Sacramento County Grand Jury
2019-2020
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 (10)
Findings & Recommendations
13 findings
F1:
For several years Sacramento PD has lagged behind the national standard for number of officers based on population. This was caused by budget reductions during the 2008 recession resulting in staff reductions that, in spite of significant recruitment efforts, have never been fully restored.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The Sacramento City Council and the Sacramento Police Department should work together to include the positions and budget authority necessary to permanently establish an on-going recruitment function in the Department. The position and budget authority should be included in the 2021-2022 Sacramento PD budget proposal considered for approval by the City Council.
F2:
While recruitment seems to be a high priority within the Department, there is no line item budget for recruiting police officers and there is no continuity in police officer recruitment staffing.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The Sacramento Police Department should review potentially eliminating the A.A. degree and 60-unit requirement to attract new recruits. The review should consider waiving those requirements for potential recruits with professional training and expertise that could be equally relevant (Military, Lateral Police Transfers). This review shou ld begin immediately with an implementation of its recommendations during FY 2020-2021.
F3:
Unlike other Northern California law enforcement agencies, the Sacramento Police Department requires a potential recruit or transfer from another agency to have an A.A. Degree or 60 hours of college instruction. While the Department believes the requirement helps to assure higher quality policing, it may also unnecessarily preclude the Department’s ability to consider otherwise highly qualified candidates. This requirement makes Sacramento PD less competitive for attracting recruits.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The Grand Jury recommends that elected officials support and highlight the positive accomplishments of the Police Department and the vital mission/services provided by law enforcement, which in turn would encourage recruitment and retention of officers and would improve the morale of the Department. The Grand Jury recommends this becomes a priority immediately.
F4:
Differences in law enforcement agency responsibilities and job functions appear to be determining factors in recruitment more than salary and benefits.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
The Sacramento City Council and the Sacramento Police Department should work together to include the positions and budget authority necessary to permanently establish an on-going recruitment function in the Department. The position and budget 80 authority should be included in the 2021-2022 Sacramento PD budget proposal considered for approval by the City Council.
F5:
Public officials support for the Department is a critical factor in improving departmental morale and in responding to community criticism of the Police Department. Community criticism of the Department has a negative impact in the recruitment of new officers and the morale of existing officers.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
In an effort to improve public perception, the City should consider using a professional public relations firm and/or seek pro bono assistance of an ad agency to create a multi- faceted advertising campaign with the goals of building a collaborative relationship between the community and citizens and highlighting law enforcement as a career. The City’s Public Information Office should present a public relations plan to the City Council and the PD for their consideration by the end of calendar 2020.
F6:
Rapid growth in population away from the city center not only supports the need for additional police officers for patrol duties but also limits the amount of time available for officers to complete required administrative tasks and do community outreach.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
The Department should explore ways to shorten the entire recruitment hiring process. This process should begin immediately with a completion date within the next 12 months.
F7:
Due to the current demands of the job, officers are not able to spend as much time as would be desirable developing relationships within the communities they serve.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
The Grand Jury recommends the Police Chief continue to work with POST officials to update or change cadet marksmanship and driving standards and to give candidates the attention needed to better prepare them for those requirements. The Goal for completion would be within the next 12 months.
F8:
The Grand Jury recognizes the Department has taken steps in reviewing policies specifically related to tattoos. 79
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
The Grand Jury recommends the Sacramento City Council and the Police Department continue to expand and make permanent the CSO Program and provide a strategy for the utilization of the CSO position by December of 2021.
F9:
The main target groups for recruitment are millennials or Gen Y individuals whose career needs and concerns vary from veteran officers.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9:
The Grand Jury recommends that bi-annual open forum style town hall meetings with the police officers moderated by the Mayor, City Manager, Police Chief and the Police Union Representative be conducted that would give officers and management an opportunity to discuss areas of concern and interest with the goal of bolstering support between police officers and community leaders. The Grand Jury recommends this meeting begin within the next six months.
F10:
The resources allocated to public relations to enhance the image of the Police Department are inadequate. It must be noted that the Police Department is making some positive changes in public relations with rap videos and freeway signage etc.
