1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

1

KERN COUNTY

GRAND JURY

1999- 2000

FINAL REPORT

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface..................................................................................... 4

Final Report Staff....................................................................... 5

Mission Statement .................................................................... 6

Oath......................................................................................... 7

Foreperson’s Letter to Judge ...................................................... 8

Organization & Committee’s Chart .............................................. 9

Committee Reports

Administration / Audit Committee ......................................... 10

Another Step in Kern County Contracting Procedures ................... 11

Kern County Water Agency, How Do We Grow From Here............ 14

Kern Community College District ................................................ 17

Ad Hoc Committee .................................................................. 20

Waste Management – Three Chapters

Chapter One - The West Side Story ............................................ 21

Chapter Two – Waste Management AB 939................................. 25

Chapter Three – Let’s Clean Up This Mess .................................. 27

Cities and Services Committee ............................................... 29

City of Arvin .............................................................................. 30

City of Bakersfield ..................................................................... 32

California City............................................................................ 36

City of Delano ........................................................................... 38

City of Maricopa ........................................................................ 40

City of McFarland ...................................................................... 42

City of Ridgecrest...................................................................... 44

City of Shafter ........................................................................... 46

City of Taft ................................................................................ 48

City of Tehachapi....................................................................... 49

City of Wasco........................................................................... 50

Continuity and Tracking Committee........................................ 52

Grand Jury Tracking Report ........................................................ 53

County Government ................................................................... 55

Edit Committee ....................................................................... 57

Edit Committee Mission Statement ............................................. 58

Health, Education & Social Services Committee..................... 59

Department of Weights and Measures ......................................... 60

Department of Human Services ................................................... 62

Kern County Aging and Adult Services ........................................ 63

Kern County Department of Agriculture........................................ 65

Kern County Farm and Home Advisor.......................................... 67

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

3

Sierra Sands School District, Ridgecrest ..................................... 70

Taft Animal Shelter .................................................................... 72

Westside Cemetery District........................................................ 74

Law and Justice Committee.................................................... 75

Bakersfield Police Department .................................................... 77

Kern County Sheriff’s Department /

Buttonwillow Sub- Station.................................................... 79

Kern County Sheriff’s Department-

Computer – Assisted Dispatch System ............................... 81

Camp Erwin Owen..................................................................... 85

Delano Police Department .......................................................... 88

Delano Community Correctional Facility ...................................... 91

Kern County Sheriff – Volunteer Services Division......................... 93

Kern County Sheriff’s Department –

Communication Specialists ................................................. 98

McFarland Community Correctional Facility ................................. 101

Mesa Verde Correctional Facility ................................................ 104

Kern County Public Defender’s Office.......................................... 107

Kern County Sheriff’s Department /

Tehachapi Sub- Station................................................... 111

Kern County Sheriff’s Department /

Wasco Substation......................................................... 113

Public Relations Committee.................................................... 115

Visitations ................................................................................ 116

Recognition Awards ................................................................... 118

1999- 2000 Kern County Grand Jury

Districts and Nominating Judge .................................... 119

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

4

KERN COUNTY

GRAND JURY

1999- 2000

PREFACE

The State of California authorizes the establishment of county Grand Juries. Each Grand

Jury panel is composed of nineteen dedicated, hardworking, intelligent, resourceful, civic-minded

citizens, representing all geographic areas of the county. Each Grand Jury panel

serves for a period of one year and publishes a final report.

The 1999- 2000 Kern County Grand Jury panel is composed of people of different ages,

most of whom have retired, with different educational and occupational experiences and

different life experiences in general. They represent several outlying communities as well

as the metropolitan area. While the original panel was composed of nine women and ten

men, its final composition is ten men and eight women. This diversity has contributed

greatly to the success of the panel.

In Kern County, the Grand Jury has a dual responsibility. One area is dealing with

criminal investigative and indictment procedures. The other major area of responsibility

deals with civil oversight. Most of our work during this term has been in this latter area.

The Grand Jury is designed to be a watchdog agency as well as the conscience of the

community. It is with our legislated mandate in mind that we have sought to uncover any

inefficiencies, malfeasance, or unethical behavior which may be present in the various

governmental bodies within the county. We are pleased to report that, for the most part,

we found that our public agencies are staffed by hardworking, honest, dedicated

individuals who, is some cases, are working under very difficult conditions.

The final report is a compilation of individual reports of investigations and inspections

conducted by the Kern county Grand Jury. All investigations were the result of citizen’s

complaints or were initiated by the Grand Jury in compliance with the Penal Code.

All individual reports shown herein have been approved by the Grand Jury, coordinated

with the affected party for accuracy, submitted to the County Counsel for legal opinion,

and approved and signed by the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court before being

issued to the public domain.

– C. Michael Dake, Parliamentarian

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

5

KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY

FINAL REPORT

1999- 2000

PUBLISHER

1999- 2000 Kern County Grand Jury

STAFF

EDITOR

James E. Poole

ASSOCIATE EDITOR

Ethel Wells

DEPUTY EDITOR

C. Michael Dake

ART & COMPUTER GRAPHICS

DIRECTOR

Carolyn E. Troxel

COPY EDITOR

Ruth E. Kranovich

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

6

KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY

1999 – 2000

MISSION STATEMENT

We have dedicated ourselves to:

·   Serve and assist private citizens, public employees, and elected

officials to strive for excellence in government.

·   Ensure fair, unbiased, equitable, and just treatment of all who come

before us.

·   Generate trust in public agencies by recognizing merit when earned

and making constructive suggestions for improvement where needed.

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

7

THE GRAND JURY

OATH

“ I do solemnly swear ( affirm) that I will support the

Constitution of the United States and of the State of

California, and all laws made pursuant to and in

conformity therewith, will diligently inquire into, and true

presentment make, of all public offenses against the people

of this state, committed or triable within this country, of

which the Grand Jury shall have or can obtain legal

evidence. Further, I will not disclose any evidence brought

before the Grand Jury, nor anything which I or any other

grand juror may say, nor the manner in which I or any

other grand juror may have voted on any matter before the

Grand Jury. I will keep the charge that will be given to me

by the court.

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

8

June 28, 2000

Honorable Clarence Westra

Judge, Kern County Superior Court

Bakersfield, CA 93301

Dear Judge Westra:

In compliance with Penal Code Section 933, the 1999- 2000 Grand Jury presents our final

report of all investigations undertaken by the Grand Jury members.

I would like to thank you for your leadership and guidance throughout this year. The Grand

Jurors represented all supervisoral districts of Kern County. They are from all walks of life

and represent a wealth of knowledge. They have been very diligent in their efforts to fulfill

the charge given to them on the day they were empanelled. I would especially like to thank

the Court for the pleasure of working this year with such an intelligent, cooperative group of

people. We have all learned from experiences encountered during the past year.

I would like to thank the County Counsel, and the District Attorney for their assistance in

interpreting the law for us; the Superior Court Executive Officer, the County Administrative

Officer and all the department heads that were so willing to help us in our duties.

Special “ kudos” and thanks to our Court Liaison. She was always there for us, assisting when

we did not know where to turn during the performance of our duties.

In addition to the investigations performed and reports completed we also did the following:

·   Designed a new Grand Jury Emblem using the County Seal with an imprint of Kern

County in the center.

·   Purchased four ( 4) new computers and three printers for use by the Grand Jurors.

·   Invited a county department head to speak at practically every Wednesday general

meeting.

·   Wrote an Office Orientation Manual for use by the incoming Grand Jurors.

·   Created television and radio ads for Grand Jury member recruitment.

·   Prepared a new budget format that can be easily understood.

·   Organized the library and files creating a computerized list of materials that are available

for research when needed by the incoming Grand Jurors.

·   Worked out a plan for Grand Jury parking including handicap parking.

These are just a few of the items completed during our term. We hope these will assist the

incoming Grand Jurors in performing their duties.

Thank you again for your support and guidance.

Cordially,

Helen J. Richards, Foreperson

Kern County Grand Jury 1999- 2000

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

9

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY

ORGANIZATION AND COMMITTEES CHART

OFFICERS:

Helen J. Richards - Foreperson

Raymond Rowland - Foreperson Pro Tem

& Sergeant At Arms

Ferrelene Zachary - Secretary

C. Michael Dake - Parliamentarian

COMMITTEES:

ADMINISTRATION & AUDIT

Finance, audits, and administration concerns.

George J. Lusich, Jr. - Chairman

Carolyn E. Troxel - Vice Chairperson

C. Michael Dake

Robert E. Herrick

CITIES & SERVICES

Cities and Special Districts annual review.

Dan O. Neal - Chairman

Nellie G. Gomez - Vice Chairman

Jean Beavers

Raymond R. Mortimer

CONTINUITY

Maintains contact with board of supervisors and

tracking of reports.

George A. Venema - Chairman

H. Dale Bennett

Nellie G. Gomez

Raymond R. Mortimer

EDIT

Compilation of final reports.

James E. Poole - Chairman

Ethel Wells - Vice Chairperson, Secretary

C. Michael Dake - Deputy Chairman

Robert E. Herrick

Frank K. Johnson

George J. Lusich, Jr.

Dan O. Neal

George A. Venema

HEALTH, EDUCATION & SOCIAL

SERVICES

Monitor health , education and welfare agencies.

Robert E. Herrick - Chairman

Raymond R. Mortimer

George A. Venema

Ethel Wells

LAW & JUSTICE

Investigates criminal justice agencies.

Frank K. Johnson - Chairman

Ruth E. Kranovich - Vice Chairman

Jean Beavers

Anna Cleveland

C. Michael Dake

LIBRARY

Organizes research material.

James E. Poole - Chairman

Carolyn E. Troxel - Vice Chairman

Ethel Wells

PUBLIC RELATIONS

Informs the public of mission of the Grand Jury

and encourages recruitment.

James E. Poole - Chairman

Nellie G. Gomez - Vice Chairperson, Secretary

Dan O. Neal, Publicist

Anna Cleveland

George J. Lusich, Jr.

Ethel Wells

AD HOC

Special investigation teams.

C. Michael Dake

Robert E. Herrick

Ruth E. Kranovich

George J. Lusich, Jr.

Raymond R. Mortimer

Dan O. Neal

James E. Poole

Carolyn E. Troxel

George A. Venema

Ethel Wells

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

10

ADMINISTRATION AND AUDIT

COMMITTEE

Chairman

George J. Lusich, Jr.

Vice Chairperson

Carolyn E. Troxel

Committee Members

C. Michael Dake

Robert E. Herrick

The Administration and Audit Committee studies the county departments and special

districts having administrative, management, and fiscal responsibilities. The 1999- 2000

committee attempted to work on issues that might have long term results through

suggestions to policy makers that could help them make decisions.

We interviewed a number of departments in connection with our goals. Much effort was

made in some areas, particularly in water supply, county contracts with outside agencies

and the Kern Community College District.

The committee communicated with personnel from the following entities during our

investigations:

·   Kern County Auditor- Controller- County Clerk

·   Kern County Administrative Office

·   1st District Supervisor

·   2nd District Supervisor

·   3rd District Supervisor

·   Kern County Human Services

·   Kern Mental Health Department

·   Kern County Superintendent of Schools

·   Kern County Water Agency

·   Kern County Community College District

·   Bakersfield College

·   Kern County Sheriff’s Department

·   Kern County Counsel

·   Brown, Armstrong, Randall, Reyes, Paulden, McCown and Hill Certified Public Accountants

·   Kern County District Attorney’s Office

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

11

KERN COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

PURPOSE: ANOTHER STEP IN KERN COUNTY CONTRACTING

PROCEDURES

This committee conducted many interviews with elected officials, county staff and private

individuals regarding the current contract procedures manual in Kern County.

