Score: -35 (5/13/40)

Riverside County Grand Jury • 2014-2015

Riverside County Civil Grand Jury Inquiries—

Published: July 29, 2014 17 pages

View Original PDF

⚠️ 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: F11, F12, F13, F14, F15, F16, F17, F18, F19, F20, F21, F22, F23, F24, F25, F26, F27, F28, F29, F30, F31, F32, F33, F34, F35, F36, F37, F38, F39, F40, F41, F42, F43, F44, F45, F46, F47, F48, F49, F50, F51, F52, F53, F54, F55, F56, F57, F58, F59, F60, F61, F62, F63, F64, F65, F66, F67, F68, F69, F70, F71, F72, F73, F74, F75, F76, F77, F78, F79, F80, F81, F82, F83, F84, F85, F86, F87, F88, F89, F90, F91, F92, F93, F94, F95, F96, F97, F98, F99, F100, F101, F102, F103, F104, F105, F106, F107, F108, F109, F110, F111, F112, F113, F114, F115, F116, F117, F118, F119, F120, F121, F122, F123, F124, F125, F126, F127, F128, F129, F130, F131, F132, F133, F134, F135, F136, F137, F138, F139, F140, F141, F142, F143, F144, F145, F146, F147, F148, F149, F150, F151, F152, F153, F154, F155, F156, F157, F158, F159, F160, F161, F162, F163, F164, F165, F166, F167, F168, F169, F170, F171, F172, F173, F174, F175, F176, F177, F178, F179, F180, F181, F182, F183, F184, F185, F186, F187, F188, F189, F190, F191, F192, F193, F194, F195, F196, F197, F198, F199, F200, F201, F202, F203, F204, F205, F206, F207, F208, F209, F210, F211, F212, F213, F214, F215, F216, F217, F218, F219, F220, F221, F222, F223, F224, F225, F226, F227, F228, F229, F230, F231, F232, F233, F234, F235, F236, F237, F238, F239, F240, F241, F242, F243, F244, F245, F246, F247, F248, F249, F250, F251, F252, F253, F254, F255, F256, F257, F258, F259, F260, F261, F262, F263, F264, F265, F266, F267, F268, F269, F270, F271, F272, F273, F274, F275, F276, F277, F278, F279, F280, F281, F282, F283, F284, F285, F286, F287, F288, F289, F290, F291, F292, F293, F294, F295, F296, F297, F298, F299, F300, F301, F302, F303, F304, F305, F306, F307, F308, F309, F310, F311, F312, F313, F314, F315, F316, F317, F318, F319, F320, F321, F322, F323, F324, F325, F326, F327, F328, F329, F330, F331, F332, F333, F334, F335, F336, F337, F338, F339, F340, F341, F342, F343, F344, F345, F346, F347, F348, F349, F350, F351, F352, F353, F354, F355, F356, F357, F358, F359, F360, F361, F362, F363, F364, F365, F366, F367, F368, F369, F370, F371, F372, F373, F374, F375, F376, F377, F378, F379, F380, F381, F382, F383, F384, F385, F386, F387, F388, F389, F390, F391, F392, F393, F394, F395, F396, F397, F398, F399, F400, F401, F402, F403, F404, F405, F406, F407, F408, F409, F410, F411, F412, F413, F414, F415, F416, F417, F418, F419, F420, F421, F422, F423, F424, F425, F426, F427, F428, F429, F430, F431, F432, F433, F434, F435, F436, F437, F438, F439, F440, F441, F442, F443, F444, F445, F446, F447, F448, F449, F450, F451, F452, F453, F454, F455, F456, F457, F458, F459, F460, F461, F462, F463, F464, F465, F466, F467, F468, F469, F470, F471, F472, F473, F474, F475, F476, F477, F478, F479, F480, F481, F482, F483, F484, F485, F486, F487, F488, F489, F490, F491, F492, F493, F494, F495, F496, F497, F498, F499, F500, F501, F502, F503, F504, F505, F506, F507, F508, F509, F510, F511, F512, F513, F514, F515, F516, F517, F518, F519, F520, F521, F522, F523, F524, F525, F526, F527, F528, F529, F530, F531, F532, F533, F534, F535, F536, F537, F538, F539, F540, F541, F542, F543, F544, F545, F546, F547, F548, F549, F550, F551, F552, F553, F554, F555, F556, F557, F558, F559, F560, F561, F562, F563, F564, F565, F566, F567, F568, F569, F570, F571, F572, F573, F574, F575, F576, F577, F578, F579, F580, F581, F582, F583, F584, F585, F586, F587, F588, F589, F590, F591, F592, F593, F594, F595, F596, F597, F598, F599, F600, F601, F602, F603, F604, F605, F606, F607, F608, F609, F610, F611, F612, F613, F614, F615, F616, F617, F618, F619, F620, F621, F622, F623, F624, F625, F626, F627, F628, F629, F630, F631, F632, F633, F634, F635, F636, F637, F638, F639, F640, F641, F642, F643, F644, F645, F646, F647, F648, F649, F650, F651, F652, F653, F654, F655, F656, F657, F658, F659, F660, F661, F662, F663, F664, F665, F666, F667, F668, F669, F670, F671, F672, F673, F674, F675, F676, F677, F678, F679, F680, F681, F682, F683, F684, F685, F686, F687, F688, F689, F690, F691, F692, F693, F694, F695, F696, F697, F698, F699, F700, F701, F702, F703, F704, F705, F706, F707, F708, F709, F710, F711, F712, F713, F714, F715, F716, F717, F718, F719, F720, F721, F722, F723, F724, F725, F726, F727, F728, F729, F730, F731, F732, F733, F734, F735, F736, F737, F738, F739, F740, F741, F742, F743, F744, F745, F746, F747, F748, F749, F750, F751, F752, F753, F754, F755, F756, F757, F758, F759, F760, F761, F762, F763, F764, F765, F766, F767, F768, F769, F770, F771, F772, F773, F774, F775, F776, F777, F778, F779, F780, F781, F782, F783, F784, F785, F786, F787, F788, F789, F790, F791, F792, F793, F794, F795, F796, F797, F798, F799, F800, F801, F802, F803, F804, F805, F806, F807, F808, F809, F810, F811, F812, F813, F814, F815, F816, F817, F818, F819, F820, F821, F822, F823, F824, F825, F826, F827, F828, F829, F830, F831, F832, F833, F834, F835, F836, F837, F838, F839, F840, F841, F842, F843, F844, F845, F846, F847, F848, F849, F850, F851, F852, F853, F854, F855, F856, F857, F858, F859, F860, F861, F862, F863, F864, F865, F866, F867, F868, F869, F870, F871, F872, F873, F874, F875, F876, F877, F878, F879, F880, F881, F882, F883, F884, F885, F886, F887, F888, F889, F890, F891, F892, F893, F894, F895, F896, F897, F898, F899, F900, F901, F902, F903, F904, F905, F906, F907, F908, F909, F910, F911, F912, F913, F914, F915, F916, F917, F918, F919, F920, F921, F922, F923, F924, F925, F926, F927, F928, F929, F930, F931, F932, F933, F934, F935, F936, F937, F938, F939, F940, F941, F942, F943, F944, F945, F946, F947, F948, F949, F950, F951, F952, F953, F954, F955, F956, F957, F958, F959, F960, F961, F962, F963, F964, F965, F966, F967, F968, F969, F970, F971, F972, F973, F974, F975, F976, F977, F978, F979, F980, F981, F982, F983, F984, F985, F986, F987, F988, F989, F990, F991, F992, F993, F994, F995, F996, F997, F998, F999, F1000, F1001, F1002, F1003, F1004, F1005, F1006, F1007, F1008, F1009, F1010, F1011, F1012, F1013, F1014, F1015, F1016, F1017, F1018, F1019, F1020, F1021, F1022, F1023, F1024, F1025, F1026, F1027, F1028, F1029, F1030, F1031, F1032, F1033, F1034, F1035, F1036, F1037, F1038, F1039, F1040, F1041, F1042, F1043, F1044, F1045, F1046, F1047, F1048, F1049, F1050, F1051, F1052, F1053, F1054, F1055, F1056, F1057, F1058, F1059, F1060, F1061, F1062, F1063, F1064, F1065, F1066, F1067, F1068, F1069, F1070, F