Gran Jurado del Condado de Yuba
2014-2015
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
5 hallazgos
F1:
The 2013-2014 Grand Jury found that there was “no formal accident response plan for the Yuba County Airport.” 2014-2015 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report Yuba County Airport Safety The Yuba County Administrative Services Director and the Yuba County Airport Manager responded to the finding: “Disagree. There is a posted ‘in an emergency’ placard in every hangar to call 911 in an emergency, and a plan filed with all emergency responders in the area (including the FAA and the Yuba County Sheriff).” The Yuba County Board of Supervisors responded to the same finding: “The Board of Supervisors disagrees with this finding. Plans are on file with local emergency responders, particularly fire.” The 2014-2015 Grand Jury interviewed the Yuba County Airport primary and secondary fire responders, and the Yuba County Office of Emergency Services. All three agencies stated that there is no formal accident response plan for the Yuba County Airport.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R1:
The 2014-2015 Grand Jury recommends the Yuba County Board of Supervisors immediately directs the Yuba County Office of Emergency Services (OES) develop a formal accident response plan in coordination with all local emergency responders for the Yuba County Airport. (See F1)
F2:
The 2013-2014 Grand Jury found that there was “no planned Yuba County Airport related exercises with local emergency responders.” The Yuba County Administrative Services Director and the Yuba County Airport Manager responded: “The airport and the local jurisdictions (primarily fire) do conduct emergency response drills and exercises at the airport at various times of the year. And Administrative Services has been working with the Office of Emergency Services to schedule multi-jurisdictional emergency response exercises.” The Yuba County Board of Supervisors responded to the same finding: “In addition, Yuba County Emergency Services is planning an emergency response exercise for the Airport during the current fiscal year.” The 2014-2015 Grand Jury interviewed the Yuba County Airport primary and secondary fire responders, and the Yuba County Office of Emergency Services. All three agencies stated that there have been no planned airport response drills or exercises with the Yuba County Airport for the last several years. In October, 2014-2015 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report Yuba County Airport Safety 2014, a multi-jurisdictional emergency Slow Rise Flood response exercise was conducted; however, it was not directed to the Yuba County Airport emergency response capability.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R2:
The 2014-2015 Grand Jury recommends the Yuba County Board of Supervisors immediately directs local districts (primarily fire) conduct emergency response drills and exercises in coordination with Yuba County Airport management at the Yuba County Airport. The Grand Jury also recommends the Yuba County Board of Supervisors immediately directs the Yuba County OES include the Yuba County Airport in all multi-jurisdictional emergency response exercises. (See F2) 2014-2015 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report
F3:
The Yuba County Administrative Services Director and the Yuba County Airport Manager responded to a 2013-2014 finding that: “There is a posted ‘in an emergency’ placard in every hangar to call 911 in an emergency.” The 2014-2015 Grand Jury did locate the “in an emergency” checklist placard at the Yuba County Airport (See Figure 1). The Grand Jury, however, found it contained deficiencies: Phone numbers are not listed for the Airport Manager or the Airport Lead maintenance worker. There is no date listed on the checklist to indicate when it was last reviewed or updated. There is no point of contact to notify if there are any issues with the checklist. The checklist does not define the acronyms FAA, NOTAM, or ELT. The checklist does not identify who is to notify the FAA or how. 2014-2015 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report Yuba County Airport Safety Figure 1. Yuba County Airport Emergency Procedures Checklist
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R3:
The Grand Jury recommends the Yuba County Airport Manager immediately update the “in an emergency” checklist posted at the airport to include: (See F3) Phone numbers listed for the Airport Manager and the Airport Lead maintenance worker. A date listed to indicate when it was last reviewed and updated. A listed point of contact to notify if there are any issues with the checklist. Spell out the acronyms FAA, NOTAM, and ELT. Indicate who will notify the FAA.
F4:
The 2013-2014 Grand Jury recommended “the ultra-lights be moved to the west side of runway 14/32 where safer operations with other aircraft at the airport would be improved.” 2014-2015 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report Yuba County Airport Safety The Yuba County Administrative Services Director and the Yuba County Airport Manager responded: “This recommendation will not be implemented. This would require ultralight flyers to relocate onto actual airport property which would cause greater potential for conflict with aircraft, and would also put them in conflict with County ordinance which prohibits their use on actual airport operational land.” The Yuba County Board of Supervisors responded to the same finding: “This recommendation will not be implemented. This would require ultralight flyers to relocate onto actual property which would cause greater potential for conflict with aircraft, and would also put them in conflict with County ordinance which prohibits their use on actual airport operational land.” County of Yuba Ordinance Chapter 2.110.130 AIRPORT RULES AND REGULATIONS, Adopted December 16, 2008 states, “…No motorless aircraft or ultralight vehicles as defined by FAR (Federal Aviation Regulations) Part 103 (http://www.ultralighthomepage.com/CFR.part103.html) may land or take off at the Airport without prior permission of the Airport Manager…” (See Figure 2) 2014-2015 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report Yuba County Airport Safety Figure 2. Sign located at main entrance at Yuba County Airport. The Grand Jury is puzzled why the Airport Management has not exercised the authority provided in the aforementioned ordinance to relocate the ultralight operations to a safer, more suitable location. Pilots interviewed by the Grand Jury voiced safety concerns regarding the in- flight conflicts between ultralights and other aircraft operating at the Yuba County Airport. Pilots stated they have observed ultralights crossing over the runways and approach/departure zones. Ultralights operate at a much slower speed, have a much slower maneuvering response time, and because of their small size, are very difficult to see. It was reported to the 2014-2015 Grand Jury that most ultra-light activity occurs along the Feather River which is west of the Yuba County Airport. The interview with an FAA representative confirmed that moving ultralight activities west of runway 14/32 would eliminate their potential runway crossings and greatly improve the safety of ultralight operations and other aircraft operating at Yuba County Airport. 2014-2015 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report Yuba County Airport Safety
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R4:
The 2014-2015 Grand Jury recommends the Yuba County Board of Supervisors direct airport management to immediately move ultralight operations to an area west of runway 14/32, to a safer and more suitable location. (See F4)
F5:
The 2013-2014 Grand Jury recommended “The Administrative Services Director revise and update the Airport Manager Job Description to reflect current duties and responsibilities.” The Yuba County Administrative Services Director and the Yuba County Airport Manager responded: “This recommendation will be implemented. The Administrative Services Director will coordinate with the Director of Human Resources to review the class specification for the Airport Manager and determine if any updates are needed. This will be done within 30 days.” The Yuba County Board of Supervisors responded to the same finding: “This recommendation will be implemented by requesting a review of the job specifications immediately with the intent to complete the review by the end of the current fiscal year.” The 2014-2015 Grand Jury conducted an interview with the Yuba County administrativeServices Director on March 26, 2015. The Airport Manager’s class specification review (job description), as of that date, was still not complete. The Yuba County Administrative Services Director is in violation of Penal Code §933.05 (b)(2).
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R5:
The Grand Jury recommends the Yuba County Board of Supervisors directs the Yuba County Administrative Services Director to ensure the Yuba County Airport Manager’s job specification review (job description) is complete, as represented, by the end of the 2014-2015 fiscal year. (See F5) Request for Responses: Pursuant to Penal Code §933.05, the Grand Jury requests responses as follows: Yuba County Board of Supervisors (F1, F2, F4, F5, R1, R2, R4, R5) Yuba County Administrative Services Director (F3, F5, R3, R5) Yuba County Airport Manager (F3, R3) The governing bodies indicated above should be aware that the comment or response of the governing body must be conducted in accordance with Penal Code §933(c) and subject to the notice, agenda and open meeting requirements of the Brown Act.
