Calaveras County

Recommendations 7

• R1

  Page 16
  Utilize volunteers in office operations when available. RESPONSE REQUESTED: Animal Control Services
• R2

  Page 16
  An additional office technician is needed. RESPONSE REQUESTED: Board of Supervisors Animal Control Services
• R3
  All new contracts should include a contract provision requiring contractors to cooperate during Grand Jury civil investigations regarding public services that the County is legally obligated to provide to the public, ensuring there are no delays or resorting to subpoenas. RESPONSE REQUESTED: Board of Supervisors County Counsel's Office County Administrative Office 27 28 VALLECITO CONSERVATION CAMP #1 29 30 VALLECITO CONSERVATION CAMP #1 REASON FOR INVESTIGATION In accordance with Penal Code Section 919(b), the Grand Jury shall inquire into the condition and management of public prisons within the county. SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION The scope of the investigation focused on daily operations, staffing, condition of the facility, and the safety and security of staff and inmates; it also considered how AB109 has effected the camp and its involvement in the Butte fire. BACKGROUND Vallecito Conservation Camp #1 (VCC) was opened in 1958. The camp is jointly operated by the Sierra Conservation Center (SCC) facility of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) and the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CALFIRE). The inmate crews provide a needed resource of trained crews primarily for firefighting in the counties of Calaveras and Toulumne and, when necessary, throughout the state of California. The crews also complete conservation and community service projects throughout the Sierra. PROCEDURE On March 17, 2016, the Grand Jury conducted a scheduled inspection and discussed operations with the Camp Commander and a CALFIRE Captain. INVESTIGATION During a tour of the camp, areas visited were the kitchen, cafeteria (dining hall), dormitory, TV rooms, library, visiting area, barber shop, laundry, hobby shop, mechanics shop, woodworking shop, and the inventory warehouse. CDCR staff at the facility consists of nine correctional officers, one Sergeant and one Lieutenant (Camp Commander). The inmates that are selected for the conservation camp go through a two week physical training program. If they pass the physical training, inmates then attend two additional weeks of CALFIRE training at the Sierra Conservation Center. The inmates are assigned to one of five fire teams or the support team which is responsible for daily operations and maintenance of the camp. About 1% of inmates find work related to firefighting once released from the VCC. The non-secure detention facility currently houses 84 low risk adult males. A brief demonstration of a fire drill was done for the Grand Jury during their tour. Two inmates are assigned to each of the six fire boxes located across the facility and serve as a first response to in-camp fires. VCC maintains and operates a Food Dispenser Unit (FDU) for active firefighting crews, which is capable of carrying hundreds of meals. The kitchen at Vallecito prepares the meals locally and utilizes the FDU to ship the meals to wherever they are needed. The FDU is managed by a CALFIRE captain and two inmates while on site. The facility provides fire hose pressure testing and repair which is utilized by CALFIRE and other fire departments. The facility is also responsible for mending and repairing firefighting garb for the VCC. The Fire Camp crews comprised fifteen percent of the firefighting teams that fought the Butte Fire. The Vallecitto Fire Camp arrived on the fire line on day one and was there until the fire was fully contained. A General Equivalency Diploma (GED) program is available. Some inmates were in the process of taking this exam at the time of the tour. AB109 has had the effect of reducing the VCC prison population and high risk prisoners have not been used to fill the short fall in fire crews. Present prison population of eighty-four has resulted in vacancies in staffing of fire crews, for example two crews have dropped from fifteen to nine inmates. RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION FINDING 1: The Grand Jury found the overall condition of VCC to be well maintained. Everything was clean and orderly with grounds and buildings well maintained. RECOMMENDATION: None RESPONSE REQUESTED: None FINDING 2: Areas that need improvement are the entertainment and library rooms which contained some damaged furniture. RECOMMENDATION: Improve condition of the entertainment/library rooms by providing furniture that is both functional and durable. RESPONSE REQUESTED: Vallecito Conservation Camp FINDING 3: Communication between the staff and the inmates is direct and clear. RECOMMENDATION: None RESPONSE REQUESTED: None 32 FINDING 4: Fire drills are conducted monthly and emergency procedures are clearly posted. RECOMMENDATION: None RESPONSE REQUESTED: None FINDING 5: The facility provides fire hose pressure testing and repair. RECOMMENDATION: None RESPONSE REQUESTED: None FINDING 6: Fire Camp crews comprised fifteen percent of the firefighting teams that fought the Butte Fire. RECOMMENDATION: None RESPONSE REQUESTED: None FINDING 7: A GED program is available to inmates.
