San Francisco County Grand Jury
1996-1997
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
7 findings
F1:
The City should institute a trial program under which ACC would take over dog licensing duties from the Tax Collector's office and receive appropriate funding. At the end of the trial period, the Controller should evaluate the cost-effectiveness of this endeavor and make appropriate recommendations.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The City should institute a trial program under which ACC would take over dog licensing duties from the Tax Collector's office and receive appropriate funding. At the end of the trial period, the Controller should evaluate the cost-effectiveness of this endeavor and make appropriate recommendations.
F2:
ACC should evaluate the costs and benefits of requiring veterinarians to submit copies of all rabies vaccination certificates and using that information to notify owners of unlicensed dogs of the licensing requirement.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
ACC should evaluate the costs and benefits of requiring veterinarians to submit copies of all rabies vaccination certificates and using that information to notify owners of unlicensed dogs of the licensing requirement.
F3:
ACC should request an increase in license fees at least equal to those charged in Oakland. Vicious Animals Findings The Grand Jury agreed with the widely expressed admiration for the skills of the SFPD officer currently charged with hearing vicious animal complaints and also agreed with the consensus of the various parties involved that this function more properly belongs under the aegis of the Municipal Court. Vicious animal hearings resemble trials and often elicit strong emotions from participants, which, on occasion, have led to actual physical violence.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
ACC should request an increase in license fees at least equal to those charged in Oakland. Vicious Animals
F4:
A Municipal Court Commissioner should be trained to take over this part-time, but sensitive, position.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
A Municipal Court Commissioner should be trained to take over this part-time, but sensitive, position.
F5:
Armed bailiffs should be present at all vicious animal hearings, and participants should pass through metal detectors en route to such hearings. Holding Animals As Evidence in Court Cases Finding Dogs confined as evidence in court cases where the charge is harboring a vicious or fighting animal or otherwise abusing an animal can be held in cages at ACC for up to a year and a half awaiting the trial. Nevertheless, the Grand Jury found no instance where a dog was actually brought into court. This is both inhumane and expensive. Furthermore, all experts the Grand Jury consulted agree that an animal confined to a cage for many months would not exhibit the same characteristics it had when first incarcerated. The "evidence" would change over time.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
Armed bailiffs should be present at all vicious animal hearings, and participants should pass through metal detectors en route to such hearings. Holding Animals As Evidence in Court Cases
F6:
In those cases where the District Attorney has requested that ACC house animals, all parties involved , ACC and the District, City, and defense attorneys , should cooperate in developing a plan that will preserve the necessary evidence yet avoid the need to house those animals for up to a year and a half.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
In those cases where the District Attorney has requested that ACC house animals, all parties involved , ACC and the District, City, and defense attorneys , should cooperate in developing a plan that will preserve the necessary evidence yet avoid the need to house those animals for up to a year and a half.
F7:
In cases of abused animals that ACC has determined to be no danger to the community and eligible for either release to owners or adoption, the Grand Jury recommends that ACC seek methods to expedite hearings to avoid the hardship of long-term caging on both caretakers and animals. REQUESTED RESPONSES Mayor Board of Supervisors Department of Animal Care & Control City Attorney REQUESTED RESPONSES CONTINUED District Attorney Public Defender APPENDIX A License Fees License Fees in Selected SF Bay Area Jurisdictions Intact dog/altered dog: . Year 2 Years 3 Years San Francisco $16/8 $30/14 $44/20 Oakland $40/10 $70/18 $100/26 San Mateo County $21/11 None None Contra Costa County $22/11 $41/19 $60/27 All jurisdictions offer substantially reduced fees for senior citizens. Footnotes 1. It has been decades since confirmed case of rabies has occurred in a companion animal in San Francisco.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
In cases of abused animals that ACC has determined to be no danger to the community and eligible for either release to owners or adoption, the Grand Jury recommends that ACC seek methods to expedite hearings to avoid the hardship of long-term caging on both caretakers and animals. REQUESTED RESPONSES Mayor Board of Supervisors Department of Animal Care & Control City Attorney REQUESTED RESPONSES CONTINUED District Attorney Public Defender
Findings & Recommendations
2 findings
F1:
A more formalized approach to after-hours use of City and County-owned vehicles needs to be undertaken.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
A more formalized approach to after-hours use of City and County-owned vehicles needs to be undertaken.
F2:
On a periodic basis, monthly or quarterly, each department should report to one designated official each instance of after-hour use of all motor vehicles assigned to that department. The person designated to receive and review these reports must have the authority to investigate them for accuracy, and must do so. The Controller's office is best equipped to perform this function.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
On a periodic basis, monthly or quarterly, each department should report to one designated official each instance of after-hour use of all motor vehicles assigned to that department. The person designated to receive and review these reports must have the authority to investigate them for accuracy, and must do so. The Controller's office is best equipped to perform this function.
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R3:
The reports must certify that, for each reportable pay period, each employee who has used a motor vehicle has been appropriately charged with the $3.00 imputed income that will be reported on the employee's W-2 Form. REQUESTED RESPONSES Mayor's Office Board of Supervisors Controller
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
13 findings
F1:
Permitting DBI should continue to work with other departments to implement its planned process for applicants to have a single contact to determine the status of permit requests. This "one-stop permit center" will allow the permit applicant to deal with one person until the permit is issued rather than the current process of dealing with four to five persons from various City reviewing agencies. Similarly, DBI should pursue and implement the planned new process to have departments review an application simultaneously rather than passing an application from one department to the next. Under the old system, approval could take at least four months. Under the new system, approval time should be cut in half.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
Permitting DBI should continue to work with other departments to implement its planned process for applicants to have a single contact to determine the status of permit requests. This "one-stop permit center" will allow the permit applicant to deal with one person until the permit is issued rather than the current process of dealing with four to five persons from various City reviewing agencies. Similarly, DBI should pursue and implement the planned new process to have departments review an application simultaneously rather than passing an application from one department to the next. Under the old system, approval could take at least four months. Under the new system, approval time should be cut in half.
F2:
Demolitions Where permits for building demolitions are made, DBI should require that approved reports from the State Air and Water Quality Board be filed with DBI before final approval of the demolition is given. This will insure that the state's requirements have been met. REQUESTED RESPONSES Mayor Board of Supervisors Department of Building Inspection Building Inspection Commission APPENDICES A. Departmental Responsibilities B. Information Reviewed C. Department Directory D. Complaint Process APPENDIX A Department of Building Inspection (DBI) DBI is responsible for safeguarding life, limb, health, property, public welfare and public safety through the implementation and enforcement of building, housing, plumbing, electrical, mechanical, and disability access codes concerning the design and construction of buildings and structures within the City. DBI has approximately 200 employees. Its annual budget is about $20 million. About $17 million is covered by charges for services and $3 million for licenses and fines. Thus, it is a self-funding department. Department of City Planning (DCP) Through a plan review process, DCP is responsible for ensuring that all proposed construction, demolition, signs and uses are in conformance with the planning code and ensures that designs and environmental factors are in accordance with all applicable laws and policies. Fire Department (SFFD) SFFD is responsible for ensuring that all proposed construction and alteration projects relating to residential, assembly, hazardous, institutional occupancies and high rise buildings are in compliance with state laws and regulations. This includes the removal of petroleum underground storage tanks. Department of Public Health (DPH) DPH is responsible for ensuring that proposed food establishments, laundromats, and massage parlors are in compliance with the health code. Department of Public Works (DPW) DPW is responsible for ensuring that all proposed construction projects comply with the applicable street use and mapping regulations. Projects are reviewed for street and sidewalk use, curb cuts, infringement of sidewalks by signs and other items that may affect the appropriate use of streets and sidewalks. APPENDIX B BUILDING INSPECTION DEPARTMENT LIST OF INFORMATION REVIEWED 1. 1981 Review of Building Permit Process 2. October 1989 Budget Analyst Report to the Board of Supervisors 3. Organization Chart 4. 1995 Highlights -- 1996 Work Plan 5. 1996 Quarterly Newsletters 6. Planning Department Building Permit Application Packet 7. Meeting Agenda 8. Building Inspection Permit Brochures 9. Permit Processing Timetable 10. Monthly Internal Reports on Backlog 11. General Checklist for Contractors on Requirements 12. Management Information Systems APPENDIX C DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING INSPECTION 1660 Mission Street, San Francisco, CA 94103 (415) 558-6088 BUILDING INSPECTION COMMISSION (BIC) 6TH FLOOR 558-6164 Office 558-6225 Fax Bobbie Sue Hood - President Eileen Hansen - Vice President Roy Guinnane Robert Davis Jaime Sanbonmatsu Sigmund Frieeman Armando Vasquez Maria Gracia Banico, Secretary - 558-6164 DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING INSPECTION (DBI) DIRECTOR'S OFFICE - 6TH FLOOR 558-6225 Fax Frank Y. Chiu, Director - 558-6131 James Hutchinson, Deputy Director, Permit Services - 558-6142 William Wong, Deputy Director, Inspection Services - 558-6139 Patty Perez, Secretary - 558-6131 ACCESS APPEALS COMMISSION (AAC) 6TH FLOOR 558-6014 Office 558-6225 Fax Walter Park, President Enid Lim - Vice President Rosilyn Baltimore Terry Nancy Hogan Linton Stables, III Laurence Kornfield, Secretary ABATEMENT APPEALS BOARD (AAB) - 558-6139 Office William Wong, Department Representative - 558-6225 Fax BOARD OF EXAMINERS (BOE) - 558-6135 Office Wing Lau, Department Representative - 558-6041 Fax BUILDING CODE ADVISORY COMMITTEE (BCAC) - 558-6004 Office Alan Tokugawa, Department Representative 558-6208 Fax UNREINFORCED MASONRY BUILDINGS APPEALS BOARD (UMB) - 558-6157 Office Hanson Tom, Department Representative - 558-6041 Fax ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES (ADM) - 3RD FLOOR Paulette Hooey, Manager 558-6237 - Office 558-6207 - Fax Provides support to the Department in the areas of personnel, payroll, fiscal management, purchasing, employee services, and related data collection. BUILDING INSPECTION DIVISION (BID) - 3RD FLOOR Joan MacQuarrie, Chief Bldg Inspector 558-6096 - Office 558-6261 - Fax Inspects for compliance with Building Code requirements for building permits and responds to complaints on residential and commercial buildings. CENTRAL PERMIT BUREAU (CPB) - 1ST/2ND FLOOR Teresa Hansell, Manager 558-6070 - Office 558-6170 - Fax Issues building, plumbing and electrical permits; collects fees for processing applications for DBI and other City agencies. CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION (CED) - 3RD FLOOR Rafael Torres-Gil, Sr Bldg Inspector 558-6454 - Office 558-6474 - Fax Responsible for abatement of code violation cases referred from the Building, Plumbing, and Electrical divisions. Performs complete physical inspections of buildings and issues inspection reports of violations. Revised 07/25/96 COMMERCIAL PLAN CHECK (CPC) - 2ND FLOOR Wing Lau, Chief Building Inspector 558-6133 - Office 558-6041 - Fax Screens, reviews, and approves commercial tenant improvement applications for compliance with Building, Mechanical, Energy codes and Disabled Access regulations. CUSTOMER SERVICES DIVISION (CSD) - 1ST FLOOR Peter Burns, Manager 558-6088 - Office 558-6401 - Fax Answers general and code questions; gives permit status and information; processes Board of Permit Appeals requests. DISABLED ACCESS DIVISION (DAD) - 6TH FLOOR Carla Johnson, Acting Sr. Bldg. Insp. 558-6014 - Office 558-6225 - Fax Responsible for the intake and resolution of all complaints filed by the public regarding disabled access citywide. EARTHQUAKE PREPAREDNESS SECTION - 3RD FLOOR Zan Turner, Coordinator 558-6104 - Office 558-6261 - Fax Provides planning, training, and coordination of earthquake preparedness and other disasters. ELECTRICAL INSPECTION DIVISION (EID) - 3RD FLOOR Steven Young, Chief Electrical Insp. 558-6030 - Office 558-6178 - Fax Provides public safety by enforcing municipal and State regulations and codes relative to construction, alteration, and installation of electrical equipment and systems. HOUSING INSPECTION DIVISION (HIS) - 6TH FLOOR Lesley Stansfield, Acting Manager 558-6220 - Office 558-6249 - Fax Inspects for code compliance in residential housing under building permits or as a result of complaints and frequently inspects apartments and hotels. MAJOR PROJECTS/UMB'S - 2ND FLOOR Hanson Tom, Building Plans Engineer 558-6133 - Office 558-6041 - Fax Reviews applications and plans for compliance with Building, Mechanical, Housing, Energy codes, and Disabled Access regulations. MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS (MIS) - 6TH FLOOR James Albert, Manager 558-6227 - Office 558-6249 - Fax Provides automated data capture, data management, and report dissemination throughout the Department. PLUMBING INSPECTION DIVISION (PID) - 3RD FLOOR Thomas Lehane, Chief Plumbing Insp. 558-6054 - Office 558-6178 - Fax br> Provides public safety by enforcing municipal and State regulations and codes relative to construction, alteration, and installation of plumbing equipment and systems. RECORDS MANAGEMENT (RMD) - 1ST/2ND FLOOR Michael Rodman, Manager 558-6080 - Office 558-6402 - Fax Management, processing, and updating of all microfilm services and residential records. RESIDENTIAL PLAN CHECK (RPC) - 2ND FLOOR Jeffrey Ma, Acting Manager 558-6133 - Office 558-6041 - Fax Screens, reviews, and approves residential applications and plans for compliance with Building, Mechanical, Housing, Energy codes, and Disabled Access regulations. SPECIAL PROGRAMS: Boiler Inspections, 3rd Floor - Thomas Lehane, Chief Plumbing Inspector 558-6054 Building Permit Status, 1st Floor - 1-800-4SF-BLDG Reroofing Inspection, 3rd Floor - Joan MacQuarrie, Chief Bldg Inspector 558-6096 OTHER CITY OFFICES: Bureau of Street Use & Mapping, 1st Floor 558-6060 City Planning Department 5th Floor 558-6378 APPENDIX D PROPOSED COMPLAINT PRIORITY FORMAT COMPLAINT HANDLING PROCEDURES Currently, the Department of Building Inspection handles all complaints in the same manner unless a hazardous condition exists, such as lack of heat. All complaints are received and documented whether complainants identify themselves or not. The validity of the complaint is determined by inspection. It is sometimes difficult to prioritize a complaint because of language problems. The following prioritized complaint chart is to be used as a guideline for inspectors. PRIORITY 1 INSPECTION MADE WITHIN 48 HOURS A Structural failure/collapse - fire damage. B Lack of heat. C Sewage leak/gas leak. D Exposed electrical wiring/hazardous wiring. E Major roof leaks. F Broken elevators. G Rodent/vermin/insect infestation. H Lack of sprinklers/smoke detector system/fire extinguisher. I No sanitary facilities in residential units. PRIORITY 2 INSPECTION WITHIN 5 DAYS A Inadequate sanitary facilities. B Work started without permit. C Lack of egress. D Room sizes smaller than code allows. E Lack of proper cooking facilities in R occupancy. F Lack of hot water. G Security i.e., door and locks not working properly. H Lack of disability access. PRIORITY 3 INSPECTION WITHIN 2 WEEKS A Hazardous wiring (not enough outlets) B Lack of sprinklers in garbage rooms and chutes. C Lack of required electrical illumination. D Faulty weather protection. E Dampness of habitable rooms. F Lack of adequate garbage and rubbish storage and removal facilities. G General lack of maintenance (painting, floor covering, etc.) PRIORITY 4 INSPECTION UP TO 4 WEEKS OR AS TIME PERMITS A Peepholes. B Storage in R3 occupancy. C Construction noise. D Lack of natural light. E Non-habitable units. F Cracks in plaster. G Minor odors. H Energy conservation. I Illegal use (Planning Code)(not life threatening) PROPOSED COMPLAINT PROCESS (See Attached Flow Chart) 1. Complaints are received by D.B.I. staff and are directed to appropriate division: Housing, Building, Electrical, Plumbing, and Disability Access.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
Demolitions Where permits for building demolitions are made, DBI should require that approved reports from the State Air and Water Quality Board be filed with DBI before final approval of the demolition is given. This will insure that the state's requirements have been met. REQUESTED RESPONSES Mayor Board of Supervisors Department of Building Inspection Building Inspection Commission APPENDICES A. Departmental Responsibilities B. Information Reviewed C. Department Directory D. Complaint Process
F3:
Senior Inspector is informed of action and reviews N.O.V. Determines if emergency order is required.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
Senior Inspector is informed of action and reviews N.O.V. Determines if emergency order is required.
