San Mateo County 2005-2006 - California Grand Jury Reports

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 (18)

December 31, 2006 — Issue What can the Boards of Directors of the Half Moon Bay and Point Montara Fire Protection Districts do to provide

18 páginas 35 hallazgos 1 recomendaciones

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 35 hallazgos

F1: Determining the appropriate level of service.

F2: Establishing goals and objectives.

F3: Determining and approving budgets.

F4: Promoting the best interests of the District.

F5: Hiring an effective administrator/fire chief and holding that person accountable for the implementation of district policy, the efficient operation of the department, and fiscal responsibility. Consolidation of the Half Moon Bay and Point Montara Fire Protection Districts: 2 Abandoned house in Half Moon Bay catches fire, Coastsider.com, May 3, 2006 5

F6: In 2004 the San Mateo County City Managers Association commissioned a study, of the 11 cities and seven special districts that provide fire suppression services to San Mateo county residents3. The study concluded that “consolidation of fire service delivery appears to demonstrate economies of scale reductions on a cost per capita basis for service areas up to approximately 30,000 population.”

F7: In response to citizens’ requests, the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) accelerated its service review of the Point Montara and Half Moon Bay Fire protection Districts and on May 12, 2005, submitted a final report that stated that the area within the boundaries of the two Districts is best governed by a single consolidated fire district.4

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R1: Consolidate the two districts into a single fire protection district by December 31,

F8: At a special joint meeting on February 8, 2006, the HMBFPD and PMFPD Board of Directors voted separately to pass resolutions for both a name and a governance model for the new consolidated district. They chose the name “Coastside Fire Protection District.” The governance model describes the method by which the combined boards would achieve the required odd number of directors and in two subsequent election cycles reduce the number to five at-large members.

F9: Most individuals interviewed believed that consolidation made good business sense, would be good for fire safety, and would create a more stable organization. One individual said that consolidation was a “no brainer.” Some interviewees, however, had reservations because they were concerned with HMBFPD management. . Conflict between labor and management has existed in the HMBFPD for at least the past six years during which:

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R1: Consolidate the two districts into a single fire protection district by December 31,

F10: HMBFPD has been embroiled in five lawsuits with current or former employees and has so far paid $707,595 in settlements.

F11: HMBFPD has spent $516,280 on legal fees in addition to the amounts it paid in settlements of lawsuits.

F12: A division chief spent six months putting together a performance and management system that firefighters and captains did not implement.

F13: Twenty-eight firefighters have retired or left HMBFPD to seek employment elsewhere. The resulting instability has raised concerns about the ability of the HMBFPD to provide adequate level of services:

F14: The directors of the PMFPD expressed concerns with management of HMBFPD and in 2003 gave notice they would not renew their contract when it expired in 2005. Since 3 Fire Agency Consolidation Threshold Analysis, Management Partners, Inc. Municipal Service Review, Pt. Montara & Half Moon Bay Fire Districts, May 12, 2005 6 May 19, 2005, HMBFPD has been providing fire service to PMFPD on a month-to- month basis.

F15: The HMBFPD fire marshal and fire inspector resigned.

F16: HMBFPD’s Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), a labor agreement with its firefighters, expired on December 31, 2005.

F17: The HMBFPD fire chief retired in December 2005, and an interim fire chief left in April 2006.

F18: Nearly all individuals interviewed by the Grand Jury agreed that the problems pointed out by Chief Bonano were valid. Some agreed that the fire district’s ability to provide services consistent with its mission was in jeopardy. Most agreed that action needs to be taken. The HMBFPD Board of Directors has taken initial steps to address District problems:

F19: Prior to its expiration, the Board of Directors modified the MOU to change the employee retirement plan, to alter the contribution to employee health benefits, and to provide no salary increases.

F20: The Board of Directors has created a subcommittee to focus on the District’s finances.

F21: The Board of Directors hired a new attorney to represent the District on March 8, 2006.

F22: The Board of Directors issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) in April 2006 for contracting out all or a part of the HMBFPD operations. The stated objective of the RFP is to determine if the Half Moon Bay and Point Montara communities can be better and more efficiently served by contracting with nearby agencies for fire and life- safety services. Responders were requested to address the provision of services for the Half Moon Bay and Point Montara Fire Districts independently and collectively.

F23: In May 2006 the RFP was mailed to 15 fire-service agencies in San Mateo County5. The agencies were told they have until June 15, 2006, to respond. On May 18, 2006, the Menlo Park Fire Protection District, CDF, and the San Mateo Fire Department all sent representatives to an informal bidders' conference at the HMBFPD district office.6 Opinions expressed by interviewees during discussion of Alternative 1, “Contract out the Fire Services”:

F24: The Board of Directors must select a contractor that has an established reputation for effective leadership and delivery of fire protection services. Fire District Awaits Contract Responses, Half Moon Bay Review, May 19, 2006 6 Three Suitors Show For Fire Conference, Half Moon Bay Review, May 24, 2006 7

F25: The Board of Directors must actively oversee the contracting agency. Contracting the fire services must not be or perceived to be simply a “takeover” of the District by another agency.

F26: HMBFPD already subcontracts fire prevention services to the San Mateo City Fire Department and up to 12 other services such as janitorial, legal, etc. to other service providers.

F27: CDF currently provides fire services to all areas that surround the HMBFPD and PMFPD.

F28: Water rescue is not a core service provided by the District. It can also be provided by a number of other agencies on the Coastside such as the Harbor District, Coast Guard, or state park lifeguards. Surf rescue is a specialized skill and only nine of the 2,406 calls the District responded to in 2005 were for surf rescue.

F29: HMBFPD is one of three fire agencies in San Mateo County to staff an ambulance. The District now subsidizes the ambulance by about $500,000 per year and this puts a strain on the HMBFPD budget. Opinions expressed by interviewees during discussion of Alternative 2, “Internally rebuild the Fire Department”:

F30: To rebuild the department will demand a heroic leader, a supportive board, sufficient funding, and a lot of time.

F31: All interviewees thought it would be difficult to find a suitable fulltime permanent fire chief who was capable of rebuilding the Department.

F32: The District must rebuild the District’s culture and eliminate the entrenched culture of strife that exists between unionized firefighters and management

F33: Rebuilding is more likely to fail than succeed in any reasonable time.

F34: PMFPD may not want to consolidate with HMBFPD if this option is selected. The interviewees were unanimous in their reaction to alternative 3, “Take no action and maintain the status quo”:

F35: Maintaining the status quo is not a viable option. CONCLUSIONS 8 The Half Moon Bay and Point Montara Fire Protection Districts constitute a single service area and the Grand Jury believes consolidation will achieve cost and service delivery efficiencies The HMBFPD has been mired in a culture of strife for at least the past six years. The District has spent more that $1million in litigation with five of its former or current employees, and has experienced very high employee turnover. These difficulties have negatively impacted the ability of the District to provide an adequate level of service. Now is an opportune time to significantly change the District: the union contract has expired, there are vacancies in the fire chief and one division chief positions, and the current Board of Directors is fully engaged in finding solutions that will serve the interests of the District. It is clearly not in the best interest of the District for the HMBFPD Board of Directors to take no action and merely maintain the status quo. The Grand Jury believes that rebuilding the department from within would be a formidable undertaking, would take a long time, and have only a modest chance of success. The Grand Jury believes that the lowest-risk solution to the Districts’ problems is for the Board of Directors to subcontract fire protection services to another organization. By subcontracting, the District could acquire the operating procedures necessary to provide reliable, consistent fire services within an established culture of cooperation. The Board would retain local control by setting goals and objectives and holding the subcontractor accountable. Furthermore, subcontracting does not preclude the Board from reexamining this decision in future years. The HMBFPD Board of Directors needs to examine the mission of the district and should analyze the costs and benefits of some of the existing services. Not all services now performed by the District are equally important. For example, instead of staffing the ambulance with firefighters and providing for surf rescue, the District could save money by staffing the ambulance with American Medical Response (AMR) personnel and letting the Harbor District, Coast Guard, and State Park Lifeguards provide surf rescue. The Grand Jury believes that the Boards of Directors of the Half Moon Bay and Point Montara Fire Protection Districts must now focus completely on the best interest of the District to set out a vision for the future, to establish goals and objectives, and to hold whoever manages the District accountable for achieving them.

7 páginas 9 hallazgos

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 9 hallazgos

F1: San Mateo County and the San Francisco Airport are currently mutual aid partners in a number of arenas: o SFO relies on county hospitals for surge capacity in the event of an incident at the airport. o SFO has a joint agreement with the San Mateo Department of Public Health regarding the protection against and treatment of communicable diseases. o SFO conducts an annual air crash exercise involving County resources. 18 o The fire departments of both SFO and those within the County are available to help one another in case of need. For example, SFO assistance was used in responding to a fuel truck fire on highway 101.

F2: SFO has a positive and informal relationship with the Office of Emergency Services (OES).

F3: The County Sheriff is responsible for investigation of all criminal activity at SFO and maintains an office at the airport.

F4: The Federal Aviation Agency requires that SFO be prepared to meet nine types of emergencies. The airport exceeds this and prepares for 13 different types of emergencies, including a major earthquake.

F5: SFO operates a state-of-the-art emergency operations center located at the airport.

F6: SFO and the County are currently discussing the hazards associated with opening a fuel depot in South San Francisco.

F7: According to County officials the airport represents a major risk to the County, but it also has considerable resources that could be used to assist in an emergency.

F8: Overall emergency planning in the County is the primary responsibility of the Sheriff’s Office of Emergency Services (OES) which is funded through a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) between the 20 incorporated cities and the County. The governing body of the JPA is the Emergency Services Council.

F9: SFO is not a member of the JPA. Conclusions The location of the airport within the County dictates that the two entities coordinate their response to certain emergencies. The airport represents many risks to the county but it also possesses many resources that can benefit the County in a crisis. The need for comprehensive mutual aid agreements and disaster preparedness plans will increase if an airport fuel depot is located in South San Francisco. The foregoing Findings point to the need to include SFO in the emergency planning of San Mateo County.

40 páginas 56 hallazgos 9 recomendaciones

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 56 hallazgos

F1: Emergency Preparedness, Earthquake Preparedness

F2: Basic First Aid, Triage

F3: Light Search and Rescue

F4: Incident Command System

F5: A Hands-On Exercise A survey of the cities and municipalities in San Mateo County (County) found the following: Number of City CERT Program Individuals Trained Atherton Yes 30 Belmont Yes 38 Brisbane Yes 65 Broadmoor No 0 Burlingame Inactive 0 Colma No 0 Daly City Yes 40 East Palo Alto Yes 50 Foster City Yes 214 Half Moon Bay No 0 Hillsborough Yes 50 Menlo Park Yes 300 Millbrae Inactive 0 Pacifica No 0 Redwood City Yes (New In2006) 0 San Bruno Inactive 0 San Carlos Yes 36 San Mateo Yes (New In 2006) 0 South San Francisco Yes (New In2006) 0 Woodside Fire District (Woodside, Yes 300+ Portola Valley, and nearby County) Total 1123 7 The total trained is approximately 0.1% (or 1 in 1,000) of the population of San Mateo County. Expressed another way, only 0.4% of all households in the County have trained residents, ranging from more than 5% in the Woodside Fire District to 0% in many cities. CERT programs often turn to Neighborhood Watch programs (Watch programs) to recruit residents to train in emergency preparedness. Watch programs are coordinated by police departments and are primarily used for crime prevention. These programs have existed for several years and are widespread throughout the County. They take several forms and vary in physical boundaries, membership, organization, goals, and scope. Some Watch Programs have begun limited disaster preparedness training, covering such topics as:

F6: Where to meet in an emergency

F7: Where non-ambulatory residents live

F8: Communications basics Conclusions Community Emergency Response Teams (CERT) programs provide excellent training for local residents and instructs them how to prepare for and respond to local disasters. Very little of this training, however, is actually carried out. Only 1,123 individuals in the County have been trained and, of these, 800 reside in only three communities. Indeed, 10 out of the 21 cities and municipalities in the County have not trained a single individual. The more common Neighborhood Watch programs could provide a greater cadre of people interested in CERT training.

F9: San Mateo County and the San Francisco Airport are currently mutual aid partners in a number of arenas: o SFO relies on county hospitals for surge capacity in the event of an incident at the airport. o SFO has a joint agreement with the San Mateo Department of Public Health regarding the protection against and treatment of communicable diseases. o SFO conducts an annual air crash exercise involving County resources. 18 o The fire departments of both SFO and those within the County are available to help one another in case of need. For example, SFO assistance was used in responding to a fuel truck fire on highway 101.

F10: SFO has a positive and informal relationship with the Office of Emergency Services (OES).

F11: The County Sheriff is responsible for investigation of all criminal activity at SFO and maintains an office at the airport.

F12: The Federal Aviation Agency requires that SFO be prepared to meet nine types of emergencies. The airport exceeds this and prepares for 13 different types of emergencies, including a major earthquake.

F13: SFO operates a state-of-the-art emergency operations center located at the airport.

F14: SFO and the County are currently discussing the hazards associated with opening a fuel depot in South San Francisco.

F15: According to County officials the airport represents a major risk to the County, but it also has considerable resources that could be used to assist in an emergency.

F16: Overall emergency planning in the County is the primary responsibility of the Sheriff’s Office of Emergency Services (OES) which is funded through a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) between the 20 incorporated cities and the County. The governing body of the JPA is the Emergency Services Council.

F17: SFO is not a member of the JPA. Conclusions The location of the airport within the County dictates that the two entities coordinate their response to certain emergencies. The airport represents many risks to the county but it also possesses many resources that can benefit the County in a crisis. The need for comprehensive mutual aid agreements and disaster preparedness plans will increase if an airport fuel depot is located in South San Francisco. The foregoing Findings point to the need to include SFO in the emergency planning of San Mateo County.

F18: All districts have a plan for caring for children in the event of an emergency. Several districts are in the process of revising and standardizing the plan for all schools they administer.

F19: Among the potential disasters for which schools prepare are fire, earthquake, intruder-on-campus, bomb threat, hazardous materials incident, civil defense threat, windstorm, or flood.

F20: Most districts review their emergency plans annually and conduct periodic drills or simulations with students, ranging from monthly fire drills to annual or semi- annual earthquake or intruder drills. Reviews are conducted at various times of the year.

F21: The full-time employees of all districts are trained and understand their assigned responsibilities to care for children in the event of an emergency. Training is conducted annually.

F22: With respect to holding students for an extended period of time, there is wide variation among districts. The time periods range from a few hours to three days (72 hours). Several school districts have committed to holding students "until parents arrive to pick up children."

F23: Most schools expect to communicate with parents through cellular phones or land-line telephones. A variety of phone trees, automated calling systems, and radio station broadcasts were mentioned as alternate communication methods.

F24: Several schools can communicate with police or fire departments directly by radio and do not depend on telephones.

F25: Nearly all districts inform their students of what to expect in case of an emergency or disaster.

F26: High schools release older students (grades 9 - 12) on their own; elementary schools release students only to parents or other designated individuals.

F27: Among special preparations are the following: o Walkie-talkies to connect to emergency lines o Each classroom equipped with an emergency backpack containing basic first aid supplies and emergency contact and release information for each child in the class o Students bringing their own disaster kits with boxed drinks, granola bars, and other snacks to be stored at the school o Availability of a book of student photographs for emergency personnel to use 22 Conclusions The Grand Jury found that all school districts have emergency plans for the care of students should a disaster or other emergency occur during school hours. There is variation among the plans, and several areas that warrant attention are outlined in the following recommendations. The Grand Jury concluded that it was important that parents be aware of emergency plans.

