Gran Jurado del Condado de San Diego
2007-2008
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
4 hallazgos
F01:
Article V, §40 of the San Diego City Charter no longer reflects the generally held viewpoint concerning the role an elected City Attorney should play as general counsel of a modern Municipal Corporation and should be amended.
F02:
San Diego Deputy City Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the City Attorney and are subject to dismissal, with or without cause, provided only that notice is given.
F03:
San Diego Deputy City Attorneys enjoy significantly less job security than their counterparts in the offices of the District Attorney and County Counsel. Fact: Since December 2004, a combined total of 124 Deputy City Attorneys have left the employ of the City of San Diego.
F04:
The departure of so many experiences Deputy City Attorneys has had a negative effect on conduct of the city’s business.
Recomendaciones adicionales
3
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R10:
Amend Section 40 (City Attorney) to create professional qualifications for this Office, define the civil client as the municipal corporation of the City of San Diego, clarify authority over the control and settlement of litigation, and establish a process allowing a City entity to retain outside legal counsel (at the entity’s own expense) when the City Attorney’s Office may not provide legal advice due to an ethical or financial conflict of interest. One of the most serious problems with the Charter is the ambiguity of Section 40. The City has witnessed constant conflict over defining the duties of the City Attorney’s Office. Is the City Attorney supposed to act as a policymaker or to serve as the City’s attorney? There has been disagreement over whether this officer acts as attorney for the City as the municipal corporation, or for the City as the general public. The California State Bar’s Rules of Professional Conduct provide clear rules for how an attorney is supposed to work when he or she represents an organization, and how to address such matters as Attorney-Client privilege and conflict of interest. The problem with the claim that the City Attorney is to represent the general public is that the people do not speak with one voice. How does one know what the public wants in any given situation? Consequently, an attorney who sees him or herself in this manner acts as both the attorney and the client. How would one know what the public wants, outside of one’s own subjective understanding? The responsibility of the attorney to conform his or her actions with the client’s right to make decisions is a bedrock principle of our legal system, and protects both the attorney and the client. Proponents of the recommendation thought the Charter should be clear that the civil client is the municipal corporation, and should establish a process to designate which officers are to make client decisions in the control and settlement of litigation. Those in favor also thought the Charter should establish professional qualifications for election to the City Attorney’s Office, and create a process to resolve whether outside legal counsel should be retained in the event that the City Attorney cannot represent a City entity due to a conflict of interest. Those who opposed this recommendation did so on the grounds that the City Attorney must be authorized to represent the people, or that the officer must be maintained in the watchdog role to protect the City’s interests. Others who expressed some approval of the concept or the intent of the recommendation stated that this matter was better left to an appointed or an elected Charter commission. The majority of the Committee noted that the recommendation does allow the City Attorney to litigate on behalf of the people both for criminal matters, as well as civil matters where the Mayor or Council have given their approval. This language is only controversial in that the present Charter language is so vague it allows action that might well violate the Rules of Professional Conduct. This Charter language requires the City Attorney to follow those rules. The Charter language recommended would preserve intact the City Attorney’s ability to use an injunction or writ of mandamus to restrain or compel actions of City officials, and thus the officer’s oversight role is protected. The Subcommittee spent a great deal of time on the issue, and a number of the other Committee members who were not on this Subcommittee are already well versed in the rules of conduct governing all attorneys. Finally, City Attorneys are not guaranteed representation on appointed or elected Charter commissions: only the governing body or the voters can create a Charter commission. Ultimately, the Committee’s majority felt that this issue was one of the most important addressed by the Committee, and that to fail to recommend an improvement to remove this dangerous ambiguity from the Charter would be a dereliction of duty.3 VOTE: SEPTEMBER 27, 2007; 9 AFFIRMATIVE, 5 NEGATIVE, 1 ABSENT. ROLL CALL: AFFIRMATIVE = BERSIN, CHANNICK, DAVIES, JONES, MCDADE, MILLIKEN, MUDD, NELSON, ROTH; NEGATIVE = CLEVES ANDERSON, GORDON, KWIATKOWSKI, SORENSEN, SPARROW; ABSENT = WILSON. Source: Archives of the 2007 San Diego Charter Review Committee
08-122:
Draft an amendment to Article V, §40 of the San Diego City Charter,
08-123:
Explore moving Deputy City Attorneys who have completed an appropriate
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
1 hallazgos
F01:
The Civil Process Office operates with a high degree of dedication, professionalism and technical expertise, toward fulfilling the mission of the office. COMMENDATION The Grand Jury wishes to acknowledge the personal commitment, dedication and hospitality offered by the members of the Civil Process unit toward all who seek assistance in recovery of court ordered funds or assets. We found the members of the unit, both sworn and non- sworn, to be very professional in every aspect of their responsibilities and delivery of same toward the citizens who seek their assistance. We wish to commend them for a job well done and continued positive support of civil action within the Superior Court of San Diego County. REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS The California Penal Code §933(c) requires any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the agency. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court); except that in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g. District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such comment shall be made within 60 days to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code §933.05(a), (b), (c), details, as follows, the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made: (a) As to each grand jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor. (b) As to each grand jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. (c) If a finding or recommendation of the grand jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the grand jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel matters over which it has some decision making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. Comments to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in compliance with the Penal Code §933.05 are required from the: Responding Agency Recommendations Date None
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
5 hallazgos
F01:
Since CCDC is authorizing the expenditure of public Redevelopment Agency funds for contracted services, there should be more oversight by the Redevelopment Agency.
F02:
The lack of current audited financial statements opens the Redevelopment Agency to law suits and fines and hinders public oversight of revenues collected and expended, indebtedness and allocations for low and moderate income housing. Fact: The Redevelopment Agency owes the City approximately $250 million in loan repayments.
F03:
There is no timetable for repayment of these loans to the City.
F04:
This misrepresentation has sometimes misled the public and the media as to the true role of CCDC as an agent, planner and project manager for the Redevelopment Agency.
F05:
A single tiered Redevelopment Agency for all 17 project areas can be operated with greater efficiency than the present three-tiered model.
Recomendaciones adicionales
6
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
08-116:
Establish a dollar threshold over which any sole source contract, especially for
08-117:
Take steps to insure the timely submission of the Fiscal Year 2007/2008
08-118:
Direct staff of the three component entities of the Redevelopment Agency to
08-119:
Identify the true funding mechanism for every approved project at the time of
08-120:
Notify the Centre City Development Corporation to identify the true funding
08-121:
Direct City Redevelopment Division staff now working on reorganizing
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
11 hallazgos
F01:
The City of San Diego needs to address the gaps in emergency and fire protection services. Fact: Proposition 172 was passed in 1993 to offset partially the loss of local property tax revenue shifted to the State to augment educational funding. The revenue generated by the additional ½ cent sales tax was intended to fund local public safety agencies. Fact Firefighting agencies are considered public safety agencies. _____________________________________________________________________9 Fact: At the time Prop 172 was passed the County of San Diego had no fire agency to which sales tax revenue could be allocated.
F02:
The 2003 and 2007 wildfires have demonstrated a need for the creation of a consolidated County fire agency.
F03:
The use of Proposition 172 money to fund a County fire agency is appropriate.
F04:
Due to the size and composition of a county that includes 18 cities, solutions need to be proposed and implemented as soon as possible.
F05:
The County of San Diego does not comply with NFPA standards for emergency response time or emergency response locations. Fact Fire Fighters are expected to respond to medical and life safety emergencies in addition to fire emergencies.
F06:
Emergency medical or life safety calls outnumber fire calls by three to one or at least 75% of calls for emergency assistance to Fire Fighters.
F07:
Higher than average response times reduce the ability of responding agencies to prevent loss of life and property. Fact: Six volunteer fire departments are in County Service Areas under the San Diego County Department of Planning and Land Use. Fact: The Fire Prevention Unit in the Department of Planning and Land Use has experience in managing fuels reduction programs and in administering the Fire Enhancement Program.
F08:
The staff of the Fire Prevention Unit in the Department of Planning and Land Use have sufficient expertise to serve as staff for a newly created fire agency.
F09:
Sixteen cities responded to the Grand Jury’s request for copies of their Standard Operating Procedures Manual for Emergencies (SOP). Two cities in the county, La Mesa and Imperial Beach did not. Fact: The Cedar Fires presented unforeseen difficulties for emergency personnel. As a result, many of the existing disaster procedures were changed to accommodate weather, terrain and evacuation of inhabitants. Fact: Many of the “Emergency Disaster Procedure Plans” were developed after the Cedar Fires and finalized in September 2006 by the county and most of the cities in the county. However, a few are still incomplete. _____________________________________________________________________15 Fact: The Red Cross has limited ability to meet the sheltering needs of all evacuees within the first 48 hours of a major disaster. Fact: The County of San Diego is responsible for meeting the sheltering needs not provided by the Red Cross.
F10:
The County of San Diego needs an understanding of the sheltering capacity of the local Red Cross during the first 48 hours of a major disaster.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R10:
Coordination and control of dispatch activities.
F11:
Neither the County of San Diego nor any of the cities, including the City of San Diego, had a standard operating procedure for the operation of a mega- shelter.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R11:
Coordination of training for all participating departments.
Recomendaciones adicionales
3
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R12:
Incorporation of the existing funding, staff and functions of the Fire Prevention Unit in DPLU, including the Fire Enhancement Program.
R13:
Establishment of the Office of the San Diego County Fire Commander as an independent office, not as a component of the Department of Planning and Land Use.
R14:
Creation of the position of San Diego County Fire Commander, either on the level of a Deputy Chief Administrative Officer or reporting directly to the Deputy Chief Administrative Officer for Public Safety. _____________________________________________________________________12 FACTS/FINDINGS Fact: The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) suggests appropriate response time to emergencies be within 5 to 7 minutes. To meet that standard, Fire Stations/Emergency Response Centers need to serve areas within a radius of five miles of the station.
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
24 hallazgos
F01:
All areas were in compliance. Medical and mental facilities are outstanding. Weapons lockers were located outside the perimeter of the modules (cells) and were well secured. Rapid response staging areas for both disturbance and fire response were well equipped and organized. The staff kitchen area was clean and very well staffed. The recreation areas are spartan but well maintained. Contact sports are not permitted. Fact: Understaffing continues to be a problem.
F02:
Increased access to reserved or free parking for staff would help recruitment and moral.
F03:
The exterior and interior conditions of SDCJ were in very good condition for the most part. The Grand Jury did notice some areas around the shower areas in the modules that could use waterproofing maintenance. The jail facility overall was clean and well maintained.
