Gran Jurado del Condado de Shasta
2022-2023
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 (2)
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
8 hallazgos
F1:
During the 2018 Carr fire evacuations the Shasta County The Board of Supervisors agrees with the Supervisor of District 2 of Shasta County used Board of Super- finding. the authority of his office to enter the evacuated visors area and fuel his personal home generator mul- tiple times for personal gain.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R1:
The Shasta County Board of Supervisors Shasta County The recommendation has been imple- will place on their agenda by October 15, 2021, Board of Super- mented. A resolution of censure against the a motion to publicly censure the Supervisor of visors Supervisor of District 2 was adopted by a District 2 for actions taken during the 2018 Carr majority of the Board of Supervisors on Fire. June 8, 2021.
F2:
Review by the SCGJ finds that this activity Shasta County The Board of Supervisors disagrees par- is prohibited by California State Assembly Bill Board of Super- tially with this finding. AB 1234 establishes No. 1234. visors a requirement that certain public officials complete two hours of training in general ethics principles every two years, and there was no finding by the Grand Jury that the Supervisor of District 2 of Shasta County failed to complete such training. In addition, the Grand Jury expressly found that "no laws were broken." The Board of Supervi- sors agrees with the Grand Jury that there is a general governmental ethics principle, as noted in AB 1234, prohibiting the use of public resources for personal purposes, and that the District 2 Supervisor's conduct is a breach of that general principle.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R2:
The Shasta County Board of Supervisors Shasta County The recommendation has been imple- by October 15, 2021, will offer the Supervisor of Board of Super- mented. On June 8, 2021, a resolution was District 2 an opportunity to publicly apologize visors adopted by a majority of the Board of Super- for his actions. visors offering this opportunity to the Super- visor of District 2. Anderson Union High School District Report “Teaching Current and Future Leaders” THE 2020-2021 SHASTA COUNTY GRAND REQUIRED RESPONSES JURY FOUND AND/OR RECOMMENDED: RESPONDENT
F3:
When AUHSD Trustees conduct business Anderson Union Finding #3 does not state a particular short- during closed session, accurate reporting of High School coming of the District's Brown Act compli- closed sessions during the public session en- District Board of ance, but to the extent the finding implies a sures transparency, increases public confi- Trustees and lack of compliance with closed session re- dence in trustee activity, and meets Brown Act Superintendent porting rules, the District disagrees wholly requirements. with the finding. AUHSD trustees follow Brown Act protocols when reporting out of closed session: a) if the Board took action, the Board president reports in open session the disposition of the action taken b) We note that "Non-action items, such as obtain- ing direction from the legislative body, re- gardless of whether a vote is taken on that direction, need not be reported out." (Lozano Smith Brown Act Handbook, 2021, p.26) To explain: Government Code section 54957.1 is cited in the grand jury report but the report only lists the portion of the statute that says a legislative body shall report "any action taken." However, this is not the sum of what section 54957.1 requires. Crucially, not all actions taken are required to be re- ported, nor should they for confidentiality reasons. Only the specific categories of ac- tions listed in section 54957.1 are reported out. For example, section 54957.1 only re- quires reporting of "Action taken to appoint, employ, dismiss, accept the resignation of, or otherwise affect the employment status of a public employee in closed session ..." It would be inappropriate for confidentiality reasons to detail closed session discus- sions or direction given on private person- nel matters that do not rise to the level of action that affects employment status. Sec- tion 54957.1 goes on to list a similar narrow category of reports that are made from closed session for items such as real prop- erty negotiations, conferences with legal counsel, and so on. The report states that "years" of agendas were reviewed and expresses concern that no action is reported out in some cases. Be- cause the report does not identify any partic- ular action that was taken in closed session 4 that should have been reported out, the Dis- trict is unable to examine any particular sce- nario and assess compliance. We note, however, that it is common and lawful to have discussion and for boards to give direc- tion in closed session, but to still have no re- portable action. We have reviewed our prac- tices and are confident that required reports are made, that staff and board mem- bers are knowledgeable about the required reports, and that assistance of legal counsel is used when needed to ensure Brown Act compliance. Response: This has already been imple- mented, as Board members do regularly re- view the Brown Act, and the Board Presi- dent has reviewed the closed session re- porting requirements. Staff and the Board as a whole endeavor to ensure compliance with the reporting rules and we have not identified any situations where reports are lacking. The District appreciates the recom- mendation and agrees that Brown Act com- pliance is a critical component of govern- ment transparency.