F4:
If 1st notice is complied with, then case is abated.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
1995 Highlights -- 1996 Work Plan
F5:
When time has elapsed and corrections have not been made, then Inspector issues 2nd notice.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
1996 Quarterly Newsletters
F6:
Chief Inspector of Division is notified and reviews case. If unable to reach a solution, then sends the case to the Director of D.B.I. for a Hearing.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
Planning Department Building Permit Application Packet
F7:
If 2nd N.O.V. is complied with, then case is abated.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
If 2nd N.O.V. is complied with, then case is abated.
F8:
If B.I.D., P.I.D. and E.I.D. cases have not been resolved at Chief's level, then case is now referred to Code Enforcement Division. C.E.D. prepares case for Director's Hearing.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
Building Inspection Permit Brochures
F9:
Director has hearing and issues order of abatement if required. Develops cost assessment statement and mails to owner with instructions of A.A.B. (Abatement Appeals Board) process.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9:
Permit Processing Timetable
F10:
If building is brought into compliance with Director's order, then case is abated. If not in compliance, then case is referred to full Commission for review or at request of property owner to A.A.B. Hearing.
Related Recommendations (1)
R10:
Monthly Internal Reports on Backlog
F11:
A.A.B./Commission Hearing Appeal is heard and decision is rendered. If appeal is denied and owner still refuses to comply then case is sent to full Commission.
Related Recommendations (1)
R11:
General Checklist for Contractors on Requirements
F12:
C.E.D. presents all facts and findings to full Commission for review.
Related Recommendations (1)
R12:
Management Information Systems
F13:
Commission reviews all cases with orders of abatement and decides on next course of action, i.e., City Attorney referral, lien process, collection agency etc.
Related Recommendations (1)
R13:
Commission reviews all cases with orders of abatement and decides on next course of action, i.e., City Attorney referral, lien process, collection agency etc.
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R14:
City Attorney takes legal action. FLOWCHART OF COMPLAINT PROCESS
Quick View
Full Details →
Additional Recommendations
24
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
The City should renovate a City property for use as a youth guidance center, purchase a building for use as a youth guidance center, or build a new youth guidance center. A new youth guidance center should take priority over acquisition or construction of any other City facility.
R2:
The Mayor, each member of the Board of Supervisors, and the Judges of the Superior Court should tour the YGC at once to observe the conditions for themselves.
R3:
The City should invite all interested television stations, radio stations, and print media to tour and film the YGC so that the public can be made aware of the conditions at the YGC.
R4:
The CGJ recognizes that a new youth guidance center cannot be acquired or built immediately. However, since the present situation is unacceptable, the CGJ recommends that the City immediately expedite measures to improve the health, safety, and welfare of our incarcerated youth at the YGC, particularly in response to fire safety issues. Some possible remedies are: a) Purchase and install a central locking/unlocking mechanism for each individual cell. b) Install smoke detectors in each cell so that counselors in the central area of each unit will be able to detect a fire breaking out in an individual cell. c) Install a sprinkler system in the hallways, common areas, and each individual cell. d) Given the fire safety hazard, increase the number of counselors in each locked unit so that the doors on each of the individual cells can remain unlocked at all times for safety purposes. Each of these remedies comes with a cost, either for equipment or personnel or both. This additional cost is worthwhile when compared to the carnage that would result from a major fire or emergency where the youth could not be evacuated from their cells. The City cannot maintain the status quo while debating whether to acquire or build a new facility or during the construction or acquisition process of a new facility.
R5:
The interior of the YGC should be painted at once, in appropriate colors, in order to make the facility less dreary. II. Housing for Girls Boys at the YGC are housed in five separate units, taking into account their age, the severity of alleged offenses, and other factors to protect the younger and more vulnerable boys. However, there are insufficient facilities to separate the girls, pre- adjudication, in a similar manner. Girls of all ages and regardless of the severity of the alleged crimes are housed together in a single unit. The impact is, for example, that a naive thirteen-year-old girl accused of a minor offense lives with a relatively sophisticated seventeen-year-old girl accused of a much more serious crime. Currently, most of the girls who are court-ordered to serve time in a facility are sent out of the Bay Area, sometimes as far away as Colorado and Pennsylvania.
R6:
The JPD must immediately find a location to properly house the girls involved with the juvenile justice system.
R7:
The CGJ recommends that Hidden Valley Ranch be made into a facility to house girls in the juvenile justice system.
R8:
The CGJ recommends that the JPD investigate a possible arrangement with the surrounding counties to house those counties' girls at Hidden Valley Ranch thereby sharing the expense.
R9:
The CGJ recommends that the JPD investigate the possibility of using Hidden Valley Ranch to house not only those girls held pre-adjudication, but also those girls whose cases have been adjudicated. Housing these girls closer to home would encourage more family involvement, save the expense of housing the girls in distant locations, save travel costs of JPD personnel to travel to these sites, and provide more opportunity for community groups in reintroducing the girls to the community after release. III. Care of Youth While in Custody of Juvenile Probation Department And After Release To rehabilitate youth in its custody, the JPD should have sufficient programs to retain the young people's attention all of their waking hours. Such programs as do exist are haphazard and far from comprehensive. Once youths are released from the juvenile justice system, the Probation Officers maintain some contact with them. There are some procedures in place (for example, a Memorandum of Understanding between the JPD and the Department of Public Health relating to health care needs of youth being released from custody), but there are few comprehensive, coordinated programs to follow youths back into the community and provide them with necessary and basic human services. Frequently, the youth are simply dispatched back into the communities they came from with insufficient guidance in how to further their education, find and keep a job, obtain health care and life skills, and reintegrate into our community.
R10:
In accordance with its stated philosophy to "promote[] the belief that youth should be offered every opportunity for rehabilitation and growth... [and] endeavor to provide the youth in our charge with the tools to succeed by teaching life skills and providing educational, vocational and emotional support," the Juvenile Probation Department -- coordinating with other responsible City departments and agencies, with community groups and, wherever possible, with the families of the youth -- should formulate effective programs to care for youth both while in custody and after release.
R11:
While the youth are incarcerated under the control of the City, programs should be instituted (or, where they currently exist, expanded), to provide them with training and counseling in at least the following areas: a. Drug counseling, including peer counseling; b. Sex education and family issues; c. Practical life skills; d. Appropriate educational programs, including vocational training or GED where appropriate; e. Skills in how to find and keep a job.
R12:
An "after-care" program must be adopted for youth when they are released from the juvenile justice system that encompasses at least the following concerns: a. Returning to school or entering alternative programs to complete his or her education. b. Counseling and job training; c. Finding and keeping a job, either after school or full-time; d. Emotional health and life skills; e. Parenting skills where necessary; f. Drug counseling where necessary; g. Family and peer interaction.
R13:
The JPD must diligently and regularly monitor all of these activities and programs -- both while the youth are in custody and after release -- and develop objective criteria to determine whether the programs are succeeding and, if not, to replace them with better programs. IV. Grant Money Funds are available through state and federal grants, grants from public and private foundations and trusts, and other sources for various programs designed to help youth at risk who become involved in the juvenile justice system.
R14:
The CGJ recommends that the JPD hire or retain, on a full-time basis, an individual with background and training in development and fund raising, and particularly with skills in the search and application for grants. V. Grievance Procedure If a youth incarcerated at the YGC or Log Cabin Ranch has a complaint or grievance, he or she turns in a complaint form which is reviewed by the supervising counselors who may be the very persons about whom the youth may have a complaint or grievance.
R15:
The CGJ recommends the appointment of an ombudsperson to whom youth can turn with confidence to express grievances. We do not view this individual as an advocate for the youth, but rather a neutral party who can report the grievance to the appropriate party and then follow up to ensure it is resolved. VI. Coordination of Activities Among Responsible Departments, Commissions, and Agencies The City's juvenile justice system is governed by two bodies. The JJC, whose members are appointed by the Superior Court, is mandated by Welfare and Institutions Code § 229 "to inquire into the administration of the juvenile court law in the county or region in which the commission serves. For this purpose the commission shall have access to all publicly administered institutions authorized or whose use is authorized by this chapter situated in the county or region, shall inspect such institutions no less frequently than once a year, and may hold hearings." The JPC is a creature of the City Charter whose members are appointed by the Mayor. Although, as indicated above, it has no mission statement, the CGJ presumes that the JPC sees its roles as similar to that of the JJC. There are numerous City departments, commissions, and agencies which have obligations to youth involved in the criminal justice system, including the JPD, the JPC, the JJC, the Superior Court, the San Francisco Unified School District, the Department of Public Health, the Police Department, the District Attorney, and the Public Defender. Some of the departments are run by commissions. Others report directly to the Mayor. Still others are run by elected public officials. The JPC is appointed by the Mayor, whereas the JJC is appointed by the Superior Court. Each of these departments, commissions, and agencies has its own vertical management hierarchy.
R16:
The CGJ urges the JJC and the JPC to coordinate their activities, to pool their collective talents, and to work together toward the common goal of assisting youth at risk in our City.
R17:
The CGJ recommends that, since the JPD, under the guidance of the Chief Probation Officer, has the overall responsibility for the operation of the juvenile justice system, it must provide strong leadership, vision, and professionalism. The CGJ recommends that the JPD exercise its responsibilities with greater strength and vigor, using the "bully pulpit" when necessary to coordinate the services provided by various City departments and community-based organizations for the benefit of the City's youth.
R18:
The CGJ recommends that the JPD fulfill its mission statement and coordinate the activities of all of the departments that have any responsibility for youth involved in the juvenile justice system. There must be a strong leader appointed with authority to coordinate the activities of all departments having obligations to provide services for our City's youth. VII. Education of Youth In The Juvenile Justice System The San Francisco Unified School District is responsible for educating juveniles in the custody of the JPD.
R19:
The CGJ recommends that the San Francisco Unified School District, in coordination with the JPD, adopt an educational program such as that recommended by Jefferson Associates and Community Research Associates in March 1987 entitled "Creating a New Agenda for the Care and Treatment of San Francisco's Youthful Offenders: A Model Program." This education program would contain the following components: a. Functional assessment; b. Functional curriculum; c. Vocational education; d. Transition; e. Comprehensive systems; f. Training of correctional educators. [7]
R20:
The CGJ recommends that the San Francisco Unified School District and the JPD make a commitment to use the time during which youthful offenders are incarcerated for an appropriate educational program to improve their chances in life after release. VII. Contracts With Outside Service Providers The JPD has entered into contracts with outside service providers and community- based organizations which provide, for a fee, services which would otherwise be provided by the JPD. The City spent $1,219,035 in fiscal year 1996-1997 in payments to these service providers and community-based organizations; the budget in fiscal year 1997-98 is $1,279,990. The City has been paying a number of these groups for six years or longer.
R21:
The JPD should comprehensively evaluate and monitor each service provider and community-based organization before issuing a new Request for Proposal.
R22:
The JPD should develop objective criteria for monitoring and evaluating the services of these providers.
R23:
The JPD should appoint a person as a contract administrator who shall regularly monitor and evaluate the programs provided by service providers and community-based organizations to ensure that the services are actually being provided, that the quality is as contracted, and that their obligations to the JPD and the youth are fulfilled. This person should provide a written report on a pre-assigned periodic basis to the Chief Probation Officer regarding these services as well as their effectiveness in accomplishing their goals. This report should be a public record protected by the City's Sunshine Ordinance. IX. Additional Training For Counselors The job description for the counselors at the YGC is as follows: The Counselor, Juvenile Hall is responsible for the care, custody, safety and welfare of juveniles detained at Juvenile Hall. The counselor observes behavior and conduct of residents in an assigned living unit; prepares and maintains records and reports such as incident reports, behavior reports and individual case reports; conducts on-going individual and group counseling sessions with juveniles; plans, directs and supervises leisure time activities; supervises residents en route to, from and at various locations; confers with departmental personnel and representatives of outside agencies..... [8] The CGJ asked repeatedly to see the manual or set of guidelines used by the JPD to train the counselors and outline their responsibilities and the JPD's expectations for their services. No such material was ever forthcoming, causing the CGJ to conclude that the JPD does not have an adequate manual or set of guidelines describing counselors' duties.