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
10 hallazgos
F1:
Longer periods of incarceration, due to the Realignment transfer of state prisoners to local facilities (Public Safety Realignment, 2013: http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/realignment/) and the extended stay of ICE prisoners (Your Complete Guide to Obama’s Immigration Executive Action, web site: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/11/19/your-complete- guide-to-obamas-immigration-order/#economy) , have increased the medical and mental health needs of inmates. The Mental Health Professional (psychiatrist) although available by phone, is on site only one day per week mainly to evaluate incoming inmates and update prescriptions. There are no non-emergency or on- going mental health services available to the inmates. Inmates diagnosed as needing treatment at a state mental hospital wait for months to transfer. Suicidal inmates can stay in padded cells, with little or no comforts, for weeks. The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation advised: “Where there are options, however, it is recommended that there be a limit to the length of time an inmate can be housed in a safety cell. Title 15 requires medical and mental health checks and regular review by a watch commander for retention in a safety cell. Additionally several large counties have established internal policies in this regard, saying that after 24 hours, the person must be removed either through a 5150 process or by placement somewhere else in the jail. Of course, extensive housing in a safety cell or sobering cell should be avoided to the greatest extent possible for mentally ill inmates as well as for all others.” (Jails and Mentally Ill: Issues and Analysis, a briefing paper developed by The California Corrections Standards Authority (CSA), pg. 26. http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/COMIO/docs/MENTALLY_ILL_IN_JAI LS_PAPER.pdf ) 2014-2015 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report Yuba County Jail Additionally a Human Rights Watch Report states: “Yet most independent psychiatric experts, and even correctional mental health staff, believe that prolonged confinement in conditions of social isolation, idleness, and reduced mental stimulation is psychologically destructive. How destructive depends on each prisoner’s prior psychological strengths and weaknesses, the extent of the social isolation imposed, the absence of activities and stimulation, and the duration of confinement.” (Human Rights Watch report - Ill Equipped: U.S. Prisons and Offenders with Mental Illness, §VII paragraph http://www.hrw.org/reports/2003/usa1003/1.htm) Female inmates have a higher rate of mental health problems than the males: 75% of female inmates v. 63% of male inmates (Mental Health Problems of Prison and Jail Inmates, Highlights, U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report, from: http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/mhppji.pdf).
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R1:
The Yuba County Jail Commander request and the Board of Supervisors approve a budget for a full-time licensed mental health counselor, within the next budget cycle. (See F1)
F2:
As reported by the substance abuse counselor, in-house support groups, which were beneficial to inmates’ mental health, were suspended two years ago, and there are limited funds for referring released inmates to recovery programs.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R2:
Reinstate and expand support groups. Support staff use creative means of financing to include grant applications for funds to support in-house groups and inmates in programs when they are released. (See F2) 2014-2015 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report
F3:
The Consent Decree (Consent Decree, 1978; Derril Hedrick, et al. v James Grant, et al., US District Court for the Eastern District of California, CIVIL S-76-162 TJM) mandates a licensed Registered Nurse (RN) on site at least 15 hours per week; however, there is not a RN currently on staff. This is a violation of the Consent Decree §V A1, pg. 11. The need for a RN is even more vital with the extended stays caused by Realignment (Realignment – The Bottom Line by Board of State and Community Corrections, 2013, http://www.bscc.ca.gov/s_californiapublicsafetyrealignment.php) as well as the change in housing the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainees (Your Complete Guide to Obama’s Immigration Executive Action, http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/11/19/your-complete- guide-to-obamas-immigration-order/#economy). 2014-2015 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report Yuba County Jail The Executive Assistant in medical services advised that YCJ are considering several persons that have Physician Assistant (PA) credentials which will more than meet the requirement. However, a PA may not necessarily have nursing experience (A Patients Guide to the Physician Assistant, http://www.pg2pa.org/PA_NP.html); therefore, unless the PA also has RN certification, the PA will not satisfy the mandate listed in the Consent Decree for a RN. YCJ is also considering hiring a Nurse Practitioner, which would more than meet the requirements of the Consent Decree.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R3:
Hire a full-time Registered Nurse or a full-time Nurse Practitioner for the medical unit to be on the job no later than October 15, 2015. This will bring the Jail into compliance with the Consent Decree (1978). (See F3)
F4:
Several of the Medical Assistants (MA) and one contracted crisis counselor do not have the appropriate credentials and is in violation of Yuba County Human Resources Job Classification for Medical Assistants.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R4:
The Sheriff shall uphold the mandates of the Yuba County Human Resources regulations in regards to job classification requirements by supporting and facilitating the Medical Assistants to obtain and maintain their MA credentials. Proper certification is to be in effect by June 30, 2016. (See F4)
F5:
The Executive Assistant in medical services does not have a degree, although his job description requires a two-year degree (Job Classification: Executive Assistant, Human Resources Department of Yuba County; http://www.co.yuba.ca.us/departments/personnel/documents/Specifications/E/Exe cutive%20Assistant%20December%202013.pdf). There is a disparity between the Consent Decree (1978), the Yuba County Human Resources and the Yuba County Jail policies in regards to the licensing/credentialing requirements.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R5:
The Sheriff shall uphold the Yuba County Human Resources regulations in regards to job classification requirements for the position of Executive Assistant and support the Executive Assistant in medical services to obtain the minimum two-year college degree by June 30, 2016. (See F5)
F6:
The medical unit staff does not participate in fire drills, nor understand the procedure for emergency evacuation. The supervisor conducting the tour was unable to explain the procedure to the Grand Jury members on the tour.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R6:
For the safety of all YCJ staff and personnel, an immediate review and implementation of all fire drill procedures, with an emphasis on making sure all staff members in the medical unit of the facility are well-informed about evacuation. (See F6)
F7:
A copy of the Consent Decree has not been provided to the Grand Jury for an undetermined number of years, and was not provided to this year’s Grand Jury until the Grand Jury discovered the omission through a news report. This is in violation of the Consent Decree, §XV, Paragraph 4, pg. 49. The Consent Decree §XV (1978) holds the Law Enforcement Committee of each Grand Jury as responsible for monitoring jail compliance of the Consent Decree. There has been a failure of the parties to the Consent Decree to provide the Grand Jury with a copy of the Consent Decree as mandated by the Consent Decree. 2014-2015 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report Yuba County Jail The Grand Jury was unable to find a recent record of prior Grand Juries having been informed of the Consent Decree. “The members of the Yuba County Grand Jury who serve on the Court and Law Enforcement Committee shall be provided each year with a copy of the Consent Decree so that they will know the minimum legal standards for conditions of confinement in the Jail. The Grand Jury shall be requested to do an analysis of whether the Jail is in conformity with all provisions of the Consent Decree and include that analysis in its yearly report.” (Consent Decree, 1978; Derril Hedrick, et al. v. James Grant, et al., US District Court for the Eastern District of California, CIVIL S- 76-162 TJM §XV, paragraph 4, pg. 49)
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R7:
The Yuba County Board of Supervisors, the County Counsel and the Sheriff shall determine and name which agency will be responsible for delivering the Consent Decree to the Foreperson of the Grand Jury in the future. The Consent Decree will be provided to the new Grand Jury, along with a report as to how the Jail is complying with the conditions listed in the Consent Decree (1978). The Consent Decree and the report of compliance will be provided by July 30th of each year to the Grand Jury Foreperson. (See F7)
F8:
The medical unit is housed in cramped quarters below street level as observed during the Grand Jury YCJ tour. Until the upstairs administrative staff is moved to a remodeled facility expansion plans for the medical unit are on hold.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R8:
Because the expansion of the medical unit quarters does not involve making use of any of the upstairs administrative space to be vacated, remodeling of the nearby storage area should be planned and completed by June 30, 2016. (See F8)
F9:
As observed during the Grand Jury’s tours of the jail, the physical layout of the jail raises safety issues for the staff and the inmates, most notably the section built in 1962 known by staff and inmates as the “dungeon”.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R9:
It is recommended that the Sheriff and the Board of Supervisors explore all available federal, state, county, and grant funding sources to build a new facility or upgrade the 1962 portion of the facility utilizing optimum architectural design for the safety and well-being of staff and inmates. This will assist the Correctional Officers in managing inmates and to meet the needs of the growing inmate population. (See F9)
F10:
A copy of a summary of the Consent Decree is provided to the inmates upon booking; however, it is not identified as a “Consent Decree”, as a mandate for the jail to follow, nor does it explain that a full copy can be obtained in writing (Yuba County Inmate Handbook). The Consent Decree (1978) states it is to be posted in the ‘Libraries and the Women’s Tank’. The Undersheriff advised that the Consent Decree is posted in the ‘Law Library’ and that the information is available in the Inmate Handbook.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R10:
The Yuba County Inmate Handbook is to be immediately corrected by the Sheriff to identify the Consent Decree as a legally enforceable Judgement, and that a copy of which can be obtained upon request. The Sheriff shall order copies of the Consent Decree to be posted immediately in the ‘Libraries and the Women’s Tank’. (See F10) 2014-2015 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
3 hallazgos
F1:
