The 2004

Madera County Grand Jury

Final Report

January 1 - December 31, 2004

gjp PAG E 2 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 3

PAG E 4 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury

Wishes to Thank

These Officials

For Their Assistance

GRAND JURY PRESIDING JUDGE

THE HONORABLE EDWARD P. MOFFAT

MADERA COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY

ERNEST J. LICALSI

MADERA COUNTY COUNSEL

DAVID A. PRENTICE

JURY COMMISSIONER

HAROLD E. NABORS

DEPUTY JURY COMMISSIONER

LYNDA PIERINI

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 5

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Grand Jury Member Photo inside cover

Final Report Approval Signatures Page 3

Grand Jury Assistant Officials Page 4

Table of Contents Page 5

Member Roster Page 6

Grand Jury Historical Review Page 7

Foreman’s Letter to County Citizens Page 8

Final Reports by Order of Publication Date

Madera Detention Facility Page 9

City of Madera Attorney Hiring Policy With RESPONSES Page 10

Valley State Prison for Women Page 20

Transient Occupancy Tax ( Bed Tax) With RESPONSES Page 23

Rolling Hills Citizen’s Association Taxing Error Page 32

Eastern Madera County Government Building Janitorial

Service Contract With RESPONSES Page 36

Prison Crimes Case Tracking Log Page 43

Chukchansi Indian Casino’s Gambler’s Anonymous Payments Page 44

City of Chowchilla Police Department and Jail Page 45

Madera County Juvenile Detention Facility Page 47

Central California Women’s Facility Page 49

Central California Women’s Facility Fire Department With RESPONSES Page 51

Madera County Department of Social Services IEVS & SIU Page 56

Eastern Madera County Sheriff’s Facilities Page 57

City of Madera Business Rental License Fee Page 59

The Roberta J. Wills Trust & The Madera County Animal Shelter Expansion Page 61

The Madera~ Chowchilla Water & Power Authority Page 68

The Road Department and The Condition and Maintenance of Road 620 Page 70

Madera County Office of Education

Funding and Bank Reconciliation Discrepancy Page 71

Yosemite Union High School District School Board Residency Requirement Page 73

Review of the Madera County Court Uncollected Fines Report from

The 2003 Madera County Grand Jury Final Report Page 75

Madera County Juvenile Corrections Camp Page 76

Madera County Department of Social Services, Child Protective Services

And the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 Page 84

Yosemite Union High School District’s Superintendents

Circumvention of School Policy Page 86

Responses to The 2003 Madera County Grand Jury Final Reports Pages 92 - 187

Letter of Transmittal to Presiding Judge of Madera County Superior Court Page 188

Secretary’s Letter Page 189

2003 Madera County Grand Jury Excellence in Reporting Award & Letter Pages 190 - 191

Grand Jury Complaint Form Page 192

Grand Jury Questionnaire ( Serve on the Madera Grand Jury) Inside Back Cover

PAG E 6 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

2004 Madera County Grand Jury Members

January 12, 2004 – December 31, 2004

Minnie M Aguirre Joe Mitchell - Chairperson

Madera Coarsegold

Harry F Cocciolo - Chairperson Barbara Mohler*

Raymond Madera

Don Craib* Treasurer Salome’ Philips

Oakhurst Madera

Stephanie Green - Chairperson Gary Powell - Foreman

Madera Madera

Mikhail P Haynes - Secretary Katheryn Ross

Madera Chowchilla

Donald G Hoffman - Treasurer Mona Sturgeon * - Pro~ tem

Madera Madera

Gayle Huls JoAnn Swallow - Secretary

Madera Coarsegold

Robert H Isaacs – Treasurer/ Chairperson Donna Taghdiri – Pro- tem/ Legal Madera Madera

Bryant ‘ Bear’ Johnston - Chairperson Janet Trosper - Chairperson

Madera Madera

Douglas Kleist - Chairperson John Villa*

Ahwahnee Madera

Hal Lane - Chairperson Robert E Walls*

Madera Chowchilla

This year’s Grand Jury created 10 different committee’s including the City,

County Government, Water, Special Districts, Special Issues, Schools,

and Public Safety/ Welfare. In addition, the Reports Committee, Records,

Operations and Relocation Committees were created to deal with issues

within the Grand Jury itself.

