📋
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.
⚠️ 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 7 findings
F1
Page 94
Although Skyline Academy was scheduled to open at the end of 2023, the Jury’s investigation detected limited organized effort toward the opening, no urgency, and minimal forward progress. The Chief Probation Officer disagrees with the finding. Contrary to this finding, the Skyline Academy opened as a pilot program in Juvenile Hall in January 2024 and has since served seven in-custody youth with enhanced evidence-based programming, prosocial activities, and targeted interventions addressing criminogenic needs. This initiative required a substantial coordinated effort among multiple agencies, community partners, and stakeholders, all working towards a common goal. The project's success necessitated extensive infrastructure work, including approvals, funding allocations, and conceptual designs. Construction in a detention facility demands multiple levels of legal compliance and design review, which naturally take time to work through county and state processes. The preparatory phase involved significant data mining, financial and resource reviews, and reallocation of staffing resources, alongside efforts to recruit for hard-to-fill positions. Recognizing that the heart of every successful program lies in its people, the project emphasized staff involvement. Experts in their respective fields were given the opportunity to contribute through a committee-based approach, ensuring buy-in and long-term sustainability. The pilot program aimed to keep youth local, focusing on their rehabilitative goals, and provided staff and providers the chance to engage with the youth prior to the formal program launch. This approach allowed the youth to have a voice in their own rehabilitation process. The pilot program has been serving seven Napa County youth who would have otherwise been transferred outside of the county, away from their families. The pilot program underscores the commitment to building a culture of support, safety, rehabilitation, and opportunity for the youth. The program continues to develop and is scheduled to formally open by the end of Summer 2024, reflecting a deep commitment to fostering a supportive and rehabilitative environment for youth in need.
F2
Page 94
Repeated requests for details on the development of Skyline Academy went unmet, leading the Jury to conclude that no formal project plan is being implemented. The Chief Probation Officer partially disagrees with the finding. All requests for information made directly from the Chief Probation Officer were provided timely, which is the expectation, and all staff will be notified via memo of this standard. The definition or expectations of a formal project plan may be interpreted differently, as the focus was on designing and developing a program that meets the individual needs of youth, creating linkages 88 | P a g e to robust community supports, engaging a variety of stakeholders, organizing construction projects, completing contracts and requests for proposals, creating new logos, increasing youth literacy and educational opportunities through new tablets for youth and career-technical education, painting murals to soften the look of the facility, seeking ways to expand opportunities for youth both inside and outside of the program, increasing mental health services, and creating programming infrastructure that is culturally relevant and in the native language of the youth and their families when possible. The development and implementation of the pilot program involved numerous stakeholders and was structured through the department’s strategic planning initiative, intentionally designed to leverage a committee structure. This collaborative approach ensured that subject matter experts within the department had the authority and ability to contribute to the design, creation, and implementation of the program, resulting in a more innovative and community-focused initiative. The pilot phase was led by a committee of staff and has allowed for valuable learning and adjustments, ensuring that the final program is well-suited to the needs of the youth and families they serve. By fostering a collaborative environment and involving various experts in leadership roles, the program aims to deliver targeted and effective interventions for youth. The formal program documents are being finalized, with full implementation scheduled by the end of Summer 2024, reflecting a steadfast dedication to building a supportive, accountable, and rehabilitative culture for youth.
F3
Page 95
The Jury found that normal operations in the Prospect wing of Juvenile Hall (which houses short-term youth) have been resumed following the suspension of Covid restrictions. The Chief Probation Officer agrees with the finding.
F4
Page 98
The Jury found that an annual golf tournament held in Napa County has consistently been allowed to not comply with the permit application rules. The County Executive Officer and Planning Building and Environmental Services Director disagree with the finding. The annual golf tournament is not considered a Temporary Event and therefore not subject to the County’s Temporary Events License Permit and related review procedures, and submittal and processing deadlines. The annual golf tournament is reviewed and authorized under a Site Plan Approval, which is governed by the Use Permit for the Resort that has been in place since 1964. The Board of Supervisors agrees with the County Executive Officer and the Planning Building and Environmental Services Director.