F28: All law enforcement personnel interviewed stated that the county-wide digital radio network does not currently perform as well as expected. The initial trial of digital radios by the Redwood City Police Department was marred by coverage gaps and the poor performance of handheld radios inside buildings. The Redwood City Police Department has subsequently switched to the digital radio network and is working with ISD to optimize its performance in Redwood City.

F29: The proponents of the digital network in ISD believe the following. o The digital system offers capabilities not available with analog equipment, e.g., message encryption and data transmission. o Analog radio equipment will not perform as well as digital equipment with narrowband channels. o Their current efforts to improve system performance will correct both the real and perceived shortcomings.

F30: Most of the local police departments are reluctant to forsake their existing analog radio systems and migrate to the County’s digital system because the digital system does not perform as well as their existing systems.

F31: It is critically important that handheld radios function properly in all locations, including within buildings. Most local police departments have installed enough analog receivers to guarantee satisfactory performance of their current systems. 30

F32: Some local police departments have purchased analog radios that are capable of either wide or narrowband operation, and those agencies have stated that they plan to convert their radios to narrowband channels when necessary, i.e., before 2013.

F33: Local police departments have conducted some experiments with narrowband channels, and the results show that they can expect to successfully convert their existing analog networks to conform to the FCC mandate.

F34: There is a significant difference in the cost of the two types of radio: a mobile radio suitable for use on the county digital network costs roughly three times as much ($3500 vs. $1200) as an analog radio used by local police departments. A digital receiving/transmitting station costs more than an analog station. The station recently added atop the Hall of Justice cost approximately $500,000.

F35: When officers from different local police departments communicate by radio, their conversations must travel over the County digital network. The call originates from a handheld or mobile radio and is transmitted as an analog signal to a base station. There the signal is digitized and transmitted over the County digital network to a base station in the second jurisdiction. The signal is then converted back to analog and transmitted to an officer in the field.

F36: The typical life of base station radios is 12 to 15 years. Mobile radios typically last seven to ten years and handheld radios five to seven years. Analog radio technology is mature and will be less commonly used in 20 years. Digital radio technology is much newer and is still evolving. It is expected to become less expensive in the future and it may eventually replace analog technology. Conclusions

F37: It is essential that the acknowledged performance shortcomings of the County’s digital radio network be corrected so that the safety of officers in the field is not compromised.

F38: Local police departments are correct to insist that any radio technology they employ must provide excellent performance with both mobile and handheld radios.

F39: The analog radio users that plan to convert their radios to narrowband operation need to know with certainty that narrowband analog equipment will perform satisfactorily and meet future requirements. 31

F40: The proponents of the digital radio network and the users of the many analog radio networks disagree on whether analog radios will perform satisfactorily with narrowband channels

F41: Given the interdependence of the radio users and the climate of changing radio technology, the parties involved need to manage the evolution of the public safety communication system with minimum disruption and maximum efficiency

F42: It is essential that the acknowledged performance shortcomings of the County’s digital radio network be corrected so that the safety of officers in the field is not compromised.

F43: Local police departments are correct to insist that any radio technology they employ must provide excellent performance with both mobile and handheld radios.

F44: The analog radio users that plan to convert their radios to narrowband operation need to know with certainty that narrowband analog equipment will perform satisfactorily and meet future requirements. 31

F45: The proponents of the digital radio network and the users of the many analog radio networks disagree on whether analog radios will perform satisfactorily with narrowband channels

F46: Given the interdependence of the radio users and the climate of changing radio technology, the parties involved need to manage the evolution of the public safety communication system with minimum disruption and maximum efficiency

F47: The plans submitted by SamTrans and Libraries and the draft of the new Public Works plan all address the majority of the critical elements needed to protect the County’s residents and property in case of a disaster.

F48: The Parks and Recreation and the Airport plans need to be improved or rewritten.

F49: The Library, Parks and Recreation, and Airport plans are not SEMS compliant.

F50: The Parks and Recreation plan, the Public Works draft, and the Airport plan need improvement in the areas of training and field exercises.

F51: It is vital that all department heads ensure that the highest quality emergency preparedness plans exist or are written for all agencies or groups under their supervision for which a plan is deemed appropriate. 39

F52: The plans submitted by SamTrans and Libraries and the draft of the new Public Works plan all address the majority of the critical elements needed to protect the County’s residents and property in case of a disaster.

F53: The Parks and Recreation and the Airport plans need to be improved or rewritten.

F54: The Library, Parks and Recreation, and Airport plans are not SEMS compliant.

F55: The Parks and Recreation plan, the Public Works draft, and the Airport plan need improvement in the areas of training and field exercises.

F56: It is vital that all department heads ensure that the highest quality emergency preparedness plans exist or are written for all agencies or groups under their supervision for which a plan is deemed appropriate. 39

Recomendaciones adicionales 9

No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.

R1: The San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury recommends that the city council of every city and town in San Mateo County establish and promote an active and ongoing CERT training program with the initial goal of training 5% of its households.

R2: Because leadership matters the San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury recommends that: 2.1. All members of the Board of Supervisors become CERT trained as a demonstration of their commitment to this critical individual effort. 2.2. All members of the city council of every city and town in San Mateo County become CERT trained as a demonstration of their commitment to this critical individual effort. Issue | Background | Findings | Conclusions | Recommendations | Responses | Attachments Summary of Disaster Preparedness of Special Districts Issue To what extent are Special Districts in San Mateo County prepared to respond to a disaster? Summary Special districts are governmental agencies that deliver specific services within defined geographic boundaries. The most common special districts fall into the following categories: Police or Fire Protection; Water; Sanitation/Sewer; Healthcare/Hospitals; and Resource Conservation. The functions implemented by special districts for a geographic region are similar to those performed by departments in larger municipalities. The San Mateo Civil Grand Jury (Grand Jury) conducted interviews with staff and board members of 20 Special Districts to determine the level of emergency preparedness of each. In addition, the Grand Jury interviewed personnel from the San Francisco Airport, the California Water Service Company, and the County Office of Emergency Services (OES). (See

R4: Are there assigned responsibilities for full time regular employees to care for children in the event there is a disaster during school hours when children are in attendance?

R5: Have the employees been trained and understand their responsibilities? ___ When?

R6: How long is each facility prepared to hold students? ________________________

R7: What are the provisions for communication with parents or guardians and subsequent release of students if an emergency occurs during school hours? (describe briefly)

R8: Do students understand the expectations of the plan, specifically those relating to being released from school? What differences are there for high school, middle school, or elementary schools? Are there any preparations unique to your district which you would like to have shared with other schools and districts? 24

R9: Unique Preparations NA Aircraft HS is No Walkie- Simultane Follow crash/Smo Red Talkies ous SEMS & all g/Wildland Cross within & to telephone of ICS fire/Tidal Evac. emergency to all w/ wave/Wind Facility line & emergenc storm for all administrati y # schools on 25

11 páginas 10 hallazgos 2 recomendaciones

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 10 hallazgos

F1: The plans submitted by SamTrans and Libraries and the draft of the new Public Works plan all address the majority of the critical elements needed to protect the County’s residents and property in case of a disaster.

F2: The Parks and Recreation and the Airport plans need to be improved or rewritten.

F3: The Library, Parks and Recreation, and Airport plans are not SEMS compliant.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R1: The Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Supervisors ensure the following: 1.1 The Parks and Recreation plan is rewritten or improved so that the plan is SEMS compliant, includes personnel training programs, and provides for periodic field exercises to test and improve the Plan. 1.2 The Airport Plan is rewritten or improved, and that the Public Works and Airport Plans are SEMS compliant, include personnel training programs, and provide for periodic field exercises to test and improve the Plans. 1.3 The Libraries Plan is SEMS compliant. 1.4 The new Public Works and Airport Plans are completed and disseminated.

F4: The Parks and Recreation plan, the Public Works draft, and the Airport plan need improvement in the areas of training and field exercises.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

F5: It is vital that all department heads ensure that the highest quality emergency preparedness plans exist or are written for all agencies or groups under their supervision for which a plan is deemed appropriate. 39

F6: The plans submitted by SamTrans and Libraries and the draft of the new Public Works plan all address the majority of the critical elements needed to protect the County’s residents and property in case of a disaster.

F7: The Parks and Recreation and the Airport plans need to be improved or rewritten.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

F8: The Library, Parks and Recreation, and Airport plans are not SEMS compliant.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

F9: The Parks and Recreation plan, the Public Works draft, and the Airport plan need improvement in the areas of training and field exercises.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

F10: It is vital that all department heads ensure that the highest quality emergency preparedness plans exist or are written for all agencies or groups under their supervision for which a plan is deemed appropriate. 39

Recomendaciones adicionales 1

No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.

R2: The Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Supervisors ensure the following: The Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Directors of the San Mateo County Transit District ensure that the personnel training section of the SamTrans Emergency Preparedness Plan is upgraded and that periodic field exercises are conducted to test and improve its plan. 40

54 páginas 20 hallazgos 10 recomendaciones

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 20 hallazgos

F1: All districts have a plan for caring for children in the event of an emergency. Several districts are in the process of revising and standardizing the plan for all schools they administer.

F2: Among the potential disasters for which schools prepare are fire, earthquake, intruder-on-campus, bomb threat, hazardous materials incident, civil defense threat, windstorm, or flood.

F3: Most districts review their emergency plans annually and conduct periodic drills or simulations with students, ranging from monthly fire drills to annual or semi- annual earthquake or intruder drills. Reviews are conducted at various times of the year.

F4: The full-time employees of all districts are trained and understand their assigned responsibilities to care for children in the event of an emergency. Training is conducted annually.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)

R4: Are there assigned responsibilities for full time regular employees to care for children in the event there is a disaster during school hours when children are in attendance?

R5: Have the employees been trained and understand their responsibilities? ___ When?

F5: With respect to holding students for an extended period of time, there is wide variation among districts. The time periods range from a few hours to three days (72 hours). Several school districts have committed to holding students "until parents arrive to pick up children."

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R6: How long is each facility prepared to hold students? ________________________

F6: Most schools expect to communicate with parents through cellular phones or land-line telephones. A variety of phone trees, automated calling systems, and radio station broadcasts were mentioned as alternate communication methods.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R3: Each district should inform parents, in writing, that telephone communications might not be possible in an emergency and should spell out how their school will provide for children in the event of a major disaster. Response: The District is currently formulating a special communication to parents which will be placed in a school newsletter, explaining the procedures that would be utilized in the event of an emergency. We would expect to have this information published by early November in conjunction with the mailing of the respective parent newsletters. We will endeavor to continue our planning and communication with local police and fire departments and hope to never have to utilize these procedures. Sincerely, Michael J. Crilly Superintendent LA HONDA-PESCADERO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT P.O. Box 189 • 620 North Street, Pescadero, CA 94060 650-879-0286 • FAX 650-879-0816 Timothy A. Beard, Superintendent A Lighthouse District October 31, 2006 Hon. Steven M. Hall Judge of the Superior Court Hall of Justice 400 County Center, 2nd floor Redwood City, CA 94063-1655 Dear Judge Hall: This letter is in response to the 2005-06 County Grand Jury report on “Disaster Preparedness in San Mateo County Public School Districts”. The La Honda-Pescadero Unified School District has considered the Grand Jury’s findings and submits this letter in response to the recommendations to school districts. Our school district, which has an enrollment of less than 400 students in grades K-12, covers a large geographical area along the southern coast of San Mateo County. Because of our isolation and the lack of local services in this part of the county, we are especially concerned about the safety of students in the event of an emergency. The district’s emergency plan is currently being revised to address a range of safety issues from intruder attacks to bird flu. We will incorporate the findings of the Grand Jury report in the development of our revised plan. The timeline for completing this task is as follows: September-November Revise district plan December 8 Governing Board approves final plan January 2007 Staff training in implementing emergency plan January 2007 Information to parents about emergency procedures The La Honda-Pescadero Unified School District agrees with the Grand Jury that the safety of students in our schools is of the utmost importance, and the findings of this report will be helpful to us as we revise our plan to prepare for emergencies that may occur in our area. Sincerely, Timothy A. Beard, District Superintendent Administrative Offices Las Lomitas School La Entrada School 1011 Altschul Avenue 299 Alameda de las Pulgas 2200 Sharon Road Menlo Park, CA 94025 Atherton, CA 94027 Menlo Park, CA 94025 (650) 854-2880 (650) 854-5900 (650) 854-3962 www.llesd.k12.ca.us [Kindergarten – Grade 3] [Grades 4-8] July 25, 1006 Honorable Stephen M. Hall Judge of the Superior Court Hall of Justice 400 County Center: 2nd Floor Redwood City, CA 94063-1655 Dear Judge Hall: The following comments are in response to the Grand Jury Findings and Recommendations related to Disaster Preparedness in San Mateo County Schools: The Grand Jury recommends that all school districts in San Mateo County review the following recommendations and comply as soon as possible: 1. At the beginning of each school year, each district or school should review its emergency plans and update training of personnel. We agree with the finding. The recommendation has been implemented and has been a regular, annual practice for many years. 2. Each school site housing children should have emergency communication equipment that will operate independently of the land-line or cellular phone systems to guarantee reliable communication with police and fire departments. We agree with the finding. The recommendation has been partially implemented. We have “independent” emergency communication equipment that provides communication among the school sites and the district office. We are awaiting the allocation of a band width / contact provision from both the police and fire departments. 3. Each district should inform parents, in writing, that telephone communications might not be possible in an emergency and should spell out how their school will provide for children in the event of a major disaster. We agree with the finding. The recommendation has been implemented and has been a part of our annual back-to-school information for many years. Sincerely, Mary Ann Somerville District Superintendent District Office Board of Education 181 Encinal Avenue Bruce Ives Atherton, California 94027 Carol Orton 650-321-7140 Laura Rich FAX: 650-321-7184 Nancy Serrurier www.mpcsd.org Terry Thygesen A Community of educators, scholars, parents and staff working together to inspire, serve, challenge and enrich all students Kenneth Ranella, Superintendent October 6, 2006 Jo Sauer Mitchell, Honorable Stephen M. Hall Asst.Supt/Curriculum & Judge of the Superior Court Instruction Hall of Justice 400 County Center, 2nd Floor Diane White, Redwood City, CA 94063-1655 Chief Business Official From Grand Jury Summary: Olivia Mandlik, Dir. Of Student Services “The Grand Jury recommends that all school districts in San Mateo County review the following recommendations and comply as soon as possible. Jim Bowlby Dir. Of Technology 1. At the beginning of each school year each district or school should review its emergency plans and update training of personnel. Kathryn Tinio, 2. Each school site housing children should have emergency Human Resources communication equipment that will operate independently of the land-line or cellular phone systems to guarantee reliable Ahmad Sheikholeslami communication with police and fire departments. Facility Program Manager 3. Each district should inform parents, in writing, that telephone communications might not be possible in an emergency and should spell out how their school will provide for children in the event of a major Dennis Hatfield Supervisor Maintenance, disaster.” Transportation, Operations The Menlo Park City School District agrees with the finding of the 2005-06 Grand Jury regarding Disaster Preparedness in San Mateo County Public School Districts. A District administrator has been assigned to and is currently in the process of reviewing the District’s emergency plan and updating it as appropriate for the 2006-07 school year. 1. Annually, by October 17, the following District Emergency Preparedness Plan forms are completed by each school in the District and submitted to the District Safety Coordinator and the School-site PTO Emergency Preparedness representative: (cid:131) Principals’ Checklist (cid:131) Drill Schedule (cid:131) Site Hazard Survey (cid:131) Staff Emergency Team Roster (cid:131) Site Evacuation Map 2. All parents are notified in writing at the beginning of the school year that the District will attempt to contact radio or television stations to convey District information if communications to the outside are not disrupted. 3. At the beginning of each school year, parents receive information in writing regarding the specifics of each school’s emergency plan. Respectfully, Kenneth J. Ranella Superintendent Millbrae School District 555 Richmond Drive, Millbrae, CA 94030 650-697-5693 ● 650-697-6865 (fax) ● http://www.smcoe.k12.ca.us/msd/do/ KAREN K. PHILIP NANCY PALMER SHARON DEBIAGIO TRACEY WALSH Superintendent Chief Business Official Director of Curriculum Director of Special Services August 28, 2006 Hon. Stephen M. Hall Judge of the Superior Court Hall of Justice 400 County Center, 2nd Floor Redwood City, CA 94063-1655 Dear Judge Hall: The Millbrae School District has received the Grand Jury report entitled “Disaster Preparedness in San Mateo County Public School Districts.” Disaster Preparedness and Training is a high priority in the Millbrae School District. Please note that for all Grand Jury recommendations, the Millbrae School District agrees, and currently meets or exceeds implementation for all recommendations. Sincerely, Karen K. Philip Superintendent ar BOARD OF TRUSTEES JOHN P. DARRO MARJORY LUXENBERG JOHN J. LYNCH ROBERT N. MILLER CAROLINE SHEA An Equal Opportunity Employer PPPPaaaacccciiiiffffiiiiccccaaaa SSSScccchhhhoooooooollll DDDDiiiissssttttrrrriiiicccctttt Board of Trustees Avram Frankel, P.E Betsy Massie 375 Reina Del Mar Avenue j Pacifica, California 94044 Connie Menefee (650) 738-6600 j (650) 557-9672 (fax) Michael O’Neill Joan Weideman Academic Excellence (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1) Standards for Success District Administration James Lianides www.pacificasd.org Superintendent Susan Vickrey Assistant Superintendent Josephine Peterson Chief Business Official October 2, 2006 Honorable Stephen M. Hall Judge of the Superior Court Hall of Justice 400 County Center, 2nd Floor Redwood City, CA 94063-1655 Re: Disaster Preparedness in San Mateo County Public School Districts Dear Judge Hall: On behalf of the Pacifica School District, Board of Trustees, we submit the following response to the 2005-06 Grand Jury report of July 19, 2006 which contains findings and recommendations pertaining to the Pacifica School District. The Pacifica School District agrees with the findings. Actions for recommendations are as follows:

