 05, 2017 62 pages
View PDF View Full Original

Findings and Recommendations 17 findings

F1
The County is mandated to “weigh or measure packages, containers, or amounts of commodities sold or in the process of delivery. . .”27 in order to protect our citizenry from unscrupulous packagers of commodities.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
Page 291
The BOS should retain a competent management and consulting firm to implement the 2009- 2010 CGJ recommendations to develop a county videoconferencing hub system that could be the platform for video arraignments and appearances. (Findings 1, 10, 19, 20, 21, 14, 21, 22)
F2
Due to lack of funding, Weights & Measures is unable to adequately perform package inspections, as required by California Business & Professions §12211.
Related Recommendations (2)
R7
Page 291
The Sheriff should recommend the location of a courthouse adjacent to the new MCJ to be completed in 2024-2025. (Findings 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 11, 12, 13, 18, 22)
R8
Page 291
The BOS should recommend the location of a courthouse adjacent to the new MCJ to be completed in 2024-2025. (Findings 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 11, 12, 13, 18, 22)
F3
Extremely small sampling inspections, by Weights & Measures have revealed gross package shortages.
No recommendations for this finding
F4
In order to properly protect our consumers, Weights & Measures needs to perform a one day inspection annually at every business location within the County that packs, imports, warehouses or distributes more than 10,000 packages or containers per year. California Business and Professions Code §12211 276 2016-2017 LOS ANGELES COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT
No recommendations for this finding
F5
Weights & Measures currently has only two Quantity Control Inspectors. This is inadequate to protect our population of 10 million. The Department needs to add at least 10 more Quantity Control Inspectors.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
Page 291
The Sheriff should contract with an experienced and competent management consulting company familiar with Law and Justice practices to review the Sheriff’s data collection and management capabilities and its ability to produce a wide variety of management reports quickly. It should also examine means to improve the interface with the LA City and court systems. The review should recommend upgrades and replacement of existing data management programs as well as indicate the necessary time, material and staff resources to accomplish this improvement. (Findings 5, 6, 14)
F6
All surrounding counties in the State are meeting their mandated obligations under California Business & Professions Code §12211. These counties have ordinances in place which allow them to raise revenue to pay for the cost of their package inspection programs28.
No recommendations for this finding
F7
The County needs to have a Package Inspection Program which will assure that inspections are done on a regular basis so as to protect the consumers of Los Angeles County. A Package Inspection Program needs to be funded in order to have the necessary personnel on staff to carry it out.
No recommendations for this finding
F8
Weights & Measures has previously attempted to have an ordinance created which would allow for a package permit registration and tariff to be required by every “identified location”. County Counsel opined that the County is prohibited from creating such an ordinance per Government Code §54985(c)(4). The CGJ believes that interpretation of §54985(c)(4) needs to be revisited in light of findings 6, 9 and 10.
No recommendations for this finding
F9
Los Angeles County Department of Agriculture and the Department of Weights & Measures were separate departments until they merged in 1984. Each of these departments stands independently as to functions and statutory mandates.
No recommendations for this finding
F10
The Agriculture Commissioner in Los Angeles County wears two hats: (1) “Agriculture Commissioner” and (2) “Director of Weights and Measures” also known as the “County Sealer”. This occurred as a result of the 1984 merger of the two County Departments of Agriculture and Weights & Measures. Although together they are one department today, the two Bureaus stand independently as to functions and statutory mandates.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
Page 291
The BOS should recommend the use of videoconferencing court appearances for the mentally ill, “No-Go” medical and physically handicapped inmates. (Findings 10, 22)
F11
Currently Weights & Measures is responsible for their own outreach on packaging shortages. Weights & Measures has the information available on their website. This Department is virtually unknown to the public, hence there are almost no complaints regarding quantity issues or discrepancies. There is no active outreach exposing this issue to consumers. The CGJ believes that with proper exposure to the issue of shortages, public support would skyrocket, hence reining in the abuses that are occurring by packagers.
No recommendations for this finding
F12
Consumer & Business Affairs does not provide outreach or information regarding commodity packaging shortages to the public. Consumer & Business Affairs does provide information on pricing inconsistencies and is mandated by County Ordinance to take the 28 San Bernardino County Code of Ordinances Title 4 Chap 22 §41.2201(a)-§41.2211, and §16.0201(d)(2); Santa Barbara County Code of Ordinances Chapter 34c, Sec 34c-1 to Sec 34c-10; Riverside County Ordinance No. 832 in its entirety; Ventura County Ordinance Art 9.5§6297-1 to 6297-7 2016-2017 LOS ANGELES COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT 277 reins during emergencies to provide outreach relative to price gouging. In the opinion of the CGJ the correct department to handle the outreach on commodity packaging shortage issues is Consumer & Business Affairs.
No recommendations for this finding
F13
The County’s Help Line 211 and the City of Los Angeles Information Services 311 do not have information regarding packaging shortages and registering complaints in their databases. The CGJ believes this information needs to be supplied to both services so that residents of the County can be properly directed to the correct department.
