Ventura County 2018-2019 - California Grand Jury Reports

May 02, 2019 — “Reducing Supply, Saving Lives, Reducing Demand,” is to “multiply the number and convenience of Rx disposal sites.”

19 pages 22 findings 4 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 22 findings

F01: In 2009, VCBH’s Alcohol and Drug Program (ADP), in collaboration with the VCSO, established a countywide drug disposal program. The program encourages residents to safely dispose of unused or expired medications in secure, confidential disposal bins at law enforcement facilities. Through proclamations in 2012 and 2017, the BOS has supported the drug disposal program. (Ref-13)

F02: In fiscal year 2014-2015, 18% of 769 County adult residents surveyed by VCBH used drug disposal bins. (Ref-14)

F03: In 2017, according to VCBH, the use of drug disposal bins by County adult residents remained static at 18%. (Ref-15)

F04: In response to the escalating opioid epidemic, the Ventura County Rx-Abuse & Heroin Prevention Workgroup (Workgroup) was established in 2012. A goal of the Workgroup, which is composed of numerous agencies, is “to increase community awareness of the risks of opioid misuse and engage support for safe and secure disposal.” The Workgroup does not include Ventura County Animal Services. (Ref-16) 2 Drug and Sharps Disposal

F05: Another of the Workgroup’s goals, put forward in a 2017 presentation entitled “Reducing Supply, Saving Lives, Reducing Demand,” is to “multiply the number and convenience of Rx disposal sites.” (Ref-16)

F06: From 2014 to 2019 the number of drug disposal sites at law enforcement facilities in Ventura County has been reduced from ten to nine. (Ref-17) (Att-01)

F07: According to the Workgroup’s 2017 presentation, “Since 2009 over 16 tons of Rx drugs have been collected and destroyed by the Ventura County Rx-Abuse and Heroin Workgroup partners in the Ventura County Sheriff’s Office.” (Ref-16)

F08: VCSO has standard operating procedures for drop-off bin collection. The bins are designed to allow staff to empty and weigh the entire assortment of miscellaneous pharmaceuticals with minimal handling. Prescription drugs are not separated from OTC drugs, such as cold and flu remedies and vitamins. (Att-03)

F09: The VCBH website provides a link to a list of some, but not all, law enforcement agencies that have drug disposal bins and refers the public to “call your local police department for safe, confidential drop-off bins.” (Ref-18)

F10: Phone inquiries by the Grand Jury to local police and Sheriff’s departments resulted in contradictory information. (Att-01)

Related Recommendations (1)

R03: The Grand Jury recommends that all law enforcement agencies update their websites and other sources of public information. Information should include, but not be limited to, guidance regarding the availability of disposal bins for drugs and sharps, accessibility requirements to the bins and directions for disposal. (C-01)

F11: A Grand Jury visit to the Santa Paula Police Department revealed no drug disposal bin.

Related Recommendations (1)

F12: A Grand Jury visit to the Ojai Police Department revealed that its drug disposal bin had been over-filled by pharmacies and doctors offices and had therefore been removed from the lobby. Access to the bin required staff assistance.

Related Recommendations (1)

F13: A Grand Jury visit to the Oxnard Police Department revealed that proof of city residency is required to dispose of drugs.

Related Recommendations (1)

F14: A Grand Jury visit to the Simi Valley Police Department revealed that an appointment is necessary to drop off drugs. Information regarding sharps disposal was inconsistent.

Related Recommendations (1)

F15: A study conducted by Pennsylvania School of Veterinary Medicine from January 2007 through December 2017 concluded that the increase in opioid prescriptions for pets during that period paralleled a rise in similar prescriptions for people. (Ref-19)

F16: All nine drug disposal sites in Ventura County accept pet medications; however, there is no public information specific to veterinarians or pet owners on safe storage and disposal of prescriptions for pets.

Related Recommendations (1)

R02: The Grand Jury recommends that the Ventura County Animal Services be included in the process of developing and implementing any future drug and sharps disposal program. (C-01, C-02, C-03, C-04, C-05, C-06, C-07)

F17: Disposing of used medical sharps in the trash, recycling bin, or flushing them down the toilet is illegal in California, according to the State Health and Safety Code. These disposal methods pose serious health risks to Drug and Sharps Disposal 3 children, sanitation staff, water treatment facility operators and the public. (Ref-20)

F18: An estimated one million Californians inject medications, and 936 million needles are used by self-injectors in California each year. A 2018 study by Environmental Research and Education Foundation and the Solid Waste Association of North America found that 95% of self-injectors improperly dispose of sharps. (Ref-10)

F19: A Grand Jury visit to the six Sheriff’s substations revealed that all have drug drop-off bins, but none have bins for sharps disposal.

Related Recommendations (1)

R01: The Grand Jury recommends that the BOS consider adopting the EPR model for drug and sharps waste disposal throughout the County in order to develop a uniform program that can be used by all County law enforcement agencies and departments. (C-01, C-02, C-03, C-04, C-05, C-06, C-07)

F20: A Grand Jury visit to city police departments revealed that all except Ventura and Santa Paula have drug drop-off bins. Only the Port Hueneme Police Department has a bin for sharps disposal. (Att-01)

Related Recommendations (1)

F21: A number of counties in California have already developed ordinances requiring pharmaceutical companies to establish and pay for a local drug collection program based on the EPR model. (Ref-03, Ref-04, Ref-05, Ref- 06, Ref-07, Ref-08, Ref-09)

