Ventura County 2011-2012 - California Grand Jury Reports

May 22, 2013 — Papg Grand Jury Follow-Up

7 pages 9 findings 9 recommendations

Findings & Recommendations 9 findings

F01: Development of metrics within the PAPG created a monthly activity report new case management system that tra cks and monitors key metrics and process objectives that include case load numbers, timeliness of client visits, timeliness of completed investigations to County Counsel, trial outcomes and financial activities. The PAPG office met with Panoramic to identify the best method for capturing this data.

F06: PAPG has not been able to meet Since the review, the office is fully its policy goals of visit frequency to staffed and timeliness of visits increased conservatees. There has been significantly to 68%. Our goal is 100% instability in the PAPG staff. There but 90% is likely the better target as Number Finding Status/Outcome has been a complete turnover in some clients are AWOL or in the leadership within the PAPG since hospital. The addition of new and added July of 2011. There is no current vehicles has increased our ability to visit use of interns to provide on-going clients timely. The agency Director staffing needs. Vacancies existed presented the increase of cases to the in July 2011 and continue in April Board at the annual budget review. 2012. Recruitment of new staff, projected growth in the client base, anticipated changes in the court and mandated certification requirements necessitate an ongoing process of training and personnel development

F07: The large transactional workload The staff is aware of services through and the effects of the work dealing the EAP as well as relying on a team with the mentally ill and severely approach to case management. disabled seem to have contributed to turnover of PAPG workers. The term for the latter issue is empathy fatigue.

F09: Training personnel via on-the-job On the job training is key to assisting training without documented new employees in learning how to standard practices increases the access important legal information that workload on management and staff guides our work. The PAPG office which may lead to inconsistent utilizes one to one supervision meetings program implementation. This to address technical issues, case result removes resources from management and client issues, and to documenting standard practices. provide support, guidance and Given the anticipated increases in instruction. One to one meetings are workload for the PAPG there may standard practice in the AFS be further delay in documenting Department. PAPG processes and procedures

F11: The wide geographic distribution of The PAPG office uses a standard clients and the need for template for documenting visits by the transportation, documentation and CSW that is uploaded into the visitation of conservatees Panoramic case management system consumes a significant portion of located under “events.” This allows the the workload of the PAPG. The Deputy to easily view the status of the documentation includes status of client as observed and documented by the clients and the clients’ care the CSW. The Deputy also documents facilities. Due to the distances observations into “events”. Number Finding Status/Outcome traveled, the completion of a handwritten contact visitation form is occasionally completed after a visit.

F13: Client valuables are being stored in The PAPG Office obtained an additional the cash cart and in the warehouse, storage bin at the TTC vault under a due to lack of secure storage in the revised MOA dated August 2012. We no PAPG office. This is in violation of longer store valuables in the cash cart. PAPG policy. There is a need for The PAPG also obtained new space at safe storage of clients’ small-sized GSA warehouse that will permit an assets and papers in a container increase in the number of spaces for near the offices of the DPGs. small-sized assets. This space is secure Accessibility to the Treasury vault as was the previous space. by the PAPG needs to be based on the variable nature of the PAPG requirements in a timely fashion. In addition, the availability of secure storage must meet the size and quantity needs of the PAPG at various times, rather than an allocation of a fixed set of lock boxes

F14: The PAPG has no policy in place The PAPG policy requires the fiscal for liquidating assets after closure manager to verify and confirm that all of cases assets have been liquidated at case closure. All inventories are identified in Panoramic and can be directly documented, thus eliminating the need for handwritten notes.

F17: The present telephonic interactions In consultation with VCBH, the PAPG between PAPG sub-payee office created a list that is sent out processing and VCBH case monthly to VCBH that shows the client workers could be improved with name, case number, status, and funds information technology applications available. The PAPG office also now enforces the practice that calls to the PAPG sub-payee program are redirected to the appropriate VCBH case manager. Number Finding Status/Outcome

F20: GroupWise software system has a potential to exchange data with the Panoramic system to a greater extent than is currently utilized. Number Recommendation Status/Outcome

Additional Recommendations 6

Not linked to specific findings.

R02: The PAPG should purchase lap-top or tablet HSA implemented the computers with photographic capability for DPGs use of iPADS for key and CSWs with standard templates for performing field workers throughout inventories in the field, evaluating care facilities and the agency. All field staff documenting contacts with conservatees. The in the PAPG office have template should allow direct input to the Panoramic received iPADS, have software. been trained and receive regularly scheduled mini- training on increasing functionality.

R03: The PAPG and VCBH should add to their MOA the Completed and signed charter and procedure of the Continuity of Care June 20, 2012 Committee. The PAPG and the Treasurer-Tax Collector should Completed and signed

R04: review their current MOU with respect to the use of August 22, 2012 the TTC vault to allow more flexible access and storage.

R05: The PAPG should, as part of their policy for closing The fiscal department cases, address the liquidation of assets of clients has modified the closing prior to closure. The policy should address the final case checklist to include distribution of funds to the TTC. items for property distribution and funds and signatures as needed. Number Recommendation Status/Outcome

R08: The PAPG should develop and document in-house A desk manual will policies and procedures for the operation, data address operations in administration, security and change control of combination with best Panoramic database. The PAPG should also practice manual, rules of develop a handbook documenting policies, the court under the WIC procedures, checklists, forms and contacts as a and Probate Code. guide for deputies.

R12: The PAPG should update the fiscal oversight policy Policy completed. to establish the frequency of periodic inventory of client assets in the PAPG office vault, cash cart, warehouse and the Treasury vault. The inventory should be reconciled to the Panoramic database and other inventory records. This inventory should include all sites yearly on a random basis chosen by the head of the PAPG office. The PAPG and VCBH should jointly assess the In consultation with issue of empathy fatigue of DPGs and CSWs and if VCBH, it was appropriate, provide the necessary training to deal determined that issues with this issue. related to staff personal reactions to work is best addressed through one to one supervision and EAP. The PAPG and Health Care Agency establish an Completed June 20, MOU delineating joint roles, responsibilities and 2012 reporting requirements for conservatees of the PAPG under treatment in County medical facilities to assure compliance with existing law.

June 19, 2012 — City of Ventura Code Enforcement

31 pages 44 findings 8 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 44 findings

F01: CE administration requires code enforcement training and experience. (FA-01–06, 10, 11, 14, 17–22, 25, 27, 28, 32–44) 6 City of Ventura Code Enforcement

F02: The City has a large number of older dwellings and second dwelling units that have unpermitted work. (FA-34)

F03: Many of the second units provide inexpensive (low-income) housing and rentals. (FA-34)

F04: ―The 2nd Unit Dwelling Amnesty Permit Program‖ reduces permit fees and addresses zoning issue requirements for those who can afford impact fees and building construction upgrades to comply with the program. (FA-07, 08)

F05: Applicants not accepted into the Amnesty Program risk citations, higher fees, and possible demolition of their second dwelling units. (FA-08)

F06: Many property owners fear CE and the cost of permits, fees, and construction costs. (FA-01, 02, 06, 08–14, 18, 19, 21, 25-27, 29, 30, 32– 34, 36–44)

F07: CE and the City have shown preferential treatment in code enforcement to favored citizens. (FA-11)

F08: None of the levels of the City appellate process is by an independent third party and can become expensive to the property owner. (FA-27)

F09: The City holds the property owner responsible for the burden of proof for the existence of permits. (FA-02–05)

F10: The City holds the current property owners responsible for any and all prior work requiring permits. (FA-02)

Related Recommendations (1)

R08: That VCC place the burden of maintaining building and safety and code enforcement records or documents on the City, in compliance with current law. (FI-09) 8 City of Ventura Code Enforcement Responses Responses Required From: Ventura City Council (FI-01–17) (R-01–08) References Ref-01. Legislative Analyst’s Office, December 1996, ―Understanding Proposition 218‖ http://www.lao.ca.gov/1996/120196_prop_218/understanding_prop218 _1296.html (accessed May 22, 2012) Ref-02. Legislative Analyst's Office, July 15, 2010, "Proposition 26 Increases Legislative Vote Requirement to Two-Thirds for State Levies and Charges. Imposes Additional Requirement for Voters to Approve Local Levies and Charges With Limited Exceptions. Initiative Constitutional Amendment." http://www.lao.ca.gov/ballot/2010/26_11_2010.aspx (accessed May 22, 2012) Attachments Att-01. The 2nd Dwelling Unit Amnesty Permit Program Att-02. City of Ventura Administrative Report Dated: November 16, 2009

F11: CE has been aggressive with property owners in personal contacts, paperwork, documents, and enforcement tactics. (FA-01–05, 14, 18–22, 25–34, 36–44)

Related Recommendations (1)

R05: That VCC rewrite policies, procedures and practices with the purpose of reducing conflict between Code Enforcement and property owners. This should include:  editing forms that appear more threatening than informative prior to a determination of non-compliance (FI-11, 15, 16)  describing violations and remedy options with reasonable detail and clarity (FI-11, 15, 16)  developing a training strategy for Code Enforcement with the intent to assist owners through the process of making their properties safe (FI-11, 12, 15, 16)  providing equitable relief with respect to permit fees for successive owners who failed to discover prior code violations through their due diligence (FI-09, 10)  retaining an inventory of low-income dwellings in Ventura for state reporting requirements (FI-02–06, 10–16)  creating an independent third-party appeals process focusing on property safety issues and fairness (FI-08)

F12: CE is more aggressive and less helpful than a comparison city in the County. (FA-24)

F13: The VCC has raised fees for budgetary reasons. (FA-12, 13, 25, 26, 33, 38)

Related Recommendations (1)

R06: That VCC refrain from using non-safety code enforcement matters to raise revenue. (FI-04, 06, 13, 15)

F14: When the VCC approved shifting B&S permit fees to a cost reimbursable system, it resulted in higher fees. (FA-12, 13, 20, 25, 26, 33, 38)

Related Recommendations (1)

R06: That VCC refrain from using non-safety code enforcement matters to raise revenue. (FI-04, 06, 13, 15)

F15: The City's use of the term substandard is very broad, allowing the City to apply it to issues ranging from life-safety to nuisances. (FA-09, 18, 22, 28, 30, 34)

Related Recommendations (1)

R04: That VCC redefine ―substandard‖ as life safety issues in the code enforcement policies. (FI-15, 16)

F16: Inconsistent and confusing information is provided by the CE to property owners. (FA-06, 09, 10, 22, 28, 30, 42)

Related Recommendations (1)

F17: The VCC approved retaining the developer permit fees in excess of reimbursable costs. Though informed that collecting and retaining more than the costs to perform a service may be contrary to law, the VCC failed to lower these fee rates. (FA-36) City of Ventura Code Enforcement 7 Recommendations

Related Recommendations (1)

R07: That VCC return excessive fee rates previously collected from developers and lower these fee rates to a level compliant with the law. (FI-17)

F18: An administrative report informed the VCC that approximately 20% of the inspected second units met the City's definition as ―substandard.‖ Some were not life safety issues, but affected neighborhood livability, on-street parking, and increased demand for utility usage. The report also stated that many property owners either inherited unpermitted property or did not realize the need for permits for various repairs or additions. (Att-02)

F19: The VCC was advised that property owners expressed frustration regarding expenses, inflexible zoning and building laws, and the mandatory costs to legalize their unpermitted dwelling units.

F20: The City stated that finding more code violations does not have a direct financial impact on the CE group, but does significantly raise the permit fees for the B&S Department and likely saves CE jobs.

Related Recommendations (1)

R06: That VCC refrain from using non-safety code enforcement matters to raise revenue. (FI-04, 06, 13, 15)

F21: The CE has acted on complaints that appear to be retaliatory in nature against neighbors.

F22: The City’s use of the term ―substandard‖ is too broad and needs to be revised with specificity.

Related Recommendations (1)

R04: That VCC redefine ―substandard‖ as life safety issues in the code enforcement policies. (FI-15, 16)

F23: The previous CE fees were arbitrary and had little monetary relationship to the cost of services.

F24: A comparably sized city in Ventura County uses a very different approach to code enforcement. The comparable city works with property owners to find solutions to code enforcement issues. Most property owners have very little knowledge of code enforcement or building codes. Providing options, talking with and listening to property owner(s) creates co- operation and defuses conflict.

