Riverside County Grand Jury
2009-2010
From the annual report
The consolidated year-end volume. The individual investigations it contains are listed separately below.
📑 Year-End Report
The full consolidated volume; individual reports are listed below.
Individual reports (16)
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
2 findings
F1:
The former city clerk was derelict in her duties, in that she failed to provide written minutes of city council meetings for a period exceeding one year in violation of Government Code §40801: “The City Clerk shall keep an accurate record of the proceeding of the legislative body and the board of equalization in books bearing appropriate titles and devoted exclusively to such purposes, respectively. The books shall have a comprehensive general index.” The former city council was derelict in its responsibilities in allowing the minutes to fall behind without taking corrective action.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The current city clerk should continue to transcribe tapes of prior city council meetings for approval by the city council with a target completion date of July 30, 2010. The city council should ensure that the minutes of a meeting are completed in time to vote for adoption at the next scheduled meeting.
F2:
The current city clerk is also a full-time administrative secretary for the City of Blythe. She reports to the city manager, which appears to be a conflict of interest.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The city council should place a measure on the ballot for the next city election, transferring the position of city clerk from an elected to an appointed position, reporting to the city council. Utilizing time in her position as assistant to the city manager to perform clerk duties should not be permitted. 2
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
4 findings
F1:
In November 2009, an update to the PeopleSoft payroll software was not tested thoroughly by the OASIS staff. As a result, the normal bi-weekly county payroll of $29 million soared to $53 million. Employees with direct deposit were overpaid twice, then saw the money disappear twice, and finally the correct amount was deposited. The county, working through its bank, recalled the erroneous amounts. The payroll incident highlighted an ongoing problem that user departments have with OASIS. According to testimony, OASIS staff was negligent in not fully testing many computer upgrades and patches. For example, after a recent update, functionality that had existed ceased to be. Users complained about not being involved in the testing to make certain that everything worked as before. OASIS staff tried to return the lost functionality, but in some cases they were not successful. Moreover, the customer service provided by OASIS has ranged from good to poor, according to a survey conducted by OASIS in January 2010. User departments have complained about the delays in correcting reported problems and responding to requests for system enhancements.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The county executive office should eliminate OASIS, turning over the financial and payroll functions to the county auditor-controller, the county’s accountant, and turning over the human resources system to the human resources department. The major users including the auditor-controller’s office, the human resources department and the purchasing department should collaborate to oversee the PeopleSoft system, including the thorough testing of upgrades and patches. (There already exists a collaboration to operate a major county computer system, the property tax system. The three departments that use the system—the assessor, the treasurer-tax collector and the auditor- controller—share the cost, the staffing and the operation. If one department wants to change something, its staff is responsible for doing so while notifying the others. The system is being replaced, and the three departments are working together on the project.)
F2:
When PeopleSoft was installed, OASIS promised that county employees would be able to enter their work time directly into the system, saving the time and the expense of dual entry. The timecard software exists, and it has been used by a small number of county employees for a number of years. The first step in preparing the county’s bi-weekly payroll involves employees entering their time and labor. For some employees, the process is simple and straightforward. Others, however, have a much more complicated task. For example, if an employee is paid from the proceeds of multiple grants, there must be entries for the time spent for each grant. In addition, the county’s land-use planners have a procedure similar to attorney billing. For instance, they must allocate their daily work to individual planning proposals so that a developer is properly charged for work performed on a subdivision. All but two of the county’s 52 departments have come up with procedures to record time and labor. Many use a spreadsheet initially to record information. After a supervisor has approved a printout, a clerk re-enters the information into PeopleSoft. In one office with about 220 employees working on multiple grants, the re-entering takes a clerk three days to complete. 2
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
Employees countywide should be trained to use the timecard software to enter their time and departments should incorporate the procedure as soon as practical. Departments will save money and free up clerks for other duties.
F3:
In the modern business world, money is moved electronically. Employees of larger companies and government entities are paid with direct deposit of funds. The federal or state government electronically moving the amount to a taxpayer’s account pays many income tax refunds. The auditor-controller’s office still pays the county’s bills by writing checks, known as warrants, and then mailing them. In addition, the treasurer-tax collector must send checks to invest money and to pay amounts owed. The treasurer estimates the county loses between $13,699 to $41,096 per day, depending on the prevailing interest rate, by using checks instead of electronic transfer when the department invests money. The treasurer contends that money could be held longer, and invested longer, but still be paid on time with electronic fund transfer. OASIS and the county’s auditor-controller’s office are now testing a pilot project to pay cities and special districts electronically their shares of property taxes. The testing of the PeopleSoft software is expected to be completed by July 1, 2010.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The PeopleSoft electronic transfer software package should be implemented for all county departments that pay bills. Vendors would be paid in a more timely fashion with the county using less labor and no postage to pay a bill.
F4:
Testimony revealed that one of the undelivered promises by OASIS was a paperless purchasing process. Vendors could register electronically in order to be included in all appropriate county-bidding opportunities. When the county wanted to purchase something, all bidders who carry the item would be notified electronically of the process. Bids would be submitted electronically, and the best bid selected. After the county takes possession of the item, the vendor would be paid through an electronic fund transfer. Currently the purchasing department maintains a list of bidders. When the county wants to purchase something, bid specifications must be mailed and, in some cases, published as a legal notice. After a successful bid and after the product or service has been delivered, the vendor must wait for the county to send a payment check. The payment can take as long as 90 days. The purchasing department has been told by OASIS unit that there is a paperless purchasing module that could be installed at a cost of $400,000, but the purchasing department is currently testing a different online paperless procurement system that costs nothing. For a fee of $20,000 the vendor would provide the programming needed to interface the online system to PeopleSoft. 3
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
The county should proceed with the online paperless procurement system to save money. 4
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
4 findings
F1:
#06-020 II.F.1 states: "Maximum of four effective applications per incident, either drive stun or discharge mode, whether from a single or a combination of multiple Energy Conducted Weapon(s) units." A review of a Taser report provided by the Sheriff's Department shows the Taser was used eight times on the same individual in a span of less than one minute. (See Attachment 1, Lines 0059-0066)
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
Establish written policy detailing the number of times a X-26 Taser may be used on an individual within a specified time frame.
F2:
The Less-Lethal Devices Manual Addendum to Department Directive #06-020 III.F.1.b states: "When deputies deploy the X-26 Taser they need to remain aware and attempt to limit the time of each discharge to no more than five seconds." The X-26 Taser has a built-in feature that allows the user to keep track of the number of seconds activated. Deputies do not always adhere to the five-second policy. Attachment 1 shows five usages in excess of five seconds on the same individual in a period of less than one minute.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
Require sheriff supervisors conduct a detailed review of all X-26 Taser If a report reveals non-compliance with written policies, reports. appropriate disciplinary action should be administered to the violator.
F3:
There is inconsistency in the use of Less-Lethal Weapons in the Riverside County jails. One facility reported the first option to gain compliance would be the Oleoresin Capsicum (OC) spray (pepper), whereas another facility would rely on the X-26 Taser. The Riverside Sheriff's Department Corrections Division Policy and Procedures does not provide guidance regarding the prioritization of the use of Less-Lethal Weapons.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
Develop realistic training exercises to assist the deputies in determining which is the most appropriate Less-Lethal Weapon rather than relying on the X-26 Taser as the Less-Lethal Weapon of choice.
F4:
In a review of the Corrections Division Policy and Procedures Manual it was noted section 505.07.5.6 has no designated assignment on Emergency Response Team (ERT) for the use of the X-26 Taser. However, the Less-Lethal Devices Manual section on ERT states "Deploys the X-26 Taser as directed by the ERT Sergeant".
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
Conduct a thorough review and update of all documentation to ensure consistency. Seq GMT lime Local Time Duration Temp Battery (11)--- 3:33.41 05:33:41 1/2 76 1 14.45 4.33-38 07-23-28 1 10 20 10045 U3 (M: 22 20:00:22 1 75 it. 0047 14 17:06 07:17.06 24 26 1 0048 01:50.10 18.50:10 Ĭ 26 25 0049 04:18:06 21:18:06 1 25 2.5 0050 03:11:20 2 20:11:20 25 25 0051 01:33:24 18:33:24 1 25 25 0052 01:42:01 18:42:01 24 25 1 0053 01:47:52 18:47:52 25 1 24 0054 01:49:35 18:49:35 1 24 25 0055 06:47:14 23:47:14 1 24 25 0056 08:42:09 01:42:09 25 25 0057 08:42:15 01:42:15 25 25 0058 09:41:44 02:41:44 24 25 1 0059 09:57:32 02:57:32 6 34 24 0060 09:57:40 02:57:40 6 35 23 0061 09:57:46 02:57:46 5 35 23 0062 09:57:59 02:57:59 6 36 22 0063 09:58:09 36 02:58:09 6 22 0064 09:58:18 02:58:18 36 21 6 0065 09:58:24 02:58:24 21 5 36 0066 09:58:30
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
4 findings
F1:
#06-020 II.F.1 states: "Maximum of four effective applications per incident, either drive stun or discharge mode, whether from a single or a combination of multiple Energy Conducted Weapon(s) units." A review of a Taser report provided by the Sheriff's Department shows the Taser was used eight times on the same individual in a span of less than one minute. (See Attachment 1, Lines 0059-0066)
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
Establish written policy detailing the number of times a X-26 Taser may be used on an individual within a specified time frame.