Related Recommendations (1)
R10:
The Grand Jury recommends the Police Department establish a committee or forum of younger officers to provide input on the type of “incentives” or programs that are geared to the younger professional lifestyle in order to attract new officers. The goal would be to drive changes in the Police Department that will attract new candidates including lateral transfers and also assist in retaining current officers. The Grand Jury recommends this should be done within the next six months.
F11:
The current hiring process is antiquated and too long which may discourage potential recruits. The Grand Jury notes that the Police Department is reviewing how the process might be updated and shortened.
Related Recommendations (1)
R11:
The Grand Jury compliments the City and Sacramento Police Department for reviewing and relaxing restrictions on tattoos, and encourages them to take similar actions on body piercings and below the collar ponytails. The Police Department should reflect not only the diversity of the community but also what is now more prevalent and acceptable in order to increase the recruitment pool and better relate to the public they serve. The Grand Jury recommends this work begin immediately. 81
F12:
POST training requirements for driving and marksmanship contribute significantly to candidate washout/failure at the Police Academy.
F13:
The Community Service Officer program has made a positive contribution to both the Sacramento PD and the citizens it serves. Not only has it enabled the PD to reduce call response times even as the population has grown but it has provided a good pool of candidates to fill full time police officer positions.
Findings & Recommendations
13 findings
F1:
For several years Sacramento PD has lagged behind the national standard for number of officers based on population. This was caused by budget reductions during the 2008 recession resulting in staff reductions that, in spite of significant recruitment efforts, have never been fully restored.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The Sacramento City Council and the Sacramento Police Department should work together to include the positions and budget authority necessary to permanently establish an on-going recruitment function in the Department. The position and budget authority should be included in the 2021-2022 Sacramento PD budget proposal considered for approval by the City Council.
F2:
While recruitment seems to be a high priority within the Department, there is no line item budget for recruiting police officers and there is no continuity in police officer recruitment staffing.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The Sacramento Police Department should review potentially eliminating the A.A. degree and 60-unit requirement to attract new recruits. The review should consider waiving those requirements for potential recruits with professional training and expertise that could be equally relevant (Military, Lateral Police Transfers). This review shou ld begin immediately with an implementation of its recommendations during FY 2020-2021.
F3:
Unlike other Northern California law enforcement agencies, the Sacramento Police Department requires a potential recruit or transfer from another agency to have an A.A. Degree or 60 hours of college instruction. While the Department believes the requirement helps to assure higher quality policing, it may also unnecessarily preclude the Department’s ability to consider otherwise highly qualified candidates. This requirement makes Sacramento PD less competitive for attracting recruits.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The Grand Jury recommends that elected officials support and highlight the positive accomplishments of the Police Department and the vital mission/services provided by law enforcement, which in turn would encourage recruitment and retention of officers and would improve the morale of the Department. The Grand Jury recommends this becomes a priority immediately.
F4:
Differences in law enforcement agency responsibilities and job functions appear to be determining factors in recruitment more than salary and benefits.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
The Sacramento City Council and the Sacramento Police Department should work together to include the positions and budget authority necessary to permanently establish an on-going recruitment function in the Department. The position and budget 80 authority should be included in the 2021-2022 Sacramento PD budget proposal considered for approval by the City Council.
F5:
Public officials support for the Department is a critical factor in improving departmental morale and in responding to community criticism of the Police Department. Community criticism of the Department has a negative impact in the recruitment of new officers and the morale of existing officers.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
In an effort to improve public perception, the City should consider using a professional public relations firm and/or seek pro bono assistance of an ad agency to create a multi- faceted advertising campaign with the goals of building a collaborative relationship between the community and citizens and highlighting law enforcement as a career. The City’s Public Information Office should present a public relations plan to the City Council and the PD for their consideration by the end of calendar 2020.
F6:
Rapid growth in population away from the city center not only supports the need for additional police officers for patrol duties but also limits the amount of time available for officers to complete required administrative tasks and do community outreach.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
The Department should explore ways to shorten the entire recruitment hiring process. This process should begin immediately with a completion date within the next 12 months.
F7:
Due to the current demands of the job, officers are not able to spend as much time as would be desirable developing relationships within the communities they serve.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
The Grand Jury recommends the Police Chief continue to work with POST officials to update or change cadet marksmanship and driving standards and to give candidates the attention needed to better prepare them for those requirements. The Goal for completion would be within the next 12 months.