F04:
Education providing for high school graduation is available for those inmates who request it. Although the length of stay for most inmates is minimal, their education records travel with them when transferring to different facilities. _________________________________ DISCUSSION South Bay Detention Facility _____________________________________________________________________5 The South Bay Detention facility (SBDF) is located within the South County Regional Complex in the city of Chula Vista, which also houses the South County Courts. SBDF opened in 1982 and is authorized a sworn staff of 62 personnel. SBDF is a Type II non-booking facility and houses male inmates awaiting court or trial appearances in the adjacent court. (SBDF does perform booking functions for the nearby Chula Vista City Jail, under an agreement between the Sheriff’s Department and the City of Chula Vista.) The facility houses only healthy adult males. Inmates suspected of having a communicable disease are segregated and transferred out of the facility. Medical staff is on duty 12 hours per day to provide care and respond to medical emergencies. After hours, the custody staff call 911 if a medical response is needed. The CSA rated capacity for the facility is 386 inmates, however, the court rated capacity is 431. The population on August 2, 2007, was 397. This includes several trustee inmate workers who help maintain the facility for commitments not exceeding 10 months. The facility has eight modules for housing prisoners, with three person cells. There are also cells for disciplinary or administrative segregation. The inmate population is generally low risk, healthy and incarcerated for one year or less. There are no formal education classes. However, there are social classes such as Parenting, Domestic Violence, Alcoholics Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous, Substance Abuse and Anger Management. FACTS/FINDINGS Fact: Nurses provide medical care and respond to emergencies from 0700 to 1900 hours. 911 is called if medical response is needed after hours. Fact: The three facility air conditioning units had a design life expectancy of 15 years. They are now in their 28th year. Proposed change out of the units in the 2008-2009 Sheriff’s Detention budget.
F05:
The facility is aging with more and more basic maintenance required for continuous use. The staff and support personnel are to be commended in their dedication to the facility as well as getting needed upgrades to ensure safety and security for everyone. Fact: A security committee named Problem Oriented Policy & Solutions (POPS) was formed, composed of non-supervisory staff members. POPS is defined as a management tool under which problems are defined and solutions engineered and tested.
F06:
The computer components have been installed and all of SBDC staff has been issued new ID cards that will allow them access through the doors. _________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________6 DISCUSSION George F. Bailey Detention Facility The George F. Bailey Detention Facility (GBDF) is a maximum-security facility located in the Otay Mesa area along with several other county, state and privately operated federal facilities. GBDF is the largest of all facilities operated under the Sheriff’s Department Detention Services Bureau. The facility was built in 1991 and was opened for limited operations in 1993. GBDF became fully operational in 1994 and was originally built to house 856 male inmates in single cells. Since then its capacity has been increased to1688 inmates. CSA rated the capacity of this facility at 1380 inmates. The State conducts biennial inspections for all custody facilities within the county along with various county agencies to ensure the compliance with CSA standard. At the time of the Grand Jury visit the inmate population was 1651 with an average daily population of 1610 for the previous two months. GBDF consists of six housing units as well as administrative, processing and health care areas. Programs and services include but are not limited to: social visitation, legal visitation, medical screening, counseling, meals and religious services. The health care unit consists of a 24 bed medical infirmary, isolation cells, medical offices and specialty medical clinics. Inmate processing for the maximum-security facility includes screening to identify risk associated with the inmate and to identify the social and educational programs that could be offered to the inmate while he is within the facility. The risk/security rating (classification number) assigned to each inmate ranges from one (1) (least dangerous) to level six (6) (most dangerous). This classification system is utilized throughout all Sheriff’s facilities in the county to help ensure staff and inmates safety as well as to minimize conflicts that may arise in the housing units. The Jail Information Management System (JIMS) compiles data on the history of each individual inmate and keeps records of inmate problems, classification, and special attention requirements. The JIMS data helps to ensure the safety of the inmate by identifying housing or isolation needs. Staffing at GBDF continues to remain below the authorized staffing level--currently at a 75 to 80% level at this facility. The facility is well-used and worn down in places, but is being operated and managed by a very dedicated staff of sworn and non-sworn professionals. With the addition of a new detention housing unit called Facility 8, the Sheriff’s inmate population bed capacity increased by 200 in early 2008. As of April 9, 2008, the new facility (adjacent to GBDF) had an inmate population of 172. During the inspection tour and informational briefing by staff, particular attention was given to a newly implemented program as the result of California Senate Bill 618 – Community Reentry Program (enacted in October 2005, with an implementation date of January 2006). The main thrust of the program is to address the recidivism problem by a _____________________________________________________________________7 comprehensive reentry program for state prison-bound offenders, designed to assist them in the transition from prison to society. The pioneering program, which began in San Diego County in early 2007, begins with assessments while in jail, programming while in prison and support services upon release. Information received at GBDF about SB618 was also supported by additional staff input regarding program implementation at R. J. Donovan State Correctional Facility. The number of inmates involved as of April 2008 is small but the program is growing. FACTS/FINDINGS Fact: The George F. Bailey Detention Facility is a maximum-security facility and the largest in the San Diego County System. Fact: The staffing is less than 80% of the authorized staffing level for sworn personnel.
F07:
The efforts currently underway to recruit and hire custody/detention service deputies for all Sheriff Detention facilities should continue to minimize under staffing. Fact: The implementation of SB618 (Community Re-entry Program) started in early 2007. It is a multi-agency plan involving representatives from correctional institutions, law enforcement, community based organizations, governmental agencies, local community members and former prisoners. _________________________________ DISCUSSION East Mesa Detention Facility The East Mesa Detention Facility (EMDF) was transferred from Probation to the Sheriff in October 1991 as a low to medium security male detention facility. Intended to house 490 inmates, EMDF has an inmate capacity of 512 and a CSA rated capacity of 360. Located on Otay Mesa adjacent to GBDF and other facilities, EMDF receives its inmate population from GBDF. Levels 1 thru 4 inmates transferred to EMDF usually are in custody at EMDF for an average of 30 to 90 days. The average inmate population for EMDF is 435 inmates, while the sworn deputy staffing level is approximately 85% of authorized strength. Housing dorms, area security and inmate grievance procedures appear to be well run and without any major problems, notwithstanding the lack of 100% staffing. Because EMFD is the primary source of inmate labor for the Sheriff’s Detention Services Bureau, newly arrived inmates from GBDF are screened by staff to identify inmate skills and occupation experience. This screening includes medical and physical exams to ensure inmates are able to do the job assigned. The inmates receive training in food service, grounds maintenance, facility maintenance, woodworking and cabinet making skills, print shop and laundry operation. The Grossmont High School District manages and teaches these programs and provides certificates of _____________________________________________________________________8 completion/training as appropriate for the classes or operational training completed. Educational programs for those inmates with a desire to participate are also available. These include English as a Second Language, GED program, and a very well equipped computer lab are open for participation in addition to vocational skills programs, and self- help programs. Of particular note is the utilization of inmate labor to bring about cost benefits to the County of San Diego in the adjacent Food Service/Preparation and Laundry Service facility: these will be discussed in a later segment of this report. FACTS/FINDINGS Fact: Educational and Self-help classes are offered to inmates who desire them.
F08:
The educational and hands on training classes need to be expanded to further the efforts by staff to reduce recidivism by inmates. Fact: Trade classes leading to certificates of completion are offered.
F09:
Certificates of training need to be further supported by outreach to the business community for potential hiring of inmates upon their release. Fact: EMDF is understaffed in the number of sworn personnel assigned. _________________________________ DISCUSSION Las Colinas Women’s Detention Facility Grand Jurors inspected the Las Colinas Detention Facility (LCDF) on two occasions this year—one announced and the other unannounced. The Jury was provided a presentation and an opportunity for questions as well as the opportunity for follow-up questions after the tour. Las Colinas dates from the 1960s era where it was used as a juvenile facility. It is constructed of mainly modular (and temporary) housing units. It was converted in 1979 to the primary women’s detention facility for the county, and has served in that capacity ever since despite not having been originally designed as a permanent long-term adult facility. CSA has rated this facility for a maximum of 400 inmates but at any one time the Las Colinas facility frequently houses 600 to 700 inmates. The demographic distribution of the population at the time of the first Grand Jury visit was as follows: 44% Caucasian, 28% Hispanic, 24% Black, 1% Filipino, 1% Asian, 1% Native American and 1% other. _____________________________________________________________________9 Las Colinas is authorized for 129 sworn officers and currently employs 109 officers (85% staffed). Total staff, including (non-sworn) professional staff, is currently 157. This facility is in violation of court-ordered maximums, and its actual daily capacity has been in excess of its rated capacity for several years. This facility is projected to continue to operate above rated capacity for the foreseeable future. Obviously, this is unacceptable. We noted that Las Colinas has an excellent vocational and educational program including a comprehensive GED program as well as a host of religious and substances abuse services, mainly staffed by volunteers. Training ranges from graphic arts and computer skills, to food handling, landscaping, and sewing. In fact, inmates are tasked with making the uniforms for the seven other detention facilities in San Diego County. However, due to a high interest level there are waiting lists for most of the programs. The Grand Jury finds that LCDF does have adequate medical facilities including complete obstetric care and basic dental care. However, there are concerns that the new digital imaging chest x-rays that are used to screen for TB are not being installed at LCDF due to its age and eventual replacement. If it has been determined that this technology is appropriate for San Diego’s other booking facilities (i.e., Central Jail and Vista) it is our opinion that cost should be a non-factor in the decision to modernize Las Colinas due to the public health ramifications as well as concerns about equal protection issues. Overall, conditions at Las Colinas have improved since the 2006/2007 Grand Jury’s scathing report: however, the facility is still in dire need of replacement. FACTS/FINDINGS Fact: The majority of the structures on the facility site are over 40 years old.
F10:
While extensive rehabilitation has been undertaken, deferred maintenance at LCDF remains a problem due to its age and the fact that it was not designed to be a permanent facility. Fact: Las Colinas is lacking in the comprehensiveness of its medical facilities, especially its psychological and intake-screening facilities, compared to the other detention facilities in the County, which house males only.
F11:
These inequities raise substantial 14th Amendment issues regarding the equal treatment of detainees within our County, in addition to raising the possibility of lawsuits against the County concerning its violation of this provision. _____________________________________________________________________10
F12:
The potential exists for a federal action concerning sex-based discrimination resulting from the noticeably inequitable detention and medical facilities at Las Colinas compared to male detention facilities in the County. Specifically, violations of the provisions contained in title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 could cause the County to lose badly needed federal funds currently earmarked for Las Colinas. _________________________________ DISCUSSION Vista Detention Facility The Grand Jury visited the Vista Detention Facility (VDF). A conference room presentation was provided which evolved into a question and answer session. A tour of the facility followed. Facility improvements were in process to cell doors, flooring and locking systems. The inmate population was 872, up from 832 reported by the 2005/2006 Grand Jury, and 849 reported last year. The VDF remains a type II facility booking both males and females for pretrial confinement of felony and misdemeanor charges. VDF is budgeted for 129 sworn officers, up from 120 in fiscal 2007 and 114 in fiscal 2006. The actual number of sworn officers available for duty is 94. Overtime and temporary rehires make up the shortfall. The video surveillance system appears to be the most up-to-date the Jury has observed. FACTS/FINDING Fact: All required inspection reports have been completed within the last 6 months.
F13:
The fire safety inspection identified a few minor deficiencies. The other required facility inspections were satisfactory. Fact Sworn staffing is low, thirty plus officers short of authorized strength
F14:
The use of overtime by administration is not a long-term answer to the staffing shortage.