1071, F1072, F1073, F1074, F1075, F1076, F1077, F1078, F1079, F1080, F1081, F1082, F1083, F1084, F1085, F1086, F1087, F1088, F1089, F1090, F1091, F1092, F1093, F1094, F1095, F1096, F1097, F1098, F1099, F1100, F1101, F1102, F1103, F1104, F1105, F1106, F1107, F1108, F1109, F1110, F1111, F1112, F1113, F1114, F1115, F1116, F1117, F1118, F1119, F1120, F1121, F1122, F1123, F1124, F1125, F1126, F1127, F1128, F1129, F1130, F1131, F1132, F1133, F1134, F1135, F1136, F1137, F1138, F1139, F1140, F1141, F1142, F1143, F1144, F1145, F1146, F1147, F1148, F1149, F1150, F1151, F1152, F1153, F1154, F1155, F1156, F1157, F1158, F1159, F1160, F1161, F1162, F1163, F1164, F1165, F1166, F1167, F1168, F1169, F1170, F1171, F1172, F1173, F1174, F1175, F1176, F1177, F1178, F1179, F1180, F1181, F1182, F1183, F1184, F1185, F1186, F1187, F1188, F1189, F1190, F1191, F1192, F1193, F1194, F1195, F1196, F1197, F1198, F1199, F1200, F1201, F1202, F1203, F1204, F1205, F1206, F1207, F1208, F1209, F1210, F1211, F1212, F1213, F1214, F1215, F1216, F1217, F1218, F1219, F1220, F1221, F1222, F1223, F1224, F1225, F1226, F1227, F1228, F1229, F1230, F1231, F1232, F1233, F1234, F1235, F1236, F1237, F1238, F1239, F1240, F1241, F1242, F1243, F1244, F1245, F1246, F1247, F1248, F1249, F1250, F1251, F1252, F1253, F1254, F1255, F1256, F1257, F1258, F1259, F1260, F1261, F1262, F1263, F1264, F1265, F1266, F1267, F1268, F1269, F1270, F1271, F1272, F1273, F1274, F1275, F1276, F1277, F1278, F1279, F1280, F1281, F1282, F1283, F1284, F1285, F1286, F1287, F1288, F1289, F1290, F1291, F1292, F1293, F1294, F1295, F1296, F1297, F1298, F1299, F1300, F1301, F1302, F1303, F1304, F1305, F1306, F1307, F1308, F1309, F1310, F1311, F1312, F1313, F1314, F1315, F1316, F1317, F1318, F1319, F1320, F1321, F1322, F1323, F1324, F1325, F1326, F1327, F1328, F1329, F1330, F1331, F1332, F1333, F1334, F1335, F1336, F1337, F1338, F1339, F1340, F1341, F1342, F1343, F1344, F1345, F1346, F1347, F1348, F1349, F1350, F1351, F1352, F1353, F1354, F1355, F1356, F1357, F1358, F1359, F1360, F1361, F1362, F1363, F1364, F1365, F1366, F1367, F1368, F1369, F1370, F1371, F1372, F1373, F1374, F1375, F1376, F1377, F1378, F1379, F1380, F1381, F1382, F1383, F1384, F1385, F1386, F1387, F1388, F1389, F1390, F1391, F1392, F1393, F1394, F1395, F1396, F1397, F1398, F1399, F1400, F1401, F1402, F1403, F1404, F1405, F1406, F1407, F1408, F1409, F1410, F1411, F1412, F1413, F1414, F1415, F1416, F1417, F1418, F1419, F1420, F1421, F1422, F1423, F1424, F1425, F1426, F1427, F1428, F1429, F1430, F1431, F1432, F1433, F1434, F1435, F1436, F1437, F1438, F1439, F1440, F1441, F1442, F1443, F1444, F1445, F1446, F1447, F1448, F1449, F1450, F1451, F1452, F1453, F1454, F1455, F1456, F1457, F1458, F1459, F1460, F1461, F1462, F1463, F1464, F1465, F1466, F1467, F1468, F1469, F1470, F1471, F1472, F1473, F1474, F1475, F1476, F1477, F1478, F1479, F1480, F1481, F1482, F1483, F1484, F1485, F1486, F1487, F1488, F1489, F1490, F1491, F1492, F1493, F1494, F1495, F1496, F1497, F1498, F1499, F1500, F1501, F1502, F1503, F1504, F1505, F1506, F1507, F1508, F1509, F1510, F1511, F1512, F1513, F1514, F1515, F1516, F1517, F1518, F1519, F1520, F1521, F1522, F1523, F1524, F1525, F1526, F1527, F1528, F1529, F1530, F1531, F1532, F1533, F1534, F1535, F1536, F1537, F1538, F1539, F1540, F1541, F1542, F1543, F1544, F1545, F1546, F1547, F1548, F1549, F1550, F1551, F1552, F1553, F1554, F1555, F1556, F1557, F1558, F1559, F1560, F1561, F1562, F1563, F1564, F1565, F1566, F1567, F1568, F1569, F1570, F1571, F1572, F1573, F1574, F1575, F1576, F1577, F1578, F1579, F1580, F1581, F1582, F1583, F1584, F1585, F1586, F1587, F1588, F1589, F1590, F1591, F1592, F1593, F1594, F1595, F1596, F1597, F1598, F1599, F1600, F1601, F1602, F1603, F1604, F1605, F1606, F1607, F1608, F1609, F1610, F1611, F1612, F1613, F1614, F1615, F1616, F1617, F1618, F1619, F1620, F1621, F1622, F1623, F1624, F1625, F1626, F1627, F1628, F1629, F1630, F1631, F1632, F1633, F1634, F1635, F1636, F1637, F1638, F1639, F1640, F1641, F1642, F1643, F1644, F1645, F1646, F1647, F1648, F1649, F1650, F1651, F1652, F1653, F1654, F1655, F1656, F1657, F1658, F1659, F1660, F1661, F1662, F1663, F1664, F1665, F1666, F1667, F1668, F1669, F1670, F1671, F1672, F1673, F1674, F1675, F1676, F1677, F1678, F1679, F1680, F1681, F1682, F1683, F1684, F1685, F1686, F1687, F1688, F1689, F1690, F1691, F1692, F1693, F1694, F1695, F1696, F1697, F1698, F1699, F1700, F1701, F1702, F1703, F1704, F1705, F1706, F1707, F1708, F1709, F1710, F1711, F1712, F1713, F1714, F1715, F1716, F1717, F1718, F1719, F1720, F1721, F1722, F1723, F1724, F1725, F1726, F1727, F1728, F1729, F1730, F1731, F1732, F1733, F1734, F1735, F1736, F1737, F1738, F1739, F1740, F1741, F1742, F1743, F1744, F1745, F1746, F1747, F1748, F1749, F1750, F1751, F1752, F1753, F1754, F1755, F1756, F1757, F1758, F1759, F1760, F1761, F1762, F1763, F1764, F1765, F1766, F1767, F1768, F1769, F1770, F1771, F1772, F1773, F1774, F1775, F1776, F1777, F1778, F1779, F1780, F1781, F1782, F1783, F1784, F1785, F1786, F1787, F1788, F1789, F1790, F1791, F1792, F1793, F1794, F1795, F1796, F1797, F1798, F1799, F1800, F1801, F1802, F1803, F1804, F1805, F1806, F1807, F1808, F1809, F1810, F1811, F1812, F1813, F1814, F1815, F1816, F1817, F1818, F1819, F1820, F1821, F1822, F1823, F1824, F1825, F1826, F1827, F1828, F1829, F1830, F1831, F1832, F1833, F1834, F1835, F1836, F1837, F1838, F1839, F1840, F1841, F1842, F1843, F1844, F1845, F1846, F1847, F1848, F1849, F1850, F1851, F1852, F1853, F1854, F1855, F1856, F1857, F1858, F1859, F1860, F1861, F1862, F1863, F1864, F1865, F1866, F1867, F1868, F1869, F1870, F1871, F1872, F1873, F1874, F1875, F1876, F1877, F1878, F1879, F1880, F1881, F1882, F1883, F1884, F1885, F1886, F1887, F1888, F1889, F1890, F1891, F1892, F1893, F1894, F1895, F1896, F1897, F1898, F1899, F1900, F1901, F1902, F1903, F1904, F1905, F1906, F1907, F1908, F1909, F1910, F1911, F1912, F1913, F1914, F1915, F1916, F1917, F1918, F1919, F1920, F1921, F1922, F1923, F1924, F1925, F1926, F1927, F1928, F1929, F1930, F1931, F1932, F1933, F1934, F1935, F1936, F1937, F1938, F1939, F1940, F1941, F1942, F1943, F1944, F1945, F1946, F1947, F1948, F1949, F1950, F1951, F1952, F1953, F1954, F1955, F1956, F1957, F1958, F1959, F1960, F1961, F1962, F1963, F1964, F1965, F1966, F1967, F1968, F1969, F1970, F1971, F1972, F1973, F1974, F1975, F1976, F1977, F1978, F1979, F1980, F1981, F1982, F1983, F1984, F1985, F1986, F1987, F1988, F1989, F1990, F1991, F1992, F1993, F1994, F1995, F1996, F1997, F1998, F1999, F2000, F2001, F2002, F2003, F2004, F2005, F2006, F2007, F2008

