Santa Barbara County Grand Jury
2011-2012
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
7 findings
F1a:
CARES Crisis Residential North, with a 12-bed capacity, has averaged 7.4 full beds in the last five months through March, 2012.
F1b:
The Santa Barbara County medical community is not fully aware of the capabilities of CARES Crisis Residential North and its benefit to recovering mentally ill patients.
F1c:
CARES Crisis Residential North is the only unlocked facility for mentally ill patients who have no insurance in both Santa Barbara County and San Luis Obispo County.
F1d:
CARES Crisis Residential North helps mentally ill indigent patients obtain food stamps and Medi-Cal insurance; as well as helping them find homes and jobs.
F1e:
Utilization of the CARES Crisis Residential North facility has been shown to be a cost effective treatment option for Santa Barbara County post-acute mentally ill patients.
F2:
When Emergency Room physicians are not provided the patient’s mental/medical history, they are reluctant to sign a patient’s admission package to CARES Crisis Residential North.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
That the Mobile Crisis Team and CARES Crisis Residential North work with Emergency Room staff to facilitate a protocol for admitting their patients to the transitional CARES program. . Santa Barbara County Grand Jury
F3:
CARES Crisis Residential North is a safe environment for patients discharged from a locked facility to transition back into society.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
That CARES Crisis Residential North coordinate with the Santa Barbara County Main Jail/City Jails and the Santa Barbara County Psychiatric Health Facility on the capacity of CARES Crisis Residential North for possible placement of their appropriate patients upon release.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
2 findings
F1:
Lompoc Housing and Community Development Corporation loan agreements gave Santa Barbara County, as the lead entity in the HUD HOME Consortium, authority to require audits and inspect the organization‟s records.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1a:
That the Santa Barbara County Board of, Supervisors establish a policy that the Auditor- Controller conduct an annual audit, with time certain deadlines, of all organizations that receive County funds in excess of $100,000.
R1b:
That the Lompoc City Council establish a policy that the Management Services Director conduct an annual audit, with time certain deadlines, of all organizations that receive City funds in excess of $50,000.
F2:
The Lompoc Redevelopment Agency did not enforce the restrictive covenants on Lompoc Housing and Community Development Corporation property. Official notices of 12 Lompoc Community Development Department Memorandum, dated 11/21/11 noncompliance did not enunciate consequences nor did the Redevelopment Agency Board of Directors take action when it had the opportunity.
Related Recommendations (2)
R2a:
That the Santa Barbara County Auditor-Controller report the results of these audits annually to the Board of Supervisors prior to County budget approval.
R2b:
That the City of Lompoc Management Services Director report the results of these audits annually to the City Council prior to budget approval.
Additional Recommendations
4
Not linked to specific findings.
R3a:
That the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors appropriate the necessary funds to allow the Auditor-Controller to conduct annual audits per Recommendation 1a or, where permissible, require that organizations receiving county-controlled funds in excess of $100,000 bear the cost of an annual audit.
R3b:
That the City of Lompoc appropriate the necessary funds to allow the Management Services Director to conduct annual audits per Recommendation 1b or, where permissible, require that organizations requesting grants or loans in excess of $50,000 bear the cost of an annual audit.
R4a:
That the County of Santa Barbara withhold all funding from any organization that fails to supply complete records for annual audits or has failed to meet requirements of existing contracts.
R4b:
That the City of Lompoc withhold all funding from any organization that fails to supply complete records for annual audits or has failed to meet requirements of existing contracts. Santa Barbara County Grand Jury
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
5 findings
F1:
There is a direct correlation between truancy and delinquency.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
That each secondary school district be responsible for establishing and operating its own truancy reduction program that conforms to the legal requirements of the State of California's Education Code by the beginning of the 2012-13 school year.
F2:
Between 2000 and 2008, Santa Barbara County had an effective truancy program under the direction of the Santa Barbara County Office of the District Attorney. During that time the truancy rate averaged 20 percent.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
That the Office of the District Attorney request and that the Board of Supervisors approve the appropriate amount in the Office of the District Attorney's budget to support its participation in truancy reduction programs.
F3:
After the termination of the program, truancy rates increased to a high of 30.76 percent in Santa Barbara County in 2010-11 and exceeded the truancy rate for the State of California for three years in a row.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
That the Office of the District Attorney assign staff to support the truancy reduction programs.
F4:
All agencies consulted agree that the involvement of the Santa Barbara County Office of the District Attorney is necessary for an effective truancy reduction program.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
That all secondary school districts document their efforts to address truancy in a manner that can be used by the Office of the District Attorney, if and when legal proceedings are initiated.