F15:
Recruiting strategies for the hiring of sworn officers needs to be developed, as do strategies for the retention of existing staff. _________________________________ DISCUSSION Descanso Detention Facility _____________________________________________________________________11 The Grand Jury visited the Descanso Detention Facility (DDF). The last inspection by CSA was on January 13, 2006. The CSA inspected for compliance with the Minimum Standards for Local Detention Facilities, as outlined in CCR Titles 15 and 24. The Grand Jury’s review of the inspection report revealed that CSA found one area of non- compliance. On the day of the CSA inspection, the facility exceeded the rated capacity by two inmates, resulting in noncompliance with sections of the code that deal with dormitory dayroom space and the number of toilets, washbasins and showers. Descanso is classified as a Type II medium security facility for adult males in good health with no known psychological problems or psychotropic medication requirements. The facility is a work-camp environment with few disciplinary problems and escapes are almost nonexistent. Descanso is considered to be a “plum” assignment, and inmates would rather be there than at one of the higher level secure facilities. Descanso has a CSA rated capacity of 308. On the day the Grand Jury visited, the total in custody was 324, 16 greater than the CSA rating. However, it is 116 less than the court ordered capacity of 440. The facility commander indicated that through prudent use of overtime the current staff of forty-nine sworn officers is adequate. There are over twenty professional staff members and approximately ten volunteer instructors and clergymen who work with the inmate population. The facility sits on approximately 14 acres of land located east of Alpine. There are over 60 structures located on the property, with construction dating back to the mid 1940’s. Inmate trustees work many jobs on- and off-site and are trained in plumbing, carpentry, landscaping and the use of tools associated with those trades. The inmates’ skills are utilized to maintain and renovate the buildings and grounds. The inmates have an opportunity to continue their education on various subjects and to obtain a GED certificate. Due to its location, the facility has inherent issues associated with transportation, emergency medical treatment, potable water and waste/sewerage disposal. Booking and release of between twenty and thirty inmates every week normally take place at San Diego Central Jail. Inmates are transported to East Mesa for dental and other routine medical treatment; however, a helicopter pad is available on the grounds for emergencies. The facility has four wells, three of which are currently used. The County of San Diego, Department of Environmental Heath (DEH), conducted an inspection of the Water System on the day of the Grand Jury’s visit. The inspection indicated that a Boil Water Order issued by the County on April 16, 2007, must stay in effect and that the facility is currently under a Compliance Order due to an “exceedence” of the lead and copper rules. Additionally, the DEH report indicates that several of the wells have additional tests that are either due or overdue as of November 14, 2007. FACTS/FINDINGS Fact: There is limited use of video surveillance at the facility. _____________________________________________________________________12 Fact: Overtime is being used to support minimum safe staffing levels at the facility.
F16:
There is a very obvious pride and dedication by the sworn and non-sworn staff at DDF towards the inmates as well as the facility. _________________________________ DISCUSSION Kearny Mesa Juvenile Detention Facility& Girls Rehabilitation Facility The Grand Jury visited the Kearny Mesa Juvenile Detention Facility (KMJDF) on October 11, 2007. This facility, opened in 1954 and formerly known as Juvenile Hall, is located at 2801 Meadow Lark Drive in the Birdland area of Kearny Mesa. It has undergone several expansions and refurbishments over the past 53 years. The facility is certified by the CSA for 359 beds and currently houses 300~320 boys and girls. Detainees (also referred to as wards) up to 19 years old are held by court order for offenses ranging from truancy to murder. Offenders may also be held in pre-trial confinement if the court so determines. The average stay at KMJDF on the day of inspection was 23 days for boys and 24 days for girls. County Probation Department staff conducted a tour for the Grand Jury of the buildings and grounds and briefed us on the various programs in place. The facility shows its age, but is generally well maintained by on-site Facilities Management with assistance from County General Services. The San Diego County Office of Education runs the on-site school program. Detainees are required to attend the state certified school from 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. 5 days a week. All school credits are directly transferable to any San Diego County school district. Parents and guardians are encouraged to participate and interact with the detainees in their programs. Co-located with KMJDF (and subsidiary to it) is the Girls Rehabilitation Facility (GRF). GRF is an intensive, highly structured program serving up to 50 female detainees between ages 13 and 17½. Each female ward must be ordered by the court to first complete a personal training program and be assessed as eligible to the GRF facility. The programs offered are structured to meet each girl’s personal, emotional and educational needs. GRF is based on a philosophy of Cognitive Restructuring – learning to think about their actions to determine what they should have done differently to better control their behavior. The ultimate goal of this 10-12 week program is for girls to think with awareness before they act. KMJDF has excellent medical care resources for the detainees. On-site facilities are operated under contract with the nearby Rady Children’s Hospital. Any detainee with a medical issue has access to a doctor and nursing staff at all times, including immediate transport to Rady when needed. Social workers, therapists and crisis teams are also on hand. _____________________________________________________________________13 FACTS/FINDINGS Fact: The facility at Kearney Mesa has been receiving and detaining juveniles for more than 50 years.
F17:
The juvenile facility is showing its age and, even with limited preventative maintenance and cleaning, the odors of constant use are overwhelming to all who visit there. _________________________________ DISCUSSION East Mesa Juvenile Detention Facility The East Mesa Juvenile Detention Facility (EMJDF) is located on 25.7 acres on Otay Mesa near (but not affiliated with) the Sheriff’s detention and industrial complex. It is a 185,825 square foot facility with 360 parking spaces. It opened on June 24, 2004. When we visited the facility, we found the sworn Probation Officers and non-sworn staff to be very accommodating, both by escorting us to all the areas we wished to inspect and by providing us with details about the facility and their particular job functions. There are ten self-contained housing units for the detainees. There are 380 detention beds and a plan to add 240 more. Each room has its own toilet, a sink and a drinking fountain. Detainees are also provided with closed-circuit televisions. Visitations from different religious denominations are available to interested detainees. Interviews are conducted and biographies taken during the intake process. A program called “The Six Pillars Of Character” is used to teach detainees how to make effective and ethical decisions. The pillars are Trustworthiness, Respect, Responsibility, Fairness, Caring, and Citizenship. Detainees are required to attend school Monday through Friday to earn credits towards receiving high school diplomas or GED certificates. The County Office of Education provides comprehensive educational services. Medical and mental health services are available to detainees on a 24-hour period everyday. We observed that the teachers have organized classrooms and the teaching is adequate. One of their teachers has been chosen as San Diego County “Teacher of the Year” and rightly deserves a commendation. The detainees range in age from 14 to 18 years with an average of 16 years old. Detainees are kept up to a month or more depending on the length of court proceedings. After such time as any detainee has earned the necessary credits and the courts have decided to release them, they are picked up at the facility by their parents or legal guardians. _____________________________________________________________________14 FACTS/FINDINGS Fact: EMJDF is a modern detention facility that has the appearance of a school campus. Fact: The facility is a maximum-security detention site for juvenile males, ages 12 to18 years.
F18:
The facility is well maintained and the staff of sworn and professional personnel is dedicated to the wards in their custody. _________________________________ DISCUSSION Camp Barrett Camp Barrett is a minimum-security “open environment” facility. The four dormitories hold 50 wards each, between the ages of 16-1/2 and 19. At the time of our first visit Camp Barrett housed 145 wards. The approximate length of stay for each ward is 270 days. Camp Barrett does not have a “keep separate” policy; therefore, wards are not classified. According to staff, gang activity is less than at other facilities because Camp Barrett is a “Gang Neutral/Race Neutral” site. During the past year, 6 escape attempts have been recorded. Staff members report that “people skills” are their main defense to diffuse any type of situation. The Camp was originally used to house prisoner road crews, and the oldest structure was built in the 1950’s. Although old, the structures seem to be in adequate condition. It was unfortunate that the Director of Camp Barrett was unavailable to meet with the Grand Jury when we visited the facility on December 6, 2007. It was immediately apparent that the staff left in charge was unprepared for our visit. After waiting in a narrow hall for approximately 10 minutes, we were escorted to the courtyard for a briefing. Upon request we were taken to the wards’ recreation hall for the remainder of the briefing. The carpeting in this room was old and extremely musty smelling; the plastic molded chairs were covered with graffiti. Staff informed us that the carpet was last cleaned approximately 3 years ago. Even though a recommendation to remove the carpeting in this room was made over a year ago, this has not yet been done. We were informed that the carpet removal has been approved. The 2006/2007 Grand Jury had recommended that funds be allocated to recondition the athletic field, this also obviously has not been done. Upon entering Camp Barrett, each ward is given a “Rule Book” printed in English and Spanish. The books were found to be outdated, lacking information, and stated classes or _____________________________________________________________________15 programs no longer offered. Additionally there were several different versions of the book handed out to Jury members who visited the site. The wards get one-third off their sentence for coming to the camp as well as time off for good behavior or performance. However, if ward(s) are manipulative or fails to participate in Camp activities, they can be re-sentenced by a judge. Re-sentencing can occur when a ward accumulates infractions such as refusing to follow instructions, talking back, being argumentative, showing disrespect to the staff, communicating without permission, gang related behavior, etc. At the time of the Grand Jury’s initial visit, Camp Barrett had 54 positions for line staff. This is short by 6 positions. To compensate for this shortage, there is mandatory overtime that increases shifts to 12 hours and the number of consecutive workdays from five to seven. Camp Barrett High School is located within the facility. Classes are conducted Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 2:35 p.m. Exercise takes place after classes for one hour each day consisting of “long muscle movement” and cardiovascular activity of running up and down the hills surrounding the camp. Twenty laptop computers have been donated for the wards’ use. Well water from tanks on the hills above the access road provides the water supply for Camp Barrett. A leach field is used for solid waste. Gray water is not reused. Fire extinguishers in the main office were inspected only 3 times during the past year and the last inspection was performed in September of 2007 It was previously recommended that the carpeting in this building be replaced as well, however, this also had not been done. The wards complained to a Grand Jury member that the staff is intimidating and verbally confrontational. We did witness proof of this complaint when a cafeteria worker berated one of the wards in front of us and a group of his peers. Even though one quarter to one third of the wards have been diagnosed with psychological problems and several are receiving psychotropic drugs, at the time of our first visit Camp Barrett had not had a full-time, in-house psychologist for 8 months. The administration of psychotropic drugs was performed by a doctor at the East Mesa or Kearney Mesa facility, requiring a lengthy round trip. A full-time psychologist was scheduled to start the day after our return visit. At that time, 20 wards were on psychotropic medicines. It was obvious that the staff of Camp Barrett was much more prepared for our return visit that took place on February 28, 2008. Recent rains provided a lovely green ground cover over the courtyard and surrounding grounds making them much more inviting. _____________________________________________________________________16 We were greeted by the Director and immediately escorted to the recreation room used for the briefing on our previous visit. The moldy carpet was still in place and graffiti still covered the chairs. However, the room conditions were much improved over our first visit. At the time of our second visit, 143 wards were in residence. The staff totaled 61 with 58 sworn staff. Seven are bi-lingual and the staff is very diverse. The wards were 60% Hispanic, 27% African-American, 10% Caucasian, and 3% other ethnicities. There have been no suicide attempts, no deaths, 7 escape attempts and 4 or 5 fights. OC (pepper) spray is used on an average of once a month. The primary method of discipline is “go to cover”, wherein every ward within earshot ducks and covers their heads with their arms. Safe Crisis Management (SCM) is required conflict management training for all staff. The date of their last fire inspection was one week previous to our second visit. Although the Director stated that fire extinguishers are inspected monthly, a recheck of the fire extinguisher log shows otherwise. Fire drills are preformed twice each month with the last drill being preformed the week before our second visit. The wards also participate in the drills. We did not converse with any of the wards on our second visit. Therefore, we do not know whether relations with the staff had improved. FACTS/FINDINGS Fact: The facility is remote and is a rural minimum-security juvenile male detention site. Fact: The placement of wards to Camp Barrett is by court order, and there is a waiting list of 16 to19 year olds who have completed the screening process and review by the Juvenile Court. Fact: Camp Barrett High School is located on the grounds of the facility.
