Sacramento County Grand Jury
2007-2008
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 (9)
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
1 findings
F2:
Current codes or City policy do not require an immediate on-site visit by an employee ofAnimal Services, upon notification that one animal has killed another. Such a visit has to be requested.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
A provision should be included in the Elk Grove codes that, upon notification of death of an animal by another animal, the person reporting such an incident should be told they may request an immediate visit by an animal control officer. Response Requirements Penal Code sections 933 and 933.5 require that specific responses to both the findings and recommendations contained in this report be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Sacramento Superior Court by October 1,2008, from: • Elk Grove City Council 62
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
Elk Grove Animal Services should set up procedures to guarantee timely response to affidavits filed with them.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
2 findings
F1:
B. Elk Grove Animal Services did not adhere to the timelines of the Municipal Code relating to complaints of "vicious" animals. The delayed response and the misinformation given to the cat owners created the perception of injustice.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
Elk Grove Animal Services should set up procedures to guarantee timely response to affidavits filed with them.
F2:
Current codes or City policy do not require an immediate on-site visit by an employee ofAnimal Services, upon notification that one animal has killed another. Such a visit has to be requested.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
A provision should be included in the Elk Grove codes that, upon notification of death of an animal by another animal, the person reporting such an incident should be told they may request an immediate visit by an animal control officer. Response Requirements Penal Code sections 933 and 933.5 require that specific responses to both the findings and recommendations contained in this report be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Sacramento Superior Court by October 1,2008, from: • Elk Grove City Council 62
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
2 findings
F1:
Sacramento International's Master Plan was approved by the Board ofSupervisors in late 2007. It was drafted as a 20-year plan. However, as a result ofthe complex environmental reviews now required which take up to a cumulative eight years before completion, International's Master Plan is now a 12-year plan. Even though updates are planned every 5 years, it remains a short term airport plan.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
Future airport master plans should be 30-Year Plans to take into account the impact ofdelays resulting from complex environmental reviews and extensive community input required prior to approval.
F4:
Executive Airport's 5,500 foot runway is totally encroached by development.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
As appropriate, and without jeopardizing current flight operations, the County Airport Director should discourage jet aircraft from using Executive Airport, and, through incentives, encourage jet aircraft to use Mather Field, McClellan or International. Response Requirements Penal Code sections 933 and 933.5 require that specific responses to both the Findings and Recommendations contained in this report be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Sacramento Superior Court by October 1,2008, from: • Sacramento County Board of Supervisors, Findings 1, 2A, 2B, 2C, 3A, 3B, and 4; Recommendations 1, 2, 3, and 4. The 2007-2008 Grand Jury recognizes previous outreach efforts by the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors to jurisdictions encompassed by the airport Policy Planning Areas. 55
Additional Recommendations
2
Not linked to specific findings.
R2:
Sacramento County should ensure that land use restrictions and Avigation and Noise Easements are mandatory for all developments approved within International's Airport Policy Planning Area, to include neighboring s counties.
R3:
The County Board of Supervisors should establish an Aviation Committee ofselect airport and County staff directly responsible for overseeing and advocating the long-term regional importance and viability of Sacramento's airport system. Direct representation by regional airport experts on the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) is recommended.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
1 findings
F1:
President, Elk Grove Unified School District Board of Education, Findings lA, lB, IC, 2A, and 2B; Recommendations I and 2. 60
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The EGBERT should comply with the Brown Act since it is using public dollars to fund benefits for public employees, and using reimbursed public staff time and facilities. Future Unfunded Liabilities
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R2:
The EGUSD needs to prepare for affiliation with an organization such as CalPERS to administer its health and welfare retirement benefits. The District should see that necessary laws are enacted to allow for this transition. Response Requirements Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05 require that specific responses to both the findings and recommendations contained in this report be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Sacramento Superior Court by October 1,2008, from: • President, Elk Grove Unified School District Board of Education,
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
1 findings
F1:
President, Elk Grove Unified School District Board of Education, Findings lA, lB, IC, 2A, and 2B; Recommendations I and 2. 60
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The EGBERT should comply with the Brown Act since it is using public dollars to fund benefits for public employees, and using reimbursed public staff time and facilities. Future Unfunded Liabilities
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R2:
The EGUSD needs to prepare for affiliation with an organization such as CalPERS to administer its health and welfare retirement benefits. The District should see that necessary laws are enacted to allow for this transition. Response Requirements Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05 require that specific responses to both the findings and recommendations contained in this report be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Sacramento Superior Court by October 1,2008, from: • President, Elk Grove Unified School District Board of Education,
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
16 findings
F1:
The Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) incorrectly vests excessive discretion for Library operations and issues in one position, that ofLibrary Director.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
How long have you served on the Governing Board?
F2:
Are you a member of any standing committees on the Board? If so, which ones and how long have you served on it/them?
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
In view ofthe numerous serious management problems currently afflicting the Library, the Governing Board should seriously consider removing the current Library Director for the following causes: • Fiscal mismanagement • Failure to adequately track and implement financial controls or other management initiatives • Lax oversight ofsubordinates • Abuses of credit card and travel policies by the Director and the executive team • Chronic, long-standing, unresolved morale problems • Unclear cash management policies and procedures
F3:
The JPA failed to create any system of independent checks and balances in the Library for the benefit of the Governing Board when considering issues and rendering decisions.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The Governing Board should define specific measurable guidelines to operate the Library along established business principles to include: • Criteria for the safeguard and proper use ofpublic funds • Management accountability and reporting systems • Efforts to recoup outstanding balances owing to the Library
F4:
When you were appointed to the LibraryGoverning Board did you receive any written documents or instructions outlining your duties and responsibilities?
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
The Governing Board should seriously consider having the Director of Human Resources removed for lack ofleadership in establishing and implementing 25 personnel policies, repeated abuses of the Library travel and credit card policies, and her dilatory reimbursements of personal expenses.
F5:
Have you ever appointed an alternate to the Governing Board to represent you at its meetings? If so, who is that person by name?
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
The Governing Board should create a standing committee of Governing Board members for direct financial oversight of Library operations to ensure proper safeguarding and accounting for the expenditure of public funds.
F6:
As a member of the Governing Board have you ever participated in the appointment of a Treasurer for the Library Authority? If so, when and who is the person you appointed?
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
The Governing Board should create more direct oversight and reporting procedures for the approval of consultant contracts for services at the Library.
F7:
As a member of the Governing Board have you ever participated in the appointment of the Authority Auditor? Ifso, who is that person you appointed?
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
Parties to the JPA should amend it to require the Treasurer and the Auditor be separate individuals to remove any possible conflicts of interest.
F8:
The Governing Board gave the Library Director broad latitude and required little accountability from the Director beyond regularly scheduled agenda meeting reports.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
The Governing Board should publish an annual report which shall include a budget summary, year-end accomplishments, and future plans.
F9:
As a member of the Governing Board have you ever seen an independent annual audit for the Authority finances during your tenure on the Governing Board? If so, for what years?
Related Recommendations (1)
R9:
The Governing Board should have Library Authority Counsel as a full·time position, given the volume and complexity of Library operations.
F10:
The Governing Board failed in its oversight ofthe Library, the Library Director, and the Library executive team pursuant to the obligations set forth in the Joint Powers Agreement of 1993, as amended in February, 2007.
