Yuba County Grand Jury
2008-2009
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
4 findings
F1:
The surgery and recovery room are not utilized as originally intended resulting in lost revenue to the county. In addition, not having a clinic in the county requires the community members to seek lower-cost services in overbooked out-of-county locations.
F2:
Food and Agriculture Code § 31108 requires an extended holding period for animals, above and beyond the current county ordinance requirements, with exception in the case of increased business hours (e.g. 7:00 p.m. one weekday).
F3:
In the last year there have been more animals found abandoned due to foreclosures in the area, as well as people not being able to afford continued care for their animals.
F4:
The county lost approximately $49,000 in dog licensing revenue due to nearly half of the pet owners not responding to the ACS’ letters.
Additional Recommendations
3
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
Establish a contract with a veterinarian to be put on retainer or hire part-time staff. This would generate revenue for the county by administering vaccines, spaying and neutering animals and meet the new requirements outlined in the “Hayden Law”.
R2:
The hours need to be extended at least one weekday to 7:00 p.m. to meet the “Hayden Law’s” intent that “Shelters should be open during hours that permit working pet owners to redeem pets during nonworking hours”. Further research would be required in order to find the best solution to meet the intent of the law.
R4:
Establish a procedure to increase the payments for dog licenses, including but not limited to, visits from officers to the homes. The collection of the fees would help in the funding of a staff position for ACS. PASSED and ADOPTED by the Yuba County Grand Jury on May 12, 2009
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
4 findings
F1:
Based on the review of documents the policies and procedures currently in place in the CED adequately manage and monitor each public nuisance complaint from inception to resolution.
F2:
The nature of public nuisance abatement is ongoing and fluid. As existing complaints are resolved new complaints are being logged and tracked.
F3:
The CED’s budget for code enforcement is from the General Fund and is based upon abatement fees. This restricts the number of personnel assigned to code enforcement and in turn restricts the ability of the Officers to resolve complaints during times of increased filings, and track complaints moving through the Judicial and Administrative Processes.
F4:
Code Enforcement is “response driven” as per the policy of the Board of Supervisors; there is no proactive approach to public nuisance abatement in Yuba County.
Additional Recommendations
2
Not linked to specific findings.
R3:
The Board of Supervisors should revisit the operating budget for the CED in order to increase the number of Code Enforcement Officers. This will enhance the ability of the CED “to eliminate environments that create or support public health or safety hazards as well as promote a minimum standard of living” for the citizens of Yuba County. Further, augmenting the number of Code Enforcement Officers would lead to an increase in the number of abatements resolved and abatement fees collected.
R4:
“Response driven” public nuisance abatement may not be the best model for a sparsely populated, largely rural county such as Yuba. It is recommended that the Board of Supervisors revisit this policy for improving the purpose and mission effectiveness of the Code Enforcement Department. PASSED and ADOPTED by the Yuba County Grand Jury on June 2, 2009 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report June 25, 2009
Findings & Recommendations
3 findings
F1:
The complaint process has improved and follows a chain of command for greater accountability.
F2:
The future Residential Construction Guide will be a useful and necessary tool for do-it- yourselfers and the professional builders in Yuba County.
F3:
The Community Development and Services Agency continues to improve both customer relations and complaint resolution in the Building Department.
Additional Recommendations
4
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
from the Final Report reads as follows: “The building department needs to build a friendly approachable reputation, especially with construction professionals. “
R2:
The Community Development and Services Agency needs to complete, post and publicize the Residential Construction Guide as soon as possible. Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report June 25, 2009
R3:
The Community Development and Services Agency should take the lessons learned with the streamlined complaint process in the Building Department and extend them throughout the Agency. PASSED and ADOPTED by the Yuba County Grand Jury on June 2, 2009
R5:
from the Final Report reads as follows: “The building department needs to formalize a complaint process. Complaints and their solutions should be documented. Community Development and Services management should periodically review the complaint/solution database to determine that complaints are being resolved. Customers of the building department need to be made aware that such a system exists and that there will be no reprisals for using it.”