F5
Page 98
The Napa County permit matrix to be a complex five-page document that is confusing to the average applicant. The County Executive Officer and Planning Building and Environmental Services Director partly disagree with the finding. The permit matrix was intended to be an internal guidance document for staff to facilitate their review of building permit applications. It was not intended for public use and as such was not written in layman’s terms. As part of the goals for the Building Division for fiscal year 24/25 detailed above, Staff will be reviewing the information and content on the web site and preparing enhancements to the available documents that will provide a better understanding of the permitting process. The Board of Supervisors agrees with the County Executive Officer and Planning Building and Environmental Services Director.
F6
Page 98
The PBES is currently without a formal process for customers to provide feedback, either in person or on the website. The County Executive Officer and Planning Building and Environmental Services Director partially disagree with the finding. Staff has conducted one-on-one meetings and group discussions with industry professionals and builders regarding the permitting process this past year in order to obtain feedback regarding our online digital permitting process. This approach not only provided us feedback on the process of permitting it also gives the building staff an educational opportunity to discuss 92 | P a g e particular permitting requirements and develop productive relationships with the design and building construction community. The Building Division intends to expand upon these efforts to conduct surveys of the permitting process which will be sent out to applicants who have used the system in the past year. The Board of Supervisors agrees with the County Executive Officer and Planning Building and Environmental Services Director.
F7
Page 99
The PBES does not assign specific field inspectors for entire projects leading to potential conflicting opinions about required corrective actions. The County Executive Officer and Planning Building and Environmental Services Director partially disagree with the finding. Building inspectors are assigned to a mapped district. Every effort is made to have the same inspector conduct inspections for the same project; however, individual inspectors may be unavailable. As such, rather than delay the progress of construction, other inspectors may be called upon to provide a timely inspection. Additionally, workload in one area may be greater, so two inspectors may be needed to cover the demand for that district. With that said, the inspectors strive for consistency and are all trained on the California Building Code. With regard to inspections related to correction notices, on occasion an inspector may not be available for a follow-up inspection, and a different inspector may be assigned to conduct the inspection. The inspector will typically focus solely on the items the prior inspector noted and confirm those they have been corrected. If they see additional items that the prior inspector may have inadvertently overlooked, they are advised to honor the prior inspector's corrections unless they observe a life safety violation. The Board of Supervisors agrees with the County Executive Officer and Planning Building and Environmental Services Director.
Recommendations 9
-
R1Page 95By October 1, 2024, the Board of Supervisors direct the Napa County Probation Officer to develop and implement a detailed project plan for the Skyline Academy. The plan should formalize the project scope, be updated monthly, and provide a timeline, steps toward completion, assigned tasks, progress towards goals, available resources, and a budget. The Chief Probation Officer: This recommendation will not be implemented, because it is not warranted. The Skyline Academy is scheduled to formally open by the end of Summer 2024, making this level of detailed project planning for implementation unnecessary. The program has been in a pilot phase since January 2024. The need for this program arose, in part, from the rapid passage of Senate Bill 823, which realigned the Division of Juvenile Justice population in California from the state to the local level. This historic change required a complete redesign of how serious and violent youth were handled statewide. Napa County did not open a Secure Track Program, which is designed for youth who would have otherwise been sent to the state Division of Juvenile Justice. Napa 89 | P a g e County prioritizes the rehabilitation of youth while holding them accountable for their behaviors with the goal of rehabilitation prior to adulthood. Consequently, the County has not sent many youths to the state for care and could not sustain opening a Secure Track Program.