The surveillance system is inadequate to handle the security for Juvenile Hall. The 2010-2011 Grand Jury Report stated: “Members of the Grand Jury were told by Juvenile Hall’s interim superintendent that the surveillance system was ‘inadequate’. The current system has no recording capability, and there is a need for additional cameras to cover several high security/high liability areas of the property.” (http://www.yubacourts.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/GrandJury/GJR 2010.PDF) The 2011-2012, 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 Grand Juries also found the surveillance system to be inadequate. The Probation Office and the Yuba County Board of Supervisors agreed with these findings. (http://www.yubacourts.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/GrandJury/GJR2012.PDF; http://www.yubacourts.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/GrandJury/GJR2013Resp.pdf; http://www.yubacourts.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/GrandJury/GJR2014Resp.pdf) All three Grand Jury reports recommended that the system be updated. Two responses advised that the cost was being examined and the third response advised that it was not cost effective at this time. As of this date the surveillance system has been ‘inadequate’ for more than five years and this security deficiency is not expected to be corrected for another three years, minimum. This security surveillance system does not have recording capability and too few cameras to cover several high security and high liability areas.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R1:
The Yuba County Board of Supervisors approves funds to upgrade the presently inadequate surveillance cameras to provide broader security. Although funding has been allocated for a new facility, it is not expected to be occupied for a minimum of three years. For the safety of the juvenile inmates, this deficiency must be corrected immediately. Further recommend that the Chief Probation Officer immediately, upon approval of funding by the Board of Supervisors, should direct installation of needed cameras. (See F1)
F2:
Staffing levels remain low which can create problems in the supervision of the juveniles when staff members take time off due to vacation or illness, however extra help employees are available to reduce overtime. The recommendation of the 2013-2014 Grand Jury has not been met.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R2:
The Chief Probation Officer and the Facility Director immediately hire additional staff. (See F2)
F3:
The 2014-2015 Grand Jury found insulation on a wall in the indoor recreation area continues to be in disrepair. No action has been taken to remedy this same finding from previous Grand Jury Reports. 2014-2015 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report Yuba County Juvenile Facilities The 2011-2012 Grand Jury found: “Members of the Grand Jury noted that there was damage to the exposed insulation within the indoor recreation area of the Camp Singer building. This building also houses classrooms, laundry facilities, as well as woodworking and construction classes.” (http://www.yubacourts.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/GrandJury/GJR 2012Resp.pdf ) The 2012-2013 Grand Jury found that the facility was deteriorating due to inadequate funding and recommended that funding be allocated for maintenance. The Program Manager agreed and advised that there are many costly repairs and maintenance for the facility and that they were looking into possible State funding (http://www.yubacourts.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/GrandJury/GJR2013Resp.pdf).
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R3:
Repair the insulation in the indoor recreation area. (See F3) Commendations: C1. The staff of both juvenile facilities were observed during the site visit showing a caring manner in which they interact with juveniles encouraging the youths to express themselves in socially acceptable ways. The staff was also observed guiding the juveniles to view themselves as worthy and capable. C2. Camp Singer has implemented highly admirable enrichment programs. Vocational programs include basic tool knowledge, general construction techniques, and basic electrical. There also is a woodworking/furniture building class as well as computerized drafting and engineering training. 2014-2015 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
7 hallazgos
F1:
In October, 2014, current Grand Jury members observed a portion of the Operation Slow Rise training exercise. The Office of Emergency Services (OES) operates in a proactive, professional, and well-organized fashion. OES leads the effort in coordinating emergency responses in Yuba County; whether it is flood, fire, traffic, rail, chemical, or any other like disaster. (www.co.yuba.ca.us/Departments/OES/)
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R1:
The County Office of Emergency Services should continue with their proactive, professional, and well-organized approach to training and coordination of emergency service activities. (See F1)
F2:
The City of Marysville does not have an approved Multi-Hazard Plan. The city’s draft of the Multi-Hazard Plan has been submitted to the City Manager’s office for review and will be subsequently submitted to the Marysville City Council for adoption.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R2:
The Marysville City Council complete and formally adopt their Multi-Hazard Plan and continue working proactively with the County Office of Emergency Services. (See F2)
F3:
The Emergency Operations Center located at the County Government Center, (915 8th Street, Marysville, CA) is convenient for training given the number of county employees that participate in the training exercises. However, its physical location is at-risk due to its close proximity to an active railroad line, inter- regional State Highway 20, and within the confines of the Marysville levee system.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R3:
The Yuba County OES and the Board of Supervisors give careful consideration to relocating the Emergency Operations Center to a location with less exposure to disruptions impacting the ability to respond to a disastrous event, should one occur, on the adjacent railroad line, State Highway 20, or breach in the Marysville levee system. (See F3) Commendation: C1. The Grand Jury appreciates the hard work and focus of the Yuba County OES and the City of Marysville and acknowledges their emphasis on the wellbeing and safety of the citizenry of Yuba County in the event of a natural disaster or other life threatening emergency. The Grand Jury appreciates and recognizes the positive attitude, outlook, and openness of the Marysville City Manager and the Chief of Police. Request for Responses: Pursuant to Penal Code §933.05, the Grand Jury requests responses as follows: From the following governing bodies: County Administrator (F3, R3) OES Manager (F3, R3) City Manager, City of Marysville (F2, F4, R2) Chairman, Yuba County Board of Supervisors (F1, F3, R1, R3)
F4:
The City of Marysville has made significant progress in addressing the concerns of the 2011-2012 Grand Jury. City Management has been open to discussions with the current Grand Jury and the Yuba County OES. City Management has made significant progress in addressing previous non-compliance issues. 2014-2015 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report Emergency Preparedness of Yuba County
F5:
The City of Marysville does not have a qualified emergency operations plan.
F6:
The City of Marysville does not have an emergency management plan that coordinates emergency response among other organizations.
F7:
The Marysville Chief of Police has failed to take advantage of offers from the OES to assist in achieving a compliant emergency operations plan. Prior Recommendations from 2011-2012 Final Report:
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
1 hallazgos
F1:
At the time of our visit to Camptonville School, the Grand Jury found there was not an Information Technology (IT) person. The Superintendent acknowledged that this has hindered the upkeep of the District’s website http://www.cville.k12.ca.us and maintenance of other technologies. The Jury members were advised that the District is looking for a new IT person. It was reported to the Grand Jury that budget and population limits make this a difficult position to fill. This has not stopped the District from utilizing up-to-date technologies.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R1:
The Grand Jury recommends that the District continues its search for an Information Technology (IT) person to oversee the upkeep of their website as well as maintenance of other technologies in use at the District. (See F1) 2014-2015 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
1 hallazgos
F1:
The Yuba County Grand Jury finds that the Sutter Yuba Mosquito and Vector Control District (SYMVCD) appear to be in compliance with their Best Management Practices manual. Genetically modified mosquitoes released into areas of concentrated West Nile Virus (WNV) cases could reduce the overall occurrences of the virus over time. Each year, the District prepares for the coming season utilizing a set of standards contained within a document called Best Management Practices Manual. The document is assembled from a number of sources including scientific literature, state and inter-agency documents, and experienced vector control professionals. Other procedures contained within this document come from District affiliates, the California Department of Fish and Game, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, specifically, a document titled: Environmental Effects of Mosquito Control appendix K4. The Grand Jury relied on the SYMVCD website: http://www.sutteryubamvcd.org/Public%20Health%20Pesticide%20Application% 20Notification.asp for the majority of this report. 2014-2015 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report The Mosquito Abatement Report Figure 1. An example of a SYMVCD fogger unit. (January 2015) A further example of the proactive nature of the District is that several members of the Board of Trustees and employees attend conferences held around the country sponsored by various Mosquito abatement associations and districts. At its annual conference last fall the Florida Mosquito Control Association’s four day meeting featured a representative from a company called Oxitec. The representative presented a lecture on the subject of genetically modified mosquitoes that could be used to reduce the number of biting female mosquitoes in an environment. Briefly, the way it works is Oxitecs workers begin by modifying a select swarm of mosquitoes then manually remove females, aiming to release only males, which feed on nectar and don’t bite for blood like females. The modified males then mate with wild females whose offspring die, reducing 2014-2015 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report The Mosquito Abatement Report the population. This technique is currently limited to Aedes Aegyptus mosquitoes which carry Dengue, and Chikungunya viruses. Oxitec is awaiting permission to release its modified mosquitoes this spring in Key Haven Florida, a neighborhood of more than 400 homes closely clustered on a relatively isolated peninsula at the north end of Key West. There are ongoing concerns that accompany any discussion which involves genetic modification of plants or animals. While genetic manipulation of any species of mosquitoes is still in its relative infancy, the mosquitoes responsible for transmitting WNV are just now getting attention from geneticists within the scientific community. The primary reason for low priority of concern over WNV is that compared to Malaria, West Nile Virus is not only survivable, but is much less debilitating, especially in the long term. Figure 2. An example of a SYMVCD fogger unit in use. (January 2015) The District provides plenty of detailed information on all of its operations on its website. The already abundant information is soon to be updated. The public’s ability to report and request assistance with problems relating to mosquito or other vector issues, or just obtain information, can be easily addressed online or by calling the District’s office.
