2005-2006 Final Report*

Recommendations 5

• R1
  The Grand Jury has no recommendation on this matter. Grand Jury Report #2006-AF-01 Asset Forfeiture Executive Summary: The Grand Jury of Humboldt County made inquiries regarding the distribution of funds received from the sale of asset forfeitures. These funds are distributed to the County and occur as a result of crime related action taken against individuals, or groups of residents, of Humboldt County. Who Shall Respond: Pursuant to California Penal Code Sections 933 and 93305, responses to the Findings and Recommendations of Grand Jury Report #2006-AF-01 shall be provided as follows: No Response is required. Asset forfeiture is the result of having property seized when the property is alleged to have been used in illegal activities. Seizures in Humboldt County include vehicles, cash, generators, GRAND JURY OF HUMBOLDT COUNTY Final Report of 2005 - 2006 chemicals, and illegal monies. Houses and unimproved property also may be seized. Owners of seized property have 30 days to make an appeal to the courts. An asset may be released if the owner can prove that this asset was not used in any illegal activity. In cases of proven hardship, seized vehicles or houses may be returned. Court procedures to determine if the property was in fact used in illegal activities is complicated and require a great deal of time and effort. This may process often takes many months, even years to complete. Assets confiscated during this process must remain secured, in the custody of law enforcement, until the presiding judge in each case has made a rulng regarding the legality of the seizure. Those assets which are able to be transported are held in the Sheriff's Evidence Yard until a decision has been made by the court in each situation. Assets which are involved in Federal seizures are turned over to the Federal Marshal. Some of the forfeitures are equipment, which may be donated to Humboldt County agencies, or sold to them for a token amount. The remaining items, upon release by the courts, may be sold at auction. The funds, generated by the sale of these assets, are distributed through the actions of the State or Federal Court, and are deposited in either a State or Federal Trust Account. Distribution of the State Trust Account Funds is determined by the State Health and Safety Code, Section 11489. This was last amended by the State Legislature in SB457 in 1997. The Grand Jury of Humboldt County also inquired of the Auditor-Controller what the current distributions are, in accounting for this income to the County. These distributions are listed below. According to estimates made by the Sheriff, these figures are typical of the average funds the county receives from asset forfeitures. Distribution Formula for the State Trust Account Funds Seizing agency 65% (Normally the Drug Task Force, occasionally the Sheriff) District Attorney 10% State 24% Private non-profit 1% Total distributions, by year: 2000-01: $280,656 2001-02: $134,888 2002-03: $256,764 2003-04: $198,491 2004-05: $302,960 GRAND JURY OF HUMBOLDT COUNTY Final Report of 2005 - 2006 Grand Jury Report #2006-AF-02 County Elections Department Executive Summary: The Grand Jury recognizes that one of the most important functions of County government is to insure fair and accurate elections - the backbone of our representative democracy. Concerns from the public led Congress to pass the "Help America Vote Act" (HAVA) and California voters to pass Proposition 41, the "Voting Modernization Bond Act" in 2002. These actions suggested to the Grand Jury that it review the Humboldt County Election Department's procedures and determine the impact, if any, these legislative changes will have on future election practices. Therefore, members of the Grand Jury monitored all phases of the November 2005 Special Election, interviewed Election Department personnel and participated in the pre-election Logic and Accuracy Observer Panel. Who Shall Respond: Pursuant to California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05, responses to the Findings and Recommendations of Grand Jury Report #2006-AF-02 shall be provided as follows: • No response is required. Report: Humboldt County has approximately 81,000 registered voters clustered in over 270 precincts who vote by mail or at one of seventy polling places. Presently, some 17,000 residents are permanent absentee voters joined by 5,000 or more "one-time" absentee voters. In recent elections, one in four registered voters in the County voted absentee. The County Election Department starts preparing four and one half months in advance of an election. Candidate filing fees and "petitions in lieu of" fees start arriving 113 days in advance. Depending upon the number of candidates and local races, ballots must be constructed and a contract with a State certified printer must be negotiated well in advance. The November 2005 Special Election required twenty-five ballot types and a general election often requires more than 100 ballot types. State law requires ballots be printed for at least 75% of the registered voters in a county. At a cost of between thirty to forty cents per ballot, this significant expense to the County is multiplied by the cost of printing and mailing sample ballots. Ballots are mailed out to voters outside the United States sixty days before an election. Domestic absentee ballots are mailed out directly from the printer approximately thirty days before an election. County election