Humboldt County Grand Jury
• 2007-2008
• Agency Response
Response to:
2007-2008 Final Report
Recommendation(s):*
⚠️ 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.
Note: Missing finding numbers detected: F4, F5
Findings and Recommendations 4 findings
F1
Economies of scale could be achieved by consolidation of some management elements with local sewer treatment systems. Response to Finding 1: General Manager Partially Disagrees: Although Inflow and Infiltration (I&I) may present a common problem for most sewer systems, Manila's system is unique among those listed in that it is of Septic Tank Pumping System (STEP) design. Unlike conventional gravity sewers lines, which often are constructed of concrete or clay, pressure sewer lines are made of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) or high-density polyethylene. The joints are solvent weld or rubber gasket and the system usually employs cleanouts or pigging ports instead of manholes, reducing the possibility of inflow and infiltration of storm water and groundwater. This system is particularly susceptible to I&I (since electricity is required to pump all effluent within the pressurized system). Due to this susceptibility, the system is designed to be sealed from I&I. The district has identified I&I exposed sites and has implemented a simple, cost effective plan to minimize I&I from the sites. In our opinion, any pooled resources in regard to engineering and management for our system are very limited. Lastly, the district would not want to dilute the efforts of gravity type systems mentioned in the report. Regards, Christopher Drop General Manager Manila CSD 707-444-3803 manilacsd1@sbcglobal.net Manila CSD 08/12/08 To, Awisca RESORT IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. SHELTER COVE – HUMBOLDT COUNTY – CALIFORNIA 9126 Shelter Cove Road, Whitethorn CA 95589 707-986-7447, Fax: 707-986-7435, info@sheltercove-ca.gov, www.sheltercove-ca.gov August 20, 2008 County Administrative Office County Of Humboldt 825 5th Street, Suite 111 Eureka, CA 95501-1153 RE: RESPONSE TO GRAND JURY REPORT 2007-2008 Dear Sirs: The Resort Improvement District #1 (District) disagrees wholly with the findings of the Grand Jury Report #2008-CD-01, Sewer Treatment Systems. Economies of scale cannot be achieved by consolidation of some management elements with local treatment systems. The District has aggressively pursued rehabilitation of its sewer collection system for more than ten years and invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in its effort to reduce Inflow and Infiltration (I&I). These efforts have resulted in a significant reduction in wet weather flow to our wastewater treatment facility. Management elements of this program are an insignificant portion of the program expense because the District's staff supervises the long range program as well as annual rehabilitation projects. Nearly all of the District's expenses for this program are directly related to inspection, repair and replacement of infrastructure. Shelter Cove is a very remote location and no tangible benefit or discount could be expected from combining construction projects or sharing management resources with any other sewer collection/treatment system. The District disagrees wholly with the recommendations of the Grand Jury Report #2008-CD-01, Sewer Treatment Systems. Joint efforts with the other sewer districts listed in the report would be impractical considering the distance between these facilities, and the unique nature of each sewer system's problems. As explained above in our response to the findings, The District has already identified its specific I&I problems and has been correcting these problems annually in a prioritized sequence within the limits of its financial resources. The District will continue with these efforts until I&I is reduced to an acceptable level. Sincerely, Resort Improvement District #1 Richard Culp, PE-General Manag RECEIVED AUG 2 2 2008 CAO CITY OF BLUE LAKE Blue Lake, CA 95525 Post Office Box 458, 111 Greenwood Road, Phone 707.668.5655 Fax 707.668.5916 E-mail BlueLakeCity@aol.com July 8, 2008 Honorable John T. Feeney Presiding Judge Humboldt County Superior Court 825 Fifth Street Eureka, CA 95501 Re: Response to Grand Jury Report Numbers 2008-CD-021 and 2008-LJ-01 Dear Judge Finney: The 2007-2008 Humboldt Grand Jury has requested that the City Council of City of Blue Lake respond to finding and recommendation 1 of Grand Jury Report No. 2008-CD-01. This letter constitutes the response of the City Council prepared and submitted in accordance with Penal Code Section 933 and the Humboldt County Standard Format for Responses.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
> The City Managers of Arcata, Blue Lake, Eureka, Ferndale, Fortuna, and Rio Dell shall respond to Finding and Recommendation 1.