Related Recommendations (1)

F25: Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO) was initiated in 2008 to increase efficiency and to refocus priorities. As the economy deteriorated, BFO was used to decrease ineffective spending and increase revenues. City of Ventura Code Enforcement

F26: The City considers that new code enforcement fees are not a tax. The B&S Department’s permit process had been funded by the General Fund. The same inspection activities are now performed, except the funding comes from the new permit fees, charged to individuals or companies that build or modify structures. This creates additional revenue for the City.

F27: There is an appeal process for property owners who dispute CE citations. The first review is by the CBO. The second review is with the Local Appeals Board. The Appeals Board has no City employees. The members are appointed by the VCC and usually have a background in architecture, engineering, construction, real estate, property management, or planning. There is a third appeal process which is administered by a company that is paid by the City to collect citations. There are significant costs to the property owner for the second and third appeals.

F28: A structure can be classified as ―substandard‖ for many reasons, ranging from life-threatening health and safety issues to not having a permit. This characterization subjects the property to citations, fines, penalties, civil actions, liens, and forfeitures. The City's written definition of ―substandard‖ was derived from several sources including the California Uniform Housing Code, the State Health and Safety Codes, and City ordinances.

F29: The issuance of a citation can result in fines of $426 per day. There are no waivers for financial hardship.

F30: Clouded property titles restrict borrowing against the property. After a Notice of Non-Compliance has been issued for any ―substandard‖ housing issue(s), ranging from safety to a missing permit, an inspection is required. The inspection will not be performed until a permit is purchased. After the inspection is completed, the City releases the clouding restrictions against the property.

F31: CE is associated with the California Association of Code Enforcement Officers (CACEO), an organization that shares code enforcement information and lobbies for code enforcement issues. CACEO shares information on solutions to problems, including how to increase revenues.

F32: When a complaint is received, it is CE policy to review permits on file prior to an inspection. The inspectors are trained to focus on the primary allegation, but they can deal with other unrelated issues, if they are life safety issues and in ―plain view.‖ In practice, CE looks for additional permit violations.

F33: The VCC directed City management to find budget reductions. CE recommended to the VCC that revenues could be enhanced if more inspections were conducted, creating more permit fees and potential fines.

Related Recommendations (1)

R06: That VCC refrain from using non-safety code enforcement matters to raise revenue. (FI-04, 06, 13, 15)

F34: In February 2009, CE was directed to conduct visual inspections, looking for unsafe second units and second dwelling units. The City staff estimated that there are over 6,000 older dwellings and about 2,100 City of Ventura Code Enforcement 5 unpermitted ―substandard‖ second dwellings. The City considers many of these second dwelling units as low-income housing.

F35: According to the City, taxes are for general population benefit and fees are for user service expense recovery. Fees may not be collected for more than the reasonable cost for the service(s) without becoming an illegal tax. The B&S Department is currently recovering costs via permit fees. The City's fee schedules are created by a consultant, with input from the affected departments. The reasonableness of the fees is reviewed by the consultant by comparing the fees for other cities. Many of these cities also have their fee schedules created by the same consultant.

F36: Proposition 218 allows for the collection of fees for providing services to individuals. The VCC was apprised of the effects of the new building permit fees, including that developers were paying more than what it cost to perform the inspections. The VCC voted to keep the collected excess fees and not reduce the rates.

F37: During inspections, CE takes property photographs, both exterior and interior, unless asked to stop by property owners. CE practice allows that, with legal access, anything that is in plain view may be photographed.

F38: In 2008, CE attempted to become revenue self-sufficient by trying to raise revenues and decrease expenditures. The goal was to become independent of the General Fund. CE began a cost-recovery plan. Citations increased and CE charged a fee for each visit after the first.

Related Recommendations (1)

R06: That VCC refrain from using non-safety code enforcement matters to raise revenue. (FI-04, 06, 13, 15)

F39: The CE badges were designed to look similar to the Ventura Police Department badges. CE inspectors are not peace officers.

F40: The term ―substandard,‖ as used by the CE, has many meanings including that a structure is unsafe.

F41: Citations and permits can be expensive and sometimes burdensome to low income owners. These costly citations and permits can lead to loss of income and sometimes force property sales.

F42: The citation forms and notice forms are intimidating or confusing to people. The forms are sometimes not completed with accurate, detailed information and descriptions.

F43: CE claims to have more power than police officers relative to property matters.

F44: Construction done without required plans and permits is deemed, by CE, to be hazardous and unsafe. Findings

June 18, 2012 — Port Hueneme Water Rates

26 pages 17 findings 2 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 17 findings

F01: The City attracts scrutiny for having the highest water cost per 15 HCF of any governmental agency in the County and for the process in which the Proposition 218 election was conducted and certified. (FA-01-16) (Att-01, 04)

F02: There were multiple efforts from 2009-2010 to prove that the amount charged by the City for the “Utility Users Tax” is unsupportable. (FA-16) (Att-02)

F03: The City failed to make a good faith effort to resolve the tax issue following years of meetings, telephonic contacts, and correspondence. (FA-16) Port Hueneme Water Rates 3

F04: The tax calculation employed starting in October 2009 is not transparent because the old “water service charge” appears to remain as part of the bill without an identifying line item. (FA-03, 04)

F05: The 73% increase of the “Utility Users Tax” beginning on the City’s billings of October 2009 is evidence of a new tax. (FA-03, 04)

F06: The City’s inclusion of the amount of the old “water service charge” in calculating their 4% “Utility Users Tax” requires an administrative hearing to determine the validity of a new tax, as required by Proposition 218. (FA-03, 04, 17)

F07: The City’s Proposition 218 election was invalid, particularly by failing to notify owners of a new tax in City’s “Notice to Property Owners of Public Hearing on Proposed Water Rate Adjustments” and the subsequent certification of that vote. (FA-01, 02, 17) (Att-03, 04) Recommendations

F08: The City of Santa Paula water users pay $59.52 for 15 HCF for governmental supplied water. (Att-01)

F09: The City of Oxnard water users pay $58.20 for 15 HCF for governmental supplied water. (Att-01)

F10: The City of Simi Valley water users pay $56.86 for 15 HCF for governmental supplied water. (Att-01)

F11: The City of Camarillo water users pay $44.79 for 15 HCF for governmental supplied water. (Att-01)

F12: The City of Ventura water users pay $37.82 for 15 HCF for governmental supplied water. (Att-01)

F13: The City of Moorpark water users pay $37.51 for 15 HCF for governmental supplied water. (Att-01)

F14: The City of Ojai water users of Casitas Municipal Water District pay $34.47 for 15 HCF for governmental supplied water. (Att-01)

F15: The City of Ojai water users of Golden State Water Company pay $99.80 for 15 HCF. Golden State Water, a privately-held company that operates to maximize profit for shareholders, charges the highest rates in Southern California. [Ref.-05]

F16: In the past the City refused to accept proof via meetings, telephonic contacts, and correspondence of the water ratepayers’ tax increase.

F17: A neutral third party administrative hearing could resolve the tax and ballot issues. Findings

June 13, 2012 — Crisis Intervention Team

28 pages 31 findings 1 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 31 findings

F01: Cultural changes in the United States, with respect to the way persons with mental illness were treated and housed, increased the likelihood that persons with mental illness would not be isolated from at-large communities and would come into contact with law enforcement. (FA-01–05)

F02: County law enforcement sought methods to deal with increased OISs, and specifically those which involved the mentally ill and appeared, in hindsight, to have been avoidable. (FA-07)

F03: The seminal CIT program was the Memphis model developed in 1988 partly ―. . . as a result of a police shooting incident involving a person with a mental illness. . . .‖ (FA-08) [Ref-03]

F04: County law enforcement selected the ―specialized police-based program‖ developed with the collaboration of Behavioral Health—which is the Memphis model. (FA-11, 14)

F05: The collaborative effort of County law enforcement and Behavioral Health produced a unique comprehensive County CIT 40-hour program modeled, in large part, on the Memphis model. (FA-14) Crisis Intervention Team 5

F06: The Memphis model calls for CIT training of 20% of deputies and senior deputies working patrol assignments. (FA-08, 12)

F07: The availability of trained CIT officers of participating County law enforcement agencies provides the ability to far exceed the recommended Memphis model of 20%. (FA-15, 16)

F08: Due to the high percentage of CIT trained officers in the County, it is likely the responder will be CIT trained. (FA-15, 16, 18)

F09: Some mentally ill people incur repeated police interaction and are known to CIT members, and they know CIT members. Repetitious crisis callers are often also known to 911 call takers. (FA-21, 26)

F10: All dispatch centers have lists of officers who are CIT trained. Except for one center (Simi Valley), officers’ CIT training is not reflected on dispatch screens. (FA-23, 27)

Related Recommendations (1)

R01: All County dispatch centers identify officer’s CIT status on their 911 displays with other specialized training. (FI-10) Responses Responses Required From: City Council, City of Oxnard (FI-10) (R-01) City Council, City of Port Hueneme (FI-10) (R-01) City Council, City of San Buenaventura (FI-10) (R-01) City Council, City of Santa Paula (FI-10) (R-01) Ventura County Sheriff (FI-10) (R-01) For Information Only: Ventura County Probation Agency City Council, City of Simi Valley Commendations County law enforcement agencies are to be highly commended for this innovative policing program. In many cases this program will protect both the mentally ill and responding officers from potential violence and death, and will also facilitate a diversion function for distressed individuals. Crisis Intervention Team References Ref-01. Kelly, Timothy A., Ph.D., BG1522ES: A Policymaker’s Guide to Mental Illness (2007) http://www.heritage.org/Research/HealthCare/BG1522ES.cfm (accessed May 9, 2012) Ref-02. Corner, Gary. ―People with Mental Illness.‖ Guide No.40 (2006)‖ http://www.popcenter.org/problems/mental_illness/print/ (accessed May 18, 2012) Compton, Michael T. et al. ―A Comprehensive Review of Extant Research on Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) Programs.‖ Journal of the Academy of Psychiatry and Law Online.‖ (2008) http://jaapl.org/content/36/1/47.full (accessed March 21, 2012) Ref-03. Alvarez, Fred. ―A Community Says Goodbye: The Closing of Camarillo State Hospital; Some Ex-Patients Thrive on Outside, Others Struggle.‖ Los Angeles Times. March 23, 1997. Ventura County Section. http://psychtechs.net/pages/indexes.cgi?idxcatid=23&idxid=7872 (accessed May 18, 2012) Ref-04. Wikipedia. Camarillo State Mental Hospital, May 12, 2012. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camarillo_State_Mental_Hospital (accessed May 12, 2012) Ref-05. Von Quednow, Cindy. ―Local Ventura County crisis intervention program hosts Orange County officials.‖ Ventura County Star. October 8, 2011. http://www.vcstar.com/news/2011/oct/08/ventura-county-crisis- intervention-program-hosts/ (accessed March 23, 2012) Ref-06. Weiner, Janet, et al. ―Military veteran mortality following a survived suicide attempt.‖ BMC Public Health 2011, pp. 1–11. http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/11/374 (accessed May 13, 2012) Ref-07. CA Department of Corrections and Rehabilitations. Executive Summary, The Future of California Corrections, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/2012plan/docs/plan/exec-summary.pdf (accessed May 15, 2012) Ref-08. Ventura County Probation Agency. CalRealignment Org. Ventura County Plan September 27, 2011. http://www.calrealignment.org/county- implementation/list-of-county-plans.html (accessed May 20, 2012) Attachments Att-01. A Comprehensive Review of Extant Research on Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) Programs Att-02. CIT Program–Benefits Statement Crisis Intervention Team 7 Glossary TERM DEFINITION 911 Call Center A communication center where emergency calls for service are received and dispatched At-large communities Communities where the populace is unrestricted in movement and social intercourse Behavioral Health Ventura County Behavioral Health Department Call taker Person in a dispatch center who receives incoming calls and refers the call to a dispatcher CIT Crisis Intervention Team County Ventura County Crisis call(s) A call to a 911 dispatch center identified by the call taker as likely to involve a mentally ill person Crisis-dispatch actions Steps taken in a dispatch center when a crisis call is received Dispatcher Person in a dispatch center who informs response resources of the nature and location of an incident requiring a response Grand Jury, Jury 2011–2012 Ventura County Grand Jury Memphis model The 1988 seminal CIT concept and inception of CIT Mental illness ―[B]iopsychosocial brain disorder characterized by dysfunctional thoughts, feelings, and/or behaviors that meet diagnostic criteria‖ MOA Memorandum of Agreement, specifically the ―Ventura County Law Enforcement, Crisis Intervention Team Memorandum of Agreement‖ MOU Memorandum of Understanding, specifically between Ventura County Behavioral Health Department and the Ventura County Sheriff’s Office for Crisis Intervention Team Academy Services OIS or OISs Officer involved shooting(s) 8 Crisis Intervention Team TERM DEFINITION Oxnard PD City of Oxnard Police Department Sheriff Ventura County Sheriff Ventura PD City of San Buenaventura Police Department Crisis Intervention Team 9 This page intentionally blank 10 Crisis Intervention Team Attachment 01 A Comprehensive Review of Extant Research on Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) Programs Crisis Intervention Team 11 This page intentionally blank 12 Crisis Intervention Team Crisis Intervention Team 13 14 Crisis Intervention Team Crisis Intervention Team 15 16 Crisis Intervention Team Crisis Intervention Team 17 18 Crisis Intervention Team Crisis Intervention Team 19 20 Crisis Intervention Team Crisis Intervention Team 21 22 Crisis Intervention Team Attachment 02 CIT Program–Benefits Statement Crisis Intervention Team 23 This page intentionally blank 24 Crisis Intervention Team Crisis Intervention Team 25 26 Crisis Intervention Team

F11: The 911 dispatchers are often able to de-escalate a crisis using CIT techniques pending arrival of the dispatched police unit. (FA-22, 24)

F12: Probation utilizes CIT trained personnel as field officers—carrying mental health caseloads—and at its juvenile facilities, where the County’s juvenile detainees are housed. (FA-28–30) Recommendation

F13: The point of origination of CIT in the County was the collaboration among the Sheriff, the Oxnard PD, the Ventura PD, and Behavioral Health.

