Yolo County Grand Jury
2021-2022
From the annual report
The consolidated year-end volume. The individual investigations it contains are listed separately below.
📑 Year-End Report
The full consolidated volume; individual reports are listed below.
Individual reports (7)
Findings & Recommendations
7 findings
F1:
The Davis Parks budget no longer adequately covers park maintenance throughout the year at satisfactory quality levels.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The City of Davis should address the weed infestation in the parks and green belts, with removal of weeds and reinstall grass back to its original form by September 1, 2022.
F2:
Davis Parks greenery is unkempt and shows a lack of consistent maintenance.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The City of Davis’ competitive bidding process should be transparent when awarding contracts to this contractor and should provide an explanation of said process regarding by September 1, 2022.
F3:
The City of Davis has been unsuccessful in hiring additional maintenance staff and an IPM Specialist, as outlined in the City of Davis Policy and Procedures.3
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The City of Davis should actively recruit for the IPM Specialist position or in the absence of a qualified candidate, the City of Davis should outsource this position by September 1, 2022.
F4:
Parks that are maintained by the City of Davis are better maintained than the parks that are serviced by the sole contractor. 3 https://documents.cityofdavis.org/Media/Default/Documents/PDF/PW/Integrated%20Pest%20 Management/07-IPM-Policy-ATT2-IPM-Policy-and-Procedures.pdf 5
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
The City of Davis Parks Department should actively promote civic pride and the volunteerism programs already in place such as ADOPT-A-PARK. Additional ideas for volunteer recruitments include: • enlisting Scout troops to help contain weed growth in the parks. • working with service clubs (e.g., Rotary, Lyons Club, Kiwanis) to help maintain the parks. • amplifying public service announcements encouraging “pull weeds in your neighborhood green belts and parks. “
F5:
The City of Davis does not have a transparent policy in place regarding the bidding process for the publicly funded contractor supporting the Parks department.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5:
The City of Davis should publicize an annual Measure H spending report detailing expenditures as they specifically benefit the parks and aquatics centers. 4 https://www.cityofdavis.org/city-hall/parks-and-community-services/volunteer-opportunities 6 REQUIRED RESPONSES Pursuant to Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, the County Grand Jury requests responses as follows: The City of Davis Findings F-1, F-2, F-3, F-4, F-5, F-6, Recommendations R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, R-5 7 EXHIBIT A: North Davis Green Belts, taken in Oct 2021 8 North Davis Green Belts, taken in Oct 2021 9 EXHIBIT B: Play Fields in South Davis taken fall 2021 Heavy clover within the fields at Play Fields 10 EXHIBIT C: Mace Ranch taken fall 2021 11 EXHIBIT D: North Star Soccer Fields Fall of 2021 12 North Star Soccer Fields Fall of 2021 13 Photos taken in wintertime 2021 of North Star Soccer Fields 14 EXHIBIT E: North Davis Bike Path taken spring of 2022. 15 16 EXHIBIT F: Measure H 2018 https://www.cityofdavis.org/home/showpublisheddocument/17066/637800193630070000 17 18
F6:
Although the City of Davis has mechanisms in place to promote volunteerism to beautify parks, volunteer opportunities could be better promoted to the public.4
F7:
There is lack of coordination between the Public Works Department and the Parks Department when capital projects within the park system take place. This leads to the lack of re-greenification of Davis parks. RECOMMENDATIONS
Findings & Recommendations
3 findings
F1:
The District lacks a complaint or grievance process to gather and assess information regarding flooding. This failure limits long-term planning to reduce the impact of flooding.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The District, solely or in coordination with County administration, create and implement a procedure to receive and record complaints, grievances, and service requests related to flooding issues. The process should clearly identify the responsible agency.
F2:
The District fails to track complaints and grievances concerning flooding, depriving the public and government decision makers of access to information concerning flooding in Yolo County.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The District document all complaints and outcomes regarding flooding, making them accessible to the public, by September 1, 2022.