FINDINGS:

Approximately $ 200,000,000, is served in one way or another by contracts, making proper

procedures an imperative.

The 1997- 98 Grand Jury’s annual report to the board of supervisors found deficiencies in

the contracting procedures used within Kern County. The report included a

recommendation for a single department to be established to manage and oversee county

contracts. A standardized contract form and guidelines were recommended. As a result of

board action, the Contract Procurement Manual dated August 1998 was developed,

adopted and distributed to all county departments. This was an excellent first step toward

solving the contracting problems. The recommendation for a single contracting

department was rejected because of the board policy that department heads have this

responsibility. Department heads are either elected, in civil service, or acting ‘ at will’ of the

board. Thus, this responsibility is not always easily carried out.

Interviews were held with various county officials and persons with experience on both

sides of contracting issues.

The Kern County Board of Supervisors is responsible for over all management of the

county. Properly, the board does not wish to micro- manage the departments.

At present, utilizing the procurement manual, each department head is responsible for his

or her contract’s content and is subject only to review as to form by County Counsel and

final approval by the Board of Supervisors.

The last few years have shown that some contracts, particularly with non- profit

corporations, have experienced serious difficulties with operations and management

procedures.

Many contracts are not renewed until months after the contract period has started or even

ended in some cases. Part of this problem is due to the uncertainties of the receipt of state

and federal money in time for prompt renewal and renegotiations. However, at times part

of the problem lies within the county. While the Board of Supervisors policy requires

certain actions for retroactive approval, this area is still a problem.

There are some instances where special procedures are needed to accomplish short term

contracting. The Sheriff’s officer training programs with their many contracts, require high

insurance limits for a lecturer or trainer. This is expensive and seems overdone.

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

12

The county is making responsible efforts to improve the manual and procedures. For

example, auditing ability by the Kern County Auditor/ Controller has already been

strengthened by the addition of staff. Many of those interviewed were of the opinion that

further auditing is needed.

The Procurement Manual is intended to ensure that proper business practices are being

used to account for the use of public funds. Several of the larger departments are already

using such practices. They have the means and the staff to oversee the content, and the

awarding and monitoring of their large number of contracts. Smaller departments do not

have the financial ability or the staff personnel to develop a contracting group.

COMMENTS AND CONCLUSIONS:

In the long term, as technology and our county needs grow, the necessity for skilled

professional contracting personnel will increase. The need for proper preparation of

contracts and monitoring will multiply.

There is the human tendency for a department head to decide that his or her department

needs goods or services in a very short time. There are, no doubt, circumstances that

require fast action. However, department heads should know that these actions will often

draw justified criticism of poor planning on their part.

The very appearance of wrongdoing has damaged the public’s perception of the spending

of public monies.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. The Procurement Manual should be reviewed by the County Administrative

Office, department heads, the county counsel, and the County Auditor/ Controller to

make certain that the following improvements are achieved:

A: Non- profit corporation contractors should be monitored to insure that their operations

meet the requirements of the contract. Monitoring should also be done to see that the

county receives full value for this public money and that the contracts meet all legal

requirements and are operated in accordance with good business practices. This work

could include managerial audits, operational audits, and financial audits. The contracts

should contain specific language to allow the county to initiate or require such audits. This

will make clear that the county ( and the Grand Jury) will have timely access to the records

for oversight as needed.

B: Profit corporations and other contractors shall be monitored to insure that their

operations meet the requirements of the contract. Further, to see that the county receives

full value for its money and that the contractors meet all legal requirements.

C: The manual should be reviewed closely to determine whether those requirements, that

are now optional with the department head, should be changed to mandatory

requirements.

2. All contracts ( if it has not already been done) should be listed and reviewed by the

department head enumerating the contractors names, fees, purpose and date of

renegotiations. Adequate time should be given for the new contract to be evaluated or

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

13

new contractors to be found. The County Administrator’s Office and the

Auditor/ Controller should have copies of this work as requested and the subsequent

audits and monitoring. This is so that the board might have an opportunity to take any

early action necessary to protect public interest.

3. Contracts must be reviewed expeditiously so that the contractor is able to meet the

time constraints and deliver the goods or services.

4. Blanket purchase orders should be used in such special circumstances as in the

Sheriff’s Officer Training Program. Appropriate forms approved by county counsel

would be used.

5. A study should be initiated to determine the best way for the county to provide

increased support to all public entities. This will ensure that the counties contracting

proficiency meets the increased expertise of the contractors and changing regulations.

This program could provide the training and job classifications to develop a

professional staff and ultimately a separate department.

6. The smaller departments need support to develop contract systems for timeliness,

monitoring, and oversight. These smaller entities should make more use of the

support now available from the County Counsel, Auditor/ Controller, General Services,

and the County Administrator as needed.

RESPONSE REQUIRED

RESPOND WITHIN 90 DAYS TO

PRESIDING JUDGE

KERN COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT

1415 TRUXTUN AVENUE

BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

14

KERN COUNTY WATER AGENCY

HOW DO WE GROW FROM HERE?

The Kern County Grand Jury Administration and Audit Committee met with the Kern

County Water Agency, s General Manager, President of the Board and the agency general

counsel, and reviewed the agency’s budget and operations. The committee feels the

agency is well run and is performing a great service for the County of Kern. In line with

this, the committee presents this position paper.

The 1999- 2000 Kern County Grand Jury commends the Bakersfield Californian for its

editorial, dated 9/ 27/ 99, entitled, “ Water War” needs leadership.

Further, the Kern County Grand Jury commends the Kern County Water Agency for its

most timely and informative series of articles. These articles plainly state the cost, to all of

us, for the past shortage of water during the 1987 to 1991 drought and what to expect

when the next drought arrives. In the best case scenario, the State Water Project and the

Central Valley Project water supplies to Kern County would be short about forty four to

forty five per cent of normal. If the pending environmental requests are taken from the

available supplies, these shortages increase. A most serious situation. This must serve

as a wake up call to all citizens and leaders in Kern County. It is time for action. For us

not to act is a failure to protect what we have now and will need in the future for ourselves

and those who follow.

The Kern County Grand Jury calls the Cal- Fed proposed solution to “ Fix the Delta” a

failure, in that it may help restore the delta but does so at the expense of the other users.

It does not in any way properly address the basic problem of a lack of adequate supply.

Re- dividing the existing supplies, with greatly increasing demands and with known

decreases in overall supplies, is a gross error in problem solving. It is the opinion of the

Grand Jury that not planning to immediately take steps to increase the supply of new

water, is an invitation for a disaster. To wait ten years to see if the “ Through- Delta plan”

works, before taking proper steps is illogical. It will take another ten years to complete a

major project, with all the environmental hoops that have to be satisfied. That means

twenty years to relieve this shortage.

Paying lip service to study new supplies means that it is a lesser priority of needs for Cal-

Fed and that satisfying environmentalists’ demands has the highest priority. This does not

properly address the state’s needs.

By skewing the entire Cal- Fed process to accommodate environmentalist demands

without the accountability demanded of agriculture and urban users, is a serious mistake.

Environmentalists need better science to support their demands. Their disregard for new

supplies is an outrage. This must be the foundation of a serious challenge to the Cal- Fed

proposed solution by all the officials, community leaders, local organizations and

concerned citizens of Kern County. There is no need to plan the infrastructure to meet the

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

15

needs of the anticipated twenty million new Californians without planning to have water for

them.

The electorate approved the State Water Project in 1960 and facilities were constructed.

The first water was delivered to Kern County in 1968. A key part of the project was a

Delta Water Transfer System. This was part of the original plan, but was never built. An

initiative to build a peripheral canal and other projects to complete the system was

defeated by the voters in 1982. Failure to complete the project means that in a water

short year the yield of the project is about two million- acre feet, whereas, 4.2 million- acre

feet have been contracted for delivery to the thirty state contractors. This results in

automatic shortages in dry years. However, entitlement holders still must pay for all of

their entitlement water to continue to retire the bonds. ( Note: entitlement is the number of

acre- feet contracted for delivery each year.)

In the 1960’ s the Kern County Water Agency was formed to relieve the state from having

to deal directly with the many districts in the county. It currently represents and

coordinates twenty- three separate districts having local, federal, and/ or state supplies

within the county. The agency contracted with the State Department of Water Resources

for approximately 1.1 million acre- feet of water per year for Kern County. It is used mostly

by agriculture with a small amount of municipal and industrial water.

The cost of state water has increased faster than projected. This coupled with changes in

agricultural economics has caused some of the westside districts to have more entitlement

than can be supported. They are being forced to face up to selling the excess

entitlements. Some of these entitlements are leaving the county. This is a shame and

bodes ill for the future.

New supplies will mean increased costs. It is the opinion of those close to the water

situation in the county, that the present state water supply is now and in the foreseeable

future the least expensive available supply.

The ambitious 2010 plan for expansion around Bakersfield, and the desire to attract new

industries which will create more jobs, will hinge upon an adequate water supply.

Therefore, it behooves the county and city planners to step forward and devise a way to

keep these entitlements in Kern County. The city has a good water right and supply from

the Kern River but should work closely with the county and the agency to keep the state

water. By using the high quality river water along with the project water supply, would

ensure an adequate supply of both quantity and quality for expanded future demands.

In 1974 the voters approved a bond issue to start addressing the state water issues. In

March 2000 the voters will again be asked to approve a bond issue to continue progress

on water problems. Both of these issues are steps along the way. However, they are not

part of the Cal- Fed proposal that is vital to the solutions, of quality and supply for the

future. It is of utmost importance that new supplies and improved water quality be part of

the Cal- Fed proposal.

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

16

Fortunately, earlier Californians had the foresight to build what has to date kept our state

in water and allowed it to grow to what it is today. However, this system will not support

our future needs.

For years, the Kern County Water Agency has led the fight to protect Kern’s water

supplies. The county is most fortunate to have such an effective and well- managed

agency representing its interests. Supporting the agency is a very talented group of

District Engineer- Managers and Board of Directors, which has made this county one of the

most effective water management groups in the state. It is hoped that the Californian’s

Editorial, the Kern County Water Agency articles and the Grand Jury Report will energize

the county into action in support of the water community.

It will take considerable public pressure to have an impact on this process. All county

leaders, public officials and concerned citizens should contact the Federal Bureau of

Reclamation, the Department of Water Resources, Fish and Game, Federal and State

Legislators urging a change in direction for the Cal- Fed process to provide for an

adequate supply of quality water for our state.

HOW WE GROW FROM HERE WILL DEPEND UPON A RELIABLE SUPPLY OF GOOD

QUALITY WATER.

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

17

Kern Community College District

Purpose of Inquiry:

Our community has been faced with a changing job market; we are no longer going to be

dependent upon oil and agriculture. Kern Community College District ( KCCD) plays a vital

part in the effort to expand and meet the needs of our community’s job market. The

college district also has a new Chancellor. The Grand Jury felt it was important that we

meet with the new chancellor to gain a better insight of his mission for our future.

Findings:

Time and expertise limited our investigation. We interviewed the Chancellor on two

occasions, as well as the district financial officer, two board members, the President of

Bakersfield College, and several Bakersfield College staff members.

The Chancellor has only been with the district for a few short months but has easily

realized that he has a very dedicated and valuable educational staff and faculty.