• R4
  None RESPONSE REQUESTED: None 33 FINDING 8: AB109 has reduced the VCC prison population which has resulted in vacancies in inmate crews; for example two crews dropped from fifteen to nine inmates.
• R5
  VCC should consider reducing the number of fire crews in order to maintain fully manned crews. RESPONSE REQUESTED: Vallecito Conservation Camp 34 CALAVERAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE COMPLAINT PROCESS 35 36 CALAVERAS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE COMPLAINT PROCESS REASON FOR INVESTIGATION The Grand Jury received several complaints that generated a discussion regarding the Calaveras County Sheriff's Office (CCSO) complaint process. The focus of the discussion was on the process of how the CCSO handles all citizen complaints; not the complaints themselves. BACKGROUND The CCSO's complaint process is outlined in their Policy and Procedure Manual Section 1020. The policy provides guidelines for reporting, investigating and disposition of complaints regarding the conduct of members and employees of the department. The Policy and Procedure Manual gets updated approximately every six months, therefore, the Grand Jury reviewed both current and prior copies of the manual. Section 1020.3 of the current Policy and Procedure Manual states in part: "Personnel complaints include any allegation of misconduct or improper job performance that, if true, would constitute a violation of department policy or of federal, state or local law, policy or rule. Personnel complaints may be generated internally or by the public. Inquiries about conduct or performance that, if true, would not violate department policy or federal, state or local law, policy or rule may be handled informally by a supervisor and shall not be considered a personnel complaint. Such inquiries generally include clarification regarding policy, procedures or the response to specific incidents by the Department. 1020.3.1 Complaint Classifications Personnel complaints shall be classified in one of the following categories: Informal - A matter in which the Duty Sergeant is satisfied that appropriate action has been taken by a supervisor of rank greater than the accused member. Formal - A matter in which a supervisor determines that further action is warranted. Such complaints may be investigated by a supervisor of rank greater than the accused member or referred to the Divisional Internal Affairs, depending on the seriousness and complexity of the investigation. 1020.3.2 Sources of Complaints The following applies to the source of complaints: (a) Individuals from the public may make complaints in any form, including in writing, by email, in person or by telephone. (b) Any department member becoming aware of alleged misconduct shall immediately notify a supervisor. 37 (c) Supervisors shall initiate a complaint based upon observed misconduct or receipt from any source alleging misconduct that, if true, could result in disciplinary action. (d) Anonymous and third-party complaints should be accepted and investigated to the extent that sufficient information is provided. (e) Tort claims and lawsuits may generate a personnel complaint." California Penal Code 832.5(a) states: “Each department or agency in this state that employs peace officers shall establish a procedure to investigate complaints by members of the public against the personnel of these departments or agencies, and shall make a written description of the procedure available to the public." California Penal Code 832.7(a) states: "Peace officer or custodial officer personnel records and records maintained by any state or local agency pursuant to section 832.5, or information obtained from these records, are confidential and shall not be disclosed in any criminal or civil proceeding except by discovery pursuant to Sections 1043 and 1046 of the Evidence Code. This section shall not apply to investigations or proceedings concerning the conduct of peace officers or custodial officers, or an agency or department that employs those officers, conducted by a Grand Jury, a District Attorney's office, or the Attorney General's office." OPINION of Attorney General Daniel E Lungren, No.96-307 says in part: "Conclusion: 1. When a grand jury is conducting a civil "watchdog" investigation of a local police agency, it has the right to examine peace officer personnel records, including citizens' complaints, or information compiled from such records, without first obtaining issuance of a subpoena or court order." California Department of Justice Information Bulletin: Citizens' Complaints Against Peace Officers effective January 1, 2016 states: "All LEAs (law enforcement agencies) should have a clearly delineated procedure to investigate complaints and that procedure should be publicly available on their website." PROCEDURE The Grand Jury interviewed various personnel, reviewed documents and visited websites. PERSONS INTERVIEWED The Grand Jury interviewed several personnel from the CCSO. DOCUMENTS AND WEBSITES REVIEWED CCSO Complaints dated from March 2014 – December 2015 CCSO Policy and Procedure Manual (several generations) 38 A copy of an Internal Affairs Investigation (selected by CCSO) Citizen Complaint Form (formal and informal) Internal Affairs Log CCSO website: www.sheriff.co.calaveras.ca.us California Department of Justice website: [email protected] California Department of Justice Information Bulletin: Citizens' Complaints Against Peace Officers effective January 1, 2016 OPINION of Attorney General Daniel E Lungren, No.96-307 California Penal Codes (PC): 832.5, 832.7 INVESTIGATION The Grand Jury found one case which, due to the nature of the complaint, should have resulted in documentation of a complaint received along with an internal affairs investigation. In this case, the Grand Jury was informed that a formal investigation was not initiated because CCSO determined they had enough information from the arrest report and no further action was needed. This decision was not in line with policy and procedure. Selectively deciding not to document a complaint or conduct an internal affairs