officials favor absentee voting because it is necessary to handle the ballots only once (when they are returned), absentee voting relieves congestion at polling locations, and voter participation is much greater among absentee voters (approximately 85% return their ballots). Absentee ballots may be processed and counted beginning seven days before Election Day, allowing Election Department staff time to verify the signatures on the returned ballots. GRAND JURY OF HUMBOLDT COUNTY Final Report of 2005 - 2006 Voting rosters are printed three weeks before Election Day. These are the books poll workers use to identify voters and insure each voter gets the correct ballot type. Two weeks before an election County staff begins assembling supplies for the seventy polling locations. These supplies include all material needed by poll workers, such as office supplies, rosters, and an exact number of ballots. Ballot boxes, secured supply boxes and polling booths are delivered to the polling locations the Thursday before Election Day. The AccuVote machines are picked up by poll location inspectors the night before the election and remain in their custody until polls open. These vote-tabulating machines have sealed locks that prevent tampering. Humboldt County employs approximately 280 poll workers on Election Day who work a fifteen-hour day for $71.00. The inspectors (supervisors) at each polling location receive $76.00 and can earn a $20.00 bonus if they successfully complete a checklist of assigned tasks. Inspectors are required to attend a two-hour training session the week before an election for which they are paid $7.50. Members of the Grand Jury observed Humboldt County's preparations for and execution of the November 2005 Special Election. They were impressed with the overall organization, meticulous attention to detail, and commitment to accuracy shown by the Election Department's staff. County election officials actively seek citizen review of their policies and procedures. They solicit volunteers to participate in the "Logic and Accuracy Observer Panel" that convenes prior to every election to test the accuracy of all ballot types and the AccuVote optical scan machines that will tally the votes. They also welcome citizens to join their Election Observer Panel on election night to monitor voting returns as the precincts report in. Grand Jury members who participated in both panels for the November 2005 Special Election were satisfied that Humboldt County reported accurate election results. There are security measures and procedures in place to prevent unauthorized tampering with the AccuVote machines. The methods employed to transmit election results accurately from the polling locations to election headquarters after the polls closed were observed to be well thought out, effective, and secure. In 1995, Humboldt County abandoned punch-card voting machines for an optical scan system manufactured by Diebold Corporation. The Diebold model used by the County was approved by the State of California at the time of purchase. In March 2002 California voters passed Proposition 41 establishing a bond fund for California counties to modernize their voting systems and eliminate all punch-card systems in the State. Although Humboldt County had already eliminated its punch-card equipment, it will still receive $980,000 from this fund. These monies are available for the County to further improve its voting systems to comply with the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) by the June 2006 election. GRAND JURY OF HUMBOLDT COUNTY Final Report of 2005 - 2006 HAVA has presented new challenges for County election officials. One of its requirements is that all polling places must be accessible to the handicapped. Several of the seventy polling places the county has used are not in compliance with Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) standards. The county must make these locations handicapped-accessible on Election Day or find substitute locations. HAVA also requires that every polling place must have at least one handicapped-accessible voting machine. California also requires that any touch-screen voting system used in the state must provide a verifiable paper trail of every vote and be pre-certified by the Secretary of State prior to use. The county plans to purchase Diebold touch-screen machines that will be compatible with the Diebold system presently in use, but these machines were not certified by the State until February 2006. Humboldt County shares the same predicament as many counties in the state. It will be impossible to purchase, install, and train staff on the equipment necessary to be in compliance with HAVA by the June 2006 election. This issue was not resolved by the time this report was compiled. GRAND JURY REPORT #2006-HS-01 County Veterans Service Office Executive Summary: The County Veterans Service Office (CVSO) was established by the Board of Supervisors of Humboldt County to assist veterans and their dependents in obtaining benefits from federal, state and local agencies administering programs for veterans. The CVSO staff consists of a Veterans Service Officer and a Veterans Service Representative. The CVSO also works in cooperation with other veteran's organizations within the county and state. The CVSO is fulfilling its mission to the veterans of Humboldt County. Who Shall Respond: Pursuant to California Penal Code Section 933 and 933.05, responses to the Findings and Recommendations of Grand