Funds received from the state are very often categorical, which limits the needed flexibility

to manage programs and set goals. At present, the State of California has a program that

stresses “ transfer” to a four- year college for all junior college graduates, thus forcing more

academic classes. The industrial arts, where young people learn a trade and older people

improve their ability to handle more complex and difficult jobs, are losing support in the

junior college system. Certificate programs, such as nursing, computers, and accounting

are gaining in popularity and are fulfilling a much- needed source of labor in this

community.

The community college schools are drastically under financed when comparing them to

other educational institutions. We are informed that prison educational programs have a

higher priority for funding than do the community colleges.

The most pressing problem we encountered in our investigation of KCCD was the very

low morale of the teaching staff. This is a dedicated faithful group that only wants

Bakersfield College to be the best in the state. Most of the problems lie in the perceived

question of fairness of the distribution of funds between the community college and district

management. There are indications that administrative costs are higher than they should

be in relation to the total budget. It was pointed out to the Grand Jury that redundancy and

overlapping of administrative jobs is an on- going problem. It is also important to note that,

when asked for data that showed how Kern Community College District compares with

other schools its size that, no two groups had the same figures. It seems obvious that the

only real figures should come from the state.

The board is well aware of the problems that the community colleges face and they have

begun to address them.

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

18

Comments:

The district board, the district management, the teaching staff, and this Grand Jury agree

that the general under- funding of the community college systems by the state needs

drastic upward revision. The district board, as evidenced by their minutes, would like to

see a general group action throughout the state by community college districts to inform

and lobby the state legislators and the governor for timely, steady funding that will meet

the needs of California. The community colleges are far below other educational units in

funding and this needs to change.

The Grand Jury believes that the community college could meet the real needs of our

society by placing more emphasis on providing young people with skills so that they may

enter the work force and be prepared for life. This requires that the districts, as a group,

sell themselves to the state as being ready, willing and able to service these needs.

Support is needed from all legislators.

The Grand Jury believes that the Governor’s “ transfer” program is a good program with

excellent goals. However, we believe that some re- thinking is necessary to allot more of

our resources to “ bread and butter” classes.

The board of directors of the district, its management, teaching staff and administrators

believe that a management audit is necessary. The Grand Jury agrees that a

management audit is a must and is of the highest priority. Auditors in private enterprise or

state auditors should be engaged quickly to perform this function.

There is an acknowledged overlap and redundancy between district and campus

administrative costs which must be addressed by both parties.

The faculty at Bakersfield College has proven they are high achievers and we want

nothing less. The faculty is the college district’s best chance for success. Without them

every other position is unnecessary. The achievement of their mission will depend upon

the quality of the faculty and their direct involvement in educational decisions. Good

faculty moral is critical for long term educational goals at Bakersfield College.

The Grand Jury takes no side or role in the collective bargaining issue but feels strongly

that this issue must not be detrimental to the success of the college.

Recommendations:

·   A management audit should examine the relative apportionment of funds between

administration and instruction.

·   The district must keep and attract qualified instructors.

·   An examination is necessary to determine the needs of the district to achieve its

mission to prepare students for employment and to become productive citizens.

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

19

·   The Grand Jury recommends that staff members and the new leaders now in place

make a special effort to communicate so that the positions taken by the parties

have a rational and a reasonable base. Then these great institutions can get about

their business.

RESPONSE REQUIRED WITHIN 90 DAYS TO:

PRESIDING JUDGE

KERN COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT

1415 TRUXTUN AVENUE

BAKERSFIELD CA 93301

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

20

AD- HOC COMMITTEES

COMMITTEE MEMBERS

Waste Management Investigation

Dan O. Neal

George Lusich

Carolyn Troxel

Special Investigation # 1

Bob Herrick

Michael Dake

James E. Poole

Special Investigation # 2

Dan O. Neal

Bob Herrick

Carolyn Troxel

Ferrelene Zachary

The Foreperson of the 1999- 2000 Grand Jury appointed members of the jury to serve on special

temporary committees in areas, which required extensive investigations.

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

21

THE WEST SIDE STORY

CHAPTER ONE OF THREE

PURPOSE OF INQUIRY:

To comply with a specific request by the city of Taft through the Cities and Service

Committee of the Kern County Grand Jury regarding illegal dumping; fire hazards; and

“ attractive nuisances” within and immediately adjacent to the city of Taft.

FINDINGS:

“ The Public Official who, upon receipt of information leading him/ her to believe that a

public nuisance exists upon private property in the unincorporated area of the county,

shall make a reasonable investigation of the facts and if possible inspect the property to

determine whether or not a public nuisance exists. Inspections may include

photographing the conditions to obtaining samples or other physical evidence. If an

owner/ occupant or agent refuses permission to enter or inspect, the Public Official may

seek an inspection warrant pursuant to the procedures provided for in the California Code

of Civil Procedure, Section 18822.50 through Section 18822.59.

Further, Section 8.44.050 Keeping premises free from creating a public nuisance. Every

owner of property shall properly maintain the property in such a manner that it does not

contain or become a public health nuisance and shall promptly abate any public nuisance

in accordance with this chapter.

A major problem for the City of Taft is illegal dumping. Taft officials, West Side Waste

Management Company, and concerned citizens have been fighting illegal waste dumping

in Taft for years. However, it appears they are loosing the battle.

As members of the Grand Jury toured the county areas immediately surrounding the city

of Taft we noted that a distinct delineation was apparent. The side of the street that was

within the confines of the city limits appears neat, clean and well cared for; whereas the

county area ( directly across the streets) shows no pride of community or area. Trash has

accumulated.

West Side Waste Management has to date voluntarily hauled 326.9 tons of trash and

garbage, 53.1 tons of appliances and 898 tires to the local landfill. The company has not

been paid for these services as their contract is with the City of Taft. The company has

thus far expended $ 41,281 in labor and $ 57,150 in equipment costs. When questioned

as to why this effort and money had been expended the owner states, “ This area is my

area of responsibility, and I care”.

Without “ pride of neighborhood”, the areas affected by illegal accumulations of trash and

garbage will continue to be a blight on the entire area.

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

22

Within the areas where there is no mandatory trash pickup it is obvious that although the

intentions of the residents may be good, the actions have been poor and the “ trips to the

dump” are just not happening. The trash is accumulating! It has been shown in the past

and in other areas that trashy neighborhoods tend to spread quickly into the adjacent

areas and the problems are compounded exponentially.

This information reinforces the idea that mandatory trash pickup is urgently required in

densely populated areas of the county, not only around the Taft area but throughout Kern

County.

Extreme trash and garbage concentration depicts a health hazard. The Director of the

Kern County Public Health Department informed our committee that “ unfortunately, it is no

longer the responsibility of the Health Department. The Board of Supervisors decision in

1988 took that function away from the Health Department and added a new department,

the Environmental Health Department. Our prime responsibility now is epidemics and

other special health hazards.”

The Director of the Environmental Health Department explained to the Grand Jury

committee that his department does not have jurisdiction over trash and garbage that is

“ inside a building”. Although the title Director of the Environmental Health Department

assumes health- related issues, it was pointed out that no medical training is required for

this director’s management position.

During out investigation we met with the Fourth District Supervisors’ Chief of Staff. He

informed the committee that the Supervisor is aware of the problem, this is an old

problem. But like so many unsolved problems for Kern County, lack of funds is usually

the answer.

The Department of Building and Safety has compliance codes that must be followed. The

inspector must first determine the location of the perceived problem and a certain time

period must elapse. If deemed a health, fire or other hazard the building could then be

boarded up or in other words made “ a less attractive” nuisance.

These “ attractive nuisances” were deemed to be “ fire hazards” by the Taft City Officials.

A list of the problem areas with specific addresses was compiled. Copies of this list were

sent to Chief of the Kern County Fire Department, Departments of Building and Safety,

and the Environmental Health Departments.

As previously stated in this report, certain structures, lots overgrown with weeds, and

other trashy areas are deemed to be fire hazards. During the investigation and writing of

this report the structure ( as previously reported to county officials) at 325 Olive Street

burned. This instance further proves that fire hazards and other public nuisances must be

dealt with on a priority basis and alleviated immediately.

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

23

CONCLUSION:

We are now convinced that our county government has been so fragmented that it is

virtually impossible to assess failure for any of the departments that we have investigated

and interviewed. Departments should be named according to their duties so that the tax

payers of this county will be able to locate and deal with the departments whose names

relates to the duties they have accepted as managers and employees of the tax payers of

Kern County. The Board of Supervisors should provide adequate funding to enforce

existing ordinances.

COMMENTS:

The combined committees have gone through five departments of " bureaucracy" and thus

far we have not been assured that the trash, garbage and dilapidated buildings that

plague Taft and Kern County will be alleviated.

If the Grand Jury, as a group of dedicated and interested citizens has this much trouble

attempting to help where requested, what chance does the average citizens have of

getting his or her problems solved effectively and efficiently.

The Kern County Waste Management Department is doing a commendable job to reach

all the timely solid waste reduction requirements of AB 939. Kern County will most likely

exceed the state mandate by 12/ 31/ 2000; otherwise the $ 10,000 per day fine could be

levied by the state of California for non- compliance.

The Board of Supervisors and Waste Management Managers have instituted and

conducted “ studies” on the county’s trash collection problem since 1993. The new

millenium demands immediate action.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. The Kern County Health Department should be charged with the protection of all of the

citizens of Kern County with regard to all communicable diseases, from birth to death. It is

recommended that the Environmental Health Department be placed under the direction of

the Director of the Health Department.

2. The Board of Supervisors should take immediate steps to implement mandatory trash

and garbage collection in the densely populated areas of the county and most especially,

those areas not incorporated into, but adjacent to, incorporated cities.

3. The Building and Safety Department should immediately put an adequate number of

inspectors into the field to seek out and solve the problems of dilapidated and dangerous

building and safety law violations. A monthly report of existing violations should be

submitted to adjacent incorporated cities; the applicable county supervisor; the affected

fire department; the county’s health officer and the director of waste management. On site

photographs should accompany each reported violation.

4. The Kern County Code Compliance Division should be more diligent in its efforts to

seek out and locate violations of the county codes. And make a greater effort to, as their

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

24

letterhead says become a “ Partnership to Promote Health and Safety, and to Maintain

Community Standards”. The departments involved should immediately add an

adequate number of inspection personnel to assure that their stated goals are met.

5. Although mandates can be met for AB 939, it would greatly benefit all citizens of Kern

County to exceed those requirements. Kern County was late in making efforts for solid

waste reduction and has not been as progressive as other counties. We recommend that

Kern County Waste Management lead the way to establish a solution to reduce solid

waste accumulating in illegal dumping in outlying county areas. We also recommend that

other large waste accumulators such as schools and retail establishments be inspired to

better manage their solid waste in the form of recycling and/ or assistance in establishing a

program to reduce solid waste.

6. All the county departments we spoke with have expressed concerns regarding the

trash and garbage problems throughout Kern County. But each has expressed that the

problem is not theirs. It would benefit all Kern County residences for the Board of

Supervisors to form a special task force made up of department heads that are involved in

the problem of trash, garbage, fire, health hazards, and “ public nuisances” that plague our

county. This special task force should be charged specifically to develop co- operative

efforts to devise solutions to these problems in a reasonable time frame.

REFERENCE:

A. Cities and Services Report – City of Taft

B. AB 939, dated 1986

C. Chapter 8.44 – Kern County Ordinances

RESPONSE REQUIRED:

Presiding Judge

Kern County Superior Court

1415 Truxtun Avenue

Bakersfield, CA 93301

:

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

25

WASTE MANAGEMENT AB 939

CHAPTER TWO OF THREE

PURPOSE OF INQUIRY:

The purpose of this inquiry is to determine if Kern County is ready for AB 939. AB 939

mandates that all counties reduce solid waste volume by twenty- five per cent by January

1, 1995 and fifty per cent by December 2000.