F2:
The Less-Lethal Devices Manual Addendum to Department Directive #06-020 III.F.1.b states: "When deputies deploy the X-26 Taser they need to remain aware and attempt to limit the time of each discharge to no more than five seconds." The X-26 Taser has a built-in feature that allows the user to keep track of the number of seconds activated. Deputies do not always adhere to the five-second policy. Attachment 1 shows five usages in excess of five seconds on the same individual in a period of less than one minute.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
Require sheriff supervisors conduct a detailed review of all X-26 Taser If a report reveals non-compliance with written policies, reports. appropriate disciplinary action should be administered to the violator.
F3:
There is inconsistency in the use of Less-Lethal Weapons in the Riverside County jails. One facility reported the first option to gain compliance would be the Oleoresin Capsicum (OC) spray (pepper), whereas another facility would rely on the X-26 Taser. The Riverside Sheriff's Department Corrections Division Policy and Procedures does not provide guidance regarding the prioritization of the use of Less-Lethal Weapons.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
Develop realistic training exercises to assist the deputies in determining which is the most appropriate Less-Lethal Weapon rather than relying on the X-26 Taser as the Less-Lethal Weapon of choice.
F4:
In a review of the Corrections Division Policy and Procedures Manual it was noted section 505.07.5.6 has no designated assignment on Emergency Response Team (ERT) for the use of the X-26 Taser. However, the Less-Lethal Devices Manual section on ERT states "Deploys the X-26 Taser as directed by the ERT Sergeant".
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
Conduct a thorough review and update of all documentation to ensure consistency. Seq GMT lime Local Time Duration Temp Battery (11)--- 3:33.41 05:33:41 1/2 76 1 14.45 4.33-38 07-23-28 1 10 20 10045 U3 (M: 22 20:00:22 1 75 it. 0047 14 17:06 07:17.06 24 26 1 0048 01:50.10 18.50:10 Ĭ 26 25 0049 04:18:06 21:18:06 1 25 2.5 0050 03:11:20 2 20:11:20 25 25 0051 01:33:24 18:33:24 1 25 25 0052 01:42:01 18:42:01 24 25 1 0053 01:47:52 18:47:52 25 1 24 0054 01:49:35 18:49:35 1 24 25 0055 06:47:14 23:47:14 1 24 25 0056 08:42:09 01:42:09 25 25 0057 08:42:15 01:42:15 25 25 0058 09:41:44 02:41:44 24 25 1 0059 09:57:32 02:57:32 6 34 24 0060 09:57:40 02:57:40 6 35 23 0061 09:57:46 02:57:46 5 35 23 0062 09:57:59 02:57:59 6 36 22 0063 09:58:09 36 02:58:09 6 22 0064 09:58:18 02:58:18 36 21 6 0065 09:58:24 02:58:24 21 5 36 0066 09:58:30
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
8 findings
F1:
The ranch in the recent past has had approximately 35 cadets, operated at 50% of capacity while staffed for 100%. The 2009-2010 actual operating costs were $4,658,674. Using an average of 35 cadets, this amounts to $133,104 per cadet, per year.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The Twin Pines Ranch should increase the camp population to capacity or even increase capacity to become cost effective.
F2:
The restrooms in the shops and the fire station area are in need of repairs or maintenance. (see Attachment 1)
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
All restrooms should be thoroughly cleaned, repaired and painted. Basic plumbing repairs should be done. A maintenance and cleaning schedule should be established for these facilities.
F3:
The kitchen is in need of refurbishing. Kitchen floors and walls are rough painted concrete that make cleaning and sanitation difficult. Keeping them dry is nearly impossible. (see Attachment 2) The deep sinks are inadequate for cleaning pots and pans.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The kitchen, dining hall floors and walls should be resurfaced with tiles or smooth surface materials. New, larger deep sinks should be installed to facilitate the cleaning of
F4:
Grill, microwaves and ovens are in need of deep cleaning. (see Attachment 3) The dry food storage areas are not rodent proof. They are being used for
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
large cooking apparatus. The food mixer should be replaced or refinished to facilitate cleaning and sanitation. Stainless steel food surfaces on grill, microwaves and ovens should be thoroughly cleaned or replaced. The dry storage area needs floor and wall repair and painting. Doors to
F5:
storage of brooms, mops and buckets. There are adequate storage areas for such apparatus available outside the building that is underutilized. Floors and walls of this area are in need of resurfacing. (see Attachment 4)
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
the outside should be replaced with rodent proof doors and screens. No cleaning equipment, mops, buckets and brooms should be stored in this area. All dry storage should be off the floor on racks. The cold storage box should be completely replaced with a larger box.
F6:
The cold storage room is cramped. It is difficult to see what is stored on the shelves and allow for adequate rotation. The room is not equipped with a recording thermometer.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
Stainless steel wire racks should be utilized inside to allow for cold air circulation and ease of inspection of containers. A recording thermometer should be installed.
F7:
The exhaust vent on the kitchen roof is worn out.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
The exhaust vent should be repaired or replaced. Inspection for accumulated grease and combustible materials should be done.
F8:
The dining hall tablecloths are worn out. The 'sneeze guards' on the steam tables are impossible to see through forcing diners to look under them to see the food, defeating its purpose. (see Attachment 5)
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
Cleanable table coverings should be replaced on a regular basis in the dining hall. The Lucite 'sneeze guards' on the steam table should be replaced. (The Larry D. Smith Correctional Facility in Banning, which prepares and transports meals to county jails, might be utilized for temporary food preparation while improvements are being made. If funding is not available for remodeling, the sheriff's facility might be used on a permanent basis.) ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 2 ATTACHMENT 3 ATTACHMENT 3 ATTACHMENT 4 \mathcal{C} ATTACHMENT 5
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
8 findings
F1:
The ranch in the recent past has had approximately 35 cadets, operated at 50% of capacity while staffed for 100%. The 2009-2010 actual operating costs were $4,658,674. Using an average of 35 cadets, this amounts to $133,104 per cadet, per year.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The Twin Pines Ranch should increase the camp population to capacity or even increase capacity to become cost effective.
F2:
The restrooms in the shops and the fire station area are in need of repairs or maintenance. (see Attachment 1)
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
All restrooms should be thoroughly cleaned, repaired and painted. Basic plumbing repairs should be done. A maintenance and cleaning schedule should be established for these facilities.
F3:
The kitchen is in need of refurbishing. Kitchen floors and walls are rough painted concrete that make cleaning and sanitation difficult. Keeping them dry is nearly impossible. (see Attachment 2) The deep sinks are inadequate for cleaning pots and pans.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The kitchen, dining hall floors and walls should be resurfaced with tiles or smooth surface materials. New, larger deep sinks should be installed to facilitate the cleaning of
F4:
Grill, microwaves and ovens are in need of deep cleaning. (see Attachment 3) The dry food storage areas are not rodent proof. They are being used for
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
large cooking apparatus. The food mixer should be replaced or refinished to facilitate cleaning and sanitation. Stainless steel food surfaces on grill, microwaves and ovens should be thoroughly cleaned or replaced. The dry storage area needs floor and wall repair and painting. Doors to
F5:
storage of brooms, mops and buckets. There are adequate storage areas for such apparatus available outside the building that is underutilized. Floors and walls of this area are in need of resurfacing. (see Attachment 4)
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
the outside should be replaced with rodent proof doors and screens. No cleaning equipment, mops, buckets and brooms should be stored in this area. All dry storage should be off the floor on racks. The cold storage box should be completely replaced with a larger box.
F6:
The cold storage room is cramped. It is difficult to see what is stored on the shelves and allow for adequate rotation. The room is not equipped with a recording thermometer.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
Stainless steel wire racks should be utilized inside to allow for cold air circulation and ease of inspection of containers. A recording thermometer should be installed.
F7:
The exhaust vent on the kitchen roof is worn out.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
The exhaust vent should be repaired or replaced. Inspection for accumulated grease and combustible materials should be done.