The Treasurer position changed during the term. * Resigned during term

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 7

The Madera County Grand Jury

And

The History of The Grand Jury’s of California’s Counties

Juries first were created under the law of Etherel II, who reigned during the Anglo- Saxon period of A. D. 978- 1016. By A. D. 1368, Juries had evolved to include the Grand Jury, or Grand Inquest, formed by Edward III.

Most of us have heard the term, “ Grand Jury’, but most of us have little knowledge of what a grand jury actually does.

Grand Jury’s in America first started in 1635, and later became a full legal body, with the Fifth Amendment of the U. S. Constitution, which states, “ No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, of in the Militia, when in actual service time of War or public danger…”

The Grand Jury system has been in existence in California since 1879, when the State Constitution was adopted. Every county in California has at least one Grand Jury, and in some cases, the larger counties have more than one. Santa Clara County, for instance, has one Grand Jury that deals with civil issues, and another Grand Jury for criminal issues. There are also times that Grand Juries may handle Coroner Inquests, though these are rare occasions.

Madera County has one Grand Jury, which normally handles all investigations. The District Attorney may pull a Special Grand Jury from the petit jury pool, for a criminal issue, and allow the regular Grand Jury time to work on other issues. In criminal cases, the Grand Jury is presented with evidence of a crime and decides if there is enough evidence to permit a case to be brought against a defendant. The Grand Jury also has the power to accuse public official of improper actions in the performance of official duties. In its civil jurisdiction, the Grand Jury is the watchdog of local government.

Most Grand Jury members are drawn from the regular petit jury pool. Letters are sent out to a random group from the jury pool, and those whom respond with interest then go through an interview process. Nineteen people and several alternates are selected each year, and are then impaneled in January to serve for one year. The nineteen members that are selected at random from those who finish the interview process commit themselves to do this work and find that they spend a great deal of time attending meetings, conducting investigations, and writing reports on those investigations. Most investigations are routine and do not result in recommendations.

Some of the Grand Jury investigations are triggered by public concerns. These may be brought to the Grand Jury through letters, phone calls, and personal contact with members of the Grand Jury. The concerns of these issues are then brought before the Grand Jury, or one of the Grand Jury Committees, in order to determine if an investigation should be carried out. All Grand Jury business is conducted in secret, and all information and discussions are considered highly confidential. This is done, ( 1) to protect the innocent accused who is exonerated from disclosure of the fact that he has been under investigation and from the expense of standing trial where there was probably no guilt; ( 2) to ensure the utmost freedom to the Grand Jury in its deliberations, ( 3) to prevent subordination of perjury or tampering with witnesses; ( 4) to encourage free and untrammeled disclosures by persons who have information with respect to the commission of a crime, and ( 5) to prevent the escape of those whose indictment may be contemplated.

If any citizen or member of the community has questions or concerns about anything that might involve the Madera County Grand Jury, please call or fax the Grand jury office at 559- 662- 0946. You can also write a letter to the Madera County Grand Jury, P. O. Box 534, Madera, CA 93639.

You can be assured that no one outside the Grand Jury will know about your contact. PAG E 8 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

2004 Madera County Grand Jury

P. O. Box 534

Madera, California 93639- 0534

( 559) 662- 0946

December 31, 2004

Foreman’s Letter

The Honorable Edward P. Moffat

Presiding Judge

Madera County Superior Court

209 West Yosemite Avenue

Madera, California 93637

Dear Judge,

The 2004 Madera Civil Grand Jury would like to present its Final Report in accordance with applicable California Penal Code, Section 933 with great Pride.

