📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report
This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.
Plumas County Grand Jury
• 2003-2004
Probation Department Function Under the general direction of the Judge of the Superior Court, the Probation Department
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings 8 findings
F1
Page 23
One probation officer is now assigned to students on probation who are enrolled at PCCS. This officer follows prescribed procedures by signing the visitation log and notifies teachers if students on probation are to be removed from the classroom. This has improved communications between the Probation Department and PCCS.
F2
Page 23
The Probation Department does not have a separate juvenile division.
F3
Page 23
The Probation Department is in need of expanded office space for personnel and equipment. Lack of space has caused overcrowding conditions and lower staff morale. Currently, there is inadequate office space for fourteen employees.
F4
Page 23
Two hundred hours of training are required for newly employed probation officers. The Chief Probation Officer indicated the department experiences high turnover. Many officers leave for higher paying positions in other counties once, they reach the two hundred hour mark. The average retention duration for entry- level probation officers is eighteen months. Current annual compensation levels are: entry level - $29,448; I year - $31,200; 4-5 years - $34,800.
F5
Page 23
Funding for the Probation Department is provided from the County general fund (55%), six separate grants (22%), State and federal sources (20%) and fees charged to probationers (3%).
F6
Page 23
At the time of the Grand Jury interview, the Chief Probation Officer had not received a performance evaluation for eleven years.
F7
Page 26
Complaints by PCCS teachers to the Sheriff's Office were not investigated in a timely manner.
F8
Page 26
There is no juvenile officer assigned by the Sheriff's Department to the PCCS.
Recommendations 11
-
R1Page 36"1. The Board of Supervisors should set forth protocol to better evaluate performance of the Building official (and other department heads). The protocol should include input from employees within the department as well as those individuals or agencies served by the department."
-
R2Page 35"2. That residents living outside of a fire district consider annexation to an adjacent district to improve their fire protections." BOS Response No response
-
R3Page 35"3. That Fire Districts pursue available grants to assist with their needs. The County Fire Warden, working with the Fire Officers' Association, could assist with this effort. The Vision 2020 program may be able to provide assistance with grants in the near future." BOS Response No response.
-
R4Page 35"4. That the County Fire Warden, in collaboration with the Fire Officers' Association, coordinates implementation of countywide standardized training and safety programs. Additional funding through the County Fire Warden's office should assist in these endeavors. Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 Title HI funding, in addition to other grants, could be utilized." BOS Response No response.
-
R5Page 36"5. That the Board of Supervisors clarify the County Fire Warden's job description in regard to countywide enforcement of all laws and ordinances, rules and regulations relating to fires or to fire prevention and protection, as addressed in Government Code Section 24008." BOS Response "Response: The recommendation will be implemented by March, 2003, or shortly thereafter in the CAO's discretion."
-
R6Page 36"6. That all Fire Chiefs, or their representatives, participate in the Plumas County Fire Officers' Association." BOS Response No response 2001-2002 Plumas County Purchasing Procedure
-
R7Page 23At least two to three times during the school year, a general meeting of the School District, Probation Department, Sheriff's Department and PCCS staff should be held to discuss current and emerging issues. COMPLAINT #03/04-03 Nature of Comi3laint A citizen submitted a complaint against the Sheriff s Department and the District Attorney alleging, among other charges, improper use of the California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System ("CLETS") program in the District Attorney's Office by a County employee. Response The Complainant was advised that this complaint was not within the jurisdiction of the Grand Jury and that his complaint and related documentation was forwarded to the California State Attorney General's Office. Complainant was further advised to pursue his complaint with the California Attorney General and to consider consulting with the current County Sheriff. COMPLAINT #03/04-04 Nature of Complaint A citizen requested the Grand Jury investigate the Grizzly Lake Resort Improvement District (GLRID) in regard to its management in the Crocker Mountain area. Complaints were as follows: • The GLRID refuses to serve (provide water) to the entire Crocker Mountain Subdivision • GLRID does not have maps available of the water and sewer system pipes on Crocker Mountain • GLRID does not post minutes of its board meetings and they do not have a Public Comment period on their agenda • No citizen of the Crocker Mountain area serves on the board of the GLRID
-
R95-96Central Plumas Recreation District
-
R97-98Mental Health 95-96, 99-00
-
R98-99Page 39Fire X X Ag. Commissioner Engineering Environmental Health Housing and Community Development Local Agency Formation Commission Planning X Public Works 95-96, 97-98, X
-
R99-00X Treasurer/Tax Collector