Sonoma County Grand Jury
2008-2009
Findings & Recommendations
7 findings
F1:
Based on the independent audit of AC&C and the Shelter, many changes and improvements had already been implemented when the Grand Jury began this investigation.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The Agricultural Commissioner should make sure that AC&C implements a working operational telephone system and website in Spanish. They should also generate informational literature in Spanish and make it available throughout the County.
F2:
The AC&C does not adequately provide access to information in Spanish through its telephone system, literature or website. As a result they are not effectively addressing the need to further educate and inform the Hispanic population regarding the services available.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
AC&C should staff a full time Dispatcher at the Shelter or implement a part time arrangement of multiple personnel dedicated to this position of critical importance.
F3:
The AC&C does not have a full time dispatcher working with its field officers, who respond to calls from throughout the County. Instead, staff members fill in as needed, and the Sheriff’s department and/or other law enforcement agencies handle dispatch during off hours. This can leave the field officer in a vulnerable position, as the dispatcher must effectively transmit information, and also provide necessary backup to the officer, should the situation warrant it.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The Agricultural Commissioner should eliminate the use of inmate labor as recommended by the 3-Year Quick Start and Action Plan.
F4:
The AC&C uses inmate labor from the Sonoma County Adult Detention facility as part of their housekeeping staff. The quality of this labor has proven to be unreliable and disruptive. It requires additional supervision for training and security issues.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
AC&C should assess the cost effectiveness of operating and leasing the MAC. If this is not fiscally prudent, it should consider divesting itself of the MAC.
F5:
There are five other shelters within the County that provide additional service and work in conjunction with AC&C. As some of these shelters are private entities they have the prerogative to choose which animals to accept, unlike AC&C which must accept all animals.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
The Board of Supervisors should consider developing a new Citizens’ group for animal welfare to render oversight more effectively, while also acting as advocates for AC&C. Alternatively, the current Animal Welfare Advisory Committee should meet regularly with AC&C and report back to the Board of Supervisors. Required responses Agricultural Commissioner: F-2, F-3, F-4, F-6, R-1, R-2, R-3 AC&C Director: F-2, F-3, F-4, F-6, R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4 Board of Supervisors: F-7, R-5 23
F6:
The Mobile Animal Center (MAC) was purchased with donated funds prior to the independent audit. The MAC is not cost effective for its original intended use, which was to perform spay/neuter surgeries in the mobile unit throughout the community. Once the unit was put into operation, it was determined that it did not provide adequate space for the animals to recover. However, it is still being used in other ways and by other agencies.
F7:
The Animal Welfare Advisory Committee was created to advise the Board of Supervisors on animal welfare. The members, who are appointed by the 21 Board of Supervisors, no longer hold regular meetings or play a significant part in the function of AC&C. Conclusions In order to adequately sustain and continue to improve services provided by AC&C, the necessary and appropriate levels of funding must be maintained. Special attention should be paid to adequate staffing levels, spay/neuter programs and the need for a full time dispatcher, as recommended by the 3-Year Quick Start and Action Plan. It is important to keep in mind that as the population and demographics of Sonoma County changes to a more urban environment, the likely increase in numbers of cats and dogs, necessitates more education and focus on spay/neuter programs. With these changes, the need to provide information in Spanish also increases. The Agricultural Commissioner must address this need with appropriate funding to implement Spanish language resources. The Grand Jury found that AC&C is functioning well and has a dedicated team of hard working, caring individuals serving the needs of the community. They found no evidence of animal abuse or use of unqualified rescue agencies. The AC&C staff must perform their jobs while facing ethical and emotional issues on a daily basis. They have made great strides in the quality of their service and this will become more evident as they continue implementing the Citygate recommendations. The Grand Jury believes it is time for the public to put past negative perceptions to rest and recognize the good work that is being done by AC&C. Appropriately, the name change from “Animal Regulation Division” to its current “Animal Care and Control” supports the many caring services provided by the staff and volunteers, bringing the joy of their work to the community. Commendations The Shelter staff is to be commended for its efforts in managing and supervising itself during stressful transitional times, with and without a Director. During that time, the launch of the 3-Year Quick Start Plan is evidence of its commitment to the care and service of the animals and the people of Sonoma County. Recommendations
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
6 findings
F1:
Of the need for qualified applicants to serve on the sitting Grand Jury and that citizens from all cultural, ethnic, and socio-economic sectors of the County need to be encouraged to apply to serve on the Jury.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
That future Grand Juries and the Superior Court use the media to bring its concerns about diversity to the citizens of Sonoma County. Radio, television and print media should be used to inform citizens about the existence and scope of the Grand Jury's duties, and for the need for citizen participation. The information must be delivered in the languages of the targeted communities whenever possible.