The Taxpayers and Government of Madera County can be very proud of this Grand Jury Panel. They have served a tremendous amount of hours investigating various departments of the Government and taxpayer's personal complaints. Their professionalism and dedication is second to none. The devotion that has been shown over the past year by the 2004 Panel has been overwhelming. When I was appointed Foreperson of this panel, I was concerned whether I could direct these Great Citizens as a Civil Grand Jury, but believe me they put their feet on the ground running. Their quality and quantity of work will be seen and read in this 2004 Final Report.

It has been a privilege and honor to serve with this panel of distinguished people. We hope we have made a difference in our County, and especially a county with growing pains. I hope the citizens of Madera County understand the need to keep up with the New Technologies and Tools of the Governments of the County and Cities to keep up with the ever- growing changes.

I want to congratulate the 2003 Grand Jury Panel for the ‘ Certificate of Merit’ they received from the California Grand Jury Association for their investigative work concerning court fees. They made a difference. Well Done.

Your Honor, I want to give you and the Deputy Jury Commissioner, Ms. Lynda Pierini, a big “ Thank You” for all the great help I have received.

Respectfully Submitted,

Gary Powell, Foreman

2004 Madera County Grand Jury 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 9

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury’s

Final Report on

The Madera County Department of Corrections Adult Jail

INTRODUCTION

Members of the Grand Jury toured the Madera County Department of Corrections ( the Madera County Jail) on February 20, 2004.

FINDINGS

The Madera County Jail is not operated by the County Sheriffs Department, but is a separate and independent entity. The facility consists of housing units, cells, a medical clinic, a mental health clinic, central control, hearing room, a booking & release center, and administrative offices.

The current annual budget of the County Jail is 4.9 million dollars, 3 million for staffing, at least 1.26 million for health care, and .49 million for food. Budget cuts from the State of California total $ 50,000 for the current year. Current staffing at the jail is 79 sworn personnel and 14 non- sworn personnel. There are 7 sworn personnel vacancies, which are being recruited for at the present time. There are a minimum of 12 officers and a watch commander per shift.

In 2003 the County Jail processed 5000 bookings, 80 % of which were related to drug or alcohol abuse. The population of the County Jail is at an all time high. The average daily count during 2003 was 344 inmates at a cost of $ 51.20 per inmate per day, or $ 18,717 per year. The majority of inmates are awaiting trial and their stay ranges from one day to two or three years. The jail is rated to house 316 inmates. Men and women are housed in separate areas in a dormitory style or in cells.

The jail contracts with ARAMARK, a Correctional Service to operate the kitchen and provide meals to the inmates at the cost of $ 489,000 per year. The average cost of a 300- calorie meal is $ 1.26.

Health care and other hospitalization has been provided for the last seven years through a contract with Correctional Managed Care Medical Corporation. The current annual contract is for 1.26 million dollars. The contract specifies that the corporation is to provide services up to $ 50,000 per inmate, at which point the county assumes any additional expense. The jail has a four - bed infirmary and a nurse is on duty at the jail 24 hour a day. Inmates who have psychotic emergencies are hospitalized in Fresno at Community Hospital Behavior Health Center for up to 72 hours. If longer hospitalization is needed, the inmate remains at the jail until a psychiatric bed is found outside the county. There is no mental health facility in Madera County. Inmates who are mentally challenged can serve their sentence at the Regional Vocational Center.

By law, educational opportunities are required. Inmates may participate in the General Education Development ( G. E. D.) program, the Substance Abuse program, English as a Second Language, and kitchen certificates can be earned by those working in the kitchen. Other jobs available to the inmates are work in the parks, at the animal shelter, auditor’s office, and in trash collection.

CONCLUSION

The Grand Jury was favorably impressed during their tour of the Madera County Jail. The Jury recognizes the unique challenges of housing inmates who represent a full range of security issues on a limited budget. The facilities were clean and well maintained and the staff exhibited professionalism and commitment to serving the community.

