Santa Barbara County Grand Jury
2013-2014
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 (12)
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
7 findings
F1A:
The current plan to fund Northern Branch Jail operating cost is based on estimates of property tax increases of no less than 3.5 percent per year.
F1B:
The plan is based on the Board of Supervisors exercise of discipline necessary to allocate roughly 28 percent of the property tax increases to the reserve fund through FY2022-23.
F1C:
According to the results in Figure 2 and Table A-1, the probability of the success of the Northern Branch Jail operating plan is most likely to be in the range of 50 to 70 percent.
F2:
The County Fire Department is allocated 25 percent of property tax increases; for property tax increases of 3.5 percent, the current plan allocates 28 percent of property tax increases for NBJ, leaving the County with 47 percent of property tax increases for all other departments.
Related Recommendations (2)
R2A:
That the County show both the annual property tax increases values and percentage increase over prior year on the County website and distribute to news media in a format similar to Table 3 below. County Property PTI Ratio of Ratio of Plan Funding Reserve Property Tax Available Year's Percentage FD Allot NBJ Allot Increase Fund FYE Tax Increase to All Contribution Increase to Total to Total Over Prior Balance Revenue (PTI) Other to NBJ ($M) PTI PTI Year ($M) ($M) ($M) ($M) Depts 2012 174.4 2.4 1.40% 0% 42% 58% 1.0 1.0 1.0 2013 176.2 1.7 1.00% 338% 57% -296% 1.0 2.0 0.0 2014 183.4 7.2 4.10% 25% 18% 57% 1.3 3.3 3.3 2015 190.2 6.9 3.74% 25% 19% 56% 1.3 4.6 7.9 2016 195.2 5.0 2.61% 25% 30% 45% 1.5 6.1 13.7 2017 205.0 9.8 5.04% 25% 15% 60% 1.5 7.6 18.6 2018 210.0 4.9 2.40% 25% 30% 45% 1.5 9.1 17.2 2019 212.2 2.2 1.06% 25% 81% -6% 1.8 10.9 10.8 2020 226.9 14.7 6.92% 25% 12% 63% 1.8 12.7 5.6 2021 240.5 13.6 5.99% 25% 16% 59% 2.2 14.9 2.1 2022 251.1 10.6 4.42% 25% 21% 54% 2.2 17.1 0.2 2023 261.3 10.2 4.06% 25% 22% 53% 2.2 19.3 0.0 Table 3. Displays property tax increases and allocation. Data for 2014 are estimated; data is hypothetical for 2015 and later and are not intended to be predictions but are intended for format only.
R2B:
That the County prominently display a graph similar to Figure 5 below, on the County website and distribute to news media that contains the annual percentages of property tax increases allocated to Public Safety (Probation, Fire and Sheriff’s Office), (2) Northern Branch Jail, and (3) all other departments. 120% 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% -20% -40% 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Figure 5. Example displaying percentage of PTI allocated to Northern Branch Jail, Fire and All Other Departments. Data for 2014 are estimated; data are hypothetical for 2015 and later and are not intended to be predictions but are intended for format only.
F3:
The public may not be informed concerning the potential impact that Northern Branch Jail operating cost may have on staffing and services provided by other departments.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
That the Board of Supervisors communicate with their constituents, at least annually, concerning staffing and service cuts, revenue enhancements, or other options that may be necessary to fund Northern Branch Jail operating cost. 2013-14 egatnecreP yb noitacollA ITP %95 %24 %833 %75 %592- %75 %52 %81 %65 %52 %91 %54 %52 %03 %06 %52 %51 %54 %52 %13 %52 %18 %6- %36 %52 %21 %95 %52 %61 %45 %52 %12 PTI Allocation: NBJ, Fire, and All Other Departments NBJ Fire All Other Departments
F4:
The Office of the County Assessor appears not to have the expertise to take full advantage of the potential for additional property tax revenue based on higher assessments of specialized industries such as oil and gas, wineries, and upscale hotels.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
That the Board of Supervisors collaborate with the County Assessor to assure the Office of the County Assessor has adequate capacity and expertise to optimize property tax receipts from specialized industries.
F5:
The Santa Barbara County Jail Northern Branch Fiscal Analysis, Facts & Figures published in November 2008 is outdated.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
That the Board of Supervisors update and publish the referenced report to revisit options that could mitigate any shortfall in operating cost if and when that shortfall becomes apparent.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
8 findings
F1:
The Santa Barbara County policy Administration of Vehicle Fleet and Employee Use of County Vehicles is found in two sections of the County of Santa Barbara On-Line Policies and Procedures Manual on the county intranet.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
That Santa Barbara County revise its Administration of Vehicle Fleet and Employee Use of County Vehicles sections into one unified policy that makes it clear that the two sections are to be applied and enforced together.