R24:
The JPD should institute an ongoing formal training program for counselors beyond that required by state law, with a written manual or set of guidelines outlining their responsibilities and the expectations of the JPD for services provided by the counselors. REQUESTED RESPONSES Mayor Board of Supervisors Juvenile Probation Department Juvenile Probation Commission Juvenile Justice Commission San Francisco Unified School District Superior Court Department of Public Health Police Department REQUESTED RESPONSES (CONTINUED) District Attorney Public Defender -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Footnotes
Findings & Recommendations
13 findings
F1:
R&P should establish a mandatory procedure to enable those City employees whose duties bring them to R&P facilities to report substandard conditions quickly and easily.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
R&P should establish a mandatory procedure to enable those City employees whose duties bring them to R&P facilities to report substandard conditions quickly and easily.
F2:
Supervisory personnel should regularly visit all facilities for which they have oversight responsibility to determine whether both R&P's and concessionaire's on-site staff are doing their jobs.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
Supervisory personnel should regularly visit all facilities for which they have oversight responsibility to determine whether both R&P's and concessionaire's on-site staff are doing their jobs.
F3:
When on-site personnel report any maintenance problems that might affect safety, or health of either employees or users, R&P senior staff should promptly alert the appropriate City departments as well as the concessionaire.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
When on-site personnel report any maintenance problems that might affect safety, or health of either employees or users, R&P senior staff should promptly alert the appropriate City departments as well as the concessionaire.
F4:
R&P should train staff at all levels to follow up on all reported problems and make certain they have been fully corrected within a reasonable amount of time.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
R&P should train staff at all levels to follow up on all reported problems and make certain they have been fully corrected within a reasonable amount of time.
F5:
R&P personnel should provide printed forms that encourage members of the general public who use its facilities to report any areas of concern.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
R&P personnel should provide printed forms that encourage members of the general public who use its facilities to report any areas of concern.
F6:
R&P should be meticulous in maintaining its contractual obligations, thereby encouraging concessionaires to maintain theirs. Concession Contracts Findings The Grand Jury found several problems related to the wording, awarding, and maintenance of both golf course and other recreational concession contracts. Some lessees fail to make required capital improvements in a timely fashion, but R&P contracts seldom provide other options - - either increased rent or alternative improvements - - when the original agreement cannot be fulfilled. In one case, a contract required a golf course concessionaire to build a driving range within eighteen months; the concessionaire did not even submit plans till three years had passed. By then, various neighborhood changes and newly discovered environmental concerns had made the project infeasible, but the contract did not require the lessee to build the range at an alternative location or, if that was not possible, recompense the City monetarily. In another instance, a concessionaire constructed a golf cart-storage shed that was markedly smaller than contract specifications, then let it fall into disrepair. The Grand Jury could find no evidence that R&P either exacted compensation for the reduced building size or insisted the shed be properly maintained. Contracts alert lessees to the specific years for which they may expect audits, encouraging them to report revenues accurately for those years but not necessarily for every year. Rather than issuing RFPs well in advance, especially for those concessions not performing up to expectations, R&P often allows contracts to expire and go on a month- to-month rental, thereby sometimes prolonging a relationship with an unsatisfactory tenant. The Grand Jury found eight concessions operating with expired agreements and two others due to expire in 1998. One of those is a golf course under consideration for an upgrade to professional tournament standards, which would require substantial expenditure of funds and add considerably to the complexity of negotiating a new lease. R&P has allowed several tenants to fall into arrears on their rents, resulting not only in loss of income to the City but also in occasional lengthy disputes over amounts due, some of which have required the City Attorney's intervention. In one such case, the amount in dispute is over $100,000. Although the SF Controller alerted R&P to problems with one contract in a 1994 audit, R&P neglected to take corrective action for two years and has just recently referred the matter to the City Attorney.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
R&P should be meticulous in maintaining its contractual obligations, thereby encouraging concessionaires to maintain theirs. Concession Contracts
F7:
R&P contracts should contain provisions that ensure lessees comply with contractual obligations in a timely fashion, provide remedies for unwarranted delays, and penalize concessionaires who willfully neglect to fulfill agreed-upon contractual obligations.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
R&P contracts should contain provisions that ensure lessees comply with contractual obligations in a timely fashion, provide remedies for unwarranted delays, and penalize concessionaires who willfully neglect to fulfill agreed-upon contractual obligations.
F8:
Contracts should provide mutually agreed-upon remedies, including renegotiation, in the event factors beyond the lessees' control, such as environmental restrictions or neighborhood objections, prevent fulfilling the original conditions.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
Contracts should provide mutually agreed-upon remedies, including renegotiation, in the event factors beyond the lessees' control, such as environmental restrictions or neighborhood objections, prevent fulfilling the original conditions.
F9:
R&P should review contracts long enough before their expiration dates to be able to effect any desired changes in terms or issue RFPs.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9:
R&P should review contracts long enough before their expiration dates to be able to effect any desired changes in terms or issue RFPs.
F10:
R&P should make timely and accurate rent payment by its concessionaires a higher priority than has been its practice, instituting remedial action whenever lessees either fall into arrers with or under report monies due.
Related Recommendations (1)
R10:
R&P should make timely and accurate rent payment by its concessionaires a higher priority than has been its practice, instituting remedial action whenever lessees either fall into arrers with or under report monies due.
F11:
Contracts should not specify in which (or for which) years audits will occur. Record Keeping Findings The Grand Jury had some difficulty in making certain determinations because R&P did not keep the kinds of records necessary to review the histories of each property thoroughly. For example, when the Jury requested proof of insurance and workers' compensation policies, R&P's Property Management division did not have current certificates on file. (R&P subsequently obtained, and then gave the Jury, up-to-date certificates for all concessionaires.) R&P never was able to provide building plans the Jury requested.
Related Recommendations (1)
R11:
Contracts should not specify in which (or for which) years audits will occur. Record Keeping
F12:
R&P should institute procedures to determine on a regular basis whether lessees are maintaining all required insurance.
Related Recommendations (1)
R12:
R&P should institute procedures to determine on a regular basis whether lessees are maintaining all required insurance.
F13:
R&P should keep files of blueprints and other related construction documents so that its own staff or outside examiners can readily check any structures against their original plans. REQUESTED RESPONSES Mayor San Francisco Board of Supervisors General Manager, Recreation and Park Department Recreation and Park Commission Controller City Attorney Footnotes 1. The concessionaire at Sharp Park Golf Course provides on-site supervision; the result is an admirable model for other lessees to emulate..
Related Recommendations (1)
R13:
R&P should keep files of blueprints and other related construction documents so that its own staff or outside examiners can readily check any structures against their original plans. REQUESTED RESPONSES Mayor San Francisco Board of Supervisors General Manager, Recreation and Park Department Recreation and Park Commission Controller City Attorney Footnotes
Findings & Recommendations
9 findings
F1:
The SFPL should make no further cuts of either personnel or funds at the branches, and restore all frozen budget items as soon as possible.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The SFPL should make no further cuts of either personnel or funds at the branches, and restore all frozen budget items as soon as possible.
F2:
The SFUSD should appoint a liaison to work with the SFPL's Coordinator of Children's and Youth Services in exploring ways in which the two agencies can collaborate on a regular and ongoing basis for the good of the children and youth of San Francisco.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The SFUSD should appoint a liaison to work with the SFPL's Coordinator of Children's and Youth Services in exploring ways in which the two agencies can collaborate on a regular and ongoing basis for the good of the children and youth of San Francisco.
F3:
The SFUSD should commit resources to staff development so that teachers can be made aware of the services at the branch libraries. Teacher training or "in-service" days should include a library segment.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The SFUSD should commit resources to staff development so that teachers can be made aware of the services at the branch libraries. Teacher training or "in-service" days should include a library segment.
F4:
The SFUSD and SFPL should jointly investigate the possibility of locating multiple computerized SFPL data bases in the schools, to enable school staff and students to access them more easily.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
The SFUSD and SFPL should jointly investigate the possibility of locating multiple computerized SFPL data bases in the schools, to enable school staff and students to access them more easily.
F5:
The School Board and Superintendent should make a commitment to the school libraries and fund a full-time librarian in each and every public school in the City.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
The School Board and Superintendent should make a commitment to the school libraries and fund a full-time librarian in each and every public school in the City.
F6:
The Library Commission should take the earliest opportunity available under Proposition E to ascertain whether present hours make the best use of resources in serving the adults and children of the City.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
The Library Commission should take the earliest opportunity available under Proposition E to ascertain whether present hours make the best use of resources in serving the adults and children of the City.
F7:
The SFPL should request that the Department of Health, Department of Public Works or other appropriate agencies make the necessary inquires and tests to ascertain the extent to which health or safety problems exist at the Chinatown branch. Should problems be verified, the SFPL should promptly make the necessary repairs or improvements. In any event, the SFPL should make repairs or improvements to the ventilation system so that patrons and staff can feel comfortable.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
The SFPL should request that the Department of Health, Department of Public Works or other appropriate agencies make the necessary inquires and tests to ascertain the extent to which health or safety problems exist at the Chinatown branch. Should problems be verified, the SFPL should promptly make the necessary repairs or improvements. In any event, the SFPL should make repairs or improvements to the ventilation system so that patrons and staff can feel comfortable.
F8:
The SFPL and DPW should undertake a review of the retrofit and renovation plans for the Mission branch in order to avoid problems such as those which are apparent at the Chinatown facility. Renovation plans for other branches should undergo a similar review process. REQUESTED RESPONSES Mayor San Francisco Board of Supervisors SFUSD Superintendent SFUSD Board City Librarian SFPL Coordinator of Children's and Youth Services SFPL Chief of Branches APPENDICES 1. Text and analysis of Proposition E: Library Fund 1995 2. Text and analysis of Proposition A: Library Bond 1988 3. San Francisco Unified School District Mission and Goals APPENDIX 1 Text and Analysis of Proposition E: Library Fund 1995 Library Fund E PROPOSITION E Shall the City be required to maintain funding for the Library Department at a level no lower than that for the 1992-93 fiscal year, and to establish a Library Preservation Fund, to be used only for additional library services, by placing a certain amount of property tax revenues in that fund annually, and shall the City be required to keep open a main and 26 branch libraries for a specified minimum number of hours each week? YES NO Analysis by Ballot Simplification Committee THE WAY IT IS NOW: The amount of money the City spends for public libraries is set each year through the budget process. The City is not required to spend a particular amount of money on libraries. The City does not have to keep open a specific number of branch libraries or to have libraries open a specific number of hours each week. THE PROPOSAL: Proposition E is a charter amendment. Under Proposition E, for the next 15 years, the City would have to spend at least as much for libraries as it did in fiscal year 1992-93. The City would also have to use a specific percentage of its property tax revenues for a Library Preservation Fund. The Fund could only be used to increase spending for library operation, services and materials. During the term of the Fund, the Library would have to operate a main library and at least 26 branch libraries, including a library for the blind. After public hearings, the Library Commission would set the hours that the main library and each branch are open. From 1995 through 1999, Proposition E specifies the average number of hours libraries must be open per week. After 1999, the Library Commission could change the average number of hours libraries must remain open, after holding public hearings and based on a study of needs and the adequacy of library services. A "YES" VOTE MEANS: If you vote yes, you want to establish these funding and service requirements for libraries. A "NO" VOTE MEANS: If you vote no, you do not want to make these changes. Controller's Statement on "E" City Controller Edward Harrington has issued the following statement on the fiscal impact of Proposition E: If the proposed charter amendment is adopted, in my opinion, it would mandate the current level of spending on library services ($20.8 million) plus reallocate funds (an additional $13.7 million in 1994-95) from current city services to expand specific library services as set forth in the measure, for a total funding commitment of approximately $34 million in 1994-95 with escalation factors in future years. To the extent property tax revenues would be shifted to library programs, other current City spending would have to be curtailed or new revenues found to support these continuing expenditures. Between 1994-95 and 2009-10, these dedicated funds would grow in two ways: The base $20.8 million would be increased by the general percentage increase in all City appropriations; the $13.7 million of additional funding would grow based on the increase in assessed values of City properties. How "E" Got on the Ballot On March 11, 1994, the Registrar of Voters certified that the initiative petition, calling for Proposition E to be placed on the ballot, had qualified for the ballot. 