F3:
The District’s official mission statement does not include any responsibility for flood control management as required by the District Act, and fails to acknowledge responsibility for floodwater or stormwater control and remediation. RECOMMENDATIONS
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The District revise its mission statement to include flood control responsibilities under the District Act by September 1, 2022. REQUIRED RESPONSES Pursuant to Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, the Grand Jury requires responses as follows: Yolo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Findings F-1, F-2, F-3 and Recommendations R-1, R-2, R-3. Yolo County Board of Supervisors Findings F-1, F-2 and Recommendations R-1, R-2. INVITED RESPONSES Yolo Local Agency Formation Commission (Yolo LAFCo) Finding F-3 and Recommendation R-3. EXHIBIT A Subdivisions (p), (q) and (r) of the District Act reflect the two aspects of the District’s authority regarding water in Yolo County, authorizing both distribution of water for use and control of flood and storm waters: “(p) To construct, purchase, lease or otherwise acquire works and to purchase, lease, appropriate, or otherwise acquire surface waters and water rights, useful or necessary to make use of water for any purposes authorized by this act. “(q) To do any and every lawful act necessary to be done that sufficient water may be available for any present or future beneficial use or uses of the lands or inhabitants within the District, including, but not limited to, the acquisition, storage, and distribution for irrigation, domestic, fire protection, municipal, commercial, industrial, and all other beneficial uses. Water which is surplus to the needs of the lands and inhabitants within the District may be made available for beneficial use outside the District pursuant to rules and regulations prescribed under subdivision (v) of this Section 3. “(r) To control flood and storm waters within the District and the flood and storm waters of streams outside of the District, which flow into the District; to conserve such waters by storage in surface reservoirs, to divert and transport such waters for beneficial uses within the District; to release such waters from surface reservoirs to replenish and augment the supply of waters in natural underground reservoirs and otherwise to reduce the waste of water and to protect life and property from floods within the District.” 6
Findings & Recommendations
3 findings
F1:
The district does not have a published step-by-step guide for parents/guardians seeking educational support services for struggling students, making it difficult for parents/guardians to advocate for a child to obtain the support to which they are legally entitled.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The district create a Parent Handbook for Special Education with the goal of providing a transparent process for parents/guardians and district staff to follow. Provide this document to the grand jury by October 1, 2022, and to families enrolled in the district.
F2:
The most recently available data from the 2018-19 literacy testing at Shirley Rominger Intermediate and the comments in the School Plan for Student Achievement’s Note 2, indicate the district struggles with literacy with their third through fifth grade students.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The district provide a graphic in a publicly accessible office in each school which clearly outlines the steps required to (a) evaluate a child for disabilities and (b) obtain special education services or classroom accommodations for a child by October 1, 2022. 7
F3:
The district has been unable to clarify, in publicly available data, the percentage of students who are underperforming in literacy skills. RECOMMENDATIONS
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The district complete the CAASPP testing for the 2021-22 school year for grades three- five and report these literacy scores to the Grand Jury by October 1, 2022. Additionally, this grand jury recommends an annual reporting of these literacy scores to grand juries through the 2024-25 school year.
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R4:
The district review the English Language Arts student performance data provided in the School Plan for Student Achievement to ensure the information is clear to a lay public and mathematically accurate. REQUIRED RESPONSES Pursuant to Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, the Grand Jury requests responses as follows: From the following individuals: District Superintendent Diana Jimenez Findings F-1, F-2, F-3 and Recommendations R-1, R-2, R-3,
Findings & Recommendations
3 findings
F1:
The Yolo County Elections Office is an exemplary administrator and guardian of our democratic electoral mechanism. Its employees are dedicated to the provision of a comprehensive and transparent mechanism for the citizens of our country to participate in elections.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
Yolo County Elections Office should prepare a departmental summary of an emergency response plan that is appropriate to release to the public by October 1, 2022. COMMENDATION Yolo County Elections Office deserves congratulations for its efforts at keeping our democracy safe from potential fraud using state-of-the-art technology and practices. REQUIRED RESPONSES Pursuant to Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05 the Grand Jury requests responses from the Yolo County Registrar of Voters for Finding F-3 and Recommendation R-1. 4
F2:
We have found no evidence of systemic or other significant fraud in our county elections since at least 2001.
F3:
The Yolo County Elections Office has not published a departmental emergency response plan, as the YCGJ 2019-20 had recommended. RECOMMENDATION
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
4 findings
F1:
Management failed to conduct an adequate background check and failed to properly vet the SOTC to ensure all qualifications for the position were met, as specified by the City of West Sacramento’s personnel rules.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The City of West Sacramento should update the personnel rules to guide management to conduct more thorough background checks of an applicant’s work history and implement a vetting process to ensure the candidate selected for hire is fully qualified for the position.
F2:
Management failed to verify timely completion of certifications necessary for the SOTC to independently inspect construction projects to which the SOTC was assigned during the SOTC’s employment.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The City of West Sacramento should update the personnel rules to require that the building department management conduct follow-up annual reviews of professional licenses, certifications and training requirements, to ensure employees are current with requirements for their positions.