Findings & Recommendations
4 findings
F1:
The chemicals used in the laundry are in large buckets next to one of the washers and not secured.
F2:
The wards working in the laundry are not trained in exposure control or offered hepatitis B vaccinations as required by OSHA Regulation (29 CFR, § 1910.1030).
F3:
Some of the holding area doors are scratched and are difficult to lock. The carpet is torn, which could result in injuries. The windows in the cells have paper stuffed into the holes around them and they are scratched with gang affiliations.
F4:
The Exposure Control Plan is outdated with the last revision being completed in September 2001. The OSHA Regulation (29 CFR, § 1910.1030) requires that the Exposure Control Plan be reviewed on an annual basis.
Additional Recommendations
4
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
Establish a caged area to lock the chemicals out of reach and to restrict access to the dangerous chemicals.
R2:
Offer the laundry workers hepatitis B vaccinations in accordance with OSHA Regulation (29 CFR, § 1910.1030),
R3:
Replace and repair as necessary.
R4:
Update the Exposure Control Plan and establish a procedure to ensure the plan is reviewed on an annual basis. PASSED and ADOPTED by the Yuba County Grand Jury on May 26, 2009
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
1 findings
F1:
While proper review and approval by the DSA of the location of the portables may have been obtained, the Committee has safety concerns. An on-site visit to the location made evident that there is probable risk that a speeding vehicle or heavy equipment hauler could collide with the classroom buildings. The close proximity of these portables to three avenues of traffic increases those odds and the possibility of injuries or death makes this risk unacceptable.
Additional Recommendations
1
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
Consider placing the portable classrooms in a safer location. PASSED and ADOPTED by the Yuba County Grand Jury on June 12, 2009
Findings & Recommendations
3 findings
F1:
Employee information, personal financial institution details, was disseminated inadvertently to the general public with no knowledge or consent of the employees. After the fact, OPUD management did inform the employees, in writing, of the dissemination of the information. The Grand Jury commends OPUD management for responding quickly to avert a potentially serious problem.
F2:
The OPUD does not have written policies and procedures for handling, storage and distribution of confidential information.
F3:
The accounting positions are considered sensitive positions; however, the employees are not required to sign agreements for the handling of confidential information.
Additional Recommendations
2
Not linked to specific findings.
R2:
The OPUD should develop and maintain written procedures for handling, storage and distribution of confidential information. The OPUD must ensure all employees are trained in these procedures and understand the applicability of these procedures to their respective job duties and responsibilities.
R3:
Update Job Description/Job Duty statements with confidential information requirements. Employees with access to “sensitive” information should be bonded and/or sign an agreement acknowledging adherence to procedures of handling confidential information. PASSED and ADOPTED by the Yuba County Grand Jury on May 5, 2009
Findings & Recommendations
5 findings
F1:
The current RHCSD Board of Directors has not produced a budget for either 2007-2008 or for the 2008-2009 years as required by California Government Code § 61110.
F2:
Based on previous Financial Statements reviewed no payroll expenses were found. Therefore, it is assumed all “employees” of RHCSD are outside contractors. Outside contractors hired by the RHCSD did not receive their copies of IRS form 1099 in a timely manner for the years of 2007 and 2008. This lack of attention may have caused undue tax penalties to some contractors and for the RHCSD.
F3:
Multiple violations, according to California Government Code § 61047, were found when reviewing stipend payments to some past and current board members. These stipend payments only added to the already overburdened costs to the RHCSD.
F4:
California Government Code §§ 53234 and 53235.1 require ethics training, if the local agency provides any type of compensation, salary or stipend to those officials. Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report June 25, 2009
F5:
The dissolution of the RHCSD is being considered by the County and LAFCO. The County is in the process of determining the liability of the bonds for which the RHCSD has administrative responsibilities.