F8:
The Grand Jury recognizes the Department has taken steps in reviewing policies specifically related to tattoos. 79
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
The Grand Jury recommends the Sacramento City Council and the Police Department continue to expand and make permanent the CSO Program and provide a strategy for the utilization of the CSO position by December of 2021.
F9:
The main target groups for recruitment are millennials or Gen Y individuals whose career needs and concerns vary from veteran officers.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9:
The Grand Jury recommends that bi-annual open forum style town hall meetings with the police officers moderated by the Mayor, City Manager, Police Chief and the Police Union Representative be conducted that would give officers and management an opportunity to discuss areas of concern and interest with the goal of bolstering support between police officers and community leaders. The Grand Jury recommends this meeting begin within the next six months.
F10:
The resources allocated to public relations to enhance the image of the Police Department are inadequate. It must be noted that the Police Department is making some positive changes in public relations with rap videos and freeway signage etc.
Related Recommendations (1)
R10:
The Grand Jury recommends the Police Department establish a committee or forum of younger officers to provide input on the type of “incentives” or programs that are geared to the younger professional lifestyle in order to attract new officers. The goal would be to drive changes in the Police Department that will attract new candidates including lateral transfers and also assist in retaining current officers. The Grand Jury recommends this should be done within the next six months.
F11:
The current hiring process is antiquated and too long which may discourage potential recruits. The Grand Jury notes that the Police Department is reviewing how the process might be updated and shortened.
Related Recommendations (1)
R11:
The Grand Jury compliments the City and Sacramento Police Department for reviewing and relaxing restrictions on tattoos, and encourages them to take similar actions on body piercings and below the collar ponytails. The Police Department should reflect not only the diversity of the community but also what is now more prevalent and acceptable in order to increase the recruitment pool and better relate to the public they serve. The Grand Jury recommends this work begin immediately. 81
F12:
POST training requirements for driving and marksmanship contribute significantly to candidate washout/failure at the Police Academy.
F13:
The Community Service Officer program has made a positive contribution to both the Sacramento PD and the citizens it serves. Not only has it enabled the PD to reduce call response times even as the population has grown but it has provided a good pool of candidates to fill full time police officer positions.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
9 findings
F1:
Clear lines of responsibility regarding relocation of Single Room Occupancy (SRO) clients have been difficult to determine. Opinions from interviewees indicate the agencies were not always working collaboratively, sharing information and consistently messaging.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The Joint Powers Authority along with Sacramento Steps Forward and Sacramento Homeless Policy Council should collaboratively develop a single uniform plan relating to SRO displacement that would improve transparency, coordination, accountability and reduce duplication of efforts between the stakeholders by June 30, 2021.
F2:
The Grand Jury found no evidence that a study of best practices from other cities has been performed or communicated.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The Joint Powers Authority and Sacramento Steps Forward should develop a task force, utilizing the Sacramento Homeless Policy Council, to include representatives of all agencies involved in plans for gentrification throughout the County of Sacramento and especially Downtown Sacramento. This task force should research best practices of other jurisdictions to learn how they manage their efforts to protect residents of housing slated for gentrification and issue a report of findings by June 30, 2021.
F3:
The Grand Jury found that the conversions of The Berry, The Capitol Park and the Shasta facilities appear to have been well-planned and meet the intent of the law and the needs of the community.
F4:
Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency (SHRA) did not provide the Grand Jury information on reporting or tracking individual residents of SROs who were displaced. Therefore, it could not be determined whether those occupants who may have been compensated have relocated, whether the relocation was successful or, worst case, if the resident spent the money and may now be homeless. 47
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
Placements for residents of all SROs being repurposed or revitalized need to be monitored and publicly reported. To facilitate greater understanding and ensure improved transparency of the placement process, the SHRA website could be utilized to contain reports similar to the Capitol Park Hotel Resident Relocation Report for all SRO property renovations. SHRA should provide the elements and timeline of these reports by March 31, 2021.
F5:
The Grand Jury Report for 2018-2019 recommended seeking assistance to look at the actions and coordination of the stakeholders. As a result of those recommendations, The Sacramento Homeless Policy Council (SHPC) was formed which will impact future relocated tenants.