ENTITIES TO RESPOND: NONE PAG E 1 0 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

Final Report on

The Office of The City Attorney

City of Madera Hiring Policy

INTRODUCTION

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury was asked to investigate the hiring policy of the Office of the City Attorney of the City of Madera. The Foreman was given a complaint suggesting that a particular hiring incident in 2003 had an appearance of impropriety and/ or nepotism.

FINDINGS

The Grand Jury investigated the following issues in order to determine what, if any, policies were in place at the time of the 2003 incident and at the present time. ( 1) Was there a hiring policy that affected all hiring within the City of Madera and within the City Attorney's Office? ( 2) Did the City Attorney's Office post the position for hiring of an attorney for the Office? ( 3) Was there a formal interview process for the hiring of attorneys at that time and is there such a process today? ( 4) Has the City of Madera adopted a Code of Ethics to guide all matters that might need to be addressed by such a code?

During our investigation, the Grand Jury determined that there are two types of situations for hiring people in the City of Madera. There are Civil Service employees who are hired through a rigorous process with clear guidelines and standards. There are also employees, commonly known as “ at- will” employees, who are hired at the discretion of the hiring authority, and for which no formal hiring policies have been established. The latter can be hired without the City posting the position or interviewing alternate candidates. The attorneys in the City Attorney's office fall under this category.

The incident in 2003, which led to the Grand Jury’s review, involved the hiring of an attorney who was the son of another attorney in the office. Although this hiring was approved by the Madera City Council, a review of the minutes of Council meetings at that time made it clear that several Council members were quite concerned about the appearance of impropriety in this matter. Interviews with a number of people in the City seemed to suggest that the reason the hiring was done so quickly revolved around the immediate need of an attorney at that time and the fact that the attorney hired had already been working as an Intern in the office. In addition, this Intern already had other job offers. Speed was deemed to be essential in making sure that this candidate was not lost.

Although the City Council of the City of Madera concluded that this was not a violation of the City hiring policies at the time, the City Council did recently adopt two new resolutions regarding this issue for the future, in order to address their concern over impropriety or nepotism in the hiring of at- will employees. Specifically, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 04- 78 ( see attachment 1), which establishes a procedure for hiring and promoting " at- will employees, and Resolution No. 04- 87 ( see attachment 2), which extends the City's nepotism policy to include " at- will" employment.

CONCLUSION

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury found that the hiring of a new Deputy City Attorney without going through a posting and interview process was understandable due to the necessity to fill the position quickly. The outward appearance of this situation caused many within the community to view this hiring as an unfair hiring practice. Though this hiring was done quickly due to understaffing at the City Attorney's Office, it might have been better if the hiring had been done with a formal posting and interview process. With the changes currently being made to the City's hiring policies, it is believed that the City of Madera has moved forward and will be better positioned to insure that hiring of any staff be done with less appearance of impropriety.

RECOMMENDATIONS

As mentioned earlier, the City of Madera does not at this time have a Code of Ethics. The Grand Jury recommends that the City Council of Madera quickly adopt and implement a Code of Ethics to guide and regulate the personal conduct of both elected officials and City employees in conducting city business.

RESPONSES

1) The Board of Supervisors of The County of Madera 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 11

2) The City Council of The City of Madera ( See Response at end of this Report)

3) The City Attorney of the City of Madera ( See Response at end of this Report) PAG E 1 2 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

11 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 13

PAG E 1 4 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

SUBJECT: HIRING POLICY

PURPOSE

This policy has been prepared for and shall apply to those employees described in Section

2- 2.305 ( E) of the Madera Municipal Code (" at will" employees). It shall be

implemented in all hiring and promotional opportunities after the date of its adoption.

POLICY

Through the City's operating principles and values, the City embraces its responsibility to

its employees. These operating Principles and Values provide in part that the City shall:

􀂾 Embrace our obligation to provide equal employment opportunities.

􀂾 Provide professional growth and development opportunities.

􀂾 Fairly recognize, empower and reward our employees for their contributions.

