📋

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.

Score: -1 (3/0/4)

Amador County Grand Jury • 2019-2020

Amador County Fire Protection Services

43 pages

View PDF View Full Original

⚠️ 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 and Recommendations 9 findings

F1 Page 47

The AFPA is not accomplishing its functions and is not complying with the JPA as follows: ● The AFPA Board failed to appoint an Executive Officer and other essential staff members. An Executive Officer is required to develop and prepare annual budgets, preliminary budgets, and work programs for the AFPA Board to review and approve. Because an Executive Officer was not appointed, these budgeting actions have not occurred. (JPA Sections 6.7(a)(1) and (5), 6.8, 6.9, and 8.0.) ● The AFPA Board failed to perform planning functions including, but not limited to, developing operational and funding strategies to enhance fire protection coverage, consolidating AFPA member networks and department operations, and developing consistent and cost efficient response plans. (JPA Section 7.1.) ● The AFPA Board is not holding regular monthly public meetings that comply with the Brown Act (JPA Section 6.5(a).) ● The AFPA is not establishing and maintaining reports and accounts regarding funding sources and expenditures, and its members are not conducting required annual audits regarding the use of Measure M funds. (JPA Sections 7.1(h) and 8.2.)

Related Recommendations (4)

Page 48

The AFPA should comply with the JPA for budgeting and staffing necessary to complete its required functions by February 1, 2021. Paid staff should be utilized to meet compliance standards of the Brown Act, and an Executive Officer needs to be hired to achieve many of the required functions of the AFPA. (F1)

Page 48

The AFPA should perform oversight and planning functions throughout the covered area including consolidation. In addition, monthly meetings need to be reconvened as required by the JPA by February 1, 2021. (F1)

Page 48

The AFPA should immediately comply with the Brown Act. Complete meeting schedules, agenda packets, meeting minutes, and sub-committee minutes and reports should be promptly and publicly posted. (F1)

Page 48

Once the above-referenced recommendations have been completed, the AFPA should develop a system of checks and balances to enhance accountability and ensure it is meeting all responsibilities and duties as outlined in the JPA by April 1, 2021. (F1)

F2 Page 47

Measure M and Ordinance 1676 are confusing, overly restrictive, and do not allow sufficient flexibility in the use of Measure M funds by the districts for “Fire Protection and Emergency Response Safety.” The Board of Supervisors does not have sufficient flexibility to modify the allowable uses for the funds.

Related Recommendations (1)

Page 48

The Amador County Board of Supervisors should review Measure M and Ordinance 1676 with input from AFPA members, identify potential ambiguities, and determine if action is required to clarify those ambiguities, including consideration of a clarifying ballot amendment if needed. The review should occur by December 31, 2020. (F2)

F3 Page 47

The Amador Fire dispatching process is inefficient and not fully supported by all Amador Fire leadership. The protocol has several steps before actual dispatching through Camino takes place. The intermediate steps can add delays in deploying resources.

Related Recommendations (1)

Page 48

The AFPA should investigate the County’s current call dispatching system for fire and EMS, and explore options to improve the process or locate a new solution. Recommendations should be made by February 1, 2021. (F3)

F4 Page 47

Changes AFPD made to response areas in June 2019 caused confusion in response responsibilities. The changes were not sufficiently communicated or coordinated with other districts. It was believed “Area 118” was created to reclaim response areas by AFPD from other districts so the Measure M funds would follow. The response maps returned to the previous configuration partly as a result of an unwritten “temporary 3 year” agreement between the affected districts.

Related Recommendations (1)

Page 48

The AFPA should immediately ensure any changes to response area maps be communicated, well-understood, and publicly documented with district and department input prior to implementation. (F4)

F5 Page 47

New fire stations are being planned and built near existing stations, near the boundaries of districts, or in areas already well-served. Martell is an example of this occurring.

Related Recommendations (1)

Page 48

The AFPA’s county-wide planning of fire stations should include locations in areas of greatest need, where fire protection coverage can be maximized and response times reduced. Opportunities to reduce costs by co-locating or consolidating utilizing the Amador Plan should be considered. This should be accomplished by February 1, 2021. (F5)

F6 Page 47

A Fire Chief routinely self-dispatches to incidents, and therefore violates protocol.