F19:
The high school is a modern accredited facility with eight full time teachers on staff. Fact: The Rule Book offered to wards is outdated and lacks current information about Camp Barrett.
F20:
The Rule Book needs to be current and factual so as to provide the incoming ward with all necessary information about Camp Barrett. _________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________17 DISCUSSION Juvenile Ranch Facility Rancho Del Campo The Juvenile Ranch Facility (JRF) is located near the community of Campo in eastern San Diego County. This facility was originally built as a U. S. Army barracks for Buffalo Soldiers in the early 1940’s. The current juvenile facility was opened in the mid 1960’s with two buildings serving as dormitories for the wards. The facility was expanded with the addition of two dormitories called Rancho del Rayo in 1978 and 1980. Three dormitories are currently in use, Campo II and Rayo Rayo II and I. The Campo II dorm shows its 1940 vintage but is well maintained considering all that have used it. Renovation of some of the buildings occurred during the early to mid 1990’s and a new library and computer lab were built at the facility in 1999. JRF is a behavioral and drug/alcohol rehabilitative facility serving male youths between the ages of 12 and 17. It is a minimum-security facility operated by the Probation Department; it has a capacity of 250 wards, with the average population being 160. The ward population is divided as to needs with Campo II housing those with behavior problems. Rayo I and II serve specific rehabilitative functions and are segregated by age. Programs offer drug/alcohol and behavioral treatment appropriate by age to each dorm, based on the Phoenix House Therapeutic Community model. The Phoenix House is a vital member of the San Diego juvenile justice system. This program addresses issues such as substance abuse, anger management and education. It promotes a positive peer culture. Phoenix House conducts daily morning and evening meetings that involves the staff and wards as well as parent meetings on the first Sunday of each month. The main purpose of the meetings is to promote motivation and to help establish an upbeat mood that encourages wards to meet their daily challenges and prepare them for the transition to life after their stay at the ranch. At Rancho Del Campo, each juvenile is required to enter into a contractual agreement that includes a list of specific goals that need to be met prior to release. As part of this agreement, individuals are assigned to a team that must work together to accomplish group tasks and goals and must also get along with other teams at the facility. A variety of programs are offered to meet the particular needs of the wards, including anger management, family counseling, crisis counseling, chemical dependency, personal responsibility, literacy, commitment to change, vocational training, and recreational activities. The San Diego County Office of Education administers the high school facility. All the juveniles attend Rancho Del Campo High School, which provides a mainstream educational program, individualized to meet each ward’s needs. Nine classroom teachers, seven aides and one special education teacher hold the classes in separate classrooms. All the teachers that we met were caring and enthusiastic educators that _____________________________________________________________________18 obviously enjoyed working in this environment. Several of the Grand Jury members had concerns about the subject of a movie that was being shown on the day we visited. Principal Davis assured us that the movie “Cry Freedom” supported the mainstream world history lesson plan and might be shown at any of the high schools in the County of San Diego. The JRF at Campo appears to be well run with a high level of staff enthusiasm and dedication toward the wards. This observation is supported by the 2006 and 2007 San Diego County Juvenile Justice Commission Reports. Both reports commended the staff for portraying an optimistic view of their effectiveness in providing a healthy, supportive environment for the wards. These reports also identified the fact that facility repairs and upgrades are inhibited by the need to comply with the local Campo Historical Society’s standards for historically accurate renovations. The overall mission of the facility requires major maintenance and remodeling and or construction of new buildings if it is to continue its current mission. You are encouraged to visit the San Diego County Office of Education web site at http://www.sdcoe.net/jccs2/?loc=mountain-rancho&m=1. From this site you can find the Internet links to all the Juvenile Court and Community Schools. While none of us want to see our children in one of these facilities, you will be encouraged, as we are, with the role models who teach and guide wards through the rehabilitation process as well as the positive environment at the facilities. _________________________________ _________________________________ DISCUSSION Temporary Holding Facilities Members of the 2007/2008 Grand Jury inspected a number of temporary holding facilities throughout the county. These inspections were in addition to the mandated state, county, health and fire inspections (CCR Titles 15 and 24). Temporary holding facilities are used to house detainees or arrestees while arranging transportation to a booking facility, or short time holding for investigation, or pending detainees’ release (Notice to Appear Citation or PC §849(b) release). Nearly all municipal and special-district police departments maintain only these short-term holding facilities since adult arrestees are booked into a Sheriff’s booking facility, and juveniles into Juvenile Hall, as soon after arrest as practical. Jury members toured the only exception in the county, the City Jail operated by the City of Chula Vista. The jail, staffed by sworn and non-sworn custodial personnel, houses the majority of those arrested in Chula Vista for minor offenses. As noted on a previous report segment, the Chula Vista City Jail, under an arrangement with the Sheriff’s Department, uses nearby South Bay Detention Facility for arrestee booking services. At _____________________________________________________________________19 present, the Chula Vista City Jail is under contract with the CDCR to house inmates from the Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility who are completing a drug rehabilitation program in the last months of their sentences. The sports venues at Qualcomm Stadium and Petco Park were also visited to inspect the physical layout of areas used by San Diego Police and event security personnel for detainees. The policies and procedures utilized at both facilities were reviewed with SDPD Special Events personnel. The temporary facilities visited dated from 1978 to 1999, with two to four cells being utilized. Most of the departments had video monitors as well as audio in place, but responsibility for monitoring usually fell on the arresting officer or in some cases the on- duty watch commander. Several agencies utilize a contract service to transport the prisoner, after initial processing and chemical testing, to the county facility for booking. This allows the arresting officer to return to field duty with minimum down time for arrestee processing. The detention policy and procedures for females and juveniles was also reviewed at each site visited, with the staff member providing a full disclosure of the process including the required juvenile detention logs. No issues or concerns were noted in any of the temporary facilities visited. _________________________________ DISCUSSION East Mesa SDSD Complex Laundry, Food Processing, Commissary The San Diego Sheriff’s Department operates a very impressive complex, providing three separate service support functions. These operations utilize a combination of sworn officers, civilian staff and management, and inmate labor under their direct supervision and control. The complex is located adjacent to East Mesa Detention Facility (EMDF), which is where the inmate labor force utilized in the facilities is detained. The largest unit is the Food Production Center where the civilian staff, along with deputies, direct and in some cases train (Certified Food Service Managers) inmate workers in the preparation, cooking and prepackaging of individual meals for all county adult and juvenile detention facilities. This amounts to 35,000 to 45,000 daily meals created utilizing the cook chill technology. This method provides for a long shelf life and provides the inmates with a standardized fresh and wholesome daily menu for about $ 0.75 cents per meal. The unit also provides special or restrictive meals for medical or religious reasons. The prepared meals are chilled, vacuum packed, labeled and stored in large walk-in refrigerators until they are trucked to the various detention facilities. This is a modern, award-winning food production facility, and it was obvious that safety and sanitation were of the utmost importance in all aspects of the operation. The facility was and continues to be visited and studied by institutional food service professionals from all over the world. _____________________________________________________________________20 An adjacent area houses a laundry facility that handles 8,000 to 10,000 pounds of laundry per day. The unit services all the detention facilities in the county except Las Colinas, which maintains its own laundry and uniform production facility. With the utilization of large capacity, 400/440 pounds per load machines, the facility operates two shifts per day, five days a week. Approximately fifty inmates are involved in the facility operation along with a civilian staff of 14. The entire process from washing to iron/folding creates an unusual environment at various times of the year. The facility air exchange units are being modified/upgraded to help manage and control the air circulation within the work area. Also in the complex is a large warehouse that houses the Inmate Services Commissary Store, which is part of the Inmate Welfare Fund operation. Inmates at county detention facilities with money in their commissary accounts are allowed to place weekly orders for commissary goods such as snack foods and personal hygiene items. The Inmate Welfare Special Revenue Fund operates within the Sheriff’s Department under the authority of Penal Code §4025. The multi-disciplinary Inmate Welfare Committee oversees operation and expenditures of the fund. The fund generates monies mainly from the Commissary Store operation, inmate telephone contracts, print shop, and salvages property and fund account interest. Expenditures are staff salaries, purchases for resale, operating expenses and other as approved by the committee to benefit the inmates. The overall annual budget for the Inmate Welfare Fund is approximately 3.5 to 4.5 million dollars. FACTS/ AND FINDINGS Fact: Operations at the Otay Mesa involving laundry service, food preparation and distribution are managed by the Sheriff’s Department. The sworn and civilian staff is supported by inmate workers from EMDF.