Related Recommendations (1)
R10:
The Governing Board should create its own oversight ofLibrary operations by establishing stronger internal controls.
F11:
An Accounting Policies and Procedures Manual was to have been implemented under the 2003 Financial Management System Assessment. Three Finance Officers later, this still has not occurred. Further, there is no complete personnel policies manual.
Related Recommendations (1)
R11:
The Governing Board should require complete and comprehensive policy and procedure manuals for both the Finance Department and for personnel practices.
F12:
Were you present at the meeting of the Governing Board when a petition of no confidence was submitted by several staff and supporters of the Library Authority? • If not, did you have an alternate attending in your place at that meeting? • Have you or your alternate taken any action in response to that petition? • Have you received any written reports in response to your inquiries or that of your alternate?
Related Recommendations (1)
R12:
Fully staff the Finance Department to ensure proper accounting procedures. Include sufficient compensation to attract and retain a Finance Director with the appropriate knowledge, experience, and skills. 27
F13:
As a member ofthe Governing Board have you received an annual report from the Library Authority Director for the years of your tenure?
Related Recommendations (1)
R13:
Strengthen current credit card policies and travel procedures. Ensure appropriate oversight ofprojected expenses and tighter controls authorizing expenditures.
F14:
Procedures for cash management at Library branches are inconsistent. Some branches retain cash until it accumulates in an amount up to $2,000 before the cash is transferred to the Finance Department for accounting and deposit. No one has been assigned the responsibility of auditing branch library cash accounts.
Related Recommendations (1)
R14:
Establish standard procedures for all Library branches regarding cash management. Response Requirements Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05 require that specific responses to all findings and recommendations contained in this report be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Sacramento Superior Court by August 15, 2008 from: • The Sacramento Public Library Governing Board 28 SACRAMENTO PUBLIC LIBRARY Attachment 1 JOINT POWER AUTHORITY BOARD MEMBERS &. ALTERNATES 2007-2008 (REVISED) City of Citrus Jeff Slowey, Councilmember Jeannie Bruins, Councilmember Heights 6237 Fountain Square Drive 6237 Fountain Square Drive Citrus Heights, CA 95621 Citrus Heights, CA 95621 Phone: 916-861-6636 Phone: 916-725-2448 jslowey@citrusheights.net jbruins@citrusheights.net City of Elk Sophia Scherman, Councilmember Gary Davis, Councilmember Grove 8380 Laguna Palms Way 8380 Laguna Palms Way Elk Grove, CA 95758 Elk Grove, CA 95758 Phone: 916-478-2279 916-478-3201 scherman@sophia-elkgrove.com gdavis@elkgrovecitv.org City of Elizabeth Samano. Councilmember Darryl Clare, Councilmember Isleton/City of City of Isleton City of Galt Galt PO Box 285 380 Civic Drive (Isleton holds Isleton, CA 95641 Galt, CA 95632 seat/Galt holds Phone: 916-502-3741 Phone: 209-366-7117 alternate) officegenmb@hotmail.com dclare@cLgalt.ca.us City of Rancho Linda Budge, Mayor David Sander, Councilmember Cordova VICE CHAIR 2729 Prospect Park Drive 2729 Prospect Park Drive Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 Phone: 916-851-8700 Phone: 916-851-8700 dsander@cityofranchocordova.org Ibudge@cityofranchocordova.org City of Raymond L. Tretheway, III Lauren Hammond, Councilmember Sacramento Councilmember 915 I Street, 5th Floor 915 I Street, 5ttl Floor Sacramento, CA 95814 Sacramento, CA 95814 Phone: 916-808-7200 Phone: 916-808-7001 Ihammond@cityofsacramento.org rtr~theway@cityofsacramento.org City of Sandy Sheedy, Councilmember Lauren Hammond, Councilmember Sacramento 915 I Street, 5t1l Floor 915 I Street, 5th Floor Sacramento, CA 95814 Sacramento, CA 95814 Phone: 916-808-7002 Phone: 916-808-7200 ssh~Qtyofsacramento.org Ihammond@cityofsacramento.org City of Robbie Waters, Councilmember Lauren Hammond, Councilmember Sacramento CHAIR 915 I Street, 5th Floor 915 I Street, 5th Floor Sacramento, CA 95814 Sacramento, CA 95814 Phone: 916-808-7200 Phone: 916-808-7007 Ihammond@cityofsacramento.org rwaters ci ofsacramento.or City of Bonnie Pannell, Councilmember Lauren Hammond, Councilmember Sacramento 915 I Street, 5t1l Floor 915 I Street, 5th Floor Sacramento, CA 95814 Sacramento, CA 95814 Phone: 916-808-7008 Phone: 916-808-7200 Qgnn~JI~i ofsacramento.or Ihammond ci ofsacramento.or 2008 SPLAB Members with Alts SACRAMENTO PUBUC LIBRARY JOINT POWER AUTHORITY BOARD MEMBERS 8r. ALTERNATES 2007-2008 (REVISED) City of Kevin McCarty, Councilmember Lauren Hammond, Councilmember Sacramento 915 I Street, 5th Floor 915 I Street, 5th Floor Sacramento, CA 95814 Sacramento, CA 95814 Phone: 916-808-7200 Phone: 916-808-7200 kmccarty@cityofsacramento.org Ihammond@cityofsacramento.org f--------,I-------------~--t------------ County of Roger Dickinson, Supervisor Cortez Quinn Sacramento 700 H Street, Room 2450 School Board Trustee Sacramento, CA 95814-1280 Twin Rivers Unified School District Phone: 916-874-5485 700 H Street, Room 2450 dickinsonr@saccounty.net Sacramento, CA 95814-1280 Phone: 916-874-5485 quinnc@saccounty.net County of Jimmie Yee, Supervisor Linda Kimura, Director Sacramento 700 H Street, Room 2450 Arcade Creek Rec & Park District Sacramento, CA 95814-1280 4982 Pasadena Avenue Phone: 916-874-5481 Sacramento, CA 95841 yeej@saccounty.net Phone: 916-485-8442 Cell: 916-214-8442 .kImYIgf.Q!.JI.@.Q.QJ-,.~Qm County of Susan Peters, Supervisor Larry Masuoka Sacramento 700 H street, Room 2450 School Board Trustee Sacramento, CA 95814-1280 san Juan Unified School District Phone: 916-874-5471 4425 Sierra View Way peterssu@saccounty.net Fair Oaks, CA 95628 Phone: 916-966-9900 (office) masuoka@pacbell.net County of Roberta MacGlashan, Supervisor Donald Wilson Sacramento 700 H Street, Room 2450 School Board Trustee Sacramento, CA 95814-1280 Center Unified School District Phone: 916-874-5491 3957 Weybridge Way Antelope, CA 95843 Phone: 916-899-8144 (cell) wilson4centerschoolboard@yahQO.com County of Don Nottoli, Supervisor NO ALTERNATE Sacramento 700 H Street, Room 2450 Sacramento, CA 95814-1280 Phone: 916-874-5465 nottolid@saccounty.net Sacramento Anne Marie Gold N/A Public Library Library Director SECRETARY TO THE BOARD 828 I Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Phone: 916-264-2830 '--- ----'-_amgQ!d@-sgc;;l1bIgtY.•.Qr9 2008 SPLAB Members with Alts Attachment 2 QUESTIONS FOR :l\'IEMBERS OF THE LIBRARY GOVERNING BOARD 1. How long have you served on the Governing Board? 2. Are you a member of any standing committees on the Board? If so, which ones and how long have you served on it/them? 3. Does any standing committee of which you are a member submit a report to the Governing Board? 4. When you were appointed to the LibraryGoverning Board did you receive any written documents or instructions outlining your duties and responsibilities? 5. Have you ever appointed an alternate to the Governing Board to represent you at its meetings? If so, who is that person by name? 6. As a member of the Governing Board have you ever participated in the appointment of a Treasurer for the Library Authority? If so, when and who is the person you appointed? 7. As a member of the Governing Board have you ever participated in the appointment of the Authority Auditor? Ifso, who is that person you appointed? 8. As a member of the Governing Board have you ever served as member of the Finance Advisory Committee? • Does any staff member or any alternate serve for you on the Finance Advisory Committee? If so, who is that person by name? 9. As a member of the Governing Board have you ever seen an independent annual audit for the Authority finances during your tenure on the Governing Board? If so, for what years? 10. Knowing that the Governing Board shall adopt a budget for the Authority within 90 days of the commencement of each fiscal year (defined as July 1 to June 30)? • To your knowledge has the Governing Board done that? • Did you vote on such an adoption for any fiscal year in which you were a member of the Governing Board? • Ifso, for which years? 11. Do you know if the Finance Advisory Committee has fulfilled its duties pursuant to para 11 e. of the 2007 Joint Powers Agreement? 12. Were you present at the meeting of the Governing Board when a petition of no confidence was submitted by several staff and supporters of the Library Authority? • If not, did you have an alternate attending in your place at that meeting? • Have you or your alternate taken any action in response to that petition? • Have you received any written reports in response to your inquiries or that of your alternate? 13. As a member ofthe Governing Board have you received an annual report from the Library Authority Director for the years of your tenure?