Related Recommendations (1)

Page 48

The AFPA should immediately ensure routine, intentional self-dispatching comes to an end as it violates established dispatching protocols and endangers public safety. (F6)

F7 Page 47

On multiple occasions, a Fire Chief canceled responding resources who would have been first to arrive in order to allow another department to respond, thereby unnecessarily adding to the response time. Not using the first-arriving engine resource is a public safety issue.

Related Recommendations (1)

R10

Page 48

The AFPA should enforce established protocol and immediately ensure the first arriving dispatched responders and/or engines should be utilized, and reprimand any Chief who is reported as intentionally slowing down a responding engine. (F7, F8)

F8 Page 47

A Fire Chief slowed down an engine arrival by intentionally driving their district/department’s vehicle slowly in front of the responding engine of another district or department. Slowing down a responding engine is a public safety issue. 37

Related Recommendations (1)

R10

Page 48

F9 Page 48

Amador County Fire Departments have been prevented from participating in training with other local fire departments.

Related Recommendations (1)

R11

Page 48

Consistent with the JPA’s spirit of cooperation, the AFPA should ensure all Amador County Fire Departments and Districts collaborate and cooperate to allow training opportunities among firefighters to the greatest extent possible. This should be implemented by January 1, 2021. (F9) 38

Agency Responses 1

Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.

Fire Protection Authority

January 08, 2021 • 9 pages • 18 responses • Score: -1 (+3, 0, -4) View Details ▾

PDF

18 responses to findings and recommendations

AWA has taken steps to increase transparency, yet still has room for improvement.

Response: Agree Score: +1

F1. * The AFPA Board failed to appoint an Executive Officer and other essen- tial staff members. An Executive Officer is required to develop and prepare annual budgets, preliminary budgets, and work programs for the AFPA Board to review and approve. Because an Executive Officer was not ap- pointed, these budgeting actions have not occurred. (JPA Sections 6.7(a) and (5), 6.8, 6.9, and 8.0) Agree that the AFPA has not appointed an Executive Officer and other staff to work on budgets and work plans. However, the AFPA has no funds with which to create a budget and these positions and functions wou...

AWA’s financial stability remains a great concern.

Response: Agree Score: +1

F2. Measure M and Ordinance 1676 are confusing and overly restrictive, and do not allow sufficient flexibility in the use of Measure M funds by the districts for "Fire Protection and Emergency Response Safety." The Board of Supervisors does not have sufficient flexibility to modify the allowable uses for the funds. Agree that Measure M and Ordinance 1676 are confusing and overly restrictive. The use of Measure M funds is clearly delineated in Ordinance 1676 which added Chapte

Should AWA decide it is necessary to adjust its rates, the reasons for doing so should be clearly documented and explained. (F1, F2)

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

R2. The AFPA should perform oversight and planning functions throughout the covered area including consolidation. In addition, monthly meetings need to be reconvened as required by the JPA by February 1, 2021. (

Employees have not been sufficiently trained on their use of the Springbrook software. 3

Response: Unknown Score: 0

F3) AFPA Response: The recommendation will be implemented in that the AFPA will continue to discuss and explore other possible options for dispatching systems, however, it is the Board of Supervisors who contract for and who are responsible for, the current dispatch system.

By December 31, 2020, AWA should acquire membership in the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) to implement their standards for compiling the Comprehensive Annual Finance Report. (F1, F2)

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

R3. The AFPA should immediately comply with the Brown Act. Complete meeting schedules, agenda packets, meeting minutes, and sub-committee minutes and reports should be promptly and publicly posted. (

During this investigation, the Grand Jury found no retaliatory actions by AWA management to employees.

Response: Agree Score: +1

F4. Changes AFPD made to response areas in 2019 caused confusion in response responsibilities. The changes were not sufficiently communicated or coordinated with other districts. It was believed "Area 118" was created to reclaim response areas by AFPD from other districts so the Measure M funds would follow. The response maps returned to the previous configuration partly as a result of an unwritten "temporary" 3 year" agreement between the affected districts. Agree.