FINDINGS:

Members of the Kern County Waste Management Task Force also serve as the Kern

County Waste Management Advisory Committee. This task force was formed when AB

939 was first introduced in 1990. Each county was required to have a task force to

implement AB 939. Kern County Waste Management Advisory Committee was already

established and “ doing a good job”, according to the waste management director, and

therefore was requested to become the new Waste Management Task Force. The board

of supervisors then appointed the task force. The advisory committee was formed in 1986

and the task force in 1990.

Although the task force and advisory committees are made up of the same members the

two committees report to the entities that created them. The task force reports to the state

of California. The advisory committee reports to the Board of Supervisors. The board

and state act as a “ check and balance” system so that no conflict of interest occurs. The

task force has no enforcement powers and is advisory only. Solid Waste Management

has a $ 31,000,000 budget, as approved by the Board of Supervisors.

Kern County had done little to reduce solid waste volumes prior to January 1, 1995. The

county was able to meet the January 1995 requirements by requesting major companies

that generated high volumes of solid waste to immediately implement a program to reduce

the amount of solid waste entering our landfills. The county accomplished this by greatly

increasing charges for disposal of solid waste. Some counties in California had a greater

challenge since they had been reducing the solid waste from their landfills for many years

prior to AB 939.

If Kern County does not reach the fifty per cent reduction ( by December 31, 2000) it can

result in fines of $ 10,000 per day. As of this date ( January 2000) Kern County is at forty

nine per cent of compliance. A large portion of the reduction has been attributed to the

diverting of dirt, rock, concrete, and other hard construction materials. Diverting other

construction materials such as wood, plaster, and packing materials as generated by local

businesses, homeowners and other county residences will attain the remaining required

reduction percentages.

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

26

The committee asked the director of waste management what was being done at schools

regarding waste management. She said each school was responsible for any recycling

effort. Few schools have voluntary recycling programs.

COMMENTS:

The Solid Waste Management Department appears to be well managed and is “ On track”

to comply with AB 939 requirements.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

The Solid Waste Management Department should become more involved with recycling in

every school district. The waste accumulated at schools is substantial and recycling of

waste would contribute greatly to the reduction of solid waste to our landfills.

RESPONSE REQUIRED

Respond within 90 days to

Presiding Judge

Kern County Superior Court

1415 Truxtun Ave.

Bakersfield, CA 93301

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

27

WASTE MANAGEMENT

LET’S CLEAN UP THIS MESS

CHAPTER THREE OF THREE

PURPOSE OF INQUIRY:

During the course of the Cities and Services visits to the eleven incorporated cities in Kern

County, City and Public Works Managers were asked individually about problems that

were of concern to their cities. Invariably when these management personnel were asked

about trash and garbage, relative to the county area surrounding their cities and areas of

responsibility, the answers were uniformly negative.

Areas affected include: Maricopa, Taft, Bakersfield, Wasco, Delano, McFarland,

California City, Ridgecrest, Tehachapi, Arvin and Shafter – ALL ELEVEN OF THE

INCORPORATED CITIES!

Committee members have seen the problems of trash, garbage, fire hazards and other

“ public nuisances” that are prevalent throughout all five of the Supervisorial Districts of

Kern County. The committees met with county staff and various city officials.

FINDINGS:

1. The Kern County Grand Jury finds that the present handling of solid waste in the

unincorporated portions of the county has caused a dangerous health and safety

problem in the county and areas adjacent to the cities.

2. The county has chosen not to adopt ordinances that will cause mandatory trash

collection to take place in the county areas.

3. The county has not demonstrated an adequate enforcement ability to cause illegal

dumping to cease.

4. Trash has been accumulating for years in the county and in areas adjacent to the cities

and in the heavier populated areas of the county. Industrial and agricultural lands

have also suffered. A cleanup effort by the cities and some of the trash haulers has

helped.

5. Committees made up of city and county agencies have met through the years.

Careful and thoughtful studies have been made. Some potential areas of service have

been delineated. The technical staffs of the county and cities know the problem areas

and understand their solution.

6. Proposition 218 approved by the voters, limited the ability of public entities to tax.

However, garbage handling is exempt. The tax assessment may not exceed the

actual cost of services rendered.

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

28

7. An excellent contract covering waste haulers and garbage handling in the greater

Bakersfield area has been developed and was presented to the board on December

14, 1999. However, it does not include the needed mandatory trash collection for this

area! Meantime, the remaining portions of the county are neglected.

8. In order to clarify almost fifty years of rules and regulations, “ waste management

zones” were proposed throughout the county. Each “ zone” encompasses a given

area. Greater Bakersfield is Zone 2.

9. The delays have caused the anticipated trash cleanup costs to rise to the order of one

to two million dollars depending on the methods and people used to do the work.

Hearings and negotiations should begin immediately.

10. The county has a very fragmented enforcement and control system since various

segments of jurisdiction have been removed from the County Health Officer.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. The county should immediately “ clean up the county” by contracts and emergency

funds, and/ or prisoner labor as required, to get the job done. The county staff is well

aware of the locations of the problem areas.

2. To make the “ clean up” be a permanent solution, mandatory pickup is necessary in

the appropriate areas. Aggressive enforcement of all ordinances including those

regarding illegal dumping is required.

3. The County Board of Supervisors should immediately adopt the proposed greater

Bakersfield Zone 2 ordinance with additional mandatory trash collection provisions and

extend the hauler’s contract to cover this provision. If those negotiations cannot be

successfully achieved in a very short time, the work should be done under separate

emergency contracts.

4. The County Board of Supervisors should immediately develop and adopt a similar

proposal for all areas of higher density population in the county. .

5. The county should proceed with contracts as may be negotiated and institute fees. If

the perceived areas of dispute cannot be resolved between the various public and

private entities, then a request for an opinion by the Attorney General of the State of

California could be made. If lawsuits have to be filed by the various entities involved,

so be it, then a judge will make a decision and clear the way.

6. The Kern County Health Officer should be asked for an opinion on the waste issue, so

that public and private sectors will recognize the seriousness of the problems.

Consideration should be given to returning jurisdiction to the county health officer for

these important areas of health.

RESPONSE REQUIRED

Respond within 90 days to

Presiding Judge

Kern County Superior Court

1415 Truxtun Ave.

Bakersfield, Ca 93301

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

29

CITIES AND SERVICES COMMITTEE

Dan O. Neal – Chairman

Nellie Gomez- Vice- Chairperson

Jean Beavers

Raymond Mortimer

Mission Statement

The Grand Jury Committee on Cities and Services has the responsibility to oversee joint

power agencies, incorporated cities and various services within the county according to

Penal Code 925. a.

The Cities and Services Committee reviews and evaluates procedures, methods used by

the cities and other agencies to determine whether they comply with stated objectives and

to determine whether or not their operations can be improved.

The Committee may inquire into aspects of Kern County or any incorporated city

governments, including special districts and joint power agencies, to ascertain that the

best interests of Kern County are being served.

It is also the desire of this committee to assist the cities, joint power agencies, and

services within Kern County to the best of its ability and within the scope of its powers.

The 1999- 2000 Grand Jury has visited all eleven incorporated cities within the county and

special districts.

The following is a list of the incorporated cities visited:

Arvin Bakersfield California City

Delano Maricopa McFarland

Ridgecrest Shafter Taft

Tehachapi Wasco

The Cities and Service Committee thanks all of those individuals with whom we have had

interviews. You have helped greatly in the compilation of the reports we have issued.

This committee believes that you have all helped to make our cities and our county a

better place to live. For this we sincerely thank you.

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

30

CITY OF ARVIN

PURPOSE OF INQUIRY:

Annual visitation by the Grand Jury pursuant to Penal Code Section 925. a.

INTRODUCTION:

Members of the committee visited the city on December 28, 1999. We made a tour of the city to

determine its overall general appearance. We looked for problem areas, inspected the condition of

the streets and observed the operation of the sewage treatment facility. We met with the City

Manager and discussed the overall operation of city departments, discussed problems the city was

having and examined and compared current and past budgets including its capital improvement and

maintenance expenditures.

FINDINGS:

In August 1993 when the present City Manager assumed office, the city was faced with the

following problems:

·   The city was $ 40,000,000 in debt.

·   Fifty- four lawsuits and/ or grievances were pending against the city.

·   City employees were actively working to recall the entire city council.

·   The city owned golf course was $ 28,000,000 in debt.

In succeeding years from 1992 to present, the following has been accomplished:

·   The $ 40,000,000 debt has been retired.

·   All fifty- four lawsuits and/ or grievances have been resolved.

·   The employees are no longer working to recall the city council.

·   The $ 28,000,000 golf course debt has been settled for $ 600,000 payable over ten years.

The sewage treatment plant has been leased to a private operator for $ 88,000 per year,

which is being used to retire the $ 600,000 golf course settlement. The sewage plant is

operating at sixty- five percent capacity; however, based on the official population ( 11,409),

per capita flow is approximately one hundred eighty percent of normal. This is because

there are approximately six thousand illegal residents using the system who are not

counted as part of the official population. This fact will require the plant to be expanded

sooner than would otherwise be required for normal population growth.

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

31

The December 8 and 22, 1999 issues of the local newspaper, The Arvin Tiller, reported

that recent city council meetings had erupted into fierce shouting matches. Accusations

have been made against the city manager and the police department, the newspapers

and others. The accusations were described as being personal attacks against city

officials. Officials were accused of “ manipulating and using the system to keep those less

fortunate, and those who are new to the system away from the process. This they claim is

a violation of their civil liberties of the United States of America.”

The Arvin Tiller and the Lamont Reporter were accused of being biased and being used

as a “ forum to attack.”

An inspection of the streets revealed that the pavement, in the majority of the streets

inspected was not being adequately maintained. Those streets were in various degrees of

deterioration.

COMMENTS:

The continuation of the remarkable progress made in the last seven years by the city is

being endangered by the acrimony created by the public accusations being made.

The City Manager and staff are to be commended for their excellent work and progress

toward solving the city’s myriad of problems.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

·   It is recommended that an inspection be made of the streets and a ten to fifteen

year master plan for maintenance and reconstruction be developed.

·   It is also recommended that all the streets, which are beginning to have

problems, be sprayed with an asphalt- rejuvenating agent in order to stop further

deterioration. The process should be repeated every two to three years until

such time as all of the streets have been brought up to good condition. If this is

done, ultimately considerable funds will be freed up for other city purposes.

RESPONSE REQUIRED

Respond within 90 days to

Presiding Judge

Kern County Superior Court

1415 Truxtun Avenue

Bakersfield, California 93301

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

32

CITY OF BAKERSFIELD

Bakersfield, California is located near the southern end of California’s Central Valley on

State Highway 99.

Known as the “ City of Golden Opportunity,” the discovery of oil in the area in the early

1900’ s plus an ideal climate for farming has brought economic stability to Bakersfield.

This continues to ensure the fast growth of this increasingly metropolitan city.

The 2000 population is in excess of two hundred fifty thousand. This makes Bakersfield

one of the fastest growing cities in the United States. The city’s annual growth rate has

been in excess of three per cent per year for the past three years.

The city has twelve fire stations with a 1999- 2000 annual budget in excess of

$ 19,159,903.

The fire department has one hundred ninety employees.