F3:
For over two years, supervisory and management staff failed to address the pattern of community complaints regarding the SOTC’s work.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3:
The City of West Sacramento should ensure that supervisory and management staff adhere to the employee complaint policy and act to resolve any verbal or formal complaints filed by staff.
F4:
The grand jury was not given access to the HR file of the SOTC or to the electronic tracking system, Acela, despite formal and lawful grand jury requests. RECOMMENDATIONS
Related Recommendations (1)
R4:
The City of West Sacramento should ensure that management staff are trained in the HR processes when a staff member lodges a complaint against another City of West Sacramento employee.
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R5:
The City of West Sacramento should consider an independent audit of the SOTC’s work to ensure the safety and compliance of projects inspected by the SOTC for the safety of the public. REQUIRED RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code Section (PC) 933 and PC §933.05: - The City Council of West Sacramento is requested to respond to Findings F-1, F-2, F-3 and F-4 and R-1, R-2, R-3, and R-4, and R-5 by October 1, 2022. 5
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
4 findings
F1:
Management failed to conduct an adequate background check and failed to properly vet the SOTC to ensure all qualifications for the position were met, as specified by the City of West Sacramento’s personnel rules.
F2:
Management failed to verify timely completion of certifications necessary for the SOTC to independently inspect construction projects to which the SOTC was assigned during the SOTC’s employment.
F3:
For over two years, supervisory and management staff failed to address the pattern of community complaints regarding the SOTC’s work.
F4:
The grand jury was not given access to the HR file of the SOTC or to the electronic tracking system, Acela, despite formal and lawful grand jury requests. INSPECTING THE INSPECTORS: Hiring practices at City of West Sacramento, Building Division Page | 72 RECOMMENDATIONS
Additional Recommendations
5
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
The City of West Sacramento should update the personnel rules to guide management to conduct more thorough background checks of an applicant’s work history and implement a vetting process to ensure the candidate selected for hire is fully qualified for the position.
R2:
The City of West Sacramento should update the personnel rules to require that the building department management conduct follow-up annual reviews of professional licenses, certifications and training requirements, to ensure employees are current with requirements for their positions.
R3:
The City of West Sacramento should ensure that supervisory and management staff adhere to the employee complaint policy and act to resolve any verbal or formal complaints filed by staff.
R4:
The City of West Sacramento should ensure that management staff are trained in the HR processes when a staff member lodges a complaint against another City of West Sacramento employee.
R5:
The City of West Sacramento should consider an independent audit of the SOTC’s work to ensure the safety and compliance of projects inspected by the SOTC for the safety of the public. REQUIRED RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code Section (PC) 933 and PC §933.05: - The City Council of West Sacramento is requested to respond to Findings F-1, F-2, F-3 and F-4 and R-1, R-2, R-3, and R-4, and R-5 by October 1, 2022.
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
2 findings
F1:
The current tracking system for inmate grievances (paper, pens) does not lend itself to analysis of the dispositions, tracking or data searching to make reports, discern trends or proactively identify areas of concern.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1:
The grand jury recommends that the YCSO utilize computer programming already procured and paid for by Yolo County, Microsoft Excel, to establish a simple computerized grievance system. If necessary, the grand jury recommends that the YCSO request funding from the County Board of Supervisors to fund a basic computerized grievance system. This should be completed by December 31, 2022.
F2:
There are inadequate pre-release planning and resources available for inmates pending release. RECOMMENDATIONS 2 https://www.yolocounty.org/home/showpublisheddocument/65272/637414760246630000; accessed 04/23/2022 5
Related Recommendations (1)
R2:
The YCSO should develop a procedure and train staff to use the computerized grievance tracking system by December 31, 2022.
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R3:
The YCSO should prioritize the hiring of a full-time program coordinator to better support inmates in preparing for their release back into our communities, by December 31, 2022. COMMENDATIONS It should be noted that the grand jury was not made aware of any formal complaints from the public regarding the MDC. REQUIRED RESPONSES Pursuant to California Penal Code Section 933.05, the YCGJ requests a response from the Yolo County Sheriff to Recommendations R-1 through R-3 by October 1, 2022. EXHIBIT A: BSCC approval to the Yolo County Sherriff’s Office to continue to suspend standards at the MDC, April 4, 2022. EXHIBIT B: Yolo County Sheriff’s Office’s Detention Division Policy Manual 8 9 10 EXHIBIT C: Copy of Grievance Log in 2021 11