42,503 valid signatures were required to place an initiative charter amendment on the ballot. This number is equal to 10% of the registered voters at the time the petition was first filed with the Registrar. A random check of the signatures submitted on February 23, 1994, by the proponents of the initiative petition showed that more than the required number of signatures were valid. TEXT OF PROPOSED CHARTER AMENDMENT PROPOSITION E To the Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco: We, the undersigned, registered and qualified voters of the State of California, residents of the City and County of San Francisco, pursuant to Section 3 of Article XI of the California Constitution and Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 34450) of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 4 of the Government Code, present to the Board of Supervisors this petition and request the following proposed amendment to the charter of this city and county be submitted to the registered and qualified voters of the city and county for their adoption or rejection at an election on a date to be determined by the Board of Supervisors. The proposed charter amendment reads as follows: San Francisco Charter Section 6.416 LIBRARY PRESERVATION FUND (a) There is hereby established a fund for libraries, which shall be called the San Francisco Library Preservation Fund and shall be maintained separate and apart from all other city and county funds and appropriated by annual or supplemental appropriation pursuant to sections 6.205 and 6.306 of this charter. Monies therein shall be expended or used exclusively by the library department specified in section 3.560 of the charter, solely to provide library services and materials and to operate library facilities in accordance with this section. (b) So long as the Library Preservation Fund exists as provided in this section, the following requirements shall apply: (1) The library department shall operate no fewer than 26 branch libraries, a main library, and a library facility for the blind (which may be at a branch or main library). (2) Not later than November 1, 1994, at least one public hearing shall be held at the main and each branch library, which at least one library commissioner shall attend and which shall receive the results of a survey of users' preferences as to the facility's operating hours. (3) Following these public hearings, effective no later than January 1, 1995, the library commission shall establish service hours for the main and each branch library, which shall not be reduced during the five years beginning January 1, 1995. Total annual average service hours shall be at least 1028 hours per week (that is, a level approximating the total service hours during fiscal year 1986 - 1987). (4) The public hearing process specified in subsection (2) shall be repeated at five-year intervals, being completed not later than November 1 of the year in question. (5) Following these subsequent public hearings, the library commission may modify the individual and aggregate service hours established under subsection (3), for the five- year period beginning January 1, 2000 or January 1, 2005 respectively, based on a comprehensive assessment of needs and the adequacy of library resources. Increasing library hours throughout the system and acquiring books and materials shall receive priority in appropriating and expending fund monies to the extent the funds are not needed to meet the preceding requirements of this subsection (b). Any requirement of this subsection may be modified to the extent made necessary by a fire, earthquake, or other event which renders compliance with the requirement impracticable. (c) There is hereby set aside for the San Francisco Library Preservation Fund, from the revenues of the tax levy pursuant to section 6.208 of this charter, revenues in an amount equivalent to an annual tax of two-and-one-half cents ($0.025) for each one hundred dollars ($100.00) of assessed valuation for each of the fifteen fiscal years beginning with fiscal year 1994 - 1995. The treasurer shall set aside and maintain said amount, together with any interest earned thereon, in said fund, and any amounts unspent or uncommitted at the end of any fiscal year shall be carried forward to the next fiscal year and, subject to the budgetary and fiscal limitations of the charter, shall be appropriated then or thereafter solely for the purposes specified in this section. Said fund shall be in addition to any other funds set aside for libraries. (d) The fund shall be used to increase the aggregate City appropriations and expenditures for services, materials and operation of facilities provided by the library department. To this end, the City shall not reduce the amount of City appropriations for the library department (not including appropriations from the Library Preservation Fund) in any of the fifteen years during which funds are required to be set aside under this section below the amount so appropriated, including appropriations from the San Francisco Children's Fund pursuant to section 6.415 of the charter and including all supplemental appropriations, for the fiscal year 1992-1993, adjusted as provided below. Said base amount shall be adjusted for each fiscal year after 1992-1993 based on calculations consistent from year to year, by the percentage increase or decrease in aggregate City appropriations for all purposes from the base year as estimated by the Controller. Errors in the Controller's estimate of appropriations for a fiscal year shall be corrected by adjustment in the next year's estimate. For purposes of this subsection, (i) aggregate City appropriations shall not include funds granted to the City by private agencies or appropriated by other public agencies and received by the City, and (ii) library department appropriations shall not include funds appropriated to the library department to pay for services of other City departments or agencies, except for departments or agencies for whose services the library department was appropriated funds in fiscal year 1993 - 1994. Within ninety days following the end of each fiscal year through fiscal year 2008 - 2009, the Controller shall calculate and publish the actual amount of City appropriations for the library department. (e) If any provision of this section, or its application to any person or circumstance, shall be held invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this section and its applications shall not be affected; every provision of this section is intended to be severable. Ô APPENDIX 2 Text and Analysis of Proposition A: Library Bond 1988 Library Bonds A PROPOSITION A PUBLIC LIBRARY FACILITIES SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT BONDS, 1988. To incur a bonded indebtedness of $109,500,000 to pay the cost of additions to and improvement of a main public library and branch libraries of the City and County of San Francisco. YES NO Analysis by Ballot Simplification Committee THE WAY IT IS NOW: The City operates a library system composed of the main library at the Civic Center and 26 branch libraries. The main library, built in 1917, does not meet present earthquake, fire and safety standards and is too small to hold the current collection. Eight of the branch libraries, built between 1909 and 1921, do not comply with earthquake regulations. Five of the large branches do not have handicapped access. THE PROPOSAL: Proposition A would authorize the City to borrow $109,500,000 by issuing general obligation bonds. This money would pay for the construction of a main public library and reconstruction of branch libraries. The interest and principle on general obligation bonds are paid out of tax revenue. Proposition A would require an increase in property tax. A "YES" VOTE MEANS: If you vote yes, you want the City to issue general obligation bonds totaling $109,500,000 for the construction of a main public library and reconstruction of branch libraries. A "NO" VOTE MEANS: If you vote no, you do not want the City to issue general obligation bonds for the construction of a main public library and reconstruction of branch libraries. Controller's Statement on "A" City Controller John C. Farrell has issued the following statement on the fiscal impact of Proposition A: "Should the proposed bond issue be authorized and when all bonds shall have been issued on a twenty (20) year basis and after consideration of the interest rates related to current municipal bond sales, in my opinion, it is estimated that the approximate costs would be as follows: Bond redemption $109,500,000 Bond interest 79,332,750 Debt service requirements $188,832,750 Based on a single bond sale and level redemption schedules, the average annual debt requirement for twenty (20) years would be approximately $9,441,637 which amount is equivalent to two and sixty-seven hundredths cents ($0.0267) in the current tax rate." How Supervisors Voted on "A" On July 25, the Board of Supervisors voted 9-0 on the question of placing Proposition A on the ballot. The Supervisors voted as follows: YES: Supervisors Harry Britt, Jim Gonzalez, Thomas Hsieh, Willie Kennedy, Bill Maher, John Molinari, Wendy Nelder, Carol Ruth Silver, and Nancy Walker. NO: None of the Supervisors present voted no. ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING BOND ELECTION PROPOSITION A Calling and providing for a special election to be held in The city and county of san francisco on tuesday, november 8, 1988 For the purpose of submitting to the voters of the city and county Of san francisco a proposition to incur the following bonded debts Of the city and county for the acquisition, construction, or completion By the city and county of san francisco of the following municipal Improvements, to wit: $109,500,000 for additions to and improvement Of the public library and branch libraries of the city and county Of san francisco; and that the estimated cost to the city and County of said municipal improvements is and will be too great To be paid out of the ordinary annual income and revenue of the City and county and will require expenditures greater than the Amounts allowed therefor by the annual tax levy; reciting the Estimated costs of such municipal improvements; fixing the date Of the election and the manner of holding such election and the Procedure for voting for or against the propositions; fixing the Maximum rate of interest on said bonds and providing for the levy And collection of taxes to pay both principal and interest thereof; Prescribing notice to be given of such election; consolidating The special election with the general election; and providing That the election precincts. Voting places and officers for election Shall be the same as for such general election. Be it ordained by the People of the City and County of San Francisco: Section 1.A special election is hereby called and ordered to be held in the City and County of San Francisco on Tuesday, the 8th day of November 1988 for the purpose of submitting to the electors of said city and county a proposition to incur bonded indebtedness of the City and County of San Francisco for the acquisition, construction, or completion of the city and county of the hereinafter described municipal improvements in the amounts and for the purposes stated: PUBLIC LIBRARY FACILITIES SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT BONDS, 1988. $109,500,000 in addition to pay the cost of additions to and improvement of a main public library and branch libraries of the City and County of San Francisco, including the acquisition, construction and reconstruction of public library facilities and all other works, property and structures necessary or convenient for such improvement and additions to the public library system of the City and County of San Francisco. Section 2. The estimated costs of the municipal improvements described in Section 1 hereof were fixed by the Board of Supervisors by the following resolution and in the amount specified: Public Library Facilities System Improvement Bonds, Resolution No. 545-88, $109,500,000. The said resolution was passed by two-thirds or more of the Board of Supervisors and approved by the Mayor, and in said resolution it was recited and found that the sums of money specified were too great to be paid out of the ordinary annual income and revenue of the city and county in addition to the other annual expenses thereof or other funds derived from taxes levied for those purposes and will require expenditures greater than the amounts allowed therefor by the annual tax levy. The method and manner of payment of the estimated costs of the municipal improvements described herein are by the issuance of bonds of the City and County of San Francisco in the principle amounts not to exceed the principal amounts specified. Said estimates of cost as set forth in said resolution are hereby adopted and determined to be the estimated costs of said improvements. Section 3. The special election hereby called and ordered to be held shall be held and conducted and the votes thereat received and canvassed, and the returns thereof, made and the results thereof ascertained, determined and declared as herein provided and in all particulars not herein recited said election shall be held according to the laws of the State of California and the Charter of the City and County of San Francisco providing for and governing elections in the City and County of San Francisco, and the polls for such election shall be and remain open during the time required by said laws. Section 4. The said special election hereby called shall be and hereby is consolidated with the General Election of the City and County of San Francisco to be held Tuesday, November 8, 1988, and the voting precincts, polling places and officers of election for said General Election be and the same are hereby adopted, established, designated and named, respectively, as the voting precincts, polling places and officers of election for such special election hereby called and as specifically set forth, in the official publication, by the Registrar of Voters of precincts, polling places and election officers for the said General Election. The ballots to be used at said special election shall be the ballots to be used at said General Election and reference is hereby made to the notice of election setting forth the voting precincts, polling places and officers of election by the Registrar of Voters for the General Election to be published in the San Francisco Progress on or no later than October 31, 1988. Section 5. On the ballots to be used at such special election and on the punch card ballots used at said special election, in addition to any other mater required by law to be printed thereon, shall appear thereon the following, to be separately stated, and appear upon the ballot as a separate proposition: "PUBLIC LIBRARY FACILITIES SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT BONDS, 1988. To incur a bonded indebtedness of $109,500,000 for the construction of a main public library and reconstruction of branch libraries of the City and County of San Francisco." Each voter to vote for any of said propositions hereby submitted and in favor of the issuance of the Bonds, shall stamp a cross (X) in the blank space opposite the word "YES" on the ballot to the right of said proposition, and to vote against said proposition and against the issuance of the Bonds shall stamp a cross (X) in the blank space opposite the work "NO" on the ballot to the right of said proposition. On absent voters ballots, the cross (X) may be marked with pen or pencil. If and to the extent that punch card ballot cards are used at said special election, each voter to vote for any said proposition shall punch the ballot card in the hole after the word "YES: to the right of said proposition, and to vote against said proposition shall punch the ballot card in the hole after the word "NO" to the right of said proposition. Section 6. If at such special election it shall appear that two-thirds of all the voters voting on the proposition voted in favor of and authorized the incurring of a bonded indebtedness for the purposes set forth in said proposition, then such proposition shall have been accepted by the electors, and bonds shall be issued to defray the cost of the municipal improvements described herein. Such bonds shall be of the form and character known as "serials," and shall bear interest at a rate not to exceed 12 per centum per annum, payable semiannually, provided, that interest for the first year after the date of any of said bonds may be payable at or before the end of that year. The votes cast for and against each of said respective proposition shall be counted separately and when two-thirds of the qualified electors, voting on such proposition, vote in favor thereof, such proposition shall be deemed adopted. Section 7. For the purpose of paying the principal and interest on said bonds, the Board of Supervisors shall, at the time of fixing the general tax levy and in the manner for such general tax levy provided, levy and collect annually each year until such bonds are paid, or until there is a sum in the Treasury of said city and county set apart for that purpose to meet all sums coming due for the principal and interest on said bonds, a tax sufficient to pay the annual interest on such bonds as the same becomes due and also such part of the principal thereof as shall become due before the proceeds of a tax levied at the time for making the next general tax levy can be made available for the payment of such principal. Section 8. This ordinance shall be published once a day for at least seven (7) days in the San Francisco Examiner, a newspaper published daily in the City and County of San Francisco, being the official newspaper of said city and county and such publication shall constitute notice of said election and no other notice of the election hereby called need be given. Section 9. The appropriate officers, employees, representatives and agents of the City and County of San Francisco are hereby authorized and directed to do everything necessary or desirable to the calling and holding of said special election, and to otherwise carry out the provisions of this ordinance. APPROVED AS TO FORM: LOUISE H. RENNE By: Robert A. Kenealey City Attorney Deputy City Attorney APPENDIX 3 San Francisco Unified School District Mission and Goals The mission of the San Francisco Unified School District is to provide each student with an equal opportunity to succeed by promoting intellectual growth, creativity, self discipline, cultural and linguistic sensitivity, democratic responsibility, economic competence and physical and mental health so that each student can achieve to his or her maximum ability. To achieve this mission, the Board of Education has adopted the following goals: 1) To improve teaching and learning to enhance the academic achievement of all students; 2) To improve staff, parent and community participation in the education process; 3) To maintain school environments that are safe, secure and attractive; 4) To build a school environment that is fully integrated in all its programs and activities and provides equal opportunity for all students; 5) To improve and expand the Early Childhood Education Program and integrate it into the K-12 Program; and 6) To increase and expand inter- agency collaboration to better serve our students. For each goal there are a number of measurable objectives. Every school has developed a school site plan to achieve each objective and identified their individual school priorities: 1) To improve teaching and learning to enhance student achievement; to provide necessary support for LEP students; 2) To decrease student absences and tardies and improve in-class attendance; 3) To be fully integrated in all programs and activities, thus providing equal opportunity for all students; 4) To improve all students' scores on the CTBS, proficiency and college preparatory tests/examinations; 5) To improve staff, parent and community communication and participation in the education process. In order to achieve these objectives, the Board has adopted the following set of philosophical tenets: All individuals can learn. All individuals are both potential learners and potential teachers. All individuals want to learn and to be recognized for their achievements. All individuals are entitled to be treated with respect and dignity. Learning can be subdivided into a number of specific, concrete competencies that can be used as a focus for teaching. All individuals should learn to live and work in a world that is characterized by interdependence and cultural diversity. Learning has both cognitive and affective dimensions. If individuals do not learn, then those assigned to be their teachers should accept re- sponsibility for this failure and should take appropriate remedial action. All individuals learn in many different ways and at varying rates. Each individual learns best in a particular way. Parents want their children to attain their fullest potential as learners and to succeed academically. The mission of the San Francisco Unified School District is to provide each student with an equal opportunity to succeed by promoting intellectual growth, creativity, self discipline, cultural and linguistic sensitivity, democratic responsibility, economic competence and physical and mental health so that each student can achieve to his or her maximum ability. To achieve this mission, the Board of Education has adopted the following goals: 1) To improve teaching and learning to enhance the academic achievement of all students; 2) To improve staff, parent and community participation in the education process; 3) To maintain school environments that are safe, secure and attractive; 4) To build a school environment that is fully integrated in all its programs and activities and provides equal opportunity for all students; 5) To improve and expand the Early Childhood Education Program and integrate it into the K-12 Program; and 6) To increase and expand inter- agency collaboration to better serve our students. For each goal there are a number of measurable objectives. Every school has developed a school site plan to achieve each objective and identified their individual school priorities: 1) To improve teaching and learning to enhance student achievement; to provide necessary support for LEP students. 2) To decrease student absences and tardies and improve in-class attendance. 3) To be fully integrated in all programs and activities, thus providing equal opportunity for all students. 4) To improve all students' scores on the CTBS, proficiency and college preparatory tests/examinations. 5) To improve staff, parent and community communication and participation in the education process. In order to achieve these objectives, the Board has adopted the following set of philosophical tenets: All individuals can learn. All individuals are both potential learners and potential teachers. All individuals want to learn and to be recognized for their achievements. All individuals are entitled to be treated with respect and dignity. Learning can be subdivided into a number of specific, concrete competencies that can be used as a focus for teaching. All individuals should learn to live and work in a world that is characterized by interdependence and cultural diversity. Learning has both cognitive and affective dimensions. If individuals do not learn, then those assigned to be their teachers should accept responsibility for this failure and should take appropriate remedial action. All individuals learn in many different ways and at varying rates. Each individual learns best in a particular way. Parents want their children to attain their fullest potential as learners and to succeed academically. Footnotes 1. Text of Proposition E, 1995. Hours for the branches were set by Proposition E in 1995 and are due for review in 1999. Times-open vary by branch and are limited primarily by staffing concerns. Hours during the school day are very limited at all branches.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
