Sierra County Grand Jury
2013-2014
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
5 findings
F1:
The Board meetings are held on the 3rd Wednesday of each month and are properly posted at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting, which is in compliance with the Brown Act. The postings include two public community bulletin boards.
F2:
They are in compliance with the State of California water testing requirements.
F3:
All invoices are presented to the Board members at the monthly board meeting for approval, prior to the disbursement of funds by Sierra County.
F4:
The financial statement currently has a positive cash flow.
F5:
The District has a routine maintenance schedule in place for existing facilities and a long term improvement plan for the upgrade of facilities with the following people serving as Project Chairs: James Murphy -meters; Pat Blide - arsenic levels; Russell Rosewood- telemetry; Christine Lindberg -finances.
Additional Recommendations
5
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
Continue to conduct monthly board meetings in accordance with the Brown Act.
R2:
Continue to stay in compliance with regard to water quality testing requirements. (This includes required licensing of your water system operator.) Make sure the budget allows for current expenditures.
R3:
Continue to discuss the ability of financing for the long term plans which are currently in progress.
R4:
Consider collecting facilities fees from all new development in order to plan for future 13 growth and upgrade of facilities as warranted.
R5:
Implement a maintenance program for the fire hydrants to ensure public safety.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
9 findings
F1:
In talking to the previous bookkeeper for the City, sufficient concerns were raised to warrant further investigations to determine if in fact funds are being used for improper purposes, i.e. funds from one account being used in another.
F2:
Our investigation found that the micro managing of employees resulted in scheduled tasks not being done on time resulting in additional costs to the city. Regular maintenance of the pumps at the sewer treatment plant was not done resulting in premature failure of pumps because the employees were assigned other tasks.
F3:
Because previous City Councils failed to monitor the financial status of the city and its expenditures including wages paid resulting in losses to the city, we are deeply concerned that reducing fees for water and sewer is short sighted when the costs to the city are unknown for the final repair of the sewer system.
F4:
The City has been saved from bankruptcy by the insurance settlement for employee misbehavior at the least and criminal embezzlement at the worst.
F5:
Likewise, without the luck of the USDA grant to pursue litigation against the contractors involved with the original construction of the sewer treatment system, the city would again be bankrupt as they would have no resources to pursue the litigation or to repair the sewer treatment system.
F6:
This lack of financial stability dos not bode well for the longevity of the City.
F7:
The fact that the members of the City Council cannot get their stories straight as to who directs the employees on a daily basis reinforces the allegations of a lack of clear communication to the employees as to their tasks and duties. This lack is further reinforced by policies and procedures manuals that are generally vague and unhelpful to the employees.
F8:
The fact that City Council members are acting as professional managers of the City without the knowledge commensurate with the position exposes the city to additional liability, whether it is the lack of knowledge of the safety requirements for application of herbicides or the possible toxic nature of material after a hotel or other building burns to the ground.
F9:
There appears to be no coherent policy for using volunteers, i.e. whether drug testing needs to be done (especially in the case of driving city equipment) or health checks to prevent high risk people from performing tasks dangerous to their health. The city is exposed to liability, and if the risk is not covered the city will be bankrupt shortly.
Additional Recommendations
2
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
Each one of the findings are self explanatory as to what needs to be done.
R2:
The best recommendation that the Grand Jury can make is for the citizens of Loyalton to become involved with the city and watch everything they do. 26
Findings & Recommendations
1 findings
F1:
The CCP is spending the funds according to the state recommendations.
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
It is recommended that a clear method of tracking funds and reporting on outcomes be followed.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
5 findings
F1:
The Clerk/Recorder diligently oversaw the entire process.
F2:
People were encouraged to observe the entire process of verifying signatures on the vote by mail ballot return envelopes.
F3:
People were encouraged to observe the process of counting of the ballots.
F4:
The Staff was extremely professional and thorough in strictly following the protocol for counting and verifying the vote count.