Additional Recommendations
5
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
The RHCSD Board of Directors must establish a budget for the coming year as required by California Government Code § 61110.
R2:
Work with the RHCSD accounting firm to ensure timely distribution of IRS Form 1099 for contractors as required by law.
R3:
Audit previous stipend payments and require reimbursement to RHCSD for those payments which did not meet the requirements of the law. Establish a procedure to review stipend requests for payment that will conform to the law.
R4:
Establish a procedure to review ethics training and ensure all board members have the training available per California Government Code §§ 53234 and 53235.1. There is an on-line course available at no charge through the State and classes are also available through other training agencies.
R5:
The Committee concurs with the County and LAFCO that RHCSD should be dissolved and its various contracts and obligations transferred to appropriate entities. PASSED and ADOPTED by the Yuba County Grand Jury on May 26, 2009
Findings & Recommendations
3 findings
F1:
The updated version of the Health and Human Services Department’s Strategic Plan is incomplete. The Plan does not provide clear objectives and strategies to build an action plan for improvement.
F2:
The C-IV system is web-based and more efficient than ISAWS, which will no longer be supported by the State after 2010. Yuba County is expected to implement C-IV in June 2010.
F3:
The 2007 Children’s Report Card was very informative and provided crucial information and positive insight of the children of Yuba County. The YCCC intended the report to be an annual publication but chose not to provide a report for 2008.
Additional Recommendations
2
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
Establish a clear Strategic Plan with reachable objectives and strategies to implement an action plan, then implement the Plan.
R3:
The HHSD provided critical input to the Children’s Report Card and if the YCCC does not continue to provide the report, the HHSD should establish a similar report annually or at least every other year. PASSED and ADOPTED by the Yuba County Grand Jury on June 2, 2009 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report June 25, 2009
Quick View
Full Details →
Findings & Recommendations
5 findings
F1:
The Exposure Control Plan is outdated with the last revision being completed in September 2001. The OSHA Regulation (29 CFR, § 1910.1030) requires that the Exposure Control Plan be reviewed on an annual basis.
F2:
Proper procedures for personnel (staff and inmates) working in the laundry facility are not being followed. Training of inmates working in this area is not adequate. a. Laundry inmate workers were found to be eating in the laundry room. b. Laundry inmate workers were not wearing gloves or aprons (though they were available) while working in the laundry. c. Inmates were locked in the laundry room while working. d. Could not determine if inmates were offered hepatitis B vaccinations as required by OSHA Regulation (29 CFR, § 1910.1030) and Cal OSHA (Title 8, § 5193.)
F3:
Female inmates are not offered vocational training in electrical or carpentry courses and the male inmates are not offered life-skills training.
F4:
The laundry area was built for a smaller jail. Though it meets CCR Title 15 requirements, it requires extended shifts to ensure clean laundry is provided to all inmates.
F5:
The computer system in the control room is approximately fourteen years old, but is currently working adequately. In terms of technology’s exponential improvements over the past decade, this system is outdated but functional.
Additional Recommendations
5
Not linked to specific findings.
R1:
Update the Exposure Control Plan and establish a procedure to ensure the plan is reviewed on an annual basis. Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report June 25, 2009
R2:
Provide training to inmate workers for exposure situations. The laundry personnel need to be offered hepatitis B vaccinations in accordance OSHA Regulation (29 CFR, § 1910.1030),
R3:
Establish a method to offer the same training to all inmates.
R4:
Establish a plan to replace or increase the size of the laundry to maintain the CCR Title 15 requirements as well as the needs of the inmates.
R5:
The county needs to continue to upgrade software as available, but needs to plan ahead for replacement of the system within the next five years. Commendation: The Sheriff’s Department has developed a comprehensive strategic plan that has the ability to track past accomplishments and setbacks and for continuing to plan for and enact departmental improvements. PASSED and ADOPTED by the Yuba County Grand Jury on May 19 2009 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report June 25, 2009