F7: Several schools can communicate with police or fire departments directly by radio and do not depend on telephones.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R2: Each school site housing children should have emergency communication equipment that will operate independently of the land-line or cellular phone systems to guarantee reliable communication with police and fire departments. Response: The District has had a variety of wireless communication devices over the years and is currently looking into additional systems which will guarantee communication with police and fire in the event of an emergency. The District also maintains a telephone communication system which is normally used to notify parents of attendance issues and special events. This communication system is web-based and could be operated from an external site even though district systems may be unable to be accessed. The Honorable Stephen M. Hall September 11, 2006

F8: Nearly all districts inform their students of what to expect in case of an emergency or disaster.

F9: High schools release older students (grades 9 - 12) on their own; elementary schools release students only to parents or other designated individuals.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)

R7: What are the provisions for communication with parents or guardians and subsequent release of students if an emergency occurs during school hours? (describe briefly)

F10: Among special preparations are the following: o Walkie-talkies to connect to emergency lines o Each classroom equipped with an emergency backpack containing basic first aid supplies and emergency contact and release information for each child in the class o Students bringing their own disaster kits with boxed drinks, granola bars, and other snacks to be stored at the school o Availability of a book of student photographs for emergency personnel to use 22 Conclusions The Grand Jury found that all school districts have emergency plans for the care of students should a disaster or other emergency occur during school hours. There is variation among the plans, and several areas that warrant attention are outlined in the following recommendations. The Grand Jury concluded that it was important that parents be aware of emergency plans.

F11: Plans for caring for children in case of emergency.

F12: Plans for coping with a wide variety of emergency scenarios.

F13: Semi-annual plan reviews with school staffs and monthly drills that focus on different emergency scenarios.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R1: The recommendation was implemented (already in place). District reviews Emergency Plan in the Fall and Spring as staff prepares for the annual emergency drill. 2. The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not reasonable. Specifically, the geography of Pacifica includes natural obstacles to communication equipment that will operate independently of land-line or cellular phone systems. For example, Ortega and Sunset Ridge schools are located among the hills of Pacifica. The District has explored alternatives to walkie-talkies. It is developing its fiber system and ways to maintain it for several hours through batteries and generators. Sites within the District will be able to e-mail emergency information. The District has met with the North Coast County Water District, Pacifica Police Department and Pacifica Fire Department to discuss ways to integrate communication systems. After a major disaster, schools will become an emergency center for the community. Pacifica School District Response to Grand Jury Report July 19, 2006 It is the recommendation of the Pacifica School District Board of Trustees to alert the Grand Jury that the District has specific, geographical issues in Pacifica that the District is working to overcome before it can implement the Grand Jury’s recommendation. Additionally, the Pacifica School District recommends that the Grand Jury seek Homeland Security funding for an integrated communications system among the District Office and school sites, which in the event of a major disaster, will serve as shelters for the community. 3. The recommendation was implemented. Each principal informed parents in writing through site newsletters this Fall. If you have any questions regarding the response of the Pacifica School District, please do not hesitate to contact the Office of the Superintendent at 650.738.6625. Thank you. Sincerely, James Lianides Superintendent JL:sc Cc: Pacifica School District, Board of Trustees Thomas F. Casey III, County Counsel PORTOLA VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT 4575 Alpine Road • Portola Valley, CA 94028 Phone: (650) 851-1777 • Fax: (650) 851-3700 • www.pvsd.net PVSD Anne E. Campbell, Superintendent Board of Trustees Donna Carano Donald Collat Teresa Godfrey Karen Jordan Ray Villareal October 12, 2006 Hon. Stephen M. Hall Judge of the Superior Court Hall of Justice 400 County Center; 2nd Floor Redwood City, CA 94063-1655 Dear Judge Hall, The Portola Valley School District has received and reviewed the Grand Jury Report of July 19, 2006 regarding Disaster Preparedness in San Mateo County Public School Districts. We respond to the Findings and Recommendations of the Grand Jury as follows:

F14: Staff training on a regular basis.

F15: Supplies on-hand to deal with students for up to 72 hours in case of emergency.

F16: Multiple communication options, including automated phone calling, radio station broadcasts, and land-line/cellular telephones.

F17: Radio communication with local public service agencies.

F18: Students who are informed and who have participated in emergency drills.

F19: Release plans where students are released only to parents or other authorized adults. Ormondale School Corte Madera School 200 Shawnee Pass 4575 Alpine Road Portola Valley, CA 94028 Portola Valley, CA 94028 Hon. Stephen M. Hall October 12, 2006

F20: A variety of special preparations including walkie-talkies, emergency bags for every classroom, food and water for 72 hours, and emergency release information.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)

R10: Among special preparations are the following: o Walkie-talkies to connect to emergency lines o Each classroom equipped with an emergency backpack containing basic first aid supplies and emergency contact and release information for each child in the class o Students bringing their own disaster kits with boxed drinks, granola bars, and other snacks to be stored at the school o Availability of a book of student photographs for emergency personnel to use District Response The San Mateo Union High School District agrees with this finding. The recommendation has been implemented. • The District uses a two-channel walkie-talkie to communicate with the school sites • District classrooms have access to the necessary basic first aid supplies and emergency contact and release information. Each classroom has an Emergency Bag with basic first aid supplies and tools • The District provides site-stored water and food to students • The District provides site books of student photographs for emergency personnel to use • Each site and the EOC has detailed maps of Water, Electrical, and Gas lines Recommendations Grand Jury Recommendations

47 páginas 3 hallazgos 3 recomendaciones

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 3 hallazgos

F1: The Board of Directors of Midcoast Sewer Authority, West Bay Sanitary District, Coastside County Water District, and Skyline Water District should ensure that their districts become members of WARN or of another service association that can provide disaster response assistance. Response: Although we are in agreement with the Grand Jury’s emphasis on the need for emergency preparedness and inter-agency cooperation, the Coastside County Water District is proud of its emergency preparations. CCWD has a comprehensive “Emergency Communication and Contingency Operation Plan” that was last updated in April, 2006. Additionally, CCWD is indeed a member of “another service association”, the California Utilities Emergency Association (CUEA), which can provide assistance in the event of an emergency. We have determined that CUEA membership is preferable to membership in the WARN because of liability risks associated with the terms of WARN membership. Finding:

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R1: The Board of Directors of Midcoast Sewer Authority, West Bay Sanitary District, Coastside County Water District and Skyline Water District should ensure that their districts become members of WARN or of another service association that can provide disaster response assistance. The Bayshore Sanitary District is a member of WARN.

F2: The Board of Directors of each Water, Fire Protection and Sanitary District should: Hon. Stephen M. Hall September 27, 2006 2.1 Ensure that the district coordinates closely with the municipalities it serves by: a) assigning an in-house emergency coordinator to work with the emergency coordinator of each city, town or county jurisdiction in its service area, and b) actively participating in the EOC activities of each city, town, or county jurisdiction in its service area. Response: CCWD agrees with this recommendation. We already have an in-house staff member who serves as the District’s emergency coordinator. Additionally, CCWD participates in EOC activities as part of the Coastside Emergency Services Committee, comprised of the Half Moon Bay Fire Protection District, Cabrillo Unified School District, City of Half Moon Bay Police Department, Montara Water and Sanitary District, Sewer Authority Mid-Coastside, California State Parks, California Department of Forestry and CCWD. 2.2 Ensure that their emergency communications systems are reviewed and that redundant radio links to the County are built. CCWD agrees with this recommendation, and is in the process of reviewing its communications links to the County OES and other agencies within our service area to ensure that reliable and redundant channels of communication are maintained. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely, Ed Schmidt General Manager COLMA FIRE DISTRICT November 7, 2006 Honorable Stephen M. Hall Judge of the Superior Court Hall of Justice 400 County Center, 2nd Floor Redwood City, Ca 94063 Re: Disaster Preparedness Training for the Residents of Cities in San Mateo County Dear Judge Hall As requested, the following is the Colma Fire Protection District’s response to the 2005-2006 Civil Grand Jury report dated July 19, 2006. The district agrees with the findings that Disaster Preparedness is a key issue which needs to be addressed to ensure the safety of our residents. We agree that the creation of an in-house emergency coordinator position is a valuable asset to coordinating efforts throughout our response area. We also agree that communications to county are a vital link in a disaster and they are currently under review.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R2: 1: Ensure that the district coordinates closely with the municipalities it serves by a) Assigning an in-house emergency coordinator to work with the emergency coordinators of each city, town or county jurisdiction in its service area and b) actively participating in the EOC activities of each city town or county jurisdiction in its service area. Response to Recommendation 2.1: The district created the position of Disaster Preparedness Coordinator in July of 2006 and assigned that position to Sean O’Connor a firefighter / paramedic with an extensive background appropriate for the position. He is currently working with staff from the Town of Colma as well as Broadmoor to ensure adequate coordination of disaster response efforts. The district is also actively working with both communities’ EOC activities and exercises as requested.

F3: The District should review its capacity to maintain Critical Communications Links during an emergency/disaster. Response: The District is in agreement with this recommendation and is currently working with the City of East Palo Alto and County of San Mateo to identify and ensure appropriate methods of communications during emergency/disaster situations are available. If you have questions and/or require additional information, please contact me. Sincerely, Lee Hawkins General Manager cc: Board of Directors L O S T R A N C O S C O U N T Y W A T E R D I S T R I C T September 20, 2006 Hon. Stephen M. Hall Judge of the Superior Court Hall of Justice 400 County Center; 2nd floor Redwood City, CA 94063-1655 Re: Disaster Preparedness Of Special Districts Grand Jury Report This letter is a reply to the San Mateo Grand Jury’s July 19, 2006 request concerning the status of Los Trancos County Water District emergency preparedness. Water District Service Area The Los Trancos Water District sold the water delivery operations of the District to the California Water Service Company (CalWater) effective April, 2005. The District operates no plant or equipment and, as such, has no need for a disaster preparedness plan. CalWater has assumed responsibility for this element of disaster preparedness planning. Prior to the sale the District upgraded various elements of the water distribution system to improve resilience to earthquake activity. Disaster Water Supply The District has established an Emergency Preparedness subcommittee that is working in conjunction with two local homeowners associations, (Vista Verde and Los Trancos Woods), the Woodside Fire Protection District and Community Emergency Response and Preparedness Planning (CERPP) to determine ways in which water from the District owned lake can be made available for fire fighting purposes, available for domestic water use and possibly as potable water in the event of major emergencies such as a wildland fire or catastrophic earthquake. As a partner in the on-going activities of these established groups, the District brings additional resources to bear on creating a resilient community within our jurisdiction. The activities of the subcommittee will be on-going with substantial progress in the current fiscal year. Please contact District Board member Perry Blackmon for additional information. Sincerely Perry Blackmon 25 Joaquin Portola Valley, CA 94028 CC: Clerk of the Court Grand Jury website Los Trancos County Water District ~ MID-PENINSULA WATER DISTRICT 3DAIRYLANE- POST OFFICEBOX 129 BELMONT,CALIFORNIA94002 PHONE (650)591-8941 FAX (650)591-4998 September26th, 2006 Honorable StephenM.Hall Judge ofthe SuperiorCourt Hall ofJustice 400 County Center,2ndFloor Redwood City,CA 94063-1655 Re: Mid-Peninsula Water District Response to Disaster Preparedness of Special Districts Report Dear JudgeHall: DIRECTORS Thisrespondsto the July 19,20061etterfromJohn C.Fitton, CourtExecutiveOfficer, requesting writtencommentsfromtheMid-PeninsulaWaterDistrict ("MPWD") respondingto the 2005-2006GrandJury's DisasterPreparednessof SpecialDistricts I Report ("Report"). TheReport includedthreerecommendations(onewith two LOUIS J.VELLA PRESIDENT subsections),andMPWD's responsesare setforthbelow.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R3: The Sheriff should direct the County Office of Emergency Services to commission a study to determine the potential advantages of organizing local Emergency Operations Centers by region rather than by municipality. Requires response from Sheriff. Sincerely, Joann E. Landi Joann E. Landi Clerk September 27, 2006 Hon. Stephen M. Hall Judge of the Superior Court Hall of Justice 400 County Center, 2nd Floor Redwood City, CA 94063-1655 Re: Response to 2005-2006 Civil Grand Jury Report Dear Judge Hall: The Coastside County Water District (CCWD) is in receipt of the 2005-2006 Grand Jury Report on Disaster Preparedness of Special Districts, which contains findings and recommendations pertaining to special districts generally, including Coastside County Water Districts. This will serve as CCWD’s response to the Grand Jury’s recommendations:

4 páginas

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos y recomendaciones aún no extraídos.

