San Bernardino County Grand Jury
2019-2020
Quick View
Full Details →
Additional Recommendations
8
Not linked to specific findings.
R2:
Fontana Unified School District/Victor Valley Union High School District: Bullying City of Colton: Governance
R3:
San Bernardino County Sheriff's Office: Ethics Procedures
R4:
San Bernardino County Sheriff's Office: Mobile Command Unit
R5:
San Bernardino County Sheriff's Office: Specialized Investigations Division
R6:
Victor Valley Unified High School District: Equipment Tracking and Inventory The purpose of the review was to determine if all responses were received for Civil Grand Jury FY2013-2014. The individual reports were not reviewed for effectiveness and implementation. As stated, the sole purpose of this review is to determine if all responses have been received. CURRENT STATUS: All required responses for the FY2013-14 Civil Grand Jury Report have been received. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report FISCAL YEAR 2014-2015 RECONCILIATION REPORT BACKGROUND The 2019-2020 San Bernardino County Civil Grand Jury reviewed the Grand Jury's Final Reports for FY2014-2015, which are: San Bernardino County Administrative Office: Bloomington Sewer
R7:
Sex Offender Websites
R8:
San Bernardino City: Animal Shelter
R9:
San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department: Aviation and Towing Investigations The purpose of the review was to determine if all responses were received for Civil Grand Jury FY2014-2015. The individual reports were not reviewed for effectiveness and implementation. As stated, the sole purpose of this review is to determine if all responses have been received. CURRENT STATUS: All required responses for the FY2014-2015 Civil Grand Jury Report have been received. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report FISCAL YEAR 2015-2016 RECONCILIATION REPORT
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
7 findings
F1:
details concerning Recommendation 16-22 are in the section titled Current Status. 16 | San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report
F2:
Enforcement's response to these Recommendations: Not in compliance with the
F3:
concerning Recommendation 16-27 are in the section titled Current Status.
F4:
concerning Recommendation 16-28 are in the section titled Current Status. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO CODE ENFORCEMENT
F5:
details concerning Recommendation 15-11 are in the section titled Current Status. 23 | San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report
F6:
details concerning Recommendation 15-12 are in the section titled Current Status.
F7:
details concerning Recommendation 15-13 are in the section titled Current Status. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report
Additional Recommendations
3
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
City Fire provides First Aid/CPR training to employees and the public. This training was scheduled for March 2020 but cancelled by City Fire due to COVID- 19 constraints.
R2:
Per the Community Compliance Division, the goal is to maintain CPR training every year and First Aid training every other year. Currently, personnel training logs regarding other areas are maintained and list: Date of training a. Training (Course) topic b. Training organizer c. d. Training location Hours (expected time to complete the Training) e.
R3:
First Aid/CPR training outline or materials were not provided to the Civil Grand Jury. CURRENT STATUS: The FY2019-2020 San Bernardino County Civil Grand Jury acknowledges that the training course for First Aid procedures for Code Enforcement Officers is currently not in compliance with the Recommendation. Only an overview for future training could be provided at this time. In summary, it is acknowledged by the FY2019-2020 San Bernardino County Civil Grand Jury that while the City of Rialto's planned efforts to date display an earnest effort to create and implement a formal First Aid/CPR training program for Code Enforcement Officers, a mature formal program does not exist. RECOMMENDATION 16-23: Provide an expandable baton or bite stick for self-defense. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report 9 INITIAL RESPONSE: Bite Sticks / ASPs: Officers are not issued expandable batons or bite sticks due to increased liability exposure. Instead, Community Compliance Officers are trained and encouraged to de- escalate situations and/or request Police Department assistance. Community Compliance Officers are equipped with police radios and can request assistance from emergency dispatchers at any time. FOLLOW-UP: The 2019-2020 San Bernardino County Civil Grand Jury Follow-Up to the City of Rialto Code Enforcement initial response resulted in the subsequent status from the City of Rialto Code Enforcement:
Findings & Recommendations
17 findings
F1:
City staff did not inform their superiors or the City Council that changes to the Treasurer's Report, made by the City Treasurer, were removed by staff members before publication.
F2:
The removal of the Unfunded Pension Liability comments from the monthly Treasury Report was acknowledged and eventually approved by members of the City of Upland Finance Committee.