Jury Report #2006-HS-01 shall be provided as follows: No response is required. Report: The Grand Jury finds that the County Veterans Service Office (CVSO) is fulfilling its responsibilities to the veterans of Humboldt County in a prudent and efficient manner. Its communication and coordination with other veteran's organizations within the county, as well as veteran's service facilities outside the county, is admirable. The management of its resources, despite its limited manpower and budget, has been maximized to the fullest potential. GRAND JURY OF HUMBOLDT COUNTY Final Report of 2005 - 2006 The County Veterans Service Office staff is to be commended on the exemplary performance of their duties. Grand Jury Report #2006-HS-02 Humboldt Senior Resource Center Executive Summary: The Humboldt Senior Resource Center is a non-profit organization which provides numerous services to the community's senior citizens, including Dial-a-Ride, a firewood program, senior home repair, a job bank, a senior nutrition program, Adult Day Health Services, an Alzheimer's Resource Center, and ombudsman services. The Senior Resource Center is committed to collaboration with other agencies in both private and public sectors. Who Shall Respond: Pursuant to California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05, responses to the Findings and Recommendations of Grand Jury Report # 2006-HS-02 shall be provided as follows: No response is required. Report: The Senior Resource Center receives funding from multiple sources, including state and federal, the Area Agency on Aging, local government, and donations and bequests. It has responsibly managed its funds in order to provide senior citizens with many essential services not duplicated elsewhere. The programs and services include: Partnership with the Sheriff's Work Alternative Program (SWAP) that provided vouchers ٠ for 1,500 cords of firewood over the past year for seniors in need Home delivered meal programs in Fortuna and Eureka Dial-a-Ride vouchers in collaboration with the city of Eureka ٠ Senior Home Repair ٠ Referrals for work requests for seniors (Job Bank) ٠ Nutrition services, including 39,592 meals served at the Center's dining room, plus an ٠ additional 56,803 home delivered meals over the past year Adult Day Health services, serving people with chronic physical or mental disabilities • An Alzheimer's Resource Center, with library annexes in Hoopa and Del Norte County ٠ A monthly Senior Newspaper, circulation 5,000 • Partnerships with HSU Nursing and Social Welfare departments which provide social • service interns throughout the year Long Term Care Ombudsman The Senior Resource Center is governed by a Board of Directors which represents a cross section of the community including a judge, a banker, businessmen, religious leaders and health care providers from throughout the county. The Director of the Senior Resource Center provided a tour of the facilities for the Grand Jury. GRAND JURY OF HUMBOLDT COUNTY Final Report of 2005 - 2006 The facilities are well maintained and user-friendly, and the kitchen has recently undergone a major upgrade. The Grand Jury appreciated the openness of the director and her staff, as well as the friendly and welcoming attitude of seniors at the center. The Grand Jury commends the Senior Resource Center for providing vital services to the senior community. Grand Jury Report # 2006-HS-03 Mental Health Services to the Humboldt County Correctional Facility Executive Summary: The Grand Jury received information that the mental health services being provided to the inmates in the Humboldt County Correctional Facility (HCCF) were not meeting the facility's expectations or the inmate's needs. The information alleged the lack of sufficient mental health services at the HCCF was having an adverse effect upon correctional staff and inmates. The Grand Jury was further provided testimony that there exists some degree of inconsistency in mental health treatment to inmates due to a rotating system of doctors, each with their own method of patient management. The Grand Jury's subsequent investigation revealed a significant difference between the services that the Mental Health Branch, Department of Health & Human Services, had set forth in its policies to provide to the HCCF, and the services they were actually providing. Who Shall Respond: Pursuant to California Penal Code Section 933 and 933.05, Findings and Recommendations of Grand Jury #2006-HS-04 shall be as follows: The Department of Health & Human Services, Mental Health Services Branch, shall respond to Finding 1 and Recommendation 1. Report: The Grand Jury interviewed administrative and line level staff from both the HCCF and the Mental Health Branch. In the opinion of the majority of those interviewed, the Grand Jury learned the number of inmates in need of mental health services has increased during the last several years and the mental health problems of inmates have become more intense and severe. The Grand Jury reviewed statistics from several sources indicating the inmate population requiring mental health services at the HCCF had reached 30% of those incarcerated. At the same time that the mental health population and the severity of problems were increasing at the HCCF, the Mental Health Branch reduced their staff at the HCCF. The specifics of this staff reduction were identified in a document entitled "Jail Service Program" written by the Mental Health Branch and of the Department of Health