📋
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.

Calaveras County Grand Jury • 2006-2007

Foothill Fire Protection District

4 pages
View PDF View Full Original

Findings 6 findings

F1 Page 10
The new fire station at Burson has yet to be completed. The planning and procurement process has raised the following questions: The district’s original cost and scheduling plan is outdated and needs to be revised to reflect current conditions and costs. This has resulted in a disorganized approach to building the new station. The fragmented process of letting bids for construction raises questions about bidding and final cost estimates. The bidding process should comply with the Public Contract Code. Because of pervasive ambiguities throughout the bidding process, many of the district’s contractual rights may have been waived or diminished. (Civil Code §1654)
F2 Page 10
While planning, bidding, and building Station #1 in Burson, the district failed to follow the Public Contract Code (PCC) regarding proper 5 procedure for soliciting and posting of construction contract bids (PCC § 20813). In addition, provisions requiring analysis of the project impact on the environment as required in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) were not followed (Public Resources Code § 21000). Noncollusion Certificates were not submitted nor executed as required under § 7106 of the PCC. Public construction contracts generally include indemnification requirements (PCC § 20103.6) and the securing of performance and payment bonds (Civil Code § 2819). FFPD did not include indemnification requirements in any of the contracts executed and did not secure any performance or payment bonds.
F3 Page 11
The Grand Jury found the following administrative deficiencies: 1. An incomplete policies and procedures manual. 2. No comprehensive training plan. 3. No existing comprehensive long-range plan. 4. No Fire Chief
F4 Page 12
Station 2 is not only inadequate to house equipment and administration, but does not appear to meet county building code standards. In a site visit it was noted that a major portion of a cinder block wall was removed for a vehicle pass-through with no header and post bracing. The Grand Jury could find no record of a permit being issued to have this wall removed. This may constitute a safety hazard to the people working in the building and the public attending meetings. Further investigation revealed the initial permits for expansion of the building have not received final approval.
F5 Page 12
FFPD is shorthanded of volunteer fire fighters. Currently there is an insufficient number of drivers with a Class B drivers license required to operate four of the larger fire apparatus.
F6 Page 12
Management and building deficiencies within the district have been exacerbated by lack of funding. Without a full time fire chief, there has been a legacy of last minute planning and personnel problems. A shoestring approach to the completion of the much-needed new Station #1 has contributed to the district’s existing problems. How well the district will serve its current and future residents will depend on the implementation of long range fiscal planning now. Although planned development and assessed valuation increases within the district can answer some of the district financial shortcomings, there may not be sufficient increases in funding for the district to catch up with projected growth and infrastructure requirements.

Recommendations 4