The city police department has four hundred seven full time employees and a budget of

$ 36,773,915 for fiscal 1999- 2000.

FINDINGS:

Centennial Garden- Civic Center

The Bakersfield Arena began operation in October of 1998, and Odgen Entertainment was

given the management contract for both the arena and the civic center. In the first nine

months of operation the complex lost $ l, 500,000 in operating costs. In fiscal year 1999-

2000 the operating loss to the city is estimated to be $ 500,000, an improvement of

$ 1,000,000. Although, deemed by some residents to be a “ white elephant” at its

inception, the Centennial Gardens Arena has brought excellent entertainment to

Bakersfield and the programs appear to be getting better each year.

The city’s debt for the arena was approximately $ 29,500,000, of which approximately

$ 4,500,000 of old debt was rolled over to be included in the new debt. By the time the

debt is fully retired, ( approximately twenty- three years) the city will have paid $ 77,694,491

in principal, interest and other costs. However, due to financial restructuring of some

existing city debt, the total debt of the certificates of participation, over time, is reduced to

$ 54,834,118 which is the net cost to taxpayers of Bakersfield. Full and accurate operating

costs, including water, sewerage, electricity, and general maintenance are not yet

available due to the short time that the arena has been in operation.

With the advent of the Centennial Garden Arena, the streets become congested when

both the arena and the civic center have programs at the same time. Parking for the

handicapped is in excess of one thousand feet from the doors of the civic center. Double

parking of busses on Truxtun Avenue causes even greater congestion in the area.

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

33

Pedestrians jaywalk across Truxtun Avenue to get to their cars. Many patrons park on

Truxtun Avenue and adjacent side streets where there are no lighted crosswalks.

Pedestrian- auto “ near misses” are becoming more frequent as pedestrian and auto traffic

increases in this area that is not well lighted.

AIRPORT:

The city of Bakersfield is currently in negotiations with Kern County to enlarge the airport

at Meadows Field. As these negotiations become successful the city will benefit from the

larger terminal facilities and more businesses and residents will be enticed to the county

and to the city, and Bakersfield will continue to expand as a hub of commerce.

STREETS:

The city of Bakersfield has eight hundred five and six- tenths miles of streets, and ten

thousand eight hundred forty- two streetlights. Many of the streets are in a deteriorating

condition. While the city has no formal road and street maintenance plan, efforts are

being made to repair and maintain the streets as efficiently and as quickly as possible.

The capital outlay for 1998- 1999 was $ 226,000,000 including street repair. For 1999-

2000, $ 224,000,000 has been budgeted. There was $ 2,000,000 less in capital

improvements budgeted for the present year. The actual budget for streets, buildings,

repairs, and general maintenance is $ 3,100,000 for 1999- 2000. This includes the

gasoline tax refund.

FREEWAYS:

The planned freeways are still not complete as to routes and both city and county

residents are sprouting “ NIMBY” ( not in my backyard) signs. In the meantime traffic

congestion continues to worsen and accidents are becoming more frequent.

STREET LIGHTING:

In the past years the city advertised a “ light up the night” campaign to help quell crime.

Now many of the city streets are very dark and the street lighting in many areas appears

inadequate. Newer tract areas have a requirement for a certain amount of lumens ( a

measurement of light), however there are no requirements for the older areas of the city.

Some streets are so dark that residents are fearful of walking at night.

In the southeastern section of the city, citizens have been elected to a Project Area

Committee and serve for three years, with no pay. These dedicated citizens are actively

pursuing better street lighting in order to quell crime and generally make the streets safer.

If the crime rate can be lowered, then business and industry will move into the area and

create jobs and better living conditions.

This effort to improve street lighting is to be funded by “ Community Development Block

Grants” and is under the auspices of the Economic Development Director. To date very

little has been accomplished even though the Project Area citizens have submitted

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

34

detailed surveys of problem areas. The lack of adequate street lighting is not unique to

southeast Bakersfield but is pervasive throughout the city except in the newer tracts and

subdivisions. In these areas there is an ordinance requiring minimum lighting ( lumens),

but in the older areas of the city there is no standard minimum thus some areas are very

dark and other areas are well lighted.

Police department records show the following seven council districts and information

according to crime rates. All seven districts were rated according to the reported crimes in

their areas.

( l= highest, 7= lowest)

District City Council Member Crime Rating

1 IRMA CARSON # 4

2 PATRICIA DEMOND # 1

3 MIKE MAGGARD # 6

4 DAVID COUCH # 7

5 RANDY ROWLES # 3

6 JACQUIE SULLIVAN # 5

7 MARK C. SALVAGGIO # 2

COMMENTS:

The city planning commissioners must be firm in their decisions as to where and when the

freeway extensions will be built. Not everyone will be happy, however,

the planning commissioners have the unenviable job of deciding when, where, and how

for the benefit of the most. Millions of dollars have been spent on studies and yet we have

no answers or resolutions.

Some of the city streets cross railroad tracks and the roughness of the track crossing

shows that the railroad crossing/ streets are not well maintained. In the downtown area,

the crossing at “ L” Street has been recently repaired. The crossing however, still creates

a dangerous situation. When trains are stopped and switching, pedestrians are observed

to climb over and through the trains to cross the railroad tracks. Jurors are delayed, thus

stopping the courts from proceeding with criminal and civil cases in progress. Jay walking

continues. Cars and trucks are making U- turns both north and south of the railroad tracks

at the “ L” street crossing. It is anticipated that with the advent of the new passenger/ rail

terminal the present problem can and will worsen.

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

35

ANNEXATION:

Recently the city was embroiled in an annexation controversy with regard to the Palm-

Olive area. The area has since been excluded from the city by a vote of the citizens who

were affected. Investigation reveals that the city has annexed land with a population of

over ten thousand individuals. In each case the city believes citizens have benefited.

The city is plagued with a very irregular boundary and “ islands” of non- annexed

areas. These include the areas know as Harris # 5, South Gate # 1, Dennen # l, Castro #

4, Casa Loma # 7, and Washington # 3. Some of these areas measure in blocks; others

are the size of a mobile home park. Police officers and sheriffs deputies often have to be

called in from great distances even though the police department and sheriffs deputies

“ back up” each other. This creates hazardous situations for not only law enforcement but

for safety services as well.

The entire city government is to be commended for the exemplary manner in which

cooperative dialogs with county officials have been started. Both the city of Bakersfield

and the county of Kern will benefit from this increased cooperation and understanding.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

·   The city of Bakersfield should make a greater public relations effort to annex the

islands within the city limits, most specifically those areas listed previously.

·   The city of Bakersfield should consider methods to improve street lighting in the

areas of the city that do not comply with recent tract and “ subdivision”

requirements.

·   The city should institute a long- term ( 10- 15 year) street maintenance master

plan with regard to all city streets. If a long- term plan is instituted and

maintained the cost saving will allow other projects to be completed.

·   An overpass ( such as the overpass behind the Civic Center) should be installed

at the “ L” Street railroad crossing for the efficiency and safety of the jurors,

courts, local residents, and county/ city employees.

·   Because of the past lawsuits and misunderstandings, the city should make a

premium effort to use local contractors for city projects. This will keep

taxpayers’ monies, jobs, and business activities supporting the local economy.

RESPONSE REQUIRED

Respond within 90 days to

Presiding Judge

Kern County Superior Court

1415 Truxtun Avenue

Bakersfield, California

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

36

CALIFORNIA CITY

PURPOSE OF INQUIRY:

Annual visitation pursuant to section 925. a of Penal Code.

INTRODUCTION:

Members of the committee visited the city on January 5, 2000. We made a tour of the city

to determine its overall general appearance. We looked for problem areas, inspected the

condition of the streets and observed the operation of the sewage treatment facilities.

The committee met with the City Manager, Finance Director and City Engineer. They

discussed the overall operation of several city departments, discussed problems the city

was having and examined and compared current and past budgets including its capital

improvement and maintenance expenditures.

FINDINGS:

California City with an area of two hundred four square miles is the third largest city, in

area, in California. It has approximately two hundred miles of streets, fifty six thousand

residential lots, and a population of approximately nine thousand. It is located in the high

desert approximately fifteen miles northeast of Mojave at an elevation of approximately

two thousand five hundred feet. Approximately one hundred miles of streets are not

paved. The other one hundred have pavement which ranges from very good to very poor.

A private organization constructed a prison which would house two thousand three

hundred inmates with the intention of contracting with the state to house state inmates.

After construction, they found that it could not be done because legislation had been

adopted to prohibit housing of state inmates in a private prison. The city then contracted

with the federal government to house federal prisoners and in turn contracted with the

private organization to use that prison. As a result, the city will be able to add to its income

and perform a needed service for the federal prison system.

In order to improve the city’s overall financial condition, the city treasurer has been able to

refinance much of the city’s old debt at a lower rate.

COMMENTS:

The manager and city treasurer are to be commended for achieving improved financial

status of the city.

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

37

RECOMMENDATION:

·   It is recommended that an inspection be made of the streets and a ten to fifteen

year master plan for maintenance and reconstruction be developed. It is also

recommended that all the streets which are beginning to have problems be

sprayed with an asphalt rejuvenating agent in order to stop further deterioration.

This process should be repeated every two to three years until such time as all

the streets have been brought up to good condition. If this is done, ultimately

considerable funds will be freed up for other city purposes.

RESPONSE REQUIRED

Respond within 90 days to

Presiding Judge

Kern County Superior Court

1415 Truxtun Avenue

Bakersfield, California

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

38

CITY OF DELANO

PURPOSE OF INQUIRY:

Annual visitation pursuant to section 925. a of the Penal Code.

INTRODUCTION:

Members of the committee visited the city on September 2, 1999. A tour of the city was

made to determine its overall general appearance. We looked for problem areas,

inspected the condition of the streets and observed the operation of the sewage treatment

facility.

The Committee met with the City Manager, Finance Director, a member of the city council

and a member of the police department. We discussed the overall operation of several

city departments, discussed problems the city was having and examined and compared

current and past budgets including its capital improvement and maintenance

expenditures.

FINDINGS:

The City of Delano is located approximately thirty- two miles north of Bakersfield, on State

Highway 99. It has a population of approximately thirty four thousand including

approximately six thousand inmates at North Kern Prison ( a division of California

Department of Corrections) and approximately four hundred forty prisoners at Delano

Community Correctional Facility.

The City council has adopted a 1999- 2000 annual budget totaling $ 7,393,790.

Revenue estimates total approximately $ 41,000 less than anticipated expenditures.

A review of procedures which are in place to account for funds collected from drug

confiscation indicates that the losses sustained in previous years due to the lack of

accountability will not recur.

Those monies which are now made available to the police department to be used as so

called “ flash money” are now limited to $ 700.00 rather than the amounts as much as

$ 30,000 to $ 40,000 as was the case in past years. The balance of those funds are now

maintained and accounted for along with other funds in the city’s accounts.

The city owned golf course which was previously operated at a considerable loss is now

leased to a private operator for a nominal fee each year. That operator has total

responsibility for operation and maintenance. This has changed the golf course from a

“ headache and a loss” to a “ small gainer” for the city and an improved facility for the golf

course users.

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

39

A review of the city’s streets, however, reveals a different situation. Many miles of the

city’s streets are in poor and deteriorating condition. The city does not have a long range,

ten to fifteen year master plan for street maintenance, repair and construction. Until this

master plan is formulated and in place the cost for street maintenance and repair will be

far greater than necessary. With the adoption of a master plan, monies can be saved and

made available for other needed city services. A review of the city’s total budget indicated

that fifty one per cent or $ 3,819,700 is allocated to the police department. Street

maintenance and other capital projects are not included in the city’s budget but are funded

separately. $ 658,000 from gas monies, plus $ 2,559,000 in capital projects and grant

monies are to be spent on street maintenance and other special projects within the city

limits.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

·   An immediate inspection be made of the city’s streets and a ten to fifteen year

maintenance, repair and construction plan be adopted.