F21:
Library branch managers have Master's Degrees in Library Science. (The exception to this practice is found at the smaller, more remote library branches.) These highly educated employees are, for the most part, ignored in the decision making process for Library issues. Their expertise was seldom sought and often shunned.
F48:
Three members ofthe Executive Team were aware the Director ofHuman Resources was abusing the credit card system. Her immediate supervisors knew about these abuses. The Director of Human Resources received no reprimands.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
14 findings
F1:
Isleton's elected officials and city staff have, over a period of years, demonstrated an unwillingness, either through intention or negligence, to follow minimum standards providing governance services to the community. Isleton's governance problems are long-standing. They are not the product of merely one or two officials or staff members, but rather a cumulative and continuing series of bad decisions, often made contrary to specific legal advice. Isleton has been plagued with long-term vacancies in key staff positions. They were often filled on a temporary basis by people who were unqualified, people who held other city positions, or people who had conflicts of interest. One key position, City Manager, was filled without proper authorization by the City Council. A listing of inappropriate decisions and unsupported actions follows: • The City operated without an authorized or approved budget for several years, ignoring the specific advice of the City Attorney that decisions made on fiscal items were not authorized and thus void. • At full strength the Isleton City Council is comprised of five members. There were, however, long periods when the City Council was comprised ofjust three individuals, only one of whom was elected. The others had been appointed to fill vacancies. Government Code §§ 36512(d)(1) limits the number of vacant slots which may be filled without election to two. When the City Council was comprised of only three members, it needed a unanimous vote, i.e., a majority ofthe total authorized membership of five, to pass binding legislation. Ignoring the advice ofthe City Attorney in several instances, votes taken were 2-1, yet the mayor went forward on those votes. Such votes were meaningless, unenforceable, and subject to challenge. • Fees collected from residents by the City to pay the contract waste hauler were co mingled with the General Fund to pay other expenses. As a result the waste hauler contract payments fell in arrears by over $160,000. • Redevelopment Grant Funds were improperly transferred to the General Fund and used for other purposes. Those monies have not been fully repaid, even though Council members have acknowledged in open meetings that the monies are owed to the Redevelopment Fund. • The City has not been able to conduct an acceptable audit of its books and records, even in the face of repeated requests from State and Federal authorities. • An employment contract was entered into by a sitting mayor and the then Acting Fire Chief. It was not legally approved by the Council and was subsequently reversed by the Council. Nevertheless, the contract was used by the Fire Chief in a real estate loan application to substantiate financial capability. Upon review by the City Attorney, this contract was described as having the appearance of collusion and bordered on fraud. 42 • The City has been unduly influenced by, and improperly paid monies to, the Isleton Firefighters Association, an entity which has no legal standing in the City. • The City sent an inexperienced team ofrepresentatives, which did not include the City Attorney, to negotiate impact fees for a proposed housing development. Completion of this development with fees as presently negotiated will unduly burden current infrastructure and future budgets. • The City has gone for varying lengths oftime without the essential services ofin-house planning staffor a City Attorney, relying instead on contract personnel to meet those needs. Currently, these contracts are in substantial default. • City staffis insufficient to handle numerous required tasks. At times citizens suffer because services are incomplete or are handled incorrectly. • In the past four years there has been a palpable level oftension and dysfunction within the City Council and between some Council members and City staff.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
Training in proper procedures for the conduct ofgovernment business must be provided by Isleton for current and future elected officials and City staff. Such training must include specific accounting practices and proper methods ofsequestering special purpose funds. DEBT
F2:
Past financial mismanagement, lack ofexpertise and frequent animosity among City leaders has brought Isleton to a state ofserious indebtedness. Sacramento County is able to assist Isleton with the management ofits accounts. However, the County requires an acceptable audit before assuming that task. There have been several attempted audits over the past few years. Due to missing records, the City has been unable to produce an acceptable audit.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
Isleton must immediately enter into negotiations with Sacramento County to provide account management services. The City ofIsleton should hire a professional accounting firm, and provide all assistance necessary to produce an audit acceptable to the County. RENEGOTIATE FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS
F3:
Isleton has incurred debt which is oppressive and could bankrupt the City. Long-term financing for debt consolidation appears to be the only practical solution to resolve the City'S outstanding obligations. Some creditors have expressed a willingness to renegotiate their accounts. The City Manager is currently attempting to secure a loan to consolidate the major debts ofthe City. He is investigating opportunities with several lenders which may be agreeable to work with the City ifassured ofthe cooperation ofCity leaders. 43
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The City Council and the City Manager must work in concert to secure long term financing to consolidate debts, which financing must be serviceable within the City's budget. City Manager must proactively seek to renegotiate outstanding obligations wherever possible. CITY MANAGER
F4:
Isleton has an uncertain form of governance which often pits the office of the City Manager against the office of the Mayor or other City Council members. This causes conflict.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
The Isleton City Council must adopt whatever ordinances necessary to affirm a "strong" City Manager form of government and remove from existing ordinances any ambiguous or competing language. The City oflsleton should have a full-time City Manager. The City should contract for a specific term for a City Manager, as opposed to "at will" employment. The City Manager's contract should have specific provisions for removal only "for cause," defined to include, at a minimum: • A felony conviction; • Moral turpitude as defined in Black's Law Dictionary; or • Acts without authority from the City Council when obligating funds in excess of $25,000, or an amount determined by the City Council. DEVELOPMENTAGREEMENTnMPACTFEES
F5:
Isleton representatives failed to consider current and long-term consequences to the City when negotiating a residential housing development agreement and the impact fees to fund and maintain resulting infrastructure improvements. The negotiating team was untrained and inexperienced for this complex task. • When offered training to become proficient in the type of negotiation required, City representatives refused. • The City Council, Mayor, and the then Acting City Manager ignored professional advice from the City Attorney and others when considering impact fees arising from the development proposal.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
The City Manager and other responsible city representatives must acquire expertise through appropriate training to calculate impact fees adequate to fund infrastructure and maintenance required as projects proceed. The City should seek to 44 renegotiate existing impact fees, which are inadequate. The City Manager should incorporate liquidated damages and indemnification clauses into the development agreements to protect Isleton. REDEVELOPMENT GRANT