The SFPL and DPW should undertake a review of the retrofit and renovation plans for the Mission branch in order to avoid problems such as those which are apparent at the Chinatown facility. Renovation plans for other branches should undergo a similar review process. REQUESTED RESPONSES Mayor San Francisco Board of Supervisors SFUSD Superintendent SFUSD Board City Librarian SFPL Coordinator of Children's and Youth Services SFPL Chief of Branches APPENDICES
F1996:
Other locations throughout the system are in need of both seismic upgrades and renovations, but funds for further improvements are presently unavailable. The SFPL has within it a specialized Children's Services division. It is directed by a Coordinator of Children's and Youth Services, who is responsible for interagency coordination, a number of outreach programs, and children's services at both the Main Library and each of the branches. The primary purposes of the outreach programs are to encourage young people to become interested in reading and to increase access for traditionally underserved youngsters throughout the city. Children's sections at the branches are staffed by librarians who are specialists in children's library programming and, at some larger locations, by a number of support personnel. The Children's Librarians are responsible for the selection and purchase of materials and for maintaining children's programs at the branch. These programs range from "story-times" for pre-schoolers and their parents, to making computers and homework help available for teenagers. Communication and Coordination Between SFUSD and the SFPL Of particular interest to the Grand Jury is the relationship between the branch libraries and the public schools. Children's Librarians are assigned the task of contacting and serving the schools in the vicinity of their branches. These contacts take place sporadically depending upon the availability of resources at the branch and the number of schools, both public and private, in the neighborhood. Libraries and Librarians within the SFUSD The public libraries provide a very broad range of children's services. In contrast, the stated purpose of the public school libraries and librarians is narrowly focused. They are responsible for supporting the curriculum of the school. The level of commitment by the SFUSD to its school libraries is of great concern to the Grand Jury. The District's central office commitment is very limited; there is one Program Administrator for Textbooks, Media and Library Services. The administrator is assigned a part-time Resource Librarian who assists those K-5 elementary schools that lack librarians on their staffs. Only four of the seventy-six elementary schools in the SFUSD have qualified, professional school librarians. The remaining seventy-two schools are served by a variety of volunteers, parents and paraprofessionals. This appalling lack of service is due to the School District's decision not to fund librarians on the elementary school level. The Grand Jury commends those school principals who have found creative funding sources for librarians and all those individuals who volunteer their time. The SFUSD administration allocates a half-time librarian to each middle school. About half of the middle school principals find money elsewhere in their budgets and fund full- time librarians, leaving seven schools with only half-time coverage. The SFUSD reports that high schools are each allocated a full-time librarian position. Again, some principals find money elsewhere to go beyond the allocation and fund additional half-time or full-time positions. Records provided to the Grand Jury show that some of the smaller and continuation high schools are operating with only half-time library staffing. San Francisco Unified Schools does not fund librarians in any school during the summer session. This is of concern since summer classes are often remedial in nature, and some branch libraries report surges in classroom teacher requests for library services during the summer months. Findings Usage of children's sections at the branches is heavy and continues to increase, while staffing and budgets remain static or are frozen due to budget problems within the library system as a whole. Up-to-date computers and other technologies are in short supply at the branches. The SFUSD has no effective means of facilitating ongoing communication with the SFPL Department of Children's Services. The School District makes no regular contact with librarians at the branches, and has no adequate mechanism for working with the Public Libraries Department of Children's Services despite having a mission statement which has as one of its stated goals "[t]o increase and expand inter-agency collaboration to better serve our students." [2] The Grand Jury uncovered problems which can be attributed to this lack of communication and coordination. For example, some assignments given by teachers called for research material unavailable at the branches. In other cases, whole classes were given an assignment on one subject, although the branch had only one or two books on the topic. Children's Librarians at the various branches expressed frustration at their inability to assist their young patrons due to the unrealistic nature of these types of assignments, as well as the lack of prior notification. Teachers in the SFUSD are inadequately trained in the use and availability of resources at the neighborhood branches. The SFUSD does not adequately fund its libraries and, as a result, has shifted the burden of supporting the public school curriculum to an already strained public library system. Because of the overwhelming number of requests by teachers for a very limited number of school-day hours, children's librarians limit the number of visits by each class to its neighborhood branch to one or two per year. The Grand Jury found both anecdotal and statistical evidence that indicated heavy after-school patronage of children's sections. Proposition E allows the Library Commission to increase branch library hours after the year 1999. It requires that public hearings be held and a study of community needs be taken into account. The renovation of the Chinatown branch was problematic for a variety of reasons, and cost far more then was originally planned. The original building, like many older San Francisco structures, had manually opening windows and no central air conditioning system. The new structure has only a few windows that open, no air conditioning and inadequate ventilation. Grand Jury members who toured the facility noted the lack of fresh air, and staff members at the library have made similar complaints to supervisors. In addition, on warm days temperatures at the branch can become unbearable. These temperature and ventilation problems are exacerbated in the summer months, precisely when daytime usage by school-age children is heaviest. The Mission branch is due for renovation beginning sometime in late 1997 or early 1998. A design similar to that used at the Chinatown branch is planned, and the Grand Jury is concerned that ventilation and temperature problems similar to those encountered at the Chinatown branch may occur. The Grand Jury recognizes the cost effectiveness of installing adequate ventilation and/or air-conditioning systems during initial construction rather than as a retrofit.
Additional Recommendations
21
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
CSC and DHR should identify and prioritize those changes that can speed the hiring process through CSC's rule-making authority, since a charter amendment has removed previous restrictions on CSC to act independently. Department of Human Resources The new DHR administers personnel functions for the City's approximately 27,000 employees, who work in 60 departments and include non-teaching employees in the San Francisco Unified School District and Community College District. Personnel costs constitute about 70% of the City's budget. DHR is headed by a director with a staff of approximately 200, who administer not only employment functions but also labor relations, health and safety mandates and the City's Workers' Compensation program.
R2:
DHR should develop generic tests for comparable office and clerk jobs, such as clerks, secretaries, computer specialists and accountants.
R3:
CSC and DHR should streamline the open job application appeals process.
R4:
The City should develop a blueprint for future labor contracts to take into account the changing needs of the workforce and to provide uniform treatment of employees in similar occupational groupings.
R5:
The City should establish a separate budget for the development, implementation and operation of a citywide personnel information system that can support labor contract negotiations and personnel policy administration. Major recommendations which would require union cooperation:
R6:
DHR should prepare a simple handbook to detail roles and responsibilities in the hiring process. Some departments are trying to perform personnel functions in which they have insufficient expertise or training. Others do not have a full understanding of the various steps in the hiring process. The Hiring Process Types of Positions: With certain exceptions specified in the charter, City positions are obtained by merit through competitive examinations, usually administered by the DHR. This is known as the merit system. With the exception of exempt and provisional employees, full-time and part-time employees are selected through the regular merit system process. They are granted all rights and protection provided by the City's Civil Service System. A provisional appointment is a hiring expedient which permits an individual to be hired temporarily based on less stringent qualification standards. This usually occurs because an official test has not been developed, an examination has not been scheduled or potential appointees on existing eligible lists have indicated no interest in temporary employment. Provisional appointments are comparable to regular competitive appointments in every respect except the appointees have not taken the official tests for the positions. At a future date, these employees must either pass the official examination and be competitively eligible for selection or their employment will have to be terminated. An exempt appointment is non-competitive. The charter designates these positions and allows the mayor, the Board of Supervisors or department heads to fill these openings. Filling a job vacancy or vacancies in a job classification consists of several steps. In collaboration with the department that has the vacancy, DHR staff members will fill the job as follows: (See
R7:
DHR should review the examination process for the purpose of developing testing that is more generic. It may not be necessary to develop individual tests for many occupations. Generic tests would allow job applicants to become eligible for City jobs with similar requirements by taking a single examination rather than multiple exams. Comment: Few occupations in the federal government require written examinations. The elements used to determine qualifications and ranking include education, experience and other knowledge, skills, and ability (KSA) factors that are based on individual job requirements. The federal Office of Personnel Management (OPM) requires a written examination only for clerical jobs. It fills entry-level positions in a wide range of administrative, technical and professional occupations without requiring a written examination. The process used is called Administrative Career With America (ACWA). ACWA has been tested and validated. Since it replaced a written test that was successfully challenged in a lawsuit, it also had to receive court approval.
R8:
DHR should both monitor and limit the use of provisional hiring and establish realistic time frames for its duration. Provisional status is not fair to the department, which may lose a trained and valued employee, or to the employee, who risks losing a job.
R9:
The CSC and DHR should review the appeals process and determine how it can be streamlined without compromising due process. In some situations, it may be feasible to build in specific remedies for a successful appeal while allowing a job to be filled without delay.
R10:
The Mayor's Office should consider allowing some requisitions for positions that have received prior budget approval to bypass further review. Budgetary control for these positions could be monitored at the controller's clearance point and through the automated financial system (ON-LINE FAMIS). The Mayor's Office could then concentrate its attention on positions where an in-depth review of continuing need is most critical.
R11:
The CSC and DHR should use technology to simplify the hiring process. (This area is discussed in more detail below under Information Technology.) Collective Bargaining Federal statutes, the California Labor Code, the City Charter, and the Employee Relations Ordinance govern labor relations in the City. Recent charter amendments (described above) greatly enlarged the number of personnel areas subject to collective bargaining. The City's unusually large number of employee organization units and contracts makes administering these charter amendments particularly complex. The City has over 100 bargaining units and sub- units, and 58 contracts with unions covering these units. The number of units continues to grow, with four more added in just this past year. Los Angeles County, with a workforce almost three times larger than of San Francisco's, has fewer than 20 units. The labor relations function resides with DHR's Employee Relations Division (ERD). The City Attorney's office acts as legal advisor in the collective bargaining process. It reviews and approves the legal aspects of contracts and ensures that matters reserved to the CSC, such as examination and appointments, are not included. The City Attorney's office also represents the City in both interest and grievance arbitration proceedings. Staff members of ERD and various City departments form the City's negotiating team. As in the past, the City contracts with private labor attorneys to lead some of the negotiations. The rationale is that this is a more costeffective approach for a cyclical workload. The cost of outside consultants for FY 1996-97 is projected to be between $500,000 and $600,000. The Civil Grand Jury reviewed collective bargaining with City representatives to determine their view of its current and future impact on the hiring process. The Grand Jury did not interview union representatives. It acknowledges the essential and vital role of the City's employee organizations in representing the interests of their members.
R12:
The City should pursue long-term strategic planning, as is done in the private sector, on what kind of compensation package would best serve the employees and the City. This information should be shared with the City's unions and other employee organizations.
R13:
The City should immediately increase the staffing level of ERD. This will improve the ability of ERD to successfully implement Propositions B and F, which promise "a fair, impartial and fiscally responsible way to determine wages, health benefits and working conditions for City employees."
R14:
The City, in collaboration with its unions, should initiate a study on the impact of collective bargaining on the City's resources and its future. The study should identify ways to streamline the process of labor relations to ensure equitable treatment of City employees and to provide for ease in administration.
R15:
The City should initiate discussions with the unions in order to determine whether certain working conditions and benefits of employment should be uniform in all contracts. They might, for example, want to consider that vacation, sick leave, leaves of absence, retirement, Workers' Compensation, holidays, and premium pay differentials for the same work should be uniform. These elements are examples and are not intended to be an all-inclusive listing of such working conditions and benefits of employment which should be covered by uniform provisions throughout the numerous employer contracts.
R16:
The City should pursue a long-term goal of encouraging employee organizations to merge their bargaining units.
R17:
The CSC and DHR should identify areas that are fundamental to the merit system, and ensure that candidates for City jobs will be treated uniformly in a fair and equitable manner in the labor relations process. Information Technology The City's dismal lack of a centralized, comprehensive and accurate Human Resources System is not a new issue. In 1995, the Controller's Office engaged an independent consultant, KPMG Peat Marwick, to conduct a citywide study on information technology. A report issued in June, 1996 listed a Human Resources System as one of three highest-priority projects. Former Mayor Jordan in his "Seven-Year Strategic Budget Plan," presented in 1995, highlighted a need for a citywide Human Resources Information System. The Plan projected that such a system could save the City approximately $5.2 million for the FY 1996/97, with a potential savings of $17 million over three years. The 1995-96 San Francisco Grand Jury conducted a comprehensive study of information technology and found that the City had failed to craft a citywide master plan for information technology. The report presented a number of recommendations to the City on instituting the necessary changes to correct current deficiencies and modernizing its computer systems.
R18:
The City should set aside a separate budget allocation strictly for technology to accelerate the development and implementation of an automated personnel system. The current archaic system has been a serious drain on the City's time and resources. Personnel services affect the delivery of services in all of the departments, and funds invested in a personnel system will benefit the City well into the next century.