F2:
That applications to become a Juror are available online, or by calling the Grand Jury office at 565-6330. The Grand Jury website can be accessed at sonomagrandjury.org.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
That the Grand Jury website be kept current at all times. New material should be posted within 72 hours of release.
F3:
Of the opportunity, which the Grand Jury provides for the airing and resolution of problems, which may exist in our local government.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
That representatives of the Grand Jury make themselves available to speak to community organizations and attend community events to inform the public regarding the function of the Grand Jury.
F4:
That any citizen may file a complaint concerning the operation of an agency of local government by submitting a complaint form. Forms are available on line at the website address above, or through the Grand Jury Office at the phone number above.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
That the Court and the Grand Jury use the media to inform the public when a report is published.
F5:
That Grand Jury proceedings are strictly confidential and the identity of persons filing complaints is never revealed.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
That the Superior Court continue to work with the Grand Jury to drive a continuous program for citizen awareness, and encourage citizen use of the Grand Jury. Recommended Responses Sonoma County 2009-2010 Civil Grand Jury: Rl, R2, R3, R4, R5 Superior Court: R1, R2, R4, R5 37
F6:
That there are many means and opportunities available to reach out to the community with its diverse ethnic groups. Outreach in English or other languages may be used to attract qualified people to become Jurors and to inform and educate citizens about how to utilize the Grand Jury. 36
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings and recommendations not yet extracted.
Findings & Recommendations
9 findings
F1:
Standards of Behavior have always existed in the Sonoma County Library System and were last updated Sept, 2008. Enforcement of the Standards of Behavior is the major problem. Enforcement does not exist.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The Grand Jury recommends that the Sonoma County Library Commissioners:
Stop just reviewing the enforcement policies of the Standards of Behavior and start implementing them.
F2:
The incident reports and the patron complaints at Central Library far exceed those from all the other 12 libraries combined. These reports are available for review at the Commission’s monthly meetings.
F3:
Because of lack of enforcement of Standards of Behavior, the Central Library staff members felt it necessary to generate and sign a petition requesting the reposting of the “Library Behavior Policy Sign” at the entrance of the library. This action reflects lack of support from the Director and Commission to address problems at Central Library.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The Grand Jury recommends that the Sonoma County Library Commissioners:
Stop just reviewing the enforcement policies of the Standards of Behavior and start implementing them.
F4:
The Director was hired in 2005 in part to update the infrastructure of the library system. This goal has largely been met including the introduction of self- check out.
F5:
Central Library has NO FILTERS on any computers. There would be an initial cost for installation and implementation of the filter system. There is financial assistance available for schools and libraries through the Children’s Internet Protection Act.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The Grand Jury recommends that the Sonoma County Library Commissioners:
Request a filter on all computers at the Central Library as a means of protecting minors against Pornography, taking advantage of the e-rate discount and achieving the protections embodied in the “Protection of Children Against Sexual Exploitation Act of 1977”.
F6:
Internet Access URL specific web page filters can be effective.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The Grand Jury recommends that the Sonoma County Library Commissioners:
Request a filter on all computers at the Central Library as a means of protecting minors against Pornography, taking advantage of the e-rate discount and achieving the protections embodied in the “Protection of Children Against Sexual Exploitation Act of 1977”.
