📋
Extraído del Informe Consolidado
Esta investigación fue publicada originalmente como parte de un informe consolidado más amplio que contiene múltiples investigaciones. Consulte el PDF consolidado para ver el documento completo.
⚠️ Aviso de traducción: Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Recommendations 5
-
R1Page 20The Grand Jury understands the City of Stockton’s projected budget deficit. However, when funds become available, a high priority should be given to the restoration of police officer positions.
-
R2Page 20Develop a committee of elected officials and community leaders to participate with the City Manager and facilitate the recruitment and retention of a new Police Chief.
-
R3Page 20Develop a comprehensive plan for relocating the 911/Dispatch Center to a more suitable site.
-
R4Page 20Review existing emergency contingency plans for the 911/Dispatch Center and revise them as necessary.
-
R5Page 20Re-institute the Street Camera Monitoring, previously manned by retired officers, by utilizing the Volunteers in Police Service (VIPS). RESPONSE REQUIRED Pursuant to Section 933.05 of the California Penal Code: The Stockton City Council shall report to the Presiding Judge of the San Joaquin County Superior Court, in writing and of publication of this report, with a response as follows: As to each finding in the report a response indicating one of the following: a. The respondent agrees with the finding. b. The respondent disagrees with the finding, with an explanation of the reasons therefore. As to each recommendation, a response indicating one of the following: a. The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary of the action taken. b. The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be with a time frame for implementation. c. The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation of the scope of analysis and a time frame not to exceed six (6) months. d. The recommendation will not be implemented, with an explanation therefore. 4