F2:
The current Santa Barbara County policy Administration of Vehicle Fleet and Employee Use of County Vehicles does not contain an issue date, effective date, or any other means to identify it as the most current version.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
That the Santa Barbara County’s Administration of Vehicle Fleet and Employee Use of County Vehicles policy be revised to provide an issue date or effective date to identify specifically the document as the current version.
F3:
The Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Office does not comply with the county policy requiring the annual reporting of take-home vehicle information.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
That the Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Office comply with the county policy requiring the annual reporting of take-home vehicles by providing the prescribed Information Form for each vehicle.
F4:
The Santa Barbara County Executive Office has not enforced the take-home vehicle policy by failing to require the Department of General Services to obtain, and the Sheriff’s Office to provide, the necessary documentation for each vehicle so assigned.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
That the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors direct the County Executive Office to enforce the take-home vehicle policy by requiring the Department of General Services to obtain, and the Sheriff’s Office to provide, the necessary documentation for each vehicle so assigned.
F5:
That no audit of Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Office take-home vehicle usage has been conducted examining the cost and benefits of providing vehicles to employees versus other available options.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
That the Santa Barbara County Auditor-Controller conduct an audit of all Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Office take-home vehicle usage to examine the cost and benefits of providing vehicles to employees versus other available options.
F6:
Residential storage shall not be authorized for the sole purpose of providing transportation to and from work for an employee.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
Residential storage shall not be authorized for the sole purpose of providing transportation to and from work for an employee.
F7:
Vehicles should not be left on street overnight. Safe, off-street parking shall be used whenever possible.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
Vehicles should not be left on street overnight. Safe, off-street parking shall be used whenever possible.
F10:
The County Administrator shall from time to time review the necessity for and cost effectiveness of home storage authorizations approved by the department heads. County of Santa Barbara On-Line Policies & Procedures Manual Administration of Vehicle Fleet Maintenance of Vehicles
Related Recommendations (1)
R10:
The County Administrator shall from time to time review the necessity for and cost effectiveness of home storage authorizations approved by the department heads. County of Santa Barbara On-Line Policies & Procedures Manual Administration of Vehicle Fleet Maintenance of Vehicles
Findings & Recommendations
3 findings
F1:
Union Valley Parkway at California Boulevard intersection is not a four-way stop.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
Install a four-way stop at the intersection of Union Valley Parkway and California Boulevard.
F2:
Drivers on Union Valley Parkway traveling east or west may not be aware, nor are they warned, that there is an upcoming intersection at California Boulevard.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
Install appropriate warning signs on east and westbound Union Valley Parkway as it approaches California Boulevard.
F3:
There are “Cross Traffic Does Not Stop” signs on the north and south stop sign posts on California Boulevard as it intersects Union Valley Parkway.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
If Recommendation 1 is accepted, replace the “Cross Traffic Does Not Stop” plaques on the north and south stop signs on California Boulevard as it intersects Union Valley Parkway with “ALL-WAY” (four-way) stop plaques.
Findings & Recommendations
5 findings
F1A:
The Sheriff’s Office does not comply with the county anti-idling policy.
F1B:
The Sheriff’s Office non-compliance is based on its stated need to keep critical electronic equipment in the vehicles constantly operating.
F2:
Alternate power and monitoring systems to keep this equipment operating are readily available.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
That the Sheriff’s Office expedite the installation of an alternate power or a monitoring system to allow needed equipment to remain operational and in compliance with the County’s Anti-Idling Policy.
F3:
Considerable cost savings could be realized with installation of alternative power or monitoring systems for these vehicles.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
That the Sheriff’s Office expedite the installation of an alternate power or a monitoring system to allow needed equipment to remain operational and in compliance with the County’s Anti-Idling Policy.
F4:
The Sheriff’s Office is testing a battery monitoring and alarm system.
Findings & Recommendations
3 findings
F1:
Meals served at the Santa Barbara County Main Jail meet all the standards required by the State of California for quality, quantity, and nutritional value.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
That the Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Office post each four-week cycle menu on its website.
F2:
The meal sampled at the Santa Barbara County Main Jail was flavorful, filling, and contained fresh local produce.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
That the Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Office post each Cycle Menu – Weekly Nutritional Analysis on its website.
F3:
Prices charged by the Santa Barbara County Main Jail commissary are comparable to the prices charged for like items in local convenience stores.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
That the Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Office post current jail commissary prices on its website.