F2
THE GRAND JURY FINDS THAT SUPERVISION OF THE CHIEF OF POLICE BY THE CITY MANAGER, IN OPERATION AND ADHERENCE TO BLUE LAKE POLICE DEPARTMENT COMPLAINT PROCEDURE, IS INADEQUATE We agree with this finding. RESPONSE: THE GRAND JURY RECOMMENDS THAT
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
THE BLUE LAKE CITY COUNCIL SHOULD EVALUATE THE PERFORMANCE OF THE CITY MANAGER AND DETERMINE HOW THE CITY MANAGER'S SUPERVISION OF THE CHIEF OF POLICE CAN BE IMPROVED. Although we agree with this finding, the recommendation will RESPONSE: not be implemented because the City Council has already taken actions that obviate its need. First, the City Council has been in the process of restructuring City Government. Coincidentally with your recommendation, we are currently in the process of contracting services for an interim city manager and eliminating the city manager responsibility from our current merged position of city manager/head of public works. Additionally, the City Council disbanded the Blue Lake Police Department on 20 May 2008 and instead has engaged in a contract for services with the Humboldt County Sheriff's Department as of 1 July 2008, thus eliminating the need for such supervision at this time. However, if the City of Blue Lake ever does re-establish its own police department under the direction of a city manager, the second part of this recommendation will certainly be followed at that time.
F3
THE GRAND JURY FINDS THAT SEVERAL BLUE LAKE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE INSUFFICIENTLY INFORMED OF BLUE LAKE POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES. Agree with the finding. RESPONSE: THE GRAND JURY RECOMMENDS THAT
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
ALL BLUE LAKE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS SHOULD FAMILIARIZE THEMSELVES WITH BLUE LAKE POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICY AND PROCEDURE. I agree with this finding as I believe the Grand Jury drew this
F6
Eureka Police Department's policy and procedure may not have been completely followed during Cotton's arrest. Disagree
Related Recommendations (1)
R6
The Grand Jury recommends Eureka Police Department reviews and updates policy and procedure (as necessary), and trains and updates police officers concerning subjects exhibiting bizarre behavior and/or a potential danger to self and/or others. The recommendation requires further analysis. The City of Eureka disagrees with the finding that "the Eureka Police Department's policy and procedure may not have been completely following during Cotton's arrest." After interviewing available witnesses, the investigation found no credible evidence of any of the excessive force alleged by the unnamed witnesses cited by the Grand Jury. Mr. Cotton was quite active, extremely and exceedingly combative and dangerous when taken into custody. His high level of energy and mobility did not indicate that he had suffered any serious or life threatening injury. His combative and aggressive behavior also made it infeasible to turn him over to medical professionals for their evaluation for injuries relating to his combat with citizens and officers. Nevertheless, since every experience is an opportunity to improve strategies for dealing with difficult situations like this, since this event, the City has reviewed and updated its policies to include mandatory medical evaluation, when it is safe to do so, of all persons involved in violent physical confrontations with police where serious physical injury might have occurred. 09/02/2008 11:36 7077869314 CITYOFFERNDALE City of Ferndale INCORPORATED 1893 B 1095; Ferndale CA 955 August 29, 2008 The Honorable John T. Feeney Superior Court of California County of Humboldt 825 Fifth Street Eureka, CA 95501 Your Honor: The City of Ferndale thanks you for the 2007-2008 Grand Jury Final Report. We commend the Grand Jury for their commitment and service to Humboldt County Citizens. We have the following response to Grand Jury Report #2008-CD-01; Sewer Treatment Systems:
* 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.