F22: In a sampling of eight counties with drug disposal programs based on the EPR model, the Grand Jury found it took up to two years for the counties to write and implement their ordinances. (Att-02) Conclusions C-01. The Grand Jury concluded that among the County law enforcement facilities that have drug disposal bins, there is a lack of information and consistency in public guidance regarding disposal of all medications, particularly for pet owners. (FA-09, FA-10, FA-11, FA-12, FA-13, FA-14, FA-15, FA-16) (Att- 01) C-02. The Grand Jury concluded that the BOS has not yet addressed the issue regarding the disposal of sharps waste, a requirement of SB 212, when it becomes effective January 1, 2021. (FA-01, FA-17, FA-18, FA-19, FA-20) (Att-01) C-03. Based on recent surveys, the Grand Jury concluded that VCBH has made no progress in increasing public awareness and use of drug disposal bins. (FA-02, FA-03) C-04. The Grand Jury concluded that VCBH and the Rx-Abuse & Heroin Prevention Workgroup have failed to increase the number and convenience of drug disposal bins. (FA-04, FA-05, FA-06) C-05. The Grand Jury concluded that VCBH’s assertion that more than 16 tons of prescription drugs have been collected since 2009 is misleading. This is because VCSO’s procedures for drug collection do not allow for the separation of prescription drugs from over-the-counter drugs prior to weighing. (FA-07, FA-08) (Att-03) C-06. The Grand Jury concluded that drug disposal ordinances already in effect in many counties throughout the State provide for safe disposal of 4 Drug and Sharps Disposal unwanted, unused or expired medicines and sharps. Any of these ordinances could serve as a model for Ventura County. (FA-21, FA-22) (Att-02) C-07. The Grand Jury concluded that although not specifically mandated until January 2021 by SB 212, a manufacturer-funded collection and disposal program for unused drugs and sharps would significantly increase the effectiveness of the County's current drug disposal program. The program would also reduce the risks to public safety, health and the environment. (FA-01, FA-02, FA-03, FA-04, FA-06, FA-08, FA-09, FA-10, FA-11, FA-12,

May 02, 2019 — Ventura County-Contracted Narcotic Treatment Programs

7 pages 7 findings 7 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 7 findings

F01: The Aegis and Western Pacific clinics are contractually required to provide detailed reports of services provided and outcome data to VCBH. However, VCBH does not make any of this information available to the general public. (Ref-01)

F02: For the past several years VCBH has contracted with Aegis and Western Pacific to provide narcotic treatment and counseling services in the County. The contract requires VCBH to “…conduct at minimum an annual review of the facility, policies, and documentation of compliance, conduct a survey of clients and staff, tour the grounds, and address any concerns or issues found.” (Ref-01)

F03: An internal audit by VCBH conducted of Aegis and Western Pacific records from February 4, 2013, through August 22, 2018, showed consistent problems with documentation. Most notably, at one of the clinics, more than half of 100 reviewed files revealed that methadone dosage was not charted as required.

F04: The Aegis website states that “80% of our patients are drug free within 90 days.” It also states that “88% of our patients stop using illicit opioids within 90 days.” These two statements are conflicting. They are also incompatible with VCBH’s stated aim, which is not to cure, but to “treat” or stabilize NTP patients so they can be healthy and productive members of society. (Ref-02)

F05: A Harvard School of Medicine expert, among other researchers, has drawn parallels between “opioid use disorder” and type 2 diabetes, i.e., both requiring lifelong management. (Ref-03)

F06: The Grand Jury interviewed law-enforcement and city-government officials. It was learned that incidents involving people loitering, trespassing, passing out, and drug dealing occurred in the immediate vicinity of some of the clinics. VCBH acknowledged that illicit drug use might occur outside some clinics but had no knowledge of any of these incidents involving clinic patients. VCBH stated that of the five NTP clinics, only the Aegis clinic in Oxnard maintains security personnel on site. Ventura County-Contracted Narcotic Treatment Programs