9 páginas 21 hallazgos 7 recomendaciones

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 21 hallazgos

F1: Applicants are often startled by Woodside’s strict regulatory environment and don’t like government regulation in general.

F2: Many applicants are accustomed to being catered to and getting their way in life.

F3: Applicants' desires for equal treatment lead many to feel that, despite complex and differing details, if it is allowed for one party, then it should be allowed for others.

F4: The Town is unsympathetic to contractors and owners who fail to play by the rules. The Grand Jury found that applicants’ perceptions are sometimes justified because:

F5: Not all staff members are equally knowledgeable or share the same standards. As one experienced resident put it, “it’s all in who you talk to.”

F6: The permit process often takes years, which is both expensive and tiresome. In the 1980's the Town rewrote the building code to preserve the Town's character. These rules made it very difficult to build. Nonetheless, almost everyone agrees that the rules aren't so bad. What concerns many residents, applicants, contractors, and other building professionals is how the rules are interpreted and enforced. Certain 5 situations are not clear-cut; they require interpretation and judgment, such as in the following conditions:

Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)

R2: Expand the number of building projects where permits are issued quickly and inexpensively by creating a FastTrack permit process. Projects that qualify for FastTrack permits must be carefully defined to: free staff to address more complex projects, minimize the number of residents who build without permits, and provide adequate safety and respect for community standards. The staff should be trained to implement the expanded process and be empowered to handle cross-functional issues and approve qualifying plans on behalf of all departments.

R7: Update the Town’s database of building codes, maps, and pamphlets. An updated geologic map should be prepared, the Town hazards map completed, and the municipal code revised to correct discrepancies between the old and new maps. The municipal code should be revised to incorporate current state regulations, clarify existing language, include the new hazards map, and add other changes as necessary. July 26, 2006 The Honorable Stephen M. Hall Judge of the Superior Court Hall of Justice 400 County Center, 2nd Floor Redwood City, CA 94063-1655 RE: 2005-06 GRAND JURY REPORT – TROUBLE IN PARADISE: THE WOODSIDE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS Dear Judge Hall: The Town of Woodside received a copy of the above captioned Grand Jury Report on July 18, 2006, and the staff has studied the report and recommendations contained therein. On behalf of the Town Council, I would like to offer several comments and responses. First, the Town Council greatly appreciates the efforts of the Grand Jury and the care it took to provide a balanced and well formulated set of recommendations. The many months that the members of the Grand Jury spent on its investigation and on checking and rechecking its facts and conclusions prior to the issuance of the report clearly demonstrate the dedication of the citizen volunteers who take on the responsibility of serving on the Grand Jury. Second, the Town Council is in substantial agreement with the seven recommendations of the Grand Jury that are included in the report. Many of these recommendations are already in the Town’s work plan for 2006-07. Several of the recommendations provide expansions of or enhancements to the work plan. We appreciate the thoughtfulness of the recommendations and the Grand Jury’s efforts to develop recommendations that compliment and enhance the recommendations of the Town’s Management Partners’ 2005 report. On behalf of the Town Council, I would like to extend our thanks for an opportunity to respond to the work of the 2005-06 Grand Jury. Please do not hesitate to call our Town Manager, Susan George, should you require any further information. Sincerely, Deborah Gordon Mayor Town of Woodside

F7: Many undeveloped lots are difficult to build on, and finding ways to build on these lots within the existing code is subject to judgment.

F8: One controversial area that is left to Engineering Department interpretation is whether new construction is a rebuild of an existing structure or a new development. A rebuild allows the applicant to grandfather less restrictive standards and is generally preferred by applicants.

F9: Applicants often intentionally prepare their plans so their submittals will be interpreted in the least restrictive manner. When the staff feels plans are deceptive, they respond with extra caution. Some applicants who perceive arbitrary outcomes are afraid to complain because they fear retribution. The Grand Jury considers that their fear is understandable because the same staff may remain on the job for a long time, and applicants may need additional permits in the future. There is a feeling among many residents that one is better off proceeding without a permit and begging for forgiveness if caught. It is a calculated risk, but thought to be cheaper, faster, and hassle-free. D. Permit Process Some building projects are effortless. For instance, it is possible to quickly obtain permits to replace a roof, build a fence, or rebuild a window. Some activities don’t require permits; however, most projects demand an arduous, long, and complex process. Some applicants employ facilitators to help them through the planning process. Facilitators are in demand when the process is so burdensome that applicants need help. There are, however, unintended consequences to the actions of some facilitators. For instance, facilitators that challenge the process actually slow it down. Their challenges discourage flexibility by causing the staff to apply rules rigidly to all applicants. The quality of submittals has much to do with the speed of issuing permits. Applicants’ submissions vary widely in quality, both in completeness and understanding of the requirements. Many applicants, contractors, and architects find it difficult to deal with the bewildering number of regulations that can affect a design. Many applicants need substantial assistance to understand all the requirements. Conclusions Woodside is a small rural town, with a small staff. The terrain is difficult to build on, projects are often very complex, and the rules are strict by design. People are unhappy with the development review process in many cities in the County, but in Woodside there 6 is a persistent clash of cultures. On one hand, some applicants do not always respect and often question intentions of the staff. On the other hand, the staff does not always produce a level of customer service that precludes applicants’ questioning their motives. Woodside’s development review process tends to be a series of fragmented activities by each reviewing department. Everyone is looking at the trees; nobody is surveying the forest. Because the process is not well coordinated, submittals occasionally fall between the cracks and deadlines are missed. This causes the effectiveness and credibility of the process to suffer. Procedural changes, however, must balance the desire for a less daunting process with the need for good science and safety.

F10: All departments should help applicants understand building constraints and develop plans that meet them.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)

R4: Ensure that the Director of Planning and Building, Director of Engineering, and Town Geologist develop appropriate procedures and materials to continually improve the development review process.

R6: Ensure that communication between development staff and applicants starts early and expedites the permit process. Each applicant should receive a planning packet that contains, at a minimum: • A description of the building review process and relevant town ordinances • A description of geologic, seismic, and geotechnical hazards in the Town • A description of the technical peer review process • Recommendations for selecting technical consultants • A description of necessary elements for required reports

F11: One person should be accountable for the operation of the entire development review process. This individual should be a building and planning professional. The upcoming retirements of both the Town Manager and Town Engineer/Deputy Town Manager affords a unique opportunity to restructure the Town’s staff.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R1: Restructure Town management by placing one knowledgeable person in charge of the entire development permit process. Hold this person accountable for the successful operation of the development review process, including the development of long-range planning, staff training, and customer satisfaction.

F12: Departmental directors should train and then trust their respective staffs to handle problems with a minimum of backup. Training is essential for the staffs to routinely handle the difficult tasks found in Woodside. Planning demands discretion, interpretation, and judgment. Unfortunately, the exercise of these principles often results in applicants developing perceptions of random outcomes or favoritism. The Grand Jury found that although the staff makes an effort to be consistent without compromising the Town’s guidelines and ordinances or compromising safety, there are good reasons why these perceptions persist:

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R5: Implement a continuing training program to ensure that all Planning and Building Department employees and development review engineers are well qualified to help applicants understand relevant constraints and develop plans that meet them.

F13: Rules are applied inconsistently due to errors in judgment of relatively inexperienced people. Inconsistencies foster the perceptions of favoritism or capriciousness.

F14: Some applicants push the envelope, disregard the rules, or are purposefully deceptive. Such behavior naturally leads the staff to a more cautious, more deliberate process.

F15: Many applicants do not get what they want, and without knowledge of all the details surrounding other permits, feel that the code is applied inconsistently. The Town frequently deals with facilitators who challenge the development review process. This produces unintended consequences. It creates an environment that minimizes flexibility by encouraging staff to dot every ‘i’ and cross every ‘t’. Common sense is replaced by bureaucratic process. Without give and take, the process becomes more detailed, more deliberate, and more costly. The Town has commissioned studies of the permit process. The Town Council lauds the resulting reports, but sometimes the recommendations are not implemented. For instance, the recommendations of the Kaplan Report were respected, but there is no evidence that the Town has made a significant effort to implement them. The Grand Jury is gratified to find that the recommendations of the Management Partners, Inc. report are being implemented and monitored. 7

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R3: Create a complaint board where disgruntled applicants can have their concerns addressed.

F16: All departments should help applicants understand building constraints and develop plans that meet them.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)

R4: Ensure that the Director of Planning and Building, Director of Engineering, and Town Geologist develop appropriate procedures and materials to continually improve the development review process.

F17: One person should be accountable for the operation of the entire development review process. This individual should be a building and planning professional. The upcoming retirements of both the Town Manager and Town Engineer/Deputy Town Manager affords a unique opportunity to restructure the Town’s staff.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

F18: Departmental directors should train and then trust their respective staffs to handle problems with a minimum of backup. Training is essential for the staffs to routinely handle the difficult tasks found in Woodside. Planning demands discretion, interpretation, and judgment. Unfortunately, the exercise of these principles often results in applicants developing perceptions of random outcomes or favoritism. The Grand Jury found that although the staff makes an effort to be consistent without compromising the Town’s guidelines and ordinances or compromising safety, there are good reasons why these perceptions persist:

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

F19: Rules are applied inconsistently due to errors in judgment of relatively inexperienced people. Inconsistencies foster the perceptions of favoritism or capriciousness.

F20: Some applicants push the envelope, disregard the rules, or are purposefully deceptive. Such behavior naturally leads the staff to a more cautious, more deliberate process.

F21: Many applicants do not get what they want, and without knowledge of all the details surrounding other permits, feel that the code is applied inconsistently. The Town frequently deals with facilitators who challenge the development review process. This produces unintended consequences. It creates an environment that minimizes flexibility by encouraging staff to dot every ‘i’ and cross every ‘t’. Common sense is replaced by bureaucratic process. Without give and take, the process becomes more detailed, more deliberate, and more costly. The Town has commissioned studies of the permit process. The Town Council lauds the resulting reports, but sometimes the recommendations are not implemented. For instance, the recommendations of the Kaplan Report were respected, but there is no evidence that the Town has made a significant effort to implement them. The Grand Jury is gratified to find that the recommendations of the Management Partners, Inc. report are being implemented and monitored. 7

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R3: Create a complaint board where disgruntled applicants can have their concerns addressed.

2 páginas

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos y recomendaciones aún no extraídos.

12 páginas 13 hallazgos 2 recomendaciones

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 13 hallazgos

F1: The Maguire Correctional Facility is a modern, well-managed detention facility for men who are incarcerated for less than a year, awaiting trial, going to trial, or sentenced to State incarceration and awaiting transportation to another facility. The California Board of Corrections has rated the Maguire Correctional Facility capacity to be 688 inmates. From August 2005 through April 2006, the inmate population ranged from 883 to 950. The population consistently exceeds the rated capacity.

F2: The Women’s Correctional Center houses female inmates and minimum-security- risk males. It also is home to two alternative custody programs: the Sheriff’s Work Program (male only), and the Electronic Monitoring Program for low-risk inmates. It is a Board of Corrections Type II facility with a capacity rating of 84 inmates. The inmate population from July 2004 through March 2006 ranged from 90 to 149

F3: The women’s facility does not provide the female inmate population with the same standard of service as the Maguire Correctional Facility provides for the male population. The Women’s Correctional Center has a number of deficiencies including the following: o There are no accommodations for female inmates with serious mental-health issues; they must be housed in the Maguire facility. o Lack of separate classroom/service areas. o Inadequate visiting facilities: one public visiting room for each 24 inmates in the men’s facility and one for each 65 inmates in the women’s facility; one attorney visiting room for each 96 inmates in the men’s facility and one for each 130 inmates in the women’s facility. o There are no accommodations for mother-child contact visits. o Two dorms in the women’s jail are open-bay type, housing 66 inmates (26 in one, 40 in the other). Due to the open-bay style, only inmates of “like classification;” i.e., either sentenced or un-sentenced, may be housed together. This hampers flexibility in dealing with the inmates: they cannot selectively be allowed out of their dorms either to keep hostile parties apart or to conduct inmate programs in a dedicated program room. The pod-type design of the Maguire Correctional Facility is superior in all respects.

F4: The San Mateo County Probation Department is responsible for supervision and monitoring of youthful offenders and for prevention/intervention services to 4 families and youth not yet under the Court’s jurisdiction.2 The State of California requires that incarcerated youth be provided “Social Awareness Programs” with the goal of reducing recidivism.3 This programming (education) is administered by the county probation department or the county board of education; however, there is no standard for the total number of these types of mandated classes. Most counties do not emphasize rehabilitative education to the extent that the San Mateo County Probation Department does. Many counties rely on the board of education only to meet this requirement by blending this instruction into social studies classes. The philosophy of the San Mateo Probation Department is that locking up juvenile offenders for punishment and meeting only minimum standards for housing and supervision is not beneficial for staff, the juveniles, or the community. The Probation Department believes that their model of intensive social programming reduces violence (and other problems) in the institutions. The available programs and services include: o Furlough program o Drug/alcohol substance-abuse education o Mental health—individual and group o Second Chance Education specifically designed for those juveniles heavily involved with gangs o Life Skills—teaches the skills necessary for functioning in society, especially those required to find and maintain a job o Parenting skills o Weekend Work Program o Sports League to foster teamwork and good sportsmanship o Anger Management o Cognitive Skills—how to make rational, positive life choices o Conflict Management and Resolution o A transition program to aid in developing goals o Furlough/Aftercare—provides more intense monitoring to the minors immediately upon their release. The Probation Department states that this is particularly important since recidivism is most likely to occur during the first 60-90 days after release.

F5: Camp Glenwood is a minimum-security “honor camp” for male juvenile offenders at risk for repeated offences. It is well managed and well run. A wide range of effective programs and services is available, all directed to help the juvenile offender take responsibility for his actions and furnish him with academic and life-skills education. The ultimate purpose is to assist in the resocialization of the offender and thus reduce the incidence and impact of delinquency and crime. Taken from the Probation Department’s Mission Statement. Select the “Probation” menu item on San Mateo County’s website: http://www.co.sanmateo.ca.us/ 3 Section 1378 of the State of California Title 15 Regulations for Juvenile Hall Operation. 5

F6: Hillcrest Juvenile Hall is old and barely serviceable. The County plans to transfer all juvenile detention services to the new Youth Services Center in September 2006 and to raze the Hillcrest facility in January 2007.