Findings and Recommendations 11 findings

AB 622 became law in January 2012. The law added Section 939.22(a) to the California Penal Code. County Counsel has interpreted this law, and applied the new law to allow him to represent the officials and employees of the County as to County civil matters brought before the Grand Jury, and to be present at all interviews of County employees that are to be interviewed under oath. County Counsel has attempted to attend one interview and directed, on three occasions, a Deputy County Counsel to represent County employees who have been called to give testimony in Grand Jury interviews. This presents a conflict of interest due to the incompatibility of the professional duties of the County Counsel to 3 represent the County and the Grand Jury in the same matter. This is a direct violation of California Penal Code §934(a). Conflict arises when County Counsel acts in a dual representative role. The County Counsel’s primary duty is to the BOS, not the employees. This conflict places an onerous and improper burden on the witness, because such witness is not at liberty to speak openly and candidly while giving testimony. The witness faces retaliation or discipline by his/her department supervisor or manager due to the County Counsel’s presence (referenced in McClatchy Newspapers v. The Superior Court of Fresno County 751 P. 2d 1329 (Cal. 1988). It makes County Counsel cognizant of the nature of the Grand Jury’s inquiry and the areas being reviewed, as well as, exactly what testimony was given by the witness. A witness could believe that such information may be relayed to the employee’s department or managers. Even though County Counsel is admonished not to reveal the nature of the Grand Jury interview, the secrecy and integrity of the proceedings has already been compromised by County Counsel’s mere presence, which taints the integrity of the interview. The Office of the Attorney General, State of California, in an Opinion issued June 6, 2003, (02-1108) stated, in part: …We believe the Legislature’s policy of preserving the secrecy of grand jury proceedings is not only applicable when a grand jury is performing its criminal indictment function, but also when it is performing its civil watchdog function. In McClatchy Newspapers v. Superior Court, supra, 44 Cal.3d 1162, the Supreme Court observed: The importance of secrecy is well established in the context of the grand jury’s criminal indictment function. By the same token, when the grand jury conducts a watchdog investigation of local government operations as in the instant case, secrecy appears equally vital. Compared with indictment proceedings, the efficacy and credibility of watchdog investigations no less require that witnesses testify without fear of reproach by their peers or their superiors. Though the watchdog investigation and report serve a different social purpose than the criminal indictment, eliciting candid testimony is obviously critical to both functions of the grand jury. Significantly, the separate and distinct functions of watchdog and indictment grand juries are sometimes intermingled, in the sense that watchdog inquiries into alleged corruption may involve the weighing of possible criminal indictments against county officials and others being investigated…. Whether or not a watchdog grand jury actually undertakes the weighing of indictments, secrecy 4 ‘provides the proper atmosphere in which to generate uninhibited testimony from county employees who might otherwise be intimidated by political and employment considerations.’ [Citations.] “Secrecy also serves to protect the reputations of those who may be unjustly accused during the course of a watchdog investigation. ‘Grand jury secrecy…is “as important for the protection of the innocent as for the pursuit of the guilty.” [Citation Omitted.]’ [Citation.]” (Id.at. pp. 1175-1176.) Transparency and Accountability

Related Recommendations (1)

To maintain secrecy, County Counsel, or its Deputy County Counsel, shall not represent an employee of the County when testifying before the Grand Jury, pursuant to California Penal Code §934(a). Rather than protecting county agencies from the Grand Jury’s scrutiny, County Counsel shall be receptive to such inquiries. Transparency and Accountability

County Counsel has advised department heads, on or about January 21, 2015, to delay release of information to the Grand Jury, which is a violation of the California Public Records Act (Govt. Code §§6250- 6276.48) (PRA). County Counsel’s actions obscure the transparency and accountability throughout the County. As the court in Monroe v. Garrett (1971) 17 Cal.App.3d 280, 284 [94 Cal.Rptr.531] observed: In our system of government, a grand jury is the only agency free from possible political or official bias that has an opportunity to see the picture of crime and the operation of government relating thereto on any broad basis. It performs a valuable public purpose in presenting its conclusions drawn from that overview. The public may, of course, ultimately conclude that the jury’s fears were exaggerated or that its proposed solutions are unwise. But the debate which reports, such as the one before us, would provoke could lead only to a better understanding of public governmental problems. They should be encouraged and not prohibited. Inaccurate, Incomplete, and Misleading Statements

Related Recommendations (1)

County Counsel shall advise department heads to allow access to all documents requested by the Grand Jury. The department shall provide assistance by helping identify records and information relevant to the request, which is part of the PRA, and suggesting ways to overcome any practical basis for denying access to PRA documents (see PRA §6253.1). Any denial of a request by the Grand Jury must be justified in writing, by demonstrating that the record is exempt or that the public interest in confidentiality outweighs the public interest in disclosure. Inaccurate, Incomplete, and Misleading Statements

The 2012-2013 Riverside County Grand Jury Report, which reflected the time period when the present County Counsel was then City Attorney for the City of Riverside, indicated the reason he revealed confidential information, was “to make them aware of what the Grand Jury was doing.” On May 20, 2013, he was admonished in writing by County Counsel. (See Attachment #1) 5 In a letter of reply dated May 21, 2013, from Riverside City Attorney, to the County of Riverside County Counsel (see Attachment #3), he excused his actions with the following statement, in part: …The reference to the nature of the pending Grand Jury Investigation was made in order to assist the District Attorney, County Counsel, and the presiding judge in their evaluation as to the appropriateness and legality of the Grand Jury’s conduct. In a letter to the Presiding Judge of the Riverside County Superior Court dated July 10, 2013, the then City Attorney responded to a 2012-2013 Grand Jury Report by inaccurately stating, in part: …As the court is aware, the Grand Jury is not a wholly independent body. Rather, it is under the control of the Superior Court and its Presiding Judge… The Grand Jury is an investigative arm of the superior court and has judicial, as well as, investigatory and inquisitional responsibilities and powers as defined in California Penal Code Sections 888 through 945. Once the Grand Jury is duly impaneled and sworn, its functions are conducted as a separate and independent body, acting apart from the jurisdiction of the court, beholding to no one body, entity or court. A letter from the current County Counsel to the Grand Jury dated January 8, 2015, misstates the Penal Code by omitting words, “at all times,” intrinsic to the Penal Code §934(a). Obstruction of the Grand Jury

Related Recommendations (1)

County Counsel shall refrain from making inaccurate, incomplete, and misleading statements. Obstruction of the Grand Jury

The Grand Jury has a twelve-month period to complete its work. Delay can effectively foreclose Grand Jury scrutiny, and a strategy of delay is apparent in the conflict of interest with County Counsel who is a legal representative of both Grand Jury and the agencies it seeks to examine. County Counsel has made numerous attempts to thwart the Grand Jury’s investigations of departments of the County. This obstruction included attempts to block access to information, delaying the Grand Jury’s hearings, by requiring subpoenas, making access to witnesses and records difficult and invoking attorney-client privilege to protect the 18,000 plus County employees when such privilege may not exist rather than the legitimate interests of the 2.2 million County residents. County Counsel has devised a plan, as evidenced by an email dated December 4, 2014, (see Attachment #2), to hamper the process of the Grand Jury’s pursuance of its legal and authorized duties granted them under California Penal Code §925(a). County Counsel’s scheme of 6 orchestrating this plan is accomplished by advising department heads, in staff meetings, by email, and by PowerPoint presentations. This PowerPoint presentation contains significant references pertaining to Criminal Grand Juries, which does not apply to Civil Grand Juries. His plan of action has the effect of disrupting the Grand Jury’s mission by weakening and delaying the normal process of the Grand Jury’s legal authority as outlined in California Penal Code §888 through §945. County Counsel’s actions not only attempt to gain unauthorized information and insight into the areas being reviewed, but also in effect, to usurp the legal process for which the Grand Jury exists. County Counsel’s efforts to circumvent the Grand Jury’s legal domain over its legal duties and jurisdiction constitutes an obstruction of the operations of the Grand Jury. County Counsel’s response to Grand Jury inquiries are designed to obstruct transparency, protect the BOS, County agencies, and the Office of County Counsel from scrutiny, rather than to cooperate with the legitimate intergovernmental fact-finding and investigative functions of the Grand Jury. This finding discusses a few specific instances which are typical of the resistance the Grand Jury is encountering. Evaluative techniques lead the Grand Jury to conclude the County Counsel and Executive Officer, using the email of December 4, 2014, that stated: “We will then coordinate with the affected County Department and Executive Office on the appropriate response in order to properly protect the interests of the County, its officials and employees,” expressed plans to protect the BOS from another controversial Grand Jury Report, such as the 2013-2014 Grand Jury Report on Political Reform concerning CID funds. County Counsel has either been directed to, or on his own as evidenced by his current actions, chosen to ignore California Penal Code §934(a), which states, in part: …Unless advice is requested, the judge of the court, or county counsel as to civil matters, shall not be present during the sessions of the grand jury. A voicemail received by the Grand Jury foreperson on March 19, 2015, at 1:15 p.m., from County Counsel’s Administrative Assistant, stated, “we don’t represent the Grand Jury anymore,” is also a violation of California Penal Code §934(a), which states, in part: The grand jury may, at all times, request the advice of the court, or the judge thereof, the district attorney, the county counsel, or the Attorney General… 7 Choice of Having Counsel