Recomendaciones adicionales
1
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R1:
The Grand Jury recommends that the Sutter Yuba Mosquito and Vector Control District not only continue furthering its current proactive approach to the control of mosquitoes; but explore next generation abatement techniques such as genetic modification of WNV transmitting mosquito species. Commendation: C1. The Grand Jury commends the Sutter Yuba Mosquito and Vector Control District in the compliance of their mandate as outlined in the Best Management Practices Manual. 2014-2015 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
3 hallazgos
F1:
is entirely premised on the Grand Jury's assertion that a conflict of interest (or potential conflict of interest) existed and that there was a violation of Board Bylaw 9270. As stated in the District's response to the 2013-2014 Grand Jury Report, there was no conflict of interest, nor was there any violation of Board Bylaw 9270. Accordingly, the Board disagrees with Finding 1. The Honorable Julia L. Scrogin August 11, 2015 B. Finding 2: "The 2014-2015 Grand Jury has additionally identified a lack of communication between the Superintendent and the MJUSD Board of Trustees. The Superintendent did not communicate to the MJUSD Board of potential illegal contracts or contract bid splitting of the demolition of MJUSD facilities. It was reported to the Grand Jury through interviews that the Superintendent was aware of, and allowed, the contract splitting of demolition of facilities. The Superintendent did not seek prior approval from the Board for the demolition. As a result, a lawsuit was filed by the lowest bidder and an out of court settlement cost the MJUSD approximately double the work completed. (Board Meeting Minutes, Audio and Written, http://www.mjusd.k12.ca.us) .. Response to Finding 2: Communication and discussion relating to anticipated or pending litigation (e.g. threatened or existing lawsuits) is a proper subject ofclosed session. (Gov. Code, § 54956.9.) As a result, the Board may not disclose detail on such communication or discussion without risking violation of confidential communications from those closed sessions. (Gov. Code, § 54963.) Accordingly, the Board cannot agree or disagree with Finding 2. Furthermore, the Board is not aware of any illegal contracts or illegal bid splitting, and disagrees with Finding 2 to the extent it asserts those as fact. The Board acknowledges that on March 11,2014 they reached a settlement and release agreement. C. Finding 3: "The 2014-2015 Grand Jury identified that the MJUSD Board does not properly provide the public with board meeting agendas. Grand Jury members attended numerous Board meetings and could not locate the agendas posted in some of the stated locations. The MJUSD Board does not properly provide the public with the meeting agenda as specified in the published MJUSD Board Meeting Agendas. See below MJUSD Notification of Meetings as stated in every Board Meeting Agenda: Notification o(Meetings To provide the public with information about what will be on each board meeting agenda, a public notice is published in the newspaper on Thursday prior to a regularly scheduled board meeting Listing items of interest being considered by the Board. In addition, a copy ofevery board meeting agenda is posted at all schools, sent to each PTA President and School Site Council Chairperson, posted on the district website, and available for review at the following locations: District Office "Public Notice Bulletin Board," Yuba County Library, and the Chamber of Commerce. The Grand Jury identified that the MJUSD Board does not properly provide the public with information on the MJUSD Office Public Notice Bulletin Board, Board Meeting Location, and various schools, County Library or the Chamber of Commerce." The Honorable Julia L. Scrogin August 11,2015 Response to Finding 3: The Board disagrees with Finding 3 to the extent it asserts the Board has not complied with open meeting laws concerning posting of agendas. The Brown Act requires that the agenda "shall be posted in a location that is freely accessible to members of the public and on the local agency's Internet Web site, if the local agency has one." (Gov. Code, § 54954.2.) Moreover, Board Bylaw 9320 states that "the agenda shall be posted at one or more locations freely accessible to members of the public." I The Board is not aware of any meeting or agenda posting that did not comply with open meeting laws or with the Board's Bylaw on agenda posting. The Board partially agrees with Finding 3 to the extent it asserts that for the 2014-2015 school year the Board did not post agendas consistent with the language on the Board's agenda concerning locations to post the agenda. On October 14, 2014, the Board ceased posting its agendas at the physical locations noted in Finding 3, and began posting its agendas online to increase transparency and accessibility of the agendas. (Prior to October 14,2014, the Board posted all agendas at the locations noted in Finding 3.) Due to the online posting system, the additional posting locations as stated on the agenda (e.g. Yuba County Library, and the Chamber of Commerce) were no longer necessary and the District ceased posting in those locations. In September 2014, the last Board meeting agenda was mailed out and posted for the September 23, 2014 meeting as set forth in Finding 3. At that time, the following note was attached to each agenda (this note was also mailed or emailed to all District stakeholders on the District's distribution list): Beginning with the 10114114 board meeting, copies ofthe agenda will no longer be distributed. The agenda and related documents can be viewed on the MJUSD website. www.mjusd.com Select: *Board Select: *Board Agendas and Minutes Unfortunately, the agenda template language was not immediately revised to reflect this change. Thus, the agenda language cited in Finding 3 inadvertently remained unchanged even though the District's process and procedure for posting the agenda changed. As a result, the language on the agenda was incorrect. Thank you for bringing this to our attention. As of June 2015, the agenda template has been revised and corrected as follows: 1 All Board Bylaws, Board Policies, and Administrative Regulations are available online here: http://www.mjusd.com/cms/One.aspx?portalld= 14040 1& pageld=43 943 The Honorable Julia L. Scrogin August 11,2015 Notification o(Meetings To provide the public with information regarding agenda items being considered by the Board of Trustees, a public notice is published as follows: * Posted on the MJUSD district website at www.mjusd.com. * Posted on the Public Notice Bulletin Board at the MJUSD District Office at 1919 B Street, Marysville, CA 95901 [located in the hallway outside the Superintendent's Office, Room 101] . * Emailed to all employees of the district, the Appeal-Democrat, and KUBA. D. ''Through interviews, the 2014-2015 Grand Jury has found the Superintendent and MJUSD Board have not established district goals and objectives for the MJUSD Superintendent for each succeeding year, no later than 15 June of the new school year as stipulated in Current Employment Contract between Superintendent and the Governing Board of the of the Marysville Joint Unified School District of Yuba County, California. Interviews with Board Members confirmed that the Superintendent and the MJUSD Board did not establish District goals and objectives by June 15,2014. The Contract states that the Board evaluates the MJUSD Superintendent with the Contract, Job Description, District Goals and Objectives as established by the Board and Superintendent, and the Superintendent Self-Evaluation. The District goals and objectives are a portion of the MJUSD Superintendent evaluation. The Superintendent and the Board are in violation of the current Contract stipulation to jointly establish goals and objectives and reduce to writing for the current school year no later than June 15 of each subsequent year." Response to Finding 4: The Board agrees with Finding 4 regarding the language of the Superintendent's Contract. The Superintendent's Contract provides, in pertinent part, as follows: Commencing no later than August 15,2012, and no later than