F07: VCBH staff said they conducted unannounced site visits in 2018-2019, but did not document them. Conclusions C-01. The Grand Jury concluded that opioid addiction could result in a lifelong MAT regimen. Aegis marketing materials and VCBH’s stated aim are confusing with regard to the effectiveness of MAT and the cure rate for opioid-addicted patients. (FA-04, FA-05) C-02. The Grand Jury concluded that VCBH does not provide any data to the public on measurable outcomes of the NTPs in the County. (FA-01) C-03. The Grand Jury concluded that VCBH does not conduct sufficient unannounced site visits and facility inspections. When conducted, site visits were not documented. (FA-02, FA-07) C-04. The Grand Jury concluded there is lack of oversight by VCBH regarding adequate documentation by NTP clinics in Ventura County. This could put at risk future government funding. (FA-03) C-05. The Grand Jury concluded that some NTP clinics lack sufficient security for the safety of patients and the public. (FA-06) Recommendations R-01. The current VCBH contracts require one site visit per year by VCBH staff. The Grand Jury recommends more unscheduled visits and documentation of those visits upon completion. (C-03) R-02. The Grand Jury recommends that VCBH fulfill its contractual obligation in oversight of each clinic. (C-03, C-04) R-03. The Grand Jury recommends that the Ventura County Auditor-Controller conduct a timely performance and compliance review of Aegis and Western Pacific contracts. (C-03, C-04) R-04. The Grand Jury recommends that VCBH adhere to all federal, State and County contractual policies and procedures in order to ensure continued funding for the administration of narcotic treatment programs. (C-04) R-05. The Grand Jury recommends that VCBH improve its existing educational materials regarding the goals and reasonable expectations of MAT programs. (C-01, C-02) R-06. The Grand Jury recommends that VCBH provide performance outcome data to the public on its contracted MAT programs. (C-01, C-02) R-07. The Grand Jury recommends that VCBH enhance security at contracted NTP clinics. (C-05) Ventura County-Contracted Narcotic Treatment Programs 3 Responses Responses Required From: Ventura County Board of Supervisors (C-01, C-02, C-03, C-04, C-05) (R-01, R-02, R-04, R-05, R-06, R-07) Ventura County Auditor-Controller (R-03) Responses Requested From: Ventura County Behavioral Health, Department of Ventura County Health Care Agency (C-01, C-02, C-03, C-04, C-05) (R-01, R-02, R-04, R-05, R-06, R-07) References Ref-01. Aegis and Western Pacific contracts http://bosagenda.countyofventura.org/sirepub/cache/2/jvvybvn3w34tfq peyjw0euii/71132504302019043006464.PDF Accessed April 30, 2019 Ref-02. Aegis Treatment Center website https://www.aegistreatmentcenters.com/treatment/ Accessed April 30, 2019 Ref-03. “Can Opioid Addiction Be Cured?” May 19, 2017, Vanessa Shipani https://www.factcheck.org/2017/05/can-opioid-addiction-cured/ Accessed April 30, 2019 4 Ventura County-Contracted Narcotic Treatment Programs Glossary TERM DEFINITION Aegis Aegis Treatment Centers, LLC BOS Ventura County Board of Supervisors County County of Ventura Grand Jury 2018-2019 Ventura County Grand Jury MAT Medication-assisted treatment, which combines behavioral therapy and medications to treat substance use disorders Methadone Schedule II opioid analgesic used to relieve chronic pain and reduce drug cravings in those addicted to substances such as heroin and other prescription drugs NTP Narcotic treatment program State State of California Suboxone A prescription medicine use to treat adults who are dependent on opioids. VCBH Ventura County Behavioral Health Western Pacific Western Pacific Med Corp. Ventura County-Contracted Narcotic Treatment Programs 5

April 25, 2019 — Pesticide Monitoring Near Schools and Day-Care Centers

10 pages 10 findings 1 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 10 findings

F01: A 2014 University of California at Davis study of women and their two- year-old children exposed to organophosphate pesticides demonstrated high levels of organophosphate metabolites in the children’s blood, which inhibited mental development. By age five, the children were found to have decreased attention spans. (Ref-12)

F02: A 1990 California Environmental Health Tracking Program study concluded that the County had the highest number of schools (12) and the highest number of students (13,045) exposed to pesticides applied within a quarter-mile radius. The pesticide application ranged from 2,635 to 28,979 pounds annually. (Ref-05)

F03: The only air collection monitoring station in the County is operated by the CDPR on the campus of Rio Mesa High School in Oxnard. Weekly sorbent samples are taken and analyzed. The air samples taken are random in timing. There are multiple schools and day-care centers within two miles of the collection site: City Kids Pre-school, Magic Carousel Preschool, Children R Us CDC, Citrus Glen Elementary School, Princeton Academy, Las Posas Children’s Center-Citrus Glen, Ventura Children’s Learning Center, Sunshine Preschool, Las Posas Children’s Center-Serra, Junipero Serra Elementary School, Providence Court School, Rio Del Mar Elementary School, Rio Plaza Head Start, Rio Plaza Elementary School, Rio Del Valle Junior High School, Julie Irving Head Start Center, Child Development Center Rio Real, Rio Real Elementary School, City Kids Preschool, Portola Elementary School, Fellowship Church Preschool, Little Scholars Montessori, Mesa School, Mary B. Perry High School and Marshall Elementary School. (Ref-05) Pesticide Monitoring Near Schools and Day-Care Centers 3

F04: The amount of 1,3-D, measured by the monitoring station on the campus of Rio Mesa High School for the six years from 2012 to 2017 inclusive, averaged 0.14 parts per billion (ppb). The highest year was 2012, with 0.19 ppb, and the lowest year was 2014, at 0.09 ppb. (Ref-11)

F05: The CDPR estimate is that the 70-year lifetime cumulative effect of 1,3-D in the Oxnard monitoring area would be 0.56 ppb, which is 5% of the level considered to be a health hazard. Methyl bromide and chloropicrin results also showed levels substantially less than regulatory targets. (Ref-11)

F06: After a letter survey by the Grand Jury, it was established that none of the 18 school districts surveyed in the County had received any complaints of overspray or drift of a pesticide or fumigant within the last two years.

F07: After a letter survey by the Grand Jury, it was established that all of the school districts surveyed had received annual notices of pesticides, fumigants and herbicides to be applied in the coming year, and/or notice of applications 48 hours prior to pesticide use.

F08: An interview with staff of the VCAC revealed that the VCAC has 15 inspectors in the County who make inspections of agricultural properties, applicators, and application conditions such as wind velocity, weather, temperature, and timing to prevent public and animal exposure due to overspray or drift.