F8:
The dining hall tablecloths are worn out. The 'sneeze guards' on the steam tables are impossible to see through forcing diners to look under them to see the food, defeating its purpose. (see Attachment 5)
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
Cleanable table coverings should be replaced on a regular basis in the dining hall. The Lucite 'sneeze guards' on the steam table should be replaced. (The Larry D. Smith Correctional Facility in Banning, which prepares and transports meals to county jails, might be utilized for temporary food preparation while improvements are being made. If funding is not available for remodeling, the sheriff's facility might be used on a permanent basis.) ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 2 ATTACHMENT 3 ATTACHMENT 3 ATTACHMENT 4 \mathcal{C} ATTACHMENT 5
Findings & Recommendations
8 findings
F1:
During inspection of the dog kennel, staff informed grand jury members that the entire kennel had been exposed to the parvovirus. At least two dogs had tested positive for this highly contagious and deadly disease. Staff stated this was the second such outbreak at this facility. When questioned as to why sick animals had been placed in the same kennel with healthy animals, staff responded they have no separate quarantine area.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
Sick animals must be quarantined to prevent spreading the parvovirus and other contagious diseases. Riverside County Department of Animal Services Policy No. 300-03, “Quarantine Guidelines”, states in part: “doors leading into the Quarantine rooms will be locked at all times.”
F2:
Parvovirus is a highly contagious disease, almost always fatal to dogs. Once parvo has been introduced into an area, the virus can live on surfaces such as: floors, walls, cages and food dishes, as well as dirt and grass. People can also transmit the virus on their hands, clothing and shoes. Hand sanitizers and disinfectant trays or mats (for footwear) should be used to limit the transfer of the virus. None were present at this facility. Jurors were directed to a closet in the office and told to use a household disinfectant spray for clothing and shoes. 1
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
Blythe Animal Shelter personnel should immediately install disinfecting trays or mats outside all entrances and exits to enable visitors and staff to disinfect their footwear prior to entering and exiting each building at the facility. Dispensers containing hand sanitizer should be installed in the kennel areas as well as in the office.
F3:
No signs warning of the presence of parvo were posted and verbal notice was not given until after jurors were inside the kennel.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
Signs warning of the danger of spreading parvo and the importance of disinfecting should be posted outside and inside the facility to clearly inform all entering of the hazard prior to exposure.
F4:
Upon entering the area where cats are housed, jurors observed a cage with paperwork lying on top indicating the presence of a cat; however, the cage was empty. When questioned, staff stated they were unsure of the cat’s location and possibly the “work release girl” had taken it. (The Riverside County Department of Probation Alternative Sentencing Program allows some individuals to “volunteer” in exchange for a reduced sentence.)
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
No animals should be removed from the facility without proper authorization and processing of paperwork. Individuals in the work release program should be supervised at all times.
F5:
Inspection of the euthanasia room revealed a refrigerator and cabinets, which although outfitted with hasps and locks, were not locked. Contents included vaccines, euthanasia drugs, syringes and other medical supplies. This area is adjacent to the cat room and accessible to work release workers. The controlled substance log was being kept in the administration area.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
All vaccines, euthanasia drugs, syringes and other medical supplies should be kept locked except when being used. The controlled substance log should be locked in a safe when not in use. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 21, Food and Drugs, 1301.71(a) requires all registrants provide effective controls and procedures to guard against theft and diversion of controlled substances.
F6:
Inspection also revealed two cats housed in cages in the euthanasia room. Staff stated the cats had been in the shelter for some time and were living in the euthanasia room because the cages were larger than the cages in the cat kennel area.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
No animals should be housed in the euthanasia room. Euthanasia should never be performed in front of live animals. County of Riverside, DAS Euthanasia Standard Operating Procedure states, in part: “…euthanasia will not be performed in sight of another animal.” The larger cages should be relocated outside the euthanasia room. “While animals do not ‘know’ they are about to be euthanized, they do recognize that they are in an unfamiliar environment and efforts should be made to reduce stress prior to euthanasia.” (Humane Society of the United States Animal Services Consultation Report, 2005) 3
F7:
The office assistant works alone on the shelter premises, in an isolated area, from 4:00 – 7:00 one night a week, to accommodate pet turn-in and pick-up. This practice jeopardizes the safety of a county employee in violation of Board of Supervisors Policy C-27, “Workplace Violence, Threats and Securities”.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
DAS should comply with Board Policy C-27, Section IX, 2.g., which states in part: “No employee should be permitted to work or stay in a facility or isolated unit when they are the only staff member present in the facility, if the location is so isolated that they are unable to obtain assistance if needed, or in the evening or at night if the clinic or office is closed.”
F8:
The Blythe Animal Shelter is in need of many repairs; however, a new facility is being built in the City of Blythe. It is located a few blocks off the main thoroughfare. The projected completion date is late 2010. Upon entering the dog kennel, it was immediately apparent the facility was infested with cockroaches. Staff stated this has been a problem for some time. Efforts to exterminate them have been hindered by the presence of animals, which prohibits the use of effective poisons. The infestation was present in all three buildings, as well as the shipping container where extra food is stored. 2
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
Upon completion of the new shelter facility, care should be taken, to ensure that all furniture, computers, files, linens, supplies and extra food are pest free before being transferred, to prevent any infestation of the new location. 4
Findings & Recommendations
8 findings
F1:
During inspection of the dog kennel, staff informed grand jury members that the entire kennel had been exposed to the parvovirus. At least two dogs had tested positive for this highly contagious and deadly disease. Staff stated this was the second such outbreak at this facility. When questioned as to why sick animals had been placed in the same kennel with healthy animals, staff responded they have no separate quarantine area.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
Sick animals must be quarantined to prevent spreading the parvovirus and other contagious diseases. Riverside County Department of Animal Services Policy No. 300-03, “Quarantine Guidelines”, states in part: “doors leading into the Quarantine rooms will be locked at all times.”
F2:
Parvovirus is a highly contagious disease, almost always fatal to dogs. Once parvo has been introduced into an area, the virus can live on surfaces such as: floors, walls, cages and food dishes, as well as dirt and grass. People can also transmit the virus on their hands, clothing and shoes. Hand sanitizers and disinfectant trays or mats (for footwear) should be used to limit the transfer of the virus. None were present at this facility. Jurors were directed to a closet in the office and told to use a household disinfectant spray for clothing and shoes. 1
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
Blythe Animal Shelter personnel should immediately install disinfecting trays or mats outside all entrances and exits to enable visitors and staff to disinfect their footwear prior to entering and exiting each building at the facility. Dispensers containing hand sanitizer should be installed in the kennel areas as well as in the office.
F3:
No signs warning of the presence of parvo were posted and verbal notice was not given until after jurors were inside the kennel.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
Signs warning of the danger of spreading parvo and the importance of disinfecting should be posted outside and inside the facility to clearly inform all entering of the hazard prior to exposure.
F4:
Upon entering the area where cats are housed, jurors observed a cage with paperwork lying on top indicating the presence of a cat; however, the cage was empty. When questioned, staff stated they were unsure of the cat’s location and possibly the “work release girl” had taken it. (The Riverside County Department of Probation Alternative Sentencing Program allows some individuals to “volunteer” in exchange for a reduced sentence.)
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
No animals should be removed from the facility without proper authorization and processing of paperwork. Individuals in the work release program should be supervised at all times.
F5:
Inspection of the euthanasia room revealed a refrigerator and cabinets, which although outfitted with hasps and locks, were not locked. Contents included vaccines, euthanasia drugs, syringes and other medical supplies. This area is adjacent to the cat room and accessible to work release workers. The controlled substance log was being kept in the administration area.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
All vaccines, euthanasia drugs, syringes and other medical supplies should be kept locked except when being used. The controlled substance log should be locked in a safe when not in use. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 21, Food and Drugs, 1301.71(a) requires all registrants provide effective controls and procedures to guard against theft and diversion of controlled substances.
F6:
Inspection also revealed two cats housed in cages in the euthanasia room. Staff stated the cats had been in the shelter for some time and were living in the euthanasia room because the cages were larger than the cages in the cat kennel area.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
No animals should be housed in the euthanasia room. Euthanasia should never be performed in front of live animals. County of Riverside, DAS Euthanasia Standard Operating Procedure states, in part: “…euthanasia will not be performed in sight of another animal.” The larger cages should be relocated outside the euthanasia room. “While animals do not ‘know’ they are about to be euthanized, they do recognize that they are in an unfamiliar environment and efforts should be made to reduce stress prior to euthanasia.” (Humane Society of the United States Animal Services Consultation Report, 2005) 3
F7:
The office assistant works alone on the shelter premises, in an isolated area, from 4:00 – 7:00 one night a week, to accommodate pet turn-in and pick-up. This practice jeopardizes the safety of a county employee in violation of Board of Supervisors Policy C-27, “Workplace Violence, Threats and Securities”.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
DAS should comply with Board Policy C-27, Section IX, 2.g., which states in part: “No employee should be permitted to work or stay in a facility or isolated unit when they are the only staff member present in the facility, if the location is so isolated that they are unable to obtain assistance if needed, or in the evening or at night if the clinic or office is closed.”