June 15 of each subsequent school year ofthis CONTRACT, SUPERINTENDENT and BOARD shall establish DISTRICT goals and objectives for the following school year. These goals and objectives shall be among the criteria by which SUPERINTENDENT is evaluated as hereafter provided. The Board disagrees with Finding 4 to the extent it alleges the Board and Superintendent are in violation of the current Contract. The Board and the Superintendent have established written yearly goals each and every year dating back to the inception of the Superintendent's employment in 2005. Each year, the Superintendent has presented written goals to the Board and each year the Board has had an opportunity to comment and provide input. While the Board may not have formally adopted the goals for 2014, the Superintendent presented these written goals prior to June 15. Matters related to the evaluation of the Superintendent are conducted in The Honorable Julia L. Scrogin August 11, 2015 closed session pursuant to Government Code section 54957(b)(1). As a result, the Board may not disclose further detail on this matter without risking violation of confidential communications from those closed sessions. (Gov. Code, § 54963.) E. Finding 5: liThe 2014-2015 Grand Jury has confirmed through interviews from MJUSD employees, staff and Board members that a hostile work environment exists within the Marysville Joint Unified School District. Fear of reprisal, retaliation, retribution and loss ofjob or position has been given to the Grand Jury as examples. Interviews have also revealed loss of faith in the MJUSD system along with fear of speaking to Board members. Employees and staff have expressed that intimidation and manipulation exists within the District. The Grand Jury identified the formal MJUSD system Uniform Complaint Procedures, Board Policy 1312, Interviews with District employees, staff and Board members indicated that this is a cumbersome and non-confidential system and is not being utilized. District employees and staff members stated they fear use of this system will result in possible reprisal, retaliation, retribution and Joss ofjob or position." Response to Finding 5: The Board disagrees with Finding 5. The Board is not aware ofany employee, staff, or Board member that has complained of, or been subject to, unlawful discrimination, harassment, retaliation, or hostile work environment. To the extent someone feels they have been subject to such an environment, the Board encourages them to seek informal resolution of the situation, and if unsuccessful, then they may file a wTitten complaint. With regard to the Uniform Complaint Procedures, Board Policy 1312.3 is modeled after the legally required procedure for uniform complaints as set forth in California Code of Regulations, title 5, Section 4600 et seq. Because this procedure is mandated by law, the Board cannot provide modification to this procedure to make it more or less cumbersome or complex. District Board Policies and Administrative Regulations governing complaints are consistent with industry standard for public school districts in California. The Board encourages anyone with a concern to contact their local administrator and discuss their concern. No specific procedure is required for such contact. Furthermore, Board Policies and Administrative Regulations governing complaints are crystal clear, stating that: The Board acknowledges and respects every individual's right to privacy. Discrimination, harassment, intimidation, or bullying complaints shall be investigated in a manner that protects the confidentiality of the parties and the integrity of the process. This may include keeping the identity of the complainant confidential, as appropriate and except to the extent necessary to carry out the investigation or proceedings, as determined by the Superintendent or designee, on a case-by-case basis. The Honorable Julia L. Scrogin August 11,2015 The Board prohibits any form of retaliation against any complainant in the complaint process, including but not limited to a complainant's filing of a complaint or the reporting of instances of discrimination. Such participation shall not in any way affect the status, grades, or work assignments ofthe complainant. (See e.g. Board Policy 1312.3.) REQUIRED RESPONSES TO RECOMMENDATIONS A. Recommendation 1: "The Grand Jury recommends the MJUSD Board of Trustees shall immediately direct MJUSD Superintendent to improve communications with the Board. (See Fl )" Response to Recommendation 1: Already implemented. The Superintendent is, and has always been, required to maintain effective communications with the Board. Board Policy 2111, Superintendent Governance Standards, provides that the Superintendent is required to: Communicate openly with trust and integrity, including providing all members of the Board with equal access to information and recognizing the importance of both responsive and anticipatory communications. B. Recommendation 2: "The Grand Jury recommends the MJUSD Board of Trustees shall immediately direct MJUSD Superintendent to improve communications with the Board. Improved communications would give the Board information needed to ensure that potential illegal contracts or bid splitting is avoided. (See F2)" Response to Recommendation 2: See Response to Recommendation 1. C. Recommendation 3: "The MJUSD Board needs to properly provide the public with every future board meeting agenda as specified in the published MJUSD Board Meeting Agendas. (See
F3:
The Yuba Caunty Administrative Services Directar and the Yuba County Airport Manager responded to a 2013-14finding that: 17here is a posted lin an emergency' placard in every hangar to call 911 in an emergency. " The 2014-15 Grand Jury did locate the Nin an emergencY' checklist placard at the Yuba County Airport (provided asfigure #1 in their report). The Grand Jury, however, found it contained deficiencies: • Phone numbers are not listedfor the Airport Manager or Airport Lead Maintenance Worker. • There ;s no date listed on the checklist to indicate when it was last reviewed orupdated. • There is no point ofcontact ta notify ifthere are any issues with the checklist 915 8TH STREET, SUITE 119. - MARYSVILLE.CA 95901-5273 • The checklist does not define the acronyms FAA, NOTAM, or ELT. • The checklist does not identify who is to notify the FAA or how. Administrative Services Director partially disagrees with this finding. It has been updated. There has been some confusion about what's posted in the hangars of the airport. About a year ago, the attached placard (figure 1 below) was placed in the hangars of the airport printed on bright yellow card stock. It was a much simpler list of who to call and reduced any confusion about who should notify the FAA or other entity. Just a clear list of numbers to call. IN CASE OF EMERGENCY CONTACT: EMERGENCY 911 (FIRE, SHERIFF, ETC.) OPUD FIRE DEPARTMENT 743-7117 (NONEMERGENCY) OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES 749-7520 (NONEMERGENCY) AIRPORT MANAGER AFTER HOURS 682-9003 Figure 1 In addition to this placard being placed in each hangar, an Emergency Procedures checklist was updated based on the Grand Jury's feedback. It is also posted in common pilot areas, and has been redistributed to all public safety agencies supporting the airport. A similar document has previously been shared with all local agencies, and was resent on a regular basis, but this newly updated document has also been shared again with them.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R3:
The Grand Jury recommends the Yuba County Airport Manager immediately update the "in an emergency" checklist posted at the airport to include: (See F3) • Phone numbers listed for the Airport Manager and the Airport Lead Maintenance worker. • A date listed to indicate when it was last reviewed and updated. A listed point ofcontact to notify if there are any issues with the checklist. • Spell out the acronyms FAA, NOTAM, and ELT. • Indicate who will notify the FAA. Administrative Services Director agrees with this finding. It has already been implemented. A revised Emergency Call List and an updated Emergency Procedures has been posted by the Airport Manager and shared with her large clients. A sample is attached.