F7:
Movement of computers to other locations within the building would minimize inadvertent viewing by other patrons. 16
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The Grand Jury recommends that the Sonoma County Library Commissioners:
Immediately prioritize the implementation of the interior floor plan at Central Library and move the computers to a side wall out of the present main aisle, as approved by the FY 08-09 Sonoma County Library Commissioners budget.
F8:
Protection of Children Against Sexual Exploitation Act of 1977 can be implemented.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The Grand Jury recommends that the Sonoma County Library Commissioners:
Request a filter on all computers at the Central Library as a means of protecting minors against Pornography, taking advantage of the e-rate discount and achieving the protections embodied in the “Protection of Children Against Sexual Exploitation Act of 1977”.
F9:
A letter from the Mayor of Santa Rosa dated October 1, 2008, authorized Sonoma County Library Commissioners to regulate conduct on the premises and the surrounding area outside of all the three properties, Central Library, Rincon Valley and North West Regional Library. As of May 2009 the Commission has not utilized its authority to address the problems at Central Library. Conclusions The Library Commission has always had an open door policy, which in essence attempts to make this library, a democratic institution, available to everyone. The policy has a great deal of merit. The Grand Jury has concluded that its recommendations can be achieved without compromising that policy. The 2008 Standards of Behavior have been updated and now should be enforced. The library Commission needs to actually implement and enforce the appropriate rules of behavior at the Santa Rosa Central library. This flagship library deserves the attention of the Library Commissioners as an individual facility. Standards of Behavior must be enforced to send a clear message to violators that their conduct and interference with the rights of all users will not be tolerated. In 1996 the Commissioners adopted an Internet Access Policy. http://www.sonomalibrary.org/libinfo/policies.html The policy states, “It does not monitor and has no control over the information accessed through the Internet.” The statement in this policy, “parents alone have the responsibility to control their children’s access” is short sighted. Internet filters would block the access by minors when parents are not with them at the library computers. Furthermore, it is a violation of federal law to knowingly receive visual depictions of minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct. Anyone who does so is subject to federal criminal prosecution under the Protection of Children Against Sexual Exploitation Act of 1977. A related issue is the fact that anyone, teenager or adult, traversing the central aisle in the library may be exposed to images on the computer screen that they may find to be shocking and offensive. This problem could be solved by moving the computers to a less exposed location. Permission was given to the Commission last October for Central Library’s grounds to become a smoke free zone. An extended zone is needed to prevent smoke from entering the interior of the library. Commendations Central Library’s staff is commended for their persistence in giving excellent service to their patrons, especially under the stress of not having enforcement of the Standards of Behavior in place. The Security Guard has received an award for his outstanding work in October 2008. We are very fortunate to have a person with his qualities at Central Library. Because of all the hard work and many hours last year’s Grand Jury spent on their report “Santa Rosa Central Library at Risk” this year’s Grand Jury had a solid foundation for their 2009 report. We appreciate the Press Democrat for all the informative articles published by them on the Central Library. Recommendations The Grand Jury recommends that the Sonoma County Library Commissioners:
Related Recommendations (2)
R1:
The Grand Jury recommends that the Sonoma County Library Commissioners:
Stop just reviewing the enforcement policies of the Standards of Behavior and start implementing them.
R4:
The Grand Jury recommends that the Sonoma County Library Commissioners:
Immediately impose a smoke free zone to the entire Central Library property extending to the edge of the city sidewalk. (Permission was granted by the Mayor of Santa Rosa on October 1, 2008). Required Responses to Recommendations Sonoma County Library Commission R1, R2, R3, R4 18
Findings & Recommendations
3 findings
F1:
The City Council was specifically informed by the City Clerk at the August 20 meeting that under the Elections Code, the period for persons to file papers to run as a write-in candidate was from September 8 through October 21. Cancellation of the election would eliminate their opportunity to do so.