Related Recommendations (1)

County Counsel shall discontinue interference with the work of the Grand Jury. County Counsel shall be available to the Grand Jury to provide advice, at all times, as to civil matters as stipulated in California Penal Code §934(a). Choice of Having Counsel

California Penal Code §939.22(a) permits a witness giving testimony under oath to have counsel present during a Grand Jury interview. It allows the witness to make the determination whether or not to have counsel present. It is not the determination of County Counsel. It is inappropriate for County Counsel or a Deputy County Counsel to represent the witness who is a County employee, when the Grand Jury is investigating a County department because; it violates the secrecy and confidentiality of the Grand Jury sessions. County Counsel has advised County departments and special districts, if they have been contacted by the Grand Jury for information or to give testimony under oath, to then contact County Counsel for representation. This has given the impression County Counsel must be used by County employees, when in fact, said employees, if they choose to have representation, may bring an independent attorney. The Grand Jury does not object to the County employee witnesses having counsel represent them, pursuant to California Penal Code §939.22, so long as it is not County Counsel pursuant to California Penal Code §934(a). California Penal Code §939.22(c) states: Nothing in this section shall be construed to grant a witness a constitutional right to counsel under the United States or California Constitutions nor grant any right to discovery for the subpoenaed witness. Violation of Board Policy C-35

Related Recommendations (1)

When a witness, who is a County employee, desires to be represented by counsel, in a matter regarding the performance of his/her duties, or the operations of his/her department, the County shall allow or provide an attorney not affiliated with the County Counsel, to represent the witness assuring his/her rights are not violated. Violation of Board Policy C-35

The BOS established Policy C-35 and implemented it on September 1,

Related Recommendations (1)

In order to maintain the provisions of anonymity of Policy C-35, County Counsel shall not ask, or direct, County employees to notify him of their contact with the Grand Jury. County Counsel shall complete appropriate training courses relevant to California Penal Codes and Government Codes governing the California Grand Juries. (This continuing education may assist County Counsel in understanding that the Civil Grand Jury is an independent and autonomous body beholden to no one.) Riverside County Executive Office

In an email dated December 4, 2014, County Counsel, at the direction of the Executive Office, issued a directive requesting departments of the County to advise the County Counsel regarding inquiries made by the Grand Jury. County Counsel has been directed “to establish a consistent and coordinated approach to handle these inquiries, and respond to requests for information.” This is a concerted effort to breach the confidentiality of Grand Jury proceedings. (See Attachment #2) Violation of Code of Ethics

Related Recommendations (1)

County Executive Office shall cease from issuing these directives pertaining to Grand Jury requests. County Executive Office shall direct County Counsel to cease making presentations, forcing or advising County departments and special districts, and agencies, on how to coordinate their responses to the Grand Jury. Violation of Code of Ethics

County Counsel has a history of bias and contempt against the Grand Jury, as evidenced in a 2012-2013 Grand Jury Report, City of Riverside, Office of the City Attorney. The report detailed issues with the Office of the City of Riverside City Attorney, the position he occupied at the time. Hence, County Counsel has continuously interfered with the legal duties of the Grand Jury, and has violated the provisions of the Business and Professions Code pertaining to lawyers, Section 6068. This report has precipitated County Counsel to disrespectfully neutralize the Grand Jury from performing its legal and authorized duties. Business and Professions Code Section 6068 states lawyers shall observe rules of law, including the California Rules of Professional Conduct and the State Bar Act. Business and Professions Code §6068 states, in part: It is the duty of an attorney to do all of the following: (a) To support the Constitution and laws of the United States and of this state… (d) To employ, for the purpose of maintaining the causes confided to him or her means only as are consistent with truth, and never to seek to mislead the judge or any judicial officer by an artifice or false statement of fact or law. (e)(1) To maintain inviolate the confidence, and at every peril to himself or herself to preserve the secrets, of his or her client… (g) Not to encourage either the commencement or the continuance of an action or proceeding from any corrupt motive of passion or interest… 10 Failure to Provide Upjohn Warning

Related Recommendations (1)

County Counsel shall adhere to the tenets of the Business and Professions Code §6068. Failure to Provide Upjohn Warning

The scope of attorney-client privilege in a corporate context was defined by the United States Supreme Court in Upjohn Co. v. United States, 101 S. Ct. 677, 449 U.S. 383 (1981). Since Upjohn, courts and commentators have discussed an Upjohn or Corporate Miranda warning. The need for such warnings stems from the fact that Corporate Counsel’s client is the corporation and not the employees, officers, or directors of the corporation. If an Upjohn warning has not been given, an employee may believe that he or she is represented by Corporate Counsel. Thus the attorney representing a governmental agency is best served to provide an Upjohn warning to the person consulting him/her to make the representation clear. This warning is generally given to an employee, officer or director before an interview begins. An Upjohn warning generally consists of the following requirements: (1) that the attorney represents the County, City or other unit of government and does not represent the individual personally; (2) that the communications between the attorney and the individual are privileged; (3) that the privilege belongs solely to the County, City, or other unit of government which may in its discretion choose to waive the privilege and disclose the communication to third parties; and (4) that so long as the privilege attaches, the employee may not disclose the communication to third parties. The Upjohn warning may be verbal, but the warning should be documented by a signed acknowledgement as a contemporaneous memorandum of the interview. The Grand Jury has found no evidence County Counsel informed County employees with an Upjohn Warning that clearly states to the employee that County Counsel represents the government agency and not the employee, pursuant to (Upjohn Co. v. United States, 101 S. Ct. 677, 449 U.S. 383 (1981). Conversely, County Counsel has expressed to County employees that County Counsel is the legal representative of all 18,000 plus Riverside 11 County employees and that an attorney-client relationship exists between County Counsel and all employees in the County. The result of County Counsel’s/Executive Officer’s directive, as outlined in the email of December 4, 2014, initiated a sequence that is designed to breach the secrecy provisions of the Grand Jury. All County employees are directed by County Counsel, to ask if the interview will be sworn or unsworn. He then informs the employee if the nature of the investigation is of a sensitive nature and the Grand Jury determines that sworn testimony will be necessary, then the County Counsel instructs the employee that County Counsel will be present at the interview. This act is a clear violation of California Penal Code §934(a), which states, in part: …Unless advice is requested, the judge of the court, or county counsel as to civil matters, shall not be present during the sessions of the grand jury. Employees are also directed to ask the Grand Jury to put in writing, what questions will be asked and or documents to be presented prior to the interview which is a violation. This would be a breach of the Grand Jury’s sworn oath of secrecy pursuant to California Penal Codes §924.1. Superior Court Case

Related Recommendations (1)

County Counsel shall refrain from misleading County employees into believing they may have protections when they may not. County Counsel shall inform all employees of the Upjohn Warning and shall have employees sign an acknowledgement form as proof they are aware of the Upjohn Ruling and circumstances. This policy shall be incorporated into County Counsel’s policy and procedures manual. Superior Court Case

F10

In Riverside Superior Court Case #RICMISC20151 the 2014-2015 Riverside County Grand Jury raised the issue of a potential conflict between County Counsel and County employees they may be representing. The Riverside Superior Court Judge stated: To the extent that that [sic] conflict exists, and there may be one, County Counsel, as with any other attorney, is obligated to properly advise its clients, employees about a potential conflict, and to obtain waivers appropriate or separate counsel if a waiver can’t be obtained, but that’s between the attorney and its client. County employee may have an attorney of their choice including but not limited to a private attorney, union attorney, etc., there is no mandate that the attorney has to be County Counsel. The Grand Jury found no evidence that County Counsel has or had properly advised any County employee of a potential conflict and obtained any waivers. 12

Related Recommendations (1)

R10

County Counsel shall properly advise County employees of potential conflict, and to obtain waivers appropriate or separate counsel if a waiver can’t be obtained. A County employee shall be advised that representation by an attorney is at his/her request and is not mandated that it be County Counsel. Report Issued: 06/10/2015 Report Public: 06/12/2015 Response Due: 09/08/2015 14 15 16 17

F2009 Page 1

This policy addresses the Subject: Standards of Ethical Conduct to Address Fraud, Waste, and Abuse. This policy applies to all County employees and officers. Section 7 of Policy C-35 addresses: Acknowledgement in writing of this policy by all current and future employees as evidence of receipt. Whereas this policy in Section 4 l, states that county employees have a duty to identify, report, and work to eliminate fraud, waste and abuse. Section 4 m, highlights the duty of every employee to cooperate in an investigation involving a violation or an alleged violation of this policy.