F4:
AUHSD has little organized training oppor- Anderson Union (See response to R4) tunities for trustees. Limited training is available High School for trustees who wish to participate. The lack of District Board of an organized training protocol results in ineffi- Trustees and ciency. Superintendent 5
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R4:
By January 1, 2022, the AUHSD Superin- Anderson Union Respectfully, this recommendation delves tendent should identify and implement a com- High School into substantive policy determinations prehensive training program to establish train- District Board of about particular subjects of training se- ing for Trustees and administrative personnel. Trustees and lected for officers of the District, rather than Topics should include but are not limited to: Superintendent reporting on the procedural or operational Brown Act requirements, district operation, col- aspects of school district business. (An ex- legiality, computer skills, Form 700 conflict of cellent discussion of the Attorney General's interest, AUHSD Board Bylaws, and effective viewpoint on the scope of grand jury review media relations. of school district operations can be found at 78 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 290 (1995).) We re- spectfully believe that while a recommen- dation for increased training is appropriate, the topics listed are sensitive policy deci- sions for the school board and its admin- istration to make, especially given that the topics listed cover a wide range of subject matter areas, many unrelated to the sub- stance of this report. The District will par- tially implement the recommendation by (1) recommending Brown Act training for its board members in the 2021-22 school year, 8 and (2) continuing its ongoing practice of of- fering other training opportunities on cur- rent topics to Board members. SHASCOM 9-1-1 Investigation Report “Who Is Helping the Helpers” THE 2019-2020 SHASTA COUNTY GRAND REQUIRED RESPONSES JURY FOUND AND/OR RECOMMENDED: RESPONDENT
F5:
The 2020-2021 SCGJ has found that the Anderson Union The Board agrees with the finding and current Superintendent is doing a good job of High School thanks the grand jury for acknowledging the efficiently operating and providing leadership District Board of positive efforts and accomplishments of our for the AUHSD. The Superintendent's perfor- Trustees and Superintendent. We appreciate the encour- mance is admirable given the current chal- Superintendent agement during these difficult times as we lenges. endeavor to keep our students, staff, and community safe during the ongoing corona- virus pandemic.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R5:
This Grand Jury recommends the Sheriff’s Shasta County Shasta County Sheriff: Office develop a written procedure by June 30, Sheriff The recommendation will not be imple- 2022, that includes the Grand Jury require- mented because it is not warranted or is not ments to increase transparency, such as: reasonable. Bullet point two is addressed in
F6:
As of November 30, 2019, SHASCOM’s SHASCOM-911 Agree. Board of Directors was to require SHASCOM's Board of Direc- Director to present a timeline for achieving com- tors pliance with accreditation certification of the dis- patch center, either through POST or an alter- nate accreditation organization. This was ac- complished by August 26, 2020.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R6:
This Grand Jury recommends the Sheriff’s Shasta County Shasta County Sheriff: Office develop a written plan by June 30, 2022, Sheriff The recommendation will not be imple- that provides all DCIs with opportunities for ad- mented because it is not warranted or is not ditional forensic and job-related training, neces- reasonable. A written plan is not needed. All sary for continuing professional education, at no Deputy Coroner Investigators are required personal cost. to attend an 80-hour POST certified death investigation course along with a 40-hour PC 832 Arrest and Control course within one year of their hire date. Due to staffing levels and Covid restrictions, further ad- vanced trainings were cancelled or put on hold during the Covid-19 pandemic. Some trainings have resumed, and Deputy Coro- ner Investigators will continue to attend trainings as they become available. The at- tendance of these trainings will depend on appropriate staffing levels at the Coroner's Office. The Shasta County Coroner's Office will continue to schedule trainings/seminars for employees to promote career advance- ment and development. Additional Remarks from Shasta County The Shasta County Sheriff’s Office appre- Sheriff ciates and respects the Grand Jury pro- cess. Critical review, constructive criticism, and suggestions for improvement, via Grand Jury and/or other means, will always be received without bias and evaluated for implementation with the goal of improving service, efficiency, and professionalism within the organization. I was appointed to the Office of the Sheriff- Coroner in August 2021. I immediately con- ducted assessments throughout all divisions of the Sheriff's Office to include the Coro- ner's Office. This assessment revealed the priority to find methods to address staffing shortages within the office. Most signifi- cantly, among those concerns, was not only the staffing shortages but the excessive workload