R19:
The DHR in conjunction with the Controller's office should link up payroll with the personnel system during the design period. An interface between these two major functions would lessen the opportunity for fraud and abuse.
R20:
The DHR should contact or visit other governmental agencies or private companies which have automated personnel systems to determine if hardware or software could be shared. It could also learn from their problems and successes.
R21:
Similarly, the Mayor's Office and the Board of Supervisors should conduct on-site visits to organizations that have used and applied technology successfully. This experience would aid them in deliberations on budget decisions involving information technology. REQUESTED RESPONSES Office of the Mayor Board of Supervisors Civil Service Commission Department of Human Resources Office of the Controller Office of the City Attorney Office of Telecommunication and Information Services (for Information Systems Division) DIRECTORY -
Findings & Recommendations
17 findings
F1:
IS THE CONSENT DECREE WORKING? and, 2. IF NOT, WHAT CAN BE DONE ABOUT IT? The Grand Jury's investigation of these questions necessarily involved a sampling process, primarily discussions with those directly involved in the implementation of the Consent Decree including principals, teachers and administrators. There is general consensus that the desegregation aspect of the Consent Decree has been effective, if by effective one means achieving ethnic desegregation. As a glance at any school yard during recess will attest, children of many races, colors and languages attend every San Francisco school. This picture has not been painted without substantial demographic shifts, however. Although Caucasians constitute 44% of the city's population, they make up only 13% of the public school population; the remaining 87% are categorized as nonwhite. In 1983, there were fewer Hispanics and Asians and more AfricanAmericans than today. Using the Consent Decree's nine categories the school population by percentage is presently as follows: - Hispanic 20.5 - Other White 13.1 - African-American 17.4 - Chinese 26.7 - Japanese 1.0 - Korean 1.2 - American Indian .7 - Filipino 7.5 - Other nonwhite 11.8 [6] We have the anecdotal evidence of one principal, that although her school is desegregated, she cannot get Asian and black children to hold hands in a simple playground game of "Ring Around The Rosie". In general, while schools are desegregated, classrooms may not be. One Bayview elementary school has not one white student. In short, the Decree has resulted in physical desegregation. Social desegregation remains a distant goal. Evaluation of the Consent Decree's goal of producing academic excellence through equality of opportunity, however, leads qualified observers to the sad conclusion that in this respect, the Decree has been a failure. The District Court's Expert Committee Report of July 1992, chaired by Professor Gary Orfield of Harvard, issued a 78page report in July 1992 (the Orfield Report) which was sharply critical of the Decree as a means to achievement of universal academic excellence. The Report begins: "There have been both successes and failures under the [Consent] Decree. After eight years of experience, however, the achievement data show that most AfricanAmerican and Hispanic students still face devastating levels of educational failure." [7] The Report notes that, according to the District's own data: "Where poorly performing innercity schools were simply given large amounts of new money and staff, there were no overall academic gains for African-American and Hispanic students. Too often the Decree became simply another funding source rather than the catalyst for new approaches to teaching minority students. [8] While the official dropout rate (drop outs before age 17) for the District is only 2.2%, AfricanAmerican and Hispanic students alone comprised 28% and 25%, respectively, of this figure. The Orfield Report concludes: "The District must do more than it has done to educate Hispanic and AfricanAmerican children. Clearly, there is a social and economic crisis of great severity in the inner city and the schools need the support of other basic community institutions in their efforts; we call for a major push for such cooperation . . ." [9] The Consent Decree requires that each year the SFUSD provide a report to the court that shows how students in each targeted school and program are doing over time by race, gender, language, status, initial achievement levels and other factors the parties consider important. The report shall be longitudinal, following the same students over time. [10] The longitudinal study dated October 15, 1996 of the SFUSD to the court demonstrates a marked disparity between the CTBS (California Test of Basic Skills) scores of Hispanic and AfricanAmerican students and District averages, amounting to as much as one third less in the case of mathematics and somewhat less in reading. Such scores, which are lower than those of comparable students around the country, have brought a volley of criticism on the District. The Grand Jury concludes that the Consent Decree is not working, at least for the substantial African-American and Hispanic groups. (See CONCLUSION, below) Why African-Americans and Hispanics? In the SFUSD, 57%-60% of students speak a language other than English at home. This means that a substantial amount of teacher time must be spent simply in teaching students to become proficient in English. In the case of Hispanics, LEP (Limited English Proficiency) is the single most important cause of poor achievement. Because English is not spoken at home, many children are not "reading ready" when they arrive in school. In the case of AfricanAmericans, the combination of early dropout and poor academic achievement has produced young adults whose situation is indeed dire. An article in the San Francisco Chronicle of March 19, 1997 comments on a report by the Commission on the Status of the AfricanAmerican Male and cites shorter life spans, higher unemployment and longer prison sentences as evidence of conditions that are not improving for black men in California. Thus, AfricanAmerican males represent 3.7% of California's population but have an unemployment rate of 13.1% compared to 7.5% for all California males. According to one Board member, a prime factor in poor AfricanAmerican student achievement, is "lack of parental expectation." Many African-American students come from singleparent homes or families struggling to make ends meet. Poverty is also a substantial contributor to failure. In the San Francisco Unified School District, 50% of the students are "free" or "reduced" lunch recipients, a proof measure of poverty since federal funds for free lunches are limited to the poorest sector of the school population. Similar economic factors affect underachieving Hispanic students: many Hispanics are Catholic and send their children to parochial schools when they can afford the tuition, [11] which leaves mostly the poorest Hispanics to attend public school. In this country Hispanics now constitute the underclass as the "poorest of the poor," according to an article in the New York Times dated January 30, 1997. In 1995, median household income rose for every other American ethnic and racial group, including AfricanAmericans, but for the nation's 27 million Hispanic residents it dropped 5.1%. Hispanic residents now constitute nearly 24% of the country's poor, up 50% since 1985. 30% of all Hispanic residents were considered poor in 1995, meaning they earned less than $15,569 for a family of four. Hispanic residents have by far the highest high school dropout rate of any group in the nation. Only 78% finished high school compared to 91% of whites and 84% of blacks. Contributing to this problem is the waning number of blue collar jobs as the country's economy changes to serviceoriented and technical/ business jobs. A Rand Corporation study found that Hispanic immigrants arrive in the United States speaking less English than their European or Asian counterparts and never catch up. The article concludes that limited English proficiency is the root cause of poor achievement by Hispanic students. V. Remedial Actions Taken by the SFUSD Since the Orfield report in 1992, the District has undertaken substantial and sometimes drastic steps to improve the quality of academic achievement. Schools with poor scores have been subject to intense scrutiny and have received injections of staff and funds, together with emissary administrators from District Headquarters whose job it is to keep administration closely informed as to activities and programs at their assigned schools. In a number of cases, schools have been totally reconstituted, that is, the principal and the majority of teachers have been removed and relocated with new and presumably more vigorous as well as more ethnically diversified staff being appointed. In approximately 12 instances since 1983 the District has resorted to this drastic remedy, which in certain instances has resulted in what the Superintendent calls "pockets of excellence." Philip and Sala Burton High School in the Bayview District has been reorganized with an excellent principal and younger teachers who more closely approximate the ethnic mix of the school than the former staff. At Balboa High School a special AfricanAmerican program involving group sessions and counseling has lifted grade point averages from an alarmingly low 1.0-1.5 to something approximating the District average of 2.27. The District has adopted a Comprehensive School Improvement Program (CSIP) in order to implement the reconstitution process, which, it estimates, will require three years to evaluate fully. Twelve schools have "graduated" from the reconstitution program, with some improvement in CTBS scores already observable in such schools. Reconstitution has not been popular among teachers, who oftenunderstandably resent the implication that they are not performing well. A very recent agreement between the District and the teachers' union providing for individual evaluation of teachers before relocating them may go a long way toward eliminating teacher discontent with the reconstitution process. In any event, for the first time in 1996 District reading and math CTBS scores were above national averages for comparable schools. The Grand Jury applauds such efforts, which have improved the general quality of education in the District by focusing on poorly performing units and addressing the special needs of each. However, we also believe that the poorer academic achievement of students in the AfricanAmerican and Hispanic minorities is in large part attributable to societal factors that a program targeted on school performance can only partially address. When arriving students possess limited English proficiency, come from broken or uninterested homes and have grown up in poverty, schooling, even if beginning at the age of four years and nine months, cannot alone make up for such disadvantages. It is not enough to improve the schools; students must improve as well. VI. Conclusion Fourteen years of experience with the Consent Decree have established that while it has met its goal of de facto desegregation, it has been a failure at accomplishing its primary purpose of achieving academic excellence for all ethnic groups. Ways must be found to bring poorly achieving individuals and groups to an acceptable level of education at all ages. The Grand Jury therefore offers the following: FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Education begins at birth. More affluent or educated families generally read to their children, first with picture books, then with words. Many such children read passably well and have large vocabularies by the time they enter kindergarten, particularly if they have also had the advantage of preschool. There are over 400 private preschool and day are centers in San Francisco, virtually all of which require some form of tuition. The District itself operates 37 child care centers, though with State funds and subject to a stringent means test. Findings Only historical precedent in the District requires that a child be four years and nine months old before being permitted to enter the public school system. Substantial improvement in academic achievement can be produced by introducing children to education at a much earlier age, particularly in reading readiness and speaking English. The first and best education begins with the family. The support, encouragement, example (and occasional prodding) of parents lies behind every successful student. No student can hope to achieve success without this support. Parental involvement in education should become a prime goal of the District. [12] As the Committee of Experts found in its 1992 report "there is a social and economic crisis of great severity in the inner city and the schools need the support of other basic community institutions in their efforts..." [13] The Consent Decree [14] [15] requires that "The SFUSD shall continue its efforts to encourage and improve participation of parents, students, staff, and community." The Grand Jury finds that insufficient effort has been given to carrying out this Decree. The Consent Decree of 1983 is known to few San Franciscans and understood by even fewer. It is past time that the Decree's fundamental premises were exposed to public view and its postulates reexamined. Expert opinion has found that it has failed in its goal of achieving academic excellence in San Francisco Schools for all students and ethnic groups.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The Grand Jury recommends adoption of a program leading to the reduction of the school entering age to two years and nine months, thus extending beginning education in the most formative years by a full two years. This change should occur in the form of a gradual and progressive plan, beginning with a small number of students [16] who have full parental consent and cooperation. Careful longitudinal records should be kept of such students' progress so that the success of the program can be monitored. [17] In certain instances the integration of such young students into the school system may require some modification of the Consent Decree's inflexible mandate for desegregation because busing would not be feasible. A partial return of neighborhood type schools where parent can be at hand and participatory should be considered.
F2:
Parents should be held accountable for the children's education, and should be strongly urged and induced in every possible way to devote a certain number of hours a month to fulfilling the commitment which being a parent carries with it. Suitable inducements need to be devised to produce this result, and in the case of optional enrollment schools, can be a contract requisite to admission. [18] Teacherparent cooperation is critical to our recommendation; since many parents can come to school only in the evenings, some evening scheduling of teacher time would be required.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
Parents should be held accountable for the children's education, and should be strongly urged and induced in every possible way to devote a certain number of hours a month to fulfilling the commitment which being a parent carries with it. Suitable inducements need to be devised to produce this result, and in the case of optional enrollment schools, can be a contract requisite to admission. [18] Teacherparent cooperation is critical to our recommendation; since many parents can come to school only in the evenings, some evening scheduling of teacher time would be required.
F3:
The Grand Jury recommends that the District establish a Department of Community Relations to assist the schools in developing outreach programs in each of their districts to identify community and civic organizations and businesses which may be expected to assist the schools in practical and personal ways in order that each school may develop a sense of community identity in its locality.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The Grand Jury recommends that the District establish a Department of Community Relations to assist the schools in developing outreach programs in each of their districts to identify community and civic organizations and businesses which may be expected to assist the schools in practical and personal ways in order that each school may develop a sense of community identity in its locality.
F4:
The Grand Jury recommends that the Mayor, in conjunction with the District, appoint a Committee of Concerned Citizens/(Adults Worried About Kids Education (AWAKE))/ to study and conduct public hearings on the condition of education in the public schools with particular emphasis on making whatever changes in the Consent Decree which may be required to achieve its original goal of offering the finest education to every student which any city can provide. REQUESTED RESPONSES Mayor San Francisco Unified School District Board of Supervisors Board of Education City Attorney -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Footnotes 1. N.A.A.C.P. et al v. San Francisco Unified School District at al., C78-1445 WHO, U.S. District Court N.D. Cal.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
The Grand Jury recommends that the Mayor, in conjunction with the District, appoint a Committee of Concerned Citizens/(Adults Worried About Kids Education (AWAKE))/ to study and conduct public hearings on the condition of education in the public schools with particular emphasis on making whatever changes in the Consent Decree which may be required to achieve its original goal of offering the finest education to every student which any city can provide. REQUESTED RESPONSES Mayor San Francisco Unified School District Board of Supervisors Board of Education City Attorney -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Footnotes
F5:
Desent Decree p. 27-28.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
Desent Decree p. 27-28.
F6:
Information furnished by SFUSD.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
Information furnished by SFUSD.
F7:
Orfield Report, p. 1.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
Orfield Report, p. 1.
F8:
Orfield Report, p. 9.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
Orfield Report, p. 9.
F9:
Orfield Report, P. 10.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9:
Orfield Report, P. 10.
F10:
Consent Decree, p. 28.
Related Recommendations (1)
R10:
Consent Decree, p. 28.
F11:
According to the Archdiocese of San Francisco, there are 66 parochial schools, K-8, and 13 high schools, 9-12, all of which require payment of tuition. Some scholarships are available on individual application for needy students.
Related Recommendations (1)
R11:
According to the Archdiocese of San Francisco, there are 66 parochial schools, K-8, and 13 high schools, 9-12, all of which require payment of tuition. Some scholarships are available on individual application for needy students.
F12:
Virtually everyone the Jury interviewed for this project emphasized the importance of parental involvement in encouraging academic achievement at all grade levels. Although the District encourages parental participation in education, it does not appear to have any organized program to stimulate such involvement. At Lowell High School, the parents' organization has more than 1,000 members, whereas in other schools, particularly middle schools, there is no parental organization at all.