F6:
In January 2006, there was a transfer from the Isleton Redevelopment account to the City's General Fund in the amount of$150,000. These funds have not been repaid. City officials refused to repay these funds, even after being advised by legal counsel on numerous occasions that such a transfer was unlawful. The following are documented instances of the City's longstanding awareness of its wrongdoing in transfers of this nature: • A legal memorandum dated September 19, 2000 from the former Isleton City Attorney expressed concern that the City was not following the requirements for use of Redevelopment Funds as set forth in the June 25, 1997, agreement between the City and the Redevelopment Agency. The funds were to be placed in a separate account and not co-mingled in the City's General Fund. The City was advised to stop co-mingling funds, but continued to do so. • A letter dated November 7, 2003, from the California State Attorney General to the Mayor informed the City of an investigation for a possible "major violation" of the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code § 33000 et seq.), for failing to submit required annual audits to the State Controller regarding use of Redevelopment Funds. • Another legal memorandum dated January 23,2006 from the City Attorney informed the Isleton Mayor that a loan or transfer oftax increment funds (Redevelopment Funds) to the City's General Fund was unlawful under existing California statutes. The City was also advised to maintain accurate records of Redevelopment Fund expenditures and to submit annual audits. • A third legal memorandum, dated February 22, 2006, from the City Attorney to the then City Manager and City Clerk, informed them that the transfer of tax increment funds (Redevelopment Funds) to the City's General Fund was unlawful and such a transfer should be reversed and the practice stopped. If there was a resolution memorializing such a transfer, it should be reversed. It was not authorized by law.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
Members ofthe City Council who refuse to follow legal counsel's advice relative to the use and misuse ofRedevelopment Funds should be held accountable. Steps must be taken to reverse the co-mingling of Redevelopment Funds with the City's General Fund. FIRE PROTECTION AND EMERGENCY SERVICES
F7:
Many calls for fire and emergency services in the Isleton area require multiple fire agency responses. At present, several area fire agencies have restricted or qualified mutual aid assistance agreements with Isleton. This region's fire and emergency services, primarily 45 delivered by volunteer firefighters, lack uniformity of equipment and training to meet the objective ofmutual aid.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
Unrestricted mutual aid agreements in fire and emergency services should be restored immediately. Guidelines for mutual aid, established by the California Fire Service and Rescue Emergency Aid System, must be followed. Collaborative interagency training, certification, communications, water sharing, and familiarity with different agencies and their equipment must be developed. FIREFIGHTERS ASSOCIATION
F8:
The City has been unable or unwilling to control its relationship with the Isleton Firefighters Association. The relationships and interactions between the City's Fire Department and the Firefighters Association are awkward at best. With limited dollars, the City's salaried Fire Chief, charged to organize a response to fires and medical emergencies, must rely on volunteer firefighters. None ofthe firefighters are paid by the Association, yet the Association receives money from the City for their services. To complicate matters, the Association is politically active. One of its members is an elected City Councilman who votes and promotes the Association's special interests at Council meetings. A recent Fire Chiefwith conflicting salary and employment interests with the City has been a very active and vocal leader ofthe Association.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
No City funds should be provided to the Firefighters Association, and the City should sever its relationship with that group. The use of City facilities by the Association should follow the same guidelines and procedures used by other groups. The City Council and staff should separate themselves from the political activities of the Association. COORDINATION OF SERVICES
F9:
There are seven separate fire protection and emergency related service groups in and around Isleton. (See Attachment 1.) River Delta Fire District maintains a fire station directly across the street from the Isleton Fire Department. Neither of the two fire agencies (the Isleton Fire Department or the River Delta Fire District) has a stand-alone fire protection and emergency services capability for the Sacramento County side ofthe Sacramento River. Recent concerns regarding bridge safety and bridge closures at the Rio Vista Bridge present a serious barrier to ensuring quality fire and emergency services in the Isleton area. For example, the California Department ofTransportation closed the bridge from 9:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. for three weeks this past November. This bridge is also raised and lowered for boat traffic on a daily basis. Currently, Isleton is unable to fully and reliably staff an efficient and consistent response for fire and emergency services. The combination ofall these factors makes the delivery ofreliable fire and emergency services to Isleton residents very uncertain.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9:
Isleton should aggressively explore its options to improve fire protection and emergency services to its residents as soon as possible. Isleton could internally restructure its Fire Department, hire professional full-time staff, or independently recruit, enroll, and train sufficient volunteers to meet its needs independent ofits reliance on the River Delta Fire District. Given Isleton's current fiscal limitations and other management problems and priorities, one of the following options should be selected by the City: • Merge the Isleton Fire Department with the River Delta Fire District, combining all the assets ofthe two entities; • Contract for Isleton fire and emergency services with the River Delta Fire District and liquidate the Isleton Fire Department assets; • Contract for fire and emergency services with the City of Rio Vista to provide services on the Sacramento side ofthe Sacramento River; or, • Authorize and appropriate funding for full service fire and emergency service by the City ofIsleton independent ofthe River Delta Fire District through additional funding sources, including taxes, grants, bonds, or other revenues controlled or collected by Isleton. POLICE
F10:
The Police Department is well equipped. Costs are rising for gas, equipment, unifonns, vacations, sick leave, and accidents. Some City Council members appear biased against the Police Department.
Related Recommendations (1)
R10:
The City should aggressively seek and apply for police grants to supplement existing grants. The Police Chief should work with the City Manager to explore areas to cut costs. City Council members should take their concerns about the Police Department to the City Manager. eRAWDAD FESTIVAL
F11:
Isleton is well known for its annual Crawdad Festival, sponsored by either the City or the Chamber ofCommerce. Started in 1986, this is the most socially significant event for the community and draws approximately 50,000 people each year, generating substantial revenue. The City's fiscal and accounting policies and procedures when the City operated the Festival were inadequate. City officials did not know exactly how much revenue was generated or what operating expenses were incurred. Security, collection, and safeguarding ofthese funds were all insufficient. Thousands ofdollars remain unaccounted for. City leaders have taken an indifferent attitude toward investigating this issue. 47
Related Recommendations (1)
R11:
A significant fiscal and social event for Isleton, the Crawdad Festival should continue. The City should benefit financially from the Festival, but not operate it. SENIOR COUNTY EXECUTIVE
F12:
The City ofIsleton faces many fiscal and organizational challenges that require the immediate and continued attention of City leaders as well as the citizens.