F2:
The City Council was also specifically informed by the City Clerk at the August 20 meeting, that at least one person had communicated the intent to file papers to run as a write-in candidate. 33
F3:
The Mayor of the City had a personal interest in canceling the election. This was confirmed during the meeting when she pointed out the work that she had done during the nomination period, to obtain the required signatures and to file the necessary papers on time. Conclusions The Political Reform Act of 1974 prohibits conflicting financial interests in governmental decisions, and does not address personal interests. While not illegal, the action of the Sonoma City Council to cancel the election that it had called for November 4, 2008, was nonetheless a decision that did not appear to put the public interest first. The right to vote on the persons who seek a public mandate to govern us is one of our most important constitutional rights. Any governmental action to restrict or eliminate that right should be taken only with the utmost caution and due regard for the electorate. Unfortunately, when such an important decision is allowed to be made in circumstances where personal interest is also directly involved, this high standard has not been met. The point is not whether a write-in candidate would have been successful in the election. The point is that a decision to eliminate such an important right should not be made by the vote of a person who directly benefits from it. The failure was that of the City Council as a body and not just the person who cast the tie-breaking vote. As members of the City Council and guardians of the public trust, it should have been incumbent on all of the Council members, to prevent the decision from being made under tainted circumstances. In arriving at these conclusions, we are fully mindful that the actions were taken following advice from the City Attorney. The Mayor’s disqualification was not legally required because she did not have a financial interest as defined in the law. However, we do not believe that this answer meant that the other significant issues raised by canceling an election in these circumstances could be ignored by the City Council. The absence of illegality should not be the highest standard to which the actions of our public officials are held. If that were the case, all that we would need would be laws and lawyers to tell us what is the right thing to do, and we could dispense with such considerations as ethics, public interest, and other matters of mere policy. In America today there is a growing fear and concern as to the efficacy and validity of the political process. The very cavalier way in which the Sonoma City Council cancelled its local election can only add to this growing unease. The most sacred right we all share is the right to exercise our voice and this is accomplished by voting. 34
Findings & Recommendations
6 findings
F1:
SYC is one of very few gender-responsive treatment facilities for adolescent girls in the State. A gender-responsive program is one that acknowledges that gender makes a difference. It has comprehensive services integrating policy and practice that target the female's pathway to criminality, and creates an environment of safety, respect and dignity. This type of program addresses the unique issues of substance abuse, trauma, mental health, 7 physical abuse and economic marginality. Consideration is also given to the general physiological differences, reproduction, and gender roles.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The Sonoma County Board of Supervisors should take all necessary steps to retain the program at SYC, even if budget cuts are required for the Probation Department. SYC must be allowed and given appropriate time to fully develop into a gender-responsive program, and prove its true benefit to our communities.
F2:
While emphasizing behavior modification and support services to transition girls successfully back into the family unit, school and community, SYC is cognizant of the need for vocational services. Currently there are some opportunities directed towards vocational programming through the Assistance Dog Program, Mural Project, and Weekend Work Crew. However, only the Work-Ready program is certified. On the other hand Probation Camp has firmly established marketable vocational programs in place for the boys, providing skills verification for employers.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The Probation Department should enhance existing programs at SYC, and expand them to include certified vocational programs. It should develop and/or make available trainings comparable to those offered to the boys at Probation Camp, including a Culinary Arts Program. This can be done by bringing a chef back to SYC, which will provide vocational training and offer a positive role model. 9
F3:
The Probation Camp has a full time chef who prepares food for the boys, and teaches culinary skills. At SYC the girls prepare their own breakfast and receive their other meals from the Juvenile Justice Center food services.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
Until a new facility for SYC can be realized, the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors should make all necessary upgrades to the existing physical location to enhance the therapeutic environment. The following improvements are needed immediately: Furnish and install an Intercom system Furnish and install indoor and outdoor cameras Repair the existing access road to SYC
F4:
The physical building at SYC is old, outdated and is not conducive to a therapeutic environment. Although it has been grandfathered into the Corrections Standards Authority for inspection, that practice “gives the impression that a facility is adequate, when in reality the opposite may be true.” The Corrections Standards Authority inspection found that the physical plant at SYC does not provide a setting similar to the level found at Probation Camp. It encouraged County leaders to place a high priority on replacing the facility for SYC.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
The Probation Department should establish and secure the necessary space requirements for conducting all programs, so that SYC staff does not have to search out available space/rooms, move equipment and supplies, nor rearrange schedules. Similar Type One fire-resistive reinforced concrete construction, now being occupied by SYC, exists nearby and can be re-occupied as I-3 Occupancy under the Uniform Building Code.