F3:
The City of Upland did remove the City Treasurer's signature block from the Treasurer's Report after the City Treasurer refused to sign the report without a statement about Unfunded Pension Liabilities being placed on the report.
F4:
The City of Upland marginalized (limited) the City Treasurer's role in the City's financial oversight because they did not want their citizens to ask questions regarding the City's Unfunded Pension Liabilities.
F5:
The City of Upland considers actions of publicly addressing the Unfunded Pension Liability as inviting negative criticisms and questions from the citizens of Upland, and not being part of the solution.
F6:
The handwritten notation of $112,039,675.00, representing the City of Upland's Unfunded Pension Liability, on the monthly Treasury report, although not a best practice, is allowable. CA Government Code Title 4, Chapter 3, Section 41006 (Exhibit 1) authorizes the
F7:
appointment of a Deputy City Treasurer by the City Treasurer. 72 | San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report
F8:
City management personnel are confused about the City Treasurer's voting authority as a member of the Finance Committee. It is not unanimously understood if the City Treasurer has full voting authority on all Committee issues, or is restricted to specific issues.
F9:
The City's management personnel were confused about the roles and responsibilities of the elected City Treasurer, and expressed a preference that the City Treasurer be appointed rather than elected.
F10:
City of Upland Finance Committee members either were misinformed or confused about their roles on the Finance/Investment Committee(s). Not all City management personnel and City Council Members are familiar with the City
F11:
of Upland's Statement of Investment Policy (Exhibit 2).
F12:
City of Upland officials, elected and management, do not have a complete understanding of how CA Government Code Title 4, Chapter 3, Sections 41001-41007 (Exhibit 1) and CA Government Code Title 5, Division 2 53646 (Exhibit 7) apply to the financial reporting and operational processes of the City of Upland. City of Upland management personnel is not aware of a City Treasurer's formal
F13:
orientation process that defines his duties, responsibilities, authority, and interactions within the City of Upland. The duties of the elected City Treasurer have been reduced or limited to simply
F14:
overseeing the investment funds, rather than overseeing all funds received and paid out by the City, as specified by CA Government Code Title 4, Chapter 3, Sections 41001 – 41005 (Exhibit 1) and the City's Statement of Investment Policy (Exhibit 2), dated June 25, 2018.
F15:
The City of Upland does not have a clear understanding of the amount of annual pension cost and seriousness of the Unfunded Pension Liabilities threatening the City of Upland. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report Finance Committee meeting minutes and past Investment Report Summaries are not
F16:
available on the City of Upland's website for public review.
F17:
Management personnel discontinued the operation of the Finance Committee to limit input by the City Treasurer regarding Unfunded Pension Liability because they did not want their citizens asking questions about the Unfunded Pension Liability.
Additional Recommendations
9
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
I hereby certify that the investments are in compliance with the investment policy adopted by the City Council in June 2018. The City has the ability to meet its budgeted expenditures for the next six months.
R2:
public works projects of other local agencies for their consistency with the General Plan
R3:
The market values for funds held in banking institutions do not change. The amounts listed as market values for these items are the same as their book values. The book value for the State Pool is the withdrawal value provided by the State Treasurer. The market value of funds held by the State Treasurer equates to the City's pro-rata share of the market value of the entire State Pool.
R4:
The book value for the State Pool is the withdrawal value provided by the State Treasurer. The market value of funds held by the State Treasurer equates to the City's pro-rata share of the market value of the entire State Pool.