Related Recommendations (1)
R12:
Sacramento County should identify a senior county executive familiar with government operations to assist Isleton in resolving problems where county assistance might be effective. Absent the above, Sacramento County should prepare to assume the civic, administrative, and public safety needs ofthe residents ofIsleton in the event ofdisincorporation. COUNTY ASSISTANCE
F13:
Sacramento County can assist Isleton in its accounting and record-keeping. The county can provide experienced program personnel to help Isleton identify, secure, and administer all grants or other public monies available.
Related Recommendations (1)
R13:
The Grand Jury urges that Sacramento County give these actions a high priority. DISINCORPORATION
F14:
Without immediate improvements such as suggested in this report, Isleton may be unable to properly operate and maintain the necessary city services and governance required ofa general law city.
Related Recommendations (1)
R14:
The City Council and City Manager, if unable to provide the necessary city services to Isleton residents as required by law, must investigate disincorporation. Response Requirements Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05 require that specific responses to both the findings and recommendations contained in this report be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Sacramento Superior Court by May 16,2008, from: • Isleton City Council, Findings 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9, 10, 11, and 14; Recommendations 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11, and 14. • Sacramento County Board of Supervisors, Findings 12 and 13; Recommendations 12 and 13. ATTACHMENT 1 @,@ '" LS tl ~ r' Co :1 't i: i; A Sacramento Melropolitan Fire Dlstnd \ B C,ty of Sacramento '~ C Cosumnes Community Services District D Della Fire Protection District E Herald Fire Distric1 F City of Folsom G Pacific Fruitndge Fire Pro(eelion Dis(rict H Willon FIre District ""':~'.~~ I Natomas Fire Protection District (SACRAMEN10 CITY) ". J City of Isleton ,", , 3 > K River Della Fire District ' "'!. - \ .... L Walnut Grove Fire Proteclion District ;;. 1\1 Coun/and Fire Dislriel (9 ." ::J , Q'h SACRAMENTO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA FIRE DISTRICTS "SoI3fl{) County Fife Districts ne-.rr hku'lJ (:':01. Part of S:a<: .\r~tro \J",p)
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
1 findings
F1:
noted the need for "Training in proper procedures for the conduct of government business..." Finding 5 iterated this need, especially in regard to impact fees for new development. The Grand Jury recommended both generalized education in the conduct of government business and specifically that"... representatives ... acquire expertise ... to calculate impact fees." Summary of Responses The City concurs and has provided training in response to Finding llRecommendation 1. Specific training is not mentioned in the response to Recommendation 5, but the City is actively seeking to re-open the current, and only, impact fee agreement it has. It is the City's intent to negotiate all future development agreements that may come before the City for approval with the intent ofensuring that the development impacts are properly addressed prior to any project approval. Summary of Finding and Recommendation 6 The Grand Jury found that, despite advice of Isleton's legal counsel, Redevelopment Funds were co-mingled with General Funds. Summary of Response Isleton concurs. Adherence to this Finding and Recommendation is part and parcel of Isleton's agreement with the County (Recommendation 13) and in the City's concurrence with
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
by the 2006-2007 Grand Jury: One additional Work Project Field Operations sergeant must be allocated to address this workload. This sergeant would share in the supervision of up to 36 deputies per week. Response to Recommendation #1 by the Sheriff's Department: Concur. The Sheriff's Work Release Division requested a second Work Project Program Supervisor (Sheriff Sergeant) be funded this fiscal year. As in past years, due to overall Sheriff's Department needs and the limited resources ofthe Board, this request was not forwarded as one ofthe Department's most urgent requirements. Comment by the 2007-2008 Grand Jury The 2007-2008 Grand Jury is mindful ofpast requests for the additional Sergeant's position for the Sheriffs Work Release Program. The Sheriffs Department concurred with the need for an additional supervisor, but not to the extent that funding was requested. This Grand Jury believes this position warrants higher consideration and should be funded. The Work Release Program assists the county in controlling jail overpopulation, saves the county from increasing financial pressures associated with incarceration, decreases dependency on county services, and allows the convicted individual to remain employed during the length of sentence. This Grand Jury believes that the Department's characterization ofthis request as "not urgent" is shortsighted. This Grand Jury appreciates the other needs ofthe department; however, the importance of the Work Release Program should be recognized by providing the necessary personnel to support this worthy and effective program. Rancho Seco Nuclear Power Plant: Maintenance/Disposalof Radioactive Waste and Used Nuclear Fuel Issue Are all reasonably necessary steps being taken regarding the storage and disposal of radioactive waste and used nuclear fuel produced at the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) decommissioned Rancho Seco Nuclear Power Plant (Rancho Seco)? Reason for Investigation The 2006-2007 Grand Jury initiated this investigation to determine 1) the status of radioactive waste and used nucelear fuel storage/disposal at Rancho Seco, 2) if adequate steps are being taken to protect the public from release of radioactive materials, and 3) if all appropriate steps are being taken to ensure that used nuclear fuel is being removed and stored in a safe and timely manner. Background: The 2006-2007 Grand Jury recommended, among other things, that SMUD seek federal compensation for the storage and security of spent nuclear fuel, if the fuel is not moved to a repository elsewhere. Summary of Responses by SMUD: SMUD responded by stating that, in its opinion, it was unlikely the proposed central repository for spent nuclear fuel at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, would ever open. SMUD also responded that financing and funding for the storage and security ofthe spent nuclear fuel was the subject of litigation. SMUD prevailed in its claim that the federal government is responsible for these costs. That case has been appealed by the federal government. SMUD further responded that, even in the event of a reversal of the lower court decision to hold the federal government responsible, SMUD has budgeted sufficient funds to pay for the ongoing storage and security of the spent fuel if necessary. It further stated the impact on the operations and maintenance budget for this contingency is not significant. Comments to SMUD's Responses: The 2007-2008 Grand Jury has reviewed SMUD's response to the Findings and Recommendations ofthe 2006-2007 Grand Jury regarding the costs for storage and security of the spent nuclear fuel at Rancho Seco. This Grand Jury concurs with SMUD's response which indicates first, that the federal government is responsible for the cost of storage and security for the spent nuclear fuel. Second, this Grand Jury also concurs with SMUD's observation that, should the decision of the lower court upholding SMUD's contention be reversed, SMUD has the capacity to provide safe storage and security within its operations and maintenance budget for as long as necessary. Finally, this Grand Jury is hopeful that a federal repository will be identified for the storage of spent nuclear fuel. 109 15 YEAR FINAL REPORT INDEX (1993 thru 2007) SACRAMENTO COUNTY GRAND JURY AGENCY DATE PUBLISHED Airport System: • Conflict of Interest, Sacramento International 1998 • Encroaching Land