F5:
Neither SYC nor Probation Camp are state mandated programs. The Juvenile Justice System in Sonoma County is currently undergoing an evaluation, as one part of a study looking at the County’s adult criminal justice system. This part of the study is expected to be completed by fall of 2009. Furthermore, the County’s strategic plan encourages best practices, effective rehabilitation, and further upstream allocation of resources; an early intervention approach that focuses on changing societal influences.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
The Probation Department should be required to explain the expense anomaly between SYC and Probation Camp, given the difference in staff size and number of juveniles served. Providing transparency will lead to more equitable allocation of resources and adequate funding for SYC.
F6:
After extensive review of financial records, the Grand Jury did not receive an adequate explanation as to why there is such a disparity in programs between the two youth facilities, given the apparent parity in funding. Conclusions Both SYC and Probation Camp programs serve a highly beneficial purpose in our County by addressing the needs of one of our most valuable resources, our youth. Recognizing the importance and value placed on upstream programs, the Grand Jury strongly advises the Board of Supervisors to take all measures necessary to improve and strengthen the SYC program. Allowing SYC the chance to develop its gender-responsive program is clearly aligned with what the 8 Board of Supervisors intended when the County transitioned SYC to an all female facility. It is generally recognized in social scientific literature that prison inmates are less well educated and have fewer marketable job skills than the overall population. Providing at-risk youth with employment opportunities through academic and vocational education is an essential strategy to discourage future delinquency and incarcerations. This strategy is also believed to be the most cost-effective. SYC is a young program and is currently lacking in vocational opportunities for the female residents. Probation Camp has been in existence for more than 50 years and its vocational training is firmly established in the Juvenile Justice System of Sonoma County. While current activities at SYC are worthwhile in terms of education and therapy, much more is needed to serve this most vulnerable population. Although, the age and population at SYC is different from that at Probation Camp, the need for vocational opportunities is no less important for the young women. By effectively utilizing an upstream allocation of resources, all of the at-risk youth programs could be successful. Commendations The Director and staff at SYC are to be commended for the outstanding work they have done with the minimal resources available. They have successfully transitioned girls returning to their homes, schools and community. Sonoma County prides itself on having a progressive and forward-thinking government and these programs are fine examples of that. If SYC is given the chance to fully develop, just as Probation Camp has, Sonoma County could continue to lead the way and be a model of success through its gender-responsive girls program. Recommendations
Related Recommendations (1)
R6:
Immediately upon completion of the current Juvenile Justice study, the Probation Department should furnish the Grand Jury with its findings. Required responses to Findings Board of Supervisors – F-4 Chief Probation Officer – F-3, F-6 Required responses to Recommendations Board of Supervisors – R-1, R-3 Chief Probation Officer – R-2, R-3, R-4, R-5, R-6 Requested responses Board of Supervisors – F-6, R-2, R-5 Chief Probation Officer – R-1 10
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
5 findings
F1:
With respect to the former lead counsel whose employment was the subject of the complaint, the LSJPA Board decided to replace him after he worked six months of his two-year contract. The settlement was structured to be paid out over the course of the next six months, ending August 31, 2008. The monthly payment amounts varied based on withholding requirements, which may have led to the perception that there was a salary increase. Payroll records indicate that approximately $100,000 was paid out from March 2007 through August 2007, during which time the former lead counsel was no longer performing duties for the LSJPA. The LSJPA lead counsel was replaced by an internal staff attorney.