F8:
The Blythe Animal Shelter is in need of many repairs; however, a new facility is being built in the City of Blythe. It is located a few blocks off the main thoroughfare. The projected completion date is late 2010. Upon entering the dog kennel, it was immediately apparent the facility was infested with cockroaches. Staff stated this has been a problem for some time. Efforts to exterminate them have been hindered by the presence of animals, which prohibits the use of effective poisons. The infestation was present in all three buildings, as well as the shipping container where extra food is stored. 2
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
Upon completion of the new shelter facility, care should be taken, to ensure that all furniture, computers, files, linens, supplies and extra food are pest free before being transferred, to prevent any infestation of the new location. 4
Findings & Recommendations
9 findings
F1:
In 2007 the redevelopment agency floated a bond issue that netted approximately $24 million to fund projects in the redevelopment area. The official statement listed three general categories of planned expenditures: revitalization of downtown, economic incentives and public improvements. Little specificity was included in the official statement. Investigation revealed that the redevelopment agency board had not formulated detailed, prioritized plans for the use of the proceeds.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The redevelopment agency should develop a prioritized list of redevelopment projects to justify any future funding through the bonding process. Further, projects and their prioritization should be widely publicized and then reviewed by members of the community for their input prior to the issuance of future bonds.
F2:
Testimony revealed that the city’s and the redevelopment agency’s planning and project implementation have been hampered by key employee turnover. Since 2008, three city managers have left, and a fourth is scheduled to begin work in February 2010. Since 2004 five community development directors/consultants have come and gone, and the sixth is now in place. Since 2004, four redevelopment managers have left, and the fifth is now in place. Additional investigation revealed that allegations of micro-managing have been leveled against members of the city council/redevelopment agency board.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The Banning City Council and the redevelopment agency should consider retaining an outside consultant to ascertain from employees their attitudes toward their work environment and their relationship with policymakers. Further, the leaders in Banning should take the initiative to establish ongoing workshops on the role of policymakers and employees and how to improve relations.
F3:
One of the programs of the redevelopment agency is called Façade Improvement. Property owners are given grants or forgivable loans to improve the exteriors of their buildings in the project area. It was found that the redevelopment agency board has committed funds for improving the appearance of vacant, unrented property while ongoing businesses are made to wait for assistance.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The redevelopment agency board should prioritize how façade improvement money is spent. First priority should be given to owners of buildings where businesses are operating; second priority should go to building owners who have a commitment to rent a vacant structure; and lowest priority should be instances where a building owner seeks redevelopment money for a vacant building.
F4:
Onsite visits and sworn testimony revealed East Banning to be a blighted area in need of priority attention from the redevelopment agency. There is a paucity of sidewalks, streetlights and parks. Old furniture is strewn about the neighborhood; trash and weeds are plentiful. Aside from some low-income housing expenditures, the redevelopment agency has neglected this blighted area of the city.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
The redevelopment agency should commit now to a major improvement program over the next 10 years to reduce the blight in East Banning.
F5:
Redevelopment agencies are required by law to prepare five-year plans. The 2004-2009 Banning plan notes the need for an additional staff person to assist the one agency employee devoted exclusively to redevelopment. Deadlines have been missed, and programs and contracts have not been monitored and administered adequately. Without the additional person or the hiring of outside consultants, the plan notes, “it is not probable that the agency will be able to implement the programs and projects in the time periods identified herein.” 2
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
The redevelopment agency board should consider the hiring of an additional staff person to help in monitoring current projects and administering programs.
F6:
In July 2009, the redevelopment agency bought property in the western side of the city without acquiring its own independent certified appraisal. Witnesses testified that the price paid, $1,200,000, was above market value. Since the purchase, the redevelopment agency board has budgeted an additional $800,000 to make the property more desireable.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
All future development property purchases by the redevelopment agency must include an independent certified appraisal ordered by the redevelopment agency staff.
F7:
On August 4, 2005 the city council voted to give the Alliance $10,000. In the course of the next four years, the city council and the same people acting as the redevelopment agency board voted to give the Alliance a total of $806,503.08 in public funds for a variety of uses (see appendix for a breakdown on the funds). On August 21, 2006, the first and largest contract between the redevelopment agency and the Alliance was approved for $343,000 over a two-year period. While this contract called for the Alliance to stage arts and cultural events, it also required the Alliance to perform specific redevelopment activities. The following redevelopment activities were never performed: development of a downtown Property-Based Improvement District (PBID) and a campaign to market Banning with advertising on billboards, radio, television and infomercials.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
The redevelopment agency board should enforce the immediate return of $162,000 of public money from the Banning Cultural Alliance in accordance with the terms of the contracts. The amount arises from the Alliance failing to meet its contractual requirement to use $34,000 to develop a PBID; to use $110,000 for a marketing program between 2006 and 2008; and $18,000 to develop a PBID between 2008 and 2009. A reasonable rate of interest on the amount should also be included. 4
F8:
The first two contracts, covering the period between 2006 and 2009, followed the same format. The Alliance was given a check for the total at the beginning of the each contract year. The agreements contained no means to measure success or failure of the efforts by the Alliance, and they contained no criteria to determine whether the obligations were indeed fulfilled.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
The redevelopment agency board should include in all of its contracts with personal services suppliers and outside organizations provisions for measurement of success or failure and of fulfillment or nonfulfillment of the obligations assumed. Penalties and/or termination provisions for nonperformance should be included.
F9:
An examination of the relationship between the Alliance and the redevelopment agency revealed a willingness by the board to fund the group without any measure of accountability, without measures of success or failure and without demands for return of funds not spent on contractual obligations. No other outside organization in Banning has been treated this way by the board of the redevelopment agency. 3
Related Recommendations (1)
R9:
The redevelopment agency board should immediately cease and desist awarding any redevelopment funds to the Cultural Alliance. 5
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
11 findings
F1:
DEH Policy No. 16, Department Policies, states in part: "All Department employees are responsible for reviewing and complying with policies." Newly hired staff in the LEA is not consistently being trained according to procedures set forth in DEH Policy No. 708, Staff Training Procedures. This training is mandated by the Riverside County DEH for newly hired employees and also required for existing personnel to ensure their skills remain current
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
for training as specified in Policy No. 708 are followed. DEH supervisors/trainers should maintain training documentation on a
F2:
LEA personnel as required by Policy No. 708 are not consistently documenting training conducted.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
database and hard copy file records as required by Policy No. 708, Paragraph XV. "Documentation of Training." DEH supervisors/trainers administer oral and written tests as prescribed in
F3:
Trainees are not consistently being administered written and oral tests required by Policy No. 708.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
Policy No. 708. The DEH should develop and the Riverside County Board of Supervisors
F4:
The LEA inspects approximately 100 practitioners of tattooing, body piercing and permanent cosmetics annually. The focus of the inspection process is to establish and maintain sterile conditions and safe disposal of instruments. In 1999, Health and Safety Code §119305 authorized counties to adopt regulations to protect consumers and practitioners from transmission of contagious diseases through cross-contamination of instruments and supplies. The Riverside County Board of Supervisors has not adopted ordinances and regulations to implement the legislation.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
should adopt the required ordinances/regulations immediately to protect practitioners and their customers. DEH should then proceed to have cooperating cities adopt the ordinance or enter into other agreements with DEH for inspection services.
F5:
The DEH Application for Registration of a Person Engaged in the Business of Tattooing, Body Piercing or Permanent Cosmetics (Attachment 1) does not require practitioners to: Provide proof of successful completion of an LEA approved health a. and safety class that has a curriculum, which contains all the sections of the Hazard Control Plan. b. Establish an Exposure Control Plan. Obtain a facility permit. C. d. Document practitioners' protection against Hepatitis B. Obtain a copy of LEA health standards. e.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
DEH must ensure that potential practitioners complete all requirements of registration, as recommended by the California Conference of Local Health Officers, before LEA issues a Certification of Registration. The Health and Safety Code does not authorize unenforceable Interim
F6:
CHA issued Interim Standards in 1999 to be used by Environmental Health Specialists when inspecting tattooing, body piercing and permanent cosmetics operations (Attachment 2). Practitioners sign the form, which commits the signer to comply with these standards. An Advisory Inspection Report is provided to practitioners at the completion of inspections (Attachment 3). Neither the Interim Standards nor Advisory Inspection forms actually contain standards. They merely consist of checklists of subjects that shall apply to a practitioner.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
Standards to be used in lieu of enforceable regulations with standards. LEA should develop an up-to-date set of standards for use by Environmental Health Specialists. This advisory, if to be continued in use, should be consistent with California
F7:
Riverside County Health Services Agency Interim Standards for tattoo and body art practitioners advises: "Practitioners shall not: Apply any tattoo to any person under eighteen (18) years of age except when authorized or directed by a physician." This information is incomplete as stated.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
Penal Code §653: Tattooing persons under the age of 18. "Every person who tattoos or offers to tattoo a person under the age of 18 years is guilty of a misdemeanor. This section is not intended to apply to any act of a licensed practitioner of the healing arts performed in the course of its practice." Change the body piercing standard to accurately reflect Penal Code §652,
F8:
Another incomplete statement in the Interim Standards states that practitioners shall not "Perform body piercing on a person under age of eighteen unless a parent or guardian accompany them."
