📋
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 • 2016-2017

Board of Supervisors Needs to Take Grand Jury Seriously

Published: June 12, 2017 5 pages
View PDF View Full Original

Findings 7 findings

F1
The Grand Jury finds that the Board of Supervisors, in assuming the oversight role of a County Administrative Officer, is ultimately responsible for the Probation Department’s success or failure.
F2
The Grand Jury finds that Plumas County currently does not have a formal review policy for newly hired Department Heads.
F3
The Grand Jury finds that court reports that have significant deficiencies will negatively impact the judicial system.
F4
The Grand Jury finds that the Drug Court is a critical part of the Plumas County Judicial system.
F5
The Grand Jury finds that having a BOS member on the PCCCP would provide help to resolve differences.
F6
The Grand Jury finds that the current status of the Daily Reporting Center and Alternative Sentencing Program within the District Attorney’s office is working.
F7
The Grand Jury finds that there have been five Probation Chiefs over a six-year period which has contributed to the disruption of the Judicial system.

Recommendations 6