In order to implement these principles and values, this policy will define a process by

which hiring and promotional opportunities for at will employees shall take place.

1. All appointments of at will employees will be made based on merit and fitness for the position. Many factors may be considered in making this

determination including, but not limited to education, experience, professional licenses, past performance and/ or professional accomplishments, and specific measurable skills.

2. Prior to beginning recruitment for an at will position, the City Administrator

shall review the job description for the job classification and the potential pool

of candidates currently employed by the City. Based on the knowledge, skills,

and abilities required for the position, the City Administrator will make a

determination of whether the recruitment for the position will be open ( open

to all who meet the specified qualifications) or closed ( open only to those

qualified candidates currently employed by the City of Madera). For those at

will positions that the Madera Municipal Code provides that the City Council

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 15

Page 2

is the appointing authority, the City Administrator shall make a

recommendation to the City Council regarding an open or closed recruitment.

The City Council shall then make that determination.

3. In either case, the period of time provided for the recruitment process will be

determined by the City Administrator or his designee. At the close of the

recruitment period, the City Administrator or his designee shall review the

pool of candidates, determine those who, among those candidates who meet

the minimum qualifications, are most qualified for the position, and invite

them for an interview with an oral board. Unless authorized by the City

Administrator, the number of candidates invited to the oral board shall be no

less than three.

4. The oral board shall consist of at least one professional external to the City

organization, one member of the City staff, and one person who is a resident

of Madera but not an employee or elected official of the City. The oral board

shall examine the candidates based on those factors determined to constitute

the merit and fitness for the position. At a minimum, these factors shall

include the skills, knowledge and abilities described in the job description.

The oral board shall rank the candidates based on the criteria the City

Administrator or his designee provide. The City Administrator, City Council,

or its designee, for Council designated appointments, shall interview at a

minimum the top three ranked candidates. Additional candidates may be

interviewed if it is determined the City's interests are served by interviewing a

greater number of candidates.

5. A conditional offer of employment for an at will position shall be made only

by the City Administrator or his designee for those positions that the Madera

Municipal Code designates as being hired by the City Administrator. Offers

of conditional employment for Council appointed at will positions shall be

made only by the City Council.

6. Following a conditional offer of employment, candidates will be subject to the

City's hiring practices which include medical evaluation, drug screen, background

check, Department of Justice fingerprint check, and any other pre- employment PAG E 1 6 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

page 3

screening tools the City Administrator or his designee deems necessary.

7. Exceptions to this policy may be approved on a case- by- case basis only upon

the approval of the City Administrator or City Council.

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 17

PAG E 1 8 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 19

November 4, 2004

2004 Madera Grand Jury

P. O. Box 534

Madera, CA 93639- 0534

Re: Combined Response To Grand Jury From City Council and City Attorney, City of Madera

Dear Grand Jury Members,

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the report prepared by the 2004 Grand Jury. Your conclusion that the hiring was not in violation of any existing policy and was understandable given the needs of the City and the qualifications of the candidate is consistent with the facts that were facing the City at the time of the hire.

The City wishes to thank the grand jury for the manner in which the investigation was conducted, including their fairness and analysis of the issues. It is always helpful to have an outside independent party take time to review the policies and practices of the City especially when the review is done in a professional, unbiased and reasoned fashion. Your additional suggestion to consider adoption of a " Code of Ethics" will also be considered by the City.

Should you have any questions, please feel free to give me a call at ( 559) 675- 0855.

Joseph A. Soldani

City Attorney

205 West 4th Street, Madera, California 93637- 3527

PAG E 2 0 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

2004 Madera County Grand Jury

PO Box 534

Madera, California 93639- 0534

( 559) 662- 0946

3rd Interim Report On Valley State Prison for Women

INTRODUCTION

Members of the 2004 Madera County Grand Jury toured Valley State Prison for Women, an institution of the California Department of Corrections, on March 25, 2004, pursuant to the duty to “ inquire into the condition and management of the public prisons within the county,” as prescribed in § 919( b) of the California Penal Code. This report deals strictly with the prison facility and its programs.