F14: The collaborative effort of County law enforcement and Behavioral Health produced a unique comprehensive County CIT 40-hour program modeled, in large part, on the Memphis model.

F15: Though CIT training began in December of 2001, the countywide effort was documented in a MOA in 2004. The following are the current data by jurisdiction:  Sheriff’s Department; 722 officers, 258 CIT trained (36%)  Port Hueneme PD; 24 officers, 23 trained (96%)  Oxnard PD; 231 officers, 121 trained (52%)  Santa Paula PD; 28 officers, 21 trained (75%)  Simi Valley PD; 117 officers, 78 trained (67%)  Ventura PD; 121 officers, 57 trained (47%)

F16: The availability of trained CIT officers of participating County law enforcement agencies provides the ability to far exceed the recommended Memphis model of 20%.

F17: Responses to emergency calls are made by the nearest available officer.

F18: Due to the high percentage of CIT trained officers in the County, it is likely the responder will be CIT trained.

F19: In practice, the first responder will evaluate the situation and, if considered necessary, will call for a CIT officer to be dispatched to the scene.

F20: CIT officers wear CIT identity emblems on their uniform.

F21: Some mentally ill people incur repeated police interaction and are known to CIT members, and they know CIT members.

F22: All County 911 dispatch centers have CIT trained dispatch staff.

F23: All dispatch centers have lists of officers who are CIT trained. However, with the exception of one center (Simi Valley), an officer’s CIT training status is not displayed on the dispatchers’ screens. Crisis Intervention Team

Related Recommendations (1)

F24: Many 911 dispatchers are often able to de-escalate a crisis using CIT techniques pending arrival of the dispatched police unit.

F25: Dispatchers who identify mental health calls keep the caller on the line to update and advise the responding unit.

F26: Repetitious crisis callers are often also well-known to 911 call takers.

F27: On-duty patrol officers are identified on the dispatcher’s screen, but their CIT training is not indicated (except for Simi Valley)—though several other special qualifications are displayed.

Related Recommendations (1)

F28: The County Probation Agency (Probation), though not a signatory to the MOA, understands the importance of CIT and has some officers CIT trained.

F29: Probation utilizes CIT trained personnel as field officers—carrying mental health caseloads—and at its juvenile facility, where the County’s juvenile detainees are housed.

F30: Probation personnel, CIT trained, at the juvenile facility augment on-site Behavioral Health staff to work with distressed juveniles.

F31: The County CIT program has been successful for a number of reasons. It is respected and valued by the share-holders as well as the citizenry most likely to be well served by CIT policing methods—mentally ill citizens and their families—and enhances the safety of responders. [Ref-03] (Att-01, 02) Findings

June 12, 2012 — Ventura County Animal Services Department

68 pages 69 findings 22 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 69 findings

F01: Since 2010, the Department has had, and presently has, excellent and well thought-out ―Strategic Plans-Mission Statements.‖ (FA-01)

F02: The Department has made substantial improvement under its post-May 2008 management. (FA-03)

F03: The Department operates a service whose principal mandated mission is the control of rabies and the health and safety of the public. (FA-02)

F04: The Department’s mandated mission and collateral services put the Department in close and personal contact with the public. (FA-09)

F05: The humane treatment of animals and the euthanizing of animals is a focus point of many County citizens and is the subject of extensive newspaper coverage. (FA-09, 10)

F06: The Department’s mandated mission and collateral services bring the Department into conflict with elements of ―animal-rescue‖ public. (FA-10)

F07: The Department outsources all shelter spaying and neutering services required or requested. (FA-04)

F08: The Department outsources emergency services for animal injuries and nighttime animal incidents. (FA-05)

F09: The Department is understaffed for medical and technical personnel considering its volume of required animal intake and services. (FA-06, 07)

F10: One veterinarian cannot, over time, physically perform all day and night veterinarian medical services of the Shelter. (FA-04–07)

Related Recommendations (3)

R01: That the County Executive Office conduct a study to determine the economic feasibility of returning outsourced Shelter work to the Department and hiring a second County veterinarian. (FI-07–10)

R02: That the Department bring outsourced services in-house and hire a second County veterinarian. (FI-09, 10)

R21: That the Board of Supervisors provide sufficient additional funds to permit the hiring of a second veterinarian and an Internet maintenance specialist, and to pay for necessary Bordetella vaccine. (FI-09, 10, 17–19)

F11: The Department’s ―unique‖ County Shelter Home Inspection Procedure requires the absence of trained personnel from other Shelter duties. (FA-27, 30)

Related Recommendations (1)

R08: That the Department eliminate its ―unique‖ Shelter home inspections policy and better utilize trained personnel for core Shelter duties. (FI-09, 11, 32)

F12: Internet posting of information of animal adoption candidates—their photo, medical information, breed, size, configuration, and Ventura County Animal Services Department 9 temperament—is critical to the time-line of an animal’s adoption and survival. (FA-34, 35)

F13: The Department has difficulty in the timely and thorough servicing of its animal adoption Internet service. (Ref-34, 36)

Related Recommendations (1)

R05: That the Department employ an expert Internet website maintenance employee, or utilize an expert site maintenance volunteer, to improve and maintain its website. (FI-12–14)

F14: The Department lacks professionally-trained personnel to maintain its Internet site. (FA-36)

Related Recommendations (1)

R05: That the Department employ an expert Internet website maintenance employee, or utilize an expert site maintenance volunteer, to improve and maintain its website. (FI-12–14)

F15: Department personnel involved in the euthanasia process evidence low morale and ―empathy fatigue.‖ (FA-39)

Related Recommendations (1)

R07: That the Department institute biannual mandatory Employee Assistance Program counter stress technique training for all personnel involved with the euthanizing process, including administrative ―list makers.‖ (FI-15, 16)

F16: Stress reduction training is available to County organizations and individual employees through the EAP. (FA-40)

F17: The use of the Bordetella vaccine for dogs has become standardized in animal care facilities in the United States. (FA-19, 21)

F18: The Bordetella inoculation of intake dogs is not a matter of permanent policy of the Department. (FA-20)

Related Recommendations (2)

R03: That the Department institute inoculation of all incoming dogs with the Bordetella vaccine as a permanent policy. (FI-17–19) Ventura County Animal Services Department 11

F19: The Department has not budgeted for the purchase of the Bordetella vaccine, though it has accepted a temporary grant to inoculate certain dogs. (FA-23)

Related Recommendations (2)

R03: That the Department institute inoculation of all incoming dogs with the Bordetella vaccine as a permanent policy. (FI-17–19) Ventura County Animal Services Department 11

F20: A planned and budgeted ―one-stop process‖ animal intake facility is scheduled. (FA-37)

Related Recommendations (1)

R04: That the Department expedite the completion of the planned and budgeted ―one-stop‖ intake facility. (FI-20)

F21: The Department utilizes and trains volunteers to assist in the Shelter’s activities. Department volunteer training is lengthy, with ―no-hands-on‖ —regardless of animal handling experience—and volunteers rarely are used for ―inside-trust‖ work. (FA-33)

Related Recommendations (2)

R15: That the Department revise the training program for volunteers to progressively introduce hands-on animal contact during the training. (FI-21, 22)

R16: That the Department train and utilize competent volunteers to undertake substantive internal administrative duties as well as animal contact duties. (FI-21, 22) 12 Ventura County Animal Services Department

F22: Other shelters train volunteers with progressive hands-on animal involvement and utilize some volunteers for inside administrative tasks facilitating non-animal-contact duties and increasing shelter efficiency. (FA-33)

F23: Restrictive dog group housing procedures have resulted in less than optimal use of kennel space and unnecessary animal stress. (FA-42–FA-44)

Related Recommendations (2)

R11: That the Department work to improve the selection of compatible breeds in order to increase common kenneling. (FI-23)

R12: That the Department take better care to avoid collocating breeds in kennels likely to bring stress upon one another. (FI-23)

F24: The Department relies on experience-training for Shelter personnel, who often identify ―pit bull mix‖ characteristics without identifying what kind of ―mix‖ is suggested, when classifying Shelter and Internet breed descriptions. (FA-57–59)

Related Recommendations (2)

R09: That the Department reach out to volunteer breed experts and breed classifiers to better train Shelter personnel to more accurately judge breed mixes and act, at times, for the Shelter in classifying dogs on intake and for Internet descriptions. (FI-12, 24, 29–32)

R10: That the Department include with every ―pit bull mix‖ classification, the suspected ―mix‖ breed in the Shelter and Internet description. (FI-12, 24)

F25: The Medical Section of the Department operates autonomously with minimal supervision from the administration with respect to scheduling, work hour accountability, and resource usage, including vehicle usage and storage. (FA-52)

Related Recommendations (1)

R06: That the Department administration exercise more direct control and require more accountability of the medical section with respect to hours of work, overtime, vehicle usage, on-call, and other non-medical policies and practices. (FI-25–28)

F26: Scheduling of medical functions affects the continuity and efficiency of Shelter adoption processes. (FA-52, 53) 10 Ventura County Animal Services Department

Related Recommendations (1)

F27: At times, entry of medical information and other action data into Shelter software is not entered contemporaneously with the service performed and is often entered by other than the actors. (FA-52)

Related Recommendations (1)

F28: Data entered into Shelter software by other than the actor responsible for the entry avoids accountability and may be incomplete. (FA-52)

Related Recommendations (1)

F29: The Department’s proposed mandatory ―Spaying and Neutering of Pitt Bulls‖ legislation affects all owners of dogs in legislated city and County areas who own dogs with ―pit bull‖ physical features. (FA-60–65)

Related Recommendations (1)

R17: That the Department revise its proposed mandatory ―pit bull‖ spay and neuter ordinance program to cover only dogs brought, or caught and brought, to the Shelter. (FI-29–31)

F30: Under the proposed ordinances, classification of mixed breeds labeled as ―pit bulls‖ is to be subjectively and finally judged by the Department. (FA-60–65)

Related Recommendations (1)

R17: That the Department revise its proposed mandatory ―pit bull‖ spay and neuter ordinance program to cover only dogs brought, or caught and brought, to the Shelter. (FI-29–31)

F31: Persons owning dogs judged to be ―pit bull mixes‖ are subject to fines for not having had spay or neuter surgery performed on their dogs. (FA-60–65)

Related Recommendations (1)

R17: That the Department revise its proposed mandatory ―pit bull‖ spay and neuter ordinance program to cover only dogs brought, or caught and brought, to the Shelter. (FI-29–31)

F32: Adoption of the proposed legislation will increase the work load of Shelter officers. (FA-60–65)

F33: The proposed legislation provides for an appeal process whereby, on appeal, the Department’s appellate decision of its own field classification decision is final. (FA-60–65)

Related Recommendations (1)

R18: That the Department revise its proposed mandatory ―pit bull‖ spay and neuter ordinance program appeal process to include an ―outside‖ review by a three-person hearing panel of volunteer breed experts not in the employ of the County—including at least one volunteer veterinarian—in lieu of Department review of its own earlier decision. (FI-33)