F7: The Youth Services Center is under construction. The San Mateo Probation Department expects it to be completed on time (September 15, 2006) and within budget. The Center will include a new 180-bed juvenile hall to replace Hillcrest Juvenile Hall, a 30-bed girl’s ranch (an honor camp, the female equivalent of Camp Glenwood), a 24-bed group home, probation offices, courts, and mental health offices. This new facility will place San Mateo County in compliance with the California State Board of Corrections regulations for the care of children in detention. Conclusions

F8: The Maguire Correctional Facility is well managed and well run, but is consistently overcrowded.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R2: The Sheriff of San Mateo County should move as quickly as possible to do everything within his jurisdiction to relieve overcrowding in both the Maguire Correctional Facility and the Women’s Correctional Center. COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence County Manager’s Office DATE: October 6, 2006 BOARD MEETING DATE: October 17, 2006 SPECIAL NOTICE: None VOTE REQUIRED: None TO: Honorable Board of Supervisors FROM: John L. Maltbie, County Manager SUBJECT: 2005-06 Grand Jury Response Recommendation Accept this report containing the County’s responses to five 2005-06 Grand Jury reports: (1) Disaster Preparedness Training for the Residents of Cities in San Mateo County; (2) Disaster Preparedness at San Francisco International Airport; (3) Preparing for FCC-Mandated Changes in County Law Enforcement Radio Networks; (4) Disaster Preparedness in SamTrans, Environmental Services and Public Works; and (5) San Mateo County Detention Facilities. VISION ALIGNMENT: Commitment: Ensure Basic Health and Safety for all; and Responsive, Effective and Collaborative Government. Goals 7 and 20: Maintain and enhance the public safety of all residents and visitors; and Government decisions are based on careful consideration of future impact, rather than temporary relief or immediate gain. This activity contributes to these commitments and goals by ensuring that all Grand Jury findings and recommendations are thoroughly reviewed by the appropriate County departments and that, when appropriate, process improvements are made to ensure the public safety of County residents and visitors and to improve the quality and efficiency of services provided to the public and other agencies.

F9: The Women’s Correctional Facility is well managed and well run, but the physical plant is a crowded disgrace and must be replaced.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)

R1: The Board of Supervisors should move as quickly as possible to fund and build a new Women’s Correctional Center.

F10: The San Mateo County Probation Department provides many extremely valuable services to our community by effectively managing, educating and socializing juvenile offenders instead of only incarcerating them.

F11: The Maguire Correctional Facility is well managed and well run, but is consistently overcrowded.

F12: The Women’s Correctional Facility is well managed and well run, but the physical plant is a crowded disgrace and must be replaced.

F13: The San Mateo County Probation Department provides many extremely valuable services to our community by effectively managing, educating and socializing juvenile offenders instead of only incarcerating them.

4 páginas 14 hallazgos

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 14 hallazgos

F1: The mission of the RPP is to serve the needs of school administrators, teachers, staff, and the students.1

F2: The goals of the RPP include: o Management of at-risk students in San Mateo County o Supervision and monitoring minors who are on informal probation and those on formal court probation o Reduction of crime and violence on campus o Minimizing drug and weapons possession

F3: The duties of probation officers involved in the Risk Prevention Program include: o Assist in all aspects of an investigation resulting from student misbehavior o Participating in incident review meetings o Participating in site truancy meetings o Functioning as liaison to police departments o Leading the district gang intervention program o Being a presence on campus o Conflict resolution and violence prevention o Cooperating with school officials when requested o Involving parents

F4: All persons interviewed believe the program is highly effective. It has an excellent reputation with police, school officials, and students. School officials unanimously described the officers detailed to the schools as competent, caring, and effective.

F5: Officials from the County Probation Department, the Sheriff, 15 police chiefs, and seven school superintendents wrote that when a probation officer is visible on-campus2 o Positive, beneficial intervention is possible o Gang activity on campus and in the community drops o Violence on campus declines 1 Taken from the mission statement of the San Mateo County Probation Department. Taken from of a letter to the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors, dated July 12, 2003, and signed by 15 police chiefs or their representatives and seven school district superintendents. 3 o Possession and sales of drugs on campus decreases o Truancy decreases between 66% and 72%

F6: A cost-sharing formula between schools, cities, and the Probation Department was adopted in 2000. In July 2000, the cities of Redwood City, San Carlos and Belmont opted not to participate in the cost-sharing formula citing philosophical differences over the cost-sharing scheme. Later, Atherton, Menlo Park, and East Palo Alto also withdrew.

F7: In June 2003, the Board of Supervisors approved three additional Deputy Probation Officers for the south county with cost sharing among cities and school districts (RPP III). The approval was a direct result of the Disproportionate Minority Confinement Report and the increased gang violence and delinquency in the southern portion of the county. The school districts of Sequoia Union, Redwood City, and Ravenswood along with the cities of Redwood City, Menlo Park, Atherton and East Palo Alto committed to finance one-half of the cost of the three Deputy Probation Officers (approximately $158,480) with the balance borne by the Probation Department. Schools serviced under this arrangement are: Menlo Atherton High, Sequoia High, Kennedy and Hoover Middle Schools; Cesar Chavez, San Francisco 49er Academy, Belle Haven, Aspire Charter School, East Palo Alto Charter School, and East Palo Alto High School.

F8: At present, the RPP is funded approximately 70% by the County and 30% by the various municipalities and school districts. All of the participants believe the program is effective in preventing delinquency and reducing gang impact; however, because the various municipalities and school districts have disparate funding, some are having difficulty finding the money to participate. Conclusions

F9: The Risk Prevention Program is innovative and serves the community’s need for safety and protection by providing intervention services to youth not yet under the court’s jurisdiction and their families.

F10: With the County Probation Department funding 70%, the program is an economic bargain for the cities and participating school districts.

F11: The Grand Jury believes the Risk Prevention Program is effective. It is an extremely valuable program with proven results and deserves continued support. 4

F12: The Risk Prevention Program is innovative and serves the community’s need for safety and protection by providing intervention services to youth not yet under the court’s jurisdiction and their families.

F13: With the County Probation Department funding 70%, the program is an economic bargain for the cities and participating school districts.

F14: The Grand Jury believes the Risk Prevention Program is effective. It is an extremely valuable program with proven results and deserves continued support. 4

32 páginas 36 hallazgos 4 recomendaciones

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 36 hallazgos

F1: The property tax system, including county allocations and state audits, builds on itself year upon year. Consequently, it is possible for errors introduced in a previous allocation to be incorporated in a future allocation and thereby be propagated from year to year.

F2: Although San Mateo County apparently benefited from the trial court funding provisions of the Brown/Presley Act of 1988, the County Controller did not identify or implement the TEA provisions of the Act, which would have benefited four no/low-tax cities at the expense of the County.

F3: Prior to learning of §98 of the Code in 2005, the Controller failed to allocate approximately $8.1 million of TEA funds to four cities for the 15 year period between 1991 and 2005 (from $0.3 million to $3.3 million per city). 5

F4: The Controller relies on the State Controller’s Office (SCO) quadrennial audit of the methods employed by the County to apportion and allocate property tax revenues to determine compliance with statutory requirements. In 1997, the SCO audited the County’s property tax allocations for the seven-year period 7-1-88 to 6-30-95. It was standard procedure at that time to audit for TEA compliance. In this particular audit, however, the state auditor inexplicably modified the audit program to exclude TEA compliance. None of the three levels of SCO reviewers caught the omission. In 2005, Portola Valley discovered that it was entitled to an additional share of property taxes collected within the town’s boundaries based on the TEA formula provided in Code §98 and brought this to the attention of the County Controller.

F5: The Controller promptly responded to Portola Valley’s claim by requesting the opinion of County Counsel. The request for opinion focused mostly on old information in its own files and less on the current Code §98. The Controller also stated “the impact would be material if it is found that San Mateo County is subject to the requirements of this law.”

F6: County Counsel responded to the Controller in 30 days and opined that the County is not exempt from the provisions of §98 of the Code.

F7: The Controller researched which cities in the County qualify under Code §98, and determined how to calculate the amounts they are entitled to under TEA and from where the TEA amounts are withdrawn. Additional payments to qualifying cities must come from payments previously allocated to other entities.

F8: Five months following receipt of Portola Valley’s claim pursuant to §98 of the Code, the Controller sent checks totaling approximately $2.6 million (for the two most recent years of the 15 years in which payments should have been made) to the four qualifying cities in the County. The checks were accompanied by minimal documentation, but courtesy phone calls were placed on the day the checks were posted.

F9: The initial basis for calculating the payments sent to the four cities was later found to be incorrect. Upon reflection, the Controller changed its interpretation of how to apply the Code with regard to ERAF I and ERAF II, which reduced by 15% the earlier TEA payments from $2.6M to $2.2M. Additionally, the Controller modified the assumptions for the interest due each city, resulting in a slightly increased interest payment.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R1: Cities: Cities should not rely entirely on the county to look after their interests. As demonstrated here, to do so is a false economy. The city councils of Colma, Half Moon Bay, Woodside, and Portola Valley should: 1.1 Align their expectations of receiving services with those of the professionals providing services. Contracts should clearly specify all expectations. Specifically, agreements with contract city attorneys should clearly state the scope of the city’s expectations with regard to their monitoring and reporting of state legislation that impacts the city. Likewise, job descriptions for full-time city attorneys should also clearly state the full scope of activities expected of them by the city council. 1.2 Assign city staff to participate in relevant financial organizations such as SAMFOG or CSMFO, participate in and monitor bulletins of the League of California Cities and report on items of interest at city council meetings.

F10: In March 2006, the Portola Valley town council delayed a planned ballot measure to reduce the town’s utility tax rate because they had lost confidence in the figures generated by the County Controller and was uncertain of the town’s future receipts of property taxes. The town council’s loss of confidence was the result of 6 the minimal explanation sent with the original check, the changed interpretation of how to apply ERAF to TEA, and inaccurate interest calculations. The 1980’s and early 90’s were a time of rapid change in financial systems and processes; however, the county’s controller’s office remained provincial and ineffective. William Bergman was elected County Controller in 1978, followed by Jerry Trias in 1986. The current Controller, Tom Huening, was elected in 1998.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R4: The Board of Supervisors should: 4.1 Take the following steps to assure that cities, schools, and special districts in the County can rely on figures generated by the County Controller. 4.1.1. Provide funds for the Property Tax and Special Accounting Manager to actively and consistently participate in the County Property Tax Manager’s subcommittee of the CAAC. 4.1.2. Monitor the results of customer surveys conducted by the Controller’s Office and bring concerns to the Controller’s attention,. 4.2 Extend the responsibilities of the Deputy County Manager for Legislative Affairs and County Counsel to include informing elected officials of the County of legislation that might impact their departments. 4.3 Monitor the progress of and review the results of the Controller’s mini- compliance audit of current property tax allocation practices and take further actions as deemed necessary to assure that the County accurately allocates property taxes. 14

F11: Grand Jury Reports in 1989 and 1990 identified significant deficiencies in the operation and management of the Controller’s Office, including the misallocation of property taxes. On September 4, 1990, the Board of Supervisors reached agreement with the elected County Controller to add a Deputy Controller to the department to help address the deficiencies. A new Controller was elected in November 1998.

F12: In 1988, the State Legislative Analyst identified 17 counties as having qualifying no/low-tax cites. Thirteen of them identified the 1988 TEA legislation and implemented the requisite changes. Another three were incorrectly identified as having qualifying no/low-tax cities. San Mateo is the only county with qualifying low/no-tax cities to have failed to implement the TEA legislation. All 13 counties that correctly implemented the legislation indicated that their participation in the County Auditor’s Association of California (CAAC) and County Property Tax Managers’ Association Sub-Committee was instrumental in their identifying the TEA provisions.

F13: In the fall of 1987 and 1988, the State Board of Equalization sent all county assessors a table of Tax and Revenue Code sections that were affected by legislation of interest to assessors. The 1987 list identifies SB 709, and the 1988 list included AB 1197, the two generalized TEA legislative actions which the County Controller failed to identify and implement. Currently, the Controller’s Office appears to operate professionally and has put many of its earlier problems behind them. For example:

F14: In 2003, in cooperation with the County Counsel’s Office, the Property Tax Division determined that the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) owed the County, cities, and special districts $33.7 million in excess property tax shift as defined by the law. Since that initial determination in 2003, the Controller has issued refunds totaling $135 million to the County and $59 million to cities and special districts, funds that might have been distributed three years later or not at all.

F15: Until the four no/low-tax cities discovered the TEA provisions, no misallocations of property taxes had been identified since the grand jury reported in 1990 that 23 school districts identified mistakes in the allocation of supplemental property taxes. Actually, few County agencies ever question their property tax allocation. 7

F16: Mistakes discovered during the SCO’s quadrennial audits are adjusted. The most recent audit, completed August 13, 2004, identified only one shortcoming. The County did not properly record secure parcels in redevelopment project tax rate areas, which is actually the responsibility of the County Assessor. As of March 2006, the Assessor had put in place a number of quality assurance measures to improve tax rate area (TRA) assignments.

F17: The Controller reaches out to local agencies in the County primarily through the San Mateo County Financial Officer’s Group (SAMFOG). Additionally, when addressing issues impacting the County’s 23 school districts, the Controller works directly with the County Office of Education who in turn communicates with individual school districts.

F18: The Controller’s Office conducts an annual survey of all cities, special districts, and RDA’s in the County. The purpose of the survey is to measure their performance in meeting customers’ needs. In January 2006, 11 of 47 customers surveyed responded. Five of the respondents rated their overall satisfaction with the Property Tax Division excellent, 5 rated it good, and 1 rated it poor. Thirty- six customers did not respond. Despite the many improvements mentioned above, there are other actions that indicate a need for the continued development of Controller’s Office expertise.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

F19: The Code (§96.1) stipulates that “If it is determined that an allocation method is required to be adjusted and a reallocation is required for previous fiscal years, the cumulative reallocation or adjustment may not exceed 1% of the total amount levied at a 1% rate of the current year’s original secured tax roll. The reallocation shall be completed in equal increments within the following three years.” The Controller adjusted in a single payment the reallocation to the four qualifying low/no-tax cities by an amount greater than 1%.

F20: The Code (§96.1) further stipulates “any allocation of property tax revenue that was subjected to a prior completed audit by the Controller, where all finding have been resolved, shall be deemed correct.” The last State Controller’s audit, covering the years 7-1-99 to 6-30-03 was completed August 13, 2004. There are no formal documents resolving the one finding contained in that audit. If the years covered by this audit are deemed eligible for retroactive TEA payments, it is estimated that an additional $3.2 million will be payable to the four qualifying cities. The recent widespread use of the Internet has made it much easier for organizations to inform their members of relevant issues and for communities of interest to support one another. 8

F21: The County Property Tax Manager’s Association (a subcommittee of the CAAC) is a state organization that stays on top of changes in the Code. This organization of county property tax managers is an excellent source of information and forum for the exchange of practices. In 2003 it published a 599 page “California Property Tax Managers’ Reference Manual,” which is currently posted on the Controller’s website. It describes TEA.

F22: The Controller has also posted on its website “Demystifying the California Property Tax Apportionment System” (written Feb. 2006). It describes TEA. The Board of Supervisors is responsible for the County’s efforts to affect state legislation. The Grand Jury learned that in the 1980’s the Controller’s Office relied on the County Manager’s Office to inform it of legislation that might impact them.

F23: In 1985, the County lobbied against SB 1091, a predecessor TEA bill that was never enacted. The County Manager’s Office coordinated these efforts that at a minimum involved the County Manager, Controller, and various budget analysts. They relied at the time on Legislative Bulletins issued by the County Supervisors Association of California, which is today named the California State Association of Counties (CSAC). However, despite receiving legislative bulletins from CSAC, the County Manager’s Office apparently failed to identify, or at a minimum, failed to notify the Controller’s Office of the passage of SB 709 two years later or AB 1197 three years later.

F24: The present County Manager believes that in the 1985-88 time period the County did not have a legislative affairs office. A formal office was formed in the early ‘90’s and is headed today by a Deputy County Manager. However, that perception is inconsistent with a document the Grand Jury has reviewed dated 1985 with the following letterhead: “County Manager’s Office, Legislative Affairs.” That document addresses “No Prop Tax Cities.” In 1985, the County lobbied against legislation to set a 10% minimum for no/low-tax cities.