No recommendations for this finding
F14
Los Angeles County Code of Ordinance Chapter 8.08 covers “Consumer Commodity Retail Pricing”. Section 8.08.040(B) codifies the remedy an individual has against an establishment due to a violation of item pricing laws. There is no similar ordinance for violations of packaging shortages. Consumers of Los Angeles County have a right to have their remedy for package shortages codified so as to pursue an action on their own.
No recommendations for this finding
F15
Los Angeles County Code of Ordinance Section 8.08.040(B) codifies the remedy an individual has against an establishment due to a violation of item pricing laws, e.g. $50. This ordinance was last updated in 1980 and should currently be brought in line with 2017 dollars, which is $147.82.29
Related Recommendations (1)
R9
Page 291
LAPD Chief of Police should implement Recommendation #4 of the 2009-2010 CGJ70 in order to facilitate the operation of a videoconferencing program with particular attention to ensuring privacy for defendant and attorney conferences. (Finding 15)
F16
Jurisdiction for pursuing consumer lawsuits relative to packaging shortages is equally shared by the State, counties and cities. Since the prosecuting agency that chooses to handle a case is solely based on the commitment and dedication of that agency toward consumer protection, the CGJ feels that Weights & Measures should seek all legal avenues in referring out cases. Data Management System
Related Recommendations (3)
R5
Page 291
The Sheriff should renegotiate its contract with LAPD to not transport inmates without proof of a completed case filing with the court. (Findings 16, 17, 18)
R6
Page 291
The Los Angeles City Attorney should make sure that a case filing is complete before an arrestee is transported to court. (Findings 16, 17) 69 Orange County Court, Santa Ana, Interview with Bench, 3/13/17 266 2016-2017 LOS ANGELES COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT
R10
Page 291
LAPD should expedite the discovery process for misdemeanor narcotic cases in order to participate in video arraignments. (Finding 16) VI REQUIRED RESPONSES California Penal Code Sections 933(c) and 933.05 require a written response to all recommendations contained in this report. Responses shall be made no later than ninety (90) days after the Civil Grand Jury publishes its report and files it with the Clerk of the Court. Responses shall be made in accord with Penal Code Sections 933.05 (a) and (b). All responses to the recommendations of the 2016-2017 Civil Grand Jury must be submitted on or before September 30, 2017, to: Presiding Judge Los Angeles County Superior Court Clara Shortridge Foltz Criminal Justice Center 210 West Temple Street, Eleventh Floor-Room 11-506 Los Angeles, CA 90012 Responses are required from: Responding Agency Recommendations County of Los Angeles Board of Supervisors 17.1, 17.4, 17.8 County of Los Angeles District Attorney 17.3 County of Los Angeles Sheriff 17.2, 17.5, 17.7 City Attorney, Los Angeles 17.6 Los Angeles City Chief of Police 17.9, 17.10 70 2009-2010 CGJ Final Report, pg. 80 2016-2017 LOS ANGELES COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT 267 VII ACRONYMS ACLU American Civil Liberties Union APD Alternate Public Defender BOS Board of Supervisors CCJCC Countywide Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee CGJ 2016-2017 Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury CRDF Century Regional Detention Facility DA District Attorney EEC Los Angeles County Citizens Economy & Efficiency Commission LAPD Los Angeles Police Department SHERIFF Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department MCJ Men’s Central Jail MOU Memorandum of Understanding PD Public Defender PEMC Project Evaluation and Management Committee SCAQMD Southern California Air Quality Management District VIII COMMITTEE MEMBERS Gerard Duiker Chair Sharon Muravez Co-Chair 268 2016-2017 LOS ANGELES COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT ARE YOU GETTING LESS THAN WHAT YOU PAY FOR? Regi Block Chair Dorothy Brown Hilda Dallal Ronnie Dann-Honor Marilyn Gelfand Dianne Kelley ARE YOU GETTING LESS THAN WHAT YOU PAY FOR? I SUMMARY Los Angeles County does not have a Package Inspection Program in place and as such is unable to adequately oversee its responsibility for inspecting and testing consumer packaged goods. Other counties in the state have Package Inspection Programs codified in their ordinances to cover program costs and to set out procedures and standards. The Federal Fair Packaging and Labeling Act (ACT) requires manufacturers and packagers to provide a statement on packaged items identifying, among other things, the quantity contained therein.1 Pursuant to the ACT, consumers in Los Angeles County are guaranteed protection and should expect that what is stated on the outside of a commodity label is actually what is on the inside of the package. The ACT provides uniform standards to be followed throughout the nation for commodity labeling and packaging while delegating oversight to the states. The State of California, in turn, hands over the job of oversight to the counties within the state, specifically each county “Sealer.”2,3 In Los Angeles County the County Sealer is the Director of the Department of Weights & Measures. Focusing on the consumers’ rights to fair packaging, committee members of the 2016-2017 Civil Grand Jury (CGJ) explored and researched Los Angeles County Office of the Agricultural Commissioner/Director of Weights and Measures (Weights & Measures) with their attention on consumers’ rights to fair packaging and labeling. This resulted in the following observations:
F17
Weights & Measures does not have a data management system in use by their field inspectors. Approximately 83% of field inspector’s time can be saved writing inspection reports. This would save the County money in labor and allow the Department to hire more field inspectors with the savings. VI
No recommendations for this finding

Additional Recommendations 7

These recommendations are not explicitly linked to specific findings.