of the personnel currently occupy- ing the positions because of these short- ages. Staffing shortages and the dynamics created by the COVID 19 pandemic, com- bined with an increasingly growing case load, are at the core of the problem. Staff is overworked and overwhelmed. The three active Deputy Coroner Investigators rotate on call duties, responding to cases at all hours of the night, and rarely get their sched- uled time off. Investigators are down a sig- nificant amount of case reports. The Sher- iff’s Office has routinely conducted recruiting efforts, to fill vacant positions, but locating qualified candidates has been challenging. We are currently at the mercy of two con- tracted pathologists that respond from out of the area on an "as-needed" basis, which of- ten delays the processes. Additional, ongo- ing recruiting efforts to fill the permanent pathologist position has too been unsuc- cessful. The Coroner's Office Administrative Secretary is overwhelmed with phone calls, generated paperwork, and clerical duties im- pacted from staffing shortages. It is frustrating to read the "findings" and "recommendations" from the Grand Jury. The information contained within the Grand Jury report inspires skepticism about their investigative abilities. While I appreciate some of the objective findings and recom- mendations, others seem biased and the product of disgruntled past employee inter- views without further exploration into the matter. Missing is the fair assessment of comparative Coroner's Offices within the State. Also absent is the factual information in reference to mandated compliance is- sues, opposed to the opinion-based find- ings listed in the report. In my short time with the Sheriff's Office, I have learned one single most significant factor that is also missing from this report: the men and women of the Shasta County Sheriff’s Office, in all divisions and aspects of this organization, serve this community with absolute dedication, commitment, and integrity. As noted above, we are open to constructive criticism and will continue to implement change for the betterment of the citizens we serve. Reports issued by the Grand Jury do not identify individuals interviewed. Penal Code Section 929 requires that reports of the Grand Jury not contain the name of any person or facts leading to the identity of any person who provides information to the Grand Jury. 27
F7:
By January 31, 2021, SHASCOM's Board SHASCOM-911 Agree. The Spillman CAD database is the of Directors was to instruct the Agency’s Direc- Board of Direc- responsibility of the IPS Board which sup- tor to present a project plan for incorporating in- tors ports the Redding Police Department, formation on people with access and functional Shasta County Sheriff’s Office, Anderson needs into the CAD database. This has not Police Department, and other public safety been done. agencies. These agencies have the capa- bility to develop a means to collect this data and input it into the Spillman CAD data- base. For example, the Redding Police De- partment provides a resource for the City of Redding called SNAP (Special Needs Alert Program). People with access and func- tional needs can upload their information and the data is flagged in the Spillman CAD database by the Redding Police Depart- ment. SHASCOM dispatchers can then re- lay this crucial information to first respond- ers. The Anderson Police Department and the Shasta County Sheriff’s Office are cur- rently in the process of implementing the SNAP program for their respective agen- cies. 11
F8:
The existing cold storage facility accommo- Shasta County Shasta County Board of Supervisors: dates up to 20 gurneys. When the number of Board of Super- The Board of Supervisors disagrees wholly cadavers exceeds this number (and has been visors and Sher- with the finding. as high as 30), the cadavers (in body bags) are iff stored two to a gurney. The cold storage facility in the Coroner's Of- fice can accommodate six gurneys which is what is available and used. In addition, the cold storage facility has eight stainless steel rolling tables which can temporarily accom- modate two decedents (in body bags) should the decedents exceed the number of gurneys and tables available. Maximum capacity of decedents in the cold storage facility at the Coroner's Office is twenty-two. Should the Coroner's Office reach maxi- mum capacity, local mortuaries allow stor- age of decedents, at their facilities until room becomes available at the Coroner's Office. Shasta County Sheriff: The Sheriff-Coroner wholly disagrees with this finding. The cold storage facility in the Coroner's Office can accommodate 8 stain- less steel rolling tables and 6 gurneys which is what is available and used. If decedents exceed the number of tables and gurneys available, the decedents (in body bags) can be temporarily stored two to a table but only 1 on a gurney. Maximum capacity of dece- dents in the cold storage at the Coroner's Office is 22. If the Coroner's Office reaches maximum capacity, local mortuaries allow storage of decedents, at their facilities, until room becomes available at the Coroner's Office. 22
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
9 hallazgos
F1:
The COR has utilized the lower level of Enterprise Park as a dumping area for assorted types of debris without any management plan or direct oversight by the City.