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
which states "it shall be an infraction if any person performs or offers to perform body piercing upon a person under the age of 18 years, unless the body piercing is performed in the presence of or as directed by a notarized writing by the person's parent or guardian." Ċ,
F9:
Written registration information provided to practitioners of tattooing, body piercing and permanent cosmetics establishments does not inform registrants that a person who violates sterilization, sanitation and safety standards shall be subject to a civil penalty of $500 per violation. There are no provisions for the revocation (after due process) and reinstatement of registration.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9:
Update the registration forms to completely inform practitioners of all fees and consequences of violations. Institute an appropriate set of investigative standards and impose and collect civil penalties if and when allowed. Riverside County would retain all penalties collected.
F10:
Health and Safety Code §119303 required practitioners to pay an annual inspection fee of $105 beginning in January 1999. DEH did not begin collecting the fee until January 2009, ten years later (Attachment 4). DEH's failure to collect these fees from practitioners from 1999 to the end of 2008 deprived the department and county of much needed revenue.
Related Recommendations (1)
R10:
DEH should immediately: a) Ensure that all practitioners are registered with DEH and pay the one-time registration fee. b) Provide registrants with applicable department standards. c) Ensure all registrants are inspected annually and pay the cost of the inspection to DEH. Riverside County is authorized to charge an additional amount if necessary to cover the actual cost of registration and inspection. d) Ensure that practitioners who fail to register or violate the sterilization, sanitation and safety standards are subject to a civil penalty of five hundred dollars ($500) per violation, as required by Health and Safety Code §119306.
F11:
The 2009-2010 Riverside County Grand Jury requested that DEH provide a list of body art practitioner inspections completed in Riverside County in 2007, 2008 and 2009. The lists received contained some incomplete and clearly erroneous data, such as: Numerous inspections were listed as completed in cities in a) San Bernardino, Orange, San Diego and Los Angeles counties. b) Contrary to testimony from several DEH inspectors and supervisors, inspections were completed in the unincorporated portions of Riverside County. c) It is not clear from the information provided what subsequent actions were taken after inspections disclosed discrepancies such as: "waste disposal" and "sanitation" during routine and follow-up inspections. d) Inspection information was not specific enough to be useful. Entries such as "Riverside", "Riverside Countywide" and "Moreno Valley", etc., were provided instead of exact address and practitioner identification information.
Related Recommendations (1)
R11:
Information provided to agencies outside of DEH should be responsive to the information requested with as much accuracy and specificity as possible. Report Issued: 05/05/10 Report Public: 05/07/10 Response Due: 08/03/10 Reg # Office Use Only RIVERSIDE COUNTY COMMUNITY HEALTH AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Application for Registration of a Person Engaged in the Business of Tattooing, Body Piercing or Permanent Cosmetics 4080 Lemon Street, 9th Floor • P.O. Box 1280, Riverside, CA 92502-1280 ☐ One-Time Registration: $25.00 ☐ Annual Renewal/Inspection Fee: $105.00 Applicant's Full Name Date of Birth Physical Description: Wt.: Ht.: Eyes: Hair: Personal ID/CDL No.: Exp. Date: Gender: Residential Address: Number, Street Name, Apt. Number, City, Zip. Home Phone" / Cell Phone" Mailing Address (if different from above): Check all Procedures to be performed:
Additional Recommendations
15
Not linked to specific findings.
R14:
46. ☐ Single use needles only for body ☐ Used items proper disearded □ Contaminated non-disposable
R15:
equipment properly stored ☐ Proper disposal of sewage/liquid waste piercing
R16:
2. □ Client advised procedure is permanent. □ No eating, drinking or smoking. □ Sterilizer used/cleaned/maintained 17
R23:
□ Restrooms available to clients ☐ Separate cleaning / sterilization area □ Proper Liquid waste disposal
R24:
☐ Approved sterilization units with ☐ Restroom within 200 feet
R26:
43. EQUIPMENT WASTE DISPOSAL CLIENTS □ I rash receptacles clean & covered ☐ Separate area for cleaning equipment ☐ Skin surfaces cleaned before procedure
R27:
☐ Biohizardous-inbeled sharps container ☐ Clean area sink □ No procedures on unhealthy skin
R33:
properly □ Clean outer clothing 18 ☐ Client not impaired by drugs or
R34:
Alcohol □ Hepatitis B Vaccination □ Documentation on required spore test
R36:
packaged/sterilized/stored cosmetics for persons under eighteen □ Proper use of disposable gloves
R37:
☐ Proper use of face shield
R38:
☐ Inks, pigments, dyes not reused 21 □ Exposure control plan
R42:
□ Handsinks adequate
R45:
13. 28 ☐ Contaminated sharps/waste disposal □ Approved sanitizer 29 ☐ Proper aftercare instructions
R48:
□ Janitorial sink □ Clean linens used for each client
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
11 findings
F1:
DEH Policy No. 16, Department Policies, states in part: "All Department employees are responsible for reviewing and complying with policies." Newly hired staff in the LEA is not consistently being trained according to procedures set forth in DEH Policy No. 708, Staff Training Procedures. This training is mandated by the Riverside County DEH for newly hired employees and also required for existing personnel to ensure their skills remain current.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
for training as specified in Policy No. 708 are followed. DEH supervisors/trainers should maintain training documentation on a
F2:
LEA personnel as required by Policy No. 708 are not consistently documenting training conducted.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
database and hard copy file records as required by Policy No. 708, Paragraph XV. "Documentation of Training." DEH supervisors/trainers administer oral and written tests as prescribed in
F3:
Trainees are not consistently being administered written and oral tests required by Policy No. 708.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
Policy No. 708. The DEH should develop and the Riverside County Board of Supervisors
F4:
The LEA inspects approximately 100 practitioners of tattooing, body piercing and permanent cosmetics annually. The focus of the inspection process is to establish and maintain sterile conditions and safe disposal of instruments. In 1999, Health and Safety Code §119305 authorized counties to adopt regulations to protect consumers and practitioners from transmission of contagious diseases through cross-contamination of instruments and supplies. The Riverside County Board of Supervisors has not adopted ordinances and regulations to implement the legislation.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
should adopt the required ordinances/regulations immediately to protect practitioners and their customers. DEH should then proceed to have cooperating cities adopt the ordinance or enter into other agreements with DEH for inspection services.
F5:
The DEH Application for Registration of a Person Engaged in the Business of Tattooing, Body Piercing or Permanent Cosmetics (Attachment 1) does not require practitioners to: Provide proof of successful completion of an LEA approved health a. and safety class that has a curriculum, which contains all the sections of the Hazard Control Plan. b. Establish an Exposure Control Plan. Obtain a facility permit. C. d. Document practitioners' protection against Hepatitis B. Obtain a copy of LEA health standards. e.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
DEH must ensure that potential practitioners complete all requirements of registration, as recommended by the California Conference of Local Health Officers, before LEA issues a Certification of Registration. The Health and Safety Code does not authorize unenforceable Interim
F6:
CHA issued Interim Standards in 1999 to be used by Environmental Health Specialists when inspecting tattooing, body piercing and permanent cosmetics operations (Attachment 2). Practitioners sign the form, which commits the signer to comply with these standards. An Advisory Inspection Report is provided to practitioners at the completion of inspections (Attachment 3). Neither the Interim Standards nor Advisory Inspection forms actually contain standards. They merely consist of checklists of subjects that shall apply to a practitioner.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
Standards to be used in lieu of enforceable regulations with standards. LEA should develop an up-to-date set of standards for use by Environmental Health Specialists. This advisory, if to be continued in use, should be consistent with California
F7:
Riverside County Health Services Agency Interim Standards for tattoo and body art practitioners advises: "Practitioners shall not: Apply any tattoo to any person under eighteen (18) years of age except when authorized or directed by a physician." This information is incomplete as stated.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
Penal Code §653: Tattooing persons under the age of 18. "Every person who tattoos or offers to tattoo a person under the age of 18 years is guilty of a misdemeanor. This section is not intended to apply to any act of a licensed practitioner of the healing arts performed in the course of its practice." Change the body piercing standard to accurately reflect Penal Code §652,
F8:
Another incomplete statement in the Interim Standards states that practitioners shall not "Perform body piercing on a person under age of eighteen unless a parent or guardian accompany them."
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
which states "it shall be an infraction if any person performs or offers to perform body piercing upon a person under the age of 18 years, unless the body piercing is performed in the presence of or as directed by a notarized writing by the person's parent or guardian." Ċ, 4
F9:
Written registration information provided to practitioners of tattooing, body piercing and permanent cosmetics establishments does not inform registrants that a person who violates sterilization, sanitation and safety standards shall be subject to a civil penalty of $500 per violation. There are no provisions for the revocation (after due process) and reinstatement of registration.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9:
Update the registration forms to completely inform practitioners of all fees and consequences of violations. Institute an appropriate set of investigative standards and impose and collect civil penalties if and when allowed. Riverside County would retain all penalties collected.