F6:
Kaiser Permanente is funding support to help SHPC develop oversight, stronger collaboration and a coordinated plan.
F7:
While SHRA has the legal mandate for housing individuals displaced by gentrification, several initiatives and/or agencies including Sacramento Steps Forward (SSF), Volunteers of America, and Continuum of Care are involved in various aspects. It is not clear which entity makes the final decision, which initiates policy and which manages implementation regarding development of plans and re-housing those impacted by gentrification.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The Joint Powers Authority along with Sacramento Steps Forward and Sacramento Homeless Policy Council should collaboratively develop a single uniform plan relating to SRO displacement that would improve transparency, coordination, accountability and reduce duplication of efforts between the stakeholders by June 30, 2021.
F8:
The Joint Powers Agency (JPA) members - Sacramento City, Sacramento County and SHRA - are making efforts to work more collaboratively along with Sacramento Steps Forward and the newly formed Sacramento Homeless Policy Council along with Community Solutions.
F9:
Sacramento City Code mandates a minimum of 712 SRO rooms must remain available at all times. As of July 3, 2019, the City had 762 rooms including those at the new complex at 7th & H which indicates they are maintaining the mandated levels. The question remains whether that is an adequate number today.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The current mandate of maintaining 712 SRO units may not be an adequate number. SHPC should study the number of SRO units needed in 2020 and beyond and provide a report of
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
9 findings
F1:
Clear lines of responsibility regarding relocation of Single Room Occupancy (SRO) clients have been difficult to determine. Opinions from interviewees indicate the agencies were not always working collaboratively, sharing information and consistently messaging.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The Joint Powers Authority along with Sacramento Steps Forward and Sacramento Homeless Policy Council should collaboratively develop a single uniform plan relating to SRO displacement that would improve transparency, coordination, accountability and reduce duplication of efforts between the stakeholders by June 30, 2021.
F2:
The Grand Jury found no evidence that a study of best practices from other cities has been performed or communicated.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The Joint Powers Authority and Sacramento Steps Forward should develop a task force, utilizing the Sacramento Homeless Policy Council, to include representatives of all agencies involved in plans for gentrification throughout the County of Sacramento and especially Downtown Sacramento. This task force should research best practices of other jurisdictions to learn how they manage their efforts to protect residents of housing slated for gentrification and issue a report of findings by June 30, 2021.
F3:
The Grand Jury found that the conversions of The Berry, The Capitol Park and the Shasta facilities appear to have been well-planned and meet the intent of the law and the needs of the community.
F4:
Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency (SHRA) did not provide the Grand Jury information on reporting or tracking individual residents of SROs who were displaced. Therefore, it could not be determined whether those occupants who may have been compensated have relocated, whether the relocation was successful or, worst case, if the resident spent the money and may now be homeless. 47
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
Placements for residents of all SROs being repurposed or revitalized need to be monitored and publicly reported. To facilitate greater understanding and ensure improved transparency of the placement process, the SHRA website could be utilized to contain reports similar to the Capitol Park Hotel Resident Relocation Report for all SRO property renovations. SHRA should provide the elements and timeline of these reports by March 31, 2021.
F5:
The Grand Jury Report for 2018-2019 recommended seeking assistance to look at the actions and coordination of the stakeholders. As a result of those recommendations, The Sacramento Homeless Policy Council (SHPC) was formed which will impact future relocated tenants.
F6:
Kaiser Permanente is funding support to help SHPC develop oversight, stronger collaboration and a coordinated plan.
F7:
While SHRA has the legal mandate for housing individuals displaced by gentrification, several initiatives and/or agencies including Sacramento Steps Forward (SSF), Volunteers of America, and Continuum of Care are involved in various aspects. It is not clear which entity makes the final decision, which initiates policy and which manages implementation regarding development of plans and re-housing those impacted by gentrification.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The Joint Powers Authority along with Sacramento Steps Forward and Sacramento Homeless Policy Council should collaboratively develop a single uniform plan relating to SRO displacement that would improve transparency, coordination, accountability and reduce duplication of efforts between the stakeholders by June 30, 2021.