and Human Services. The polices contained in the Jail Services Program were approved by the HCCF. In this Jail Services Program Document, the Mental Health Branch identified specific staffing for the HCCF, including an Alcohol and Other Drugs Counselor and a Discharge Planner. During the Grand Jury's investigation, it was learned that against the wishes of the HCCF administration, both of these positions have remained unfilled at the HCCF by the GRAND JURY OF HUMBOLDT COUNTY Final Report of 2005 - 2006 Mental Health Branch. These unfilled positions have caused the Mental Health Branch to not be following the polices in its own Jail Services Program to provide specific staff services. According to testimony, these vacancies have been to the detriment of the remaining mental health staff, the correctional staff, and the inmates. It was reported to the Grand Jury there had been as many as six on-site mental health staff at the HCCF when policies in the 2003 Jail Services Program were approved and signed. At the time of this investigation the Grand Jury found only two staff members remain at the HCCF, a nurse and a clinician. The registered nurse is not a Certified Psychiatric Nurse. The clinician, a Licensed Clinical Social Worker, is soon to leave this position and a replacement will have to be found. The Grand Jury was informed that the Mental Health Branch has plans to fill some of the vacant staff positions before the next scheduled State inspection of HCCF. The Grand Jury was told that the correctional officers would continue to spend a significant number of extra man-hours dealing with the problems created by the large number of inmates requiring mental health services. The Grand Jury learned that while the population of inmates at the HCCF needing mental health services has increased, the number of patients housed at Sempervirens (SV: the county's acute mental health facility) has decreased. Currently admissions to SV have averaged eight patients. The staff to-patient ratio at SV is one staff member for every five patients. In previous years SV had consistently remained at or near its full capacity of sixteen patients. The Grand Jury was informed that while there are occasions when an inmate of the HCCF is brought to SV to receive more controlled and intensive treatment, those occasions average only six to eight per year. Testimony revealed that once an individual is booked into the HCCF, the county is no longer reimbursed for any medical or mental health services it provides. Witnesses informed the Grand Jury that some key staff members from the Mental Health Branch who oversee the mental health services at the HCCF either had never been to the facility or had not been to the HCCF in years. Testimony was received that the Mental Health Branch has no legal requirement to provide mental health services to inmates at the HCCF and that their doing so was an act of generosity. Contradicting this belief by the Mental Health Branch, the Grand Jury located mandates within the California Welfare & Institutions Code, the California Code of Regulations Title 15, and Title 9 of the State Department of Mental Health, all of which clearly state that mental health services shall be provided to inmates by the local Mental Health Director. The Grand Jury received testimony that psychiatric services from medical doctors are provided to the HCCF inmates three afternoons a week. These services consist primarily of evaluating, reviewing and refilling medications. Because the county has had difficulty in recruiting and retaining medical staff, temporary physicians are often used at the HCCF on a rotating basis, along with some county staff physicians. Doctors on rotation may remain for GRAND JURY OF HUMBOLDT COUNTY Final Report of 2005 - 2006 as little a few weeks and rarely, if ever, do they remain more than a few months. This means in any given week, a substantial percentage of inmates requiring mental health services are being seen by whatever doctor happens to be available that day. Since each physician could have different approaches to medication protocols, inmates may receive several different psychotropic medications within a short period of time. The Grand Jury also found the majority of physicians being utilized by Mental Health were not board certified as psychiatrists. In contrast, according to the American Board of Medical Specialists, which provides board certification in psychiatry, approximately 89% of medical doctors today are board- certified in their field of practice. The Grand Jury learned that the policies in 2003 Jail Service Program to provide the HCCF with an Alcohol and Other Drugs counselor and a Discharge Planner are not being followed. The Grand Jury learned that, due to increases in both the number and severity of mental health problems in the inmate population, the filling of these positions is even more essential now than it was in 2003. The Grand Jury finds that there are only two on-site mental health staff at the present time, compared with up to six staff in recent years. The Mental Health Branch acknowledges it has the ability to fill one or more of the vacant staff positions at least temporarily through staff transfers. The Grand Jury received testimony from several sources regarding the inconsistency of mental health services to inmates of the HCCF, due to the constant rotation of doctors. The Grand Jury acknowledges the difficulty of the Mental Health Branch in recruiting and retaining physicians.