RESPONSE REQUIRED

Respond within 90 days to

Presiding Judge

Kern County Superior Court

1415 Truxtun Avenue

Bakersfield, California 93301

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

40

CITY OF MARICOPA

PURPOSE OF INQUIRY:

Annual visitation pursuant to Section 925. a of the Penal Code.

INTRODUCTION:

Members of the committee visited the city on November 23, 1999. We made a tour of the

city to determine the overall general appearance. We inspected the condition of the

streets, observed the operation of the water system and sewage treatment facility. We

met with the Mayor, City Clerk, City Treasurer and the City Manager. The group

discussed any problems the city was having and examined the past and current budgets

including the current capital improvement and maintenance expenditures.

FINDINGS:

Maricopa is located approximately forty seven miles southwest of Bakersfield, California

on State Highway 166. The population is approximately one thousand two hundred forty.

Incorporated on July 25, 1911, this is the “ Mother City” of the prolific Midway Sunset Oil

Fields. Maricopa is the gateway to Cerro Noreste/ Mt. Pinos recreation area. Maricopa is

the name applied by a Pima Indian tribe.

The real growth of Maricopa began with the Lakeview Gusher in 1910. This famed

“ gusher” helped to make Kern County “ First in Oil” in the state and nation.

The city of Maricopa is a general law city with a council form of government which

provides for the council to set policy and give direction on all matters concerning the city.

The city council consists of five members who are elected at large for four year terms. The

mayor is selected by the council members after each election.

The Kern County Sheriffs Office provides protection under contract. Fire protection is

provided by the Kern County Fire Department.

The population of the city declined slightly in past years, however recently the population

is growing at a rate of approximately 3.7 percent. This has allowed at least two new

businesses to startup in the business district.

Eight of the “ Downtown business district” buildings have been adjudged unsafe and are on

the " URM"”( un- reinforced masonry) list. Those buildings were constructed circa 1911 and

do not comply with current earthquake safety laws. Three are inhabited and maintain

businesses therein.

All invoices to the city must be approved by a majority of the city council including payroll

for three city employees.

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

41

The sewage system is adjudged by the city manager to have very few non- paying users

however over two hundred families have septic tanks. The city council will institute a grant

search in the near future to correct this situation thru the availability of government grants.

The city treasurer maintains the bank balances and signs all checks with any council

member, and warrants for invoices that have been approved by the city council. The

treasurer and the city council perform a self- audit of the city accounts and balances on a

yearly basis.

City hall has no handicapped parking for use of city employees and visitors of the city hall.

COMMENTS:

Maricopa is the smallest city in Kern County and is struggling to remain autonomous.

The citizens govern themselves and appear to be “ holding their own” with elected officials

doing an overall seemingly good job.

The city’s budget has operated “ in the black” for the past approximately eight years and

now maintains an account with a special high interest paying state organization.

RECOMMENDATION:

·   The city officials should contract with an independent auditor controller to audit

all city accounts and balances to avoid the potential appearance of impropriety

that could result from a self- audit.

·   That the city provide adequate handicapped parking spaces at the city hall.

RESPONSE REQUIRED

Respond within 90 days to

Presiding Judge

Kern County Superior Court

1415 Truxtun Avenue

Bakersfield, California 93301

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

42

CITY OF MCFARLAND

PURPOSE OF INQUIRY:

Annual visitation pursuant to section 925. a of the Penal Code.

INTRODUCTION:

Members of the committee visited the city on September 2, 1999. We made a tour of the

city to determine its overall general appearance. We looked for problem areas, inspected

the condition of the streets and observed the operation of the sewage treatment facility.

We met with the city administrator, discussed the overall operation of several city

departments, discussed problems the city was having, and examined and compared

current and past budgets including capital improvement and maintenance expenditures.

FINDINGS:

McFarland has a population of nine thousand four hundred twenty, including one thousand

two hundred twenty five inmates in the McFarland Community Correctional Facility.

There are twenty two miles of streets which, for the most part, appear to be in good

condition.

The wastewater treatment plant was visited and appears to be operating efficiently, but

was nearing its capacity of one million gallons per day. Deep oxidation ponds are being

used which require the use of aerators.

A budget has been adopted which is balanced. All departments are being held within the

budget, while at the same time the necessary city services are being provided.

COMMENTS:

It is the committee’s impression that the city is being very well managed by the council

and city administrator.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

·   When the wastewater flow approaches the treatment plant capacity and needs to

be expanded, it is recommended that shallower oxidation ponds be constructed

which do not require aerators, thereby saving electrical costs.

·   For maintaining pavement in the future, it is recommended consideration be given

to using an asphalt rejuvenating agent on a regular two to three year program. This

program would be viable on new pavement and on those streets which have not

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

43

deteriorated to the point they must be replaced. It would not be applicable to those

streets which have been sealed so the rejuvenating agent will not penetrate.

RESPONSE REQUIRED WITHIN 90 DAYS TO:

PRESIDING JUDGE

KERN COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT

1415 TRUXTUN AVENUE

BAKERSFIELD CA 93301

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

44

CITY OF RIDGECREST

PURPOSE OF INQUIRY

Annual visitation pursuant to section 925. a of the penal code.

INTRODUCTION:

Members of the committee visited the city of Ridgecrest on August 26, 1999. We made a

tour of the city to determine its overall general appearance. We looked for problem areas,

inspected the condition of the streets and observed the operation of the sewage treatment

facility. We met with several council members and discussed the overall operation of

several city departments, discussed problems the city was having. We examined and

compared current and past budgets, including its capital improvement and maintenance

expenditures.

FINDINGS:

Ridgecrest is located approximately one hundred ten miles northeast of Bakersfield in the

high desert.

It was incorporated November 29, 1963 as a general law city with a council administrator

form of government which provides for the council to set policy and give direction on all

matters concerning the city. The city administrator is responsible for carrying out council

policy and overseeing the day- to- day operations of the city. Ridgecrest City Council

consists of five council members who are elected at large for four- year terms. The mayor

is selected by council members after each election.

The population of Ridgecrest is twenty- seven thousand five hundred which reflects a

continuing decrease from the past several years from a high of more than thirty thousand.

When the city was incorporated in 1963, the population was less than seven thousand and

had more than seventy miles of poorly constructed and maintained streets. This

represented a ratio of street miles to population more than five times greater than normal

for other cities in the county. As a result the city has had a continuing struggle to

adequately fund the improvement and maintenance of its streets. To the cities credit this

has been accomplished amazingly well. The population has quadrupled since

incorporation while the street mileage has only doubled.

The current projected street budget shows $ 1,453,554 for asphalt concrete ( AC) overlay,

rubberized chip seal and single chip seal. It does not, however, indicate the use of an

asphalt- rejuvenating agent to prevent deterioration of AC pavement. Inspection of the

streets indicates many miles are in immediate need of this treatment.

In 1965, a study was made of the city’s wastewater treatment plant which showed that the

plant would require expansion within a relatively short period of time. As a condition for

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

45

the city to receive grants for that expansion, the city and the then Naval Ordinance Test

Station ( now the Naval Weapons Center) were mandated by the state to combine their

wastewater facilities. The decision was made to expand the navy’s plant and abandon the

city’s plant with the city assuming the responsibility for maintenance operation of the

combined plant. That arrangement continues.

The plant is operating very efficiently and, as a result of the reduction in population, has

excess capacity. The treated effluent is being put to beneficial use by using it to water the

Naval Weapon Center Golf Course and also to irrigate alfalfa on the city owned property

near the site of the abandoned city treatment plant.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

·   It is highly recommended that a ten to fifteen year master plan be prepared for

maintenance, repair and for reconstruction of all the city’s streets.

RESPONSE REQUIRED

Respond within 90 days to

Presiding Judge

Kern County Superior Court

1415 Truxtun Avenue

Bakersfield, California 93301

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

46

CITY OF SHAFTER

PURPOSE OF INQUIRY:

Annual visitation pursuant to Section 925. a of the Penal Code.

INTRODUCTION:

Members of the committee visited the city on January 4, 1999. We made a tour of the city

to determine its overall general appearance. We looked for problem areas, inspected the

condition of the streets and observed the operation of the sewage treatment facility.

We met with the City Manager and Finance Director, discussed the overall operation of

several city departments, discussed problems the city was having and examined and

compared current and past budgets including its capital improvement and maintenance

expenditures.

FINDINGS

Shafter, is located approximately twenty miles northwest of Bakersfield, California.

The city of Shafter was founded in 1913 and incorporated January 11, 1938. Shafter is a

charter city with a City Manager and five elected members of the Town Council.

The City of Shafter covers an area of eight and nine tenth square miles and has a

population of 11,139. The city has some fifty miles of streets. Fire protection is afforded

by the county of Kern.

The city has its own police department, which has a chief and captain who have been

there less than a year. The old police building has been partly demolished, rehabilitated

and integrated into a new design of approximately five thousand six hundred square feet.

The complete interior of the facility looks new, is very well maintained and well designed to

effectively accommodate the fifteen full time and six part time staff.

The department has integrated itself well into the community by establishing foot patrols,

bicycle patrols, and high visibility. The city council has supported the department by

raising officer salaries to aid in retention.

Shafter has four park sites with twenty- eight acres and one library with twenty- six

thousand five hundred volumes.

The city has one hundred fourteen full time employees, seven part time employees and

five elected officials. The city’s annual budget for 1999- 2000 is $ 4,866,845.

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

47

With the advent of the new World Trade Center and the expansion of Minter Airfield, the

City of Shafter is living up to its mission statement, “ Celebrating our caring, friendly and

safe community.” The City of Shafter shapes the future while providing quality service.

The new millenium promises Shafter an exciting future. The City Manager and staff, plus

the City Council are to be commended for their continuing efforts to ensure Shafter’s

growth and prosperity.

COMMENTS:

The City of Shafter appears to have a strong sense of community spirit. The homes

appear to be well maintained the streets are clean and free of litter and trash. The city

exudes a sense of community pride.

The entire city staff is to be commended for cooperating with other cities and communities

with regard to procedures, finances and overall good government. Visiting members of

the Grand Jury were impressed with the City Manager and the Finance Director when they

explained how the city operates with a $ 4,800,000 dollar budget and only $ 785,000 in

property tax receipts and still maintains an adequate cash reserve.

Although a street maintenance master plan exists an inspection of some of the streets

indicates deterioration of some areas in varying degree from slight to severe.

RECOMMENDATION:

·   That the city’s existing master plan for street maintenance be more closely

followed in order to save future maintenance and construction costs.

RESPONSE NOT REQUIRED

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

48

CITY OF TAFT

PURPOSE:

Annual visit pursuant to section 925. a of the Penal Code

INTRODUCTION:

Members of the committee visited the city on September 21, 1999. We made a tour of the

city to determine its overall general appearance. We looked for problem areas, inspected

the condition of the streets and observed the operation of the sewage treatment facility.

We met with the City Manager, City Treasurer, Public Works Manager and the Chief of

Police. We discussed the overall operation of several city departments, discussed

problems the city was having and examined and compared current and past budgets

including its capital improvement and maintenance expenditures.