F10:
Health and Safety Code §119303 required practitioners to pay an annual inspection fee of $105 beginning in January 1999. DEH did not begin collecting the fee until January 2009, ten years later (Attachment 4). DEH's failure to collect these fees from practitioners from 1999 to the end of 2008 deprived the department and county of much needed revenue.
Related Recommendations (1)
R10:
DEH should immediately: a) Ensure that all practitioners are registered with DEH and pay the one-time registration fee. b) Provide registrants with applicable department standards. c) Ensure all registrants are inspected annually and pay the cost of the inspection to DEH. Riverside County is authorized to charge an additional amount if necessary to cover the actual cost of registration and inspection. d) Ensure that practitioners who fail to register or violate the sterilization, sanitation and safety standards are subject to a civil penalty of five hundred dollars ($500) per violation, as required by Health and Safety Code §119306.
F11:
The 2009-2010 Riverside County Grand Jury requested that DEH provide a list of body art practitioner inspections completed in Riverside County in 2007, 2008 and 2009. The lists received contained some incomplete and clearly erroneous data, such as: Numerous inspections were listed as completed in cities in a) San Bernardino, Orange, San Diego and Los Angeles counties. b) Contrary to testimony from several DEH inspectors and supervisors, inspections were completed in the unincorporated portions of Riverside County. c) It is not clear from the information provided what subsequent actions were taken after inspections disclosed discrepancies such as: "waste disposal" and "sanitation" during routine and follow-up inspections. d) Inspection information was not specific enough to be useful. Entries such as "Riverside", "Riverside Countywide" and "Moreno Valley", etc., were provided instead of exact address and practitioner identification information.
Related Recommendations (1)
R11:
Information provided to agencies outside of DEH should be responsive to the information requested with as much accuracy and specificity as possible. Report Issued: 05/05/10 Report Public: 05/07/10 Response Due: 08/03/10 5 Reg # Office Use Only RIVERSIDE COUNTY COMMUNITY HEALTH AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Application for Registration of a Person Engaged in the Business of Tattooing, Body Piercing or Permanent Cosmetics 4080 Lemon Street, 9th Floor • P.O. Box 1280, Riverside, CA 92502-1280 ☐ One-Time Registration: $25.00 ☐ Annual Renewal/Inspection Fee: $105.00 Applicant's Full Name Date of Birth Physical Description: Wt.: Ht.: Eyes: Hair: Personal ID/CDL No.: Exp. Date: Gender: Residential Address: Number, Street Name, Apt. Number, City, Zip. Home Phone" / Cell Phone" Mailing Address (if different from above): Check all Procedures to be performed:
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
11 findings
F1:
DEH Policy No. 16, Department Policies, states in part: "All Department employees are responsible for reviewing and complying with policies." Newly hired staff in the LEA is not consistently being trained according to procedures set forth in DEH Policy No. 708, Staff Training Procedures. This training is mandated by the Riverside County DEH for newly hired employees and also required for existing personnel to ensure their skills remain current.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
DEH supervisors should ensure that the content, sequence and procedures for training as specified in Policy No. 708 are followed.
F2:
LEA personnel as required by Policy No. 708 are not consistently documenting training conducted.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
DEH supervisors/trainers should maintain training documentation on a database and hard copy file records as required by Policy No. 708, Paragraph XV. "Documentation of Training."
F3:
Trainees are not consistently being administered written and oral tests required by Policy No. 708. The LEA inspects approximately 100 practitioners of tattooing, body
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
DEH supervisors/trainers administer oral and written tests as prescribed in Policy No. 708. The DEH should develop and the Riverside County Board of Supervisors
F4:
piercing and permanent cosmetics annually. The focus of the inspection process is to establish and maintain sterile conditions and safe disposal of instruments. In 1999, Health and Safety Code §119305 authorized counties to adopt regulations to protect consumers and practitioners from transmission of contagious diseases through cross-contamination of instruments and supplies. The Riverside County Board of Supervisors has not adopted ordinances and regulations to implement the legislation.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
should adopt the required ordinances/regulations immediately to protect DEH should then proceed to have practitioners and their customers. cooperating cities adopt the ordinance or enter into other agreements with DEH for inspection services.
F5:
The DEH Application for Registration of a Person Engaged in the Business of Tattooing, Body Piercing or Permanent Cosmetics (Attachment 1) does not require practitioners to: Provide proof of successful completion of an LEA approved health a. and safety class that has a curriculum, which contains all the sections of the Hazard Control Plan. b. Establish an Exposure Control Plan. Obtain a facility permit. C. Document practitioners' protection against Hepatitis B. d. Obtain a copy of LEA health standards. e. CHA issued Interim Standards in 1999 to be used by Environmental
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
DEH must ensure that potential practitioners complete all requirements of registration, as recommended by the California Conference of Local Health Officers, before LEA issues a Certification of Registration. The Health and Safety Code does not authorize unenforceable Interim
F6:
Health Specialists when inspecting tattooing, body piercing and permanent cosmetics operations (Attachment 2). Practitioners sign the form, which commits the signer to comply with these standards. An Advisory Inspection Report is provided to practitioners at the completion of inspections (Attachment 3). Neither the Interim Standards nor Advisory Inspection forms actually contain standards. They merely consist of checklists of subjects that shall apply to a practitioner.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
Standards to be used in lieu of enforceable regulations with standards. LEA should develop an up-to-date set of standards for use by Environmental Health Specialists. This advisory, if to be continued in use, should be consistent with California
F7:
Riverside County Health Services Agency Interim Standards for tattoo and body art practitioners advises: "Practitioners shall not: Apply any tattoo to any person under eighteen (18) years of age except when authorized or directed by a physician." This information is incomplete as stated.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
Penal Code §653: Tattooing persons under the age of 18. "Every person who tattoos or offers to tattoo a person under the age of 18 years is guilty of a misdemeanor. This section is not intended to apply to any act of a licensed practitioner of the healing arts performed in the course of its practice." Change the body piercing standard to accurately reflect Penal Code §652,
F8:
Another incomplete statement in the Interim Standards states that practitioners shall not "Perform body piercing on a person under age of eighteen unless a parent or guardian accompany them." ķ
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
which states "it shall be an infraction if any person performs or offers to perform body piercing upon a person under the age of 18 years, unless the body piercing is performed in the presence of or as directed by a notarized writing by the person's parent or guardian." 2 4
F9:
Written registration information provided to practitioners of tattooing, body piercing and permanent cosmetics establishments does not inform registrants that a person who violates sterilization, sanitation and safety standards shall be subject to a civil penalty of $500 per violation. There are no provisions for the revocation (after due process) and reinstatement of registration.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9:
Update the registration forms to completely inform practitioners of all fees and consequences of violations. Institute an appropriate set of investigative standards and impose and collect civil penalties if and when allowed. Riverside County would retain all penalties collected. DEH should immediately:
F10:
Health and Safety Code §119303 required practitioners to pay an annual inspection fee of $105 beginning in January 1999. DEH did not begin collecting the fee until January 2009, ten years later (Attachment 4). DEH's failure to collect these fees from practitioners from 1999 to the end of 2008 deprived the department and county of much needed revenue.
Related Recommendations (1)
R10:
a) Ensure that all practitioners are registered with DEH and pay the one-time registration fee. b) Provide registrants with applicable department standards. c) Ensure all registrants are inspected annually and pay the cost of the inspection to DEH. Riverside County is authorized to charge an additional amount if necessary to cover the actual cost of registration and inspection. d) Ensure that practitioners who fail to register or violate the sterilization, sanitation and safety standards are subject to a civil penalty of five hundred dollars ($500) per violation, as required by Health and Safety Code §119306. Information provided to agencies outside of DEH should be responsive to the
F11:
The 2009-2010 Riverside County Grand Jury requested that DEH provide a list of body art practitioner inspections completed in Riverside County in 2007, 2008 and 2009. The lists received contained some incomplete and clearly erroneous data, such as: a) Numerous inspections were listed as completed in cities in San Bernardino, Orange, San Diego and Los Angeles counties. b) Contrary to testimony from several DEH inspectors and supervisors, inspections were completed in the unincorporated portions of Riverside County. C) It is not clear from the information provided what subsequent actions were taken after inspections disclosed discrepancies such as: "waste disposal" and "sanitation" during routine and follow-up inspections. d) Inspection information was not specific enough to be useful. Entries such as "Riverside", "Riverside Countywide" and "Moreno Valley", etc., were provided instead of exact address and practitioner identification information.