F34: Under the legislation, the prior social history of the animal under consideration is irrelevant. (FA-60–65)

F35: Unnecessary, time-consuming adoption processing delays, repeated and prolonged line visits, and an indifferent ―Shelter attitude‖ are often encountered by the public at the Shelter service counter. (FA-54)

Related Recommendations (1)

R14: That the Department afford clients in a same-day single adoption transaction a ―head of the line‖ pass when a second or third line wait is required as part of the transaction. (FI-35)

F36: The Shelter’s telephone answering service takes an inordinate amount of time to provide contact options and does not allow for personal contact. (FA-55)

Related Recommendations (1)

R13: That the Department redesign its telephone answering service to reduce the categories of options presented. (FI-36)

F37: The VCASC discloses almost no Internet information and what little information is posted, is difficult to find. (FA-66–68)

Related Recommendations (1)

R19: That the Ventura County Animal Services Commission raise its public visibility by having a clear Internet reference; and by posting its membership, mission, direct contact points, agenda, minutes, meeting schedules and locations. (FI-37)

F38: Department management has seriously detracted from its effectiveness and mission by poor communication evidencing a ―siege mentality.‖ (FA-69) Recommendations

Related Recommendations (2)

R22: That management leadership review their communication and leadership skills by utilizing custom-designed EAP training to enhance those skills, avoid a ―siege mentality,‖ and consequently, to increase the effectiveness of the Department and its public and intra-governmental image. (FI-38) Responses Responses Required From: Board of Supervisors (R-20, R-21) Responses Requested From: Animal Services Department (FI-03–21, 23–27, 29–36, 38) (R-02–18, 22) County Executive Office (FI-07, 08) (R-01, 04, 05) Ventura County Animal Services Commission (FI-37) (R-19) For Information Only: Ventura County Public Health Department Commendations 1. The Ventura County Animal Services Department is to be praised and encouraged to continue in its efforts to become a model shelter despite a tightened budget, restricted personnel hiring, and the burgeoning dependent Ventura County animal population. Ventura County Animal Services Department 13 2. The public advocates reflected in this report are also to be encouraged to continue their efforts to seek compassionate and humane treatment for those unfortunate animals who live amongst us and who are without advocates, and to continue to demonstrate that Ventura County is a caring and civilized society. References Ref-01. Health & Safety Code section 121690 (e) (County-Rabies) http://law.onecle.com/california/health/121690.html (accessed April 18, 2012) Ref-02. Dept. Public Health ―All Counties in CA Rabies Area.‖ http://www.theanimalcouncil.com/files/CA_DHS_2011_Rabies_Declarati on.pdf (accessed March 15, 2012) Ref-03. Dept. Public Health. Laws & Regulations. Related to Rabies. http://www.cdph.ca.gov/HealthInfo/discond/Documents/Rabies/CA%20 Rabies%20Laws-Regulations.pdf (accessed March 15, 2012) Ref-04. Nelson, Linda or Rowley, Diana. ―Public rally for animal rights.‖ Ventura County Star, January 16, 2012. http://vcstar.com/news/2012/jan/16/public-rally-for-animal-rights- 4702/?partner+RSS (accessed March 28, 2012) Ref-05. Wenner, Gretchen. ―Animal rescue groups rally for no-kill shelter.‖ Ventura County Star, January 25, 2012. http://www.vcstar.com/news/2012/jan/25/animal-rescue-groups-rally- for-no-kill-shelter/#ixzz1nEQQGuhe (accessed: February 23, 2012) Ref-06. Williamson, Barbara. ―Williamson: Goal of becoming a no-kill shelter remains elusive.” Ventura County Star, February 11, 2012. http://www.vcstar.com/news/2012/feb/11/williamson-goal-of- becoming-a-no-kill-shelter/?print=1 (accessed: April 18, 2012) Ref-07. Biasotti, Bill. ―Activists push for no-kill animal shelter.‖ Ventura County Star, January 26, 2012. http://www.vcstar.com/news/2012/jan/26/activists-push-for-no-kill- animal-shelter/ (accessed: 02/01/2012) Ref-08. Ventura County Animal Services, ―Working Toward Zero and the No Kill Equation.‖ http://www.newmexicopetsalive.org/resources/Working_Toward_Zero.p df (accessed: April 18, 2012) Ref-09. Dept. Public Health. ―Local Rabies Control Activities Annual Report 2010 Canine Rabies Control, Part 2.‖ http://www.cdph.ca.gov/HealthInfo/discond/Documents/Rabies/LRCA% 20Reports/2010%20LRCA.pdf (accessed March 15, 2012 Ref-10. State Department of Finance. ―California Population Continues Slow Growth According to State Demographic Report‖ California Counties by Population. Ventura County Animal Services Department http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demographic/reports/estimates/e- 2/documents/E-2_Press_Release_Jul2011.pdf (accessed March 15, 2012) Ref-11. Ventura County Animal Services. Shelter Statistics by Year. http://portal.countyofventura.org/portal/page/portal/animalreg/shelters tats/ (accessed March 15, 2012) Ref-12. Barlow, Marya. ―Ventura County Animal Shelter reap rewards of pet competition.‖ Ventura County Star, December 6, 2011. http://www.vcstar.com/news/2011/dec/06/ventura-county-animal- shelter-reap-rewards-of/ (accessed April 4, 2012) Ref-13. The Association of Shelter Veterinarians, ―Guidelines for Standards of Care in Animal Shelters (2010),‖ Released: December 6, 2010. http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/20241575/778874386/name/Shelter%2 0Standards%20Oct2011%20wForward.pdf (accessed: March 7, 2012) Ref-14. California’s Model Law (Shelter Law). http://www.straypetadvocacy.org/shelter_law.html (accessed April 4, 2012) Ref-15. Ventura County Executive Office, Human Resources Division, ―Employee Assistance Program.‖ http://portal.countyofventura.org/portal/page/portal/benefits/eap (accessed: March 26, 2012) Ref-16. American Kennel Club, ―Complete Breed List.‖ http://www.akc.org/breeds/complete_breed_list.cfm (accessed: March 7, 2012) Ref-17. California Breed Specific Laws. http://www.dogsbite.org/legislating-dangerous-dogs-california.php (accessed April 11, 2012) Ref-18. County of Ventura, [proposed] Addition to Chapter 4 (Animals) of Division 4 of Ventura County Ordinance Code, Article 9, Spaying and Neutering of Pit Bulls. http://portal.countyofventura.org/portal/page/portal/animalreg/AnimalR egulationCommission/Draft%20Ventura%20Model%20Pitbull%20SN%2 0Ordinance.pdf (accessed April 11, 2012) Ref-19. Harris, Mike. ―Simi council to consider pit bull ordinance.‖ Ventura County Star, March 25, 2012. http://www.vcstar.com/news/2012/mar/25/simi-council-to-consider-pit- bull-ordinance/ (accessed April 11, 2012) Ref-20. Szatkowski: A no-kill shelter within reach http://www.vcstar.com/news/2012/may/04/szatkowski-a-no-kill- shelter-within-reach/ (accessed: May6, 2012) Ventura County Animal Services Department 15 Attachments Att-01. Ventura County Animal Services 2010-2013 Strategic Plan and ―SWOT Analysis‖ January 2012 Update Att-02. Extract from ―Guidelines for Standards of Care in Animal Shelters,‖ 3 pp, The Association of Shelter Veterinarians 2010 Att-03. Ventura County Animal Services ―Working Toward Zero and the No Kill Equation‖ Att-04. COUNTY OF VENTURA ANIMAL SERVICES, MEMORANDUM, December 5, 2011 Att-05. Department of Animal Services Policies and Procedures Manual Number 9-1, Animal Adoptions Att-06. Public letter to Ventura County Animal Services Commission Att-07. Proposed Addition to Chapter 4 (Animals) of Division 4 of the Ventura County Ordinance Code

F39: Shelter personnel have low morale with indications of apparent ―empathy fatigue‖ by those associated with the euthanasia process.

F40: Upon management application, the Ventura County Employee Assistance Program can present relevant group training to County personnel on matters that may affect the health and well-being of employees. [Ref-15]

F41: Housing more than one animal in a single unit poses medical and social risks. [Ref-13] (Att-02)

F42: There are ASV guidelines for selection of animals for group housing. [Ref-13] (Att-02)

F43: The Grand Jury visited and contacted public shelters which house multiple compatible animals in single units to increase holding capacity.

F44: The public has complained of inadequate group housing; poor selection of animals for group housing; and animal stress produced by kennel co- location of incompatible breed groupings. [Ref-05–07] 6 Ventura County Animal Services Department

F45: There are risks and benefits of group housing. [Ref-13] (Att-02)

F46: Selective mixing of compatible and socialized animals of same or similar size and breed has proved successful in other shelters and has increased the capacity of shelters to reduce euthanasia pressure.

F47: Holding animals in large population shelters results in animal stress. [Ref-13] (Att-02)

F48: Placing large dog(s) in kennels adjoining kennels holding small dog(s) results in added stress for both groups.

F49: Dogs are more likely to be judged aggressive or hyperactive on intake when stressed by the presence of other dogs, or when they are evaluated for ―temperament‖ in the presence or vicinity of other dogs.

F50: Dogs classified as aggressive or hyperactive are less likely to be adopted than those not so classified.

F51: Dogs classified as aggressive or hyperactive are more likely to be euthanized than those not so classified.

F52: In the processing of animal intake, adoption administration is dependent on the ―Medical Release‖ as well as accurate and complete intake medical data, which has been found—in some anonymous case entries—to be sparse, incomplete, inaccurate, or wrong for a given dog.

F53: The Shelter Medical section functions independently with little or no administrative management control of work schedule and attendance, performance accountability and resource usage, including vehicle usage and storage. Public comment asserts that intra-Department scheduling conflicts have unnecessarily delayed and interfered with some adoption activities.

F54: Shelter adoption process requires excessive ―line-time‖ and frequent multiple line visits for a single day adoption

F55: When a phone call is placed to the Department, the Shelter’s opening recorded message takes more than two and a half minutes.

F56: ―Pit bull,‖ is not a breed. [Ref-16]

F57: A dog’s Shelter breed description is assigned the dog during its intake process by ―experience-trained‖ intake personnel exercising their subjective judgment. The ―breed description‖ assigned is based on the dog’s configuration—in the case of a ―pit bull‖ label, size, facial characteristics (jaw and head size) and body configuration characteristics akin to those of the Staffordshire Terrier and American Staffordshire Terrier breeds.

F58: Several dog adoption facilities classifying dogs bearing ‖pit bull mix‖ physical features, make a judgment based on the prevailing breed of the dog and classify the dog primarily as that breed, e.g., ―Boxer pit bull,‖ Ventura County Animal Services Department 7 ―Brindle pit bull,‖ ―American Staffordshire Terrier,‖ ―pit bull terrier mix,‖ rather than merely labeled ―pit bull mix.‖

F59: There are known dog classification experts in the County who are willing to volunteer to assist in the formal training of classifiers and to assist in classification.

F60: The Department has recommended that the County and each city pass an ordinance mandating the neutering and spaying of ―pit bull mix‖ dogs as determined by the Department to be ―pit bull mixes.‖ [Ref-18] (Att-07)

F61: Mandatory spaying and neutering ordinances are controversial, despite the fact that as many as eleven California counties have passed such ordinances. [Ref-17, Ref-18] (Att-06)

F62: The proposed ordinance would apply to all ―pit bulls‖—as defined in the proposed ordinance—in the jurisdiction of the adopting legislative body, with the exception of five restricted categories. [Ref-18] (Att-07)

F63: Pit bull type dogs excepted by the proposed ordinance from mandatory spaying and neutering are:  dogs under sixteen weeks of age  pure-bred Staffordshire Bull Terrier, American Pit Bull Terrier, or American Staffordshire Terrier, recognized by and registered with one of several listed national registry organizations  dogs used by law enforcement or for law enforcement purposes  dogs with such infirmities, or of such an age, that there is a high likelihood it would suffer death or serious bodily injury by the surgery, if confirmed in writing by a licensed veterinarian  dogs under appeal as set forth in the proposed ordinance [Ref-18] (Att-07)

F64: The ordinance proposed by the Department is based on the Los Angeles model and provides for non-compliance fines of up to $100.00, plus administrative fees, and up to $500.00 for continued violations. [Ref- 18] (Att-07)

F65: Under the proposed ordinance, appeals from the ―pit bull‖ classification determination by the Department may be appealed within five days to the Department’s Director, or his or her designee, whose decision would be final. [Ref-18] (Att-07)

F66: Information concerning the meetings, composition, activities, policies and procedures of the Ventura County Animal Services Commission (VCASC) is obscure and difficult to obtain. Ventura County Animal Services Department

F67: Information relative to the VCASC is buried in the Department’s Internet site under a reference to ―About Us,‖ and is referred to as the Ventura Animal Regulation Commission, an out-of-date reference.