F09: Three fumigant materials are collected and analyzed by the CDPR in the County: chloropicrin, 1,3-D and methyl bromide. Future collections and analysis will include chlorpyrifos, which has been used on strawberry fields in the past. Up to 31 additional pesticides and fumigants are to be collected in future monitoring plans by the CDPR. (Ref-11)

F10: On interview with the staff of VCAC, while the pesticide chlorpyrifos is to be monitored along with 30 other substances beginning 2019, it has been banned and is not used in the County due to strict conditions of application. (Ref-11) Conclusions C-01. The Grand Jury concluded that the use of pesticides, herbicides and fumigants in close proximity to school campuses and day-care centers in the County is of concern for the health and welfare of children, faculty and members of the public associated with these campuses. (F-01, F-02) C-02. The Grand Jury concluded that, with the implementation of current regulations concerning pesticide application and fumigation near schools and day-care centers by the VCAC, students and faculty at the public schools and campuses are afforded a measure of safety from overspray or drift of pesticides or fumigants. (F-03, F-04, F-05, F-06, F-07, F-08, F-09, F-10) C-03. The Grand Jury concluded that the lack of any complaints from school or day-care campuses of overspray or drift from pesticide applications and 4 Pesticide Monitoring Near Schools and Day-Care Centers fumigations in the last two years suggests that the level of regulation appears to be effective. (F-06) C-04. The Grand Jury concluded that the monitoring of fumigants like 1,3-D, methyl bromide and chloropicrin utilized in County agriculture demonstrates that levels of drift are below cumulative harmful levels. (F-04, F-05) C-05. The Grand Jury concluded that increased sampling of additional County agricultural areas near schools, day-care centers or areas of concentrated population would provide additional public assurance of safety. (F-03, F-09) Recommendations R-01. The Grand Jury recommends that VCAC establish more comprehensive air sampling of pesticides and fumigants, either stationary or mobile, at additional locations in Ventura County where there are clusters of schools and day-care centers. This would give increased assurance of public health and safety intended by these regulations. (C-01, C-02, C-03, C-04, C-05) Responses Response Required From: Ventura County Board of Supervisors (R-01) Response Requested From: Ventura County Agricultural Commissioner (C-01, C-02, C-03, C-04) (R-01) References Ref-01. Ventura County’s 2017 Crop & Livestock Report www.ventura.org/agricultural-commissioner Accessed April 17, 2019 Ref-02. Fields of Toxic Pesticides Surround the Schools of Ventura County https://www.thenation.com/article/fields-toxic-pesticides-surround- schools-ventura-county Accessed April 17, 2019 Ref-03. Initial Statement of Reasons and Public Report Department of Pesticide Regulation Title 3, Sections 6690, 6691, 6692, and 6693 of the California Code of Regulations https://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/legbills/rulepkgs/16-004/16- 004_initial_statement.pdf Accessed April 17, 2019 Pesticide Monitoring Near Schools and Day-Care Centers 5 Ref-04. Pesticide fumes send2home at Mound School https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2000-nov-09-me-49364- story.html Accessed April 17, 2019 Ref-05. Agricultural Pesticide Use Mapping and Proximity to Public Schools https://biomonitoring.ca.gov/sites/default/files/downloads/English07281 6_0.pdf (Copy/Paste URL in preferred Web-browse) Accessed April 17, 2019 Ref-06. Ambient Air Monitoring Results for 2017 https://www.cdr.ca.gov/doc/dept/prec/2018/072018_amn_results.pdf (Copy/Paste URL in preferred Web-browser) Accessed April 17, 2019 Ref-07. California Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Environmental Health. Chemicals Listed Effective December 15, 2017 as Known to the State of California to Cause Reproductive Toxicity: Chlorpyrifos and n-Hexane https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/listingnotice121517.pdf (Copy/Paste URL in preferred Web-browser) Accessed April 17, 2019 Ref-08. Evaluation Of Chlorpyrifos As A Toxic Air Contaminant Executive Summary https://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/whs/pdf/chlorpyrifos_exec_summary.pdf Accessed April 17, 2019 Ref-09. Lazzaretti, J. Circuit Orders Ban on Chlorpyrifos. October 26, 2018. FreshLawBlog https://www.freshlawblog.com/2018/10/26/ninth-circuit-orders-ban-on- chlorpyrifos/ Accessed April 25, 2019 Ref-10. Agritoxins: Ventura County’s Toxic Time Bomb. http://www.environmentnow.org/pdf/Wishtoyo-Agritoxins-Report.pdf Accessed April 17, 2019 Ref-11. Pesticide Air Monitoring Results Database-California Department of Pesticide Regulation https://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/emon/airinit/pesticide_air_monitoring_da tabase.htm Accessed April 17, 2019 Ref-12. UC Davis MIND Institute study finds association between maternal exposure to agricultural pesticides, autism in offspring https://health.ucdavis.edu/publish/news/newsroom/8978 Accessed April 17, 2019 6 Pesticide Monitoring Near Schools and Day-Care Centers Glossary TERM DEFINITION 1,3-D 1,3-Dichloropropene is a broad-spectrum antimicrobial fungicide, herbicide, insecticide and nematicide. The EPA classifies this a probable human carcinogen. It also demonstrates acute toxicity to humans when inhaled. CDPR California Department of Pesticide Regulation Chlorpyrifos An organophosphate pesticide used to kill pests, including insects and worms. It can affect the nervous system. Chloropicrin A broad spectrum antimicrobial fungicide, herbicide, insecticide and nematicide. This page intentionally blank 8 Pesticide Monitoring Near Schools and Day-Care Centers

April 17, 2019 — Youth Sports and Public Liability

7 pages 6 findings 3 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 6 findings

F01: The Grand Jury found that all cities and Districts in the County, except the cities of Port Hueneme and Santa Paula, allow non-affiliated sports leagues to use city or district property for practice or play.

F02: The Grand Jury found that none of the cities or Districts in the County require proof of compliance with AB 2007 from non-affiliated sports leagues when permitting them to use city or district property for practice or play.