Related Recommendations (1)
R11:
information requested with as much accuracy and specificity as possible. Report Issued: 05/05/10 Report Public: 05/07/10 Response Due: 08/03/10 5 Reg# Office Use Only RIVERSIDE COUNTY COMMUNITY HEALTH AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Application for Registration of a Person Engaged in the Business of Tattooing, Body Piercing or Permanent Cosmetics 4080 Lemon Street, 9th Floor • P.O. Box 1280, Riverside, CA 92502-1280 ☐ One-Time Registration: $25.00 ☐ Annual Renewal/Inspection Fee: $105.00 Applicant's Full Name: Date of Birth Physical Description: Ht.: Wt.: Eyes: Hair: Personal ID/CDL No.: Exp. Date: Gender: Residential Address: Number, Street Name, Apt. Number, City, Zip. Home Phone# / Cell Phone# Mailing Address (if different from above). Check all Procedures to be performed:
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
11 findings
F1:
DEH Policy No. 16, Department Policies, states in part: "All Department employees are responsible for reviewing and complying with policies." Newly hired staff in the LEA is not consistently being trained according to procedures set forth in DEH Policy No. 708, Staff Training Procedures. This training is mandated by the Riverside County DEH for newly hired employees and also required for existing personnel to ensure their skills remain current.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
DEH supervisors should ensure that the content, sequence and procedures for training as specified in Policy No. 708 are followed.
F2:
LEA personnel as required by Policy No. 708 are not consistently documenting training conducted.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
DEH supervisors/trainers should maintain training documentation on a database and hard copy file records as required by Policy No. 708, Paragraph XV. "Documentation of Training."
F3:
Trainees are not consistently being administered written and oral tests required by Policy No. 708. The LEA inspects approximately 100 practitioners of tattooing, body
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
DEH supervisors/trainers administer oral and written tests as prescribed in Policy No. 708. The DEH should develop and the Riverside County Board of Supervisors
F4:
piercing and permanent cosmetics annually. The focus of the inspection process is to establish and maintain sterile conditions and safe disposal of instruments. In 1999, Health and Safety Code §119305 authorized counties to adopt regulations to protect consumers and practitioners from transmission of contagious diseases through cross-contamination of instruments and supplies. The Riverside County Board of Supervisors has not adopted ordinances and regulations to implement the legislation.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
should adopt the required ordinances/regulations immediately to protect DEH should then proceed to have practitioners and their customers. cooperating cities adopt the ordinance or enter into other agreements with DEH for inspection services.
F5:
The DEH Application for Registration of a Person Engaged in the Business of Tattooing, Body Piercing or Permanent Cosmetics (Attachment 1) does not require practitioners to: Provide proof of successful completion of an LEA approved health a. and safety class that has a curriculum, which contains all the sections of the Hazard Control Plan. b. Establish an Exposure Control Plan. Obtain a facility permit. C. Document practitioners' protection against Hepatitis B. d. Obtain a copy of LEA health standards. e. CHA issued Interim Standards in 1999 to be used by Environmental
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
DEH must ensure that potential practitioners complete all requirements of registration, as recommended by the California Conference of Local Health Officers, before LEA issues a Certification of Registration. The Health and Safety Code does not authorize unenforceable Interim
F6:
Health Specialists when inspecting tattooing, body piercing and permanent cosmetics operations (Attachment 2). Practitioners sign the form, which commits the signer to comply with these standards. An Advisory Inspection Report is provided to practitioners at the completion of inspections (Attachment 3). Neither the Interim Standards nor Advisory Inspection forms actually contain standards. They merely consist of checklists of subjects that shall apply to a practitioner.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
Standards to be used in lieu of enforceable regulations with standards. LEA should develop an up-to-date set of standards for use by Environmental Health Specialists. This advisory, if to be continued in use, should be consistent with California
F7:
Riverside County Health Services Agency Interim Standards for tattoo and body art practitioners advises: "Practitioners shall not: Apply any tattoo to any person under eighteen (18) years of age except when authorized or directed by a physician." This information is incomplete as stated.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
Penal Code §653: Tattooing persons under the age of 18. "Every person who tattoos or offers to tattoo a person under the age of 18 years is guilty of a misdemeanor. This section is not intended to apply to any act of a licensed practitioner of the healing arts performed in the course of its practice." Change the body piercing standard to accurately reflect Penal Code §652,
F8:
Another incomplete statement in the Interim Standards states that practitioners shall not "Perform body piercing on a person under age of eighteen unless a parent or guardian accompany them." ķ
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
which states "it shall be an infraction if any person performs or offers to perform body piercing upon a person under the age of 18 years, unless the body piercing is performed in the presence of or as directed by a notarized writing by the person's parent or guardian."
F9:
Written registration information provided to practitioners of tattooing, body piercing and permanent cosmetics establishments does not inform registrants that a person who violates sterilization, sanitation and safety standards shall be subject to a civil penalty of $500 per violation. There are no provisions for the revocation (after due process) and reinstatement of registration.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9:
Update the registration forms to completely inform practitioners of all fees and consequences of violations. Institute an appropriate set of investigative standards and impose and collect civil penalties if and when allowed. Riverside County would retain all penalties collected. DEH should immediately:
F10:
Health and Safety Code §119303 required practitioners to pay an annual inspection fee of $105 beginning in January 1999. DEH did not begin collecting the fee until January 2009, ten years later (Attachment 4). DEH's failure to collect these fees from practitioners from 1999 to the end of 2008 deprived the department and county of much needed revenue.
Related Recommendations (1)
R10:
a) Ensure that all practitioners are registered with DEH and pay the one-time registration fee. b) Provide registrants with applicable department standards. c) Ensure all registrants are inspected annually and pay the cost of the inspection to DEH. Riverside County is authorized to charge an additional amount if necessary to cover the actual cost of registration and inspection. d) Ensure that practitioners who fail to register or violate the sterilization, sanitation and safety standards are subject to a civil penalty of five hundred dollars ($500) per violation, as required by Health and Safety Code §119306. Information provided to agencies outside of DEH should be responsive to the
F11:
The 2009-2010 Riverside County Grand Jury requested that DEH provide a list of body art practitioner inspections completed in Riverside County in 2007, 2008 and 2009. The lists received contained some incomplete and clearly erroneous data, such as: a) Numerous inspections were listed as completed in cities in San Bernardino, Orange, San Diego and Los Angeles counties. b) Contrary to testimony from several DEH inspectors and supervisors, inspections were completed in the unincorporated portions of Riverside County. C) It is not clear from the information provided what subsequent actions were taken after inspections disclosed discrepancies such as: "waste disposal" and "sanitation" during routine and follow-up inspections. d) Inspection information was not specific enough to be useful. Entries such as "Riverside", "Riverside Countywide" and "Moreno Valley", etc., were provided instead of exact address and practitioner identification information.
Related Recommendations (1)
R11:
information requested with as much accuracy and specificity as possible. Report Issued: 05/05/10 Report Public: 05/07/10 Response Due: 08/03/10 Reg# Office Use Only RIVERSIDE COUNTY COMMUNITY HEALTH AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Application for Registration of a Person Engaged in the Business of Tattooing, Body Piercing or Permanent Cosmetics 4080 Lemon Street, 9th Floor • P.O. Box 1280, Riverside, CA 92502-1280 ☐ One-Time Registration: $25.00 ☐ Annual Renewal/Inspection Fee: $105.00 Applicant's Full Name: Date of Birth Physical Description: Ht.: Wt.: Eyes: Hair: Personal ID/CDL No.: Exp. Date: Gender: Residential Address: Number, Street Name, Apt. Number, City, Zip. Home Phone# / Cell Phone# Mailing Address (if different from above). Check all Procedures to be performed:
Additional Recommendations
13
Not linked to specific findings.