F2:
There has been no accounting or documentation of the type of disposed materials nor their quantity by the City. .
F3:
Some of the disposed materials have been dumped at the Park by the COR and some others have been impermissibly dumped by unknown individuals without consent or permission from the City.
F4:
The City has failed to secure the area in a manner sufficient to prevent or deter dumping of materials and debris at the Park by unknown individuals.
F5:
Various materials and debris remains stored at the lower tier of the Park, although the size and quantity of the materials and debris has decreased over the last year.
F6:
The City intends to continue utilizing the lower tier of the Park as a location to dump substance and materials excavated from city project sites. The City’s use of the Park for this purpose is not prohibited by local rules or law. COMMENDATIONS C1 The COR Parks Department recycles material whenever possible, saving the City time and money. C2 The COR is commended for making significant progress over the past year in removing, recycling, and discarding materials and substances previously dumped or discarded at the lower tier of the Park. C3 The COR is commended for creating a draft of a Site Management Plan Enterprise Park Disposal Area addressing issues raised by the investigation of the Grand Jury.
F7:
Shasta County Coroner has a grant pending for replacement of the current computer program contingent on the Board of Supervisors allocating any additional funding necessary to com- plete the purchase. COMMENDATIONS C1 The Shasta County Grand Jury commends the Shasta County Coroner’s Office for their ded- ication and commitment in executing their responsibilities and for the compassionate care shown by the personnel in considering the emotions and needs of the public they serve de- spite the Coroner’s office outdated condition, poor building design, and limited resources available to them.
F8:
The Board ignored independent audits that identified irreconcilable differences in the Customer Accounts Subsidiary Ledger with the General Ledger from 2014 to 2021. COMMENDATIONS C1 CCCSD customers who created the Happy Valley Community Committee, whose persistence helped to expose and correct the problems within the District. C2 The Interim General Manager and other staff who stayed and continued their service even under severe difficulties. C3 The customers who volunteered many hours to update the backlogged 2021 minutes and to audit customer accounts.
F9:
There are open positions in the Foster Care Department which impact the number of cases per worker. COMMENDATIONS C1 The Shasta County HHSA is commended for providing excellent support of the foster children in the county with its currently limited staff. C2 The staff working with resource families and foster children in Shasta County are commended for being passionate about their work. C3 Current reduced staff is commended for pulling together to support one another, especially during heavy workloads.
Recomendaciones adicionales
7
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R1:
COR Public Works Department and Parks & Recreation Department, in collaboration, will develop a management plan for all levels (tiers) of the Enterprise Park by Nov 1, 2023, including plans and measures to eliminate, prevent, or mitigate illegal dumping.
R2:
By November 1, 2023, COR Public Works Department and Parks & Recreation Department shall develop an accounting system to track content and quantity of material deposited on Enterprise Park
R3:
COR Public Works Department and Parks & Recreation Department, in collaboration, will develop a plan by November 1, 2023 to recycle, remove, or otherwise properly dispose of materials dumped or discarded at the Park.
R4:
COR Public Works Department and Parks & Recreation Department, in collaboration, will replace the locks on the gates to the lower level by November 1, 2023, and will keep a key inventory of City staff allowed access to the area. INVITED RESPONSES From the following governmental officials requested within 60 days: City of Redding Director of Community Services/Parks and Recreation
R5:
By June 30, 2024, the Board will conduct annual financial planning meetings in conjunction with annual budgeting process to establish short-term (1-5 years) and long- term (5-10 years) goals for operational growth, infrastructure build/maintenance, financing of projects, and revenue reserves.
R6:
By June 30, 2024, the Board will create and utilize a Budget Variance and Analysis Guide in order to meet financial obligations.
R7:
By December 31, 2024, the Board perform an annual performance review of the General Manager. RESPONSES Pursuant to Penal Code Section 933.05, the following response is required: From the following governing body: (within 90 days): Clear Creek Community Services District Board of Directors • F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8 • R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7 The Grand Jury recommends that all governing bodies place their responses to all Grand Jury Reports on their Regular Calendars for public discussion, not on their Consent Calendars. 8