F8:
The Joint Powers Agency (JPA) members - Sacramento City, Sacramento County and SHRA - are making efforts to work more collaboratively along with Sacramento Steps Forward and the newly formed Sacramento Homeless Policy Council along with Community Solutions.
F9:
Sacramento City Code mandates a minimum of 712 SRO rooms must remain available at all times. As of July 3, 2019, the City had 762 rooms including those at the new complex at 7th & H which indicates they are maintaining the mandated levels. The question remains whether that is an adequate number today.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The current mandate of maintaining 712 SRO units may not be an adequate number. SHPC should study the number of SRO units needed in 2020 and beyond and provide a report of
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
6 findings
F1:
On March 19, 2020 the Sacramento County Public Health Officer issued a Public Health Order. Lack of coordinated emergency response and direction from the County Executive and the Board of Supervisors shifted all oversight of the planning and implementation to the Public Health Officer and the Office of Emergency Services.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The County Executive, Board of Supervisors, and OPH should develop and adopt a public health emergency response plan which recognizes, and plans for the immediate requirements of OPH to implement public health orders to best ensure public safety. The Board of Supervisors should finalize and approve the response plan by December 2022.
F2:
In 2009, OPH experienced dramatic staffing and funding cutbacks, which have never been fully restored. As a result, OPH entered the 2020 pandemic with distinct deficits in areas, such as the field nursing unit, services for at-risk communities, and other programs that significantly impacted its ability to respond to the dynamic nature of the COVID-19 pandemic as it reached Sacramento in early 2020. These under-investments in Public Health presented significant challenges for OPH in meeting the immediate public health emergency response required in a pandemic.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The Board of Supervisors should immediately develop, formally approve and implement a direct and regular reporting process for the Public Health Officer. This process should require at least monthly reporting to the Board during public sessions. Whenever a community wide public health order has been declared, the Board of Supervisors should augment regular reporting by OPH with detailed reporting on the response to the public health emergency, including recommendations for needed services, programs and funding. These policies and processes should be adopted by the Board of Supervisors no later than June 2022.
F3:
Sacramento County administrators adhered to a traditional budget process and calendar in response to emergency funding requests from OPH, despite the availability of $181 mil- lion in CARES Act funding. That rigid process absolutely stymied appropriate and timely disbursal of emergency funds requested by OPH for needed equipment, staffing and ser- vices. 6
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
Funding for OPH should be immediately reviewed and adequately increased to build and maintain a strong organizational infrastructure with sufficient staffing. Such funding is essential to ensure that OPH maintains the critical capacity to immediately implement all essential and emergency public health services. This funding assessment and increased funding levels should be included in the budget process for the 2022-2023 budget.
F4:
Despite the gravity of the COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on Sacramento County residents, the Board of Supervisors did not request pandemic response reports directly from its Public Health Officer for nearly five months after the issuance of the first COVID-19 Public Health Order.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
The County should develop and adopt a separate emergency budget allocation and approval process. This process would operate outside the regular fiscal year county budget process in order to expedite emergency funding requests from County departments. Such a process should include program staff training, as well as transparent allocation and expenditure reporting to the Board of Supervisors and County Executive staff. The Board of Supervisors should finalize and approve the emergency budget allocation process by December 2022.
F5:
The Board of Supervisors does not have its own “Continuity of Operation” plan in place for the Board of Supervisors to use in the case of any type of public emergency which would prevent or adversely impact critical Board of Supervisors governance activities and responsibilities.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
The Board of Supervisors should develop and adopt its own “Continuity of Operation” plan, with periodic updating as appropriate. The Board of Supervisors should finalize its “Continuity of Operation” plan by December 2022. 7
F6:
Implementation of COVID-19 related Public Health Orders was hamstrung by a lack of enforcement support from the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors, the County Chief Executive, the County Sheriff and local law enforcement agencies.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
The Board of Supervisors and OPH should immediately begin discussions with the County Sheriff and other County law enforcement entities. These discussions should result in a County ordinance directing local law enforcement to enforce public health emergency orders. The Board of Supervisors should enact this ordinance by December 2022
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
4 findings
F1:
Sacramento County Department of Technology (DTech) is not currently practicing regular, consistent vulnerability scans and penetration testing. Vulnerability scanning and penetration testing are often confused. The two security procedures are quite different and are used for different purposes. At the most basic level, vulnerability scanning aims to identify any systems that are subject to known vulnerabilities while a penetration test aims to identify weaknesses in specific system configurations and organizational processes and practices that can be exploited to compromise security.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
Sacramento County Grand Jury (SCGJ) recommends the Sacramento County Department of Technology (DTech) institute frequent penetration testing performed by a third party twice per year at a minimum. SCGJ further recommends DTech perform vulnerability scans each time the following occurs within the IT ecosystem. • Security patches are applied, • Significant changes are made to the infrastructure or network, • New infrastructure or web applications are added, • An office location changes, or an office is added to the network.