F25: Today, the monitoring of legislation is distributed throughout the County and not centralized in only the County Manager’s Office. Departments do their own monitoring through participation with professional state organizations, server lists, and websites. Additionally, more formal attention is paid to such monitoring in the County Manager’s Office. The Deputy County Manager for Legislative Affairs monitors state and federal bills that impact the County so the Supervisors can address them appropriately. Participation with the California State Association of Counties (CSAC) remains one means of monitoring. The Deputy County Manager notifies impacted departments and discusses with them what if any position the County should take.

F26: The County Manager believes that elected officials are responsible for their own agencies and that the County Manager is responsible for all other departments. Thus, it would be inappropriate for an elected official to rely on the County Manager. Findings 2: The Four Qualifying Cites Colma, Half Moon Bay, Portola Valley, and Woodside qualify as no/low-tax cites under the TEA formula adopted by the state legislature in 1988 (AB 1197) and as currently contained in §98 of the Code. All four were identified in an analysis of AB 1197’s property tax shifts to no/low-tax cities prepared by the State Legislative Analyst in 1988. All four cities were members of the League of California Cities in 1988. The League issued at least 23 bulletins in 1988 that contained articles on “no/low-property tax cities.” The League identified by name all four San Mateo cities as eligible no/low-tax cities. On the eve of AB 1197 passing (Aug 26, 1988), the League indicated in one of its bulletins that it would send a special bulletin to all “no/low-tax cities” as soon as it knew the Conference Committee’s decision. Despite this plethora of information, none of the four cities communicated with the Controller regarding its TEA status nor monitored its property tax allocations. In 2005, Portola Valley’s Town Attorney identified TEA legislation in response to persistent questioning from the town’s mayor as to why the town received such a small percentage of property taxes. The Town Attorney was aware of TEA as a result of her previous work in Santa Clara County. The mayor persisted because by 2004 the town was in need of identifying new sources of revenue. Previously, there had been no pressing needs because the town had adopted a utility tax in 1985. All four cities relied on their attorneys to keep them informed of state legislation that impacted them.

F27: In the early ‘90’s, all four no/low-tax cities outsourced their city attorney functions. At that time, one individual was the city attorney for both Woodside and Half Moon Bay. This attorney believes that while his retainer agreement with Woodside provided that “The Town Attorney shall comment … on any new legislation or new cases that may affect the Town,” financial issues were not included in the “standard of care.”

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

F28: Woodside’s current town attorney interprets her standard of care to include “any law that impacts the town,” even if it overlaps with other professionals’ roles.

F29: In the early 1990’s, Portola Valley was in the process of slowly transitioning from the town’s founding Town Attorney to another attorney. In the early 1990s, Portola Valley and Woodside did not have full-time finance professionals. Half Moon Bay did. None of the four cities were members of SAMFOG, though all belonged to the California League of Cities. Since 1987 the Colma and Half Moon Bay city councils have taken significant steps to upgrade the quality and quantity of their professional staffs. This, along with monitoring information from the League of California Cities, Association of Bay Area Governments 10 (ABAG), and City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG) and participation in organizations such as California Society of Municipal Finance Officers (CSMFO) and SAMFOG results in the cities being more informed of the impact of state legislation today then they were in the past. Since 1987, Woodside and Portola Valley city councils have also taken significant steps to upgrade the quality of their professional staffs and Woodside is currently a member of SAMFOG. The four no/low-tax cities rely on the County to allocate property taxes accurately in accordance with state law and on the state to audit the County accurately. They believe the fact that the SCO approved audits, where the County allocated property taxes without regard to TEA, is an inadequate basis for not fully refunding the amounts due them. Conclusions California property tax laws, especially, those that were enacted more recently, are complicated and difficult to interpret. This increases the risk of improper application of the law and confusion among the affected taxing agencies. The most profound changes in property tax laws have happened in the last few years as funds are shifted from local to state needs. Errors introduced in the past impact the future and are difficult to spot. The Grand Jury believes San Mateo is the only county in the state with qualifying no/low-tax cities that failed to implement the 1988 TEA legislation (AB 1197) in a timely manner. The County’s failure was overlooked by the SCO in three successive audits in which it failed to discover the error, thus demonstrating the hazards of relying solely on the SCO to monitor city or county obligations. The Controller’s Office could have responded better to Portola Valley’s claim for an additional share of property taxes. While seeking County Counsel’s and surrounding counties’ guidance was appropriate, it should also have sought SCO guidance, consulted the Property Tax Manager’s Reference Manual on its own website, kept Portola Valley better informed, complied with §96.1 of the Code, and calculated payments accurately. A more considered response would have minimized the loss of confidence in the Controller’s Office currently shared by some of the low-tax cities. There are three major risks that would lead the County to fail to allocate property taxes properly:

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

F30: Risk 1 is failing to understand fully or identify changes to the Tax and Revenue Code. It is not reasonable for the Controller to rely solely on the SCO to catch such failures. The SCO did not correct the County’s failure to identify the TEA legislation in 1988. The County has an obligation to establish procedures that minimize the possibility of misapplying the Code or of failing to identify changes to the Code. 11

Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)

R2: The County Controller should: 2.1 Proactively monitor its allocation of property taxes and not rely entirely on the state audit to identify errors of calculation, interpretation, or omission. By December 31, 2006, the Controller should conduct a mini-compliance audit of current property tax allocation practices by comparing them to the entire California Property Tax Managers’ Reference Manual. The results should be reported to the Board of Supervisors and Grand Jury. Response: Concur. We will conduct a compliance audit of the property tax allocation practices of the Property Tax Division. We will begin the audit before December 31, 2006 and plan to complete it before June 30, 2007. The purpose of the audit will be to determine if the Property Tax Division complied with the requirements of the California Property Tax Manager’s Reference Manual in apportioning property taxes 2.2 Work to rebuild and retain the confidence of the County’s agencies by: 2.2.1 Expanding its cooperation with SAMFOG and encouraging those agencies that don’t currently participate in SAMFOG to do so. Additionally, the Controller should use SAMFOG to disseminate timely information regarding the distribution of property taxes that can assist local agencies to budget future revenues. Response: Concur. We recently issued a publication titled “Property Tax Highlights”, which provides an overview of the processes of assessment, collection and distribution of property taxes. It also provides, by taxing agency, a detail distribution of taxes for the year. The information found in this report will help taxing agencies better understand the property tax apportionment process and assist in developing more effective tax revenue projection methodologies. This publication is currently available on our website www.co.sanmateo.ca.us/controller ‘What’s New.’ We will print a limited number of copies for distribution. We have used SAMFOG meetings to discuss important issues relating to property tax. Recently, our office, in collaboration with the County Assessor, made presentations covering the property tax process and handling of the settlement with the airlines. We also made presentations covering changes in the property tax laws. We plan to continue working with the local taxing agencies through SAMFOG. 2.2.2 Establishing guidelines to communicate more openly, frequently, and accurately with customers. Response: Concur. As part of our survey and our attendance in the SAMFOG meetings, we will solicit from taxing agencies their opinion as to the accuracy and timelines of information we currently provide. We will make changes in our policies and procedures as warranted. 2.2.3 Encouraging more agencies to participate in the annual customer survey. At a minimum, steps should be taken to assure a broad sampling of opinion, so as to accommodate the needs of both large and small, and sophisticated and less sophisticated agencies. Response: Concur. We will explore means to encourage higher level of participation in the surveys. We will consider providing users of our website ability to provide input and suggestions online. 2 2.2.4 Explaining to affected agencies the reasoning behind all interpretations of the Code that result in benefiting the County at the expense of local agencies. Response: Concur. Through SAMFOG and individual communications to taxing agencies, we currently provide explanation of all changes in the property tax laws that affect apportionments. 2.3 Institutionalize means to monitor legislative actions that impact them, independently of the County Manager’s Office. Both the Controller and the Property Tax and Special Accounting Manager should actively and consistently participate with the CAAC and the County Property Tax Managers’ Sub-Committee respectively and endeavor to form mutually beneficial relationships with professionals in other counties. Response: Concur. We have developed means, independent of the County Manager’s Office, to identify and analyze pending legislative actions relating to property taxes. We subscribe to the “Legislative Bulletin” published by California State Association of Counties (CSAC). This publication identifies pending legislation of interest to counties and it separately lists changes to Revenue and Taxation Code (R&T Code). CSAC also allows us to track legislation as it makes its way through the process of becoming law. We review the annual State budget legislation to identify changes in areas such as school funding that can have an impact on property tax apportionment. We obtain primary guidance from the publication identified in Recommendation 2.1 called “California Property Tax Managers’ Reference Manual”. Property Tax Managers from various counties wrote this six hundred-page manual. It underwent a series of reviews and approval with final submission to the State Association of County Auditor-Controllers (SACA). The same Association produced a one hundred and sixty-page guideline for the implementation of SB1096. We utilized this guideline to implement the last major change in property tax apportionment. We maintain close contact with Property Tax Managers of all counties in the State through a discussion forum using email. Individual members post their comments, questions, or concerns and receive input from other members. Members who are not involved in the exchange can view the inquiries and responses as well. This is a very valuable tool for reviewing procedures of other counties, receiving opinion of the more experienced and knowledgeable Property Tax Managers and for participating in the analysis of new or pending legislations. We consult the San Mateo County Counsel’s office routinely to make sure that we correctly interpret and apply new legislations. We view the participation of the Controller and the Property Tax Manager in the SACA and County Property Tax Managers’ Sub-Committee respectively as part of our internal controls. The objective of this set of internal controls is to provide assurance that property tax laws are identified in a timely manner and implemented correctly. We will participate in these organizations to the degree necessary to meet this objective. 2.4 Continuously improve its procedures and tools by having the Controller and Property Tax and Special Accounting Manager periodically visit other counties to compare process and adopt their best practices. Response: Concur. We review procedures of other counties primarily through participation in the discussion forum described above. We also contact counties directly whose issues are similar to ours. Recently, we visited the City and County of San Francisco to learn more about their automated tax roll change process. We will continue to compare processes of other counties with ours as described above to identify opportunities for improvements in our processes. Yours truly, Tom Huening Controller TH:of ferrando\hue\grandjuryresponse06 cc: Members, Board of Supervisors John Maltbie, County Manager 4 July 12, 2006 The Honorable Stephen M. Hall Judge of the Superior Court Hall of Justice 400 County Center, 2nd Floor Redwood City, CA 94063-1655 RE: 2005-06 GRAND JURY REPORT – SUMMARY OF OLD MYTHS AND NEW REALITIES: WHO’S RESPONSIBLE FOR TAKING CARE OF BUSINESS? Dear Judge Hall: The Town of Woodside received a copy of the above captioned Grand Jury Report on June 21, 2006, and the staff has studied the report and recommendations contained therein. On behalf of the Town Council, I would like to offer several comments and responses. First, the Town Council greatly appreciates the efforts of the Grand Jury in investigating the County’s multi-year misallocation of property tax revenues to the Town of Woodside and the other three cities named in the report. The Grand Jury’s overview of the legislative and administrative history of the Tax Equity Allocation (TEA) formula was well researched and added clarity to a rather complicated and cumbersome process. Second, the Town Council is in full agreement with the two recommendations in the report that are directed to the four involved cities. In fact, the Town’s current practices already incorporate both recommendations. Specifically, the Town’s formal agreement with the law firm that provides Town Attorney services includes a requirement for the Town Attorney to provide a monthly report to the Town Council, in which she is to report on new legislation or recent court cases that may affect the Town. Further, the Town Manager, who also serves as the Town’s Finance Director, is a finance professional who is already a member of several municipal finance officers associations, including the two referenced by the Grand Jury. She also regularly monitors legislation through the League of California Cities and reports items of interest or import to the Town Council. We intend to continue to adhere to these practices, in full compliance with the recommendations of the Grand Jury. Finally, I would like to report that the Town Council agrees with the Grand Jury’s assertion that cities should not rely entirely on the County to look after their interests. To that end, the Town has joined with Colma, Portola Valley, and Half Moon Bay and hired special counsel expert in tax law to ascertain the appropriateness of the County’s actions thus far in response to the administration of the TEA formula. While we appreciate the efforts of the current County Controller and his staff in trying to rectify an error that first occurred almost twenty years ago, we are looking out for our own interests and not passively accepting the County’s interpretations or calculations. On behalf of the Town Council, I would like to extend our thanks for an opportunity to respond to the work of the 2005-06 Grand Jury. Please do not hesitate to call our Town Manager, Susan George, should you require any further information. Sincerely, Deborah Gordon Mayor Town of Woodside

R3: The County Assessor should: 3.1 Monitor legislation that affects the Revenue and Tax Code and share its findings with the County Controller and County Manager.

F31: Risk 2 is failing to implement the Code properly. Current results seemingly indicate proper implementation of identified changes to the Code. It is reasonable for the Controller and agencies to rely on SCO to catch any misapplication or mis- interpretation of the law. The SCO identifies shortcomings with each audit. However, this conclusion of proper implementation is tempered by the fact that in November 2005, when the Controller’s Office paid the four qualifying low-tax cities their TEA adjusted taxes, it did not compensate them as prescribed by §96.1 of the Code.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

F32: Risk 3 is failing to interpret the Code impartially. The situation described in this report clearly favored the County. The Controller is an elected official and must have an independent, unbiased perspective when interpreting the Code. Allocating property taxes is a zero-sum game, and all agencies must have confidence that the County is not advantaged at the expense of any of the 103 other taxing agencies. The confusion associated with three County Controllers in 12 years, combined with the serious deficiencies in the Controller’s Office at that time, and the fact that TEA was phased in over seven years probably contributed to the failure in 1988 to identify and implement TEA legislation. Additionally, no help was forthcoming from either the County Manager or County Counsel. The Controller’s Office has improved its performance, processes, and infrastructure since the 1988-90 timeframe. It is more connected to and active in state organizations such as CAAC to stay abreast of legislative changes and SAMFOG to keep the County’s agencies informed. Also, it posts information on its website to keep agencies and individuals informed. Cities are responsible for identifying and protecting their own financial interests. Despite receiving at least 23 bulletins addressing the subject, the four low/no-tax cities of the County failed to identify TEA as legislation that would benefit them. It is reasonable for cities to rely on the County to allocate taxes accurately and on the state to catch any failures of the County, but it might not be wise. It is unfortunate that Portola Valley imposed a utility tax in 1985 and reauthorized it several times since to obtain necessary funds when AB 1197 (1987-88) was designed to provide them additional funds from their existing property tax payments to the County. 12

F33: Risk 1 is failing to understand fully or identify changes to the Tax and Revenue Code. It is not reasonable for the Controller to rely solely on the SCO to catch such failures. The SCO did not correct the County’s failure to identify the TEA legislation in 1988. The County has an obligation to establish procedures that minimize the possibility of misapplying the Code or of failing to identify changes to the Code. 11

Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)

R3: The County Assessor should: 3.1 Monitor legislation that affects the Revenue and Tax Code and share its findings with the County Controller and County Manager.