No recommendations for this finding

Agency Responses 6

Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.

Board of Supervisors to 2014-2015 Grand Jury Report Cal Fire Riverside County Fire Department

September 23, 2015 • 6 pages • 10 responses • Score: -4 (+2, 2, -6) View Details ▾

PDF

10 responses to findings and recommendations

Response: Agree Score: +1

: Battalion #8- Station #43. City of Blythe Station #43, located in downtown Blythe, was built in 1951. The building is too small to accommodate current equipment. The engine and water tender are parked outside the building and are partially covered by canopies. According to the Riverside County Fire Department, Fire Station Useful Life and Replacement Plan, December 2010, Station #43 would need to be replaced after a 50 year life expectancy. Today the station is over 60 years old. Since July 2011 this station is no longer under contract with the City of Blythe, with the exception of providin...

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

, Riverside County Fire Department will be considering service needs and facility locations in our current, in process studies. The disposition of FS46 and its equipment will be determined at that time. FINDING NO.4: Battalion #8- Station #49, Lake Tamarisk Station #49 is located in the community of Lake Tamarisk along the lnterstate-1 0 corridor. This station provides services to the communities of Lake Tamarisk, Desert Center, Eagle Mountain and surrounding areas. According to the Riverside County Fire Department, Fire Station Useful Life and Replacement Plan, December 2010, Station #49 wh...

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

: Battalion #8 - Station #45, Blythe Air Base Station #45 is located on Economic Development Agency property, approximately seven miles west of Station #43 in Blythe. The Urban Search & Rescue #45 (US&R) vehicle has been at Station #45 since late20 12. Personnel have received US&R training for the past three years. The US&R vehicle is not fully equipped; therefore, it is not in service. When fully equipped, it will provide improved services to the fire department. Since Station #45 is centrally located, the US&R vehicle would be an essential and valuable asset in all types of emergency situat...

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

As discussed with the Grand Jury, Riverside County Fire Department is completing a review of its Technical Rescue program and equipment. We are in the process of redistributing excess equipment, and purchasing replacement or needed equipment to ensure that apparatus complements are up to our specification. We anticipate that US&R45 will be in service first quarter of FY 15/16, and fully outfitted in second quarter FY 15/16. FINDING NO.3: 21Paoc b Battalion #8 - Station #46. Riverbend Station #46 is located in Riverbend, an unincorporated community, on the Colorado River Indian Reservation. ...

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

: 21Paoc b Battalion #8 - Station #46. Riverbend Station #46 is located in Riverbend, an unincorporated community, on the Colorado River Indian Reservation. The station, which is not manned, was built approximately 20 years ago by volunteer firefighters. It houses a CAL FIRE/RVC utility truck, one engine and a rescue boat. The boat is only used for annual training purposes. There is neither kitchen nor living quarters at this station. To date, there are only two volunteer firefighters, when available, to work on weekends. In the event the Colorado River Indian Tribe (CRIT) boundary dispute i...

County Counsel shall refrain from making inaccurate, incomplete, and misleading statements. Obstruction of the Grand Jury

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

As in our response to Recommendation #1, Riverside County Fire Department will be considering service needs and facility locations in our current, in process studies. The disposition of FS46 and its equipment will be determined at that time. FINDING NO.4: Battalion #8- Station #49, Lake Tamarisk Station #49 is located in the community of Lake Tamarisk along the lnterstate-1 0 corridor. This station provides services to the communities of Lake Tamarisk, Desert Center, Eagle Mountain and surrounding areas. According to the Riverside County Fire Department, Fire Station Useful Life and Replacem...

Response: Agree Score: +1

: Battalion #8- Station #49, Lake Tamarisk Station #49 is located in the community of Lake Tamarisk along the lnterstate-1 0 corridor. This station provides services to the communities of Lake Tamarisk, Desert Center, Eagle Mountain and surrounding areas. According to the Riverside County Fire Department, Fire Station Useful Life and Replacement Plan, December 2010, Station #49 which is now 45 years 3IPagc old, and recommended to be replaced by the year 2020. The engine has to be parked outside under a partial cover, since the station is not large enough to hold the newer engines. When staff...

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

Riverside County Fire Department is actively studying various alternative methods to facilitate the replacement of Fire Station 49, utilizing the recently purchased parcel in Lake Tamarisk. We will be seeking approvals to utilize any available funding, including solar mitigation, DIF and other grants or avenues. Our goal is to bring forward a recommendation to the Executive Office in the second quarter of FY 15/16. In the interim, a 2nd bathroom is being added to the old facility to better ensure needs are met until replacement is built. FINDING NO.5: County Counsel Interference In November ...

Response: Disagree Score: -1

: County Counsel Interference In November 2014 the Grand Jury contacted the CAL FIRE/RVC office to request a copy of a document. The Grand Jury was advised it would be forthcoming. In December, the Grand Jury was informed that the document would be available in a couple of weeks. Two months later, in February, the Grand Jury made another effort to obtain this document. The CAL FIRE/RVC Chief (Chief) indicated to the Grand Jury he would have to consult with the Riverside County Office of County Counsel (County Counsel) before releasing any information to the Grand Jury. After consulting with C...

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted and is not reasonable. The Recommendation is wholly without factual or legal basis. The grand jury simply objects to the County Counsel performing his ethical and statutory duties and responsibilities. County Counsel has a legal and ethical duty to serve as legal advisor to the County Board of Supervisors, its officers and employees. (See CA Government Code §§ 26526, 26529 & 27642) Also the California Rules of Professional Conduct require County Counsel to act in the County's best interest by providing fair and competent le...

Board of Supervisors to 2014-2015 Grand Jury Report Riverside County Code Enforcement Department

September 23, 2015 • 9 pages • 12 responses • Score: -10 (+0, 2, -10) View Details ▾

PDF

12 responses to findings and recommendations

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

Respondent disagrees with the finding. Supervising Code Enforcement Officers (Field Supervisors) generally assign caseloads based on geographic areas to each Code Enforcement Officer and utilize many tools for the oversight of assignments. The Department utilizes the County of Riverside Code Enforcement case management system (CORE) to provide daily scheduling of cases that are due for inspections to each Officer, either new cases or re-inspections of on-going cases. CORE also tracks specific case information, status, and time spent on case activities. Field supervisors use daily, monthly 1 a...

Response: Will Not Implement

Scheduled: FY 2013/14 Score: -1

FINDING No.3: Cal Recycle Waste Tire Grant Program Agreement 3 The Tire Grant Program operates as an agreement with the State of California (State). The State, in its agreement, allows up to four hours per waste tire inspection. Most on-site tire inspections require much less time, some as little as 15 minutes. It is noted in the Tire Enforcement Grant Program Agreement (TEA 18-10-14) that inspection research, report writing, and actual time spent inspecting are included as part of the 3 Y2 hours billed, but most on-site inspections are completed in one hour or less. Since the State is bille...

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

Respondent disagrees with the finding. The Tire Grant Supervisor directly charged 40 hours of time to the grant, which was the amount allowed for direct billing by Cal Recycle, for general supervisory activities. However, the Supervisor does spend the majority of his time overseeing the Tire Grant program, billed through the Department's administrative overhead. The cost is partially recovered indirectly through the Tire Grant, since the program is billed based on the Code fully burdened hourly rate (which includes administrative overhead in addition to salaries and benefits), and captures sup...

Response: Will Not Implement

Scheduled: FY 2013/14 Score: -1

Respondent disagrees with the recommendation. The supervisor assigned to the Tire Grant Program does conduct other assigned department related duties including enforcement of illegal vending and dumping, and provides administrative assistance to management in several department-wide initiatives such as the development of policies and procedures and training programs. Please also see response to Recommendation No. 1. FINDING No.3: Cal Recycle Waste Tire Grant Program Agreement 3 The Tire Grant Program operates as an agreement with the State of California (State). The State, in its agreement...

Response: Disagree Score: -1

: Cal Recycle Waste Tire Grant Program Agreement 3 The Tire Grant Program operates as an agreement with the State of California (State). The State, in its agreement, allows up to four hours per waste tire inspection. Most on-site tire inspections require much less time, some as little as 15 minutes. It is noted in the Tire Enforcement Grant Program Agreement (TEA 18-10-14) that inspection research, report writing, and actual time spent inspecting are included as part of the 3 Y2 hours billed, but most on-site inspections are completed in one hour or less. Since the State is billed at 3 Y2 ho...