F5:
The 2013-2014 Grand Jury recommended "The Administrative Services Director revise and update the Airport Manager Job Description to reflect current duties and responsibilities. " The Yuba County Administrative Services Director and the Yuba County Airport Manager responded: "This recommendation will be implemented. The Administrative Services Director will coordinate with the Director ofHuman Resources to review the class specificationfor the Airport Manager and determine ifany updates are needed. This will be done within 30 days. " The Yuba County Board ofSupervisors responded to the samefinding: "This recommendation will be implemented byrequesting a review ofthe job specifications immediately with the intent to complete the review by the end ofthe current fiscal year. " The 2014-2015 Grand Jury conducted an interview with the Yuba County Administrative Services Director on March 26, 2015. The Airport Manager's class specification review (job description), as of that date, was still not complete. The Yuba County Administrative Services Director is in violation of Penal Code §933.05 (b)(2). Administrative Services Director agrees with this finding. It has already been completed. When I last met with the Grand Jury in March of 2015, I had already initiated contact with Human Resources to revise the job description. When a job description update is being requested by an employee it is a high priority but when it's not due to an employee request, it is a lesser priority. I had told them it was a low priority to be done as time and workload allowed. But the job description has been updated and is posted on the Human Resources effective April 2015. http://www.co.yuba.ca.us/Departments/Personnel/documents/Specifications/A/Airport%20 Manager%20April%202015.pdf
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R5:
The Grand Jury recommends the Yuba County Board ofSupervisors directs the Yuba County Administrative Services Director to ensure the Yuba County Airport Manager's job specification review (job description) is complete, as represented, by the end of the 2014-2015 fiscal year. (See F5) Administrative Services Director agrees with this finding. It has already been completed. A sample is attached or you may also see the updated class specification at this link: http://www.co.yuba.ca.us/Departments/Personnel/documents/Specifications/A/Airport%20Manager% 20April%202015.pdf sin~;j~/ t D4. McCoy Director, Administrative Services The County of Yuba Department:Of Administrative Services , DOUG McCOY -Director (530) 749-7880 FAX (530) 749-7884 Tuesday, July 21,2015 The ~onorable Julia Scrogin Grand Jury Presiding Judge Yuba County Superior Court 215 Fifth Street, Suite 200 Marysville, CA 95901 , Re: RESPONSE TO 2014-15 GRAND JURY REPORT - "Safety Issues at Yuba County Airport" Dear Judge Scrogin: Provided pursuant to Penal Code Section 933(c) are the comments from the County Administrator related to the findings and recommendations contained in the 2014-15 Grand Jury Final Report - "Emergency Preparedness of Yuba County". Consistent with Section 933(c), responses do not address departments under control of elected officials or o~tside agencies, except where a specific response was solicited and then our response is consistent with provisions of Penal Code Section 933.05(c).
Recomendaciones adicionales
8
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R1:
Call 911 and provide nature of fire/emergency, location, and number of injured
R2:
Notify Airport Manager at 530-682-9003
R4:
The Federal Aviation Administration will contact National Transportation Security Board (NTSB) to advise of accident
R6:
Notify Airport Lead maintenance worker, if necessary, for assistance, by first calling 530 682-8520 (or alternate number, if no answer, 530-682-1472, county after hours maintenance)
R7:
As necessary, record sky condition, visibility, temperature, barometric pressure, runway condition, time and any other pertinent information as possible; information also available by calling the Airport's Automated Surface Observation System (ASOS) at 530-742-0695 or by Aircraft Radio at radio frequency 118.475
R8:
Do NOT give any information to anyone other than Sheriff, Fire, Airport Personnel, FAA, or NTSB. Airport lVIanager or designated Public Information Officer to make statements to the press.
R9:
Do NOT allow the public to be within 100 feet of the scene, unless it is necessary to assist people who are in danger.
R10:
Have an Airport Mechanic or Operator locate and turn off the aircraft's ELT**, when safe to do so, which would normally be located in rear of fuselage. *UNICOM refers to Universal Communications utilizing an air-to-ground radio system (radio frequency 123.05 at Yuba County Airport) **EL T refers to Emergency Locator Transmitter that all aircraft must have in order to be registered by the FAA. It is designed to emit an audible radio signal on various radio frequencies if it experiences a certain amount of G forces. Once an ELT has been activated, a satellite receives the signal and it is sent to the Air Force Rescue and Coordination Center's Local User Terminals. Any time an ELT signal is transmitted, everyone must proceed as if there has been an accident or crash. It is important to locate and turn off the signal as soon as possible. Checklist Point of Contact: Mary Hansen, Airport Mgr., 530-682-9003, [email protected] Current as of 61112015 CLASSIFICATION SPECIFICATION CLASSIFICATION: Airport Manager ALLOCATION: Administrative Services FLSA STATUS: Exempt ESTABLISHED: Circa 1996 UNION AFFILIATION: Non-Represented REVISED: April 2015 JOB SUMMARY: Under general direction, manage, plan, organize and evaluate operations, construction, maintenance, line service, customer service, economic development and marketing activities for the Yuba County General Aviation Airport; develop program and strategies to maximize the use of airport properties for commercial and industrial use and perform related work as assigned. This is a singular managerial position. CLASS CHARACTERISTICS: This position reports directly to Director of Administrative Services and is characterized by the substantial amount of management and administrative oversight for the operations of the Yuba County Airport. This class is distinguished from the Director of Administrative Services in that the latter has overall management responsibility for all departmental activities and functions and establishes department vision, goals, policies, practices and procedures. EXAMPLES OF DUTIES: Essential: • Manage the overall direction, coordination and evaluation of the Yuba County Airport in accordance with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), federal, state and local laws and regulations. • Plan and coordinate development activities for the general aviation airport. • Organize and direct the operations of airport facilities, including the enforcement of ground traffic, air traffic patterns and safety rules and regulations. • Create and direct outreach and expansion programs, including maintaining liaison with various aviation and business associations. • Develop and implement programs to encourage long-term private sector investment in airport properties. • Ens~re that all airport operations and maintenance activities performed in accordance with federal and state laws and regulations. • Prepare and negotiate contracts/leases for airport facilities, including ground leases, building leases and airport permits; collect fees due and balances and accounts for money received. • Research and prepare grant proposals for airport construction and maintenance projects, such as runway and taxiway overlays, sewer and water improvements and master plan studies. • Administer grants, maintain required records and submit reports to funding sources in a timely manner. • Resolve customer complaints and disputes; maintain liaison with community groups and others to maximize service delivery. • Develop and implement a public relations marketing program for the airport and airport properties, including a national advertising program and attendance at appropriate conferences and events. • Confer and work closely with aviation planning and engineering staff on the development and implementation of capital structures and increased marketing opportunities. • Administer airport and industrial capital improvement programs, such as construction, land acquisition and development of airside and landside facilities. • Develop and monitor the airport budget; review, monitor and analyze the activity of assigned revenue and expense accounts; update management staff; make recommendations regarding budget and program issues and implement appropriate cost recovery or expense reduction policies to maintain a balanced budget. • Provide for 24-hour, 7-day emergency response; respond to such emergencies and direct activities. • Monitor changes in legislation that may affect program operations; evaluate their effect upon program activities and recommend appropriate policy and procedure modifications. • Confer with and represent the County in meetings with employees and departments, representatives from various governmental agencies, community, business, professional groups and the general public. • Conduct analytical studies; develop and review reports of findings, alternatives and recommendations; prepare or review a variety of narrative and/or statistical reports, correspondence, agenda items, policy ,.--. papers, presentations and other written materials; maintain or direct the maintenance of accurate records and files. Important: • Comply with all County equipment and safety policies and procedures, and California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal OSHA) rules and regulations. • Act as department representative in emergency or disaster response activities. EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS: Knowledge of: • Principles and practices of general aviation facility operation and service development. • Applicable laws, codes and regulations, including the FAA regulations. • The role of general aviation in the aviation community and the needs of this specialized market. • Principles and practices of contract negotiation and administration. • Administrative principles and practices, including goal setting, program development and implementation and evaluation. • Principles of grant writing and administration. • Techniques of developing and implementing effective marketing programs. • Principles and practices of government budget development and administration, financial forecasting and analysis. • Met,hods, principles and practices of effective conflict resolution. • Effective negotiation and consensus development with individuals and organizations having a broad range of interests. • Data sampling and statistical analysis techniques. • The structure and content of the English language, including rules of composition and grammar. • Administration procedures and systems, managing files and records, and other office procedures. • Modern management and supervisory theories, principles and practices. Skill in: • Project Management. • Independently coordinating, overseeing and administering operational, marketing, capital improvement and' maintenance programs as related to general aviation airport operations and related land development. • Defining and analyzing programs and issues, identifying alternative solutions, projecting consequence of actions and implementation of recommendations. • Developing and implementing goals, objectives, policies, procedures and work standards. • Independently performing professional analytical and programmatic work and carrying projects through, from data gathering to completion. • Fostering constructive relationships with internal and external stakeholders. • Conducting cost/benefit analysis. • Maintaining accurate financial and operational records. • Negotiating effective lease terms and administering contracts effectively. • Using tact, patience and courtesy in dealing with those contacted in the course of the work. Ability to: • Collaborate on topics that are sensitive in nature, involving many stakeholders with competing interests. • Listen carefully to what other people are saying, take time to understand the points being made, and ask questions as appropriate for clarification. • Interpret, apply and explain complex federal, state and local laws related to the work. • Communicate information and ideas in a manner others will understand. • Make' rational judgments and decision in a timely manner particularly in situations involving potential risks. • Interact with others and demonstrate