F03: The Grand Jury found that none of the cities or Districts in the County require proof from non-affiliated sports leagues that child physical or sexual abuse prevention training, reporting and enforcement policies are in place when permitting them to use city or district property for practice or play.

F04: The Grand Jury found that none of the cities or Districts require proof that parents have given permission for their child to play sports that could cause physical injury (parental waivers) are obtained by the non-affiliated sports leagues when permitting them to use city or district property for practice or play.

F05: The Grand Jury found that none of the cities or Districts require proof of liability insurance coverage specifically for child physical or sexual abuse or concussion-related injury claims from non-affiliated sports leagues when permitting them to use city or district property for practice or play. Youth Sports and Public Liability

F06: The Grand Jury found that city and district insurance programs varied greatly with respect to the types of insurance and coverage amounts. Most insurance programs were not specific to litigation arising from the conduct of youth sports on city or district property. Conclusions C-01. The Grand Jury concluded that most cities and Districts in the County allow non-affiliated sports leagues to use their facilities to practice or play. However, they do not require proof of compliance with California law regarding protection against concussion-related injuries from these leagues. They also do not require proof that procedures for preventing and reporting child physical or sexual abuse are in place. (FA-01, FA-02, FA- 03) C-02. The Grand Jury concluded that cities and Districts do not require proof of adequate parental waivers and insurance coverage from non-affiliated sports leagues to protect against legal action that could jeopardize public monetary resources. (FA-04, FA-05) C-03. The Grand Jury concluded that cities and Districts are underinsured with respect to the type of coverage and coverage amounts to sufficiently protect them from litigation arising from the conduct of youth sports on city or district property. (FA-06) Recommendations R-01. The Grand Jury recommends that all cities and Districts require proof from non-affiliated sports leagues that they are in compliance with California law regarding concussion-related sports injuries and that they have child physical or sexual abuse prevention and reporting procedures in place as a condition of the use of public facilities for practice or play. (C-01) R-02. The Grand Jury recommends that all cities and Districts require proof of adequate parental waivers from participants and sufficient insurance coverage from non-affiliated sports leagues as a condition of the use of public facilities for practice or play. (C-02) R-03. The Grand Jury recommends that all cities and Districts review their own insurance coverage to ensure that they are adequately protected with respect to potential claims arising from the conduct of youth sports on city or district property. (C-03) Youth Sports and Public Liability 3 Responses Responses Required From: City Council, City of Oxnard (C0-1, C-02, C-03) (R-01, R-02, R-03) City Council, City of Ventura (C-01, C-02, C-03) (R-01, R-02, R-03) City Council, City of Moorpark (C-01, C-02, C-03) (R-01, R-02, R-03) City Council, City of Fillmore (C-01, C-02, C-03) (R-01, R-02, R-03) City Council, City of Ojai (C-01, C-02, C-03) (R-01, R-02, R-03) City Council, City of Port Hueneme (C-01, C-02, C-03) (R-01, R-02, R-03) City Council, City of Santa Paula (C-01, C-02, C-03) (R-01, R-02, R-03) Board of Directors, Conejo Valley Recreation and Parks District (C-01, C-02, C-03) (R-01, R-02, R-03) Board of Directors, Pleasant Valley Recreation and Parks District (C-01, C-02, C-03) (R-01, R-02, R-03) Board of Directors, Rancho Simi Recreation and Parks District (C-01, C-02, C-03) (R-01, R-02, R-03) References Ref-01. Protecting Young Victims From Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization Act of 2017 https://www.usyouthsoccer.org/protecting-young-victims-from-sexual- abuse-and-safe-sport-authorization-act-of-2017 Accessed April 11, 2019 Ref-02. AB 2007 https://www.lcwlegal.com/news/ab-2007-requires-youth-sports- organization-to-abide-by-specified-safety-requirements-regarding- concussions-and-other-head-injuries Accessed April 11, 2019 4 Youth Sports and Public Liability Glossary TERM DEFINITION AB 2007 California Youth Sports Concussion Protocols, which requires youth sports organizations that offer athletic programs to comply with specified safety requirements regarding concussions or other head injuries County County of Ventura Districts Independent Parks and Recreation Districts Grand Jury 2018-2019 Ventura County Grand Jury Non-affiliated Youth sports leagues that are not organized or sports leagues regulated by a national governing body such as American Youth Soccer Organization or Little League Parental waiver A document signed by a parent of a child giving permission for that child to participate in a sport that may cause physical injuries and waiving liability claims against a third party SASSAA Sexual Abuse and Safe Sports Authorization Act, federal law that requires that all adults who are authorized to interact with minors in national youth sports organizations report suspected child sexual abuse to authorities. This act also requires national governing bodies of organized sports leagues to develop and enforce policies and procedures to report and respond to child abuse or molestation claims. Youth Sports and Public Liability 5

April 10, 2019 — School Implementation of Sex-Education Programs

10 pages 7 findings 7 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 7 findings

F01: The Grand Jury found of the County’s 17 school districts surveyed and the schools administered by the VCOE, all have implemented various policies, practices and procedures in keeping with AB 329 except Conejo Valley Unified School District (Conejo), which was still developing policies at the time of the Grand Jury’s survey.

F02: The Grand Jury found that Conejo, Moorpark Unified School District (Moorpark) and Mupu Unified School District (Mupu) are the only districts to establish and describe what the alternative educational activity would be for students opting-out of the sex-education curriculum. All the other districts did not specify an alternate educational activity in the materials sent to parents or guardians.

F03: The Grand Jury found that only Mupu provided information to the parents or guardians that their children could be excused from participation in all or in part of the sex-education instruction.