County Counsel shall refrain from making inaccurate, incomplete, and misleading statements. Obstruction of the Grand Jury

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

Respondent partially disagrees with the recommendation. During the period of FY13/14, the Tire Grant team conducted 1807 waste tire facility inspections, exceeding the commitment of the number of facility inspections made in the grant. The Tire Grant team also conducts illegal tire dumping surveillance, attends program training, and performs other duties as requested by Cal Recycle. In addition to their primary duties of implementing the Tire Grant Program, the team on occasion also works on other department assignments including investigations of illegal vending, dumping and other case relate...

Response: Disagree Score: -1

Respondent disagrees with the finding. The Department provides California Penal Code §832 training to all Code Enforcement Officers and Technicians. Additionally, the Department provides other required and optional job related training. This training includes required annual safety training; required annual storm water discharge inspection (NPDES) training; hazardous materials training; annual CALBO certification training for our staff who are certified building inspectors; Dog Bite Awareness; Human Trafficking; required Human Resources training (such as Employee Workplace Violence; Employee H...

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

Respondent agrees with the recommendation. The Department will continue with the practice already in place by holding regularly scheduled monthly Management team meetings and Supervisory staff meetings at their respective offices. In addition, information is made available to staff via 'tail gate' meetings, Department-wide emails, Training Bulletins and other internal communication tools. FINDING No. 6: Operating Procedures The County Code Enforcement Policies and Procedures Manual is incomplete and outdated. The manual does not adequately reflect the current procedures nor communication equ...

The BOS established Policy C-35 and implemented it on September 1,

Response: Disagree Score: -1

Respondent disagrees with the finding. The Department has an extensive Policies and Procedures Manual and revises this Manual when changes occur. If a policy and procedure is still applicable and in effect then it may have an older origination/approval date listed. Policies are revised as necessary to reflect new procedures, changes in County policies, implementation of new ordinances, and other changing requirements. The Department issues cell phones to all field staff and has a pool of Public Safety Enterprise Communications (PSEC) Handy Talkie radios available for staff to use at each offic...

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

Respondent agrees with the recommendation. As changes occur and updates become necessary, the Department will continue with the practice of reviewing and revising the Policies and Procedures Manual. FINDING No. 7: County Counsel Interference During the course of this investigation regarding abuses and deficiencies in the Code Enforcement Department, the Grand Jury encountered interference from the Riverside County Office of County Counsel (County Counsel). County Counsel has directed all County department heads to advise their subordinates to obtain legal representation from his office for s...

Response: Disagree Score: -1

: County Counsel Interference During the course of this investigation regarding abuses and deficiencies in the Code Enforcement Department, the Grand Jury encountered interference from the Riverside County Office of County Counsel (County Counsel). County Counsel has directed all County department heads to advise their subordinates to obtain legal representation from his office for sworn interviews, as well as screening of any documentation prior to complying with Grand Jury requests. County Counsel has taken the position that his office has the legal responsibility to represent all County em...

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted and is not reasonable. The recommendation is wholly without factual or legal basis. The grand jury simply objects to the County Counsel performing his ethical and statutory duties and responsibilities. County Counsel has a legal and ethical duty to serve as legal advisor to the County Board of Supervisors, its officers and employees. (See CA Government Code §§ 26526, 26529 & 27642) Also, the California Rules of Professional Conduct require County Counsel to act in the County's best interest by providing fail and competent l...

BOS to 2014-2015 Grand Jury Report edward-Dean Museum of Decorative Arts

December 15, 2015 • 13 pages • 18 responses • Score: -1 (+0, 8, -1) View Details ▾

PDF

18 responses to findings and recommendations

Response: Unknown

Scheduled: within 5 years Score: 0

Edward-Dean Museum of Decorative Arts partially disagrees with this recommendation. The Board of Supervisors will review whether it needs to appoint a "Museum Board" or whether the committee that is currently in place may serve as the Museum Board. The final determination of the formation, make up and bylaws, including meeting schedule are within the discretion of the Board of Supervisors. FINDING NO. 2: Pavilion Kitchen/Restrooms The kitchen, adjacent to the Pavilion, has been condemned for over 10 years due to the presence of asbestos and mold. The kitchen is locked and unusable. However, ...

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

Edward-Dean Museum of Decorative Arts partially agrees with this Finding. While the County was aware of the need for repairs, those repairs have been delayed due to lack of funding. As was highly publicized, in 2008, the Great Recession adversely impacted the County, causing budget reductions, furloughs and other severe cuts. Thus, the County's ability to identify funding resources to embark on such a large project was greatly impacted. To add insult to injury, in 2011, Redevelopment was abolished which was another possible funding resource which ceased to exist. 21Pagc RECOMMENDATION NO.2: ...

Response: Unknown

Scheduled: within 5 years Score: 0

Edward-Dean Museum of Decorative Arts partially agrees with this recommendation. Currently EDA is in the beginning stages of renovation of the EDM site and has selected an architect to draft plans for a new kitchen, restroom and pavilion improvements. FINDING NO. 3: Pavilion The Pavilion area needs cleaning and repair. The roof is dirty and the entire area needs paint and stucco work. There are cracks in the sidewalk which present serious trip hazards (see attached photos). The 1964 Agreement Condition #9 states: The County of Riverside shall at its own expense provide for the maintenance an...

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

County Counsel shall refrain from making inaccurate, incomplete, and misleading statements. Obstruction of the Grand Jury

Response: Unknown

Scheduled: within 5 years Score: 0

Edward-Dean Museum of Decorative Arts partially agrees with this Recommendation. 3IPagc Currently EDA is in the beginning stages of renovation of the EDM site and has selected an architect to draft plans for a new kitchen, restroom and pavilion improvements. FINDING NO. 4: Real Property The property includes approximately 10 acres of unused land which currently has a few trees, some of which are dead (see Attachment # 1) . There is an area utilized for the accumulation of trash, miscellaneous debris, dead vegetation, and a dumpster. The 1964 Agreement Condition # 12 states, in part: The Cou...

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

Edward-Dean Museum of Decorative Arts wholly disagrees with this Finding. The County is not mandated but has the right to use the portion of real property. The undeveloped land is currently being used for over flow parking during large events and weddings. In the past years, the County has utilized portions of the undeveloped land to fulfill the mission of providing related uses for the Edward Dean Museum and Decorative Arts. These include the construction of the Kay Ceniceros Building, additional landscape of the Rose and Legacy Gardens, and more recently, the completion of the outdoor Weddin...

Response: Unknown

Scheduled: within 5 years Score: 0

Edward-Dean Museum of Decorative Arts wholly disagrees with this recommendation. The County provides ongoing maintenance at the EDM. With available funding the agency could move forward with a Master Plan of the entire 16 acre site. 4JPagc FINDING NO. 5: Rental Price Structure The Riverside County Auditor's report 2008-006 states that the rental rate of $2,500 for a Saturday event was found to be competitive. Since then, the fee has increased to $4,200 which is no longer competitive. The rental rate for day use of the facility includes the dining/reception hall or pavilion, as well as the ga...

Response: Disagree Score: -1

: Rental Price Structure The Riverside County Auditor's report 2008-006 states that the rental rate of $2,500 for a Saturday event was found to be competitive. Since then, the fee has increased to $4,200 which is no longer competitive. The rental rate for day use of the facility includes the dining/reception hall or pavilion, as well as the gazebo, the pond or Legacy Garden. In addition, other services must be added, such as catering. Other venues include the use of the facility with the catering fee. There is no price structure for use of the reception hall only, nor is there flexibility in ...

Response: Unknown

Scheduled: within 5 years Score: 0

Edward-Dean Museum of Decorative Arts wholly disagrees with this recommendation. The grand jury has not provided any support to align with their recommendations or other area venues to suggest $2,500 would be profitable. Moreover, the Museum is actively looking for new ways to generate more revenue such as new wedding packages to include catering. As a government entity the EDM must follow County procurement procedures. FINDING NO. 6: Lack of Adequate Marketing 5I Page The EDMDA has been inadequately marketed. In the past two years, the 18-20 rental events per year have proven inadequate to...

The BOS established Policy C-35 and implemented it on September 1,

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

Edward-Dean Museum of Decorative Arts partially agrees with this Finding. With its limited funding, the EDM capitalizes on 'grassroot' marketing, social media and community involvement to market the Museum. The staff currently attends various mixers, community events and local businesses pertinent to weddings to distribute flyers about the museum. Advertising through radio, TV and magazines exceed the current marketing budget for the Museum. The grand jury stated, "There are very few ED MDA events that would attract residents from the Coachella Valley who live less then an hour away. Other wes...