F34: Risk 2 is failing to implement the Code properly. Current results seemingly indicate proper implementation of identified changes to the Code. It is reasonable for the Controller and agencies to rely on SCO to catch any misapplication or mis- interpretation of the law. The SCO identifies shortcomings with each audit. However, this conclusion of proper implementation is tempered by the fact that in November 2005, when the Controller’s Office paid the four qualifying low-tax cities their TEA adjusted taxes, it did not compensate them as prescribed by §96.1 of the Code.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

F35: Risk 3 is failing to interpret the Code impartially. The situation described in this report clearly favored the County. The Controller is an elected official and must have an independent, unbiased perspective when interpreting the Code. Allocating property taxes is a zero-sum game, and all agencies must have confidence that the County is not advantaged at the expense of any of the 103 other taxing agencies. The confusion associated with three County Controllers in 12 years, combined with the serious deficiencies in the Controller’s Office at that time, and the fact that TEA was phased in over seven years probably contributed to the failure in 1988 to identify and implement TEA legislation. Additionally, no help was forthcoming from either the County Manager or County Counsel. The Controller’s Office has improved its performance, processes, and infrastructure since the 1988-90 timeframe. It is more connected to and active in state organizations such as CAAC to stay abreast of legislative changes and SAMFOG to keep the County’s agencies informed. Also, it posts information on its website to keep agencies and individuals informed. Cities are responsible for identifying and protecting their own financial interests. Despite receiving at least 23 bulletins addressing the subject, the four low/no-tax cities of the County failed to identify TEA as legislation that would benefit them. It is reasonable for cities to rely on the County to allocate taxes accurately and on the state to catch any failures of the County, but it might not be wise. It is unfortunate that Portola Valley imposed a utility tax in 1985 and reauthorized it several times since to obtain necessary funds when AB 1197 (1987-88) was designed to provide them additional funds from their existing property tax payments to the County. 12

F1986: The current Controller, Tom Huening, was elected in 1998. • Grand Jury Reports in 1989 and 1990 identified significant deficiencies in the operation and management of the Controller’s Office, including the misallocation of property taxes. On September 4, 1990, the Board of Supervisors reached agreement with the elected County Controller to add a Deputy Controller to the department to help address the deficiencies. A new Controller was elected in November 1998. • In 1988, the State Legislative Analyst identified 17 counties as having qualifying no/low-tax cites. Thirteen of them identified the 1988 TEA legislation and implemented the requisite changes. Another three were incorrectly identified as having qualifying no/low-tax cities. San Mateo is the only county with qualifying low/no-tax cities to have failed to implement the TEA legislation. All 13 counties that correctly implemented the legislation indicated that their participation in the County Auditor’s Association of California (CAAC) and County Property Tax Managers’ Association Sub-Committee was instrumental in their identifying the TEA provisions. • In the fall of 1987 and 1988, the State Board of Equalization sent all county assessors a table of Tax and Revenue Code sections that were affected by legislation of interest to assessors. The 1987 list identifies SB 709, and the 1988 list included AB 1197, the two generalized TEA legislative actions which the County Controller failed to identify and implement. Currently, the Controller’s Office appears to operate professionally and has put many of its earlier problems behind them. For example: • In 2003, in cooperation with the County Counsel’s Office, the Property Tax Division determined that the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) owed the County, cities, and special districts $33.7 million in excess property tax shift as defined by the law. Since that initial determination in 2003, the Controller has issued refunds totaling $135 million to the County and $59 million to cities and special districts, funds that might have been distributed three years later or not at all. • Until the four no/low-tax cities discovered the TEA provisions, no misallocations of property taxes had been identified since the grand jury reported in 1990 that 23 school districts identified mistakes in the allocation of supplemental property taxes. Actually, few County agencies ever question their property tax allocation. 7 • Mistakes discovered during the SCO’s quadrennial audits are adjusted. The most recent audit, completed August 13, 2004, identified only one shortcoming. The County did not properly record secure parcels in redevelopment project tax rate areas, which is actually the responsibility of the County Assessor. As of March 2006, the Assessor had put in place a number of quality assurance measures to improve tax rate area (TRA) assignments. • The Controller reaches out to local agencies in the County primarily through the San Mateo County Financial Officer’s Group (SAMFOG). Additionally, when addressing issues impacting the County’s 23 school districts, the Controller works directly with the County Office of Education who in turn communicates with individual school districts. • The Controller’s Office conducts an annual survey of all cities, special districts, and RDA’s in the County. The purpose of the survey is to measure their performance in meeting customers’ needs. In January 2006, 11 of 47 customers surveyed responded. Five of the respondents rated their overall satisfaction with the Property Tax Division excellent, 5 rated it good, and 1 rated it poor. Thirty- six customers did not respond. Despite the many improvements mentioned above, there are other actions that indicate a need for the continued development of Controller’s Office expertise. • The Code (§96.1) stipulates that “If it is determined that an allocation method is required to be adjusted and a reallocation is required for previous fiscal years, the cumulative reallocation or adjustment may not exceed 1% of the total amount levied at a 1% rate of the current year’s original secured tax roll. The reallocation shall be completed in equal increments within the following three years.” The Controller adjusted in a single payment the reallocation to the four qualifying low/no-tax cities by an amount greater than 1%. • The Code (§96.1) further stipulates “any allocation of property tax revenue that was subjected to a prior completed audit by the Controller, where all finding have been resolved, shall be deemed correct.” The last State Controller’s audit, covering the years 7-1-99 to 6-30-03 was completed August 13, 2004. There are no formal documents resolving the one finding contained in that audit. If the years covered by this audit are deemed eligible for retroactive TEA payments, it is estimated that an additional $3.2 million will be payable to the four qualifying cities. The recent widespread use of the Internet has made it much easier for organizations to inform their members of relevant issues and for communities of interest to support one another. 8 • The County Property Tax Manager’s Association (a subcommittee of the CAAC) is a state organization that stays on top of changes in the Code. This organization of county property tax managers is an excellent source of information and forum for the exchange of practices. In 2003 it published a 599 page “California Property Tax Managers’ Reference Manual,” which is currently posted on the Controller’s website. It describes TEA. • The Controller has also posted on its website “Demystifying the California Property Tax Apportionment System” (written Feb. 2006). It describes TEA. The Board of Supervisors is responsible for the County’s efforts to affect state legislation. The Grand Jury learned that in the 1980’s the Controller’s Office relied on the County Manager’s Office to inform it of legislation that might impact them. • In 1985, the County lobbied against SB 1091, a predecessor TEA bill that was never enacted. The County Manager’s Office coordinated these efforts that at a minimum involved the County Manager, Controller, and various budget analysts. They relied at the time on Legislative Bulletins issued by the County Supervisors Association of California, which is today named the California State Association of Counties (CSAC). However, despite receiving legislative bulletins from CSAC, the County Manager’s Office apparently failed to identify, or at a minimum, failed to notify the Controller’s Office of the passage of SB 709 two years later or AB 1197 three years later. • The present County Manager believes that in the 1985-88 time period the County did not have a legislative affairs office. A formal office was formed in the early ‘90’s and is headed today by a Deputy County Manager. However, that perception is inconsistent with a document the Grand Jury has reviewed dated 1985 with the following letterhead: “County Manager’s Office, Legislative Affairs.” That document addresses “No Prop Tax Cities.” In 1985, the County lobbied against legislation to set a 10% minimum for no/low-tax cities. • Today, the monitoring of legislation is distributed throughout the County and not centralized in only the County Manager’s Office. Departments do their own monitoring through participation with professional state organizations, server lists, and websites. Additionally, more formal attention is paid to such monitoring in the County Manager’s Office. The Deputy County Manager for Legislative Affairs monitors state and federal bills that impact the County so the Supervisors can address them appropriately. Participation with the California State Association of Counties (CSAC) remains one means of monitoring. The Deputy County Manager notifies impacted departments and discusses with them what if any position the County should take. • The County Manager believes that elected officials are responsible for their own agencies and that the County Manager is responsible for all other departments. Thus, it would be inappropriate for an elected official to rely on the County Manager. Findings 2: The Four Qualifying Cites Colma, Half Moon Bay, Portola Valley, and Woodside qualify as no/low-tax cites under the TEA formula adopted by the state legislature in 1988 (AB 1197) and as currently contained in §98 of the Code. All four were identified in an analysis of AB 1197’s property tax shifts to no/low-tax cities prepared by the State Legislative Analyst in 1988. All four cities were members of the League of California Cities in 1988. The League issued at least 23 bulletins in 1988 that contained articles on “no/low-property tax cities.” The League identified by name all four San Mateo cities as eligible no/low-tax cities. On the eve of AB 1197 passing (Aug 26, 1988), the League indicated in one of its bulletins that it would send a special bulletin to all “no/low-tax cities” as soon as it knew the Conference Committee’s decision. Despite this plethora of information, none of the four cities communicated with the Controller regarding its TEA status nor monitored its property tax allocations. In 2005, Portola Valley’s Town Attorney identified TEA legislation in response to persistent questioning from the town’s mayor as to why the town received such a small percentage of property taxes. The Town Attorney was aware of TEA as a result of her previous work in Santa Clara County. The mayor persisted because by 2004 the town was in need of identifying new sources of revenue. Previously, there had been no pressing needs because the town had adopted a utility tax in 1985. All four cities relied on their attorneys to keep them informed of state legislation that impacted them. • In the early ‘90’s, all four no/low-tax cities outsourced their city attorney functions. At that time, one individual was the city attorney for both Woodside and Half Moon Bay. This attorney believes that while his retainer agreement with Woodside provided that “The Town Attorney shall comment … on any new legislation or new cases that may affect the Town,” financial issues were not included in the “standard of care.” • Woodside’s current town attorney interprets her standard of care to include “any law that impacts the town,” even if it overlaps with other professionals’ roles. • In the early 1990’s, Portola Valley was in the process of slowly transitioning from the town’s founding Town Attorney to another attorney. In the early 1990s, Portola Valley and Woodside did not have full-time finance professionals. Half Moon Bay did. None of the four cities were members of SAMFOG, though all belonged to the California League of Cities. Since 1987 the Colma and Half Moon Bay city councils have taken significant steps to upgrade the quality and quantity of their professional staffs. This, along with monitoring information from the League of California Cities, Association of Bay Area Governments 10 (ABAG), and City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG) and participation in organizations such as California Society of Municipal Finance Officers (CSMFO) and SAMFOG results in the cities being more informed of the impact of state legislation today then they were in the past. Since 1987, Woodside and Portola Valley city councils have also taken significant steps to upgrade the quality of their professional staffs and Woodside is currently a member of SAMFOG. The four no/low-tax cities rely on the County to allocate property taxes accurately in accordance with state law and on the state to audit the County accurately. They believe the fact that the SCO approved audits, where the County allocated property taxes without regard to TEA, is an inadequate basis for not fully refunding the amounts due them. Conclusions California property tax laws, especially, those that were enacted more recently, are complicated and difficult to interpret. This increases the risk of improper application of the law and confusion among the affected taxing agencies. The most profound changes in property tax laws have happened in the last few years as funds are shifted from local to state needs. Errors introduced in the past impact the future and are difficult to spot. The Grand Jury believes San Mateo is the only county in the state with qualifying no/low-tax cities that failed to implement the 1988 TEA legislation (AB 1197) in a timely manner. The County’s failure was overlooked by the SCO in three successive audits in which it failed to discover the error, thus demonstrating the hazards of relying solely on the SCO to monitor city or county obligations. The Controller’s Office could have responded better to Portola Valley’s claim for an additional share of property taxes. While seeking County Counsel’s and surrounding counties’ guidance was appropriate, it should also have sought SCO guidance, consulted the Property Tax Manager’s Reference Manual on its own website, kept Portola Valley better informed, complied with §96.1 of the Code, and calculated payments accurately. A more considered response would have minimized the loss of confidence in the Controller’s Office currently shared by some of the low-tax cities. There are three major risks that would lead the County to fail to allocate property taxes properly: • Risk 1 is failing to understand fully or identify changes to the Tax and Revenue Code. It is not reasonable for the Controller to rely solely on the SCO to catch such failures. The SCO did not correct the County’s failure to identify the TEA legislation in 1988. The County has an obligation to establish procedures that minimize the possibility of misapplying the Code or of failing to identify changes to the Code. 11 • Risk 2 is failing to implement the Code properly. Current results seemingly indicate proper implementation of identified changes to the Code. It is reasonable for the Controller and agencies to rely on SCO to catch any misapplication or mis- interpretation of the law. The SCO identifies shortcomings with each audit. However, this conclusion of proper implementation is tempered by the fact that in November 2005, when the Controller’s Office paid the four qualifying low-tax cities their TEA adjusted taxes, it did not compensate them as prescribed by §96.1 of the Code. • Risk 3 is failing to interpret the Code impartially. The situation described in this report clearly favored the County. The Controller is an elected official and must have an independent, unbiased perspective when interpreting the Code. Allocating property taxes is a zero-sum game, and all agencies must have confidence that the County is not advantaged at the expense of any of the 103 other taxing agencies. The confusion associated with three County Controllers in 12 years, combined with the serious deficiencies in the Controller’s Office at that time, and the fact that TEA was phased in over seven years probably contributed to the failure in 1988 to identify and implement TEA legislation. Additionally, no help was forthcoming from either the County Manager or County Counsel. The Controller’s Office has improved its performance, processes, and infrastructure since the 1988-90 timeframe. It is more connected to and active in state organizations such as CAAC to stay abreast of legislative changes and SAMFOG to keep the County’s agencies informed. Also, it posts information on its website to keep agencies and individuals informed. Cities are responsible for identifying and protecting their own financial interests. Despite receiving at least 23 bulletins addressing the subject, the four low/no-tax cities of the County failed to identify TEA as legislation that would benefit them. It is reasonable for cities to rely on the County to allocate taxes accurately and on the state to catch any failures of the County, but it might not be wise. It is unfortunate that Portola Valley imposed a utility tax in 1985 and reauthorized it several times since to obtain necessary funds when AB 1197 (1987-88) was designed to provide them additional funds from their existing property tax payments to the County.

Página 4

12 páginas 3 hallazgos 3 recomendaciones

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 3 hallazgos

F1: The Board of Trustees of the San Mateo County Community College District direct the College of San Mateo, Canada College, and Skyline College: 1.1. To continue to expand and promote their offerings of vocational training courses for students concurrently enrolled in local high schools. 1.2. To explore opportunities for offering college-level academic courses to be taught at high school sites. 1.3. To work with Jefferson Union High School District and South San Francisco Unified School District to establish a Middle College Program in conjunction with Skyline Community College.

Página 5

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R1: The Board of Trustees of the San Mateo County Community College District direct the College of San Mateo, Canada College, and Skyline College: 1.1. To continue to expand and promote their offerings of vocational training courses for students concurrently enrolled in local high schools. 1.2. To explore opportunities for offering college-level academic courses to be taught at high school sites. 1.3. To work with Jefferson Union High School District and South San Francisco Unified School District to establish a Middle College Program in conjunction with Skyline Community College.

F2: The Board of Trustees of the Jefferson Union High School District explore the feasibility of establishing a Middle College Program in conjunction with Skyline Community College.

Página 5

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R2: The Board of Trustees of the Jefferson Union High School District explore the feasibility of establishing a Middle College Program in conjunction with Skyline Community College.

