Gran Jurado del Condado de Stanislaus
2015-2016
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
14 hallazgos
F1:
The City of Patterson City Council is in violation of the Brown Act. (a) The City Council did not properly notify the public as to closed session meeting content. (b) In regard to closed sessions, the City Council did not consistently report actions taken nor record individual votes of council members concerning this property acquisition. Agrees w/ Finding Agrees Partially x Disagrees Wholly Agencies Asked to Respond
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R1:
The City of Patterson needs to consistently follow the Brown Act in order to ensure transparency to the public and remain compliant with the law. (a) Agendas for closed session meetings must be included in the open session meeting agendas and announced verbally in open session prior to adjourning to closed session. Closed session items discussed must be limited to Brown Act requirements. (b) Pursuant to California Government Code Section 54957.1(a), (element of the Brown Act), the City Council is required to publicly report any action taken in closed session and the vote or abstention on that action of every member present. sayy ESI ie sty gods 3 jury ringl Report *T Im plemented Will Implement Further Analysis Needed Will Not Implement
F2:
The City of Patterson demonstrated disregard for the law and did not exercise due diligence in the acquisition of the property at 21/25 S. Del Puerto Avenue. (a) The City of Patterson neglected to submit its plan to acquire property to the Planning Commission as required by California Government Code Section 65402(a), and the City proceeded to acquire the property without a determination by the Planning Commission if the project was consistent with its General Plan. There was no CEQA documentation prepared by the City, informing the public of the environmental consequences of this purchase. - (c) No hazardous materials assessment was performed prior to, or during, the acquisition process despite being required for the same reason as in F2(b).
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R2:
The City of Patterson needs to comply with applicable laws concerning the acquisition of property by a public entity, including but not limited to, the California Government Code and Public Resources Code. (a) The City of Patterson needs to adopt and approve a written policy and check list for the acquisition of real property, assuring compliance with all applicable laws and regulations.
F3:
The building purchased by the city cannot be used as intended without extensive remodeling and repair at significant cost.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R3:
The ESMAD needs a Board that is more involved in the oversight of the District. The Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors should expand public awareness of ESMAD Board vacancies to increase interest in Board membership.
F4:
The lack of due diligence has resulted in the waste of approximately $2,400,000.00 in public funds based upon estimates supplied by the City of Patterson. (b) a WAAL Cteamiclagic MAiiams Chl 2015-2046 Stanisiaus County Chi G Agrees w/ Finding Agrees Partially *1 Disagrees Wholly
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R4:
The City of Patterson needs to adopt and approve a written policy and check list for the acquisition of real property, assuring compliance with all applicable laws and regulations. a Implemented Will Implement Further Analysis Needed Will Not Implement
F5:
The City of Patterson failed to comply with the 2014-2015 SCCGJ request for the purchase agreement for the properties at 21/25 S. Del Puerto Avenue. The SCCGJ was led to believe, based upon review of City documentation and council agendas, that a purchase agreement existed. ' (a) The City of Patterson did not respond to the written request for information by the 2014-2015 SCCGJ as required by law California Penal Code 925(a). (b) The City of Patterson failed to fully comply in delivering all requested documents by February 17, 2015 as requested under the Freedom of Information Act in order to provide proof of the purchase agreement. (c) The City of Patterson failed to comply with the subpoena served on the City Manager, issued February 2, 2015, by the Stanislaus County Superior Court, concerning information related to the purchase agreement. (d) The Stanislaus County Superior Court issued the City Manager an Order to Show Cause, dated March 13, 2015. (e) The City Manager and City Attorney appeared before a Superior Court Judge on April 13, 2015, and agreed to appear before the 2014-2015 SCCGJ to testify under oath concerning the existence of a purchase agreement.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R5:
The Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors and the City Councils of all nine incorporated cities within the County should take action to restore budgets and expand police services, particularly community-oriented and problem-oriented policing, to respond to the potential challenges of AB 109.