Use 2002 • Executive Airport 1994 Cities: Citrus Heights • Credit Card Usage 2001 • Oversight of Contract Services 2006 Elk Grove • Elk Grove City Council 2006 • Elk Grove City Council (Response) 2007 • Elk Grove USD Fails Fiduciary Responsibility 2002 • Elk Grove USD (Response) 2003 Fair Oaks • Cemetery District Management 1993 • Head Stone Damage 2006 Folsom • Credit Card Usage-City ofFolsom 2001 • Folsom Sewage Spills Continue 2002 • Landscape and Lighting District Assessment 2005 Galt • Failure to Oversee Delivery of Services Contracted 2005 • Galt-Arno Cemetery District Operations 1997, 2001 • Lighting and Landscape Districts 2001 • Misuse of Appointive Power by City Council 2003 • Review of Galt-Amo District Operations 1998 Isleton • Administrative and Fiscal Problems 1995 • Complaints Against the Police 1998,1999,2001,2006 • Policies and Procedures 1995,1999 Sacramento City • Convention Center Operation 1997 • Financial Incentives for Targeted Business 1997 • Mayor's Office: Use ofTime and Resources 1998 • North Natomas: Development Gone Awry 2007 • Regional Radio Communications Review 1999 • Sewer Discharge into the American River 2001 • Sacramento City Unified School District Retirement 2006 111 County of Sacramento • Certificates ofParticipation 1994 • Complaint against Taxi Owners 2005,2006 • Communications and Infonnation Technology 1999 • County Civil Service Commission 2005 • County Civil Service Commission (Response) 2006 • County Employee Evaluations 1993 • County Heat Emergency Response 2007 • County Primary Care Clinic 2007 • Directed Brokerage Program ofthe County Retirement System 2002 • Economic Incentive Policy 1997 • Failure ofCounty to Oversee Contract Services/Galt 2005 • Firefighters, Our Local Heroes 1996 • Financing ofLocal Government 1994 • Flood Risk in Sacramento County 2007 • Homeland Security, Ready or Not 2005 • Homeland Security, Ready or Not (Response) 2006 • Letter Grades for Restaurants 2003 • Sacramento-Yolo Port District 1995 Coroner's Office • Crime Laboratory 1993,2000 • Death Investigations 2003 • Fees for Transporting Bodies 2000 • Review of Vendor ContractslRFP 1999 District Attorney's Office • Bureau ofFamily Support 2002 • Child Abuse and Neglect 1998 • Child Support and Welfare Agencies 1998 • Child Support and Collection Enforcement 1997 • Communication and Internal Management 1993 • Multidisciplinary Interview Center 1993 • Political Activities in School Districts 1997 • American River Flood Control District 1997 Department of Health and Human Services • Adult Protective Services 1996,1997,2002 • Aging Out Foster Children-Foster Parents 2001 • Child Abuse and Neglect 1998 • Child Abuse in Sacramento County 1996 • Child Support and Welfare Agencies 1994 • Child Protective Services at the Crossroads 2000 • Child Protective Services Intake Services 2006 • Changes Needed in Juvenile Mental Health Services 2002 112 • Children's Receiving Home 1999 • Development ofNew Programs for Foster Children 2005 • Family Maintenance and Reunification 1995 • Juvenile Hall Mental Health Services 1993 • Mental Health Services in Juvenile Justice System 2001 • Mental Health Treatment Center 1999 • Public Guardian and Conservatorship 1995 Environmental Services Department • Mismanagement ofthe Environmental Department 2000 • Review of Conflict of Interest Statement 1997 Medical Services • County Emergency Ambulance Provider 1993 • Flood Disaster Evacuation ofMedically Infirm 2006 • Goals and Objectives ofMental Health Services 2006 • Mental Health Services in the Juvenile Justice System 2001 Probation Department • Boy's Ranch and Carson Creek High School 1995 • Domestic Violence Programs 2002 • Juvenile Hall Mental Health Services 1993 • Juvenile Justice Facilities and Staffing 2000 • Mental Health Services in the Juvenile Justice System 2001 • Unequal Treatment of Female Inmates 2002 Public Library • County Library Authority 2000 • Use of Alternate Sentencing Volunteers 1993 Sherifrs Department • Rio Cosumnes Correctional Center 2007 • Escape at Cosumnes 1998 • Women's Detention Facility 1994 Main Jail • Handling and Security of Inmate Correspondence 2005 • Jail health Inmate Psychiatric Services 2004 • Jail Training for Officers 1995 • Main Jail Health Care 2006 • Use of Prostraint Chair 1998 • Women's Holding Cells 1997 • Sheriff's Tactical Air Response Operation 1993 • Work Release Program 2007 113 Special Districts • Retained Earnings-Sacramento County Special Districts 2001 • Certificates of Participation 1994 • Financing ofLocal Governments 1994 • Remuneration to Special District Board Members 1994 • American River Flood Control District 1997 • Cable TV Commission and the Brown Act 1994 • American River Fire District Management Review 1993 • Wilton Firefighters on Fire Board ofDirectors 2002 • Mosquito and Vector Control District Operations 1999 • Regional Sanitation District Economic Incentives 1997 • Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency 1994 • SMUD, Economic Development Plan 1997 • SMUD, Rancho Seco Nuclear Power Plant 2007 • Carmichael District Operational Issues 1997 • Recommendations for Water District Accountability 2003 School Districts • Center USD Violations ofBrown Act 1998 • Community School Usage 1994 • Elk Grove USD Fails Fiduciary Responsibilities 2002 • Folsom/Cordova USD Inventory Practices 1993 usn Grant/ Union • Inappropriate Use of Public Funds 2004 • Policies, Procedures and Administration 1994 usn Sacramento City • Management, Fiscal Problems 1995 • School District Maintenance 1995 • Allegation of Dual Employment, Two Public Agencies 1998 • Board ofEducation Oversight ofCASA 2004 • Lack ofResponse to Requests for Information 1997 • School Safety in Jeopardy 2003 • Students Walking to School 2005 • Volunteers Working on School Grounds 1993 Non-Profit Organizations • Children's Receiving Home 1993 • Sacramento Handicapped Parking Patrol Inc. 1995 State Prison System • Transport of Prisoners for Non-Emergency Medical Care 2002 114 Attachment 1 GRAND JURY COMPLAINT FORM GRAND JURY USE ONLY DATE RECEIVED: _ PERSON OR AGENCY ABOUT WHICH COMPLAINT IS MADE NUMBER: _ NAME: SUBJECT: _ ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NUMBER: _ NATURE OF COMPLAINT: Describe events in the order they occurred as clearly and concisely as possible. Also indicate what resolution you are seeking. Use extra sheets if necessary and attach copies of any correspondence you feel is pertinent. Documentation becomes the property of the Grand Jury and will not be returned. Please note: The Sacramento County Grand Jury has no jurisdiction over state or federal agencies, the courts, judicial officers, private companies or most organizations. WHAT PERSONS OR AGENCIES HAVE YOU CONTACTED ABOUT YOUR COMPLAINT? Person or Agency Address Date of Contact Result WHO SHOULD THE GRAND JURY CONTACT ABOUT THIS MATTER? Person or Agency Address Telephone No. YOUR NAME: _____________,DRIVER'S LICENSE NO.: _ ADDRESS: _ TELEPHONE NO.:, _ The information I have submitted on this form is true. correct and complete to the best of my knowledge. Complainant's Signature Date - OYER not investigate a matter that is currently being litigated in the court system. By law, the proceedings of the Grand Jury are confidential. The findings and recommendations and issues it chooses to SACRAMENTO COUNTY GRAND address are published in its final report. JURY COMPLAINT FORM COMPLAINT PROCESS A major function of the Sacramento County Grand Jury is to examine local county and • Present your complaint as soon as city government, special districts, school possible. The Grand Jury's term of districts, and any joint powers agency service begins July 15t and ends June located in the county to ensure their duties 30th ofthe following year. are being carried out lawfully. • Identify your specific concern and The Grand Jury: describe the circumstances as clearly and concisely as possible. • May review and evaluate procedures used by these entities to • Document your complaint with determine whether more efficient copies of pertinent information and and economical methods may be evidence in your possession. employed. Mail or deliver your complaint in a sealed • May inspect and audit the books, envelope to: records and financial expenditures as noted above to ensure that public Sacramento County Grand Jury funds are properly accounted for and 720 -9th Street, Room 611 legally spent. Sacramento, CA 95814-1302 • May investigate any charges of Complaints submitted to the Grand Jury will willful misconduct in office by be treated confidentially whenever possible. public officials. However, it may be impossible to conduct an investigation without revealing your • Shall inquire into the condition and name and complaint. management of the public prisons within the county. Grand Jury investigation reports are published in its Final Report, which is Anyone may ask the Grand Jury to conduct available to the residents of the county. an investigation of an issue within its Public entities and officers who are the jurisdiction. Whether it chooses to subjects of the reports are required to investigate such a complaint is entirely in its respond. discretion and may be affected by workload, resource limitations or legal restrictions. It is important to note that the Grand Jury may