investigation is contrary to current policy and procedure. The Grand Jury requested a current copy of the CCSO Policy and Procedure Manual, but was provided a copy that was marked "DRAFT". A second request was made for a current copy, but an outdated copy was received. It was not until a third request was made that a current copy was finally provided. The Department files a required annual report on Citizens' Complaints Against Peace Officers (CCAPO). This report contains information obtained from the Internal Affairs Investigation Log, which is the only log maintained by CCSO for complaints. This report is submitted to the State Attorney General's (AG) office. During the interview process, the Grand Jury found that not all complaints were documented, because known complaints were not found in the Internal Affairs Investigation Log. Therefore, the annual report for 2015 sent to the AG office was incomplete and inaccurate in accordance with PC 13012. During the review of the complaint process, the Grand Jury was met with a lack of cooperation whether intentional or unintentional, which delayed our investigatory process significantly. This conclusion was based in part due to the following: On multiple occasions the Grand Jury requested all the complaints for the last twelve ٠ months. After the CCSO provided copies of the complaints and stated that all were included, other complaints surfaced. After requesting a current copy of the Policy and Procedure Manual, the Grand Jury • was given different copies of manuals that were either marked as "DRAFT" or outdated. During the interview process the Grand Jury was provided with different responses to ٠ the same question regarding the complaint process. An interviewee stated during a second interview before the Grand Jury that when a violation of policy and procedure was discovered, a formal complaint was not filed. In addition, the interviewee indicated this may not have been an isolated incident. As part of the investigation, the Grand Jury reviewed the CCSO website. The website was difficult to navigate while searching for the complaint form and/or process. There are numerous ways of reaching the location of the complaint process, which contains two links, one for the complaint form and the other is for the Sheriff's Policy Manual Personnel Complaints. As of the writing of this report, on 5/4/2016, the website has only a "DRAFT" copy rather than the current adopted complaint policy displayed. RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION FINDING 1: After multiple interviews with several CCSO personnel, the Grand Jury found inconsistencies in the interpretation of the complaint process. RECOMMENDATION 1: Develop clear language and standards for the implementation of policies and procedures so there is no room for misinterpretation by CCSO personnel when reviewing and confirming their understanding of the new policies. Additionally, such standards should include a set deadline for review. RESPONSE REQUESTED: Calaveras County Sheriff's Office RECOMMENDATION 2: Future Grand Juries annually review CCSO procedures regarding complaints. RESPONSE REQUESTED: None 40 FINDING 2: There is no log in place to track formal or informal complaints (written or verbal) unless they become an Internal Affairs investigation. RECOMMENDATION: CCSO should create a log and follow their Policy and Procedure Manual Section 1020.5 which states: "All complaints and inquiries should also be documented in a log that records and tracks complaints. The log shall include the nature of the complaint and the actions taken to address the complaint. On an annual basis, the department should audit the log and send an audit report to the sheriff or the authorized designee." RESPONSE REQUESTED: Calaveras County Sheriff's Office FINDING 3: The Grand Jury finds that not all complaints were documented properly. RECOMMENDATION 1: Establish a central log to ensure all citizens' complaints, whether verbal, written or otherwise, are tracked and completed according to policy and procedure. RESPONSE REQUESTED: Calaveras County Sheriff's Office RECOMMENDATION 2: The process for any and all complaints must be initiated as soon as an employee becomes aware of a complaint or violation of policy or procedure involving a peace officer in accordance with Section 1020.3.2(b) (c). RESPONSE REQUESTED: Calaveras County Sheriff's Office FINDING 4: There are clear differences in wording and inconsistencies in the complaint process procedure among the copies of the CCSO Policy and Procedure Manual. RECOMMENDATION: All CCSO staff should have the current adopted Policy & Procedure Manual readily available. It should be the only material used or referenced. Draft copies should never be in circulation. RESPONSE REQUESTED: Calaveras County Sheriff's Office 41 FINDING 5: During the review of the complaint process, the Grand Jury was met with a lack of cooperation whether intentional or unintentional, which delayed our investigatory process significantly. RECOMMENDATION: The CCSO should be more forthcoming in furnishing requested documents and information to the Grand Jury in a timely manner in accordance with PC 832.7. RESPONSE REQUESTED: Calaveras County Sheriff's Office FINDING 6: On at least one occasion the CCSO failed to document a complaint and failed to do an internal affairs investigation. Selectively deciding when to not document a complaint or conduct an internal affairs investigation is contrary to current policy and procedure. RECOMMENDATION: The CCSO should follow their written policy and procedure, Section 1020.3.2 (b) (c), when handling citizen complaints and conduct an internal affairs investigation when warranted. RESPONSE REQUESTED: Calaveras County Sheriff's Office FINDING 7: The complaint form and process is difficult to find on the CCSO website. RECOMMENDATION: Make the website www.sheriff.co.calaveras.ca.us user friendly for all citizens with a clear link to the complaint form on the home page. RESPONSE REQUESTED: Calaveras County Sheriff's Office FINDING 8: The "DRAFT" rather than the adopted complaint policy is on the website.
