📋
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.

Placer County Grand Jury • 2015-2016

Placer County Grand Jury 2015-2016 Final Report • In the Roseville/Rocklin areas of the county, temporary overnight

Published: August 31, 2016 16 pages
View PDF View Full Original

Findings 19 findings

F1 Page 124
Placer County has done a good job in soliciting and gathering input from homeless individuals, general public, homeless advocates, city and county governmental agencies.
F2 Page 124
This process began in 2004 with the Ten-Year Plan to End Homelessness In Placer County and continues today without a stated strategy for resolution.
F3 Page 124
The counting of the homeless occurs one day every two years. This methodology is inadequate due to the mobility of the homeless, difficulty locating them, and possible duplicate counting of individuals.
F4 Page 124
There is insufficient affordable housing available throughout the county.
F5 Page 124
Due to the various circumstances affecting the homeless population there is no simple solution to meet all the needs and concerns in Placer County.
F6 Page 124
It is unlikely that any decision related to the location of a homeless shelter will satisfy all concerned. Conclusion In 2004 the Placer Consortium on Homeless and Affordable Housing Committee presented a ten- year plan to end homelessness in Placer County to the Board of Supervisors. Placer County has done a good job in soliciting and gathering input on this issue. As of this writing Placer County provides only a temporary emergency shelter located in the DeWitt Campus. There is a continuing and growing need for services that are accessible to the homeless population throughout the county. - 120 - -2016 Final Report
F7 Page 133
Colfax has multiple methods for a citizen to lodge a complaint.
F8 Page 133
Colfax does not have a formal procedure to notify complainant of resolution.
F9 Page 133
At the time of this report, Colfax is implementing a web-based citizen reporting system. Conclusion The Grand Jury’s investigation found that the City of Colfax’s code enforcement process is defined in the Municipal Code. However, the lack of a written document defining their procedures for managing complaints needs to be addressed. Additionally, their method of communication with the complainant needs to be improved. - 129 - -2016 Final Report
F10 Page 135
Lincoln has a defined process in the Municipal Code for handling code enforcement complaints.
F11 Page 135
Lincoln utilizes an informal bullet list as their guidelines for dealing with code enforcement complaints.
F12 Page 135
Lincoln tracks complaints and actions in a spreadsheet, however it was not being kept current.
F13 Page 135
Lincoln has multiple methods for a citizen to lodge a complaint.
F14 Page 135
Lincoln does not have a formal procedure to notify complainant of resolution. - 131 - -2016 Final Report Conclusion The Grand Jury’s investigation found that the City of Lincoln’s code enforcement process is defined in the Municipal Code. However, the lack of a formal written document defining their procedures for managing complaints needs to be addressed. Additionally, their method of communication with the complainant needs to be improved.
F15 Page 137
Loomis has a defined process in the Municipal Code for handling code enforcement complaints.
F16 Page 137
Loomis has informal procedures for dealing with code enforcement complaints, but they are not detailed in a written document.
F17 Page 137
At this time residents of Loomis are limited to filing their complaint over the phone or in person at City Hall.
F18 Page 137
The Town of Loomis website does not explain how to file a complaint while the new system is under development.
F19 Page 137
Loomis does not have a formal procedure to notify complainant of resolution. - 133 - -2016 Final Report Conclusion The Grand Jury’s investigation found that the Town of Loomis’s code enforcement process is defined in the Municipal Code. However, at the time of the investigation, there were some deficiencies in their procedures and complaint process. The deficiencies are the lack of a written procedure for managing complaints and for keeping complainants apprised of the resolution. Also, information on the website does not explain to a citizen how to file a complaint.

Recommendations 8