AWA should strive to be awarded the GFOA’s “Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting.” (F1, F2)

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

R4. Once the above referenced recommendations have been completed, the AFPA should develop a system of checks and balances to enhance accountability and ensure it is meeting all responsibilities and duties as outlines in the JPA by April 1, 2021. (

The Interim GM has begun a reorganization of AWA. The outcome and structure of the reorganization is unknown at this time.

Response: Unknown Score: 0

F5) AFPA Response: The recommendation will be implemented by the AFPA, but not by February 1, 2021. Consolidation is not currently on the table but will be considered in the future. It should be clear that the AFPA has no au- thority to mandate where any of the fire agencies locate fire stations, nor do any of the agencies have the authority to mandate where another agency may or may not locate a station.

A Fire Chief routinely self-dispatches to incidents, and therefore violates protocol.

Response: Disagree Score: -1

F6. A Fire Chief routinely self-dispatches to incidents, and therefore violates protocol. Disagree. this is a vague accusation. No specifics or context is provided No "protocol" is cited. A Fire Chief self dispatching, may be positive and warranted when a Chief hears a dispatch and feels that more resources or supervision are required. Specific complaints about a Chief self dispatching and the appropriateness thereof, should be directed to the overseeing authority of said Chief, such as the City Council or the District Board of Directors, for investigation. The AFPA has no investigative author...

AWA should continue fostering a positive work environment. (F4)

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

R6. The AFPA should investigate the County's current call dispatching system for fire and EMS and explore options to improve the process or locate a new solution. Recommendations should be made by February 1, 2021. (

Response: Disagree Score: -1

F7. On multiple occasions, a Fire Chief canceled responding resources who would have been first to arrive in order to allow another department to respond, thereby unnecessarily adding to the response time. Not using the first-arriving engine resource is a public safety issue. Disagree. This is a serious but vague accusation. Specific complaints about a Chief improperly cancelling resources should be directed to the overseeing authority of said Chief, such as the City Council or the District Board of Directors for investigation. The AFPA has no investigative authority or resources.

The position of General Manager should be filled as soon as possible. (F5)

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

R7. The AFPA should immediately ensure any changes to response area maps be communicated, well-understood, and publicly documented with district and department input prior to implementation. (

Response: Disagree Score: -1

F8. A Fire Chief slowed down an engine arrival by intentionally driving their district/department's vehicle in front of the responding engine of another district or department. Slowing down a responding engine is a public safety issue. Disagree. This is a serious but vague accusation. The accusation contains no specifics or context. Specific complaints of this nature should be directed to the overseeing authority of said Chief, such as the City Council or District Board of Directors for investigation. The AFPA has no investigative authority or resources.

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

R8. The AFPA's county-wide planning of fire stations should include loca- tions in areas of greatest need, where fire protection coverage can be maximized and response times reduced. Opportunities to reduce costs by co-locating or consolidating, utilizing the Amador Plan should be consid- ered. This should be considered by February 1, 2021. (

Amador County Fire Departments have been prevented from participating in training with other local fire departments.

Response: Disagree Score: -1

F9. Amador County Fire Departments have been prevented from participating in training with other local departments. Disagree. This is a vague accusation. Specific accusations of this nature should be directed to the overseeing authority of the Chief being accused, such as the City Council or District Board of Directors for investigation. The AFPA has no investigative authority or resources. Grand Jury Recommendations and AFPA Responses:

The AFPA should immediately ensure routine, intentional self-dispatching comes to an end as it violates established dispatching protocols and endangers public safety. (F6)

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

R9. The AFPA should immediately ensure routine, intentional self-dispatch- ing comes to an end as it violates established dispatching protocols and endangers public safety. (

R10

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

R10. The AFPA should enforce established protocol and immediately en- sure the first arriving dispatched responders and/or engines should be uti- lized, and reprimand any Chief who is reported as intentionally slowing down a responding engine. (

R11

Response: Unknown

Score: 0

R11. Consistent with the JPA' spirit of cooperation, the AFPA should en- sure all Amador County Fire Departments and Districts collaborate and cooperate to allow training opportunities among firefighters to the greatest extent possible. This should be implemented by January 1, 2021. (