F68: Presently, the VCASC has only posted the current agenda, some minutes, no information about the VCASC’s mission or membership, and gives no contact information.

F69: Public and city personnel—having a reason or duty to interface with Department management—believe there is a ―siege mentality‖ at the Department which results in poor communication on the part of the Department administration. [Ref-20] Findings

June 07, 2012 — Earthquake Safety in the Classroom

11 pages 27 findings 4 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 27 findings

F01: Each district and the VCOE have a current Earthquake Disaster Plan and a Comprehensive School Safety Plan. (FA-03–FA-24)

F02: Each EDP requires “duck and cover” drills be conducted each school quarter in elementary schools and at least once a semester in secondary schools. All schools are in compliance with this requirement, except Rio Elementary School District and Santa Paula Elementary School District. (FA-04–FA-24)

F03: Emergency provisions such as food, water, communications, and medical supplies are recommended for all schools. Ojai Unified School District, Santa Clara Elementary School District, and Rio Elementary School District are not in full compliance with this recommendation.(FA-04–FA-24, FA-27)

F04: Each school district and the VCOE indicated that they inspect school rooms on a regular basis for safety hazards. Inspections are conducted by school personnel, VCSSFA, and, at times, by the local fire department. (FA-04– FA-26)

F05: School drills are monitored by school personnel and, at times, by VCOE and/or the local fire department. (FA-04–FA-26) Recommendations

F06: Fillmore Unified School District has 7 schools totaling 3,774 students. The district conducts “duck and cover” drills once a quarter in their elementary schools and in high schools once a semester. They also have a limited supply of food and water and first aid supplies. Classrooms are inspected by school administration, custodial staff, local fire department and VCSSFA.

F07: Hueneme Elementary School District has 11 schools totaling 8,109 students. The district practices “duck and cover” and has emergency provisions. They have regular inspections of the classrooms. The District Assistant Superintendent, school principals, District Facilities Director, VCSSFA, and the local fire department monitor and inspect school rooms.

F08: Mesa Union Elementary School District includes 3 schools with a total of 1,254 students. The district practices “duck and cover” and have emergency provisions for all students. They have regular inspections of the classrooms. The District Superintendent, principals, and the VCSSFA monitor and inspect school rooms.

F09: Moorpark Unified School District has 12 schools with a total of 7,208 students. They practice “duck and cover” and have emergency provisions. Each school site has a cargo bin equipped with sufficient supplies to provide shelter, evacuation, first aid, and comfort for all students and staff. Sufficient water is stored at the sites in 325 gallon “water buffaloes.” They have regular inspections of the classrooms. District staff, VCSSFA, and the local fire department monitor and inspect school rooms.

F10: Mupu Elementary School District has 1 school with 137 students. They practice “duck and cover” and have emergency provisions. They have regular inspections of the classrooms. The principal, custodian, and school Earthquake Safety in the Classroom 3 secretary monitor drills and inspect school rooms. The local fire department and VCSSFA inspect school rooms on an annual basis.

F11: Oak Park Unified School District includes 7 schools with a total of 4,002 students. They indicated that they practice “duck and cover” and have emergency provisions. They have regular inspections of the classrooms. District personnel, VCSSFA and the local fire department monitor and inspect school rooms.

F12: Ocean View Elementary School District has 4 schools totaling 2,519 students. They practice “duck and cover” and have emergency provisions for their students. Site principals monitor drills. The VCSSFA inspects rooms. The District Safety Committee, Assistant Superintendent-Business Services, Assistant Superintendent- Administrative Services, Superintendent, and the governing board, monitor drills and/or inspections.

F13: Ojai Unified School District (OUSD) has 9 schools with a total of 3,005 students. They practice “duck and cover.” They do not have emergency provisions, such as food, water, communications, or medical provisions for each school. They have regular inspections of the classrooms. The District Superintendent, principals, maintenance personnel, and the local fire department monitor and inspect school rooms.

F14: Oxnard Elementary School District has 21 schools with a total of 15,870 students. They practice “duck and cover” and have emergency provisions for their students. They have regular inspections of the classrooms. Principals, VCSSFA, and the local fire department monitor and inspect school rooms.

F15: Oxnard Union High School District has 9 schools with a total of 16,642 students. They practice “duck and cover” and have emergency provisions for their students. They have regular inspections of the classrooms. The district superintendent and the local fire department monitor and inspect school rooms.

F16: Pleasant Valley Elementary School District has 12 schools with a total of 7,262 students. The EDP and CSSP plans are revised on an annual basis. They practice “duck and cover” and have emergency provisions. They have regular inspections of the classrooms. The site principal and the local fire department monitor required drills and inspect school rooms.

F17: Rio Elementary School District has 8 schools with a total of 4,482 students. They practice “duck and cover.” Each school has “water, first aid kit and some rescue equipment.” They have regular inspections of the classrooms. School personnel and VCSSFA monitor and inspect school rooms.

F18: Santa Clara Elementary School District has 1 school with 55 students. They practice “duck and cover” each month. They have water, communications, and medical supplies for the students in case of an 4 Earthquake Safety in the Classroom emergency. They have regular inspections of the classrooms. The District Superintendent and the local fire department monitor and inspect school rooms.

F19: Santa Paula Elementary School District has 7 schools with a total of 3,661 students. Six of the seven schools are in compliance with the “duck and cover” requirement. Corrective action for compliance is being taken at the remaining school. All of the schools in the Santa Paula Elementary School District have emergency bins/containers on site. Items were missing and they are currently in the process of replacing the missing inventory. They have regular inspections of the classrooms. The principals and assistant principals monitor the drills. Principals and assistant principals and maintenance personnel inspect each school room. The Santa Paula Fire Department inspects the schools on an annual basis. The district’s three Quality Education Investment Act schools are inspected by a representative from the VCOE on an annual basis.

F20: Santa Paula Union High School District has 2 schools with a total of 1,624 students. They practice “duck and cover” and have emergency provisions for their students. They have regular inspections of the classrooms. School personnel, VCSSFA, and the local fire department monitor and inspect school rooms.

F21: Simi Valley Unified School District has 29 schools with a total of 19,916 students. They practice “duck and cover” and have emergency provisions. They have regular inspections of the classrooms. School personnel, VCSSFA, and the local fire department monitor and inspect school rooms.

F22: Somis Union Elementary School District has 2 schools with a total of 474 students. They practice “duck and cover” and have emergency provisions for their students. They have regular inspections of the classrooms. The District Superintendent, Plant Manager, and the VCSSFA, monitor and inspect school rooms.

F23: Ventura County Office of Education (VCOE) has 8 schools with a total of 2,375 students. They practice “duck and cover” and have emergency provisions. They have regular inspections of the classrooms. The VCSSFA and the Risk Manager monitor and inspect school rooms.

F24: Ventura Unified School District (VUSD) has 29 schools with a total of 17,492 students. They practice “duck and cover.” Each site has adequate medical supplies in the nurse’s office. Each site is responsible for evaluating, obtaining, storing, monitoring and restocking all other supplies. The District Office provides each site with recommended supply guidelines from sources such as FEMA and the American Red Cross and funding for these supplies. They have regular inspections of the classrooms. All sites are inspected annually by the VUSD Facilities Department, the Ventura County Fire Department and VCSSFA. Site principals schedule and monitor drills. Earthquake Safety in the Classroom 5

F25: The VCSSFA inspects public school districts in the County, with the exception of Santa Paula Elementary School District. They inspect each site on an annual basis. The larger districts such as Conejo Valley Unified, Simi Valley Unified and Ventura Unified take a longer time; about every eighteen months to inspect. They inspect for hazard identification. Recommendations and corrections are based upon state and federal occupational safety and health regulations, national building and fire codes, and other generally accepted safety practices and procedures.

F26: The Oxnard, Santa Paula, Fillmore, and Ventura Fire Departments inspect schools on a regular basis for compliance with safety codes. Inspections for compliance of safety codes are the same for businesses as they are for schools. Included in these inspections are fire extinguishers, fire alarms and fire sprinkler systems.

F27: The Federal Emergency Management Agency, the American Red Cross and the Ventura County Emergency Planning Council suggest that basic emergency supplies should include water and food for at least three days for each person. [Ref-05] Findings

June 05, 2012 — Educational Inconsistencies Within the Vcccd

47 pages 9 findings 4 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 9 findings

F01: The Certificate programs at each of the VCCCD colleges differ in nomenclature for no apparent reason (Course numbering system). (FA-02)

F02: The Associate of Arts and the Associate of Science Degrees at each of the VCCCD colleges vary in nomenclature and in some cases unit value assigned to the same courses. The Grand Jury finds no apparent reason for these differences. (FA-03)

F03: The Articulation Agreement for the California State University system at each of the VCCCD colleges varies in nomenclature for no apparent reason. (FA-04–05)

F04: The Articulation Agreement for the University of California (IGETC) system at each of the VCCCD colleges varies in nomenclature used for no apparent reason. (FA-05–06)

F05: The nomenclature is different for many courses with similar content across the VCCCD colleges for no apparent reason. (FA-08)

F06: The VCCCD does not reflect the student/counselor ratio as proposed by the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges. (FA-07)

F07: The Grand Jury finds that there is an inconsistency in the Assessment Program across the three colleges of the VCCCD. (FA-09)

F08: Students entering the VCCCD are facing obstacles to pursuing higher education by the inconsistencies within the administration of the academic programs of the District. (FA-02–09)

F09: The inconsistencies in the education programs across the VCCCD indicate a failure in governance with respect to the Board of Trustees. (FA-01–06, FA-08-09) Recommendations

May 30, 2012 — Mandatory Detention Facilities Inspections

10 pages 12 findings 5 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 12 findings

F01: All places of incarceration in the County meet the minimum standards of the CSA for the areas reviewed. (FA-01)

F02: Holding facilities and jails in the County are doing a satisfactory job holding, pre- booking or booking, and incarcerating juveniles. Both Ojai Mandatory Detention Facilities Inspections 5 and Camarillo facilities have innovative programs dealing with juveniles. (FA-01, FA-06)

F03: The following facilities excelled in overall cleanliness: Main Jail, Todd Road Jail, East Valley, Camarillo, Moorpark, and Simi Valley. (FA-01)

F04: All facilities are prepared for natural disasters and medical incidents. (FA-01, FA-07)

F05: All facilities, except Oxnard, provide mattresses, bunks, or other off-the- ground seating for arrestees. (FA-01, FA-09)

F06: At the Oxnard facility one adult arrestee, (who would commonly be held under 6 hours) was held approximately 11 hours before being transported to the Main Jail. (FA-08)

F07: All facilities have adequate first aid supplies available except Oxnard and Santa Paula, which lacked visible/available AEDs. (FA-01, FA-12)

F08: “Fast food runs” were made by officers at the Port Hueneme facility due to a lack of food on hand, taking time away from officers on patrol or other assigned duties. (FA-01, FA-11)

F09: Some bedding and mattresses at the Work Furlough facility were in need of replacement. (FA-01, FA-10) Recommendations

F10: At the Work Furlough facility, several rooms had damaged bedding (springs visible through the mattresses).

F11: The City of Port Hueneme did not have a stock of food for arrestees. The officers made “fast food runs.”