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
1 findings
F1:
noted the need for "Training in proper procedures for the conduct of government business..." Finding 5 iterated this need, especially in regard to impact fees for new development. The Grand Jury recommended both generalized education in the conduct of government business and specifically that"... representatives ... acquire expertise ... to calculate impact fees." Summary of Responses The City concurs and has provided training in response to Finding llRecommendation 1. Specific training is not mentioned in the response to Recommendation 5, but the City is actively seeking to re-open the current, and only, impact fee agreement it has. It is the City's intent to negotiate all future development agreements that may come before the City for approval with the intent ofensuring that the development impacts are properly addressed prior to any project approval. Summary of Finding and Recommendation 6 The Grand Jury found that, despite advice of Isleton's legal counsel, Redevelopment Funds were co-mingled with General Funds. Summary of Response Isleton concurs. Adherence to this Finding and Recommendation is part and parcel of Isleton's agreement with the County (Recommendation 13) and in the City's concurrence with
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
by the 2006-2007 Grand Jury: One additional Work Project Field Operations sergeant must be allocated to address this workload. This sergeant would share in the supervision of up to 36 deputies per week. Response to Recommendation #1 by the Sheriff's Department: Concur. The Sheriff's Work Release Division requested a second Work Project Program Supervisor (Sheriff Sergeant) be funded this fiscal year. As in past years, due to overall Sheriff's Department needs and the limited resources ofthe Board, this request was not forwarded as one ofthe Department's most urgent requirements. Comment by the 2007-2008 Grand Jury The 2007-2008 Grand Jury is mindful ofpast requests for the additional Sergeant's position for the Sheriffs Work Release Program. The Sheriffs Department concurred with the need for an additional supervisor, but not to the extent that funding was requested. This Grand Jury believes this position warrants higher consideration and should be funded. The Work Release Program assists the county in controlling jail overpopulation, saves the county from increasing financial pressures associated with incarceration, decreases dependency on county services, and allows the convicted individual to remain employed during the length of sentence. This Grand Jury believes that the Department's characterization ofthis request as "not urgent" is shortsighted. This Grand Jury appreciates the other needs ofthe department; however, the importance of the Work Release Program should be recognized by providing the necessary personnel to support this worthy and effective program. Rancho Seco Nuclear Power Plant: Maintenance/Disposalof Radioactive Waste and Used Nuclear Fuel Issue Are all reasonably necessary steps being taken regarding the storage and disposal of radioactive waste and used nuclear fuel produced at the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) decommissioned Rancho Seco Nuclear Power Plant (Rancho Seco)? Reason for Investigation The 2006-2007 Grand Jury initiated this investigation to determine 1) the status of radioactive waste and used nucelear fuel storage/disposal at Rancho Seco, 2) if adequate steps are being taken to protect the public from release of radioactive materials, and 3) if all appropriate steps are being taken to ensure that used nuclear fuel is being removed and stored in a safe and timely manner. Background: The 2006-2007 Grand Jury recommended, among other things, that SMUD seek federal compensation for the storage and security of spent nuclear fuel, if the fuel is not moved to a repository elsewhere. Summary of Responses by SMUD: SMUD responded by stating that, in its opinion, it was unlikely the proposed central repository for spent nuclear fuel at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, would ever open. SMUD also responded that financing and funding for the storage and security ofthe spent nuclear fuel was the subject of litigation. SMUD prevailed in its claim that the federal government is responsible for these costs. That case has been appealed by the federal government. SMUD further responded that, even in the event of a reversal of the lower court decision to hold the federal government responsible, SMUD has budgeted sufficient funds to pay for the ongoing storage and security of the spent fuel if necessary. It further stated the impact on the operations and maintenance budget for this contingency is not significant. Comments to SMUD's Responses: The 2007-2008 Grand Jury has reviewed SMUD's response to the Findings and Recommendations ofthe 2006-2007 Grand Jury regarding the costs for storage and security of the spent nuclear fuel at Rancho Seco. This Grand Jury concurs with SMUD's response which indicates first, that the federal government is responsible for the cost of storage and security for the spent nuclear fuel. Second, this Grand Jury also concurs with SMUD's observation that, should the decision of the lower court upholding SMUD's contention be reversed, SMUD has the capacity to provide safe storage and security within its operations and maintenance budget for as long as necessary. Finally, this Grand Jury is hopeful that a federal repository will be identified for the storage of spent nuclear fuel. 109 15 YEAR FINAL REPORT INDEX (1993 thru 2007) SACRAMENTO COUNTY GRAND JURY AGENCY DATE PUBLISHED Airport System: • Conflict of Interest, Sacramento International 1998 • Encroaching Land Use 2002 • Executive Airport 1994 Cities: Citrus Heights • Credit Card Usage 2001 • Oversight of Contract Services 2006 Elk Grove • Elk Grove City Council 2006 • Elk Grove City Council (Response) 2007 • Elk Grove USD Fails Fiduciary Responsibility 2002 • Elk Grove USD (Response) 2003 Fair Oaks • Cemetery District Management 1993 • Head Stone Damage 2006 Folsom • Credit Card Usage-City ofFolsom 2001 • Folsom Sewage Spills Continue 2002 • Landscape and Lighting District Assessment 2005 Galt • Failure to Oversee Delivery of Services Contracted 2005 • Galt-Arno Cemetery District Operations 1997, 2001 • Lighting and Landscape Districts 2001 • Misuse of Appointive Power by City Council 2003 • Review of Galt-Amo District Operations 1998 Isleton • Administrative and Fiscal Problems 1995 • Complaints Against the Police 1998,1999,2001,2006 • Policies and Procedures 1995,1999 Sacramento City • Convention Center Operation 1997 • Financial Incentives for Targeted Business 1997 • Mayor's Office: Use ofTime and Resources 1998 • North Natomas: Development Gone Awry 2007 • Regional Radio Communications Review 1999 • Sewer Discharge into the American River 2001 • Sacramento City Unified