F21:
The operations are very cost effective, saving the county monies by not replicating the laundry and food preparation, kitchen facilities at all other detention facilities. COMMENDATION The entire Food Services unit of the Detention Services Bureau is to be commended for their decisive and positive can-do attitude during the October/November 2007 wildfires. They supported the County, CAL FIRE, National Guard and Red Cross with meal service, as these agencies managed the evacuation of an estimated half-million citizens. With minimal impact on normal operations to feed all inmates in county detention facilities, the Food Services unit supported the fire command posts within the county. This occurred simultaneously with detention facility evacuations that impacted the population of other facilities. This job well done deserves a very public commendation from the San Diego County Board of Supervisors. _____________________________________________________________________21 _________________________________ DISCUSSION San Diego County Medical Examiner Facility The Grand Jury visited the San Diego County Medical Examiner’s Office on April 3, 2008. The existing facility is located in the County Operations Center, near the site of a new two-story, 84,000 square foot facility scheduled for completion in November 2009. The Chief Medical Examiner and his assistant conducted a thorough briefing on the operations and capability of the Medical Examiner’s Office, formerly known as the Coroner’s Office. It is comforting to know that we have someone in charge of this facility that has the extensive experience and training in the many fields of forensics and pathology. Based on his briefing of the capabilities of the new facility we are also fortunate to have someone in charge who can keep San Diego on the cutting edge of this expanding field that is flooded with advancements in technology. The Medical Examiner told us that many of the procedures currently practiced are used authentically on television “CSI” dramas. He indicated that his 60 member staff investigates a little more than half of all the deaths in San Diego County and averages approximately 3,000 autopsies every year. He told us that the new facility will be able to provide better insight into not only determining how a death occurred, but how the person lived before they died. Upon entering the facility it became obvious that the current space is overcrowded and too small to process the workload. We toured the cold storage area and the refrigerated truck that is available to handle an additional 40 bodies should the need arise. The current facility can store a total of only 120 bodies. The new facility will be able to handle up to 200 bodies as well as incorporate many of the new technologies that help determine the cause of death. We also had the dubious honor of observing several of the pathologists plying their trade on the autopsy tables. Future Grand Juries will have the opportunity to see the result of all the hard work of the Medical Examiner and his staff to design and populate the new facility with modern equipment. _________________________________ DISCUSSION San Diego Unified Port District Harbor Police Department _____________________________________________________________________22 The Grand Jury visited the Harbor Police Department on February 14, 2008. This sworn police department is the law enforcement authority for the San Diego Unified Port District and its jurisdiction extends through the tidelands and nearby roadways of the five cities that surround the San Diego Bay. The department has two principle facilities; the headquarters building on Harbor Drive, across from the airport, and harbor side facility, with docks, at the end of Shelter Island. The department’s staff is extremely diversified and all police officers are cross-trained as marine fire fighters. Additional capabilities include: canine teams, a dive team, an underwater search and rescue team, and personal watercraft teams. A major component of the Harbor Police Department provides law enforcement service to the San Diego County Airport Authority at San Diego International Airport/Lindbergh Field. This division works in cooperation with Homeland Security, Transportation Security Administration and private security personnel at the airport. Patrol officers of the Harbor Police Department work both in patrol cars on land and patrol boats on the bay and nearby waters. FACTS/FINDINGS Fact: The headquarters facility is in an excellent location at the corner of North Harbor Drive and Harbor Island Drive
F22:
The decades-old building is in need of replacement to streamline operations and better serve the community. COMMENDATION The Harbor Police Department is to be commended for the performance of their duties with the limited assets and facilities that they have available. They are charged with many enforcement responsibilities that cover a large and varied territory. The San Diego Unified Port District needs to recognize these accomplishments and provide the necessary resources that the department needs. _________________________________ DISCUSSION San Diego Metropolitan Transit System Security Six members of the Grand Jury visited the Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) and San Diego Trolley, Inc. (SDTI) complex at 12th and Imperial Avenues in San Diego on March 19, 2008. A tour of the Central Control facility and security headquarters was provided. _____________________________________________________________________23 A conference room presentation and a question& answer session followed. MTS has a two-tier security service consisting of Code Compliance Inspectors (CCI) who are “public officers” as defined by the Penal Code, supplemented by armed private security officers contracted with Transit Systems Security, Inc. (TSS). The service enforces a transit-specific code of ordinances enacted by MTS, as well local and state laws, for offenses occurring on MTS vehicles or property. The service is budgeted for 30 CCI and 114 TSS officers and MTS indicates it could use more personnel. Overtime and temporary rehires make up the shortfall, with the private security contractor also providing additional temporary personnel for special events (e.g., ballgames at Petco Park and QUALCOMM Stadium). The video surveillance system appears to be most up-to- date, and on-board cameras are being installed on many buses and trolley vehicles. Some federal funding has recently allowed MTS Security to add three canine units, which also provide reciprocal assistance to other law enforcement agencies. MTS Security’s working relationship with municipal and county law enforcement in its area of responsibility appears to be excellent. FACTS/FINDINGS Fact: The only audits from outside agencies are for funding. There are no outside audits done of the Transit Systems Security operations.
F23:
The newspapers are complaining that crime on MTS Trolleys is on the rise. While ridership is up, occasional outside oversight may improve the workings of the security operations. Fact: Staffing is low and the use of overtime is not a long-term answer.
F24:
Recruiting strategies for the hiring of sworn officers need to be developed, as do strategies for the retention of existing staff. _________________________________ DISCUSSION Consolidation of Crime Laboratories The 1998/1999 San Diego County Grand Jury conducted an extensive study and recommended the consolidation of the San Diego Sheriff’s Department and the San Diego Police Department’s crime laboratories with the San Diego County Medical Examiner’s Office into a consolidated Crime Laboratory. While those crime laboratories have the most resources and workload there are crime laboratories in some of the local police departments that would benefit from a consolidation effort. The report suggested that the consolidated laboratory could be managed through a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA). _____________________________________________________________________24 The common thread of concern expressed during this year’s visits to detention facilities and local police departments in the County of San Diego is the need for additional Sworn Officers. The consolidation of crime laboratories would greatly reduce the cost of operating all the laboratories independently. The County of San Diego could benefit greatly from the example provided by the U. S. Navy. The Navy had two Primary Standards Laboratories, several Standards Laboratories and a dozen or more Calibration Laboratories all over the world. Today there is one Primary Standards Laboratory. All the Standards Laboratories have been closed and all but three of the Calibration Laboratories have been closed. This consolidation resulted in a tremendous savings and allowed the savings to be used by the operating forces. The primary objection to Crime Laboratory consolidation in the County of San Diego appears to have been turf battles as expressed in the City of San Diego’s response to the Grand Jury Recommendation 99-112. “The City of San Diego is not opposed to discussing merger possibilities of the Police Department’s laboratory with that of the Sheriff’s Department. This discussion should take place when the merger is one of equal partners bringing equal resources, status and performance to the negotiating table with the intent and likelihood of increased service levels to the constituents of both the City and the County. This is impossible at the present time.” At a time, when the armed forces have gone through several rounds of base closings, and our fleet of ships and planes have been greatly reduced, we should not allow the Cities and County to engage in turf wars over the limited resources that are paid for by the tax payers. The City Mayors and County Managers should put this at the top of their agendas for immediate action. At the very least, a comprehensive study should be initiated with the stated objective being to eliminate the duplication of facilities, equipment, maintenance and operating costs, as well as labor. A JPA between the Cities and the County of San Diego should be charged with bringing this project to fruition with a target completion date no later than 2010. REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS The California Penal Code §933(c) requires any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the agency. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court); except that in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g. District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such comment shall be made within 60 days to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code §933.05(a), (b), (c), details, as follows, the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made: (a) As to each grand jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: _____________________________________________________________________25 (1) The respondent agrees with the finding (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor. (b) As to each grand jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. (c) If a finding or recommendation of the grand jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the grand jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel matters over which it has some decision making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. Comments to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in compliance with the Penal Code §933.05 are required from the: Responding Agency Recommendations Date None _____________________________________________________________________26 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS AB (California) Assembly Bill ASTREA Air Support to Regional Enforcement Agencies CCI (San Diego Transit) Code Compliance Inspector CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CALPIA California Prison Industry Authority CCR California Code of Regulations CDCR California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation CSA Corrections Standards Authority DDF Descanso Detention Facility DEH (San Diego County) Department of Environmental Health DSB (Sheriff’s) Detention Services Bureau EMDF East Mesa (adult) Detention Facility (Otay Mesa) EMJDF East Mesa Juvenile Detention Facility (Otay Mesa) GBDF George F. Bailey Detention Facility (Otay Mesa) GRF Girls Rehabilitation Facility (Kearny Mesa) HHSA (San Diego County) Health and Human Services Agency JIMS (Sheriff’s) Jail Information Management System JPA Joint Powers Agency (or) Agreement JRF Juvenile Ranch Facility KMJDF Kearny Mesa Juvenile Detention Facility (“Juvenile Hall”) LCDF Las Colinas (women’s) Detention Facility (Santee) LVN Licensed Vocational Nurse MTS (San Diego) Metropolitan Transit System OC Oleoresin Capiscum (Pepper Spray) OIG (California) Office of Inspector General PC (California) Penal Code PCC (A. B. and Jessie) Polinsky Children’s Center POPS Problem Oriented Policy & Solutions PSU Psychiatric Security Unit Richard J. Donovan State Correctional Facility (Rock Mountain/Otay RJD Mesa) RN Registered Nurse SB (California) Senate Bill SBDF South Bay Detention Facility (Chula Vista) SCM Safe Crisis Management SDCJ San Diego Central Jail (Detention Facility SDSD San Diego Sheriff’s Department SDTI San Diego Trolley, Inc. SDUPD San Diego Unified Port District TSS Transit Systems (private) Security (contractor) _____________________________________________________________________27 VDF Vista Detention Facility Appendices: A. Grand Jury’s Facility Inspection Form A. Aerial View of the Otay Mesa Detention Complex B. Report from Little Hoover Commission (dtd January 25, 2007—Executive Summary C. Inmate programs available at adult detention facilities _____________________________________________________________________28 Appendix A Please fill in sections that apply to the facility you are inspecting Facilities: Inspection Date: r Facility Capacity: Last Inspection Date: Address: Telephone Number: FAX Number: Facility Administrator: Staff Interviewed: Facility Type: Jail ___ Lockup/Temporary Holding ___ Court Holding ___ Juvenile Hall ___ Juvenile Camp ___ Inspection Team Lead(s): Members: Member Post-Inspection Summary: _____________________________________________________________________29 AREA INSPECTED / REVIEWED (please mark) Quality of Life Programs Interviews ___ Physical Plant ___ Educational ___ Inmates ___ Meals/Nutrition ___ Vocational ___ Facility Manager ___ Mental Health ___ Community Service ___ Medical ___ Physical/Dental ___ Domestic Violence ___ School Staff ___ Religious Services ___ Victim Awareness ___ Mental Health Staff ___ Visiting ___ Gang Awareness ___ Line Staff ___ Volunteer Activity ___ Substance Abuse ___ Food Service Staff ___ Other ___ Other ___ Other General Information: 1-1 What is the actual (current) capacity of the facility? 1-2 Has the facilities rated capacity been exceeded since the last inspection? 