F2:
During the course of the investigation the Grand Jury heard two arguments in support of the use of employment contracts: They enable competitive hiring of skilled and qualified individuals because people making a move often want some guarantee of security in order to leave another situation. They ensure continuity within an organization because people tend to stay for the duration of their contracts – rather than seek other opportunities because their tenure is protected by the terms of the contract.
F3:
A decision to exit or end an employment contract before its term is complete generally indicates some dissatisfaction or change in situation on the part of one or both parties. When an employment contract is terminated there may be a settlement to avoid lengthy or costly legal action and lead to the lowest cost solution
F4:
The use of employment contracts in the recruitment of high-level personnel from outside the LSJPA staff can result in substantial financial risk of public funds.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The LSJPA Board evaluate whether employment contracts are appropriate or needed as the state’s educational system faces more and more financial pressure.
F5:
Merit systems and civil service systems make it possible to provide fair and open competition for positions, apply clear standards and testing for positions, and use established due process to ensure rights are protected. Commendation The Grand Jury commends the LSJPA Board for its intention to manage costs and provide competitively priced legal services to its members. This creative structure and the way that it is administered should make it possible to track and measure cost, performance, and overall value of its delivery specialized legal services. Conclusions As a result of its findings, the Grand Jury questions the use of employment contracts for highly compensated employees within the scope of LSJPA. The management of the employment and release of the former LSJPA lead counsel resulted in a costly situation for Sonoma County and the other entities comprising the LSJPA. The amount of money expended to end the contract could have been used to advantage in the classroom. An employment contract binds both parties, limits flexibility, and may pose problems if one of the parties later determines it is necessary to end the contract. A simple termination resulting from recognition that the initial hiring decision was a mismatch may become a breach of contract resulting in an employer being legally responsible not only for violating the contract, but also for breaching its covenant of good faith and fair dealing. As budgets continue to shrink, we question whether it is appropriate that a publicly funded entity use employment contracts. It may be argued that they are needed to attract and retain personnel and ensure continuity of operations. Current talent acquisition and management practices across many private and civil service employers are based on the development of internal talent and paying competitive salaries for at-will employment while avoiding the financial risk of employment contracts. Further, continuity of operations should be predicated on the development of teamwork and sound performance management practices rather than employment contracts. The Grand Jury concludes that merit systems and civil service systems can form the model for recruitment and hiring practices that are more in line with the fiscal realities our community faces today.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The LSJPA review and evaluate its employee management and development policies and establish a documented succession planning policy and procedure to demonstrate its commitment to emphasize promotion and hiring from within. If it becomes necessary to hire from outside, then succession planning policies and practices should be reviewed and probably modified.
Findings & Recommendations
3 findings
F1:
Each agency involved in the subject incidents properly implemented the Protocol following the deaths of each party.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The District Attorney should make a realistic assessment of his resources and ability to prepare Reports as now mandated by the Protocol. If warranted by that honest reflection, the District Attorney should pursue and effect an appropriate modification to the Protocol. Required Responses to Recommendations
F2:
In each of the incidents reviewed in this report (and in each of 5 other fatal incidents for which investigations have now been completed pursuant to the Protocol), the District Attorney’s failed to prepare and provide a written summary within the sixty (60) days required by the Protocol. The time that it has taken to prepare the Reports has ranged from seven months to twenty months.
F3:
The District Attorney’s conclusions that there was insufficient evidence of criminal liability in each case, was warranted. Conclusions The Grand Jury believes that the Protocol sets forth reasonable procedures and guidelines for Sonoma County law enforcement agencies to use in the criminal investigation of fatal incidents involving law enforcement employees. The District Attorney has generally fulfilled his responsibilities under the Protocol. However, the present Protocol, requiring a written summary within sixty (60) days, has been routinely violated. Conclusions (continued) The Grand Jury believes that the public would be better served, by the establishment of a realistic deadline that the District Attorney’s Office is able to meet, with limited and reasonable exceptions.