FINDINGS:

The City of Taft is located approximately thirty- five miles southwest of the city of

Bakersfield at the junction of State Highways 119 and 33. Taft is a general law city with

an elected City Council and a City Manager who serves at the discretion of the City

Council. The city maintains its own police and fire departments and additional fire

protection is afforded by the Kern County Fire Department.

The population of the city is approximately eleven thousand six hundred fifty nine including

two thousand two hundred thirty six inmates in the federal prison, and four hundred sixty-five

inmates in the Taft Correctional Facility.

We were shown a series of photographs that depicted shabby, falling down buildings and

generally dilapidated areas outside, but adjacent to the city limits. City officials asked if

there was anything the Grand Jury could do to help clean up those areas.

The committee members agreed those areas that are a blight to the community would be

investigated and an attempt to help as requested would be under- taken.

REPSONSE NOT REQUIRED

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

49

CITY OF TEHACHAPI

PURPOSE OF INQUIRY

Annual visitation pursuant to Section 925. a of the Penal Code.

FINDINGS:

Tehachapi is located approximately forty miles east of Bakersfield on State Highway 58 at

approximately four thousand feet of elevation.

A meeting was held with the City Administrator, and the Finance Director. Based on the

information provided, it appears the city has made great progress toward resolving its

financial problems which have occurred over the past several years and is well on the

road to financial recovery.

One major remaining problem is the Capitol Hills Subdivision which was financed by

Mello- Roos bonds and has been in default for several years. This will not be easily

resolved until considerable development occurs. In the meantime, however, the city has

no options but to continue its efforts to encourage that development.

The city does not have a master plan for street maintenance. An inspection of the city

streets indicates a major effort needs to be made to maintain and then rehabilitate a large

number of the streets especially on the north side of the rail- road tracks.

A review of the sewer plant operation indicated that it is well maintained. It has

adequate capacity for long term growth of the city.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

·   It is recommended that all the streets which are beginning to have problems be

sprayed with an asphalt rejuvenating agent. In order to stop further deterioration

this process should be repeated every two to three years until such time as all

the streets have been brought up to good condition.

·   A master plan should be prepared for a ten to fifteen year period for

maintenance and reconstruction of the streets. If this is done, ultimately

considerable funds will be freed up for other city purposes.

RESPONSE REQUIRED

RESPOND WITHIN 90 DAYS TO

Presiding Judge

Kern County Superior Court

Bakersfield, California 93301

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

50

CITY OF WASCO

PURPOSE OF INQUIRY:

Annual visitation pursuant to section 925. a of the Penal Code.

INTRODUCTION:

Members of the committee visited the city on August 13, l999. We made a tour of the city

to determine its overall general appearance. We looked for problem areas, inspected the

condition of the streets and observed the operation of the sewage treatment facilities. We

met with the city manager and discussed the overall operation of several city departments,

discussed problems the city was having and examined and compared current and past

budgets including its capital improvement and maintenance expenditures.

FINDINGS:

The City of Wasco, “ Rose Capitol of the Nation”, was incorporated December 22, 1945.

The present population is approximately twenty thousand. It is a general law city with a

mayor, vice- mayor, and three city council members. All members are elected at large.

The mayor is elected by the city council.

This community’s income is based largely on agriculture with bulk cargo service provided

by Santa Fe Railroad.

The Wasco State Prison is one of the state’s largest prisons, providing fifteen hundred

local jobs. The prison houses six thousand inmates.

The city currently has one high school, three elementary schools and three church

operated schools.

The City owns Wasco Valley Rose, an eighteen hole professional golf course open to the

public. Bonds were sold to construct the golf course. The resultant debt service for the

golf course runs in the range of $ 75,000 during the current fiscal year and will dramatically

increase after the year 2000. The cash flow of the golf course has not supported the debt

service and has placed the city in severe financial straits. The city council and the city

manager are working diligently to solve the resultant fiscal problems. The city manager

feels the problems can be solved in the near future. Negotiations to accomplish this are

ongoing, but a final solution has yet to be found.

A contract with the Kern County Sheriff’s Office provides law enforcement to the

community.

Kern County Fire Department provides fire protection.

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

51

COMMENTS:

The city management of Wasco is to be commended for its diligent efforts to solve the

fiscal problems brought on by Wasco Valley Rose Golf Course financing problems. They

are also to be commended for the improved financial outlook for the city. The overall

appearance of the city is that of a city which cares. The streets are clean and well

maintained and the homes are well kept and present an appearance of community well

being.

NO RESPONSE REQUIRED

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

52

CONTINUITY COMMITTEE

Chairman

George A. Venema

Committee Members

H. Dale Bennett

Nellie G. Gomez

Raymond R. Mortimer

The Continuity Committee’s responsibility is to attend meetings of the Kern County Board

of Supervisors, and to report findings of the Board action and activities to the Grand Jury.

The Committee is also responsible for keeping track of responses from those departments

and agencies to which the Grand Jury has directed recommendations in their reports. The

departments and agencies that the Kern County Grand Jury has visited and written Final

Reports with recommendations, shall respond to the Presiding Judge of the Superior

Court within ninety days from the mailing date of the report.

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

53

GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT TRACKING

DATE

REPORT

APPROVED

BY GJ

REPORT

SUBJECT

REPORTING

COMMITTEE

DATE

REPORT

PUBLISHED

DATE

RESPONSE

REQUIRED

DATE

RESPONSE

RECIEVED

1- 5- 00 Taft Animal Shelter HESS 2- 22- 00 5- 22- 00 3- 6- 00

1- 5- 00 Contracting Procedures Admin/ Audit 2- 22- 00 5- 22- 00 5- 23- 00

1- 26- 00 Waste Management Chapter 1 Ad Hoc 3- 6- 00 6- 6- 00

2- 2- 00 Waste Management Chapter 2 Ad Hoc 3- 6- 00 6- 6- 00

2- 9- 00 Dept Of Weights & Measures HESS 3- 6- 00 6- 6- 00 3- 7- 00 B. O. S

5- 23- 00

2- 9- 00 Waste Management Chapter 3 Ad Hoc 3- 6- 00 6- 6- 00

2- 23- 00 KCSO- Com- specialists Law & Justice 3- 30- 00 6- 30- 00 5- 1- 00

2- 23- 00 KCSO- CAD System Law & Justice 3- 30- 00 6- 30- 00 5- 1- 00

2- 23- 00 Delano CCF Law & Justice 3- 11- 00 6- 11- 00

2- 23- 00 Delano Police Dept Law & Justice 3- 27- 00 6- 27- 00

2- 23- 00 Department of Aging HESS 3- 6- 00 6- 6- 00 5- 17- 00

2- 23- 00 Sierra Sands School Dist. HESS 3- 6- 00 6- 15- 00 5- 15- 00

3- 1- 00 Dept of Agriculture HESS 4- 4- 00 7- 4- 00 5- 17- 00

3- 1- 00 KCSO- Wasco Law & Justice 4- 21- 00 7- 21- 00 5- 1- 00

3- 1- 00 KCSO- Tehachapi Law & Justice 6- 28- 00 9- 28- 00

3- 1- 00 KCSO- Buttonwillow Law & Justice 4- 21- 00 7- 21- 00

5- 1- 00

3- 1- 00 KCSO- Camp Erwin Owen Law & Justice 6- 28- 00 9- 28- 00

3- 22- 00 California City Cities 6- 28- 00 9- 28- 00

3- 22- 00 McFarland Cities 4- 13- 00 7- 13- 00

\

3- 22- 00

Tehachapi Cities 4- 13- 00 7- 13- 00

3- 29- 00 Delano Cities 4- 24- 00 7- 24- 00

3- 29- 00 Ridgecrest Cities 4- 24- 00 7- 24- 00

4- 3- 00 City of Maricopa Cities 6- 28- 00 9- 28- 00

4- 5- 00 Board of Supervisors Continuity 4- 24- 00 7- 24- 00

4- 13- 00 City of Bakersfield Cities 5- 22- 00 8- 22- 00

4- 19- 00 Bakersfield Police Dept. Law & Justice 6- 20- 00 9- 28- 00

4- 19- 00 City of Bakersfield Cities 6- 28- 00 9- 28- 00

5- 4- 00 Kern Community College

District

Ad/ Audit 5- 19- 00 8- 19- 00

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

54

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

55

CONTINUITY REPORT

COUNTY GOVERNMENT

PURPOSE:

The Continuity and Tracking Committee’s function is to observe the Board of Supervisor’s

meetings with two or more members and to report findings to the total Grand Jury at their

weekly meetings. All board meetings are televised on cable channel sixteen.

The committee is also responsible for monitoring responses to the Grand Jury from Final

Report recommendations to the various agencies and departments.

FINDINGS:

The 1999- 2000 budget for Kern County totals $ 811,000,000. When the amount of the

special budgets are added, the total reaches $ 1,200,000,000. The overall county budget is

$ 43,000,000, greater than the previous year. No department head challenged the County

Administrative Officer’s ( CAO) budget recommendations. Public Assistance and Public

Protection Agencies ( PAPPA) received the largest portions of the budget. State and

Federal aid amounts to a total of $ 486,003,000, which is fifty- nine and nine- tenths percent

of the budget.

Some of the major items on the weekly agendas which were approved by the Board were:

·   $ 780,000 to retrofit a fire fighting helicopter for the Kern County Fire

Department,

·   $ 10,600,000 to construct a new Public Health Department building,

·   Sheriff Spark’s request to place ten deputies in a safe school program in all

unincorporated areas,

·   a sludge ordinance against dumping of bio- solids for fertilizer on farms,

·   reconfirmed the board’s support for the Palmdale alignment of the high speed

rail system,

·   purchasing fifty- one acres of land for the Meadows Field Airport terminal,

·   $ 10,000,000 for a master plan of the proposed Metropolitan Recreational

Center located on North Chester Avenue,

·   an emergency dairy ordinance and formation of a dairy advisory committee,

·   the creation of a Joint Powers Agreement with Tejon Ranch Company to

finance public improvements related to land based developments,

·   Sheriff Spark’s request to provide one deputy for every one thousand

population, funds will be approved closer to July 1, 2000, so as not to

jeopardize possible grant funding for new programs,

·   $ 206,000 to Code Compliance to abate blighted properties,

·   signing of a letter opposing the Giant Sequoia Groves in Kern County becoming

a National Monument.

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

56

TRACKING:

The following chart lists the various Grand Jury committee final reports that require

responses. California Penal Code Section 933( b) reads as follows:

“ No later than ninety days after the Grand Jury submits a final report on the operations of

any public agency subject to it’s reviewing authority, the governing body of the public

agency shall comment to the presiding judge of the superior court on the findings and

recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body.”

COMMENTS:

·   The entrance doors of the County Administration building and the doors to the

Board of Supervisor’s meeting room are very handicap unfriendly.

·   Compliments to the Clerk of the Board, County Administrator, County Counsel

and their staffs for an excellent job of supporting the Board of Supervisors.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

·   Install automatic doors at the south entrance of the county administration

building and the Board’s meeting room entrance, if feasible.

RESPONSE REQUIRED

Respond within 90 days to

Presiding Judge

Kern County Superior Court

1415 Truxtun Avenue

Bakersfield, California 93301

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

57

EDIT COMMITTEE

Chairman

James E. Poole

Vice Chairman & Secretary

Ethel Wells

Deputy Chairman

C. Michael Dake

Administration / Audit Committee

George J. Lusich, Jr.