F2:
Voter Registration and Elections Department (VRE) considers election security a major concern and has given it a very high priority. The Sacramento County Registrar of Voters (SCRV) and her staff were very cooperative and began almost immediately to implement changes and corrective measures for identified shortcomings.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
Sacramento County Grand Jury (SCGJ) recommends the Communication and Media Office (CMO) adjust its election security policy to include security of the Voter Registration and Elections Department (VRE) website, communication, registration, voting and results from tabulation by June 30, 2020 in preparation for the November 2020 general election.
F3:
Media policy is currently under review to address the management of account passwords and the enforcement of the County of Sacramento supported multi-factor authentication methods. The estimated completion date is June 30, 2020. Social Media Accounts are managed by the Communication and Media Office (CMO) and adhere to the County of Sacramento Social Media Policy. Due to the limitations and diversity of Social Media account authentications, a review of Social Media Management software will be conducted by the Sacramento County Department of Technology (DTech). The estimated completion date is January 15, 2021.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
Sacramento County Grand Jury (SCGJ) recommends that the Sacramento County Department of Technology (DTech) and Voter Registration and Elections Department (VRE) need to implement multi-factor authentication procedures before the November 2020 general election.
F4:
Sacramento County Department of Technology (DTech) has begun a 16-month county-wide initiative to implement multi-factor authentication. Multi-factor authentication is one of the best deterrents to keep unauthorized users from hacking into computer networks. Voter Registration and Elections Department (VRE) will be one of the first departments to deploy this methodology.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
Sacramento County Grand Jury (SCGJ) requests that the Sacramento County Department of Technology (DTech) report back to the SCGJ the results of the CyberDefenses, Inc. review and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) audit of the election security by September 30, 2020. 98
Findings & Recommendations
6 findings
F1:
Public education in California is organized into three tiers of responsibility: State, County and District. The lines of communication are top-down and new responsibilities are added at each level. School districts are governed by a locally elected school board of directors that are responsible for hiring a district superintendent, labor contracts, and budgeting. It is imperative that all levels work together to decrease dropouts.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The Sacramento County Office of Education should facilitate the identification and use of best practices to reduce dropout rates by serving as a clearinghouse for such efforts by different schools and school districts, utilizing its website and other media to share this information, and possibly convening periodic meetings and standing committees focused on this outcome. The County Office of Education should advance such efforts during 2020-2021. 60
F2:
Government funding is not going to keep pace with the needs of public education. If the goal of decreasing dropout rates is going to be met, then schools and school districts must be proactive in finding new sources of revenue and program support. The impact of the COVID-19 crises on education funding is difficult to quantify currently, but it is going to have a negative effect in 2020-21 and beyond.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
District school boards and employee unions should recognize that because education funding can vary widely from year to year, contracts for wages and benefits should be fair to all invested parties while keeping the district financially healthy. Because of the uncertainty of COVID-19 on individual district education budgets this needs to be addressed for the 2020-21 school year at the earliest possible time.
F3:
Protocols to identify at-risk students are essential to have resources in place when needed. Student connectivity with mentors (coaches, educational staff, and extracurricular staff) is a deterrent to dropping out of school.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
School districts and school administrators should be proactive in developing community partnerships with service clubs, area 501 (c) (3) s and local businesses. District Superintendents need to look for community grants and develop outreach programs in every school during the 2020-2021 school year.
F4:
Art, music, sports, and technical classes help keep students engaged in school.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
Sacramento County district school boards should budget for providing a broad array of services for at-risk students, such as promoting volunteers for tutoring and mentoring; hiring more social service professionals, including social workers, psychologists, and counselors; and programs such as summer school, intercession and remediation to help students get back on a four-year graduation track. Schools should further such efforts during 2020-2021.