• R6
  Ensure that the CCSO website contains the current adopted policy and procedure for complaints. RESPONSE REQUESTED: Calaveras County Sheriff's Office 42 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT – WASTE MANAGEMENT 43 44 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT – WASTE MANAGEMENT REASON FOR INVESTIGATION The Grand Jury obtained information indicating that the County is failing to meet mandated recycling levels for solid and yard waste as required by the State of California. The investigation also included the temporary closure of the Red Hill Green Waste Facility, leaving the only County yard waste dump site at Rock Creek in Milton. PROCEDURE The Grand Jury interviewed personnel from the Public Works Department. The Grand Jury reviewed the following documents: • County Ordinance No. 2510 – Fee Schedule and Exemptions for Solid Waste System - Dated 5/19/1997 Resolution 09-149 – Changes to County Fees per Schedule A dated 10/1/2009 • Public Works Organization Chart FY 2015/16 • FY 2015/16 Budget – All Public Works departments • Calaveras County Local Implementation Plan (LIP) 2015, 2nd Quarter Report • BACKGROUND Public Works is responsible for design and maintenance of all county roads and bridges, operation of county landfill, transfer stations, recycling operations and public transit. This investigation was limited to the county landfill, transfer stations and recycling operations. The State mandates a percentage of waste to be recycled. The current schedule required at least fifty- percent by 2004 and to be at least seventy-five percent by 2018. Fines up to $10,000 a day can be assessed for not meeting this requirement. INVESTIGATION The review of the Local Implementation Plan (LIP) which covered all of 2014 through the second quarter of 2015 found improvements from period to period in meeting the mandated recycling requirements as outlined by the State of California. As of 2014 the mandated standard had not been met. Fines were not assessed for the period of shortfall in meeting this requirement. The closure of the Red Hill Green Waste Facility was due to the lack of water for a fire suppression system. The lack of available water is due to leakage from an existing Redwood storage tank and no operational well at this site. The site had been closed, cleared of equipment and green waste removed prior to the Grand Jury's tour of the facility on October 22, 2015. Public Works personnel stated a new 3000 gallon water storage tank had been added to the site. The current redwood tank can still supply an additional 3000 gallons of water despite its deteriorating condition which prevents storage at its rated capacity. This provided the minimum amount of water for a fire suppression system during the winter/wet months that allowed the re- opening of Red Hill Green Waste Facility by late November/early December of 2015. Public works staff indicated the existing well is to be functional during the summer of 2016. With the 45 improvements and upgraded water source/storage the Red Hill facility could remain operational during the summer/dry period for green waste recycling. The Red Hill green waste facility was re-opened December 11, 2015 and was found to be operational when re-inspected by the Grand Jury. RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION FINDING 1: The County has met and exceeded the mandated requirement for recyclable waste. RECOMMEDATION: None FINDING 2: An additional 30,000 gallons of water storage is planned to be added and a facility design change completed. The existing well will be operational by the summer of 2016 to provide an additional water source. RECOMMEDATION: Public Works must meet all commitments as shown above. RESPONSE REQUESTED: Public Works 46 Responses to the 2014-2015 Grand Jury Report 47 RESPONSES TO THE 2014 - 2015 GRAND JURY REPORT The Grand Jury releases its final report at the end of its term. Most, if not all, of the responses are received after the new Grand Jury has been seated and these responses become its responsibility. Unlike many counties, the Calaveras County Grand Jury have holdovers who return to assist the new Jury in the way the Grand Jury conducts business and aid in the analysis of the responses. To assure continuity, it is important to carefully track and evaluate responses. Responses are tracked to inform the public, ensure follow up, promote solutions, and reduce the number of unresponsive answers. Public scrutiny of the responses can improve the impact of the Grand Jury's reports and recommendations as well as increase the credibility of the elected officials and department heads whose areas were investigated. The new Grand Jury reviews the findings and recommendations of the prior year's Jury and the ensuing responses. When necessary, these responses are discussed with the appropriate standing committees for follow-up comments. If it is determined that