F12: At the Oxnard and Santa Paula facilities there were no AEDs visible and/or available. Findings

Related Recommendations (1)

R01: That the cities of Oxnard and Santa Paula purchase or make visible AEDs. (FI-07)

May 25, 2012 — Sheriffs Academy and Bond Measure S

50 pages 12 findings 3 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 12 findings

F01: When the Bond was passed in 2002, the budget for the Sheriff’s rent at the Academy was $1 per year. The $2.6 million rent to be received by VCCCD was not authorized by the voters when they approved the Bond. (FA-01, 07)

F02: Prior to the passage of the Bond, the Sheriff and VCCCD publicly agreed to partner in a program for a new Sheriff’s academy where cadets would receive credits toward an associate’s degree in criminal justice in conjunction with Academy training. (FA-01–03)

F03: The subsequent failure of VCCCD and the Sheriff to agree on terms of a partnership in education and training at the Academy led to the execution of a lease dated 2010 between the parties as landlord/tenant with an exponential increase in rent. (FA-04, 07–09)

F04: Payment of rent to VCCCD by the Sheriff for a facility built with the Bond funds is an unaccounted cost absent from the ballot when the Bond was passed in 2002. Now it is an unintended expense for County taxpayers who are already paying for the facility with the repayment of Measure S bonds. (FA-01, 04, 07-09)

F05: Absent an agreement to partner in education and training, as well as the potential loss of academic accreditation at VCCCD colleges, a future partnership is improbable for VCCCD and the Sheriff at the Academy. (FA-04, 10,)

F06: According to VCCCD, it would prefer not to be a landlord. The lease is the only agreement that obligates VCCCD to be a landlord at a time where their attention should be focused on maintaining accreditation and other obligations to its students. (FA-07, 10, 11)

F07: The Academy is underutilized according to the Bond’s promise “. . . to prepare students for jobs and four year colleges. . . .” (FA-01, 12) Recommendations

F08: According to the lease, the monthly rent for year eight through year fifteen shall increase on the anniversary date of the lease by an amount equal to the increase in the Riverside-Los Angeles Consumer Price Index using the base month of January preceding the adjustment date. (Att-05)

F09: There is no provision in the lease for decreases in years one through seven, while an increase in rent may begin in year eight. This will result in rental costs to County taxpayers of at least $2.6 million over fifteen years. (Att-05)

F10: The colleges of VCCCD are currently on probation and threatened with loss of accreditation from the Accrediting Commission of Community and Junior Colleges, due in part, to lack of proper district governance. According to VCCCD, it would prefer not to be a landlord. [Ref-03-08] Sheriff’s Academy and Bond Measure S 3

Related Recommendations (1)

R02: VCCCD should concentrate on “proper governance” of its three colleges, retaining its accreditation, and transferring the Academy building’s control to the Sheriff. (FI-02, 06) [Ref-02–06] 4 Sheriff’s Academy and Bond Measure S

F11: Colleges must be accredited for students to receive federal financial aid and transfer their credits to other colleges and universities. [Ref-04, 05]

F12: The Academy is not functioning full-time in training cadets and is operated for that purpose one to three times a year. Findings

May 22, 2012 — Public Administrator/Public Guardian Review

25 pages 28 findings 14 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 28 findings

F01: The internal controls and integration of administrative processes instituted within HSA and PAPG have significantly increased the accountability and fiscal integrity of the PAPG. The PAPG has instituted policy and process changes which mitigate the possibility of future fraud within the department. (FA-08)

F02: Documentation associated with fiscal control and internal controls has been developed and is being refined. Process mapping has been developed for portions of sub-payee processes but has not yet been refined into desk procedures. Contact forms for client visits have been developed. (FA-08, FA-09) 8 Public Administrator/Public Guardian Review

F03: All support contract services are acquired through existing contracts by other agencies or are acquired following County procedures. The PAPG is working with the Panoramic software vendor to tailor the software to their needs. (FA-15, FA-18)

F04: The PAPG has addressed the majority of the May 2010 opened audit action items. The following are notable exceptions: • Development of metrics within the new case management system- Until the processes within the PAPG are stable and documented, the complete application of metrics seems premature. Metrics must necessarily be considered surrogates for the major workload categories of the organization. Only some of these categories relate to data flowing through the case management system. Until proper metrics are articulated outside of the case management system and processes are documented, the developing of metrics within the software would seem premature. The current “Best Practices” policy contains numerous metrics associated with time that address effort rather than outcomes. Considering the size of the organization, regular measurement of these timelines as a basis for evaluating the PAPG does not seem practical. • Criteria for placement of LPS Conservatees should be documented in a Memorandum of Agreement between PAPG and Behavioral Health- Rather than a static criterion for LPS conservatee placement, a joint process has been developed by BH and the PAPG in establishing the Continuity of Care Committee. The Grand Jury considers this a more effective approach. • The PAPG should develop desk procedures for all operational areas- Policies have been developed in a number of areas but not to the level of desk procedures. This issue must remain open. The lack of operational procedures risks instability in the major processes and increases risk to the execution of the five major work categories. (FA-14, FA-16, FA-22) [Ref-05]

F05: The Panoramic database is central to the operations of the PAPG. The security, administration, and change control of that system is a core element in the protection of client assets. (FA-01–FA-04, FA-06, FA-07) (Att-02)

F06: The PAPG has been unable to meet its policy goals of visit frequency to conservatees. There has been instability in the PAPG staff. There has been a complete turnover in leadership within the PAPG since July of 2011. There has been a total staff turnover since the Grand Jury Review in 2001. There is no current use of interns to provide on-going staffing needs. Vacancies existed in July 2011 and continue in April 2012. Recruitment of new staff, projected growth in the client base, anticipated changes in the court, and mandated certification requirements Public Administrator/Public Guardian Review 9 necessitate an ongoing process of training and personnel development. (FA-01–FA-13, FA 19–FA-21)

F07: The large transactional workload and the effects of the work dealing with the mentally ill and the severely disabled seem to have contributed to turnover of PAPG workers. The term for the latter issue is empathy fatigue. (FA-06, FA-07, FA-28) [Ref-13]

F08: The role of a DPG requires understanding of public administration, property management, trust administration, ability to conduct investigations of assets, and sensitivity to the care and needs of PAPG clients. (FA-01)(Att-01)

F09: Training of personnel via on-the-job training (OJT) without documented standard practices increases the workload on management and staff which may lead to inconsistent program implementation. This result removes resources from documenting standard practices. Given the anticipated increase in workload for the PAPG there may be further delay in documenting PAPG processes and procedures. (FA-05, FA-06)

F10: Manual entries are subject to error. The inventory of property at the client’s residence requires handwritten lists prior to data entry into the Panoramic software. (FA-01, FA-15)

Related Recommendations (1)

R02: The PAPG should purchase lap-top or tablet computers with photographic capability for DPGs and CSWs with standard templates for performing inventories in the field, evaluating care facilities, and documenting contacts with conservatees. The templates should allow direct input to the Panoramic software. (FI-10)

F11: The wide geographic distribution of clients and the need for transportation, documentation, and visitation of conservatees consumes a significant portion of the workload of the PAPG. The documentation includes the status of the clients and the clients’ care facilities. Due to the distances traveled, the completion of a handwritten contact visitation form is occasionally completed after a visit. (FA-01, FA-11, FA-12, FA-26) (Att-01)

F12: The informal Continuity of Care Committee is an excellent example of cross departmental cooperation. (FA-14)

Related Recommendations (1)

R03: The PAPG and Behavioral Health Department should add to their memorandum of agreement the charter and procedures of the Continuity of Care Committee. (FI-12) [Ref-12]

F13: Client valuables are being stored in the cash cart and in the warehouse due to a lack of secure storage in the PAPG office. This is in violation of PAPG policy. There is a need for safe storage of clients’ small-sized assets and papers in a container near the offices of the DPGs. Accessibility to the Treasury vault by the PAPG needs to be based on the variable nature of the PAPG requirements in a timely fashion. In addition, the availability of secure storage must meet the size and quantity needs of the PAPG at various times, rather than an allocation of a fixed set of lock boxes. (FA-24)

Related Recommendations (2)

R04: The PAPG and the Treasurer-Tax Collector should review their current Memorandum of Understanding with respect to the use of the Treasurer- Tax Collector vault to allow more flexible access and storage. (FI-13) [Ref-13] Public Administrator/Public Guardian Review 11

R11: The PAPG should acquire a safe for client assets in the PAPG office. This would provide secure storage during the inventory and assessment process. (FI-13)

F14: The PAPG has no policy in place for liquidating assets after closure of cases. (FA-25)

Related Recommendations (1)

R05: The PAPG should, as part of their policy for closing cases, address the liquidation of assets of clients prior to closure. The policy should address the final distribution of funds to the Treasurer-Tax Collector. (FI-14)

F15: The existing vans for the transportation of conservatees are inappropriate for transporting clients of the PAPG. Transportation of the severely 10 Public Administrator/Public Guardian Review disabled and mentally ill in these vehicles is detrimental to client well- being. (FA-12, FA-13) (Att-02)

Related Recommendations (1)

R06: The Board of Supervisors should allocate a onetime budget increase to the PAPG for completion of documentation of necessary desk procedures, and for procurement of appropriate vehicles for transportation of PAPG clients. (FI-02 – FI-05, FI-15)

F16: The PAPG can anticipate workload changes in the Probate Court process based on further changes in the implementation of the Omnibus Conservatorship and Guardian Act of 2006. (FA-20)

F17: The present telephonic interactions between PAPG sub-payee processing and Behavioral Health case workers could be improved with Information Technology applications.(FA-09, FA-10)

Related Recommendations (1)

R07: The PAPG and BH should make a shared directory accessible to both the PAPG and BH case workers. The PAPG should export to the shared directory the most current transaction data of sub-payee clients from their local database. BH should export to the shared directory the most current assignment list of Behavioral Health case workers associated with sub-payee clients from their local database. This will reduce the necessity of multiple phone calls between the organizations. (FI-17)

F18: Although very many of the decedent clients are indigent, a number of the decedents are wealthy. The proliferation of e-mail in lieu of the U.S. Postal Service, online banking, and social media, have caused new technical and legal challenges to the PAPG search for assets, liabilities, and heirs. (FA-17)

Related Recommendations (1)

R10: The PAPG should request guidance from County Counsel, the Auditor Controller, and the Information Technology Department on the most appropriate techniques and procedures for acquiring control of and administering the electronic accounts of decedents—guidance to include instituting appropriate internal controls. (FI-18)

F19: The PAPG policy on fiscal operations does not address the frequency of the inventory count associated with all of the following: the vault in the PAPG office, the cash cart, the warehouse, and the Treasury vault. (FA-23)

Related Recommendations (1)

R12: The PAPG should update the fiscal oversight policy to establish the frequency of periodic inventory of client assets in the PAPG office vault, cash cart, warehouse, and the Treasury vault. The inventory should be reconciled to the Panoramic database and other inventory records. This inventory should include all sites yearly on a random basis chosen by the head of the PAPG Office. (FI-19). Public Administrator/Public Guardian Review

F20: GroupWise software system has a potential to exchange data with the Panoramic system to a greater extent than is currently utilized. (FA-27)

Related Recommendations (1)

R09: The PAPG should request the Information Technology Department evaluate the following: • a shared calendar, under GroupWise, to contain the planned activities of PAPG department members including, but not limited to, court appointments, patient transportation, site visits, department and interagency meetings, etc. • the automatic importation of GroupWise data above from Panoramic into the GroupWise shared calendar (FI-20)

F21: The PAPG is responsible for the review of conservatee placement, diagnosis, treatment, and medication and for the appropriate oversight action as conservator. (FA-01) Recommendations

Related Recommendations (1)