F5:
Career and technical education provide alternative graduation pathways for students who may not be able or interested in pursuing a college degree. The “Road Map” system used by the Natomas school district needs to be instituted Countywide.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
Sacramento County district school boards should mandate that each school establish at least one new student club, one new sports program, and one other activity that engages students and keeps them in school. Schools should implement this recommendation by June 30, 2021.
F6:
Teamwork for common goals by all invested parties is essential for lowering dropout and raising graduation rates. Simply stated, if the local community wants better schools, then the local community needs to be positively involved.
Findings & Recommendations
5 findings
F1:
Due to realignment and the Mays Consent Decree the Sacramento County jails must provide additional educational and vocational training, medical and mental health services, and brings the facilities into compliance with ADA. Sacramento County Sheriff’s Reentry Services Unit Program Guide, pp. 12-14. 110
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
By December 31, 2020, the Board of Supervisors should accept the $80 million made available to Sacramento County through SB1022.
F2:
The Grand Jury is aware, based on its interviews and research, that there are those who believe that acceptance of any funds would be an endorsement of a policy of increased incarceration. The Grand Jury believes proponents of the project should emphasize the importance of increased services and programs to ultimately reduce recidivism and improve the post incarceration lives of the inmates and their families. .
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
By June 1, 2021, the Sheriff’s Department should develop and begin implementation of the most cost-effective plan to achieve the objectives of the RCCC expansion and infrastructure improvement project.
F3:
Accepting the SB 1022 funds will commit the County to spending between $6-8 million each year for 30 years or until the bonds are repaid for staffing and operating costs.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
By June 20, 2021, the Board of Supervisors in co-operation with the Sheriff’s Department should include in implementation plans the flexibility to reduce operating expenditures to the extent required by reductions in jail population.
F4:
If the County does not accept the SB 1022 funds, the structural improvements identified by the Sheriff, DGS and the County Executive as essential to meet the housing, educational and medical and mental health service needs of long term inmates at RCCC will require county funds to be accomplished.
F5:
Whether or not Sacramento County accepts the SB 1022 funds, the County will still be responsible to fund all the changes required by the Mays Consent Decree.
Findings & Recommendations
5 findings
F1:
Due to realignment and the Mays Consent Decree the Sacramento County jails must provide additional educational and vocational training, medical and mental health services, and brings the facilities into compliance with ADA. Sacramento County Sheriff’s Reentry Services Unit Program Guide, pp. 12-14. 110
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
By December 31, 2020, the Board of Supervisors should accept the $80 million made available to Sacramento County through SB1022.
F2:
The Grand Jury is aware, based on its interviews and research, that there are those who believe that acceptance of any funds would be an endorsement of a policy of increased incarceration. The Grand Jury believes proponents of the project should emphasize the importance of increased services and programs to ultimately reduce recidivism and improve the post incarceration lives of the inmates and their families. .
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
By June 1, 2021, the Sheriff’s Department should develop and begin implementation of the most cost-effective plan to achieve the objectives of the RCCC expansion and infrastructure improvement project.
F3:
Accepting the SB 1022 funds will commit the County to spending between $6-8 million each year for 30 years or until the bonds are repaid for staffing and operating costs.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
By June 20, 2021, the Board of Supervisors in co-operation with the Sheriff’s Department should include in implementation plans the flexibility to reduce operating expenditures to the extent required by reductions in jail population.
F4:
If the County does not accept the SB 1022 funds, the structural improvements identified by the Sheriff, DGS and the County Executive as essential to meet the housing, educational and medical and mental health service needs of long term inmates at RCCC will require county funds to be accomplished.
F5:
Whether or not Sacramento County accepts the SB 1022 funds, the County will still be responsible to fund all the changes required by the Mays Consent Decree.
Findings & Recommendations
10 findings
F1:
The current multiple funding mechanisms are neither effective nor sustainable for managing Elk Grove’s parks.