F5:
Test ballots were scanned, fed thru the counting machine and verified by Grand Jury Members to assure the counting machine was functioning properly. The actual voted ballots were only handled by designated Elections Officials who then fed through the counting machine.
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
The citizens of Sierra County should thank the Clerk/Recorder and her staff for their professionalism and the excellent care in making the voting process honest and transparent. The process is open for all citizen observers.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
8 findings
F1:
The Radio Antenna Towers, (although there is “Restricted Area – No Public Access” signage), do not appear to be secure from public access, posing possible liability issues should someone attempt to climb the towers and injure themselves.
F2:
Existing sally-port recreation area continues to not meet the standards set by the state per Title 24 for jail building standards for that purpose.
F3:
Jail facility was built as a Type I* facility but has always operated as a Type II** facility. a. *Type I facility holds inmate up to 96 hours. b. **Type II facility holds inmates pending arraignment, during trial, and upon sentencing.
F4:
An up-grade to the sally-port/recreation area would bring the jail into full compliance with Title 24 for jail building standards. While non-compliance is not illegal, it exposes the county to civil liability should a negative event occur.
F5:
Funding to rectify existing non-compliance with Title 24 due to the sally-port/recreation area structural deficiencies is being sought via AB 109 realignment funds.
F6:
There is a possibility that the jail will be deemed a financial burden to the county that can no longer be sustained, thereby generating continued discussion on whether the jail should be maintained or closed meaning inmates would be permanently housed out of county.
F7:
Disbursement of AB 109 realignment funds to bring the existing sally-port/recreation area is pending completion of the SB 678/AB 109 Integrated Implementation Plan prepared by Fred Campbell, Criminal Justice Research Foundation, and the Board of supervisors’ decision regarding the viability of keeping the jail open. As of the time of this report, the finalized report was still pending completion.
F8:
There appeared to be a lack of effective communication from administration as to what training was available for Correctional Officers versus what training the Correctional Officers were actually being offered or sent to by superiors. That issue has been resolved. Sheriff Evans, the deputies, and the correctional officers/dispatchers are commended for their hard work at resolving those matters that were within their power to resolve. Sheriff Evans and his staff’s cooperation with this grand jury has been exemplary. 6
Additional Recommendations
3
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
Upon completion and presentation of Fred Campbell’s in-depth analysis of the jail, the Sierra County Board of Supervisors must make a decision of the financial viability of keeping the jail open.
R2:
The Sierra County Board of Supervisors must hold public hearings throughout the county in order to gain the public’s input regarding the prospect of closing the jail.
R3:
The Sierra County Board of Supervisors must act as expeditiously as possible on the information presented for the benefit of Sierra County.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
2 findings
F1:
In response to the AB109 Realignment Act and the impact the legislation could have in terms of longer county jail terms, the Probation Department has developed and has secured approval from the Sierra County Board of Supervisors to implement the Pretrial Electronic Monitoring Program (EM).
F2:
We find that the Probation Department is operating very effectively with limited staff. They have a wide range of clients and responsibilities. Their effectiveness could be better with more staff and resources. The Probation Department will be getting more staff with the realignment funds, and the staff is up to the challenge of improving the results of the programs
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
Continue the Electronic Monitoring Program that is in place.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
2 findings
F1:
Pertinent information was omitted in the agenda item (i.e. indicating the table was a surplus item rather than disclosing its historical significance).
F2:
Bill Copren is in possession of a cultural artifact donated to Sierra County.
Additional Recommendations
2
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
The Sierra Board of Supervisors should reexamine its policy of disposing of surplus items to avoid a recurrence of inadvertently getting rid of valuable or historical items. They should be wary of being fooled through less than honest means to declare something surplus.
R2:
Resolution 2006-193 was approved incorrectly due to misrepresentation, and the Grand Jury recommends that the Sierra County Superior Court order the Turner table be returned to the county forthwith.