more information is needed, Jury members may meet with the respondents to discuss specific responses. The Grand Jury refers to the California Penal Code (CPC) for follow up, summarization, and analysis of the responses from the responding officials and departments. Pursuant to CPC §933 and §933.05 there are time limits for responses and each Finding and Recommendation may either require or request a response from the party addressed. Specifically worded responses are limited by the CPC. Responses may include additional information to clarify a specific response. RESPONSE TIME LIMITS CPC §933 (c) ....No later than 90 days after the Grand Jury submits a final report on the operations of any public agency subject to its reviewing authority, the governing body of the public agency shall comment to the presiding judge of the superior court on the findings and every elected county officer or agency head for which the grand jury has responsibility pursuant to §914.1 shall comment to the presiding judge of the superior court, with an Information copy sent to the board of supervisors, on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of that county officer or agency head and any agency or agencies which that officer or agency head supervises or controls. In any city and county the mayor shall also comment on the findings and recommendations. All of these comments and reports shall forthwith be submitted to the presiding judge of the superior court who impaneled the grand jury. A copy of all responses to grand jury reports shall be placed on file with the clerk of the public agency and the office of the county clerk, or the mayor when applicable, and shall remain on file with the applicable grand jury final report by, and in the control of the currently impaneled grand jury, where it shall be maintained for a minimum of five years." 48 Superior Court of California Grant V. Barrett Presiding Judge County of Calaveras Timothy S. Healy 400 Government Center Drive Asst. Presiding Judge San Andreas, CA 95249 (209) 754-9800 Voice (209) 754-6296 Fax Dan Vrtis www.calaveras.courts.ca.gov Court Executive Officer David M. Sanders Commissioner September 25, 2015 California State Archive 1020 "O" Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Calaveras County Clerk (via inter-office mail) Calaveras County Grand Jury - (via inter-office mail) Pursuant to Penal Code 933(b) we are forwarding a copy of the 2014-2015 Grand Jury Report along with a copy of the responses received. Responses were received from the following departments: Calaveras LAFCO Calaveras County Board of Supervisors Calaveras County Water District Calaveras Public Utility District Calaveras County Office of the Sheriff Calaveras County Office of the Sheriff County of Calaveras County Administration Union Public Utility District Calaveras Humane Society Focas Respectfully submitted, Gnale Pamela James Deputy Clerk Judicial Administration 10 . CALAVERAS LAFCO SEP 2 5 2015 September 16, 2015 Clerk of the Court Superior Court of California The Honorable Grant Barrett County of Calavaras Deputy Calaveras County Superior Court 891 Mountain Ranch Road San Andreas, CA 95249 SUBJECT: LAFCO response to the 2014-2015 Grand Jury Report Dear Judge Barrett, Thank you for your review of the impact of the Drought on Water Service to Copperopolis. Below is the Finding 2/Recommendation and the LAFCO Commission response with respect to the items identified on pages 47 and 48 final 2014-2015 Grand Jury report. Finding 2: "There are multiple players at the Lake Tullock decision making table: TRI_DAM (Oakdale Irrigation District, South San Joaquin Irrigation District), Bureau of Reclamation, CCWD, California Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, Army Corps of Engineers, Federal [Energy] Regulatory Commission, and the US Fish and Wildlife Service. Local government has no authority over these agencies involved, it is difficult to resolve problems quickly. Two Board of Supervisor members serve on the Calaveras Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo). LAFCo is mandated by the state to review the agencies providing water and wastewater services in the county. This is an additional means for county government to stay abreast of water issues and concerns. In the past, Calaveras County water agencies held collaborative discussions on water resources, equipment and infrastructure via a technical advisory team, but the effort disintegrated (LAFCo Municipal Service Review)"
• R7
  "The Grand Jury recommends LAFCo and the two Board of Supervisor members on the LAFCo board, reconstruct the technical advisory team to promote cooperation and collaboration focused on issues facing Calaveras County now and in the future. It is also a mechanism for members of County Government to be kept apprised of water issues facing the County." Calaveras LAFCO 1 2014-2015 Grand Jury Report Response September 16, 2015 50