Chairman

Cities and Services Committee

Dan O. Neal

Chairman

Continuity Committee

George A. Venema

Chairman

Health, Education & Social Services Committee

Robert E. Herrick

Chairman

Law and Justice Committee

Frank K. Johnson

Chairman

Public Relations and Communications Committee

James E. Poole

Chairman

Library Committee

James E. Poole

Chairman

Ad Hoc Committee

Dan O. Neal

Chairman

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

58

EDIT COMMITTEE

STATEMENT

As the digital age continues to gather momentum, the interface between people and

information and government is becoming more important than ever. No Grand Jury to

date has been more focused on the broad range of evolving problems through positive

action and peaceful resolution than this the 1999- 2000 Kern County Grand Jury.

The Editorial or Edit Committee’s prime focus was on reviewing reports for adherence to

approved scope, logical construction, sentence structure, word usage, grammar,

punctuation, and spelling. Substance was the responsibility of the individual committee

that conducted the investigation. It was the plan of this year’s edit committee to make this

final report both an educational and instructional work. The result is a quality Grand Jury

Final Report.

Thank you very much for the opportunity.

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

59

HEALTH, EDUCATION & SOCIAL SERVICES

Robert E. Herrick, Chairman

Raymond Mortimer

George Venema

Ethel Wells

MISSION

This committee is charged with an overview duty to see that such agencies are performing

their assigned functions and duties in the best interest of the tax- paying public.

Since the committee has a term of one year it is impossible to cover the majority of the

agencies and entities within its jurisdiction. Therefore, the committee selected those

agencies it felt were timely or over due for review. The agencies and departments

selected for investigation and reports to be part of the final report of the year this term

were:

Department of Aging & Adult Services

Farm and Home Advisor

Community Learning Center

Department of Weights and Measures

Department of Agriculture

Sierra Sands School District

Taft Cemetery District

Taft Animal Shelter

In addition to the agencies reviewed, the committee also visited and inspected the

following agencies:

Kern Medical Center

Public Health Department

Maricopa Senior Center

Human Services Department- Foster Children

Veteran Services

The committee investigated several citizen complaints, which consumed considerable

time.

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

60

DEPARTMENT OF WEIGHTS & MEASURES

The Department of Weights & Measures is located at 1116 E. California Avenue,

Bakersfield, California. This department plays an important role in everyday commerce of

our citizens. The Health Education and Social Services committee visited this department

to observe the facilities and operations.

FINDINGS:

The Board of Supervisors formed this department on February 2, 1915. The State

Business and Professional Code mandates programs operated by this department. These

programs are to insure that all weights and measurements of products sold within the

county are accurate. The department is the last stand- alone department of its kind in the

state. All other counties have merged this department into the Agricultural Commissioners

office.

The department has an annual budget of $ 728,811. It has a staff of eleven full time

employees and one part- time to service the mandated and contractual obligations. There

are approximately twenty- five thousand devices in twenty- nine categories that require

certification by the department. All categories require annual certification except for four

that are required every ten years, one that is every two years and one that is required

when requested by the railroad.

When measuring devices and scales pass the test, a seal is affixed to each and signed

and dated by the inspector. Should a device not pass, the operator has thirty days to

repair it and the device can not be used until it is inspected again and passes.

Gasoline stations are inspected yearly. These inspections include certifying the accuracy

of meters dispensing the gasoline, pump price matches posted sign price, octane rating is

tested to insure correct octane is being dispensed. The gasoline is tested for any

contamination or water.

The facility is small but seems adequate for their needs. The facility has buildings built in

the 1930s to ones built in the 1990s. The new building is adequate to house the new

weights and measures truck recently purchased. This new heavy capacity truck is the

only one like it in the state of California.

The facility is compliant with American Disabilities Act for ramp access except there is no

designated handicap parking. There is limited parking at the facility; most parking is done

on the street.

All complaints are immediately acted upon. The result of the investigation is promptly

reported to the complainant.

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

61

COMMENTS:

·   The director and other personnel are well motivated to giving the best service to

the public in checking weights and measures.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

·   It is strongly recommended that the Department of Weights and Measures

remain a stand- alone department and not be merged into any other department.

RESPONSE REQUIRED

Respond within 90 days to

Presiding Judge

Kern County Superior Court

1415 Truxtun Avenue

Bakersfield, California 93301

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

62

DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES

PURPOSE:

The Health Education and Social Services committee visited the Human Services Department, 100

E. California Avenue, Bakersfield where we meant with the director and then toured the Taft,

California office.

FINDINGS:

The Department of Human Services has a budget consisting of two units, the

Administration and Financial Aid units.

The Administration unit has an approved budget of $ 105,652,126 with one thousand two

hundred nineteen full time positions. There is no net general fund cost to the county.

The Direct Financial Aid unit has a $ 138,355,829 budget for fiscal year

1999- 2000. The net general fund cost totals $ 13,727,285. No positions are authorized for

this budget.

The Human Services Department administers five important programs:

·   Financial Assistance Programs which gives temporary assistance to needy

families.

·   Mandated Social Services Programs.

·   California Work Opportunities and Responsibilities to Kids ( CalWorks).

·   Adoption Program.

·   Foster Homes licensing and inspections.

The Taft facility was visited; this office is responsible for the Westside District of Kern

County.

The building is in dire need of repairs because of the sinking of the building. The walls

and floor have huge cracks, which makes for an unsafe working environment. The Board

of Supervisors has approved $ 250,000 for repairs.

There are a total of eight districts in Kern County with offices in these cities:

·   Bakersfield

·   Taft

·   Delano

·   Shafter

·   Lake Isabella

·   Ridgecrest

·   Lamont

·   Mojave

NO RESPONSE REQUIRED

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

63

KERN COUNTY AGING & ADULT SERVICES

PURPOSE:

The Health, Education and Social Services committee visited the department and met with

the department head to obtain information on the consolidation of this department.

FINDINGS:

Aging and Adult Services was created and approved by the Board of Supervisors on

September 29, 1998. The department consolidated the Office on Aging with Adult

Protective Services, In- Home Supportive Services, and the Probate Conservator from the

Department of Human Services and the Senior Adult Services functions from the Mental

Health Department.

A budget of $ 12,888,622 was approved for the 1999- 2000 fiscal year. Because of the

consolidation of other departments into one, the Net General Fund for the Aging and Adult

Services Department is $ 4,900,000, a reduction of $ 300,000 from the previous budget.

The department will have a total of one hundred twenty- nine employees, which includes

one hundred seventeen that were transferred from the Office of Aging, the Department of

Human Services and the Mental Health Department. Twelve additional positions will be

added to implement the Multipurpose Senior Services Program.

Currently there are three departmental locations; in March 2000 all departments will move

to 5357 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield.

The lobby of the department has very informative brochures that list available services,

addresses and telephone numbers. Programs include Health Insurance Counseling and

Advocacy, Senior information and referral, In– Home Supportive Services, Senior Nutrition,

and Elder Abuse Prevention.

COMMENTS:

·   The consolidation of services provided to seniors and disabled adults into one

department should improve the coordination and enhance the effectiveness of

all programs.

·   The committee was impressed with the overall planning in the formation of this

department. We anticipate that the department will function efficiently.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

·   There should be increased effort to make the public aware of the programs

available in this department.

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

64

RESPONSE REQUIRED

Respond within 90 days to

Presiding Judge

Kern County Superior Court

1415 Truxtun Avenue

Bakersfield, California 93301

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

65

KERN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

PURPOSE:

The Health Education and Social Services committee visited this department to meet with

the Agricultural Commissioner; his staff and view the facilities.

The Kern County Department of Agriculture is one of the oldest departments in the county

government and serves one of the larger segments of the economy. It not only assists

the industry but equally as important is the service performed to protect the public.

The primary purposes and objectives of this office are the promotion and protection of the

county agricultural industry, the protection of the environment and the protection of the

general public.

FINDINGS:

The department has a budget of over $ 3,200,000 with county general fund support in the

amount of $ 766,385 for the current year. The many services performed by this

department generate the revenue to support the bulk of its activities. With only forty- four

funded positions plus temporary seasonal staffers, the department performs a multitude of

services.

·   FRUIT, VEGETABLE, AND EGGS.

The Agriculture Commissioner’s Fruit, Vegetable and Egg Quality Control Program

staff inspect most of the county’s multi- million dollar production of food products grown

on local farms. These inspections of fruit, vegetable, nut, and honey at packing

houses, wholesale, retail markets, and fields ensure compliance with maturity, quality,

and packing requirements. The shell- egg enforcement biologist inspects for interior

and exterior quality at packing, distribution, and retail locations, to ensure the public is

being provided with quality shell eggs.

·   PESTICIDE USE ENFORCEMENT.

The Pesticide Use Enforcement division enforces pesticide laws and regulations

through inspections and investigations. The division issues permits and monitors

pesticide use, field worker safety, and required record keeping. It also collects fruit

and vegetable commodity samples for residue analysis. This ensures that pesticides

are used in an appropriate and reasonable manner to protect the environment, the

public, field workers, and employees of businesses that handle pesticides.

·   PEST EXCLUSION.

This division of the Agricultural Commissioner’s office daily inspects incoming

shipments of plant materials at airports, nurseries, shipping companies, and county

post offices. These inspections help prevent the introduction and spread of injurious

plant pests and diseases that may be detrimental to agricultural crops. This first line of

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

66

defense also assures compliance with export requirements for agricultural

commodities destined for foreign ports.

·   PEST DETECTION/ ERADICATION

Pest detection and eradication are the actions used to determine the extent or

presence of exotic pests and to apply measures to eliminate pests if introduced into

the county. This is accomplished through an extensive trapping effort in urban,

commercial crop, and high- hazard areas throughout the county. Continuous

monitoring of previously infested areas also ensures the complete eradication and/ or

limited distribution of previously detected pests.

·   NURSERY AND SEED INSPECTION

Enforcing nursery and seed laws helps to maintain quality nursery products.

Inspection of retail and wholesale nurseries for compliance with nursery stock, pest

cleanliness, labeling, quality, varietal trueness, seed identification and viability is the

main responsibility of this program.

·   SPECIAL SERVICES

Apiary Inspection

Crop Statistics

Fairs

Public Education

Experimental Farm

Pest Management

Predatory- Animal Control

COMMENTS:

·   The committee was favorably impressed with the presentation by the

Agricultural Commissioner and his pride in his operation and the qualifications

of his staff. The facility and buildings are well maintained and have been very

versatile in arranging the space to fit the tasks of the department.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

·   The Board of Supervisors should consider changing the personnel polices to

allow lateral transfer between counties to assist in the acquiring of competent

technical personnel.

RESPONSE REQUIRED

Respond within 90 days to

Presiding Judge

Kern County Superior Court

Bakersfield, California 93301

1999- 2000 KERN COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

67

KERN COUNTY FARM AND HOME ADVISOR

PURPOSE:

To visit and review the facilities and operations of the University of California Cooperative

Extension Service in Kern County. The wide range of activities and services offered to the

citizens of the county is enormous and worthy of recognition. The facilities are located at

1031 S. Mt. Vernon Avenue, Bakersfield.

FINDINGS:

The Farm and Home Advisors office has a staff of twenty- nine employees of which seven

are county employees and the balance are employed by the University of California. Their

budget is supported at a rate of about nineteen percent from the county, sixty percent from

the University of California and twenty- one percent from federal programs. The county

support of $ 413,235 is vital as it supports the cost of transportation ( vehicles and fuel) and

any reduction of support would cripple the operation.

Cooperative Extension has provided the citizens of California and Kern County information

and educational programs in agriculture and natural resources, family and consumer

sciences, community resource development, and 4- H youth development.

In