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R4:
That the Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Office post the current Board of State and Community Corrections Biennial Inspection Report (including any Plan of Corrections) of the Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s detention facilities on its website.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
3 findings
F1:
There is no specific document which both the Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Office and a released inmate must sign to indicate that he/she has been offered a bus or taxi voucher, the use of a telephone, or the opportunity to wait in the lobby until dawn.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
That the Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Office establish a written policy requiring a form to be signed during the release process indicating that the inmate has been offered a bus or taxi voucher, the use of a telephone, or the opportunity to wait in the lobby for a ride until dawn.
F2:
The Grand Jury learned that continued private funding for the taxi service is in doubt.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
That Santa Barbara County encourages the establishment of a community-based program similar to “Lights On” in Orange County, California.
F3:
Orange County, California has a faith-based program named “Lights On,” that offers newly released inmates coffee, snacks, bus schedules, Alcoholics Anonymous fliers, and free use of a cell phone.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
5 findings
F1:
The Santa Barbara County 2-1-1 Helpline is a program that provides a valuable service to the residents of the county.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
That the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors allocate the requested funds to update the Santa Barbara County 2-1-1 Helpline Program resource database.
F2:
The Santa Barbara County 2-1-1 Helpline Program database of community resources is out-of- date and in critical need of updating.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
That the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors identifies a local agency or organization qualified to assume the administrative and managerial responsibilities of the Santa Barbara County 2-1-1 Helpline Program.
F3:
There is insufficient funding to continue operating the Santa Barbara County 2-1-1 Helpline Program.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
That the county, the cities, and other entities benefitting from the services provided by the Santa Barbara County 2-1-1 Helpline Program contribute funding in proportionate amounts as proposed by county staff in its December 2013 recommendations to the Board of Supervisors.
F4:
The cities of Santa Maria, Solvang, Buellton, Goleta, Carpinteria, and Guadalupe do not contribute financially to the Santa Barbara County 2-1-1 Helpline Program.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
That the County of Santa Barbara Board of Supervisors annually review the performance of the 2-1-1 Helpline Program to justify its continued funding.
F5:
The County of Santa Barbara is only temporarily administering the Santa Barbara County 2-1-1 Program.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
7 findings
F1:
The Cuyama Valley Recreation District Board of Directors does not review the performance of its Recreation Director annually as required by its policies and procedures.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
That the Cuyama Valley Recreation District Board of Directors formulate annual objectives for the Recreation Director so that a proper performance review can be conducted as soon as possible.
F2:
The Cuyama Valley Recreation District has not required employees or volunteers for positions having supervisory or disciplinary authority over minors to provide fingerprints and be screened for criminal background by the California Department of Justice, as required by California Public Resources Code section 5164 and California Penal Code section 11105.3.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
That the Cuyama Valley Recreation District require all employees and volunteers having supervisory or disciplinary authority over a minor, and all future applicants for such positions, to be fingerprinted through the Live Scan system and be screened for criminal background by the California Department of Justice.
F3:
The Cuyama Valley Recreation District Recreation Director currently does not submit a, written annual comprehensive recreational program plan as required by the district’s Operating Policies and Procedures.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
That the Cuyama Valley Recreation District Recreation Director submit an annual comprehensive recreational program plan to the board as required by the district’s Operating Policies and Procedures.
F4:
The Cuyama Valley Recreation District currently charges only a token amount for its recreation activities.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
That the Cuyama Valley Recreation District review the fee structure for recreation activities.
F5:
The Cuyama Valley Recreation District has not adequately trained board members, staff, or volunteers in the performance of their duties and responsibilities.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
That the Cuyama Valley Recreation District provide job descriptions and training for all board members, staff, and volunteers.
F6:
The Cuyama Valley Recreation District Board of Directors and staff have not completed required ethics training.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
That the Cuyama Valley Recreation District Board of Directors and staff immediately complete the requisite training in ethics.
F7:
The Cuyama Valley Recreation District has not adequately collaborated with potential community partners.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7:
That the Cuyama Valley Recreation District institute meetings with all potential community partners to develop collaborative recreational programs.
Findings and recommendations not yet extracted.
Findings & Recommendations
4 findings
F1:
The principal vehicle for taxing oil production in California, the property tax, was lowered substantially with the passage of Proposition 13 in 1978.
F2:
The County of Santa Barbara is facing estimated budget gaps of $5 million in Fiscal Year 2013-2014 and $13.7 million in Fiscal Year 2014-2015.
F3:
Once the proposed North County Jail opens, its operating cost is projected to deplete the Santa Barbara County General Fund by $17.3 million annually.
F4:
An oil production tax could generate essential new and ongoing revenue for the County.
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
That the members of the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors follow the recommendation of the Chief Executive Officer of the County of Santa Barbara and allow the voters to decide if an oil production tax will be implemented by putting this issue on the next county-wide ballot.
Findings & Recommendations
13 findings
F1:
The continuing use of part-time retired staff is not adequate to assist during autopsies.