1-3 What is the inmate classification system? Describe below. Since the last inspection indicate the following: Number of suicides: _______________ Number of attempted suicides: _______________ Number of deaths from other causes: __________ Number of escapes: ________________________ Special Percentage of Inmates on Psych Meds: _________ Date of last fire/emergency drill: ____________________ Local Inspections: 1-4 Fire Inspection Conducted: (Date) ______ 1-5 Medical/Mental Health: (Date) ______ 1-6 Environmental Health: (Date) ______ 1-7 Nutritional Health (Date) ______ 1-8 Corrections Standard Authority (Date) ______ 1-9 Other (Describe) _____________________________________________________________________30 Staffing: 2-1 Is the staff adequate to monitor the inmates? 2-2 Does the staff communicate in a language the inmates understand? 2-3 Is the staff a diverse or uniform group of personnel? 2-4 What are your impressions of the staff/inmate interaction? Condition of the Grounds: (lawns, recreation areas, blacktop, asphalt, other) 2-5 Exterior of Buildings: (general condition, paint, roof, drains/gutters, other) 6-13 Are cleaning fluids and chemicals labeled and safely stored? 6-13 Is there a weapons locker? 2-8 Is there recreation and sports equipment? 2-9 Are the hallways clear? Are the doors propped open or are they closed? 2-10 Holding areas (cells/rooms) –[if present] – Is there access to drinking water and a toilet? 2-11 Are there individual cells/rooms or dormitories? 2-12 Beds – Type of bed and is it off the floor? 2-13 Is the lighting adequate? 2-14 What is your impression of the temperature? Orientation of Inmates: 2-15 Are inmates briefed or instructed as to the facility rules and procedures? 2-16 Are the rules and grievance procedures posted? 2-17 Are the rules and grievance procedures understood by the inmates? 2-18 How many inmates did you interview? ______ _____________________________________________________________________31 Meals/Nutrition: 3-1 The kitchen area – Is it clean? Are knives and chemicals locked when not in use? 3-2 Have inmates working in the kitchen been trained? 3-3 Have the inmates had medical clearance/review before assignment? 3-4 Are meals served in the cells, dayrooms or in a central cafeteria? 3-5 What is the length of time allowed for each meal? Personal Appearance of Inmates: 3-6 What is your impression of the appearance of the inmates? (dirty, unkempt, well groomed, etc.) 3-7 Showers – frequency, privacy, maintenance of shower facility, and supervision by staff. 3-8 Are there any reported assaults by inmates on other inmates? 3-9 Condition of inmate clothing – (does the clothing fit, appropriate for the climate, etc.?) Programs: 3-10 (a) Exercise – is it inside or outside? (b) How frequently is exercise offered? 6-13 How much time is each inmate offered? 3-12 Do men get more exercise time then women? 3-13 Are there clergy available to the inmate upon request? 3-14 Is there access to religious services? 3-15 Are anger management and other applicable programs available? 3-16 Are medical services available? 3-17 How frequently is medical staff onsite? 3-18 How long do inmates have to be treated? 3-19 Is a physician available by phone to come onsite? 3-20 Are mental health services available? 3-21 How often does the mental health staff come to the facility? 3-22 How long do the inmates have to wait to be seen? 3-23 What types of vocational classes are available? (cooking, gardening, etc.) 3-24 Is there a program to involve community volunteers? 3-25 Is there a work program? 3-26 Other: _____________________________________________________________________32 Discipline of Inmates: 4-1 How often is discipline imposed? 4-2 What is the range of discipline options? Grievances: 4-3 What are the most common types of grievances filed by inmates? 4-4 Is there a record kept based on type and number? Telephone: 4-5 Do inmates have access to telephones? Correspondence: 4-6 Is there limited free postage for inmates without money? 4-7 Incoming/outgoing mail – Are inmates aware that their mail can be read by authorities? 4-8 Can inmates send confidential correspondence? 4-9 How are letters to attorneys, legislator, CSA. Etc.handled? Visiting: 4-10 Is there an adequate facility with space for visitors? 4-11 Are the visiting times convenient for families? 4-12 Do they accommodate a family’s work schedule, etc.? 4-13 Are there special provisions for visits by attorneys and clergy? 4-14 Does the staff supervise the visits? 4-15 Do all inmates have access to visiting? 4-16 If not, state reason. Education Program: 4-17 College level/high school level/basic literacy/other. 4-18 What is the name of the school district that provides educational services. 4-19 Teachers – State the number of full-time, part-time, and substitute teachers. 4-20 How many of the inmates that participate in the educational program. 4-21 What is the atmosphere in the classroom? 4-22 Are the supplies adequate to support the curriculum? (books, paper, computers, etc.) 4-23 Describe the activities and coursework that are assigned by the teacher(s)? 4-24 What is the relationship between the educational staff and the facility staff? _____________________________________________________________________33 Juveniles in Adult Facility” 5-1 What is the proximity to adult inmates? 5-2 Is staff available to supervise juveniles? 5-3 Is there constant auditory access to staff? 5-4 Is the juvenile provided a snack if requested? 5-5 Is there access to toilet facilities? 5-6 Is there access to drinking fountains or water? 5-7 Are there provisions to provide clothing or blankets to assure comfort? Conditions of Secure Detention Outside a Locked Enclosure: (e.g. Cuffing Rail) 5-8 Is there contact with other juveniles? 5-9 Is there constant supervision? 5-10 Any timed intervals of supervision? What are the time limits? 5-11 Is there access to toilet and washing facilities? 5-12 Is there access to a drinking fountain? Conditions of a Non-Secure Detention: 5-13 Is there constant supervision? 5-14 Are there males and females in the same room? _____________________________________________________________________34 General Observations for Kitchen Facilities Y/N 6-1 Is all food stored 6” off the Floor? ______ 6-2 Is raw food separated from cooked? ______ 6-13 Are prep areas for protein products and fruits / vegetables separated? ______ 6-4 Is there a thermometer on the refrigerator door? ______ If yes, ______ degrees F? 6-5 Is frozen food frozen? ______ 6-6 Are employee’s uniforms clean? ______ 6-7 Are plastic gloves available? ______ 6-8 Is employee hair covered? ______ 6-9 Are restrooms used as storage? ______ 6-10 Are 3-hole sinks available and in use? ______ 6-11 Are knives and chemicals in lockup? ______ 6-12 Are Grade Cards posted in full view? ______ 6-13 Are there “Fly-fans” and are they in use? ______ _____________________________________________________________________35 Appendix B Aerial View of the Otay Mesa Detention Complex Source: Google Earth _____________________________________________________________________36 _____________________________________________________________________37 _____________________________________________________________________38 _____________________________________________________________________39 _____________________________________________________________________40 _____________________________________________________________________41 _____________________________________________________________________42 _____________________________________________________________________43 Source: Little Hoover Commission Internet address: http://www.lhc.ca.gov/lhcdir/185/Report185.pdf _____________________________________________________________________44 Appendix D Detention Inmate Programs and Classes Educational Programs Psych-Social Programs Vocational Programs Descanso Detention Facility General Equivalency Diploma Alcoholics Anonymous Construction Computer Literacy Co-Dependents Anonymous Landscaping English as Second Language Domestic Violence Family Literacy HIV/AIDS Awareness Narcotics Anonymous Parenting Prep/Strive Pre-Release Religious Services Substance Abuse Awareness East Mesa Detention Facility General Equivalency Diploma Alcoholics Anonymous Construction Trades English as Second Language Domestic Violence Food Service Worker Graphics-Computer Drug Education Class Laundry Family Literacy Print Shop HIV/AIDS Awareness Narcotics Anonymous Prep/Strive Religious Services George F. Bailey Detention Facility Adult Basic Education Alcoholics Anonymous Food Service Worker English as Second Language Domestic Violence Janitorial Trades General Equivalency Diploma Drug Education Class Family Literacy Program Family Ties HIV/AIDS Awareness Narcotics Anonymous Parenting Religious Services _____________________________________________________________________45 Educational Programs Psych-Social Programs Vocational Programs Las Colinas Women’s Detention Facility Adult Basic Education Alcoholics Anonymous Landscaping English as Second Language Co-Dependents Anonymous Sewing General Equivalency Diploma Domestic Violence Painting Graphics Computer Drug Education Class Office Occupations Family Literacy Program Family Ties HIV/AIDS Awareness Legal Clinic Narcotics Anonymous Peer Mentoring Pregnant Inmate Program Parenting Prep/Strive Pre-Release Program Religious Services Reunification Welcome Home Ministries South Bay Detention Facility Adult Basic Education Alcoholics Anonymous Janitorial Trades Domestic Violence Drug Education HIV/AIDS Awareness Prep/Strive Parenting Religious Services San Diego Central Jail Adult Basic Education Alcoholics Anonymous Co-Dependents Anonymous Domestic Violence Drug Education HIV/AIDS Awareness Narcotics Anonymous Parenting Pre-Release Religious Services _____________________________________________________________________46 Educational Programs Psych-Social Programs Vocational Programs Vista Detention Facility Adult Basic Education Alcoholics Anonymous Computer Literacy AIM Domestic Violence HIV/AIDS Awareness Narcotics Anonymous Parenting Peer to Peer Support Pre-Release Religious Services Welcome Home Ministries Source: San Diego Sheriff’s Department _____________________________________________________________________47
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos y recomendaciones aún no extraídos.
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
17 hallazgos
F01:
While construction delays in highway 76 continued, many housing developments using this highway were built without the transportation infrastructure to support them.
F1:
To point out that rapid growth has surpassed many areas of the infrastructure carrying capacity of the region. While SANDAG is a great asset to the region, it does not continue obtaining opinion surveys of what the citizens of the region think of the growing infrastructure deficit that growth has caused. Nor does it answer the question: Is there an optimal population for our region within the constraints of water, power, police, schools and other infrastructure necessities? _____________________________________________________________________1 —2008 (filed May 21, 2008) 2. To examine the funding for regional infrastructure maintenance. In many cases the cities of San Diego County have borrowed money or issued bonds counting on future growth and property taxes to pay today’s infrastructure maintenance debts. The mayors and council members of these cities make up most of the SANDAG Board and make the final decisions of SANDAG. These decisions box us in by creating a cycle that works only if more growth continues forever (no light at the end of this tunnel). Plans need to be realistic reflecting managed growth and respecting existing infrastructure constraints rather than borrowing on future growth.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R1:
Developed a Smart Growth Concept Map which identifies areas throughout the region that would link smart growth land uses and transportation infrastructure.
F02:
When the time frame delays and cost increase of the Sprinter are applied to the existing and future SANDAG projects, the infrastructure deficit will increase dramatically. Fact: SANDAG has not published a combined infrastructure assessment, or considered one in its plans to be provided to the public for the region. The figures for each element of infrastructure can be found in several different reports, but not in a single overall assessment format.
F03:
An easy to read scorecard by city or supervisorial district for unincorporated areas showing the population and the infrastructure element figures should be developed. These assessments will show infrastructure figures such as public safety or hospital beds, so everyone can tell if development (both employment centers and housing tracks) can be supported. Fact: SANDAG is often criticized in the press for project delays and not building more highway lanes or roads, as many citizens want less spent on public transportation. SANDAG is caught in the middle between what the state mandates (more mass transit) and what the public wants (more lanes).
F3:
To examine the level to which the SANDAG Board reflects the concerns of the regional citizens they represent. Presently, SANDAG Board Members are mostly mayors, city council members or other regional representatives. The decisions made by the board are very important to the region. Those interviewed admit the constituents that elected them, seldom ask how they voted for an issue at SANDAG. Few even realize they sit on the SANDAG Board.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R3:
SANDAG has made changes to its governance structure; two San Diego County representatives - one representing the incorporated areas and another representing the unincorporated areas of the county - sit on the SANDAG Board of Directors. The 16 recipients named in the finding are Carlsbad, Chula Vista, El Cajon, Encinitas, Escondido, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, MTS, National City, Oceanside, Poway, San Diego, San Marcos, County of San Diego, Solana Beach and Vista. Office of Audits & Advisory Services County of San Diego FY 2007-08 GRAND JURY AUDIT OF THE SAN DIEGO March 2008 ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS Report No. A08-024 FINAL REPORT 9
F04:
It may not be possible to pave our way out of congestion; other cities have tried it for years with little success. By approving managed growth first in order to allow the mass transportation infrastructure to catch up, SANDAG will be required to concentrate on the new mandates from the state, and look closely at water and power needs. Fact: Cutbacks on Quality of Life are being made due to large increases in regional population. Recently one local city cancelled an annual holiday fair that had gone on for many years and another city stated that the jazz lawn concerts are getting too large and need to be reduced. A newspaper article tells of large gatherings at regional parks by charities and others that are having a negative impact on the park’s neighborhood. Additionally, beach goers and surfers are complaining about having to pay to park at the beach.