R14: The PAPG and the Health Care Agency establish a Memorandum of Understanding delineating joint roles, responsibilities, and reporting requirements for conservatees of the PAPG under treatment in County medical facilities, to assure compliance with existing law. (FI-21) Responses Responses Required From: Board of Supervisors (R-06) Treasurer-Tax Collector (R-04) Responses Requested From: Public Administrator/Public Guardian (FI-01-FI-21) (R-01–R-05, R-07–R-14) Behavioral Health Department (FI-12, FI-17) (R-03, R-07, R-13) Health Care Agency (FI-21) (R-14) Commendations The commitment of PAPG personnel to the health and welfare of their clients and their cooperation with this Grand Jury has been outstanding. References Ref-01. 2001-2002 Ventura County Grand Jury Report. Public Administrator and Public Guardian as Conservator http://portal.countyofventura.org/portal/page/portal/Grand_Jury/Report s/Archived_Reports_2000-2005/TAB4579523/report_af_papgc.pdf (accessed February 24, 2012) Ref-02. Attorney for Plaintiff Superior Court of the State of California. Plaintiff v Juanita Browne A/K/A Juanita Canley, Court No. 20060043109, Peoples Trial Brief and Points and Authorities Regarding Admission of Records, Filed September 10, 2008. Ref-03. County of Ventura Executive Office. Report on Review of Internal Controls and Compliance of the Public Administrator/Public Guardian (PAPG), Submitted by Thompson, Cobb, Bazilo & Associates P.C., February 2007. Ref-04. Ventura County Executive Office. Review of the Public Guardian/Public Administrator Objective 1; Implementation of Corrective Actions, Thompson, Cobb, Bazilo & Associates P.C., March 2007. Ref-05. County of Ventura. Auditor-Controller Follow up audit on the Operations of the Public Administrator/Public Guardian, May 2010, Thompson, Cobb, Bazilo & Associates P.C., May 15, 2010. Public Administrator/Public Guardian Review 13 Ref-06. California State Plan on Aging 2009–2013 http://www.aging.ca.gov/legislation/California_State_Plan_on_Aging_Ao A_2009-2013_06-30-2009.pdf (accessed March 9, 2012) Ref-07. Omnibus Conservatorship and Guardianship Act of 2006. Ref-08. Developing Conservatorship Performance Standards in the California Courts: Preliminary Observations. http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/senate_paper.pdf (accessed February 27, 2012 ) Ref-09. Judicial Council of California Report. Subject: Probate Conservatorship Task force Recommendations to the Judicial Council, December 9, 2008. http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/120908item10.pdf (accessed February 27, 2012) Ref-10. Judicial Council of California. Handbook for Conservators. http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/handbook.pdf (accessed March 12, 2012) Ref-11. Stebnicki, Mark A., Empathy Fatigue, Springer Publishing Co., 2008. Ref-12. “Memorandum of Agreement Between Ventura County Behavioral Health Department and Ventura County Human Services Agency Public Guardian for LPS Conservatorship Services 7/19/11.” Ref-13. “Memorandum of Understanding Between County of Ventura Human Services Agency & Treasurer Tax Collector Oct 21, 2010.” Attachments Att-01. Workload of the Public Administrator/Public Guardian Att-02. Vans for the transportation of Conservatees 14 Public Administrator/Public Guardian Review Glossary TERM DEFINITION BH, Behavioral Health The Behavioral Health Department of Ventura County BOS Board of Supervisors Change Control A formal process of review and sequential change of software and associated documentation County Ventura County CSW Community Service Worker Desk Procedures Also known as Desk-top Procedures. A concise document that describes each work procedure needed to perform a specific job effectively, accurately, and consistently DPG Deputy Public Guardian Empathy Fatigue A state of psychological, emotional, mental, physical, spiritual, and occupational exhaustion brought about by prolonged exposure to emotional situations Grand Jury 2011-2012 Ventura County Grand Jury GroupWise The e-mail and calendaring system of offices of Ventura County HSA Human Services Agency of Ventura County LPS conservatee A conservatee established under the Lanterman- Petris-Short Legislation PA Public Administrator PAPG Public Administrator/Public Guardian PNI Personal Needs and Incidentals account for conservatees Probate conservatee A conservatee established under the Probate code Process Mapping The graphical portrayal of steps used to perform a job Sub-Payee The PAPG is the third party administrator for the assets of a client who is no longer under LPS or probate conservatorship. VISIO Software tool for graphic portrayal of process flows and organization charts Public Administrator/Public Guardian Review 15 This page intentionally blank 16 Public Administrator/Public Guardian Review Attachment 01 Workload of the Public Administrator/Public Guardian Public Administrator/Public Guardian Review 17 This page intentionally blank 18 Public Administrator/Public Guardian Review Responsiveness to the Court a. Transportation of client to the court b. Representation to the Court c. Meeting Court Schedules d. Completion of Inventory and Appraisal e. Provide Care Plan to Court —Level of Care Plan and status reports Protection of Client Welfare f. Referrals of clients i. Hillmont Psychiatric Hospital, Aurora Vista del Mar ii. Adult Protective Services iii. Court g. Search for alternative conservators h. Participation in the Rapid Response Team (Elder Abuse) i. Participation in the placement of clients ( Continuity of Care Committee) j. Reviewing client care plan k. Reviewing client medications l. Transportation of client between care facilities m. Client visitation—in-county monthly, out-of-county quarterly n. Obtaining client benefits o. Contacting client relatives p. Overseeing client burial q. Collecting client funds and paying bills, cash and checks sent to Treasurer, checks paid through Auditor-Controller r. Ensuring personal needs and incidentals of clients s. Paying bills of sub-payees in support of Behavioral Health case workers Protection of Client assets t. Location and identification of assets and liabilities, financial assets, real assets u. Identification and collection from insurance on conservatee and property v. Maintenance of insurance on conservatee and property w. Inventory of client assets x. Liquidation of real and personal property y. Storage of personal property z. Transportation of personal property between care facilities aa. Search for heirs Effective Case Management and administration bb. Case file establishment and maintenance i. Fiscal files ii. Client files cc. Opening cases dd. Closing cases ee. Panoramic software change management Public Administrator/Public Guardian Review 19 ff. Procedural changes for entering data into Panoramic gg. Tracking case status Effective Office Administration hh. Allocation of personnel and responsibilities ii. Vendor Contract Management jj. Collecting client fees kk. Planning, programming and Budgeting ll. Establishing and updating standard practice mm. Policy and procedure review and modification nn. Internal controls establishment and maintenance oo. Personnel recruitment, training, scheduling and evaluation pp. Maintenance and negotiation of organizational relationships i. Behavioral Health Department- MOU ii. Treasurer-Tax Collector MOA iii. County Counsel iv. Adult Protective Services v. Ventura Social Security office vi. Psychiatric Hospitals MOUs vii. Care facilities viii. Auditor-Controller Office 20 Public Administrator/Public Guardian Review Attachment 02 Vans for the transportation of Conservatees Public Administrator/Public Guardian Review 21 This page intentionally blank 22 Public Administrator/Public Guardian Review Public Administrator/Public Guardian Review 23

F22: The PAPG has developed a set of best practices which addresses numerous elements of the PAPG operation.

F23: Client assets are stored in the treasury vault, warehouse, cash cart, and vault in the PAPG Office.

F24: Some valuables are stored in the warehouse and cash cart that is, by policy, to be stored in the vault. The reasons given were: (1) appraisal was not done by the County, though appraisal of the material was included in estate files; (2) the bulk of the material could not fit into the drawers allocated to the PAPG by the Treasurer-Tax Collector; (3) inconvenience of using the treasury vault.

F25: Valuables from two closed cases have remained in the Treasury vault for over five years. There is no policy for disposal of closed case inventory.

F26: The PAPG policy is to visit clients who reside in the County on a monthly basis and clients residing out of the County every three months. Although the DPGs visit clients from time to time, a majority of client contact is by CSWs. The PAPG has developed a client contact form to document observations of board and care facilities and to document contacts between CSWs and the conservatees.

F27: The PAPG office utilizes the County-wide Novell GroupWise e-mail software and associated utilities.

F28: As members of one of the caring professions, DPGs are susceptible to a sense of anxiety, stress, and sense of loss, grief, and over-identification with clients. This can lead to a negative shift in the way these professionals view the people they serve. Sometimes this results in emotional, mental and physical exhaustion. [Ref-11] Findings

May 21, 2012 — Vehicle Impound Fees in Ventura County*

3 pages

Quick View Full Details →

Findings and recommendations not yet extracted.

May 16, 2012 — Graffiti in Ventura County Cities

17 pages 18 findings 5 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 18 findings

F01: Graffiti vandalism is a crime. (FA-08, FA-09)

F02: With the exception of Ojai, graffiti represents a significant financial impact in all the other Cities. (FA-11)

F03: The eight cities reporting direct costs for abatement programs, reported total costs in excess of $1.5 million in FY 2010/2011. (FA-11)

F04: Intangible factors make the overall cost of graffiti abatement impossible to calculate. (FA-12) Graffiti in Ventura County Cities 5

F05: The VCOG has yet to follow up on any of the roundtable recommendations established during the 2007 summit. (FA-14)

F06: There is no "one size fits all" graffiti abatement program for the Cities. The Cities’ abatement plans vary. (FA-16)

F07: Only the city ordinances for the cities of Port Hueneme and Santa Paula contain provisions for the city to petition the sentencing court for the delay or suspension of driving privileges for those convicted of graffiti vandalism, as allowed for in the state vehicle code. (FA-17) [Ref-04] [Ref-07]

F08: Some of the graffiti abatement programs utilize volunteer groups. (FA-18) Recommendations

F09: Penal Code section 594, in part, states: (a) Every person who maliciously commits any of the following acts with respect to any real or personal property not his or her own, in cases other than those specified by state law, is guilty of vandalism: (1) Defaces with graffiti or other inscribed material. Graffiti in Ventura County Cities 3 (2) Damages. (3) Destroys. Penal Code section 594 also provides the criminal penalties for violation of the code. [Ref-04]

F10: As indicated in the responses to the Graffiti Survey, Attachment 1, all Cities, with the exception of Ojai, reported graffiti as a significant source of financial impact on their city budget.

Related Recommendations (1)

R01: The Cities should aggressively pursue the recovery of costs from the individual(s) convicted of graffiti vandalism. (FI-02, FI-03)

F11: The financial impact on city budgets for graffiti removal for FY 2010–2011 is shown in the table below. The City of Moorpark did not specifically budget or track costs for graffiti removal, but reported it as a fiscal impact in their response. City 2010/11 Camarillo $ 69,682.00 Fillmore $ 43,528.00 Oxnard $ 739,825.00 Port Hueneme $ 120,000.00 Santa Paula $ 102,235.00 Simi Valley $ 227,462.00 Thousand Oaks $ 91,830.00 Ventura $ 150,004.00

Related Recommendations (1)

R01: The Cities should aggressively pursue the recovery of costs from the individual(s) convicted of graffiti vandalism. (FI-02, FI-03)

F12: There are other costs associated with graffiti vandalism. They are: • homeowner costs - the California Realtors Association estimates purchase prices for homes decreased 20% in areas that are victimized by graffiti vandalism • societal costs are the hardest to quantify. Decreased perception of safety, lower community pride, at risk youth, are all effects of vandalism in a community • neighborhood and business impacts are as follows: • intimidates residents • scares away customers • discourages tourism • invites street gangs and other vandals • attracts crime in general [Ref-01]

F13: The 2007 VCOG Graffiti Summit Summary described graffiti offenders as “. . . typically young males ranging in age from 15 to 23.” It further stated that “Statistically, of that group, the majority are 16 years of age and younger." [Ref-05] 4 Graffiti in Ventura County Cities

F14: A review of the VCOG agenda/minutes, posted on their website, revealed no information indicating that the VCOG has followed up on any of the roundtable recommendations established during the 2007 summit.

Related Recommendations (2)

R02: The VCOG should schedule a follow-up to the 2007 Graffiti Summit for the purpose of updating and/or completing the roundtable recommendations previously established and to allow participants to share their current "best practices." (FI-05)

R03: The VCOG should expand summit participation to include all entities that may experience graffiti damage. In addition to the 2007 Graffiti Summit participants, the following should be included: various volunteer organizations; railroads within the County; public transportation entities; and other special districts in the County. (FI-05)

F15: Each of the Cities has either a City Ordinance and/or a separate control/abatement plan to address graffiti vandalism.