FINDINGS

Valley State Prison for Women ( VSPW) is a state prison located at the intersection of Road 22 and Avenue 24 in Chowchilla, California. This prison consists of four housing areas, administrative buildings, vocational & educational buildings, a central kitchen, an infirmary, visiting buildings, a library, gym, and chapel. The inside grounds of the prison include a landscaping nursery, manicured lawns, and a sports track. The entire prison is surrounded by a lethal, high- voltage electric fence. The grounds outside the electric fence are surrounded by alfalfa fields and almond orchards, which provide an additional source of income for the California Department of Corrections ( DOC).

VSPW houses women who have been convicted of felonies. Sentences range from a minimum of one year, to a maximum of life without parole. There are 400 women at VSPW who are serving life sentences with, and without the possibility of parole. There are no death row inmates at VSPW, as that mission has been assigned exclusively to the adjacent institution, Central California Women’s Facility. One of the missions assigned to VSPW is to specialize in the housing of pregnant inmates, and those inmates who require housing that is segregated from the rest of the inmate population.

The racial and ethnic makeup of the inmate population is approximately 37% non- Hispanic White, 29% African- American, 21% Hispanic, 3% Native American, and 10% other. The staff reports that, in general, female inmates are less violent and more productive in prison than their male counterparts. Seventy percent of the offenses by the female inmates at this prison are drug or property related. The prison staff also reported that there is approximately a 70% recidivism rate among the inmate population.

VSPW’s budget for the fiscal year 2003- 2004 was 70 million dollars, and the prison was operating within that budget. It costs $ 28,000 per year to incarcerate one inmate. The prison was designed to house 1980 inmates. On the day of the tour by the Grand Jury, the prison was overcrowded with an inmate population of 3,645. Extra bunks have been added to dormitory rooms to double the number of inmates living in each dorm from four to eight, and one extra bunk has been added to each cell to allow double occupancy of cells that were designed to hold one inmate.

The inmates are provided with three meals each day. Breakfast and dinner are served hot in a dining hall, and a box lunch is issued at breakfast time for each inmate to take along with her. Meals are designed to meet nutritional requirements, and to be “ heart healthy”. The Grand Jury members sampled the lunch and found it to be fresh, nutritious, and appetizing.

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 21

An infirmary at the prison provides medical, mental health, vision, and dental care to inmates. The staff includes five physicians, twenty Registered Nurses, twenty- six Licensed Vocational Nurses, and mental health professionals who conduct clinics on weekdays. Despite the large medical staffing, the high volume of complaints keeps the facility busy at all times.

Of the five physicians, one is assigned to each of the four housing units, and one is assigned to the emergency room at the clinic. Nurses are on site at all times, and physicians are on call, and available to respond to the prison 24 hours a day. The infirmary has a medical laboratory, a pharmacy, and x- ray equipment. It has an inpatient housing unit with 20 beds, and three “ safety cells”, for inmates who need care, to “ protect life, prevent significant

illness or disability, or to alleviate severe pain”. 1 Due to the current State Court supervision of the California State Department of Corrections Medical Facilities, the Grand Jury does not investigate the duty of care, or the care provided to inmates. 2

Inmates may have contact with approved individuals through letters, telephone calls, and receipt of care packages. Regular visits are permitted on weekends. Overnight family visits, in secure on- site apartments, are available, for approved inmates to maintain contact with their families. No inmates serving life sentences are allowed the overnight family visits.

Educational opportunities are offered through the prison’s Education Department. Programs included are non- reader’s, Adult basic education, English as a Second Language, General Education Degree’s ( GED), High School Diploma, and College education. During the first few weeks of incarceration, inmates are tested for reading ability. The average reading level of the inmates is five years, eight months of schooling. For inmates who read below a fifth grade level, the Department of Education makes a presumption of reading disabilities and provides individual attention. For those inmates who read below ninth grade levels, the curriculum is focused on reading skills. For those inmates who read at or above the ninth grade level, but have not graduated from high school, programs to earn a GED or High School Diploma are offered. Those who choose to enter academic educational programs earn one day off their sentences for each day of attendance in school. Approximately 1300 of the 3,645 inmates attend school.