F5:
Reducing truancy rates at the secondary school level would result in significantly increased revenues to the school districts.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
That all secondary school districts estimate the amount of money lost in the 2011-12 school year due to truancy and report this information to their school boards, the Santa Barbara County Education Office and the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors.
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R6:
That all secondary school districts track any reduction in truancy after the implementation of the truancy reduction program and calculate the increase in revenue resulting from such reduction and report this information to their school boards, the Santa Barbara County Education Office and the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
7 findings
F1a:
Custody Deputies conducted Isolation Cell safety checks at least once every hour as required by policy and procedures.
F1b:
The policy requiring staff to insure that each inmate’s head/face is visible and they are alive and not experiencing any trauma was not followed.
F1c:
Isolation Cell inmates were not awakened when a deputy could not determine if they were breathing.
F2:
Approximately half of Isolation Cells in East, numbered 11 to 22 contain an alcove at the end of the bed nearest the cell door that allows an inmate’s head to be hidden from view.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
That in Isolation Cells containing an alcove at the end of the bed, the alcove be filled in at a 45 degree angle to prevent an inmate’s head being hidden from view.
F3:
Plastic bags were left in Isolation Cells.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
That the Jail policy and procedure include accountability of all plastic bags to ensure that bags are not left in cells.
F4:
There was no video camera recording of deputies inspecting corridors to allow verification that the Jail policy and procedures were being followed.
Related Recommendations (2)
R4a:
That the Jail policy and procedure be initiated requiring 24/7 video recording of all Isolation Cell corridors.
R4b:
That Isolation Cell corridor video recordings be retained for at least 180 days.
F5:
The decedent made numerous requests for medical checks and several requests for cell relocation saying he feared for his saftey.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
That the Jail Mental Health staff monitor Isolation Cell inmates’ previous and ongoing requests (e.g. for medical checks and cell relocation) as possible triggers for evaluation for a potential suicide watch requirement.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings and recommendations not yet extracted.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
3 findings
F1:
All requirements of the Ralph M. Brown Act related to the confidentiality of closed sessions fully apply to the Cuyama Joint Unified School District. 4 2011-12 Santa Barbara County Grand Jury
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
That all members of the Cuyama Joint Unified School District Board of Education complete a State certified training session covering the Brown Act, as required by Government Code 53235.
F2:
Only two of five members of the current Cuyama Joint Unified School District Board of Education were recorded as having received the required training under California Government Code 53235.1.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
That the Cuyama Joint Unified School District maintain up-to-date records of Brown Act training received by Board members, as required by Government Code 53235.2.
F3:
The confidentiality rules for the May 21 and 22, 2011 closed meetings of the Cuyama Joint Unified School District Board of Education were violated.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
That the Cuyama Joint Unified School District bylaws be amended to include a requirement to admonish all attendees at each closed session about the requirement to maintain confidentiality of all confidential information acquired in that session.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
8 findings
F1:
Buellton: over the past 11 years spent $7.4 million; received $5.2 million in Tax Increment; has $1.8 million in outstanding long-term debt and obligations.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
That all successor agencies provide on their websites the following for projects funded over the past 10 years, including projects that have been funded, but not completed: 1. list of all projects funded (completed or not) and the designated blight they eliminated 2. the amounts spent (or to be spent) on each individual project 3. the names and locations of recipients of over $25,000 associated with each project 4. administrative costs and professional services associated with each project 5. amounts of principal and interest payments associated with each project
F2:
Goleta: over the past 11 years spent $21.7 million; received $19.4 million in Tax Increment; has $33.6 million in outstanding long-term debt and obligations.
Related Recommendations (3)
R2:
the amounts spent (or to be spent) on each individual project
R2a:
That all successor agencies provide on their websites their plans for defining and eliminating blight in the absence of RDAs.
R2b:
That all successor agencies provide on their websites their plans for providing low- income and moderate-income housing in the absence of RDAs.
F3:
Guadalupe: over the past 11 years spent $10.9 million; received $11.5 million in Tax Increment; has $19.9 million in outstanding long-term debt and obligations.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
That all successor agencies provide on their websites debt retirement schedules.
F4:
Lompoc: over the past 11 years spent $24 million; received $18.6 million in Tax Increment; has $43.8 million in outstanding long-term debt and obligations. 2011-12
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
administrative costs and professional services associated with each project
F5:
City of Santa Barbara: over the past 11 years spent $210.4 million; received $162.7 million in Tax Increment; has $167.2 million in outstanding long-term debt and obligations.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
amounts of principal and interest payments associated with each project Recommendation 2a That all successor agencies provide on their websites their plans for defining and eliminating blight in the absence of RDAs. Recommendation 2b That all successor agencies provide on their websites their plans for providing low- income and moderate-income housing in the absence of RDAs. Recommendation 3 That all successor agencies provide on their websites debt retirement schedules. REQUEST FOR RESPONSE In accordance with California Penal Code Section 933.05, each agency and government body affected by or named in this report is requested to respond in writing to the findings and recommendations in a timely 10 2011-12 Santa Barbara County Grand Jury manner. The following are the affected agencies for this report, with the mandated response period for each. Buellton Redevelopment Agency Successor Agency – 90 days
F6:
City of Santa Maria: over the past 11 years spent $34.7 million; received $12.0 million in Tax Increment; has $29.3 million in outstanding long-term debt and obligations.