R5:
Sources for current market valuation are Account Statements and the Wall Street Journal GNMA Mortgage rates on the last trading day of the month. This report meets the requirements of Government Code Section 53646. Date 8/22/19 Réviewed by Finance Officer Date ulen City Treasurer Date Prepared By: Angela Durham EXHIBIT 4 EXHIBIT 13 RECEIVED TREASURY REPORT AUG 2 2 2019 City of Upland - Successor Agency - Public Financing Authority For Period Ended CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE July 31, 2019 Investment Portfolio Par Value Cost Market Value % of Portfolio State Local Agency Investment Fund $ 22,951,376 N/A $ 23,113,862 25.9% Bank Accounts and Change Funds 6,405,638 N/A 6,405,638 7.2% ABS-Corporate Paydown Securities N/A 0.0% Money Market Fund N/A 1.710.441 1,710,441 1.9% Government Agency Securities 43,809,112 43,855,000 43,805,039 49.2% Corporate Bonds 13,044,430 13,053,000 13,155,177 14.8% US Treasury 800,440 800,000 796,912 0.9% Total Cash and investments $ 88,721,438 57,708,000 $ $ 88,987,070 100.0% PARS Investment Portfolio Cost % of Portfolio Market Value 115 Trust-OPEB Investment as of 7/31/19 1,124,049 1,124,049 14.3% Pension Trust Investment as of 7/31/19 6,726,145 6,726,145 85.7% Total Cash and Investments $ 7,850,194 | $ 7,850,194 100.0% Weighted Average Days to Maturity 615.11 Blended Yield: 2.240% Benchmarks: LAIF 2.379% 2yr U.S. Treasury 1.890% 5yr U.S. Treasury 1.840% Restricted Funds with Fiscal Agent Book Value Market Value Water System Lease Revenue Refunding Bonds 2011 11 11 Colonies CFD Area #2 2015 2,762,478 2,762,478 Colonies CFD Area #1 2012 3,443,372 3,443,372 Upland 54 CFD 2004 287,266 287,266 Successor Agency TAN 2013 / TAN 2016-Merged Project 2,457,152 2,457,152 Harvest at Upland CFD 2016-1 8,513,450 8,513,450 Total Restricted Funds $ 17,463,727 | $ 17,463,727
R6:
This report preets the requirements of Government Code Section 53646.
R17:
– 43: Completed as recommended •
R18:
– 4: Completed as recommended •
R20-17:
through 20-23 2/16/2021 89 | San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report
Findings & Recommendations
6 findings
F1:
Recommendation 16-22: Not in compliance with the Recommendation. Specific details concerning Recommendation 16-22 are in the section titled Current Status. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report
F2:
Recommendation 16-23: Not in compliance with the Recommendation. Specific details concerning Recommendation 16-23 are in the section titled Current Status.
F3:
Recommendation 16-24: Not in compliance with the Recommendation. Specific details concerning Recommendation 16-24 are in the section titled Current Status.
F4:
Recommendations 16-25 and 16-26 were combined in the City of Rialto Code Enforcement’s response to these Recommendations: Not in compliance with the
F5:
Recommendation 16-27: Completed as recommended. Specific details concerning Recommendation 16-27 are in the section titled Current Status.
F6:
Recommendation 16-28: Completed as recommended. Specific details concerning Recommendation 16-28 are in the section titled Current Status. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
17 findings
F1:
City staff did not inform their superiors or the City Council that changes to the Treasurer's Report, made by the City Treasurer, were removed by staff members before publication.
F2:
The removal of the Unfunded Pension Liability comments from the monthly Treasury Report was acknowledged and eventually approved by members of the City of Upland Finance Committee.
F3:
The City of Upland did remove the City Treasurer's signature block from the Treasurer's Report after the City Treasurer refused to sign the report without a statement about Unfunded Pension Liabilities being placed on the report.
F4:
The City of Upland marginalized (limited) the City Treasurer's role in the City's financial oversight because they did not want their citizens to ask questions regarding the City's Unfunded Pension Liabilities.
F5:
The City of Upland considers actions of publicly addressing the Unfunded Pension Liability as inviting negative criticisms and questions from the citizens of Upland, and not being part of the solution.
F6:
The handwritten notation of $112,039,675.00, representing the City of Upland’s Unfunded Pension Liability, on the monthly Treasury report, although not a best practice, is allowable.
F7:
CA Government Code Title 4, Chapter 3, Section 41006 (Exhibit 1) authorizes the appointment of a Deputy City Treasurer by the City Treasurer. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report
F8:
City management personnel are confused about the City Treasurer's voting authority as a member of the Finance Committee. It is not unanimously understood if the City Treasurer has full voting authority on all Committee issues, or is restricted to specific issues.
F9:
The City’s management personnel were confused about the roles and responsibilities of the elected City Treasurer, and expressed a preference that the City Treasurer be appointed rather than elected.
F10:
City of Upland Finance Committee members either were misinformed or confused about their roles on the Finance/Investment Committee(s).