F04: The Grand Jury found that only Mupu, Oxnard Union High School District (Oxnard Union), Oak Park Unified School District (Oak Park), Simi Valley 2 School Implementation of Sex-Education Programs Unified School District (Simi) and Moorpark notified parents or guardians that any student who opted-out of the sex-education program will not be subject to academic penalty or disciplinary action.

F05: The Grand Jury found that in their annual handbook to parents or guardians, only Conejo, Port Hueneme Unified School District (Port Hueneme), Oxnard Union and Mupu informed parents or guardians of their right to review any and all materials to be utilized in instruction of the sex- education classes at the beginning of the school year or the beginning of a child’s enrollment. Only Oxnard Union provided a website to conveniently review the curriculum.

F06: The Grand Jury found that information regarding sex-education curricula and surveys sent to parents or guardians in the schools’ general handbooks were not easily found.

F07: The Grand Jury found that only Oxnard, Ventura Unified School District (Ventura), Somis, Ojai School District (Ojai) and Port Hueneme provided a form that could be returned to the district enabling a parent or guardian to conveniently provide a written request that the child opt-out from the sexual-education instruction or surveys concerning sexual behaviors. Conclusions C-01. The Grand Jury concluded that all school districts surveyed, except Conejo, have implemented policies, practices and procedures regarding the implementation of AB 329. (FA-01) C-02. The Grand Jury concluded that school districts’ policies, practices and procedures fail to provide sufficient details of the sexual-health education and HIV/AIDS prevention class curriculum, or the content of the sexual- behavior surveys. This makes it difficult for parents or guardians to easily access, understand and make decisions about whether their children should be excused from or included in the sexual-education classes or surveys on sexual behavior. (FA-01, FA-02, FA-03, FA-04, FA-05, FA-06, FA-07) C-03. The Grand Jury concluded that all district policies, procedures and practices (except Conejo, Moorpark and Mupu) fail to provide adequate notice that a student excused from instruction will be provided an alternative educational activity. (FA-02) C-04. The Grand Jury concluded that all district procedures, policies and practices (except Mupu, Oxnard Union, Oak Park, Simi and Moorpark) fail to give notice that a student excused from instruction will not be subject to any academic penalty. (FA-04) C-05. The Grand Jury concluded that all districts (except Oxnard Union, Ventura, Somis, Ojai and Port Hueneme) do not provide a separate written form for parents or guardians to conveniently opt-out their students from all or part of the curriculum on sexual-health education or surveys on sexual behavior. (FA-07) School Implementation of Sex-Education Programs 3 Recommendations R-01. The Grand Jury recommends that the school districts provide to parents or guardians a separate informational notice describing the sexual education and HIV/AIDS prevention curriculum and content of sexual-behavior surveys. (C-02) R-02. The Grand Jury recommends that the notice provided to parents or guardians states that no academic penalty will attach as a result of a parent or guardian excluding a child from sexual-education classes or surveys of sexual behavior. (C-04) R-03. The Grand Jury recommends that school districts provide an alternative educational curriculum to students opting-out of sexual-education classes that closely aligns with the Legislature’s intent that “instruction and materials shall provide pupils with knowledge and skills for making and implementing healthy decisions … including negotiation and refusal skills.…” The details of the alternative curriculum should be included in the notice to parents or guardians. The Life Skills curriculum established by the Moorpark Unified School District is an example of such an alternative. (C- 02, C-03, Ref-07) R-04. The Grand Jury recommends that the school districts provide a more detailed explanation of the content of sexual-education and HIV/AIDS curriculum and sexual-behavior surveys in an easily accessible format. (C- 02) R-05. The Grand Jury recommends that the school districts facilitate the opt-out process by including a single form that can be signed and returned, indicating that parents or guardians wish to have their child excused from sexual-education instruction and surveys. (C-02) R-06. The Grand Jury recommends that the school districts notify parents or guardians that they may opt-out their children from any part of sexual- education classes or surveys, while allowing them to attend or participate in others. (C-02, FA-03) R-07. The Grand Jury recommends that school districts provide a more complete explanation in the annual parent/guardian notification of any surveys to be taken concerning sexual behavior of students. (C-O2) Responses Responses Required From: Conejo Unified School District Fillmore Unified School District Mesa Unified School District Moorpark Unified School District Mupu Unified School District Oak Park Unified School District Ocean View Unified School District 4 School Implementation of Sex-Education Programs Ojai Unified School District Oxnard Elementary School District Oxnard Union High School District Pleasant Valley Unified School District Port Hueneme Unified School District Rio Unified School District Santa Paula Unified School District Simi Valley Unified School District Somis Unified School District Ventura County Office of Education Ventura County Unified School District References Ref-01. California Healthy Youth Act (AB 329) http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id201520 160AB329 Accessed April 3, 2019 Ref-02. The following School Districts were surveyed: Briggs Elementary School District Conejo Valley Unified School District Fillmore Unified School District Mesa Unified School District Moorpark Unified School District Mupu Unified School District Oak Park Unified School District Ocean View Unified School District Ojai Unified School District Oxnard Elementary School District Oxnard Union High School District Pleasant Valley Unified School District Port Hueneme Unified School District Rio Unified School District Santa Clara Unified School District Santa Paula Unified School District Simi Valley Unified School District Somis Unified School District Ventura County Office of Education School Implementation of Sex-Education Programs 5 Ventura County Unified School District Ref-03. California Education Code Sections 51937, 51938 (b) http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayexpandedbranch.xh tml?tocCode=EDC&division=4.&title=2.&part=28.&chapter=5.6.&article = Accessed April 3, 2019 Ref-04. California Education Code Sections 51938 http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayexpandedbranch.xh tml?tocCode=EDC&division=4.&title=2.&part=28.&chapter=5.6.&article = Accessed April 3, 2019 Ref-05. California Education Code Sections, 51939 http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayexpandedbranch.xh tml?tocCode=EDC&division=4.&title=2.&part=28.&chapter=5.6.&article = Accessed April 3, 2019 Ref-06. California Education Code Sections 51937, 51939 http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayexpandedbranch.xh tml?tocCode=EDC&division=4.&title=2.&part=28.&chapter=5.6.&article = Accessed April 3, 2019 Ref-07. California Education Code Section 51933(h) http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayexpandedbranch.xh tml?tocCode=EDC&division=4.&title=2.&part=28.&chapter=5.6.&article = Accessed April 3, 2019 6 School Implementation of Sex-Education Programs Glossary TERM DEFINITION AB 329 California Healthy Youth Act Conejo Conejo Valley Unified School District Grand Jury 2018-2019 Ventura Grand Jury Mupu Mupu Unified School District Oak Park Oak Park Unified School District Ojai Ojai Unified School District Oxnard Union Oxnard Union High School District Port Hueneme Port Hueneme Unified School District Somis Somis Unified School District Simi Simi Valley Unified School District School Implementation of Sex-Education Programs 7 This page intentionally blank 8 School Implementation of Sex-Education Programs