sensitivity to their needs in order to establish and maintain a supportive and professional working relationship. • Organize work, manage mUltiple projects/programs and meet critical deadlines. • Prepare clear, concise and organized written reports, correspondence and other materials by compiling various sources of information into a professional document. Physical Demands: The physical demands and work environment described here are representative of those that must be met by an employee to successfully perform the essential function of the job, with or without accommodation. Prospective employees must complete a pre-employment medical exam (Occupational Group IV) which will measure the ability to: • See well enough to read fine print and view a computer screen; speak and hear well enough to understand, respond, and communicate clearly in person and on the telephone; independent body mobility sufficient to stand, sit, walk, stoop and bend to access the work environment and a standard office environment; manual dexterity and sufficient use of hands, arms and shoulders to repetitively operate a keyboard and to write; and the ability to sit or walk for prolonged periods of time. • Mobility to drive a motor vehicle to attend meetings or visit various work sites. Accommodation may be made for some of these physical demands for otherwise qualified individuals who require and request such accommodation. Work Environment: • Generally a typical office environment. • May be required to travel to various worksites or locations within the County. • OC:casionally may be required to travel for meetings or conferences outside normal business hours. QUALIFICATIONS: The minimum and preferred requirements are listed below. While the following requirements outline the minimum qualifications, Human Resources reserves the right to select applicants for further consideration who demonstrate the best qualifications match for the job. Meeting the minimum qualifications does not guarantee further participation in selection procedures. Licenses and Certification: • The ability to obtain a valid California Class C driver's license within ten (10) days of employment; maintain throughout employment. • Possession of a valid Pilot's License issued by the FAA is desirable. Special Requirements: • MList successfully complete an extensive and thorough background investigation which may include Live Scan fingerprinting prior to hire. • DMV printout prior to hire. • MI'lY be required to file statements of economic interest with the Yuba County Clerk/Recorder. • Will be required to perform disaster service activities pursuant to Government Code 3100-3109. Education and Experience: MINIMUM: Bachelor's Degree from an accredited college or university with major coursework in business or public administration, aviation management, economics, finance or a closely related field and five years of professional airport operations experience with extensive knowledge of FAA regulations. Candidates with strong experience who lack the degree are encouraged to apply. PREFERRED: In addition to the minimum, additional direct experience in general aviation operations and/or possession of a valid Accredited Airport Executive (AAE) certification by the American Association of Airport Executives. This class specification lists the major duties and requirements of the job. Incumbent may be expected to perform job-related duties other than those contained in this document. Approval: Department Head EEOC: A Human Resources Approval: Analyst Date: WC: 9410 Date: Signature: _______ Signature: _________ Marysville Joint Unified School District August 11,2015 The Honorable Julia L Scrogin Grand Jury Presiding Judge Yuba County Superior Court 215 Fifth Street, Suite 200 Marysville, CA 95901 RE: Response by the Board of Trustees of the Marysville Joint Unified School District to the Final Report of -15, Pages 49 - 57 The Honorable Julia L Scrogin: Pursuant to California Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, on behalf of the Marysville tt Joint Unified School District's ("District ) Board of Trustees, I hereby submit the required formal response to the 2014-15 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report ("Reporttt), pages 49 - 57. REQUIRED RESPONSES TO FINDINGS A. Finding 1: ttThe 2014-2015 Grand Jury has identified and confirmed a lack of communication between the Superintendent and the MJUSD Board of Trustees. The 2013-2014 Grand Jury identified a perceived conflict of interest that occurred within the Marysville Joint Unified School District (MJUSD). The 2014-2015 Grand Jury has confirmed through multiple interviews with MJUSD Board Members and other MJUSD staff and employees that the MJUSD Superintendent did not inform the MJUSD Board of potential conflict of interest, State Code Infractions and the violation of State ofCalifornia Government Code 1090 concerning Contractual Conflicts oflnterest (URL Omitted). The 2014-2015 Grand Jury has also confirmed through interviews that the Superintendent did not communicate with the Board of a potential violation of established board by-laws (Board By-Laws 9270 (URL Omitted» by hiring an employee with known affiliations or connections to district contractors and who therefore had a potential conflict of interest (URL Omitted). tt Response to Finding 1:
Vista rápida
Detalles completos →
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
5 hallazgos
F1:
The 2014-2015 Grand Jury has identified and confirmed a lack of communication between the Superintendent and the MJUSD Board of Trustees. The 2013-2014 Grand Jury identified a perceived conflict of interest that occurred within the Marysville Joint Unified School District (MJUSD). The 2014-2015 Grand Jury has confirmed through multiple interviews with MJUSD Board Members and other MJUSD staff and employees that the MJUSD Superintendent did not inform the MJUSD Board of potential conflict of interest, State Code Infractions and the violation of State of California Government Code 1090 concerning Contractual Conflicts of Interest (http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi- bin/displaycode?section=gov&group=01001-02000&file=1090-1099). The 2014-2015 Grand Jury has also confirmed through interviews that the Superintendent did not communicate with the Board of a potential violation of established board by-laws (Board By-Laws 9270 http://www.mjusd.k12.ca.us/board/policies) by hiring an employee with known affiliations or connections to district contractors and who therefore had a potential conflict of interest (http://www.yubacourts.org/divisions/grand-jury/reports).
F2:
The 2014-2015 Grand Jury has additionally identified a lack of communication between the Superintendent and the MJUSD Board of Trustees. The Superintendent did not communicate to the MJUSD Board of potential illegal contracts or contract bid splitting of the demolition of MJUSD facilities. It was reported to the Grand Jury through interviews that the Superintendent was aware of, and allowed, the contract splitting of demolition of facilities. The Superintendent did not seek prior approval from the Board for the demolition. As a result, a lawsuit was filed by the lowest bidder and an out of court settlement cost the MJUSD approximately double the work completed. (Board Meeting Minutes, Audio and Written, http://www.mjusd.k12.ca.us)
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R2:
The Grand Jury recommends the MJUSD Board of Trustees shall immediately direct MJUSD Superintendent to improve communications with the Board. Improved communications would give the Board information needed to ensure that potential illegal contracts or bid splitting is avoided. (See F2)
F3:
The 2014-2015 Grand Jury identified that the MJUSD Board does not properly provide the public with board meeting agendas. Grand Jury members attended numerous Board meetings and could not locate the agendas posted in some of the stated locations. The MJUSD Board does not properly provide the public with the meeting agenda as specified in the published MJUSD Board Meeting Agendas. 2014-2015 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report Marysville Joint Unified School District Board of Trustees See below MJUSD Notification of Meetings as stated in every Board Meeting Agenda: Notification of Meetings To provide the public with information about what will be on each board meeting agenda, a public notice is published in the newspaper on Thursday prior to a regularly scheduled board meeting listing items of interest being considered by the Board. In addition, a copy of every board meeting agenda is posted at all schools, sent to each PTA President and School Site Council Chairperson, posted on the district website, and available for review at the following locations: District Office “Public Notice Bulletin Board,” Yuba County Library, and the Chamber of Commerce. The Grand Jury identified that the MJUSD Board does not properly provide the public with information on the MJUSD Office Public Notice Bulletin Board, Board Meeting Location, and various schools, County Library or the Chamber of Commerce.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R3:
The MJUSD Board needs to properly provide the public with every future board meeting agenda as specified in the published MJUSD Board Meeting Agendas. (See F3)
F4:
Through interviews, the 2014-2015 Grand Jury has found the Superintendent and MJUSD Board have not established district goals and objectives for the MJUSD Superintendent for each succeeding year, no later than 15 June of the new school year as stipulated in Current Employment Contract between Superintendent and the Governing Board of the of the Marysville Joint Unified School District of Yuba County, California. Interviews with Board Members confirmed that the Superintendent and the MJUSD Board did not establish District goals and objectives by June 15, 2014. The Contract states that the Board evaluates the MJUSD Superintendent with the Contract, Job Description, District Goals and Objectives as established by the Board and Superintendent, and the Superintendent Self-Evaluation. The District goals and objectives are a portion of the MJUSD Superintendent evaluation. The Superintendent and the Board are in violation of the current Contract stipulation to jointly establish goals and objectives and reduce to writing for the current school year no later than June 15 of each subsequent year.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R4:
The MJUSD Board establish district goals and objectives for the MJUSD Superintendent for each succeeding year, no later than 15 June of the new school year as stipulated in Current Employment Contract between Superintendent and the Governing Board. The contract clearly states the MJUSD Board shall evaluate the MJUSD Superintendent in writing no later than 31 May of each subsequent full year of the contract. The evaluation shall include the Contract, Job Description, District Goals and Objectives as established by the Board and Superintendent, and the Superintendent Self-Evaluation. (See F4)
F5:
The 2014-2015 Grand Jury has confirmed through interviews from MJUSD employees, staff and Board members that a hostile work environment exists within the Marysville Joint Unified School District. Fear of reprisal, retaliation, retribution and loss of job or position has been given to the Grand Jury as 2014-2015 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report Marysville Joint Unified School District Board of Trustees examples. Interviews have also revealed loss of faith in the MJUSD system along with fear of speaking to Board members. Employees and staff have expressed that intimidation and manipulation exists within the District. The Grand Jury identified the formal MJUSD system Uniform Complaint Procedures, Board Policy 1312, (http://www.mjusd.k12.ca.us/board/policies). Interviews with District employees, staff and Board members indicated that this is a cumbersome and non-confidential system and is not being utilized. District employees and staff members stated they fear use of this system will result in possible reprisal, retaliation, retribution and loss of job or position.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R5:
The MJUSD Board must immediately address and eliminate the hostile work environment within the district. Suggested areas for the Board to address include; open communications without fear of reprisal and a simplified confidential complaint system. (See F5) 2014-2015 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report
Recomendaciones adicionales
1
No vinculadas a hallazgos específicos.