F7:
County of Santa Barbara (Isla Vista): over the past 11 years spent $44.1 million; received $39.0 million in Tax Increment; has $17 million in outstanding long-term debt and obligations.
F8:
Detailed data are not available on the amount of money spent on individual projects, the recipients of this money, or how these projects have contributed to eliminating blight.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
7 findings
F1:
Government Code section 6252(f) allows law enforcement agencies discretion to provide citizen access to patrol vehicle audio/video recordings.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
That all Santa Barbara County law enforcement agencies permit citizens stopped by patrol officers to view audio/video recordings prior to filing a legal complaint or a juvenile petition.
F2:
Law enforcement agencies in Santa Barbara County do not provide routine citizen access to patrol vehicle audio/video recordings.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
That all Santa Barbara County law enforcement agencies provide verbal as well as a printed notice to citizens contacted by a patrol officer that there has been an audio/video recording of the incident and when and where they may view it.
F3:
Law enforcement agencies in Santa Barbara County do not routinely inform the affected citizen that there is an audio/video recording being made during a patrol vehicle stop.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
That the parent/guardian of a juvenile contacted by a patrol officer be informed that an audio/video recording of a contact with their child has been made and when and where they may view it.
F4:
Law enforcement agencies in Santa Barbara County do not routinely inform the parent/guardian that there is a patrol vehicle audio/video recording of the agency’s contact with their juvenile.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
That all Santa Barbara County law enforcement agencies that currently have patrol vehicle audio/video recording capability evaluate the financial savings and report to their city councils and/or Board of Supervisors the impact of initiating Recommendations 1, 2, and 3.
F5:
Law enforcement officials reported that, upon learning of patrol vehicle audio/video recordings, the overwhelming majority of citizens did not follow up or file complaints and/or lawsuits, thereby potentially saving governments considerable time and money.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
That the City of Guadalupe initiate Recommendations 1, 2, 3, and 4 as soon as audio/video equipment has been installed in its patrol vehicles.
F6:
The City of Guadalupe does not currently have the funds to install audio/video equipment in patrol vehicles.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
That the City of Santa Barbara initiate Recommendations 1, 2, 3, and 4 as soon as audio/video equipment has been installed in its patrol vehicles.
F7:
The City of Santa Barbara is in the process of obtaining audio/video recording equipment in all patrol vehicles.
Findings & Recommendations
2 findings
F1:
All county law enforcement agencies except the police departments of the cities of Santa Barbara and Guadalupe have currently installed audio/visual technology in their patrol vehicles.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
That the police departments of the cities of Santa Barbara and Guadalupe immediately seek out funding sources to provide current audio/visual technology for all of their patrol vehicles.
F2:
Citing costs, the police departments of the cities of Santa Barbara and Guadalupe currently do not have audio/video technology installed in their patrol vehicles.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
That the police departments of the cities of Santa Barbara and Guadalupe immediately request that their respective city councils provide any necessary supplemental funds to obtain and install current audio/visual technology for all of their patrol vehicles.
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R3:
That the police departments of the cities of Santa Barbara and the Guadalupe install current audio/visual technology for all of their patrol vehicles.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings and recommendations not yet extracted.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
1 findings
F1:
The Jury was informed on September 13, 2011 by an official, that online college courses were available at the Susan J. Gionfriddo Juvenile Justice Center. In fact, they were not. REQUEST FOR RESPONSE In accordance with California Penal Code Section 933.05, each agency and government body affected by or named in this report is requested to respond in writing to the findings and recommendations in a timely manner. The following are the affected agencies for this report, with the mandated response period for each: Santa Barbara County Probation Department -90 Days
Findings & Recommendations
3 findings
F1:
The Santa Maria Police Department has a detailed policy and procedure for vehicle towing.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
That the Santa Maria City Council commend the Santa Maria Police Department’s vehicle towing enforcement personnel for their service to the citizens of Santa Maria.
F2:
The Santa Maria Police Department processes each towing citation according to the Department’s vehicle towing policy and procedure.
F3:
The Santa Maria Police Department gives citizens consideration allowable within the Department’s vehicle towing policy and procedure.
Additional documents
Documents found alongside this year's reports — not grand jury reports or responses.