F16: Graffiti control/abatement plans typically provide for some or all of the following elements: • graffiti hotline • graffiti taskforce • timely removal of graffiti • educational materials for both children and their parents • information regarding the potential penalties for graffiti violations • provide graffiti removal kits to volunteer groups • tips for graffiti prevention

F17: Each city has an ordinance addressing graffiti abatement. These ordinances contain some or all of the following elements: • fines and/or incarceration • restitution costs • community services in lieu of fines • rewards for information leading to arrest and conviction • parental liability • suspension or delay of driving privileges (Att-02)

F18: A volunteer group, Sheriff's and Youth Graffiti Removal Incident Team (SAY GRIT), has provided invaluable services to the Ventura County Watershed Protection District by the removal of graffiti in flood-control facilities within the Moorpark area. [Ref-06] Findings

Related Recommendations (1)

R04: The Cities should enlist the assistance of volunteer groups within the County for graffiti abatement. Such groups might include: Sheriff's and Youth Graffiti Removal Incident Team; Keep America Beautiful; and various civic groups. (FI-07)

March 16, 2012 — Vehicle Impound Fees in Ventura County

14 pages 15 findings 6 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 15 findings

F01: All Cities provided the administrative cost basis for the impound release fees charged to the public. With the exception of Thousand Oaks, there was no evidence that any of the Cities or agencies were collecting funds beyond the allowable administrative costs related to the removal, impound, storage, or release of the vehicles. A high fee, such as $300 or more, is not of itself an indication that a city is making a profit, as implied by the Times article, when the fee is substantiated by actual costs. A low vehicle release fee may be indicative of not recovering a larger allowable cost for the impound process from violators. [Ref-01] With respect to Thousand Oaks, the inclusion of an offset cost for the Thousand Oaks’ “Start Smart” driving classes in a vehicle release fee conflicts with the legal requirements of Vehicle Code section 22850.5, subdivision (a). (FA-03 – FA-12)

F02: All Cities have passed resolutions authorizing the collection of the fees required for release of a vehicle from impound. (FA-03–FA-12 and FA-14) Vehicle Impound Fees in Ventura County 7

F03: The Board of Supervisors has not passed a resolution authorizing the Sheriff to collect vehicle release fees to recover administrative costs for violations of Vehicle Code sections 12500, 14601, and 23152 in unincorporated areas of the County. (FA-13)

F04: Vehicle release fees across the County for violations of Vehicle Code sections 12500 and 14601 vary from $11 in unincorporated areas, to $300 in Thousand Oaks. The average (mean) vehicle release fee for the County is $137.79. (FA-03–FA-14)

F05: Six cities (Camarillo, Fillmore, Moorpark, Ojai, Santa Paula, and Simi Valley) and the Sheriff (unincorporated County areas) do not identify any additional tasks or any extra hours required to process the impoundment of a DUI vehicle versus the cost of other types of impoundments. This transfers extra costs from the DUI violator to the general public. (FA-03– FA-06, FA-09, FA-10)

F06: There is no standardized list of allowable categories of impound costs used to calculate vehicle release fees across the County. Some cities base fees on costs that occur after a traffic stop transitions to the impound process. This cost basis also includes the vehicle release paperwork. Other cities and the Sheriff collect fees based only on the cost of paperwork generated at the end of the impound process. This disparity in the services included in the fee allocations for violations of Vehicle Code sections 12500, 14601, and 23152 is a major factor in the fee variations. (FA-03–FA-14) Recommendations

F07: The City of Oxnard (Oxnard) passed Council Resolution Number 13,896 on July 20, 2010 to collect a fee of $241 for the release of a vehicle impounded in Oxnard for violations of Vehicle Code sections 12500 and 14601. The fee was based on the cost for the following: • a police officer • a police department commander • a dispatcher • a records technician • a word processor • a Black & White (B&W) cruiser If the impound was the result of a DUI incident (Veh. Code § 23152), the fee is $416 based on recovering the additional cost for a booking officer, as well as costs for the aforementioned items in the basic fee. The DUI incident cost for the police officer and word processor were higher than the fee for Vehicle Code violations of sections 12500 and 14601 due to the additional time required to process the DUI incidents.

F08: The City of Port Hueneme (Port Hueneme) passed City Council Resolution No. 3941 on December 7, 2009 to collect a fee of $160 for the release of a vehicle impounded in Port Hueneme for violations of Vehicle Code sections 12500 and 14601. The fee was based on the cost for the following: • a police officer • a technician • a communication dispatcher 4 Vehicle Impound Fees in Ventura County • costs covering equipment, building usage, and part-time labor without benefits If the impound was the result of a DUI incident (Veh. Code § 23152), the fee is $200. The higher DUI fee is based on the aforementioned cost categories with higher support hours.

F09: The City of Santa Paula (Santa Paula) does not have a specific resolution or ordinance for the fee to release a vehicle impounded in Santa Paula resulting from violations of Vehicle Code sections 12500, 14601, or 23152. Instead, Santa Paula maintains an ordinance (Resolution 6757) that lists all fees the city charges for services. The Police Fee Schedule, adopted under Resolution #6757, for storage impound release is $121. The approved date for the Police Fee Schedule Storage Impound Release fee was August 16, 2011. The fee was based on the cost for the following: • initial and backup officers to conduct an investigation, fill out CHP Form 180, and stand-by for a tow truck • a supervisor to respond to questions about a specific impound incident for citizens appearing in person at the police department • a records clerk to prepare a certified letter and establish and maintain the impound file • the cost of processing the certified letter The fee covers vehicle storage or impounds for any reason including violations of Vehicle Code sections 12500, 14601, and 23152.

F10: The City of Simi Valley (Simi Valley) passed a Joint Resolution of the City Council, Boards of Directors of the Ventura Water District No. 8, The Simi Valley Community Development Agency, The Simi Valley Industrial Development Agency, and the Simi Valley Public Financing Authority on January 28, 2008 to collect a fee of $77.70 for the release of a vehicle impounded in Simi Valley. The fee was based on the cost for the following: • a police officer • a police records manager • a police records technician • a police services assistant • material costs for copying The fee covers impounds resulting from violations of Vehicle Code sections 12500, 14601, and 23152.

F11: The City of Thousand Oaks passed Resolution No. 2011-015 on April 26, 2011 to collect a fee of $300 for the release of a vehicle impounded in Vehicle Impound Fees in Ventura County 5 Thousand Oaks for violations of Vehicle Code sections 12500 and 14601. The fee was based on the cost for the following: • a traffic sergeant • a sheriff record specialist • a cadet • a patrol deputy • postage and equipment, i.e., patrol car The fee calculation also included an administrative fee of $80. The administrative fee is an offset for the costs of preparation and instruction for the “Start Smart” driving classes. If the impound was the result of a DUI incident (Veh. Code § 23152), the fee is $400. The DUI fee is based on the aforementioned cost categories at higher support hours, but does not include the administrative fee.

Related Recommendations (1)

R04: Thousand Oaks should recalculate the vehicle release fee for violations of Vehicle Code sections 12500 and 14601, eliminating the “Start Smart” fee, to comply with Vehicle Code section 22850.5, subdivision (a). (FI-01)

F12: The City of Ventura (Ventura) approved Resolution No. 2010-016 on June 7, 2010 to collect a fee of $200 for the release of a vehicle impounded in Ventura for violations of Vehicle Code sections 12500 and 14601. If the impound was the result of a DUI incident (Veh. Code § 23152), the fee is $247. Both fees are based on the same cost for dispatch personnel and a peace officer, but Ventura elected to charge a lower vehicle release fee for non-DUI violations.

F13: The Sheriff collects a fee of $11 for the reports necessary for the release of a vehicle impounded in the unincorporated areas of the County. This fee is based on the time it takes for staff to verify the status and ownership of a vehicle and to prepare the CHP 180 Vehicle Report. The Board of Supervisors has not passed a resolution or ordinance approving fees resulting from violations of Vehicle Code sections 12500, 14601, and 23152. The charge of $11 was established on January 29, 1991 when the Board of Supervisors approved a Sheriff’s Department Fee Schedule that set fees for reproducing hardcopy reports.

Related Recommendations (2)

R05: The Board of Supervisors should request the Sheriff’s Department to apply the rates and factors for the unincorporated County areas along with directed cost recovery goals using the standardized cost category list from Recommendation R-02. It should be recognized that categories not included in the cost basis for approved fees represent costs to be borne by the general public and not the violator. (FI-04, FI-06)

R06: The Board of Supervisors should pass a resolution authorizing the vehicle release fees, as recommended by the Sheriff in R-05 above, and the basis for the fees should be available to the public. (FI-06) Responses Responses Required From: Ventura County Board of Supervisors (FI-03) (R-01, R-05, R-06) Ventura County Sheriff (FI-04, FI-05, FI-06) (R-02, R-05) City Council, City of Camarillo (FI-04, FI-05, FI-06) (R-02, R-03) City Council, City of Fillmore (FI-04, FI-05, FI-06) (R-02, R-03) City Council, City of Moorpark (FI-04, FI-05, FI-06) (R-02 R-03) City Council, City of Ojai (FI-04, FI-05, FI-06) (R-02, R-03) City Council, City of Oxnard (FI-04, FI-06) (R-02, R-03) City Council, City of Port Hueneme (FI-04, FI-05, FI-06) (R-02, R-03) City Council, City of Santa Paula (FI-04, FI-05, FI-06) (R-02, R-03) City Council, City of Simi Valley (FI-04, FI-05, FI-06) (R-02, R-03) City Council, City of Thousand Oaks (FI-01, FI-04, FI-06) (R-02, R-03, R-04) City Council, City of Ventura (FI-04, FI-06) (R-02, R-03) References Ref-01. Esquivel, Paloma. “Impounded cars boost Bell’s coffers,” Los Angeles Times, September 5, 2010. http://articles.latimes.com/2010/sep/05/local/la-me-bell-impounds- 20100906 (accessed December 30, 2011). Ref-02. Motor Vehicle Code section 22850.5, subdivision (a). Administrative Costs: Vehicle impound. http://dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc22850_5.htm (accessed December 30, 2011). Vehicle Impound Fees in Ventura County 9 Ref-03. Vehicle Code section 12500. Unlawful to Drive Unless Licensed. http://dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d06/vc12500.htm (accessed December 30, 2011). Ref-04. Vehicle Code section 14601. Driving While Privilege Suspended or Revoked. http://dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d06/vc14601.htm (accessed December 30, 2011). Ref-05. Vehicle Code section 23152 Driving Under Influence of Alcohol or Drugs. http://dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc23152.htm (accessed December 30, 2011). Vehicle Impound Fees in Ventura County Glossary TERM DEFINITION B&W Black & White, a vehicle used by uniformed police for patrol Board of Supervisors Ventura County Board of Supervisors Camarillo City of Camarillo CHP California Highway Patrol CHP Form 180 California Highway Patrol Form 180, Vehicle Report. A document containing information about the vehicle and the circumstances surrounding its seizure. Cities The ten cities within the County of Ventura: Camarillo, Fillmore, Moorpark, Ojai, Oxnard, Port Hueneme, Santa Paula, Simi Valley, Thousand Oaks, Ventura. County Ventura County DUI Driving Under the Influence Fee Basis Actual costs for impound services and materials used to derive Vehicle Release Fee authorized by a city or agency. Fillmore City of Fillmore Grand Jury 2011-2012 Ventura County Grand Jury Moorpark City of Moorpark Ojai City of Ojai Oxnard City of Oxnard Port Hueneme City of Port Hueneme Release Fee Payment as authorized by city or agency for release of a vehicle Santa Paula City of Santa Paula Sheriff Ventura County Sheriff’s Department Simi Valley City of Simi Valley Thousand Oaks City of Thousand Oaks Times Los Angeles Times newspaper Veh. Code § 12500 Vehicle Code section 12500, Unlawful to Drive Unless Licensed Vehicle Impound Fees in Ventura County 11 TERM DEFINITION Veh. Code § 14601 Vehicle Code section 14601, Driving While Privilege Suspended or Revoked Veh. Code § 23152 Vehicle Code section 23152, Driving Under Influence of Alcohol or Drugs Ventura City of Ventura 12 Vehicle Impound Fees in Ventura County

F14: The following table provides a summary of the fees charged by Cities and the Sheriff. The table contains columns for “Fee Basis” which are the actual costs for impound services and materials used to derive the Vehicle Release Fee authorized by a city or agency. Vehicle Impound Fees in Ventura County Release Fee - Release Fee No License - DUI (Veh. Code § Fee 12500 & Veh. (Veh. Code Fee Cities/Agencies Fee Basis Resolution Code § § 23152) Basis Date 14601) Camarillo* $ 80.00 $ 7 9.83 ** 12/12/2001 Fillmore* $115.00 $ 3 67.00 ** 06/28/2011 Moorpark * $110.00 $ 1 38.59 ** 07/21/2004 Ojai* $100.00 $ 1 00.00 ** 04/28/2009 Oxnard $241.00 $ 2 41.08 $416.00 $425.70 07/20/2010 Port Hueneme $160.00 $ 1 62.74 $200.00 $200.25 07/07/2009 Santa Paula $121.00 $ 1 21.49 ** 08/16/2011 Simi Valley $ 77.70 $ 7 7.70 ** 01/28/2008 Thousand Oaks* $300.00 $ 3 38.55 $400.00 $452.51 04/26/2011 Ventura $200.00 $ 2 47.00 $247.00 $247.00 06/07/2010 Sheriff - Unincorporated county $11.00 ** 01/29/1991*** * Sheriff Contract City ** No higher fee for DUI; same as Fee - No License *** Date of letter to Board of Supervisors recommending fee schedule

F15: The CHP collects no fee for the release of a vehicle impounded by their organization anywhere in the state. The Grand Jury has no oversight of the CHP, a state organization. The information in this paragraph is provided for completeness. Findings

* This report's PDF did not contain easily extractable text and required Optical Character Recognition (OCR) for analysis. There may be minor errors in the extracted findings and recommendations due to OCR limitations with scanned documents.