F11:
Not all City management personnel and City Council Members are familiar with the City of Upland’s Statement of Investment Policy (Exhibit 2).
F12:
City of Upland officials, elected and management, do not have a complete understanding of how CA Government Code Title 4, Chapter 3, Sections 41001- 41007 (Exhibit 1) and CA Government Code Title 5, Division 2 53646 (Exhibit 7) apply to the financial reporting and operational processes of the City of Upland.
F13:
City of Upland management personnel is not aware of a City Treasurer's formal orientation process that defines his duties, responsibilities, authority, and interactions within the City of Upland.
F14:
The duties of the elected City Treasurer have been reduced or limited to simply overseeing the investment funds, rather than overseeing all funds received and paid out by the City, as specified by CA Government Code Title 4, Chapter 3, Sections 41001 – 41005 (Exhibit 1) and the City’s Statement of Investment Policy (Exhibit 2), dated June 25, 2018.
F15:
The City of Upland does not have a clear understanding of the amount of annual pension cost and seriousness of the Unfunded Pension Liabilities threatening the City of Upland. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report
F16:
Finance Committee meeting minutes and past Investment Report Summaries are not available on the City of Upland’s website for public review.
F17:
Management personnel discontinued the operation of the Finance Committee to limit input by the City Treasurer regarding Unfunded Pension Liability because they did not want their citizens asking questions about the Unfunded Pension Liability.
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
and CA Government Code Title 5, Division 2 53646 (Exhibit 7). To be implemented no later than the end of March 2021. 20-7: The roles of the City Treasurer must be clearly outlined in accordance with CA Government Code Title 4, Chapter 3, Sections 41001- 41007 (Exhibit 1) and CA Government Code Title 5, Division 2 53646 (Exhibit 7), and posted to the City’s website for full transparency. To be implemented no later than the end of March 2021. 20-8: Establish a structured orientation process for an elected City Treasurer that defines his duties, responsibilities, authority, and the expected interactions as a member of the City of Upland management personnel. Include in the orientation process
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
8 findings
F1:
Recommendation 18-15 was effectively implemented
F2:
Recommendation 18-16 was effectively implemented
F3:
Recommendation 18-17 was effectively implemented
F4:
Recommendation 18-18 was effectively implemented
F5:
Recommendation 18-19: The ORAS system was purchased but not yet installed.
F6:
Recommendation 18-20: No evidence supports that this recommendation was effectively implemented.
F7:
Recommendation 18-21 was effectively implemented The specific details concerning the 2019-2020 San Bernardino County Civil Grand Jury's analysis of San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department Inmate Welfare Fund responses to the Grand Jury's questions are in the section titled, ‘Current Status’ of each recommendation reviewed. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report COMPLAINTS The San Bernardino County Civil Grand Jury receives numerous citizen complaints throughout the year. The 2019-2020 Grand Jury received a total of 46 complaints. Every complaint is carefully reviewed by the Grand Jury for issues regarding appropriate jurisdiction and importance of the complaint topic. After completion of the initial review of a citizen complaint, the Grand Jury may approve the complaint and assign it to an appropriate committee. The committee will conduct an investigation with appropriate oversight by the full Grand Jury. A written report of the committee’s findings and recommendations regarding a specific complaint may or may not be included in the year-end Grand Jury’s Final Report. The process of submitting a citizen complaint is to obtain a Confidential Citizen Complaint form from either the Grand Jury’s website or by calling the Grand Jury’s office at (909) 387-9120. The website is http://wp.sbcounty.gov/grandjury/file-a-complaint/. Once the complaint form has been completed and signed, it can be returned to the Grand Jury’s office for processing. Although the Grand Jury usually does not investigate anonymous complaints, it may conduct an investigation depending on the issue. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report CITY OF UPLAND INVESTIGATION SUMMARY The 2019-2020 San Bernardino County Civil Grand Jury (Civil Grand Jury) discovered evidence that, in 2019, the City of Upland purposely covered up, on no fewer than five (5) Treasury reports, a handwritten notation made by the elected City Treasurer of $112,039,675.00 regarding the City of Upland's Unfunded Pension Liabilities. The City's management personnel then forwarded the Treasury Report without the handwritten note to the City Council as unaltered. The evidence established that, eventually, the cover-up of the Unfunded Pension Liabilities notation was discovered, but that the City of Upland failed to take any disciplinary action. Instead, they decided to permanently remove the elected City Treasurer's signature from the Treasury Report. The evidence further established that masking of the hand-written notation was then supported by the City of Upland’s motivation to prevent the citizens of Upland from asking questions