April 10, 2019 — Transparency in the Sale of Tax-Defaulted Property to Nonprofits

12 pages 12 findings 1 recommendations

Quick View Full Details →

Findings & Recommendations 12 findings

F01: Defaulted-tax sales are scheduled to occur once each year; however, due to redemption of properties, they are held infrequently. An auction was held February 13, 2019. Prior to that, the last auction was held in 2015. At the discretion of the Treasurer-Tax Collector, if too few properties remain to warrant the expense of an auction, the sale may be cancelled and those remaining properties will be carried over until the next sale. (Ref-03)

F02: In the last 10 years, the only properties sold through the Chapter 8 procedure were two vacant parcels of land purchased by the City of Thousand Oaks.

F03: As of the date of this report, two nonprofits have initiated Chapter 8 purchases of two additional parcels. Completion of these transactions is pending.

F04: Nonprofits intending to participate in a negotiated-sale Chapter 8 process must be incorporated in the State for at least one of the following purposes: • Acquiring single-family dwellings for rehabilitation and sale to low- income persons • Acquiring vacant land for construction of low-income housing • Acquiring vacant land to be dedicated to public use (Ref-01)

F05: A nonprofit’s proposal to commence purchase of a tax-defaulted property through Chapter 8 must include the following documents: • An application to purchase a tax-defaulted property (Ref-04, Att-01) • A letter declaring an objection to a parcel that is scheduled for sale at an upcoming public auction. An objection letter is only required if the parcel in question is currently scheduled for a Chapter 7 sale. The letter 2 Transparency in the Sale of Tax-Defaulted Property to Nonprofits must provide compelling evidence that the tax-defaulted property is needed or may be needed for public use. (Ref-05, Att-02) • Articles of Incorporation in the State • A document listing each parcel under consideration and its intended use (Ref-04)

F06: If a nonprofit organization submits a proposal to the Treasurer-Tax Collector to purchase a property currently in tax default, and the property has not yet been approved for any other type of tax sale, i.e., has not yet been scheduled for public auction or sealed-bid sale, the Chapter 8 process may move forward. (Ref-01)

F07: If a nonprofit submits a proposal to purchase a property that has been approved for public auction or sealed-bid sale, the proposal must be filed with the Treasurer-Tax Collector’s office before the date of the first published or posted notice of sale at auction or sealed bid. (Ref-01)

F08: The published or posted notice of sale must be at least 21 days prior to the sale. However, the Treasurer-Tax Collector may post notice of a sale at any earlier time. (Ref-01)

F09: If the nonprofit’s application for purchase is filed with the Treasurer-Tax Collector’s office after the date of the first published or posted notice of sale, the application is not valid. In that case, the nonprofit may not purchase the property under the Chapter 8 process. The nonprofit may bid on the property at a public auction. (Ref-06)

F10: The State provides guidelines to the County regarding the process for selling tax-defaulted properties. (Ref-01, Ref-02, Ref-06)

F11: The Treasurer-Tax Collector’s website provides information for people who want to purchase property at the County’s public auction. The County provides no information regarding the Chapter 8 process, including deadlines.(Ref-03)

Related Recommendations (1)