F4:
To provide findings of a limited scope audit of SANDAG performed by the San Diego County Auditor and Controller Office at the request of the Grand Jury. PROCEDURES Members of the Grand Jury: • Viewed a presentation by the SANDAG Executive Director and staff. • Attended over 30 of the SANDAG working group and board meetings. • Reviewed many SANDAG published reports. • Interviewed current and former board members and employees of SANDAG. • Requested and reviewed an audit of SANDAG by the County Chief of Audits. (Attached) DISCUSSION 1 INFRASTRUCTURE CAPACITY In recent years this region has experienced unprecedented growth from both internal and external sources. Like many regions we have a sizeable undocumented population that contributes to and exacerbates our infrastructure growth. The local Governments escalated this growth in a “build it and they will come” philosophy. It was assumed that government would work out the growing infrastructure constraints or carrying capacity later. With our limited regional constraints, we may not have that luxury. It is time to take a closer look and manage our growth better. If we continue to invite growth and increase the infrastructure deficit, we will continue to lower our quality of life. As Edward Abbey stated: “Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell.” Examples of how infrastructure growth has slowed are: the State Route 76 expansion and the Sprinter train. The SR 76 project will change a 2-lane road into a 4-lane road _____________________________________________________________________2 —2008 (filed May 21, 2008) between I-5 and I-15. A western section was completed several years ago and now could be widened to 6 lanes. The remaining 10 miles of the conversion from 2 to 4 lanes was included during the 1987 Transnet sales tax plan. While the projected completion plan for this dangerous stretch of road is 2014, because of money constraints and priorities, there is an extended plan being considered within SANDAG, which would move completion to 2020. That would mean an improvement to a 10-mile stretch of road will have taken 33 years. Even if the present completion plans of 2014 holds, it will still take 27 years. In the meantime, accidents and fatalities will continue on the old route. The Sprinter train also goes between I- 15 and I-5 that took 20 years from planning to completion. Not only has the schedule slipped many times over the years, but the cost estimate has gone from a vision of $20 mil in 1986 to $352 mil in 2003 and $477 million recently. If we know the carrying capacity or peak population density of our region, we can manage development growth. This will allow the supporting infrastructure to grow in unison with development and not behind it. This would include development of employment centers (industrial parks, universities and large office buildings) and large housing tracts. Infrastructure carrying capacity is a measure of what an area can support, including the knowledge of whether the present population and/or any new development has or will have utilities, water, hospital beds, police, schools, fire protection, transportation, etc they require. It should be noted that while SANDAG does not have direct control or authority of land use within the cities and county, SANDAG board members do. But SANDAG should have a role in informing the citizens of the region by letting them know with an easily understood assessment or scorecard if the total infrastructure by district or city has the ability (carrying capacity) to support both existing and pending growth. The scorecard would go a long way in gaining confidence from the citizens of the region for SANDAG. Recently the state passed mandates under AB-32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 that will reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to 1990 levels by promoting mass transit and providing for more homes closer to work locations. This will have strong positive effects on our growth patterns, environment and infrastructure. SANDAG should take credit for embracing these mandates and include the mandated requirements in existing plans. To be more responsive, SANDAG should announce that it is going to promote GHG reduction, manage our growth, pay attention to the existing quality of life as well as the carrying capacity of what our current infrastructure can support. Presenting an image of a slow, well-managed region, living and growing within its means, would make anyone proud to live here. _____________________________________________________________________3 —2008 (filed May 21, 2008) FACTS / FINDINGS Fact: The SANDAG projects of Highway 76 and the Sprinter train are examples that contribute to our present infrastructure deficit. Finding #01: While construction delays in highway 76 continued, many housing developments using this highway were built without the transportation infrastructure to support them. Finding #02: When the time frame delays and cost increase of the Sprinter are applied to the existing and future SANDAG projects, the infrastructure deficit will increase dramatically. Fact: SANDAG has not published a combined infrastructure assessment, or considered one in its plans to be provided to the public for the region. The figures for each element of infrastructure can be found in several different reports, but not in a single overall assessment format. Finding #03: An easy to read scorecard by city or supervisorial district for unincorporated areas showing the population and the infrastructure element figures should be developed. These assessments will show infrastructure figures such as public safety or hospital beds, so everyone can tell if development (both employment centers and housing tracks) can be supported. Fact: SANDAG is often criticized in the press for project delays and not building more highway lanes or roads, as many citizens want less spent on public transportation. SANDAG is caught in the middle between what the state mandates (more mass transit) and what the public wants (more lanes). Finding #04: It may not be possible to pave our way out of congestion; other cities have tried it for years with little success. By approving managed growth first in order to allow the mass transportation infrastructure to catch up, SANDAG will be required to concentrate on the new mandates from the state, and look closely at water and power needs. Fact: Cutbacks on Quality of Life are being made due to large increases in regional population. Recently one local city cancelled an annual holiday fair that had gone on for many years and another city stated that the jazz lawn concerts are getting too large and need to be reduced. A newspaper article tells of large gatherings at regional parks by charities and others that are having a negative impact on the park’s neighborhood. Additionally, beach goers and surfers are complaining about having to pay to park at the beach. Finding #05: The facts above are examples of how growth without enough infrastructures in place will affect the quality of life. _____________________________________________________________________4 —2008 (filed May 21, 2008) DISCUSSION 2 BOXED IN Most citizens agree that new growth should pay for most if not all of new development infrastructure needed. Good government budget practices allow borrowing for large capital improvements, but not to pay for day-to-day maintenance. Much of our maintenance on existing infrastructure has been delayed in favor of new development infrastructure, which limits funding to pay for present problems. So we box ourselves in by borrowing from the future. Then the only choice is to keep growing to pay for the required maintenance of today. In the past, SANDAG has been fortunate enough to receive grants and allocations from both state and federal government as bailouts. However, both state and federal governments are presently cutting many areas. Because of the problems in our infrastructure deficit, our ability to provide solutions to other problems such as a larger regional airport, providing needed school buildings and hospitals, increasing our wastewater treatment facilities and finding the water we will need tomorrow at an affordable price is decreased. FACTS/FINDINGS Fact: At the end of 2007 the board of SANDAG considered two choices with respect to the Regional Transportation Plan Funding: a Revenue Constrained Scenario of $41 billion or a Reasonably Expected Revenue Scenario of $57 billion. Finding #06: The region in the past has been able to attract funds and grants from many different sources. If these additional funds are not found, it appears that a $16 billion adjustment is going to be needed. Fact: Acceptance of competitive fixed prices is prevalent by SANDAG and most government agencies in the region. Competitive fixed prices are accepted as the best price obtainable, if they are close to the budgeted amount. Regional road prices and cost elements are not compared to the prices paid by our neighboring counties. Finding #07: Prices for construction have recently come down from past prices and SANDAG believes it is due to the potential for a recession. However, the costs of cement, rock and steel have not come down. It appears that no one is looking into the question of whether we paid too much in the recent past or should today’s prices be even less than quoted. Fact: Currently there are three mass transit systems in place currently in the county: Metropolitan Transit System, North County Transit District and the Metro Liner. Finding #08: If the current projected growth estimates are allowed; a far-reaching mass transit system to all corners of the county is needed. Combining rail systems and expanding train lines would be a good start. _____________________________________________________________________5 —2008 (filed May 21, 2008) DISCUSSION 3 SANDAG BOARD While they are all elected officials, SANDAG Board members are not elected to that position. The board is made up of two members from the Board of Supervisors, two from the City of San Diego and one each from the other seventeen cities. While the members mostly set aside rivalries between cities and try to be responsible, they are limited in two areas: 1) for the most part they individually have not had any professional training in planning, and 2) they have to consider the constituents who elected them first and the needs of the region second. Since the board members were elected to govern for only a slice of the entire region, when the region needs something like an additional rail line, a power plant or an aggregate mine, the answer is too often “Not in My Back Yard.” The region, as a whole, has to suffer and pay extra for these political decisions. The most recent TransNet sales tax extension was estimated to fund much more than it probably will cover. Because sales tax revenues have recently declined, the SANDAG board is searching for a new income base to support present and future projects. FACTS/FINDINGS Fact: SANDAG has started a recent study on Quality of Life (QofL) issues, which includes beach sand replenishment, quality of water, mass transit and wastewater run off. Finding #09: These QofL issues have long been with us and have been addressed by the area cities and county. To look at them regionally will be a new challenge for the board members. Fact: Many of the cities use terms of “Build Out” and “Open Space”, while a consistent definition is hard to find. We see statements in the press from elected officials using these terms and they sound something like growth will stop at “build out” and “open space” is to be left natural. One city classifies I-5 as open space. Finding #10: SANDAG should provide better definitions of these terms for the public to understand. DISCUSSION 4 COUNTY AUDIT We requested and received a limited-scope audit report from the San Diego County Auditor & Comptroller Office. The audit revealed that some internal controls need to be strengthened, tracking procedures should be refined, prior audit findings are not tracked and made a permanent record, and the segregation of functions need to be improved. The facts and findings below are also addressed and expanded in the attached Audit. Fact: SANDAG’s financial system is owned and administered by Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) without an up to date agreement outlining the use of this system. Finding #11: Since MTS is a recipient of grants from SANDAG, there is a potential conflict of interest for MTS to administer the financial system. _____________________________________________________________________6 —2008 (filed May 21, 2008) Fact: Many different excel spreadsheets are used to track grants and prepare monthly reports back to the grantor. Input to these spreadsheets is not automated to transfer data from expenditure systems. Finding #12: With the many separate spreadsheets needed for the various grants, the reliance factor decreases. SANDAG was not able to ensure that access lists to these reporting systems are updated as needed to reflect the current user environment, or that these lists are reviewed periodically. Fact: Several periodic audits are both required and performed on the financial records of SANDAG. An ongoing tracking system for the various findings has not been established. Finding #13: When the auditor asked for the findings and recommendations for the past three years, SANDAG cited “they had no findings except one which was resolved.” The auditor later discovered findings from audits and reviews still in process of resolution. Fact: The duties of receiving, processing and depositing checks are not adequately segregated to ensure proper safeguarding. Finding #14: A sole mail clerk opens and distributes all the incoming mail for SANDAG over four floors daily. This includes incoming checks. The auditor found that unendorsed checks could be left unattended in the mail clerk’s cubicle.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R4:
SANDAG Plays a More Prominent Role Than Most Other Councils of Governments…
F05:
The facts above are examples of how growth without enough infrastructures in place will affect the quality of life. _____________________________________________________________________4 —2008 (filed May 21, 2008) DISCUSSION 2 BOXED IN Most citizens agree that new growth should pay for most if not all of new development infrastructure needed. Good government budget practices allow borrowing for large capital improvements, but not to pay for day-to-day maintenance. Much of our maintenance on existing infrastructure has been delayed in favor of new development infrastructure, which limits funding to pay for present problems. So we box ourselves in by borrowing from the future. Then the only choice is to keep growing to pay for the required maintenance of today. In the past, SANDAG has been fortunate enough to receive grants and allocations from both state and federal government as bailouts. However, both state and federal governments are presently cutting many areas. Because of the problems in our infrastructure deficit, our ability to provide solutions to other problems such as a larger regional airport, providing needed school buildings and hospitals, increasing our wastewater treatment facilities and finding the water we will need tomorrow at an affordable price is decreased. FACTS/FINDINGS Fact: At the end of 2007 the board of SANDAG considered two choices with respect to the Regional Transportation Plan Funding: a Revenue Constrained Scenario of $41 billion or a Reasonably Expected Revenue Scenario of $57 billion.