• R1a
  The Grand Jury recommends that the CAST Boards create a leadership position. Response from the District Attorney: The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented prior to January 1, 2006. As indicated above, the creation of a director position which would authorize a leadership person to coordinate and make decisions about CAST has been advocated and was initiated by the District Attorney's Office. The District Attorney's position is joined in by the CAST Executive Board, the Department of Health and Human Services and the Law Enforcement Chiefs Association. The delay in the creation of such a position has been caused by the lack of consensus within the CAST organization about the need for the position and/or the authority of the person who fills it. Additional Response from the District Attorney: Our office assigned Deputy District Attorney, Maggie Fleming, to fulfill the responsibilities of a director position and to coordinate and make decisions about CAST. Deputy Fleming is an outstanding attorney who is both experienced in and dedicated to CAST.
• R2
  The Grand Jury recommends that a dedicated 911 line be installed on the exterior of the facility.
• R3
  The Grand Jury recommends either the installation of an alarm system, or that evidence should not be stored at the facility.
• R4
  The Grand Jury recommends these photographs be removed from public view. Grand Jury Reports #2006-JL-14 Sheriff's Evidence Yard Who shall respond: Pursuant to California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05, responses to the Findings and Recommendations of Grand Jury Reports #2006-JL-14 shall be provided as follows: No response is required. The Sheriff's Evidence Yard was inspected September 12, 2005. Items needed by the volunteer search and rescue team are stored at the yard. Evidence is labeled or tagged. Large equipment such as generators and vehicles are stored outside. The facility is fenced and alarmed. Confiscated materials are warehoused until no longer required in the justice system. Surplus materials are then sold. Garden materials are contributed to local school programs. Surplus and abandoned clothing are donated to charitable programs. GRAND JURY OF HUMBOLDT COUNTY Final Report of 2005 - 2006 Grand Jury Report #2006-JL-15 Sheriff's Evidence Room Who Shall Respond: Pursuant to California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05, responses to the Findings and Recommendations of Grand Jury Report #2006-JL-15 shall be provided as follows: The Sheriff shall respond to Findings 1, 2, and 3 and Recommendations 1 and 2. An inspection of the Humboldt County Evidence Room was conducted on September 13, 2005. The evidence room is located in the basement of the Court House in what was once jail cells and compartments. Due to the large amount of materials stored in the configuration of the space, the facility is cramped and crowded. The area appeared to be secure, and only three persons have keys. A new alarm system is in place providing better security than in the past. Items of evidence left for storage when the office is closed are placed in secure lockers. A Property/Evidence Booking and Release Report remains with the evidence throughout the storage period. This document is used to track all movement of the evidence. There has been only one case of evidence being lost during the period for which records have been kept. There have been no reported cases where evidence was inadmissible due to improper handling. No process is in place for scanning the older style finger print cards into a computer data base. Fingerprints are currently recorded electronically. Therefore, the older style cards are only examined if there is a lead or a suspect. There are hundreds of confiscated firearms currently stored in several areas. In the past, once firearms were no longer required for evidence, they were sold at auction, which provided revenue for the County. Presently, the firearms are stored until arrangements are made for their destruction. Personnel are very knowledgeable and well trained. Staff presently consists of one full-time and two part-time persons. These individuals work in very difficult surroundings, maintaining evidence in acceptable condition for extended periods of time. Only the full-time person is knowledgeable in all areas of storage and procedure. There is no electronic data base of this information. Evidence Room personnel are presently required to maintain custody of large items belonging to jail inmates. Items in the inmate's possession at the time of arrest must be stored if the inmate has no one to take possession. These personal effects are often held for long periods of time, based on the circumstances of discharge or due to length of incarceration. The Evidence Room is open only during regular business hours.