F3: The Board of Trustees of the South San Francisco Unified School District explore the feasibility of establishing a Middle College Program in conjunction with Skyline Community College. Response Revenue Limit Districts like South San Francisco Unified School District have considerably less resources than Basic Aid Districts; however, South San Francisco Unified School District has a strong relationship with the San Mateo County Community College District. We have several written and Board-approved 2 + 2 Agreements with Skyline, CSM, and Canada Colleges in Business, Auto Technology, Mechanical Drafting, and Clothing. In order to implement a Middle College program, special funding would have to be available to implement such a program. If there is any further information you need, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely Barbara Olds Superintendent

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R3: The Board of Trustees of the South San Francisco Unified School District explore the feasibility of establishing a Middle College Program in conjunction with Skyline Community College. Jefferson Union High School District Board of Trustees Jean E. Brink ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES – SERRAMONTE DEL REY Rachel P. Juliana 699 Serramonte Boulevard, Suite 100 Maria S. Luna Daly City, CA 94015-4132 David K. Mineta 650-550-7900 • FAX 650-550-7888 Thomas A. Nuris Michael J. Crilly Superintendent July 6, 2006 The Honorable Stephen M. Hall Judge of the Superior Court Hall of Justice 400 County Center, 2nd Floor Redwood City, California 94063-1655 Dear Judge Hall: I am writing in response to the High School and Community College Opportunities for Collaboration Report as requested by the 2005-06 Grand Jury: Issue: How can high school districts and the San Mateo Community College District work together to advance both vocational and academic opportunities for high school students? While the Jefferson Union High School District agrees with the recommendation, the point needs to be continually made to the Grand Jury that the resources of “Revenue Limit” districts like the Jefferson Union High School District are considerably less than those of the “Basic Aid” districts of this County. A Grand Jury analysis of this disparity would be startling and enlightening. The Jefferson Union High School District has had a strong relationship for many years with the San Mateo Community College District. We have several written and board approved agreements with Skyline College relating to current “2+2” programs in Business and Automotive Technology. These programs continue to serve many students. Additionally, plans have been made to host a number of community college taught courses on the Westmoor High School and Jefferson High School campuses beginning this fall. These classes include Mandarin, SAT Preparation and ELD Support Classes. The Grand Jury Report also recommends that high school districts and Skyline College explore the feasibility of establishing a Middle College Program. During a recent meeting of the high school district and Skyline College (June 22), both entities The Honorable Stephen M. Hall July 6, 2006 agreed to explore this possibility. It was, however, acknowledged that special funding that had allowed for such programs at Canada and College of San Mateo may no longer be available for program expansion. During the coming months the high school district and college will be scheduling a work group to examine the feasibility for our students. These responses, I believe, address the recommendations of the Grand Jury. If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 650-550-7969. Sincerely, Michael J. Crilly Michael J. Crilly Superintendent

6 páginas 12 hallazgos

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 12 hallazgos

F1: Community Based English Tutoring (CBET) programs are thriving in several high-need districts. In these programs parents learn English, receive ideas for how to work with their children in reading and math, and are encouraged to read books in English to their children. These programs help parents whose native language is not English understand how the school system works and learn how to advocate for their children at school. o Child-care for younger children is provided for parents attending the CBET program. o CBET program times are flexible, meeting during the school day or in the evenings to accommodate parents’ schedules. o Calendars indicating parent education opportunities throughout the school year are published in both English and Spanish to reach parents of varying language proficiency. o Parent and community newsletters are printed in both English and Spanish. The newsletters are designed to get parents to come into the schools and emphasize parent responsibility for helping their children with school.

F2: At the beginning of the year, some schools offer workshops that allow parents to choose topics of interest. Teachers or other school personnel present the topics at times when parents are available.

F3: Title I (federal) funds are allocated to establish a Parent Resource Center and to employ a parent liaison (coordinator) at each school in the district. 3 o Parent liaisons (who are themselves parents of children in the school) hold weekly meetings with parents, help them to support their children, and guide them in working within the system to advocate for their children. o Parent liaisons connect parents with community agencies and resources as needed and also meet with administration and staff.

F4: A special grant provides English as a Second Language instruction to parents so that they can assist in the language development of their own children. English vocabulary, grammar, oral expression, reading, and interactive language skills are emphasized, along with creative writing, poetry, and book making.

F5: In one school district, a library orientation to the city library provides each parent with a library card. The goal is to encourage parents, along with their children, to use the public library.

F6: Home visits by classroom teachers to kindergarten families have fostered cross- cultural understanding and cemented positive relationships between home and school. Typically such visits are outside the scope of a classroom teacher's responsibility and require sensitivity to the family culture and values. Training is an essential component.

F7: One school district allocates $700 a year to each school to underwrite the costs of parent education and outreach. The program is designed by the parent involvement committee and includes the translation of newsletters into Spanish and workshops for parents.

F8: Some school districts solicit contributions of food from community restaurants. Parents serve breakfast to their children at school. These meals promote healthier eating habits for children and are social events for the families. BEST PRACTICES: PRE KINDERGARTEN

F9: San Mateo County Office of Education's Early Childhood Language Development Institute (ECLDI) supports children by integrating their home language and culture into the classroom while they are learning English. The ECLDI has developed training programs for parents of children aged birth-to-5 whose home language is not English. The training is included in various early childhood programs throughout the county.

F10: Sequoia Union High School District operates cooperative preschools in Belmont, Menlo Park, East Palo Alto, Redwood City, and San Carlos that serve approximately 175 families. Education and training of parents are integral parts of the preschool program. 4

F11: Preschool pilot programs, Head Start programs, and state-funded preschools in the county require parent participation. These programs place high value on family participation.

F12: The Peninsula Community Foundation (PCF) is a major philanthropic organization in the county, with schools among its beneficiaries. The Peninsula Partnership funds city-school collaboratives in high-need communities. "Raising a Reader," also sponsored by PCF, helps parents support children's learning at a very early age by reading to and with them and by developing language skills through story telling. Conclusions The Grand Jury, following its investigation, concludes that involving parents is not only cost-effective; it is crucial in motivating children’s learning. Many districts in the county demonstrate creativity in reaching out to parents. School officials recognize that their efforts do reap benefits. They acquire grants and obtain community resources to fund parent education programs and generate parent support. Preschools encourage and frequently require parents to participate in the day-to-day education of their four-year-olds. In this way, families discover the value of parents' engagement in their child's learning. The Grand Jury believes that parents’ involvement is paramount in educational achievement. Because techniques for involving parents vary, schools throughout the county can help students by sharing their best practices with each other.

21 páginas 1 hallazgos 4 recomendaciones

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 1 hallazgos

F1: The Grand Jury recommends that the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors: 1.1 Actively support SB1309, which addresses the nursing shortage and is currently being considered by the California State Legislature. Response: Agree. The Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution No. 068127 in support of SB1309 at their July 11, 2006 meeting. 1.2 Continue to fund and otherwise support the Workforce Investment Board in its ongoing effort to establish the Silicon Valley Center for Health Professions and in its exploration of other efforts to partner in finding solutions for the nursing shortage. Response: Agree. This recommendation has already been implemented and is ongoing. The San Mateo County Board of Supervisors supports the Workforce Investment Board (WIB) and its efforts. The WIB will continue to seek funding and solutions for this critical growth sector of nursing. 1.3 Extend to nurses who are already employed at the San Mateo Medical Center, and who meet certain criteria, its current recruiting strategy of offering prospective nurses rental discounts at selected apartment complexes. Response: Agree. The discounts at Westlake Village Apartments in Daly City and Hillside Gardens in San Mateo are available to current nursing staff as well as prospective nurse recruits. All new nurses at the Medical Center are made aware of the rental discounts and the discounts are advertised once a year in the San Mateo Medical Center newsletter which is distributed to all Medical Center staff.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R1: The Grand Jury recommends that the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors: 1.1. Actively support SB1309, which addresses the nursing shortage and is currently being considered by the California State Legislature. 1.2. Continue to fund and otherwise support the Workforce Investment Board in its ongoing effort to establish the Silicon Valley Center for Health Professions and in its exploration of other efforts to partner in finding solutions for the nursing shortage. 1.3. Extend to nurses who are already employed at the San Mateo County Medical Center, and who meet certain criteria, its current recruiting strategy of offering prospective nurses rental discounts at selected apartment complexes.

Recomendaciones adicionales 3

No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.

R2: The Grand Jury recommends that the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors: The Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Trustees of the San Mateo County Community College District: 2.1. Continue its support of the Chancellor and the community colleges in their ongoing effort to establish the Silicon Valley Center for Health Professions. 2.2. Explore alternate avenues for supplementing the salaries of nursing faculty.

R3: The Grand Jury recommends that the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors: The Grand Jury recommends that the Peninsula Health Care District: 3.1. Continue to fund nurses’ training by the additional step of supplementing the salaries of nursing professors so that pay will be competitive. 3.2. Take immediate steps to extend to nurses its current practice of helping doctors obtain loans for housing.

R4: The Grand Jury recommends that the Peninsula Health Care District: The Grand Jury recommends that the Sequoia Healthcare District implement a policy of helping nurses obtain loans for housing. 9

15 páginas 4 hallazgos 4 recomendaciones

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 4 hallazgos

F1: Take steps to improve clients’ understanding of their rights as dependents of the court. Prepare the CS 230 (3/02) “Child’s Personal Rights” document in several versions that are appropriate for the varying ages of the clients involved. In addition, amend these documents to include a listing of the following rights: a. The right to communicate directly with the judge to request intervention in their circumstances, should other avenues not be working. b. The right to request a change in therapy (drop or move to peer or family group). c. The right to be in contact with their lawyers prior to each hearing of their cases. Response: Partially agree. HSA agrees that the youth have the right to directly communicate with the Judge. However, the Agency believes it is the attorney’s responsibility to communicate with the client to facilitate talking with the Judge. Foster youth should have a right to change therapy regarding placement issues after discussions with social workers and TDMs. HSA is in the process of updating its Children and Family Services handbook. Included in the revision will be a modified personal rights document that is written in easily understood and youth-friendly language. The document will explain that foster youth have the right to attend court hearings and reference how to access their attorneys, and how to work with these attorneys prior to hearings. The document will also explain how to participate in decisions regarding therapy, placement, visitation and other court orders. This revision will be completed by the end of this calendar year.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R1: Take steps to improve clients' understanding of their rights as dependents of the court. Prepare the CS 230 (3/02) "Child's Personal Rights" document in several versions that are appropriate for the varying ages of the clients involved. In addition, amend these documents to include a listing of the following rights: a. The right to communicate directly with the judge to request intervention in their circumstances, should other avenues not be working. b. The right to request a change in therapy (drop or move to peer or family group). c. The right to be in contact with their lawyers prior to each hearing of their cases.

F2: Develop the proposed earlier ILSP responsibility training program for youth between 14 and 15.5 to reach youth as young as 10 or 12. This will allow more time to introduce the concepts and to help develop an attitude of self-reliance and individual responsibility. Response: Disagree. Ages 10 and 12 are too young to start ILSP. Concepts of adult self-sufficiency are too abstract for this age group. Other asset development strategies are more effective. Currently a partnership with the Fostering the Future/Peninsula Community Foundation program provides three asset coaches to current and former foster youth. One coach is assigned specifically to middle school age children in foster care. The role of the Asset Coach is to develop personal responsibility and resiliency through involvement with community, healthy use of time, and productive child/adult relationships. These youth are some of the most vulnerable in the community and have come through very difficult experiences. Through Asset Development Strategies, youth ages 10-14 can develop resiliency, self-confidence, and a connection to a caring community. This will prepare them for Pre ILSP at age 14. Adolescent Services is currently developing curriculum and interviewing trainers for the Early ILSP Program for 14-15 year olds. Classes are anticipated to begin by October 2006.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R2: Develop the proposed earlier ILSP responsibility training program for youths between 14 and 15.5 to reach youth as young as 10 or 12. This will allow more time to introduce the concepts and to help develop an attitude of self-reliance and individual responsibility.

F3: Expand both the initial and annual training of foster parents to include methods of teaching individual responsibility to their charges. Response: Agree. This is a good idea. HSA is open to discussions with foster parents regarding further training. This will be discussed at the Foster Parent Association meetings and made part of the Strengthening Partnership workshops. HSA has already started to incorporate Asset Development in the foster parent training and is looking at a more strength-based approach for working with these youth. This training will be reworked and improved during FY 2006-07.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R3: Expand both the initial and annual training of foster parents to include methods of teaching individual responsibility to their charges. Additionally, the grand jury recommends that:

F4: The County Board of Supervisors seek legislation from the State of California that would allow an exception from the State confidentiality laws to enable the promoting of individual children in foster care, their personal life circumstances, and their need for foster or adoptive parents. Response: Disagree. The County Board of Supervisors is currently involved in multiple legislative efforts related to foster children. The Agency has some concerns about making foster children’s lives too public. HSA currently shares confidential information with foster parents that is relevant to the youth’s care and supervision. The Judge can also authorize disclosure of confidential information relating to foster children. Foster parents are currently allowed to participate in court proceedings unless the parent requests they not be there. Foster children have indicated numerous times that they do not want others in their school or personal lives to know about their status. Foster children should have the same rights as other children to keep their personal and family background private. HSA does not support releasing confidential information of individual children in foster care except in specific and limited circumstances; e.g., approval by the court.

Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)

R4: The County Board of Supervisors seek legislation from the State of California that would allow an exception from the state confidentiality laws to enable the promoting of individual children in foster care, their personal life circumstances, and their need for foster or adoptive parents. 6

11 páginas 6 recomendaciones

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Recomendaciones adicionales 6

No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.

R1: Enforce the changes to the Bylaws of the Board noted in Findings I and adopted January 11, 2006, which address the day-to-day operations of the district by administrative staff and the proper comportment of Board members in their official role.

R2: As a full board, complete a formal training course, as offered by the California School Boards Association (CSBA), on the responsibilities and limitations of School Board Members. This CSBA training must be completed during the 2006-2007 school year.

R3: Direct the Superintendent to negotiate with the Classified Employees Union to eliminate the Personnel Commission. 7

R4: Direct the Assistant Superintendent of Business Services to implement all 11 recommendations of the June 2005 Audit Report before the 2006 Audit takes place.

R5: Assign members of the Board to meet regularly with members of the City Council of Daly City to identify and develop projects of mutual benefit.

R6: Improve communication with the community by: 6.1. Televising and broadcasting Board meetings 6.2. Inviting reporters from local newspapers to attend and report on each Board meeting 6.3. Posting all Board meeting agendas and approved minutes on the district web site in an easily accessible format. Board Approved 8/23/06 Jefferson Elementary School District August 14, 2006 Response to the Grand Jury Recommendation School Board Members gave opening statements of their individual responses regarding the Grand Jury recommendations at the Board Meeting on August 9, 2006. Individual Board Members’ written statements will be included as an

7 páginas 3 hallazgos

Vista rápida Detalles completos →

Hallazgos & Recomendaciones 3 hallazgos

F1: Recognize that each property, and each property owner, is a unique part of our community

F2: Appreciate that the City’s development programs and property acquisition activities must reflect the broader community values

F3: Understand that the City’s development projects have significant impact on the property owners, the properties’ neighbors, adjacent businesses, individuals, and the community Conclusions The City has become acutely aware of the impact of eminent domain on owners whose property is being taken. As a result, the City has established guiding principles to be followed in future eminent domain proceedings. At this time it is not possible to evaluate how well the guiding principles will work in practice because the City has not initiated eminent domain proceedings since the Guiding Principles were adopted at the November 14, 2005 City Council meeting. The Grand Jury applauds the City Council of Redwood City for creating and adopting the Guiding Principles for Property Acquisition, and concludes that the City Council should take action to ensure that property owners subject to eminent domain proceedings are made fully aware of these principles.