Two hundred and fifty inmates, many of whom are on scholarships, are enrolled in college level courses through correspondence with various universities and colleges. The Grand Jury commends the donors, many of whom are anonymous, for providing many of these scholarships. The various colleges and universities provide the remaining scholarships. The courses are by correspondence only, as no Internet access is permitted to inmates. In addition to the academic subjects, the Education Department also provides training in life skills in an effort to reduce the recidivism rate of the inmate’s population. Skills taught include personal growth, life plan development, finding a job after incarceration, anger management, parenting, ethics in the workplace, and the Substance Abuse Program. Participants in the Substance Abuse Program also receive education in ways to bolster self- esteem. Seventy percent of the Substance Abuse Program participants go on to attend aftercare programs upon release from prison.

There are 15 vocational training programs at VSPW. Many of these programs, in addition to teaching life skills to the inmates, also produce goods and services, which are either sold or produced for other government agencies at less than retail market cost. Many of these vocational shops also provide various services to the local community,

1 “ Valley State Prison for Women”, an informational booklet, distributed to the Grand Jury members at the close of the tour. No copyright was listed in the booklet.

2 Plata v. Davis, U. S. District Judge Thelton Henderson. PAG E 2 2 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

including schools, charities, and service organizations. Among the existing programs at the prison are office/ clerical, welding, dry cleaning, auto repair, landscaping, electronic repair, cosmetology, eye wear, air-

conditioning and refrigeration, cabinet making, and printing & graphic arts. Although the training programs receive funding through the DOC, most of the items used in the different training programs are donated by businesses in the adjacent communities. These items, including paper, inks, beauty supplies, and other items, are always welcomed with great appreciation.

CONCLUSION

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury tour of the Valley State Prison for Women showed the prison facility to have a pleasant appearance, despite the overcrowding, and the buildings to be modern and well tended.

There has never been an escape from Valley State Prison for Women.

Recommendations: None

Responses Required: None Required

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY PAGE 23

FINAL REPORT

2004 Madera County Grand Jury

PO Box 534

Madera, California 93639- 0534

( 559) 662- 0946

Final Report On The Transient Occupancy Tax For Madera County

Or

Madera Tourists Sleep Cheap, Residents Want Sleep, Too!

INTRODUCTION

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury received a complaint that the County Tax Collector’s Office had not sent a paid receipt for the Transient Occupancy Tax ( TOT), which had been paid, but not noted on the County’s Tax Collection Information Sheet in the Tax Collector’s Office. After a review of this complaint, by the entire Grand Jury, the County Committee visited the Tax Collector’s Office to determine if the payment had been noted, and if a receipt had been sent to the business owner.

Upon review, it was determined that the receipt had recently been sent to the owner; however, the method of payments, collection, recording, and depositing of TOT payments drew more questions than answers. The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury determined that a review of this tax, and its collection process was warranted. The investigation that followed led the Grand Jury through many different departments, and to many different answers. The Grand Jury learned that although the County of Madera handled most taxes in its computer system, this particular tax was recorded by hand. Furthermore, the payment of the tax was on the ‘ honor system’, and it was left up to the businesses themselves to report and submit the tax.

FINDINGS

This tax is assessed upon all persons who exercise occupancy, or are occupying, by reason of concession, permit, or right of access, for a period of thirty days or less, a living space defined as or for occupancy for dwelling, including lodging, or sleeping purpose. The tax includes, but is not limited to, any hotel, inn, tourist home or house, motel, studio hotel, bachelor hotel, lodging house, rooming house, apartment house, dormitory, public or private club, mobile home or house trailer at a fixed location or other similar structure or portion thereof. “ Other structure” for purpose of the TOT includes, but is not be limited to, a camping site or a space at the campground or recreational vehicle park, but does not include any facilities operated by a government entity or any lodging excluded from taxation under Tax Code Section 7280 ( b) or 7282. This includes all group camps that operate under Section 501 c3 of the Tax Code for religious and other groups.