F06:
The region in the past has been able to attract funds and grants from many different sources. If these additional funds are not found, it appears that a $16 billion adjustment is going to be needed. Fact: Acceptance of competitive fixed prices is prevalent by SANDAG and most government agencies in the region. Competitive fixed prices are accepted as the best price obtainable, if they are close to the budgeted amount. Regional road prices and cost elements are not compared to the prices paid by our neighboring counties.
F07:
Prices for construction have recently come down from past prices and SANDAG believes it is due to the potential for a recession. However, the costs of cement, rock and steel have not come down. It appears that no one is looking into the question of whether we paid too much in the recent past or should today’s prices be even less than quoted. Fact: Currently there are three mass transit systems in place currently in the county: Metropolitan Transit System, North County Transit District and the Metro Liner.
F08:
If the current projected growth estimates are allowed; a far-reaching mass transit system to all corners of the county is needed. Combining rail systems and expanding train lines would be a good start. _____________________________________________________________________5 —2008 (filed May 21, 2008) DISCUSSION 3 SANDAG BOARD While they are all elected officials, SANDAG Board members are not elected to that position. The board is made up of two members from the Board of Supervisors, two from the City of San Diego and one each from the other seventeen cities. While the members mostly set aside rivalries between cities and try to be responsible, they are limited in two areas: 1) for the most part they individually have not had any professional training in planning, and 2) they have to consider the constituents who elected them first and the needs of the region second. Since the board members were elected to govern for only a slice of the entire region, when the region needs something like an additional rail line, a power plant or an aggregate mine, the answer is too often “Not in My Back Yard.” The region, as a whole, has to suffer and pay extra for these political decisions. The most recent TransNet sales tax extension was estimated to fund much more than it probably will cover. Because sales tax revenues have recently declined, the SANDAG board is searching for a new income base to support present and future projects. FACTS/FINDINGS Fact: SANDAG has started a recent study on Quality of Life (QofL) issues, which includes beach sand replenishment, quality of water, mass transit and wastewater run off.
F09:
These QofL issues have long been with us and have been addressed by the area cities and county. To look at them regionally will be a new challenge for the board members. Fact: Many of the cities use terms of “Build Out” and “Open Space”, while a consistent definition is hard to find. We see statements in the press from elected officials using these terms and they sound something like growth will stop at “build out” and “open space” is to be left natural. One city classifies I-5 as open space.
F10:
SANDAG should provide better definitions of these terms for the public to understand. DISCUSSION 4 COUNTY AUDIT We requested and received a limited-scope audit report from the San Diego County Auditor & Comptroller Office. The audit revealed that some internal controls need to be strengthened, tracking procedures should be refined, prior audit findings are not tracked and made a permanent record, and the segregation of functions need to be improved. The facts and findings below are also addressed and expanded in the attached Audit. Fact: SANDAG’s financial system is owned and administered by Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) without an up to date agreement outlining the use of this system.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R10:
Economic Factors Influence Land Developments
F11:
Since MTS is a recipient of grants from SANDAG, there is a potential conflict of interest for MTS to administer the financial system. _____________________________________________________________________6 —2008 (filed May 21, 2008) Fact: Many different excel spreadsheets are used to track grants and prepare monthly reports back to the grantor. Input to these spreadsheets is not automated to transfer data from expenditure systems.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R11:
SANDAG Encourages Multifamily Housing, But Few Follow
F12:
With the many separate spreadsheets needed for the various grants, the reliance factor decreases. SANDAG was not able to ensure that access lists to these reporting systems are updated as needed to reflect the current user environment, or that these lists are reviewed periodically. Fact: Several periodic audits are both required and performed on the financial records of SANDAG. An ongoing tracking system for the various findings has not been established.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R12:
Some Local Agency Plans Emphasize Retail and Low-Density Housing
F13:
When the auditor asked for the findings and recommendations for the past three years, SANDAG cited “they had no findings except one which was resolved.” The auditor later discovered findings from audits and reviews still in process of resolution. Fact: The duties of receiving, processing and depositing checks are not adequately segregated to ensure proper safeguarding.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R13:
Many Factors Counter SANDAG’s Effectiveness In Influencing Land Use Transportation
F14:
A sole mail clerk opens and distributes all the incoming mail for SANDAG over four floors daily. This includes incoming checks. The auditor found that unendorsed checks could be left unattended in the mail clerk’s cubicle.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R14:
SANDAG Is the Primary Transportation Entity In the Region
Recomendaciones adicionales
15
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R15:
SANDAG’s Decisions Often Reflect Regional Concerns
R16:
Regional Decision Making Faces Constraints
R17:
SANDAG’s Influence on Transportation Demand Is Limited
R18:
Consolidation Might Improve Coordination of Transit Services
R19:
Consolidation Under SANDAG Needs Clarification Housing and The Environment
R20:
SANDAG Limited in Its Efforts to Promote Housing
R21:
Region’s Housing Problems Not Likely to Improve Soon Air Quality
R22:
Governance Responsibilities Well Defined
R23:
Limits of a Single-Function Entity
R24:
SANDAG’s Air Quality Role Limited Water Quality
R25:
Reasonable Allocation of Governance Roles
R26:
Constraints on Achieving Water Quality Improvement
R27:
SANDAG Has Virtually No Role in Water Quality Natural Habitat Conservation
R28:
New Conservation Program Still in Infancy
R29:
SANDAG Has Opportunity to Assist in Habitat Plan Implementation Office of Audits & Advisory Services County of San Diego FY 2007-08
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
1 hallazgos
F01:
After comparing County Procurement’s performance metrics against other similar municipal procurement staffs, County procurement staff is at or near capacity, operating as efficiently as practical. Additional resources in terms of staffing may be required to maintain the service levels the County of San Diego has come to expect from their procurement staff.
Recomendaciones adicionales
1
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
08-63:
Put in place management controls to ensure that staff workload is distributed to
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Recomendaciones adicionales
1
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R08-57:
through 08-59 8/13/08
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos y recomendaciones aún no extraídos.
Recomendaciones adicionales
7
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R1:
Changing a flat tire;
R2:
Jump- starting a vehicle;
R3:
Providing water for the radiator;
R4:
Providing a free gallon of gas; and
R5:
Towing a vehicle to a safe, pre-determined drop location, where the motorist may call for additional assistance. All of these services are provided free of charge. SANDAG reports that the FSP program assists about 50,000 motorists a year. (Appendix C.) SANDAG statistics also have shown that 75% of the roadside assists handled by FSP do not require the full service tow trucks now required by CHP for FSP programs. SAFE is currently funding approximately two-thirds ($1.5 million in three annual installments of $500,000) of the total cost of a three-year pilot project being conducted by SANDAG to test the effectiveness of the lighter Roving Service Trucks. These trucks do not have towing capacity but are capable of providing all other FSP services. The Roving Service Trucks are less costly to operate than tow trucks and, because of their superior ability to weave through traffic, take less time to reach the scene of a motorist assist incident. The pilot project began in January 2005 and extends through June 2008, by which time SANDAG expects to have published a complete evaluation. According to an interim report provided to SAFE by SANDAG in July 2006, first year statistics showed that the seven Roving Service Trucks resulted in an annual saving of $112,694 and had a faster average response time, 8.13 minutes as opposed to 10.6 minutes for regular tow trucks. The Roving Service Trucks were able to complete a motorist assist in 87% of the incidents without having to call in a tow truck.
R6:
Innovation in meeting public needs; and
R7:
Ability to complete the project and its potential for success. Agencies are limited to total awards of $60,000 over a four-year period, so that grant request funds can be equitably distributed throughout the County. Each request is documented on the bi- monthly SAFE Board meeting agenda, which lists the name of the agency, the purpose of the grant, the amount of the request, the amount of the award and where applicable the reason for rejection. (Agendas are available on the SAFE web site http://www.sdcallbox.org) The items for which Motorist Aid Grants have recently been awarded include:
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Recomendaciones adicionales
1
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R08-33:
through 08-36 Development Services Department, 08-32, 08-35, 08-36 07/15/08 City of San Diego
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Recomendaciones adicionales
1
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R08-24:
through 08-27 APPENDICES A. San Diego County Tax Assessors Office Mills Act calculations formula with example (Source: San Diego County Assessor/Auditor/Clerk) B. Mills Act communities in California by county (Source: San Diego County Assessor/Auditor/Clerk) C. Total number of individual designations among California municipalities with more than 50 Mills Act contracts (Source: San Diego County Assessor/Auditor/ Clerk)
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos y recomendaciones aún no extraídos.
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos y recomendaciones aún no extraídos.
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos y recomendaciones aún no extraídos.
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
11 hallazgos
F01:
Local government has a responsibility to inventory global warming emissions in City operations and in the community at large, set reduction targets, create and implement an action plan. Fact: The City of San Diego adopted the Sustainable Community Program in 2002 and a Climate Protection Action Plan in 2005. Fact: The Climate Protection Action Plan lists 22 policies, initiatives and resolutions, recommends annual review and revision of these measures and the development of additional climate protection policies. Fact: The Conservation Element of the recently adopted General Plan includes a section on Climate Change containing policies that address local GHG mitigation strategies.
F02:
Regulations need to be in place in order to implement adopted policies and reduce the City’s carbon footprint. Fact: San Diego has an exceptional knowledge base with three universities and researchers who are among the world’s leading climate scientists.
F03:
Local policy makers should make better use of the expertise of the researchers and the accumulated scientific information that is available in the San Diego academic community.
F04:
The Chula Vista City Council unanimously approved an aggressive program for addressing global warming in City operations and in the community.
F05:
San Diego County Government has a responsibility to inventory global warming emissions in County operations and in the community at large, set reduction targets and create and implement an action plan.
F06:
San Diego County has not yet developed a climate protection action plan. Fact: There are valuable tools available, such as the King County Guidebook for Local, Regional and State Governments, on preparing a climate protection action plan.
F07:
San Diego County needs a climate action plan in order to comply with State legislation and to begin the process of stabilizing and reducing GHG emissions.
F08:
Local government has a responsibility to inventory GHG emissions in its operations and in the community, set reduction targets, and to create and implement an action plan. Fact: SANDAG does not have a climate protection action plan in place.
F09:
As the regional governing body charged with transportation planning, the major source of GHG emissions, SANDAG has a special obligation to be the leader in developing and implementing an effective climate protection action plan. Fact: Two of the major utility companies in California are on track for meeting the state requirement of obtaining 20% of electricity from renewable sources. Fact: The local utility company has announced that it will not be able to meet the state mandate.
F10:
SANDAG has a responsibility to use its influence to encourage the local utility to match the commitment of other California utility companies to develop renewable energy resources. Fact: California is second only to Arizona in percentage of sunshine. _____________________________________________________________________14
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R10:
Encourage your friends and local, state, and federal government representatives to take the steps necessary to curb global warming. Sources: San Diego Regional Energy Office City of San Diego Climate Protection Action Plan, July 2005. _____________________________________________________________________20
F11:
This region has a renewable source of energy that is not being sufficiently utilized.
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos y recomendaciones aún no extraídos.
* This report's PDF did not contain easily extractable text and required Optical Character Recognition (OCR) for analysis. There may be minor errors in the extracted findings and recommendations due to OCR limitations with scanned documents.