San Bernardino County Grand Jury • 1999-2000

anticipated that the development and implementation phases of this computer

14 pages
View Original PDF

Findings 11 findings

F1
One employee with 1,232 hours and a direct cost of $56,114 in 1999
F2
One employee with 1,690 hours and a direct cost of $36,485 in 1998
F3
One employee with 1,946 hours and a direct cost of $22,093 in 1997 There is no consolidated reporting process by the various County departments to a central location showing the number of employees on paid administrative leave, the length of time on this leave, the reason, the cumulative cost, nor the current status. According to several appointing authorities, the trend, cost, and reasons for placing employees on paid administrative leave has not been a matter of importance to the County. Additionally, training in Standards of Conduct to emphasize the expected ethical behavior of employees has not been a priority item. The appointing authority is a term used in the Personnel Rules and the Memorandum of Understanding. An appointing authority refers to a department head. It includes any person who is designated as acting department head, employees acting for the department head during absence, and/or an employee delegated all authority to act on behalf of the appointing authority on a regular basis. The appointing authority has unlimited authority to handle all personnel actions within County guidelines, civil service rules, and state’s rights, even if the appointing authority and the employee are personal friends. The appointing authority can grant paid administrative leave without any oversight or monitoring. The length of time an employee may be on paid administrative leave also is without oversight or monitoring, as evidenced by an instance where an employee remained on paid administrative leave after pleading guilty, being sentenced by the court, and while serving a portion of the jail time. The appointing authority also decides the extent of any disciplinary action against an employee and makes the interpretation of violations of Rule X of the Personnel Rules regarding disciplinary action, subject to the employee’s appeal rights.
F4
A Capital Improvement Program Request form outlining the requirements is to be submitted to the CAO’s Administrative Analyst who acts as a “traffic director”. If the RFP process is to be waived, the need must be justified on the request form. The CAO’s Administrative Analyst logs in the request, reviews it, and sends it to the CAO Budget Analyst who handles budget matters for the requesting department.
F5
The Budget Analyst has to sign off on the request as to the need for the space, availability of funds, program needs, staffing levels, etc.
F6
Copies of the request, together with the assessment from the CAO’s office, are then to be circulated to the Board of Supervisors’ office for a 10-day comment period. Procedures do not require Real Estate Services to be officially involved and they may be unaware of a space need request.
F7
At the end of the 10-day period, the CAO’s Administrative Analyst is to review the Supervisors’ comments and either: (a) Direct the Real Estate Services Department to prepare an RFP and a Board agenda item to approve the RFP, or (b) If the RFP process is to be waived, the requesting department (perhaps in conjunction with Real Estate Services) is to prepare a Board agenda item requesting approval of the waiver of the RFP process.
F8
At this point Real Estate Services is made aware of the need for office space.
F9
If the RFP is approved by the Board, Real Estate Services is to advertise the RFP in newspapers and contact the general public, brokers and others to reasonably generate sufficient interest in leasing facilities in the County.
F10
A 5-7 person Review Committee is to be formed to review the proposals, typically with representation from the requesting department, Architecture and Engineering, Real Estate Services, the CAO’s office, the Board of Supervisors’ office, and the Supervisor’s office in whose district the building is to be located.
F11
The results of the RFP, together with Real Estate Services’

Recommendations 21

No Responses Found 1

Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.

Central Elementary School District School District