-
R2Page 96By October 1, 2024, the Board of Supervisors direct the Napa County Probation Officer to identify a project manager to be accountable for the timely and successful completion of Skyline Academy. The Chief Probation Officer: The recommendation has been implemented. The Napa County Probation Department recruited and hired a Chief Deputy Probation Officer to oversee Juvenile Hall, who also serves as the project manager for the program. Additional support includes the Assistant Chief Probation Officer and the Chief Deputy overseeing the Juvenile Division to ensure the program operates as intended both during the pilot phase and the formal operations phase. The Board of Supervisors agree with the Chief Probation Officer. 90 | P a g e NAPA COUNTY BUILDING DEPARTMENT: THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE CONFUSING Report Date: 5/1/2024 Response Date County Executive Officer: 8/6/2024 (97 days) Response Date Fire Administrator: 8/6/2024 (97 days) Response Date PBES Director: 8/6/2024 (97 days) Response Date County Fire Marshal: 8/6/2024 (97 days)
-
R3Page 100The Jury recommends that PBES immediately require compliance with the 60 (50) day rule for all applicants of temporary events license permits. The recommendation has not yet been implemented.
-
R4Page 101By December 31, 2024, the Jury recommends that PBES initiate a comprehensive review of existing policies and procedures regarding temporary events license permits to ensure future compliance and accountability. The recommendation has not yet been implemented. Please see response to Recommendation 3. The Board of Supervisors agrees with the Director of the Department of Planning, Building and Environmental Services.
-
R5Page 101By December 31, 2024, the Jury recommends that PBES modify the existing internal matrix into a format understandable by applicants. Director of the Department of Planning, Building and Environmental Services: The recommendation has not yet been implemented.
-
R6Page 101By September 30, 2024, the Jury recommends that PBES develop a customer feedback option, in person and online, as part of the application process. PBES should retain these records for potential performance improvement and evaluation purposes. Director of the Department of Planning, Building and Environmental Services: The recommendation has not yet been implemented.
-
R7Page 102The Jury recommends that, whenever possible PBES send the same inspector to conduct follow-up inspections. Director of the Department of Planning, Building and Environmental Services: The recommendation has been implemented. Inspectors are currently assigned districts (as noted in the Finding 7 response) corresponding to areas in which they are responsible for inspections. Staff strives to have the same inspector out for the same project; however, inspectors are sometimes unavailable due to personal leave, like time off, sickness, or needing to care for a loved one. Other inspectors may need to fill in to fulfill a timely inspection. Additionally, workload in one area may be greater, so two inspectors may be needed to cover the demand for that district. On occasion, an inspector may not be available for a follow up inspection that they provided a correction notice on. A different inspector may conduct the inspection. The inspector will typically only be looking at what the prior inspector noted and just confirms those items are corrected. If they see additional items that the prior inspector missed, they are advised to honor the prior inspector's corrections unless they observe a life safety violation. In these rare occasions, the inspector then uses their judgement when requiring additional corrections while considering the safety of the building and its occupants. The Board of Supervisors agrees with the Director of the Department of Planning, Building and Environmental Services.
-
R8Page 102The Jury recommends that PBES immediately establish a protocol for resolving conflicting code interpretations by different inspectors on the same project. Director of the Department of Planning, Building and Environmental Services: The recommendation has not yet been implemented.
-
R9Page 103By December 31, 2024, the Jury recommends that PBES provide mobile compatible electronic devices for each field inspector capable of reviewing plans and prior inspection notes. Director of the Department of Planning, Building and Environmental Services: The recommendation has not yet been implemented. In the fall of 2023, a single iPad was issued to the inspection team to allow preliminary testing of a mobile tablet device in the field. Based on the feedback received, the testing was expanded to include the purchase and issuance of two additional tablets to the inspection staff. Subsequently, two more tablets have been requested, bringing the total number up to five (5). This will enable each of our inspectors the ability to result inspections, view previous inspection results and comments, and access digital plans while conducting their inspections in the field. It is important to note that iPads and other remote electronic devices are limited by the wireless network coverage throughout the County. The hills and valleys in the County result in some areas lacking cell coverage, preventing the devices from communicating with the permitting software at the County offices. Despite these challenges, it has been proven that an iPad or similar device is useful in most parts of the County. We will have the 5 iPads implemented by September 30, 2024. The Board of Supervisors agrees with the Director of the Department of Planning, Building and Environmental Services.