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

Edward-Dean Museum of Decorative Arts wholly disagrees with this Finding. The County of Riverside has always insured the Museum's collection through the County's Risk Management Division. The value of artifacts does not change in a matter of 5-7 years. The last appraisal for the Museum was completed in September of2014. Industry standards for museums are for appraisals to be performed every 10 years and sometimes one time only with a curator doing inventory thereafter. The Museum Manager contacted two local museums and the Riverside Metropolitan Museum stated, "Artifact values do not change th...

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

RECOMMENDATION NO. 7: Appraisals EDA shall be responsible for obtaining appraisals, which shall be completed every five years.

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

Edward-Dean Museum of Decorative Arts wholly disagrees with this Finding. There is adequate security at all times at the Museum. Additional security is always provided during events. The current system in place alerts an employee and local police if an intruder is in the Museum. RECOMMENDATION NO. 8: Security EDA shall immediately upgrade the surveillance system to include multiple cameras on the grounds to be recorded on the DVR system. EDA shall establish an internet connection to enable the cameras to be monitored in the office and at remote locations. Early warning alarms shall alert man...

County Counsel shall adhere to the tenets of the Business and Professions Code §6068. Failure to Provide Upjohn Warning

Response: Unknown

Scheduled: fiscal year 2014-2015 Score: 0

Edward-Dean Museum of Decorative Arts wholly disagrees with this recommendation. There is adequate security at all times at the Museum. Additional security is always provided during events. The current system in place alerts an employee and local police if an intruder is in the Museum. FINDING NO. 9: Museum Inventory Inventory of the museum is being tracked by Past Perfect Museum Software which depends on accurate entry and upkeep of information, pictures, and other data. There is no cross-check system in place to verify the Past Perfect data. Response: Edward-Dean Museum of Decorative Arts ...

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

Edward-Dean Museum of Decorative Arts wholly disagrees with this Finding. Inventory is done continuously by the on-site Curator. The back up to the Past Perfect program are the hard files that are in the Curator's office. Also, the Finance Division of the Economic Development Agency has a copy of the Museum's inventory secured in a safe in Riverside. 8IPaoc 1:;; RECOMMENDATION NO. 9: Museum Inventory Physical inventory of museum contents including basement and storage areas shall be taken quarterly and shall be verified against the Past Perfect software information. Response: Edward-Dean Mus...

Response: Unknown

Scheduled: fiscal year 2014-2015 Score: 0

Edward-Dean Museum of Decorative Arts wholly disagrees with this recommendation. The County has sufficient procedures and safeguards for the EDM inventory. FINDING NO. 10: Backup Records No backup records are stored off-premises. As of January 2015 the only current inventory record is maintained on the museum property. Response: Edward-Dean Museum of Decorative Arts wholly disagrees with this Finding The Finance Division of the Economic Development Agency maintains a copy ofthe Museum's appraisal in Riverside. RECOMMENDATION NO. 10: Backup Records Since the inventory is managed by Past Per...

F10

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

Edward-Dean Museum of Decorative Arts wholly disagrees with this Finding The Finance Division of the Economic Development Agency maintains a copy ofthe Museum's appraisal in Riverside. RECOMMENDATION NO. 10: Backup Records Since the inventory is managed by Past Perfect, a copy of the data shall be sent to EDA and Risk Management monthly as a backup to the computer in the museum office. Response: Edward-Dean Museum of Decorative Arts wholly disagrees with this recommendation. The County has sufficient procedures in place to insure that copies of the inventory are stored off-site. 91Pagc FIND...

R10

Response: Unknown

Scheduled: within 5 years Score: 0

County Counsel to 2014 2015 Grand Jury Report RCIT Internal Audit

June 17, 2015 • 19 pages • 8 responses • Score: -1 (+3, 1, -4) View Details ▾

PDF

8 responses to findings and recommendations

Response: Disagree Partially Score: 0

: RCIT Non-Compliance During the period July 1, 2012, through, June 30, 2013, the Auditor-Controller performed an internal audit of RCIT. The Internal Audit Report 2013-011 was completed and submitted to the BOS on November 26, 2014, and placed on the BOS agenda for January 06, 2015. BOS Resolution No. 83-338 III C states in part: ...The head of a county entity audited will reply in writing to the Auditor-Controller to the specific audit findings and recommendations within 30 calendar days of receipt of the written findings and recommendations. As of the date of this report, RCIT has not comp...

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

RCIT submitted its response to the Internal Audit Report to the Auditor-Controller on May 27, 2015. FINDING NO. 2: County Executive Officer Failure to Enforce The County Executive Officer is not enforcing BOS Resolution No. 83-338 III C and BOS Policy A-33, Responses to All Audit Reports, requiring RCIT to reply in writing. Response: Respondent wholly disagrees with the finding. Respondent disagrees with the statement and inference that the County Executive Officer is not enforcing Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 83-338 and Board Policy A-33. The Grand Jury has provided no legitimate bas...

Response: Disagree Score: -1

Respondent wholly disagrees with the finding. Respondent disagrees with the statement and inference that the County Executive Officer is not enforcing Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 83-338 and Board Policy A-33. The Grand Jury has provided no legitimate basis for such an overly broad assertion and finding. They have based their conclusion on the late filing of one department that was, as referenced above, without a permanent Director and short staffed during the time period that the Internal Audit Report was presented. There are approximately 42 departments and agencies of the County of R...

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

The recommendation improperly suggests that the County Executive Officer has failed to exercise his duties in enforcing the referenced policy. The County Executive Officer has, and 2 | Page will continue to enforce Resolution No. 83-338 III C and BOS Policy A-33. There has not been a lack of enforcement. One department's late submittal under the circumstances does not amount to "Failure to Enforce". FINDING NO. 3: County Counsel Interference On January 21, 2014, The Riverside County Grand Jury (Grand Jury) requested RCIT to provide the Grand Jury with a copy of its written reply to the Inte...

Response: Disagree Score: -1

: County Counsel Interference On January 21, 2014, The Riverside County Grand Jury (Grand Jury) requested RCIT to provide the Grand Jury with a copy of its written reply to the Internal Audit Report 2013-011. RCIT failed to comply and informed the Grand Jury verbally as well as facsimile from the RCIT Interim CIO, dated January 21, 2015, that the Office of County Counsel Riverside County (County Counsel) has advised them to have all Grand Jury requests and questions directed to RCIT in writing, for County Counsel to review all requests in advance. California Penal Code §921 states in part: Th...

County Counsel shall refrain from making inaccurate, incomplete, and misleading statements. Obstruction of the Grand Jury

Response: Will Implement

Score: +1

and is not reasonable. The Recommendation is wholly without factual or legal basis. The grand jury simply objects to the County Counsel performing his ethical and statutory duties and responsibilities. T implication that the County Counsel requires training on the provisions of CA Penal Code §§888-945 is wholly inappropriate based upon the foregoing discussion. Moreover, the attached PowerPoint Presentation entitled "The Investigatory and Reporting Authority of Civil Grand Juries Acting in their "Watchdog" Capacity" by Gregory P. Priamos, County Counsel which was used to train the Office of Co...

Response: Agree Score: +1

: Distribution of Audit Reports The Grand Jury has not received Internal Audit Reports from the Auditor-Controller in several years. BOS Resolution No. 83-338 II D states in part: ...Audit reports, except for request audits, shall be addressed to the head of the entity audited, with copies to the Board of Supervisors, Administrative Officer, District Attorney, and the Grand Jury. For requested audits, the report shall be addressed to the proper authority requesting the audit (unless a different addressee is desired by the requestor), with copies to the Board of Supervisors, Administrative Off...

Response: Will Implement

Score: +1

The Riverside County Auditor-Controller Internal Audit Division will provide the Grand Jury a copy of Internal Audit Reports upon the Board of Supervisors acceptance of the Receive and File Form 11. 5 | Page , THE INVESTIGATORY AND REPORTING AUTHORITY OF CIVIL GRAND JURIES ACTING IN THEIR "WATCHDOG" CAPACITY Gregory F. Princes County Ownsel THE PARTY OF THE PROPERTY OF THE PARTY OF THE PARTY. L INTRODUCTION. One of the key functions of grand juries in California and alsowhere is to act in the capacity of a "wetchdag" in investigating the operations and eliabs of governmen...

County Counsel to 2014-2015 Grand Jury Report Riverside County Office of County Counsel

May 22, 2015 • 17 pages • 19 responses • Score: -19 (+0, 0, -19) View Details ▾

PDF

19 responses to findings and recommendations

Response: Disagree Score: -1

: Conflict of Interest and Secrecy AB 266 became law in January 2012. The law added Section 939.22(a) to the California Penal Code. County Counsel has interpreted this law, and applied the new law to him to represent the officials and employees of the County as to County civil matters brought before the Grand Jury, and to be present at all interviews of County employees that are to be interviewed under oath. County Counsel has attempted to attend one interview and directed, on three occasions, a Deputy County Counsel to represent County employees who have been called to give testimony in Gran...