F2:
Specialized training of the staff in the areas of infection control and blood-borne pathogens is inconsistent.
F3a:
The presence of lingering noxious odors in the Coroner’s Bureau indicates that the existing ventilation system is not adequate.
F3b:
A code compliant ventilation system is necessary to control and prevent the potential of infectious agents affecting the health of Bureau staff and the public.
F4:
Currently there is no isolation area in the Coroner’s Bureau suitable for performing autopsies on high-risk cases.
F5:
The current autopsy room air conditioner is not adequate to provide an efficient, comfortable working environment.
F6:
The Goleta Sanitary District failed to issue the correct Industrial Wastewater Permit under its Ordinance No. 77, to the Coroner Bureau.
F7:
There is no log to record the internal temperature of the autopsy room evidence refrigerator.
F8:
The Coroner’s Bureau does not have an eye wash station.
F9:
Inefficient and obsolete dictation equipment is currently used during autopsies.
F10:
The air conditioning unit in the portable building is not sufficient to provide a comfortable working environment on warm days.
F11:
The landscape area surrounding the Coroner’s Bureau is a weed patch overrun by rodents.
F12:
A Coroner’s Bureau is not required to be accredited.
Additional Recommendations
14
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
Santa Barbara County Supervisor, 2nd District, Janet Wolf – 90 days
R2a:
That the Sheriff-Coroner implement policies and procedures that require training of each Coroner’s Bureau employee in areas of infection control and blood borne pathogens on an annual basis.
R2b:
That the Sheriff-Coroner provide for employee training records to be maintained on site at the Coroner’s Bureau and to be updated annually. 2 012-2013 Santa Barbara County Grand Jury
R3a:
That the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors allocate the funds to retain a mechanical engineering firm to study and make design recommendations for the Coroner facility ventilation system.
R3b:
That the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors allocate the funds to implement the design recommendations for the ventilation system in the Coroner’s facility.
R4:
That the Sheriff-Coroner provide an isolated area in the Coroner’s Bureau suitable for performing autopsies on high-risk cases.
R5:
That the Sheriff-Coroner upgrade the air conditioning system in the current autopsy room to provide an efficient, comfortable working environment until the engineering study is completed and recommendations are implemented.
R6:
That The Goleta Sanitary District issue the appropriate permit consistent with the Bureau’s application for discharge of medical waste from autopsies. 2 012-2013 Santa Barbara County Grand Jury
R7:
That the Sheriff-Coroner require that a daily refrigeration internal temperature log be maintained on the autopsy room evidence refrigerator.
R8:
That the Sheriff-Coroner install an eye wash station in each autopsy room.
R9:
That the Sheriff-Coroner purchase and install digital dictation equipment for efficiency in preservation of and access to the pathologist’s findings.
R10:
That the Sheriff-Coroner provide an air conditioning system sufficient to cool the portable building.
R11:
That within the next six months the Sheriff-Coroner install landscaping, provide rodent removal and implement a regular maintenance schedule.
R12:
That the Board of Supervisors include in all long-range strategic planning the goal of establishing and staffing a more centrally located facility that is eligible for full accreditation by the National Association of Medical Examiners. 2 012-2013 Santa Barbara County Grand Jury
Findings & Recommendations
7 findings
F1:
That the existing bus port creates a potential safety hazard for court officials and employees, as well as the public, because in the process of loading and unloading, the detainees can visually observe the vehicles in the parking lot.
F2a:
That the holding cells in the basement of the Santa Barbara Court Holding Facility, Figueroa Street, do not have enough cells to house the detainees whose cases are before the courts that day.
F2b:
That the detainees are handcuffed to railings in the corridors due to the lack of holding cell space.
F2c:
That this overcrowding creates a dangerous environment for both deputies and detainees. 2 012-2013 Santa Barbara County Grand Jury
F2d:
That shackled detainees have to be escorted across Figueroa Street to courtrooms by deputies in full view of the passing public. Such a procession is a potential security and safety hazard.
F3:
That the holding cell level lacks cameras.
F4:
That the facility is currently open only from 7 p.m. until 7 a.m. daily.
Additional Recommendations
5
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
That the existing bus port be modified so that detainees cannot visually observe the parking lot. Santa Barbara Court Holding Facility, Figueroa Street
R2:
That the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors and the Sheriff support all efforts to address these potential hazardous situations. Santa Maria Court Services Holding Facility, Cook Street
R3:
That the Sheriff fund and install cameras to be placed on the cell level, for the safety of all detainees and deputies. Santa Maria Station
R4a:
That the Sheriff fund this location to be open and operating 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
R4b:
That the Sheriff hire and staff this location to allow it to stay open and be operating 24 hours a day, seven days a week.