F6:
The 2014-2015 SCCGJ is resigned to the fact that a formal purchase agreement did not exist. Agrees w/ Finding Agrees Partially * Disagrees Wholly
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R6:
None * Implemented Will Implement Further Analysis Needed Will Not Implement Conclusion The response from the City of Patterson regarding Finding F2(b) requires additional information. Although the City agrees with the finding, the position of the City is the CEQA documentation was not required. The response from the City of Patterson regarding Finding F2(c) requires additional information. Although the City agrees with the finding, the position of the City is that a hazardous material assessment was not required. The response from the City of Patterson regarding Finding F4 contains information that is not accurate. In their response, the City indicates “The Grand Jury failed to do its own due diligence by citing a totally unsubstantiated and therefore, speculative figure.” The public funds data, originally cited by the 2014-2015 SCCGJ, was supported by data that is contained in Appendix C of the report. The response from the City of Patterson regarding Finding F6 requires additional information. Although the City agrees with the finding, the position of the City is that a purchase agreement was not required. The 2015-2016 SCCGI is satisfied that all entities requested have responded to the findings and recommendations of the 2014- 2015 SCCGJ report within the time frame stipulated by California Penal Code Section 933(c). ai STANISLAUS COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSIT SYSTEMS Case 15-02C Reason for Investigation The 2014-2015 Stanislaus County Civil Grand Jury (SCCGJ) received a complaint questioning the need of four independent transit authorities within Stanislaus County. The complaint prompted an investigation to inquire into the feasibility ofa full or partial consolidation of the public transit authorities. Agencies Asked to Respond > Stanislaus Council of Governments (StanCOG) > Ceres Area Transit (CAT) >» Stanislaus Regional Transit (StaRT) > Ceres City Council > Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors > Bus Line Service of Turlock (BLAST) > Modesto Area Express (MAX) > Turlock City Council > Modesto City Council x oe 3 ar on £| >| 2 | 2 E - 4: 3/ = ° . Ss >| 2
F7:
Although each safety cell at the PSC has a functional video camera, they are observational only and not recorded onto any type of media.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R7:
Convert all existing safety cell cameras to record 24/7 onto media storage in an effort to mitigate claims of negligence or abuse at these high-risk locations.
F8:
None ro xn Agrees w/ Finding Agencies Asked to Respond Stanislaus County Regional 911 Director Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors Agrees Partially Disagrees Wholly
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R8:
None aot leroy Saeed Daerah md Jury ring) Report Implemented Will Implement *| Further Analysis Needed | Will Not Implement
F9:
There have been attempts to create legislative solutions to some of the consequences of Proposition 47, but they are yet to be successful. a Agrees w/ Finding Agrees Partially Disagrees Wholly
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R9:
The criminal justice leaders of Stanislaus County should continue to be active, both individually and through their professional organizations, in California’s legislative challenges to salvage the unintended consequences of Proposition 47. Implemented *1 Will Implement Further Analysis Needed Will Not Implement
R9a:
The County Board of Supervisors should continue to update the master plan for the Public Safety Center on a periodic basis and provide adequate review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
F10:
The DRC has become more important due to the additional persons placed into local post-release community supervision due to AB 109.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R10:
The City of Modesto and Stanislaus County should begin immediate negotiations with the State of California to gain control of the old courthouse property by the time the new courthouse is completed and operational.
F11:
The transportation of offenders from the existing Downtown Men’s Jail to the new Modesto Courthouse would pose logistical, financial, and public safety challenges.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R11:
The City of Modesto, Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors, and the Stanislaus County Sheriff should vigorously advocate in these early planning and design stages that the State of California provide adequate holding facilities in the New Modesto Courthouse.
F12:
Staff comments indicated CAD software is outdated.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R12:
The Regional 911 Director should take steps to update the CAD system.
F13:
Regional 911 implements continuous recruitment to fill vacated and budgeted positions.
F14:
Employees of the Regional 911 Center are highly trained and dedicated to providing public service to the community of Stanislaus County. ”“ Agrees w/ Finding Agrees Partially Disagrees Wholly
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R14:
None Implemented Will Implement Further Analysis Needed Will Not Implement nn Conclusion The 2015-2016 SCCGJ is satisfied that all entities requested have responded to the findings and recommendations of the 2014-2015 SCCGIJ report within the time frame stipulated by California Penal Code Section 933(c). EAST SIDE MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT Case 15-05C Reason for Investigation The 2014-2015 Stanislaus County Civil Grand Jury (SCCGJ) received a complaint concerning working conditions at the East Side Mosquito Abatement District (ESMAD) citing numerous examples of both poor management and outdated human resource practices. The full panel of the SCCGJ reviewed and accepted the complaint. > ESMAD Manager > ESMAD Board of Directors Agencies Asked to Respond > Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors