San Joaquin County Grand Jury
2019-2020
From the annual report
The consolidated year-end volume. The individual investigations it contains are listed separately below.
📑 Year-End Report
The full consolidated volume; individual reports are listed below.
Individual reports (3)
Findings & Recommendations
8 findings
F1:
Illegal dumping has increased in part because the County has not created a strong, enforceable ordinance to deter illegal dumping.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
By December 31, 2020, develop and adopt an enforceable ordinance to deter illegal dumping which includes a mechanism for collecting fines, an appeals process, and a way to recoup the cost of administration from the illegal dumpers.
F2:
There is no designated hearing officer and other staff required to enforce ordinances, leading to less effective enforcement.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
By December 31, 2020, designate an Administrative Hearing Officer along with Public Works staff for enforcement.
F3:
San Joaquin County lacks sufficient surveillance equipment to monitor dumping hotspots and to prosecute illegal dumpers.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
By December 31, 2020, obtain and install appropriate surveillance equipment, such as lighting and cameras, in the top five dumping hotspots.
F4:
San Joaquin County Public Works Department, Sheriff’s Office, Community Development Department, District Attorney’s Office, and all city departments within the county are not working collaboratively to address the illegal dumping problems.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
By November 30, 2020, create an illegal dumping task force (Task Force) that includes representatives from San Joaquin County Public Works Department, Sheriff’s Office, District Attorney’s Office, Community Development, and all cities within the County to participate in the Task Force. This Task Force meet regularly throughout the year.
F5:
San Joaquin County and the City of Stockton are not working together to share in the cost of illegal dumping cleanup.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
By December 31, 2020, the newly formed Task Force develop a plan to share costs for illegal dumping pickup throughout the County and the City of Stockton.
F6:
Free drop-off services are underutilized because the public is unaware of most of the programs offered.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
By January 31, 2021, the Task Force develop and implement a county-wide educational program including billboards, buses, and bus stop shelters advertising to include information about free drop-off services.
F7:
San Joaquin County and the City of Stockton do not have a robust referral system for sharing reports of illegal dumping irrespective of jurisdiction.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
By January 31, 2021, the Task Force create a referral system to notify the appropriate jurisdictions of illegal dumping. This referral system include a complaint-recording data log with follow-up measures.
F8:
Effective cleanup incentives such as disposal vouchers, fee waivers, and recycling coupons have proven effective in reducing the likelihood of illegal dumping. 19
Related Recommendations (1)
R8:
By January 31, 2021, the Task Force develop a written plan to establish an equitable way to fund and issue vouchers, fee waivers, and recycling coupons.
Findings & Recommendations
10 findings
F1:
Employees of the Public Defender’s Office filed a disproportionate number of Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) complaints compared to all other County Departments.
F2:
Confidentiality rules prevented Management from sharing any information on EEO complaints. This lack of communication caused angst and distrust in the department.
F3:
Management followed San Joaquin County Human Resources Department (HR) policies and procedures for addressing EEO complaints.
F4:
In spite of following HR policies and procedures, problems continued to escalate within the Public Defender’s Office.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
1 By December 31, 2020 the Human Resources Division of San Joaquin County hire an independent consultant to conduct a thorough operational review of all aspects of the Public Defender’s Office.
F5:
Past and present personnel issues created division and disruption between Deputy Public Defenders and Management, fueling a breakdown of trust and communication. Total cost includes litigation costs and settlement. It does not include the time of County staff and lawyers. Historically, a large lawsuit can have over $500,000 in litigation costs. 9
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
1 By December 31, 2020 the Human Resources Division of San Joaquin County hire an independent consultant to conduct a thorough operational review of all aspects of the Public Defender’s Office.
F6:
Past and present personnel issues created division and disruption between Public Defender Investigators, the Chief Investigator, and Management, fueling a breakdown of trust and communication.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
1 By December 31, 2020 the Human Resources Division of San Joaquin County hire an independent consultant to conduct a thorough operational review of all aspects of the Public Defender’s Office.
F7:
The culture, divisions, and atmosphere of the Office did not lend itself to good intra- departmental communications or de-escalation of conflicts.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
1 By December 31, 2020 the Human Resources Division of San Joaquin County hire an independent consultant to conduct a thorough operational review of all aspects of the Public Defender’s Office.
F8:
Lack of respect and professionalism within the Public Defender’s Office contributed to division and disruption.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
1 By December 31, 2020 the Human Resources Division of San Joaquin County hire an independent consultant to conduct a thorough operational review of all aspects of the Public Defender’s Office.
F9:
The Department has an intensive, time-consuming mission. The turmoil, as described in this report, placed additional stress on an already hard-working staff.
F10:
The turmoil in the Department led to a significant and preventable expenditure of taxpayer dollars.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
12 findings
F1.1:
None of the four Designated Lead Departments has provided a plain language website that describes their efforts in addressing and limiting the impact of homelessness, leaving many San Joaquin residents with the false impression that the County and is doing little or nothing to address homelessness.
F1.2:
The Community Car Program adds value to the community by reducing response times for calls for service, supporting the Encampment Response Team, and limiting the impacts of homelessness in San Joaquin County.
F1.3:
Holding Homelessness Court only in Stockton denies access to many individuals and is inconsistent with the intent of the Quality of Life Policy, which is to address and limit the impacts of homelessness in San Joaquin County.
F1.4:
The four Designated Lead Departments are successfully prioritizing homelessness and implementing the Quality of Life Policy to address and limit the impacts of homelessness in San Joaquin County.
F2.1:
One staff person is not sufficient to ensure all needs within the county are met.
F2.2:
The revised San Joaquin Continuum of Care has increased collaboration between the County, the cities, and non-profit organizations, helping to improve services for the homeless. 17
F3.1:
Although many residents are interested in how homelessness is being managed, only the City of Lodi has published accomplishments in plain language on its website. This lack of readily available information makes it difficult for residents to understand what is being done to address homelessness.
F3.2:
There is a need for community-wide planning and strategic use of resources for homelessness involving all cities within the County.
F3.3:
It is important to establish a coordinated and regional system of care for the homeless community to improve services while addressing and limiting the impact of homelessness.
F3.4:
Publishing a plain-language website titled What Lodi Has Done for has made it easier for the public to readily understand the actions the city has taken to address homelessness.
F3.5:
The leadership shown recently by the City of Stockton in working with San Joaquin County towards a shared goal of obtaining funds will streamline processes and result in improved efficiency.
F3.6:
Stockton’s leadership efforts in securing a regional strategic plan speaks to the current spirit of collaboration and communication between Stockton, San Joaquin County, and the San Joaquin Continuum of Care.