Related Recommendations (1)
R12:
Virtually everyone the Jury interviewed for this project emphasized the importance of parental involvement in encouraging academic achievement at all grade levels. Although the District encourages parental participation in education, it does not appear to have any organized program to stimulate such involvement. At Lowell High School, the parents' organization has more than 1,000 members, whereas in other schools, particularly middle schools, there is no parental organization at all.
F13:
At one South of Market high school the principal is deeply engaged in such an effort and his "missionaries" contact all civic organizations in the district and encourage them to get acquainted with their neighborhood high school and to support its activities with both time and money.
Related Recommendations (1)
R13:
At one South of Market high school the principal is deeply engaged in such an effort and his "missionaries" contact all civic organizations in the district and encourage them to get acquainted with their neighborhood high school and to support its activities with both time and money.
F14:
Consent Decree, p. 18.
Related Recommendations (1)
R14:
Consent Decree, p. 18.
F15:
Consent Decree, p. 29.
Related Recommendations (1)
R15:
Consent Decree, p. 29.
F16:
These children should be toilet trained and able to accept being in a social situation.
Related Recommendations (1)
R16:
These children should be toilet trained and able to accept being in a social situation.
F17:
Such a program should be carried out in full cooperation with Head Start, the federally funded program providing assistance to very young children and their families since 1965. In San Francisco Head Start is administered by the Economic Opportunity Council of San Francisco, which succeeded other groups such as YWCA, in 1993. Head Start provides a comprehensive program of improvement not only for young children (beginning with pregnant mothers) but also for their families with the goal of having children whose families are on welfare or otherwise qualify by a means test ready for learning at the kindergarten level. (The San Francisco Unified School District could have been the sponsoring agent and administrator of the Head Start program in San Francisco, but apparently chose not to do so when the administration was changed in 1993) Unfortunately, due to lack of funding, Head Start cannot supply the kind of program which we here recommend. According to Head Start officials, there are 6,412 eligible children for its program in San Francisco of which only 1,160 are being served at the p[resent time. This amounts to 18% of those eligible, leaving 82% unserved by any city program. For example, most schools, at least above the elementary level, have laboratories where parents could study computer skills in the early evening. (Probably the best teachers of these skills are high school students!) Again, parents could be induced or encouraged to sign a "contract" agreeing to devote a certain number of hours to school activities. Every parent, regardless of income, can contribute something, be it painting walls, monitoring study halls, or otherwise donating time as needed.
Related Recommendations (1)
R17:
Such a program should be carried out in full cooperation with Head Start, the federally funded program providing assistance to very young children and their families since 1965. In San Francisco Head Start is administered by the Economic Opportunity Council of San Francisco, which succeeded other groups such as YWCA, in 1993. Head Start provides a comprehensive program of improvement not only for young children (beginning with pregnant mothers) but also for their families with the goal of having children whose families are on welfare or otherwise qualify by a means test ready for learning at the kindergarten level. (The San Francisco Unified School District could have been the sponsoring agent and administrator of the Head Start program in San Francisco, but apparently chose not to do so when the administration was changed in 1993) Unfortunately, due to lack of funding, Head Start cannot supply the kind of program which we here recommend. According to Head Start officials, there are 6,412 eligible children for its program in San Francisco of which only 1,160 are being served at the p[resent time. This amounts to 18% of those eligible, leaving 82% unserved by any city program. For example, most schools, at least above the elementary level, have laboratories where parents could study computer skills in the early evening. (Probably the best teachers of these skills are high school students!) Again, parents could be induced or encouraged to sign a "contract" agreeing to devote a certain number of hours to school activities. Every parent, regardless of income, can contribute something, be it painting walls, monitoring study halls, or otherwise donating time as needed.
Quick View
Full Details →
Additional Recommendations
13
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
In light of the financial disincentive to return to work these practices create, the City should determine whether it is in the public's best interest to continue providing full salary continuation and salary supplementation benefits.
R2:
The City should, at a minimum, discontinue all salary continuation or supplementary benefit practices which result in employees' receiving a higher net income when not working, an obvious disincentive to return to work. Use of Department Budgets to Provide Incentives to Reduce WC Costs Each year, City funds are allocated to departments to pay for WC benefits and services according to a formula which gives most weight to a department's actual claims experience. All departments are expected to keep their expenditures within budgeted amounts, but if WC costs for a department exceed the amount budgeted, the department's budget is simply increased accordingly. On the other hand, if a department reduces its WC costs by better managing its WC claims, or by starting an effective injury and illness prevention program, and therefore spends less than the amount budgeted for WC, all the saved monies are returned to the general fund.
R3:
The City should develop a financial incentive program to recognize exceptional efforts or outstanding accomplishments made by departments to contain or reduce their WC costs. The City should reward departments that show positive results from cost containment efforts by allowing them to retain in their budgets a portion of the monies saved. Departments should be permitted to use the retained funds to enhance or expand WC cost-containment practices, or to support other department activities not directly related to WC.
R4:
The City should consider setting aside funds to support a citywide financial incentive program to reward cost-containment and -reduction success in the WC program. All organizational units or individual employees in any department should be encouraged to participate in such a financial incentive program. Following established criteria, the program should recognize exceptional efforts or outstanding accomplishments in containing or reducing WC costs. Return to Work Programs (Modified Duty Program) An effective Return to Work (RTW), that is modified duty, program is widely acknowledged by both public and private sector WC executives to be an essential component of any effort to control WC costs. RTW programs provide temporary work assignments to employees who cannot perform their customary job duties as a result of a job-related injury or illness. In addition, job duties may be modified to accommodate an employee who is recuperating from an occupational injury or illness. Only a few departments have established RTW programs. [1] A department developing its own program must use whatever staff expertise and financial resources it can spare from its own budget. Creating a sufficient number of meaningful modified duty assignments for temporarily disabled employees within a single department is often a major problem. A citywide program would increase the number of potential job assignments available for temporarily disabled employees.
R5:
The City should, at the earliest possible time, implement an effective, citywide RTW program similar to that developed by the Return-To-Work subcommittee of the City's WCTF. Experience clearly indicates that RTW programs reduce fraudulent claims and help employees return to their regular jobs faster. Furthermore, no additional costs accrue to the City for the work these employees perform. Contracting The WCD obtains a major portion of all the services required by the WC program through contracts with San Francisco General Hospital (SFGH), the University of California at San Francisco (UCSF), and a number of independent contractors. These contracts cost the City over $9,000,000 annually. SFGH and UCSF operate clinic facilities and emergency rooms for both the initial and continuing treatment of injured City employees. Private contractors provide administrative services: processing and adjusting approximately one half of all City WC claims; reviewing bills submitted by doctors and other medical service providers and maintaining networks of medical service providers offering discounted fees to injured or ill City workers. The WCD also makes payments for other medical treatment services and specialized procedures provided by practitioners not under contract with one of the City's medical service providers. In 1993 the WCD contracted with Noetics, now FIRM Solutions, to administer about one-half of all WC claims, with the WCD retaining responsibility for the other half. The decision to contract out was made because at the time it was seen as the quickest and easiest way to increase the number of staff available, to lower the average caseload per claims examiner and to handle an increasing number of WC claims. City officials expected that the efficiency and effectiveness of both systems of administering WC claims would be evaluated after two to three years, and a determination would then be made on whether to return all claims administration to the WCD or to assign all claims to a private contractor. For a number of years the WCD has retained a Vocational Rehabilitation Coordinator and a Medical Coordinator, who provide referrals to City workers and coordinate oversight of vocational rehabilitation and medical services for the City. The Coordinators are paid over $50 per hour. The City does not have a written employment contract with them and has never held open competitive bidding for these services.
R6:
The WCD should regularly monitor, assess and audit all of its contracts in a consistent and formal manner to ensure that they are conducted effectively, efficiently, and in accordance with their terms and conditions.
R7:
The City should evaluate how well the WCD and the current private contractor have managed their respective claims administration functions. Based on that evaluation, the City should determine whether in-house or contracted claims administration is in the best interest of the City and its WC program.
R8:
The WCD should avoid long extensions of the termination dates of contracts which were once competitively bid.
R9:
The positions of Vocational Rehabilitation Coordinator and Medical Coordinator should be evaluated by the WCD. If they are necessary, they should be properly classified and filled through the City's competitive merit system, or, if the City is best served by contracting for these services, an open competitive bidding process should be followed. REQUESTED RESPONSES Mayor Board of Supervisors Department of Human Resources Controller Civil Service Commission APPENDICES A. Information Reviewed B. Salary Continuation/Supplementation
R10:
Description of Salary Continuation and Supplementary Benefits, WCD
R11:
1996 SFUSD Risk Management and Risk Financing Study
R12:
WCD's Management Information System Reports
R13:
SF Public Transportation Department Quarterly Occupational Injury and Illness Report, 1996
Quick View
Full Details →
Additional Recommendations
5
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
a death with police officers at the scene;
R2:
death in a hospital emergency room;
R3:
death in a hospital, convalescent hospital room, rest home or board and care
R4:
home; indigent cases.
R5:
C. Delayed Response The CGJ closely reviewed with the MEO the issue of delayed response to a call regarding a death. This was an area where the CGJ received anecdotal information. The Chief of the Police Department advised the CGJ that representatives of the MEO are more often than not on the scene before the police arrive. However, the Chief Medical Examiner did acknowledge that there were often delays with respect to representatives of the Investigation Section arriving at a home where family members were on the scene. As noted above, this chiefly involved a situation where the Investigation Team was required to attend to a homicide case or a situation where there was a decedent in public view. As noted above, these situations have a higher order of response than the situation involving a death with family members on the scene. The MEO Administrative Guidelines Manual does provide that if the investigation representatives are going to be delayed, the investigators should telephone the MEO to advise of the delay. The CGJ recommended to the MEO that if the investigator cannot arrive at the scene of the death within one hour of advising the parties on the scene, (particularly the situation involving deaths with family members present), they should telephone the individuals at the scene, explain the delay and give an approximate time of arrival. It is recommended that the investigator's ambulance contain a cell phone. D. Public Information There is available at the MEO in the Hall of Justice several brochures in different languages delineating in a very sensitive and informative manner the duties and functions of the MEO and providing other information to survivors. It is recommended that this literature also be available in the investigator's ambulances so that it may be distributed to the survivors or friends of the deceased at the time the investigators visit the scene. The CGJ raised with the Chief Medical Examiner the issue of how members of the public may secure help in cleaning a premises that has been the scene of a violent crime. The Chief Medical Examiner advised that it is against the policy of the MEO to steer people to certain crime-scene cleaners. The MEO suggests that people look in the phone book for such services. The CGJ feels that this reticence to inform victims of violent crime as to cleaning services is not warranted. The CGJ does understand that the MEO does not want to be accused of steering members of the public to a particular vendor. Indeed there is a clear policy prohibiting referrals to a particular funeral home. However, it does seem a bit abrupt to advise people who are quite naturally in a state of shock to "look in the phone book." It is the CGJ's recommendation that a master list of crime-scene cleaning services be prepared and made available on request. E. Cultural and Language Concerns In that the population of San Francisco is so diverse in incorporating the number of recent immigrants from cultures that do not or may not understand the duties and functions of the MEO, it is particularly appropriate that the MEO be sensitive to difficulties in dealing with family members in such situations including the refusal of family members to allow access to the decedent or refusal to allow removal of the remains. The MEO Administrative Guidelines Manual provides that where access to the decedent is denied or the family or others refuse to allow removal of the decedent various procedures are to be followed. If the death is by natural causes, the investigators should explain to the family the ramifications of removal and the difficulty of certification of death. The investigators are cautioned to try to talk to one family member. If there is continued refusal it is suggested that the Investigator call the MEO. Contact with a clergyman or physician is suggested. Attempts should be made to get an outside friend, relative or professional involved. Finally, the investigators are instructed to be courteous and polite at all times. The CGJ has determined that the inability of certain members of the public to speak English has not presented a significant problem to the effective operations of the MEO. In those situations where there is not present a family member or friend who can translate, the MEO calls upon translators from the Police Department or the Department of Public Health. F. Sudden Infant Death The very traumatic situation involving sudden infant death syndrome cases is treated in detail in the Administrative Guidelines Manual. The investigators are specifically instructed to never leave a mother by herself. There should be an attempt to ascertain when the husband or partner will be home. Either a neighbor or friend should be present. The investigators must leave SIDS literature with the family and explain that a San Francisco County Public Health Nurse will be calling. Section 462 of the California Health and Safety Code requires in SIDS cases that the County Health Officer or designated agent immediately contact the person or persons who had custody of the infant and explain to such persons the nature and causes of SIDS to the extent that current knowledge permits. It is the policy of the MEO to send a letter to the parents of a SIDS victim. This letter is extremely sensitive, tactful and informative. After initially conveying the utmost sympathy on the loss of the child the letter discusses the state of the knowledge regarding SIDS, appropriate support groups and services and the MEO's particular attention to examining the circumstances of the death in question. A copy of this excellent letter is attached to this CGJ report (Attachment 2). G. Care of Personal Property Section 27491.3 of the California Government Code provides that the Coroner or Medical Examiner may take charge of any and all personal effects, valuables and property of a deceased at the scene of death and hold or safeguard the property until lawful disposition thereof can be made. The MEO Administrative Guidelines Manual details treatment of personal effects and property and treats the subject with sensitivity. If a legal next of kin is present at the scene any personal property or effects of the deceased will be removed and a receipt will be given to the next of kin. In a case of solitary deaths, all searches must be conducted by the investigating deputy only. It is emphasized that the investigator must always have a civilian witness at the scene such as the hotel manager, friends, the person who found the deceased, etc. It is specified that clothing should not be destroyed indiscriminately. Any clothing that is clean and appears serviceable should be removed, appropriately wrapped and stored and placed with the deceased. The guidelines note that the staff is to be especially careful with belt buckles or other such accouterments. The one thrown away will be the one "Uncle Harry had for 100 years and is irreplaceable." H. Complaint Procedures - Responses The subject of complaints received from the public or other agencies is treated exhaustively in the Administrative Guidelines Manual. Any complaint received must be immediately reported to the Administrator. The caller must be informed that the Administrator will return their call as soon as possible. The person receiving the call shall provide the Administrator with a written statement of the facts concerning the complaint or any alleged deviation from MEO policy. The Department Head or the Chief Medical Examiner may hold a fact-finding