R14:
□ Approved sanitizer
R15:
30. 17 equipment property stored piercing 18 ☐ Proper disposal of sewage/liquid waster CHEWES AND STANCE OF THE PROPERTY OF A PARTY HAS A STANCE OF THE PARTY OF THE PARTY OF THE PARTY OF THE PARTY OF THE PARTY OF THE PARTY OF THE PARTY OF THE PARTY OF THE PARTY OF THE PARTY OF THE PARTY OF THE PARTY OF THE P August 1, 2008 NOTICE TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY TATTOO, BODY PIERCING and PERMANENT COSMETIC PRACTIONERS In accordance with Assembly Bill 186, Section 119303 of the California Health and Safety Code, this notice is to inform every person engaged in the business of tattooing. body piercing or permanent cosmetics of the County's implementation of the annual inspection fee. Effective January 1, 2009 all body art practitioners practicing in the County of Riverside are hereby required to: 1) New Practitioner Registrants - Pay a one-time registration fee of twenty-five dollars ($25), to the Department of Environmental Health. 2) Continuing/Existing Practitioners - Pay an annual inspection fee of one hundred five dollars ($105), to the Department of Environmental Health. Please be advised that the County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health has previously assumed the costs related to annual inspection services. However, due to the decline in the economy this Department can no longer shoulder such costs. Existing practitioners will begin receiving annual invoices in the amount of $105.00 dollars due. effective January 1, 2009. More information of Assembly Bill 186 can be found online at http://info.sen.ea.gov. If still questions, feel free to contact this Department directly at: (951) 955-8982 (Western County), or (760) 393-3390 (Eastern County Office). ATTACHMENT 4
R16:
2. ☐ Sterilizer used/cleaned/maintained ☐ No eating, drinking or smoking □ Client advised procedure is permanent
R19:
☐ Tattoing, body piercing, permanent îli. packaged/sterilized/stored cosmetics for persons under eighteen 37 □ Proper use of disposable gloves
R20:
☐ Facility permit 38
R21:
□ Exposure control plan
R23:
40. ☐ Separate cleaning / sterilization area ☐ Proper Liquid waste disposal ☐ Restrooms available to clients
R25:
42. ☐ All procedures performed inside vehicle ☐ Restruom walls & ceiling light colored spore test certification
R26:
43. EQUIPMENT CLIENTS WASTE DISPOSAL ☐ Separate area for cleaning equipment ☐ Skin surfaces cleaned before procedure □ Trush receptacles clean & covered 12
R27:
44 13 □ Clean area sink □ No procedures on unhealthy skin. □ Biohazardous-labeled sharps container
R29:
□ Proper aftercare instructions ☐ Contaminated sharps/waste disposal 46 ☐ Contaminated non-disposable ☐ Single use needles only for body □ Used items proper discarded
R33:
17. properly ☐ Clean outer clothing. □ Client not impaired by drugs or
R41:
□ Approved sterilization units with ☐ Restroom within 200 feet □ Handsinks adequate 11
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
5 findings
F1:
The current contract with Diamond W Events does not specify how performance is measured or evaluated, only that 30 hours per week would be spent performing services. It also neglects to specify a time when the emergency preparedness plan should be completed.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
Upon renewal, on September 30, 2010 the contract with Diamond W Events should be rewritten to identify specific tasks, accounting, and how time is utilized.
F2:
Diamond W Events was selected without competitive bidding. Additionally, prior friendship with the vendor violates city purchasing procedure 3.06.010 (Responsible Bidders), which states in part: “A determination as to whether or not a bidder is a responsible bidder shall include an evaluation or relevant factors including, but not limited to the following factors: “Whether the bidder has a previous or existing relationship with an officer or employee of the city that may create a conflict of interest on behalf of the officer or employee if a contract is awarded to the bidder”.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The city council and city manager should comply with purchasing procedure 3.06.010 (Responsible Bidders).
F3:
On September 16, 2009, the planning commission passed a request by the Cornerstone Church to carve out a large hillside on its property for the expansion of its parking lot. The planning commission expressed concerns about the project due to the large number of truckloads of dirt, which would be hauled to church property in Murrieta via Bundy Canyon Road. The city council voted to receive and file the recommendation of the planning commission. Testimony revealed that two members of the city council are members of the Cornerstone Church. They did not recuse themselves from discussions and actions taken concerning the approval of the Cornerstone Church’s building and earthmoving requests.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
On all matters relating to the Cornerstone Church, city council members who are members of the church should recuse themselves, to avoid a conflict of interest.
F4:
There is no written procedure governing the administration of contracts or contract employees, specifically how contractor performance is measured, by whom and who approves the payment of invoices.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
The city council and city management should develop policy and procedures for administration of contracted services. These should be in compliance with accepted public sector contracting practices.
F5:
Recently, along with the efforts by city and county agencies to find ways to cut spending, the City of Wildomar decided to close offices one day per week, citing the potential savings of $500 per year in water and electricity. While other cities reduced salaries, the effect in Wildomar reduced public access to city hall by one day per week. No reduction in salaries was realized. 2
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
Since the city council has reversed its decision to close city hall on Fridays and restore the five-day schedule, it should institute such action in the future only after a cost benefit analysis. 3
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
2 findings
F1:
The City of Blythe entered into a sublease agreement and a Community Benefits Agreement with US Solar dated November 10, 2009. The sublease is in violation of terms of the lease agreement dated May 20, 1997, between the County of Riverside and the City of Blythe.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The City of Blythe should cancel all not proposed sublease agreements and the Community Benefits Agreement between the City of Blythe and Southwest Land Holdings, LLC (a wholly owned affiliate of US Solar) for the airport property. The EDA should assume the role as sole leasing agency for all lease agreements between the County of Riverside and Southwest Land Holdings, LLC.
F2:
The EDA holds that this sublease is unacceptable to the county and in violation of the existing lease agreement between the County of Riverside and the City of Blythe. The EDA is in favor of the project and desirous of proceeding with a proper lease arrangement with the legal entities.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The EDA should proceed with creating a lease between the County of Riverside and Southwest Land Holding, LLC, a wholly owned affiliate of U.S. Solar, for the 829 acres and comply with the covenants imposed by the Federal Aviation Administrations (FAA). Public Law 80-289 states in part "the income from such property must be used to support the maintenance, operation, or development costs of the aeronautical property." Blythe Airport Solar Sit Buck Boulevard RES IN VICINITY OF BLYTHE AIRPORT / SOLAR SITE Riverside Avenue Aerial View Looking West ATTACHMENT ' Blythe Airpor H T Hobsonway FEAT - I seems 1088.30 SKET 8 DIVINITION TO U.S. SOLAR - BLYTHE SOLAR ! 20.00 CARPET EKEM BOTTENHO 25 n 550 SHEET CONTRACT CCCTBRE 15 196 THINE STREET PACE NO. 895,118198, pm. 99 л LEBERT CHOLF, A.C. ř SCHOOL AND SHOP 上) ATTACHMENT 2 可能知道 A WEST DANNE SEP-PI ā A say 311 VICINITY MAP LOCATION MAP - MIN. SEC. . - a 19.480 LEGEND 4 9 . Ì 9 5 BIGNERANS - PLANING - SURPRING The Holt Group, Inc. RAME ANDERROWME FY LIKECONTINUETRY ACCOR NOW MANTANCE PASSNE ONEN DATE ON THE PASSNE ASSENCE ON THE PASSNE ASSENCE ON THE PASSNE ON THE PASSNE ON THE PASSNE ON THE PASSNE ON THE PASSNE ON THE PASSNE ON THE PASSNE ON THE PASSNE ON THE PASSNE ON THE PASSNE ON THE PASSN MESSEY & TEMPTONG 語語 齓 - PROJECT All death An alite City of ...
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
2 findings
F1:
The City of Blythe entered into a sublease agreement and a Community Benefits Agreement with US Solar dated November 10, 2009. The sublease is in violation of terms of the lease agreement dated May 20, 1997, between the County of Riverside and the City of Blythe.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The City of Blythe should cancel all not proposed sublease agreements and the Community Benefits Agreement between the City of Blythe and Southwest Land Holdings, LLC (a wholly owned affiliate of US Solar) for the airport property. The EDA should assume the role as sole leasing agency for all lease agreements between the County of Riverside and Southwest Land Holdings, LLC.
F2:
The EDA holds that this sublease is unacceptable to the county and in violation of the existing lease agreement between the County of Riverside and the City of Blythe. The EDA is in favor of the project and desirous of proceeding with a proper lease arrangement with the legal entities.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The EDA should proceed with creating a lease between the County of Riverside and Southwest Land Holding, LLC, a wholly owned affiliate of U.S. Solar, for the 829 acres and comply with the covenants imposed by the Federal Aviation Administrations (FAA). Public Law 80-289 states in part "the income from such property must be used to support the maintenance, operation, or development costs of the aeronautical property." Blythe Airport Solar Sit Buck Boulevard RES IN VICINITY OF BLYTHE AIRPORT / SOLAR SITE Riverside Avenue Aerial View Looking West ATTACHMENT ' Blythe Airpor H T Hobsonway FEAT - I seems 1088.30 SKET 8 DIVINITION TO U.S. SOLAR - BLYTHE SOLAR ! 20.00 CARPET EKEM BOTTENHO 25 n 550 SHEET CONTRACT CCCTBRE 15 196 THINE STREET PACE NO. 895,118198, pm. 99 л LEBERT CHOLF, A.C. ř SCHOOL AND SHOP 上) ATTACHMENT 2 可能知道 A WEST DANNE SEP-PI ā A say 311 VICINITY MAP LOCATION MAP - MIN. SEC. . - a 19.480 LEGEND 4 9 . Ì 9 5 BIGNERANS - PLANING - SURPRING The Holt Group, Inc. RAME ANDERROWME FY LIKECONTINUETRY ACCOR NOW MANTANCE PASSNE ONEN DATE ON THE PASSNE ASSENCE ON THE PASSNE ASSENCE ON THE PASSNE ON THE PASSNE ON THE PASSNE ON THE PASSNE ON THE PASSNE ON THE PASSNE ON THE PASSNE ON THE PASSNE ON THE PASSNE ON THE PASSNE ON THE PASSN MESSEY & TEMPTONG 語語 齓 - PROJECT All death An alite City of ...
* This report's PDF did not contain easily extractable text and required Optical Character Recognition (OCR) for analysis. There may be minor errors in the extracted findings and recommendations due to OCR limitations with scanned documents.