R01: The Grand Jury recommends that the Treasurer-Tax Collector’s office update its website, providing easy-to-follow information and instructions regarding the Chapter 8 procedure. This information should include, but not be limited to, complete information outlining all pertinent timelines and the properties available. The list of tax-defaulted properties should be updated in a regularly scheduled manner.(C-01, C-02) Response Response Required From: Ventura County Treasurer-Tax Collector (C-01, C-02) (R-01) References Ref-01. State of California “A Guide to Preparing the Chapter 8 Agreement Sale Package” https://sco.ca.gov/Files-ARD-Tax-Info/Tax-Collector-Ref- Man/Chapter8SaleGuide_2017.pdf Accessed April 3, 2019 Ref-02. State of California “County Tax Sale Procedural Manual, Volume II: Chapter 8 Tax Sales https://www.sco.ca.gov/Files-ARD-Tax-Info/Tax-Collector-Ref- Man/ctspm_v2_2016.pdf Accessed April 3, 2019 Ref-03. Office of the Ventura County Treasurer-Tax Collector https://www.ventura.org/ttc/current-auction/ Accessed April 3, 2019 Ref-04. California State Controller’s Office Form 8-16 https://www.sco.ca.gov/Files-ARD-Tax-Info/Tax-Collector-Ref- Man/sco8-16.pdf Accessed April 3, 2019 Ref-05. Revenue and Taxation Division 1. Property Taxation, Part 6. Tax Sales [3695.5] http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?secti onNum=3695.5.&lawCode=RTC Accessed April 3, 2019 Ref-06. State of California “County Tax Sale Procedural Manual Volume I: Chapter 7 Tax Sales” https://www.sco.ca.gov/Files-ARD-Tax-Info/Tax-Collector-Ref- Man/ctspm_v1_2016.pdf Accessed April 3, 2019 4 Transparency in the Sale of Tax-Defaulted Property to Nonprofits Attachments Att-01. Sample Nonprofit Application Form Att-02. Sample Nonprofit Objection Letter Transparency in the Sale of Tax-Defaulted Property to Nonprofits 5 Glossary TERM DEFINITION Chapter 7 Sale of tax-defaulted property through the public-auction process Chapter 8 Sale of tax-defaulted property to a taxing agency or to a nonprofit through an agreement-sale process County County of Ventura Grand Jury 2018-2019 Ventura County Grand Jury Redemption The process whereby a tax-defaulted property is pulled from a scheduled sale because the owner has paid delinquent taxes and penalties. State State of California Tax-Defaulted Property Property on which taxes have been delinquent for five years for residential property and farmland and three years for nonresidential commercial property. Treasurer-Tax Collector Ventura County Treasurer-Tax Collector 6 Transparency in the Sale of Tax-Defaulted Property to Nonprofits Attachment 01 Sample Nonprofit Application Form Transparency in the Sale of Tax-Defaulted Property to Nonprofits 7 8 Transparency in the Sale of Tax-Defaulted Property to Nonprofits Attachment 02 Sample Nonprofit Objection Letter Transparency in the Sale of Tax-Defaulted Property to Nonprofits 9 10 Transparency in the Sale of Tax-Defaulted Property to Nonprofits

F12: If a nonprofit wants to participate in the Chapter 8 process, it needs to call the Treasurer-Tax Collector’s office for a list of properties in tax-defaulted status and the associated deadlines. (Ref-03) Conclusions C-01. The Grand Jury concluded that there is insufficient guidance to nonprofits seeking to purchase a tax-defaulted property through the Chapter 8 process. (FA-01, FA-02, FA-03, FA-04, FA-05, FA-06, FA-07, FA-08, FA-09) C-02. The Grand Jury concluded that an excessive burden is placed on the nonprofit to determine the procedures and all applicable and necessary Chapter 8 deadlines. (FA-10, FA-11, FA-12) Transparency in the Sale of Tax-Defaulted Property to Nonprofits 3 Recommendation R-01. The Grand Jury recommends that the Treasurer-Tax Collector’s office update its website, providing easy-to-follow information and instructions regarding the Chapter 8 procedure. This information should include, but not be limited to, complete information outlining all pertinent timelines and the properties available. The list of tax-defaulted properties should be updated in a regularly scheduled manner.(C-01, C-02) Response Response Required From: Ventura County Treasurer-Tax Collector (C-01, C-02) (R-01) References Ref-01. State of California “A Guide to Preparing the Chapter 8 Agreement Sale Package” https://sco.ca.gov/Files-ARD-Tax-Info/Tax-Collector-Ref- Man/Chapter8SaleGuide_2017.pdf Accessed April 3, 2019 Ref-02. State of California “County Tax Sale Procedural Manual, Volume II: Chapter 8 Tax Sales https://www.sco.ca.gov/Files-ARD-Tax-Info/Tax-Collector-Ref- Man/ctspm_v2_2016.pdf Accessed April 3, 2019 Ref-03. Office of the Ventura County Treasurer-Tax Collector https://www.ventura.org/ttc/current-auction/ Accessed April 3, 2019 Ref-04. California State Controller’s Office Form 8-16 https://www.sco.ca.gov/Files-ARD-Tax-Info/Tax-Collector-Ref- Man/sco8-16.pdf Accessed April 3, 2019 Ref-05. Revenue and Taxation Division 1. Property Taxation, Part 6. Tax Sales [3695.5] http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?secti onNum=3695.5.&lawCode=RTC Accessed April 3, 2019 Ref-06. State of California “County Tax Sale Procedural Manual Volume I: Chapter 7 Tax Sales” https://www.sco.ca.gov/Files-ARD-Tax-Info/Tax-Collector-Ref- Man/ctspm_v1_2016.pdf Accessed April 3, 2019 4 Transparency in the Sale of Tax-Defaulted Property to Nonprofits Attachments Att-01. Sample Nonprofit Application Form Att-02. Sample Nonprofit Objection Letter Transparency in the Sale of Tax-Defaulted Property to Nonprofits 5 Glossary TERM DEFINITION Chapter 7 Sale of tax-defaulted property through the public-auction process Chapter 8 Sale of tax-defaulted property to a taxing agency or to a nonprofit through an

Related Recommendations (1)

February 22, 2018 — Ventura County Grand Jury Announces Open House March 15, 2018 On Thursday, March 15, 2018, the Grand Jury will host an

1 pages

Quick View Full Details →

Findings and recommendations not yet extracted.