session with the employees concerned in order to establish the facts. Every month, ten cases are selected at random from cases investigated by the MEO. Form response letters are sent to the survivors. This is a one page document wherein the following questions are asked: (1) Were the investigators who came into the death scene courteous, dressed appropriate, helpful; (2) Did the investigators recommend a specific funeral director; (3) Did the investigators recover the deceased jewelry in front of you; (4) Did the investigators explain why they were taking the family member to the MEO; (5) Comments. The cover letter with this form states that the office: ...recently investigated the death of your loved one. In order to monitor and improve our service to the community, we ask that you take a few moments to complete the enclosed questionnaire and return it in the self-addressed, stamped envelope provided. If you have any questions or concerns that you would like to address to me directly, please feel free to contact me at the number listed below. Signed, [Chief Medical Examiner] As noted earlier, the CGJ reviewed literally hundreds of response letters received following solicitation by the MEO. There were only a very few complaints. One complaint had to do with the number of police cars in front of the house and officers laughing, etc. Another complaint concerned what was on the death certificate. The respondent felt that the death certificate appeared to make out the deceased as a drug addict which he was not. The respondent wanted the death certificate changed to "natural causes." One response did indicate that the staff was not sympathetic or helpful. However, the respondent indicated that she was in a state of shock and did not understand what was going on. She complained that no one later followed up with a telephone call and that she had to call the MEO. However, the great majority of the responses indicated that the investigators were "dignified," "courteous," "professional," "sensitive," and "went out of their way to locate relatives." Several individuals wrote lengthy comments and indeed some were specifically typed out on a separate page. It is of note that there were no responses that would indicate language or communication difficulties. I. Public Information The Administrative Guidelines Manual details regulations pertaining to public information. To foster cooperation and mutual respect between the public, the news media and the MEO, the Chief Medical Examiner or his authorized representatives are designated as the only personnel authorized to release any information regarding decedents. No information regarding a decedent or the circumstances of the death shall be released to the media unless the immediate next of kin has been notified. To assure that authorized personnel are communicating with a relative, the appointed representative of the family, or a member of a law enforcement agency, proper identification will be required before the MEO will release any information. Finally, the Administrative Guidelines Manual provides that, notwithstanding the MEO's cooperative attitude with the public and the media, certain information must be withheld from the public and the media in order to protect the rights of the next of kin. J. Identification of the Deceased The visual identification of a deceased friend or loved one is perhaps one of the most traumatic experiences a human being may be called upon to endure. The MEO is extremely sensitive to this issue. It is the policy of the MEO, as addressed definitively in the Administrative Guidelines Manual that, if a decedent is traumatized or in post- mortem decomposition, visual identification should not be utilized. If a family insists on viewing the traumatized and/or post-mortem decomposed decedent, and in the opinion of the investigator/pathologist that decedent is unviewable, every option should be taken to dissuade the viewing. If the family still insists, a waiver should be signed before viewing. It is of note that the Administrative Guidelines Manual specifically states that "common sense should prevail! The viewing room is for identification only, but the office is here to serve the public, and as such each case should be served on its individual merit." The CGJ investigated the possibility that unauthorized third persons might enter areas of the MEO, specifically the autopsy room or storage area and view the remains of decedents. Indeed there was concern that unauthorized personnel might even photograph the remains. The CGJ is confident that appropriate security now exists to prevent such a happening. Some time ago the Chief Medical Examiner was working late and heard noises in the autopsy room. He investigated and found that the janitor had brought certain friends in to see the autopsy room. The MEO now cleans or otherwise attends to all janitorial services with respect to the autopsy room and other sensitive areas. There is a potential problem with the door utilized by the investigators' ambulances and funeral director's vehicles. This is the original door that was constructed at the time the Hall of Justice was built. While locked and made of steel, the Chief Medical Examiner is concerned that it could be crowbarred open. Were someone to do this and gain access to the MEO and photograph or otherwise take inappropriate action with respect to human remains, the uproar and potential liability to the City would be horrendous. It is strongly recommended that an appropriate requisition be made for the replacement of the existing door with a door matching all appropriate standards for security. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Issues raised in the 1997 Budget Analyst audit The CGJ has concluded that many of the critical items set forth in the 1997 audit have been corrected. Other criticisms were either not warranted or were not in need of further review or recommendation on the part of the CGJ. More specifically, past OSHA violations have been corrected. The MEO Written Exposure Control Plan and the training of employees ensures employees regarding the particular hazards inherent in their duties at the MEO. The lawsuits resulting from alleged testing of employees without their written consent were unmeritorious. All appropriate laws and regulations regarding consent for testing are in place. The MEO is meeting all regulations and requirements regarding sanitation and cleanliness. The 1997 audit's criticisms of the Toxicology and Pathology Departments were not warranted. What problems presently exist in those departments result from salary constraints inhibiting the retention of qualified professionals. The MEO is acting appropriately with respect to cooperating with other departments on the subject of inquests. The investigation division is not overstaffed but is in fact understaffed. Utilizing part-time drivers to handle certain duties of the investigation could result in serious legal exposure to the City and County of San Francisco. Sensitivity and interaction with the public With respect to interaction with the public, the CGJ concludes that the MEO acts with sensitivity and in accordance with established laws and existing policies and procedures of the office. The investigators, the first person or persons from the MEO that the family or a member of the public will have contact with present an initial visual impression of professionalism and act with sensitivity and kindness. While there have been occasions of delayed response those have been relatively few in number and were generally the result of the investigators being diverted to a higher priority call. The CGJ does recommend that appropriate contact be made with family members where a scheduled visit must be delayed. The CGJ also recommends that written information be left with survivors and survivors be advised as to appropriate assistance in cleaning a premises that has been the scene of a violent crime. The inability of certain members of the public to speak English does not appear to present a significant problem to the effective operations of the MEO. The MEO acts with great sensitivity in the area of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome cases. Regulations governing the handling of personal property are detailed and appear to be adhered to. The primary focus of MEO operations is dedicated to dealing sensitively and with kindness towards the survivors of the deceased. The Chief Medical Examiner San Francisco is fortunate indeed to have the benefit of the services of the present Chief Medical Examiner. He is a dedicated public servant. As noted earlier in this Report, the CGJ concurs with the impressions expressed in the 1997 audit concluding that the Chief Medical Examiner was very well respected in the Forensic Pathology community which recognition was of great value to San Francisco and is the key factor in generating San Francisco's reputation for providing the highest quality forensic services. The CGJ has noted the extensive time that the Chief Medical Examiner spends at the MEO, including weekends and evenings and the fact that he is subject to being called in at any time. Budgetary constraints require his participation in the Toxicology and Pathology Departments at the expense of his being able to give more attention to general managerial and supervisory duties. Recommendation (1) If representatives of the Investigation Team are going to be delayed and cannot arrive at the scene of a death within one hour of advising the parties of the scheduled arrival, the investigators should telephone the individuals at the scene, explain the delay and give an approximate time of arrival. The investigator's ambulance should contain a cell phone.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
14 findings
F1:
SFSD should continue to take actions to enable Jail #3's kitchen and laundry operations to meet the needs of Jails 3 and 7, while being in compliance with health and safety codes. (The Civil Grand Jury did not investigate the possibility of constructing a separate facility adjacent to Jail 7 to provide food and laundry services. However, the cost of building and running such a facility as well as security issues in respect to the inmates who provide most of the labor for food and laundry services appears to make this solution impractical.) 2. In the near term, SFSD should continue to educate the CIAC and others involved with the budgetary process, and to advocate for funds to keep Jail #3 operational.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
SFSD should continue to take actions to enable Jail #3's kitchen and laundry operations to meet the needs of Jails 3 and 7, while being in compliance with health and safety codes. (The Civil Grand Jury did not investigate the possibility of constructing a separate facility adjacent to Jail 7 to provide food and laundry services. However, the cost of building and running such a facility as well as security issues in respect to the inmates who provide most of the labor for food and laundry services appears to make this solution impractical.)
F3:
A study should be conducted to determine what, if any, action can be taken to keep Jail #3 operating. The study should compare the cost of operating Jail #3 with the cost of constructing a new jail in the immediate area, and ascertain potential sources of funds to overhaul Jail #3 or construct a new jail. These should include federal and state funds, as well as money from the City's General Fund and/or a bond measure. Finding The record keeping within both SBBS and DPW Construction Management concerning the construction of Jail #7 and the consequent problems was inadequate.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
A study should be conducted to determine what, if any, action can be taken to keep Jail #3 operating. The study should compare the cost of operating Jail #3 with the cost of constructing a new jail in the immediate area, and ascertain potential sources of funds to overhaul Jail #3 or construct a new jail. These should include federal and state funds, as well as money from the City's General Fund and/or a bond measure.
F4:
SFSD and DPW should mandate note-taking during all conversations, meetings, and other activities, no matter how trivial they may appear to be at the time. Such notes should always include the name of participants, date, and times as well as subjects discussed.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
SFSD and DPW should mandate note-taking during all conversations, meetings, and other activities, no matter how trivial they may appear to be at the time. Such notes should always include the name of participants, date, and times as well as subjects discussed.
F5:
Involved department personnel should maintain a daily log book noting all significant activities and recapping the day's events.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
Involved department personnel should maintain a daily log book noting all significant activities and recapping the day's events.
F6:
Records should be maintained by project, and should be readily accessible. If a record covers more than one project, sufficient copies should be made and placed in each appropriate project file.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
Records should be maintained by project, and should be readily accessible. If a record covers more than one project, sufficient copies should be made and placed in each appropriate project file.
F7:
Project files, with records, should be maintained for at least five years after all problems attendant to a project have been resolved. Findings The leaks at Jail #7 might have been corrected at no cost to the City by having the contractor do the repairs during the warranty period. The leaks could have possibly been corrected by having the City Attorney take appropriate action. They could have possibly been corrected in 1991-1992 for $40,000. The cost has now risen to $400,000 due to the failures to take earlier action. Bureau of Architecture failed to notify the Project Manager that neither FEMA nor OES was going to approve funds for leak repairs. SBBS failed to notify the Sheriff or the Project Manager, and did not request direction after the August 5, 1991 memo was issued by the Bureau of Architecture. The Project Manager failed to follow through after January 1990 to determine that the leaks were being addressed. The City Attorney was not informed or contacted for advice or assistance in respect to actions which could have been taken with the contractor, FEMA, or OES. The responsibilities detailed in the job descriptions for Sheriff's Captains who served as Facility Commander for Jail #7 and the Deputy Chief with responsibility for all of the jails make no mention for the maintenance and/or repair of jails. These employees do not believe it was or is their responsibility to see that the leaks were eliminated as this was and is the responsibility of SBBS. There is no mention in the job description of either the Deputy Sheriff or the Lieutenant in SBBS of having responsibility for the repair or maintenance of jail facilities.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
Project files, with records, should be maintained for at least five years after all problems attendant to a project have been resolved.
F8:
A DPW Project Manager should independently ascertain that a facility is functioning as contemplated, regardless of whether comments are received from the user.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
A DPW Project Manager should independently ascertain that a facility is functioning as contemplated, regardless of whether comments are received from the user.
F9:
Responsible SFSD personnel should make sure they are satisfied with repair and/or construction work performed and how a facility is functioning. They should immediately communicate any dissatisfaction to the DPW Project Manager.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9:
Responsible SFSD personnel should make sure they are satisfied with repair and/or construction work performed and how a facility is functioning. They should immediately communicate any dissatisfaction to the DPW Project Manager.
F10:
The DPW Project Manager, with the advice and approval of the City Attorney, should provide written notice to the contractor, within the warranty period, of any issues requiring correction.
Related Recommendations (1)
R10:
The DPW Project Manager, with the advice and approval of the City Attorney, should provide written notice to the contractor, within the warranty period, of any issues requiring correction.
F11:
DPW personnel who discover problems with a facility where DPW was involved, should notify the user and the DPW Project Manager immediately in writing. There should be written acknowledgment of receipt.
Related Recommendations (1)
R11:
DPW personnel who discover problems with a facility where DPW was involved, should notify the user and the DPW Project Manager immediately in writing. There should be written acknowledgment of receipt.
F12:
DPW and SFSD should ascertain that all problems with facility construction and/or repair have been addressed completely and satisfactorily. Appropriate higher management at DPW and SFSD, as well as the City Attorney's Office, should be notified immediately in writing of unresolved contractual problems.
Related Recommendations (1)
R12:
DPW and SFSD should ascertain that all problems with facility construction and/or repair have been addressed completely and satisfactorily. Appropriate higher management at DPW and SFSD, as well as the City Attorney's Office, should be notified immediately in writing of unresolved contractual problems.
F13:
Sheriff's Captains who are Facility Commanders and the Deputy Chief should have the responsibility for giving notification of areas of disrepair, and for following through with designated department personnel until resolution of any problems has been achieved. These responsibilities should be so reflected in their job descriptions.
Related Recommendations (1)
R13:
Sheriff's Captains who are Facility Commanders and the Deputy Chief should have the responsibility for giving notification of areas of disrepair, and for following through with designated department personnel until resolution of any problems has been achieved. These responsibilities should be so reflected in their job descriptions.
F14:
The job description of SBBS staff responsible for overseeing construction, capital improvements, and/or repairs, should so reflect, and should specify appropriate educational and technical qualifications. Finding Unless corrected, the leaks at Jail #7 will continue to worsen and do more damage to the facility.
Related Recommendations (1)
R14:
The job description of SBBS staff responsible for overseeing construction, capital improvements, and/or repairs, should so reflect, and should specify appropriate educational and technical qualifications.
F15:
The $400,000 request for funds to correct the leaks should be approved and made available for the coming budget year.
Related Recommendations (1)
R15:
The $400,000 request for funds to correct the leaks should be approved and made available for the coming budget year.
Additional Recommendations
2
Not linked to specific findings.
R2:
In the near term, SFSD should continue to educate the CIAC and others involved with the budgetary process, and to advocate for funds to keep Jail #3 operational.
R16:
The funds should be expedited and work commenced and completed before next season's rains do even more damage to Jail #7. REQUESTED RESPONSES Mayor Board of Supervisors San Francisco Sheriff's Department Department of Public Works Capital Improvements Advisory Committee City Attorney Department of Public Health California Board of Corrections