Ad-Hoc Committee Mold in My Home: Does Anybody Care?

R1

Have County government become informed in mold mitigation. (F1, F2)

R2

Correct County website to remove reference to mold services. (F1) Request for Responses: Pursuant to Penal Code 933.05 the Grand Jury requests responses as follows:  Community Development Department via Board of Supervisors (90 days)  Public Health Department via Board of Supervisors (90 days)  Air Quality Management District (90 days)  Lakeport City Council (90 days)  Clearlake City Council (90 days) 2010-2011 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Ad-Hoc Committee 2010-2011 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Ad-Hoc Committee 2010-2011 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Budget and Finance Committee Table of Contents  Oversights County Administration 17 Treasurer – Tax Collector 21 2010-2011 Lake County Civil Grand Jury 2010-2011 Lake County Civil Grand Jury Lake County Administration Summary: The office of the Lake County Administration is responsible for coordinating the establishment of the annual budget and monitoring detailed and overall conformance to that budget. The County’s track record is outstanding with the reserves building each year in spite of the difficult financial times and the State of California’s inability to manage its budget. While the financial discipline is excellent, management pays less attention to monitoring non-financial measures. The Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Supervisors (BOS) establish a set of non-financial goals for the County and each of its departments and monitor for success annually. Background: The County Administration Office is responsible to prepare and administer the County’s annual budget for the BOS and to provide guidance to ensure the financial health of the County. Procedure: The committee reviewed the County Budget Manual, the Recommended Budget, the Adopted Budget, the Midyear Budget Review package and the external auditor’s report. The committee met with the County Administrator on two occasions with specific questions and communicated several times on individual issues. In addition, two members of the committee participated in the presentation and review of the external auditor’s annual report and the selection of the external auditor for the upcoming year. Discussion and Facts: The following facts were obtained from the above mentioned procedure: 1. The budget process for a particular fiscal year begins in January and proceeds step by step as described in the Lake County Budget Manual. At 2010-2011 Lake County Civil Grand Jury the start of the new fiscal year (July 1), the County operates based upon the Recommended Budget until the budget is finalized and adopted in the August / September time frame by the BOS. 2. All department heads prepare a detailed budget request which includes financial goals and a narrative describing operational changes, if any, from the prior year. Lake County Administration and the department heads interact on how to achieve financial goals with minimum cost. Unresolved issues are referred to the BOS. Non-financial goals are not formally established as part of the budgeting process. 3. In prior years, an external auditor had prepared a Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) at an additional cost that included several statistics which might be referenced for non-financial goals. However, these were just statistics, not meaningful goals used to drive management action. Because of the added cost and minimal value, the CAFR is no longer included as part of the external audit. 4. Lake County Admin has maintained a significant reserve for several years as sensible budgeting policy. Now, with the State aggressively renewing past threats to shift responsibilities for various programs down to the counties, an impact of a new magnitude faces Lake County; giving Lake County's build-up of reserves an even greater significance. 5. Additional concerns include a potentially reduced revenue base due to a decrease in property taxes because of the downturn in property values. Anticipating the potential of revenue reduction, the County has identified several “At Risk” employee positions. These positions are identified in cooperation with the appropriate department heads. Staff members currently filling these positions are aware of this status and that the potential exists to be laid off. These positions remain “At Risk” until the position becomes vacant as a result of a resignation or transfer or funding status changes in the following fiscal year. 6. Over a million dollars was added to the Code Enforcement Division’s budget by the BOS over a five year period beginning in 2002/03 with the intent that these added dollars be used for the purpose of cleaning up the backlog of cases and improve the visual appearance of the County. However, no goals were set nor assigned to measure the results of the added money. It is not clear that the million dollars had any effect and the administration’s general impression is that it did not. 7. The County recently paid a private consulting firm to conduct a consumer retail analysis throughout Lake County: first, to determine local buying trends and discover items local businesses should add to inventory that will allow Lake County residents to "buy local"; secondly, to entice/recruit new businesses to Lake County - not to compete, but to fill in the gaps. The process is currently being implemented using a local contractor to educate 2010-2011 Lake County Civil Grand Jury

R1

Have County government become informed in mold mitigation. (F1, F2)