about the status of the City's Unfunded Pension Liabilities. The Civil Grand Jury also discovered evidence that when the City Treasurer submitted an appointment for Deputy Treasurer's position to the City of Upland, City management personnel denied the request without statutory authority. Evidence established that the City Council was not made aware of the appointment. CA Government Code Title 4, Chapter 3, Section 41006, states that "The city treasurer may appoint deputies". Evidence established that the City of Upland City Council determines what compensation is provided for a Deputy Treasurer. The Civil Grand Jury found evidence that members of the City of Upland Finance Committee were confused about their responsibilities. Evidence established that Finance Committee members differed as to who did and who did not have voting rights. Evidence also established that Finance Committee members did not have an accurate assessment of pension costs related to the City of Upland. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report The Civil Grand Jury found that most actions mentioned in this report may not violate the law1. The Civil Grand Jury does, however, view these practices as deceptive. These actions also demonstrate a lack of proper government practices and transparency to the citizens of Upland. The Discussion section in this report describes in detail the City of Upland's actions and decisions that represent a lack of transparency to its citizens. The Civil Grand Jury Report includes recommendations to improve Upland's understanding of its responsibilities to the Upland citizens. Glossary Capital Project Funds: Funds used to track the accumulation and use of resources for constructing, acquiring, and rehabilitating capital assets, such as buildings and roads. City Council: A group of elected officials who serve as the legislative body of the City of Upland. City Treasurer: An elected official who is primarily responsible for managing the revenue and cash flow of the agency, banking, collection, receipt, reporting, custody, investment or disbursement of municipal funds. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR): Compiled annually by a state, municipal or other governmental accounting staff and audited by an external American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) certified accounting firm utilizing Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) and adheres to the U.S. Federal Government standards determined by the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board (FASAB). The CAFR is composed of three sections: Introductory, Financial and Statistical. It combines the financial information of fund accounting and Enterprise Authorities accounting. The San Bernardino County Civil Grand Jury is aware that there potentially may be criminal activity associated with these actions that are not within the jurisdiction of the Civil Grand Jury. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report The purpose of a CAFR is to be transparent about the use of taxpayers' money and to give the public a detailed accounting of all expenditures. A CAFR accomplishes this by including dozens of basic and more intricate financial reports along with notes, narratives and supporting data. Debt Service Funds: Funds used to account for the repayment of debt. Disbursements: Payments from a fund. Enterprise Funds: Funds used to separately account for the operations of municipal services which charge fees in exchange for goods and services. Finance Committee: A standing committee of the City Council that consists of two council members, the City Treasurer (review of Quarterly Investment Report), and a Finance Officer (staff - advisory only). This Committee shall be responsible for reviewing changes to the finances of the City. This may include reviewing warrants and registers, financial statements, investment reports, the City's annual independent audit, City fees and service charges, and operating budgets. Fund Balances: The difference between assets and liabilities in a governmental fund. General Fund: Fund where a government accounts for everything not reported in another fund. General Law City: A city that runs by state rules as outlined in the California Government Code. Investment Committee: A sub-committee of the Finance Committee that reviews the Quarterly Investment Report. Management Personnel: Salaried-level employees with supervisory responsibility. San Bernardino County Grand Jury Final Report Special Revenue Funds: Funds used to report specific revenue sources that are limited to being used for a particular purpose by law or administrative actions. Treasury Report: A written report developed under the authority of the City of Upland Statement of Investment Policy (Exhibit 2), that accounts for all city investments that are submitted monthly to the legislative body. Trust and Agency Funds: Funds used to account for resources held for the benefit of parties outside the city.
F9:
Agency funds account for resources held by a city (not in a trust) on behalf of individuals or other governments. Unfunded Pension Liabilities: Pension debt obligations that do not have sufficient funds set aside to pay the debt.
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R2:
Agency funds account for resources held by a city (not in a trust) on behalf of individuals or other governments. Unfunded Pension Liabilities: Pension debt obligations that do not have sufficient funds set aside to pay the debt.