School District Retirement 2006 111 County of Sacramento • Certificates ofParticipation 1994 • Complaint against Taxi Owners 2005,2006 • Communications and Infonnation Technology 1999 • County Civil Service Commission 2005 • County Civil Service Commission (Response) 2006 • County Employee Evaluations 1993 • County Heat Emergency Response 2007 • County Primary Care Clinic 2007 • Directed Brokerage Program ofthe County Retirement System 2002 • Economic Incentive Policy 1997 • Failure ofCounty to Oversee Contract Services/Galt 2005 • Firefighters, Our Local Heroes 1996 • Financing ofLocal Government 1994 • Flood Risk in Sacramento County 2007 • Homeland Security, Ready or Not 2005 • Homeland Security, Ready or Not (Response) 2006 • Letter Grades for Restaurants 2003 • Sacramento-Yolo Port District 1995 Coroner's Office • Crime Laboratory 1993,2000 • Death Investigations 2003 • Fees for Transporting Bodies 2000 • Review of Vendor ContractslRFP 1999 District Attorney's Office • Bureau ofFamily Support 2002 • Child Abuse and Neglect 1998 • Child Support and Welfare Agencies 1998 • Child Support and Collection Enforcement 1997 • Communication and Internal Management 1993 • Multidisciplinary Interview Center 1993 • Political Activities in School Districts 1997 • American River Flood Control District 1997 Department of Health and Human Services • Adult Protective Services 1996,1997,2002 • Aging Out Foster Children-Foster Parents 2001 • Child Abuse and Neglect 1998 • Child Abuse in Sacramento County 1996 • Child Support and Welfare Agencies 1994 • Child Protective Services at the Crossroads 2000 • Child Protective Services Intake Services 2006 • Changes Needed in Juvenile Mental Health Services 2002 112 • Children's Receiving Home 1999 • Development ofNew Programs for Foster Children 2005 • Family Maintenance and Reunification 1995 • Juvenile Hall Mental Health Services 1993 • Mental Health Services in Juvenile Justice System 2001 • Mental Health Treatment Center 1999 • Public Guardian and Conservatorship 1995 Environmental Services Department • Mismanagement ofthe Environmental Department 2000 • Review of Conflict of Interest Statement 1997 Medical Services • County Emergency Ambulance Provider 1993 • Flood Disaster Evacuation ofMedically Infirm 2006 • Goals and Objectives ofMental Health Services 2006 • Mental Health Services in the Juvenile Justice System 2001 Probation Department • Boy's Ranch and Carson Creek High School 1995 • Domestic Violence Programs 2002 • Juvenile Hall Mental Health Services 1993 • Juvenile Justice Facilities and Staffing 2000 • Mental Health Services in the Juvenile Justice System 2001 • Unequal Treatment of Female Inmates 2002 Public Library • County Library Authority 2000 • Use of Alternate Sentencing Volunteers 1993 Sherifrs Department • Rio Cosumnes Correctional Center 2007 • Escape at Cosumnes 1998 • Women's Detention Facility 1994 Main Jail • Handling and Security of Inmate Correspondence 2005 • Jail health Inmate Psychiatric Services 2004 • Jail Training for Officers 1995 • Main Jail Health Care 2006 • Use of Prostraint Chair 1998 • Women's Holding Cells 1997 • Sheriff's Tactical Air Response Operation 1993 • Work Release Program 2007 113 Special Districts • Retained Earnings-Sacramento County Special Districts 2001 • Certificates of Participation 1994 • Financing ofLocal Governments 1994 • Remuneration to Special District Board Members 1994 • American River Flood Control District 1997 • Cable TV Commission and the Brown Act 1994 • American River Fire District Management Review 1993 • Wilton Firefighters on Fire Board ofDirectors 2002 • Mosquito and Vector Control District Operations 1999 • Regional Sanitation District Economic Incentives 1997 • Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency 1994 • SMUD, Economic Development Plan 1997 • SMUD, Rancho Seco Nuclear Power Plant 2007 • Carmichael District Operational Issues 1997 • Recommendations for Water District Accountability 2003 School Districts • Center USD Violations ofBrown Act 1998 • Community School Usage 1994 • Elk Grove USD Fails Fiduciary Responsibilities 2002 • Folsom/Cordova USD Inventory Practices 1993 usn Grant/ Union • Inappropriate Use of Public Funds 2004 • Policies, Procedures and Administration 1994 usn Sacramento City • Management, Fiscal Problems 1995 • School District Maintenance 1995 • Allegation of Dual Employment, Two Public Agencies 1998 • Board ofEducation Oversight ofCASA 2004 • Lack ofResponse to Requests for Information 1997 • School Safety in Jeopardy 2003 • Students Walking to School 2005 • Volunteers Working on School Grounds 1993 Non-Profit Organizations • Children's Receiving Home 1993 • Sacramento Handicapped Parking Patrol Inc. 1995 State Prison System • Transport of Prisoners for Non-Emergency Medical Care 2002 114 Attachment 1 GRAND JURY COMPLAINT FORM GRAND JURY USE ONLY DATE RECEIVED: _ PERSON OR AGENCY ABOUT WHICH COMPLAINT IS MADE NUMBER: _ NAME: SUBJECT: _ ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NUMBER: _ NATURE OF COMPLAINT: Describe events in the order they occurred as clearly and concisely as possible. Also indicate what resolution you are seeking. Use extra sheets if necessary and attach copies of any correspondence you feel is pertinent. Documentation becomes the property of the Grand Jury and will not be returned. Please note: The Sacramento County Grand Jury has no jurisdiction over state or federal agencies, the courts, judicial officers, private companies or most organizations. WHAT PERSONS OR AGENCIES HAVE YOU CONTACTED ABOUT YOUR COMPLAINT? Person or Agency Address Date of Contact Result WHO SHOULD THE GRAND JURY CONTACT ABOUT THIS MATTER? Person or Agency Address Telephone No. YOUR NAME: _____________,DRIVER'S LICENSE NO.: _ ADDRESS: _ TELEPHONE NO.:, _ The information I have submitted on this form is true. correct and complete to the best of my knowledge. Complainant's Signature Date - OYER not investigate a matter that is currently being litigated in the court system. By law, the proceedings of the Grand Jury are confidential. The findings and recommendations and issues it chooses to SACRAMENTO COUNTY GRAND address are published in its final report. JURY COMPLAINT FORM COMPLAINT PROCESS A major function of the Sacramento County Grand Jury is to examine local county and • Present your complaint as soon as city government, special districts, school possible. The Grand Jury's term of districts, and any joint powers agency service begins July 15t and ends June located in the county to ensure their duties 30th ofthe following year. are being carried out lawfully. • Identify your specific concern and The Grand Jury: describe the circumstances as clearly and concisely as possible. • May review and evaluate procedures used by these entities to • Document your complaint with determine whether more efficient copies of pertinent information and and economical methods may be evidence in your possession. employed. Mail or deliver your complaint in a sealed • May inspect and audit the books, envelope to: records and financial expenditures as noted above to ensure that public Sacramento County Grand Jury funds are properly accounted for and 720 -9th Street, Room 611 legally spent. Sacramento, CA 95814-1302 • May investigate any charges of Complaints submitted to the Grand Jury will willful misconduct in office by be treated confidentially whenever possible. public officials. However, it may be impossible to conduct an investigation without revealing your • Shall inquire into the condition and name and complaint. management of the public prisons within the county. Grand Jury investigation reports are published in its Final Report, which is Anyone may ask the Grand Jury to conduct available to the residents of the county. an investigation of an issue within its Public entities and officers who are the jurisdiction. Whether it chooses to subjects of the reports are required to investigate such a complaint is entirely in its respond. discretion and may be affected by workload, resource limitations or legal restrictions. It is important to note that the Grand Jury may