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

This recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted and not reasonable and because the County Counsel has not made inaccurate, incomplete, and misleading statements. Respondent disagrees with the Grand Jury's statement that the Office of County Counsel's (County Counsel) shall not represent County employees in matters before the Grand Jury. Respondent takes particular issue with the Grand Jury's legally unsupportable position that the County Counsel should ignore his statutory and ethical duties by not representing county employees as his clients and by not "protecting Coun...

Response: Disagree Score: -1

: Transparency and Accountability County Counsel has advised department heads, on or about January 21, 2015, to delay release of information to the Grand Jury, which is a violation of the California Public Records Act (Gov. Code §§6250-6276.48)(PRA). County Counsel's actions obscure the transparency and accountability throughout the County. As the Court in Monroe v. Garrett (1971) 17 Cal.App.3d 280, 284 [94Cal.Rprt.531] observed: In our system of government, a grand jury is the only agency free from possible political Or official bias that has an opportunity to see the picture of crime and th...

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

This recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted and not reasonable. The Respondent disagrees with this recommendation to the extent that it implies that the Grand Jury is entitled to "all documents". It is clear that the Grand Jury is entitled to all public documents that would be accessible by any other member of the public. The Grand Jury will continue to have access to the public records and information to which it is entitled pursuant to Penal Code Section 921 and interpreting case law. FINDING NO. 3: Inaccurate, Incomplete and Misleading Statements The 2012-2013...

Response: Disagree Score: -1

: Inaccurate, Incomplete and Misleading Statements The 2012-2013 Riverside County Grand Jury Report, which reflected the time period when the present County Counsel was then City Attorney for the City of Riverside, indicated the reason he revealed confidential information, was "to make them aware of what the Grand Jury was doing." On May 20, 2013, he was admonished in writing by County Counsel. (See Attachment #1) In a letter or reply dated May 21, 2013, from Riverside City Attorney, to the County of Riverside County Counsel (see Attachment #3), he excused his actions with the following state...

County Counsel shall refrain from making inaccurate, incomplete, and misleading statements. Obstruction of the Grand Jury

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

This recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted and not reasonable and because the County Counsel has not made inaccurate, incomplete, and misleading statements. Merely because the grand jury may disagree with statements made by the county counsel does not render those statements "inaccurate, incomplete, and misleading". Unfortunately, this erroneous perception by the grand jury is driven in large part by their lack of understanding of the County Counsel's role in County government and a lack of understanding of their own duties and powers enumerated in the Penal Code. ...

Response: Disagree Score: -1

: Obstruction ofthe Grand Jury The Grand Jury has a twelve-month period to complete its work. Delay can effectively foreclose Grand Jury scrutiny, and a strategy of delay is apparent in the conflict of interest with County Counsel who is a legal representative of both Grand Jury and the agencies it seeks to examine. County Counsel has made numerous attempts to thwart the Grand Jury's investigations of departments ofthe County. This obstruction included attempts to block access to information, delaying the Grand Jury's hearings, by requiring subpoenas, making access to witnesses and records di...

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

: Obstruction of the Grand Jury County Counsel shall discontinue interference with the work of the Grand Jury. County Counsel shall be available to the Grand Jury to provide advice, at all times, as to civil matters as stipulated in California Penal Code §934(a). Response: This recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted and not reasonable and because it is based on an erroneous understanding of the law. As stated above, Penal Code Section 934(a) does not place a mandatory duty on the County Counsel to provide legal advice to the Grand Jury. Rather, the legislature adop...

Response: Disagree Score: -1

: Choice of Having Counsel California Penal Code §939.22(a) permits a witness giving testimony under oath to have counsel present during a Grand Jury interview. It allows the witness to make the determination whether or not to have counsel present. It is not the determination of County Counsel. It is inappropriate for County Counsel or a Deputy County Counsel to represent the witness who is a County employee, when the Grand Jury is investigating a County department because; it violates the secrecy and confidentiality of the Grand Jury sessions. County Counsel has advised County departments an...

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

This recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted and not reasonable and because it is unsupported by the facts and the law. The Grand Jury is mistaken that a witness must select representation from the County Counsel's office when appearing before the Grand Jury. Any witness may elect, at their own expense, to retain their own separate counsel to represent them before the Grand Jury. The County Counsel offers representation, at no cost to County employees, as part of the County Counsel's representation of the County and its employees acting in the course and scope of the...

The BOS established Policy C-35 and implemented it on September 1,

Response: Disagree Score: -1

: Violation of Board Policy C-35 The BOS established Policy C-35 and implemented it on September 1, 2009. This policy addresses the Subject: Standards of Ethical Conduct to Address Fraud, Waste, and Abuse. This policy applies to all County employees and officers. Section 7 of Policy C-35 addresses: Acknowledgement in writing of this policy by all current and future employees as evidence of receipt. Whereas this policy in Section 4 I, states that county employees have a duty to identify report and work to eliminate fraud, waste and abuse. ' ' Section 4 m, highlights the duty of every employee...

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

: Violation of Board Policy C-35 In order to maintain the provisions of anonymity of Policy C-35, County Counsel shall not ask, or direct, County employees to notify him of their contact with the Grand Jury. County Counsel shall complete appropriate training courses relevant to California Penal Codes and Government Codes governing the California Grand Juries. (This continuing education may assist County Counsel in understanding that the Civil Grand Jury is an independent and autonomous body beholden to no one.) Response: This recommendation will not be implemented as it is not warranted and n...

Response: Disagree Score: -1

: Riverside County Executive Office In an email dated December 4, 2014, County Counsel, at the direction of the Executive Office, issued a directive requesting departments of the County to advise the County Counsel regarding inquiries made by the Grand Jury. County Counsel has been directed "to establish a consistent and coordinated approach to handle these inquiries, and respond to requests for information." This is a concerted effort to breach the confidentiality of Grand Jury proceedings. (See Attachment #2) Response: County Counsel wholly disagrees with this finding. The Grand Jury again...

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

This recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted and not reasonable. The Grand Jury cannot invade the relationship between the County Executive Officer and his subordinate employees, nor can they invade the attorney-client relationship between the County Counsel and his clients. The County Executive has the great responsibility of managing all County employees. To suggest that he is prohibited from overseeing requests from the Grand Jury is without legal basis. Further, the Grand Jury is incapable of invading the attorney-client privilege in any way. To suggest that they...

Response: Disagree Score: -1

: Violation of Code of Ethics County Counsel has a history of bias and contempt against the Grand Jury, as evidenced in a 2012-2013 Grand Jury Report, City of Riverside, Office of the City Attorney. The report detailed issues with the Office ofthe City of Riverside City Attorney, the position he occupied at the time. Hence, County Counsel has continuously interfered with the legal duties of the Grand Jury, and has violated the provisions of the Business and Professions Code pertaining to lawyers, Section 6068. This report has precipitated County Counsel to disrespectfully neutralize the Grand...

County Counsel shall adhere to the tenets of the Business and Professions Code §6068. Failure to Provide Upjohn Warning

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted and not reasonable and is erroneous and unsupported by facts to the extent that it implies that there has been any past violation of Business and Professions Code section 6068. As indicated above, the County Counsel will continue to represent its clients with this highest standard of professionalism and ethics in accordance with Business and Professions Code 6068 and all other applicable rules and laws governing the representation of clients. FINDING NO. 9: Failure to Provide Upjohn Warning The scope of attorney-client p...

Response: Disagree Score: -1

: Failure to Provide Upjohn Warning The scope of attorney-client privilege in a corporate context was defined by the United States Supreme Court in Upjohn Co. v. United States, lOIS. Ct. 677, 449 U.S. 383 (1981). Since Upjohn, courts and commentators have discussed an Upjohn or Corporate Miranda warning. The need for such warnings stems from the fact that Corporate Counsel's client is the corporation and not the employees, officers, or directors of the corporation. If an Upjohn warning has not been given, an employee may believe that he or she is represented by Corporate Counsel. Thus the att...

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted and not reasonable. If and when a conflict was to arise between clients, the County Counsel will handle the situation properly, according to all applicable laws and rules governing the practice of law. -FINDING NO. 10: Superior Court Case In Riverside Superior Court Case #RICMISC20151 the 2014-2015, Riverside County Grand Jury raised the issue of a potential conflict between County Counsel and County employees they may be representing. The Riverside Superior Court Judge stated: To the extent that that [sic] conflict exists...

R10

Response: Will Not Implement

Score: -1

District Attorney to 2014-2015 Grand Jury Report Riverside County District Attorney's Office

July 15, 2015 • 3 pages View Details ▾

PDF