F2:
Public confusion and misunderstanding are evidenced by the need for extensive and repeated community outreach meetings and the mixed success in securing timely voter approval for needed revenue increases. Contributing to this confusion are: the division in roles for Elk Grove’s parks between the City of Elk Grove and Cosumnes Community Services District (CCSD); priorities among neighborhood and district-wide facilities; and the challenge of managing and understanding the park system as an integrated program.
F3:
The 19 different Landscape and Lighting (L&L) district assessment rates, varying by as much as a factor of four, cause significant inequities for Elk Grove residents in terms of payments they make and benefits they derive from Elk Grove parks. 27
F4:
The practice of contributing revenue from individual benefit zones to district-wide facilities as a priority ahead of funding parks within each benefit zone compounds the revenue shortages experienced by certain benefit zones.
F5:
The requirement in Proposition 218 to secure a public vote in order to increase funding in excess of a Consumer Price Index (CPI) index is an unwieldy restraint that impedes adequate funding to maintain, repair and restore Elk Grove parks.
F6:
The existing L&L assessment rates are insufficient to sustain maintenance, repair, and restoration for parks indefinitely. Specifically, in the short term, revenue from L&L assessment rates in BZ3 and BZ4 is insufficient to maintain, repair, and restore all parks in those benefit zones.
F7:
The emphasis on individual benefit zones and overlay districts creates a complex and costly administrative burden requiring fragmented budgeting and management, and voter approvals to generate adequate revenue.
F8:
The baseline budget for park maintenance, repair and restoration does not take into account, nor is it adequate to fund future park modifications or maintenance associated with new parks and programs.
F9:
CCSD’s practice of attempting to increase voter understanding and acceptance of financial responsibility for the parks program through various outreach efforts has had uneven results in terms of gaining greater voter participation and potentially influencing additional funding for this program.
F10:
The City of Elk Grove and CCSD have not collaborated effectively to reform and restructure the system.
Additional Recommendations
7
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
CCSD and the City of Elk Grove, with the support of Sacramento County, should establish a Regional Task Force to examine the feasibility of replacing the existing system of funding park maintenance. The Regional Task Force membership should include all public officials whose constituents are directly affected. Observers may include representatives of all other related and interested agencies and constituencies such as Sacramento Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), public and private advocates, etc. This recommendation should be completed by December 31, 2020.
R2:
This task force should identify all relevant laws, ordinances, regulations, policies and procedures that might need to be amended, revised or abolished to replace the existing system with a more simplified, streamlined, equitable and sustainable funding mechanism, such as an annual assessment on all real property in the area based on the assessed value of each parcel. This recommendation should be implemented by June 30, 2021. 28
R3:
CCSD and the City of Elk Grove together should evaluate and report to the Regional Task Force on the effect of reversing the existing practice of first transferring new revenues to district-wide and regional facilities, before budgeting for local park maintenance. This recommendation should be implemented by June 30, 2021.
R4:
CCSD and the City of Elk Grove together should analyze and report to the Regional Task Force on the added short-term and long-term costs of the additional staffing and consultant services required for the practice of budgeting and managing 19 individual benefit zones and overlay districts in comparison with budgeting and managing these zones on an integrated basis. That analysis should include an examination of the additional costs for any new parks and zones created over the next decade. That analysis should also examine the costs of conducting educational sessions, surveys and elections, as well as preparing Engineer’s Reports to authorize L&L assessment fee increases. This recommendation should be implemented by June 30, 2021.
R5:
CCSD and the City of Elk Grove together should conduct and report to the Regional Task Force an integrated analysis of all current revenue and projected revenue over 10 years to be collected for park maintenance, repair and restoration over the same period. Such an assessment will help gauge the adequacy of current and projected revenue without regard to the fragmentation of those resources under the current management structure. This recommendation should be implemented by June 30, 2021.
R6:
CCSD and the City of Elk Grove together should analyze and report to the Regional Task Force on the 10-year growth of revenue permitted under the CPI growth factor, compared with a 10-year forecast of costs associated with park maintenance, repair and restoration. This recommendation should be implemented by June 30, 2021.
R7:
CCSD and the City of Elk Grove should adopt the plan developed by the Regional Task Force for implementation of a new system including relevant MOUs to enable agencies responsible for collecting appropriate tax revenues sufficient to provide park services and maintenance within all neighborhoods. This recommendation should be completed by June 30, 2021.