R1:
The Grand Jury recommends the MJUSD Board of Trustees shall immediately direct MJUSD Superintendent to improve communications with the Board. (See
Hallazgos & Recomendaciones
4 hallazgos
F1:
During an interview with the Yuba County Airport management, the Chief Deputy County Counsel appeared without an invitation and without any prior notice to the Grand Jury. The Chief Deputy County Counsel did not make the Grand Jury aware of his intended appearance. The Chief Deputy County Counsel was asked to leave the Grand Jury interview of the Yuba County Airport management. The Chief Deputy County Counsel immediately complied. The Grand Jury verified, via interviews, that during the past several years, the County Counsel has represented multiple departments regarding Grand Jury inquiries and investigations without Grand Jury invitation. The Office of the County Counsel appears to be in violation of §934 of the California Penal Code. California Penal Code §934(a) states, “Unless advice is requested… the county counsel..., shall not be present during the sessions of the grand jury.”
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R1:
The Grand Jury recommends County Counsel follow California Penal Code §934 (a) and Rule 3-310. County Counsel should be directed by the Yuba County Board of Supervisors to budget from the existing County Counsel budget a retained attorney to be available to the Grand Jury and to any department of the County when a possible conflict of interest is created by following California Penal Code §936. (See F1, F3) California Penal Code §936. Special counsel and investigators states: “When requested to do so by the grand jury of any county, the Attorney General may employ special counsel and special investigators, whose duty it shall be to investigate and present the evidence in such investigation to such grand jury. The services of such special counsel and special investigators shall be a county charge of such county.”
F2:
The County Counsel did not notify the 2013-2014 and current Grand Juries of its motion to terminate the Consent Decree of November, 1978. Such motion to terminate was filed by the County Counsel’s office in 2013. The Consent Decree requires the Grand Jury to do an annual analysis of whether the jail is in compliance with the provisions of the Consent Decree and include the results in its yearly report. The 2013 motion to terminate the Consent Decree was denied April 2, 2014, by the 9th District Court of Appeals. The County Counsel filed a Notice of Appeal April 29, 2014. The current Grand Jury was not made aware of this Notice of Appeal.
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R2:
In accordance with the Consent Decree of 1978, the County Counsel, as well as the Yuba County Sheriff, shall ensure that all current Grand Juries are made aware of the yearly requirement for the Grand Jury to perform an annual assessment of the jail’s compliance with all provisions of the Consent Decree of November, 1978. (See F2) 2014-2015 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report
F3:
The County Counsel’s office created an apparent conflict of interest to the Grand Jury by offering unsolicited comments during its interview of the Yuba County Airport management. The Chief Deputy County Counsel volunteered comment to a Grand Jury question asked of the Yuba County Airport management, a department of the county. The question was directed to the manager of the airport. It became clear to the Grand Jury that the Chief Deputy County Counsel voluntarily appeared in the interview to represent the interests of the Yuba County Airport; even though the Grand Jury was informed his presence was to solely clear up any misunderstandings between the Yuba County Airport and the Grand Jury; that the County Counsel represents both the Airport and the Grand Jury. 2014-2015 Yuba County Grand Jury Final Report County Counsel Dual Representation
Recomendaciones relacionadas (2)
R1:
The Grand Jury recommends County Counsel follow California Penal Code §934 (a) and Rule 3-310. County Counsel should be directed by the Yuba County Board of Supervisors to budget from the existing County Counsel budget a retained attorney to be available to the Grand Jury and to any department of the County when a possible conflict of interest is created by following California Penal Code §936. (See F1, F3) California Penal Code §936. Special counsel and investigators states: “When requested to do so by the grand jury of any county, the Attorney General may employ special counsel and special investigators, whose duty it shall be to investigate and present the evidence in such investigation to such grand jury. The services of such special counsel and special investigators shall be a county charge of such county.”
R3:
The County Counsel should seek an ethics opinion from the State Bar as to potential conflicts of interests in simultaneously representing the County of Yuba, the Yuba County Sheriff, the Yuba County Jail, and the Yuba County Grand Jury. (See F3)
F4:
The Grand Jury was informed by the County Counsel that the County Counsel represents the Board of Supervisors, 28 county departments, 43 special districts, and the Grand Jury. The office of the County Counsel appears to be in violation of the State Bar of California; Rule 3-310. Current Rules of the State Bar of California; Rule 3-310 - Avoiding the Representation of Adverse Interests. Rule 3-310(C) provides, in part: “A member shall not, without the informed and written consent of each client: (1) Accept representation of more than one client in a manner which the interests of the clients potentially conflict: or (2) Accept or continue representation of more than one client in a manner in which the interests of the clients actually conflict…” Explained in: Walker v. Berkeley, supra, 951 F.2d 182, 184, “ … (1) that an attorney for a governmental entity usually has only one client, namely, the client itself, which acts through constituent sub-entities and officials….”
Recomendaciones relacionadas (1)
R4:
The County Counsel should abstain from representing the Grand Jury and other County departments if there is a potential conflict of interest. (See F4) Current Rules of the State Bar of California; Rule 3-310 – Avoiding the Representation of Adverse Interests. Rule 3-310(C) provides, in part: “A member shall not, without the informed and written consent of each client: (1) Accept representation of more than one client in a manner which the interests of the clients potentially conflict: or (2) Accept or continue representation of more than one client in a manner in which the interests of the clients actually conflict…” Explained in: Walker v. Berkeley, supra, 951 F.2d 182, 184, “ … (1) that an attorney for a governmental entity usually has only one client, namely, the client itself, which acts through constituent sub-entities and officials….” Request for Responses: Pursuant to California Penal Code §933.05, the Grand Jury requests responses as follows from the following individuals: Yuba County Counsel (F1, F2, F3, F4, R1, R2, R3, R4) Chairman of the Board of the Yuba County Board of Supervisors (F1, F2, F3, F4,