Using the original tax forms, updated with yearly changes in names, etc, the TOT form asks each owner to perform the calculations necessary to determine how much tax is owed from the occupancy of its lodging facilities, and to determine what, if any taxes are due, and if any late fees are owed as a condition of when payment is made. However, as the Tax Collector’s Office noted, the TOT is paid on the ‘ honor system’, with no checks, or audits, and that as far as can be recollected, no late fees have ever been recorded, or collected. Late fees are due if the payment is made more than 30 days after the due date of the tax, which is due no later than 30 days after the end of each fiscal quarter.

The tax collected is done manually, either by being brought in to the Tax Collector’s Office, or by being mailed. In both cases, the tax is recorded on a sheet corresponding to the business entity, in pencil or pen, and then the amount paid is noted in the daily ledger. No note is made in the daily ledger as to which company paid which amount. The daily ledger is simply a total of all payments made that day. If for any reason, an entry is mistakenly

PAG E 2 4 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

made to a different business’ entities recording sheet, it would be unlikely to be discovered, or corrected, as no checks or audits are performed. It was also noted that the Tax Collector’s audit, performed each year on the entire County Administration and its departments, does not delve into the exact nature of the taxes paid under this category, TOT, due to the small percentage this tax revenue plays in the overall revenue of the County. Last year, the 2002- 2003- tax year revenue received from the TOT was $ 1,396,103. At the end of May 2004 the 2003- 2004 11- month total was $ 1,456,472. Although these amounts seem small in comparison to the overall revenues collected by Madera County, this tax has shown little or no growth in many years. The tax sheets for this tax show only forty- two businesses paying these taxes. The Grand Jury believed that this figure was low, and learned that there are more than 100 businesses operating in Madera County that would fall in this tax category. In addition, 3 different realty companies manage an aggregate of more than 250 homes for rent as vacation rentals, which would also fall within this tax. It was learned that the realty management companies do make the TOT payments, however, the realty management companies are paying aggregate payments for all the rentals, rather than individual payments for each rental. The collection of taxes, using the form provided by the Tax Collector’s office, does not verify that the calculations are done correctly, just the amount paid. The Tax Collector’s Office indicates that closer scrutiny of this payment procedure would be difficult under current staffing.

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury used information available from the Internet, phone books, and The Chambers of Commerce to determine the number of businesses, which might fall into this tax category. In addition, The Grand Jury obtained information from the computers in the Assessor’s and Tax Collector’s Office’s. The information gathered from the computers was easily retrieved, and could have been used by the departments at any time. This information could have allowed the County to realize more revenue and create additional resources to assure that taxes are paid correctly. It is also noted that the information provided on the business license application is not clearly entered into the Tax Collector’s Computer Database, which would have allowed the Tax Collector to recognize that some businesses were not paying the tax. The Assessor’s information was not shared with the Collector’s Office, in regard to type of business, which could have brought in additional revenues. It is felt that with the departments working more closely and sharing information, the County of Madera will see a dramatic increase in revenues under the TOT category. The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury estimated, based at 60% occupancy rates, with lodgings available 7 days per week, that the businesses not currently listed on the TOT Bed Tax could be adding additional revenues to the County Treasury upwards of $ 300,000. This figure is based on the published rates.

CONCLUSIONS

The Tax Collector’s Office, Assessor’s Office, and the Auditor’s Office are now aware of these issues, and are currently creating new programs, which should enable the County of Madera to see these revenue increases.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. Create and implement communications channels between the Auditor/ Controller, Tax Collector, and Assessor’s Offices, to allow for accurate determination of each business within the County of Madera, as to the type of business, and to ensure that all businesses are notified each year that they are responsible for certain taxes.

2. Add new fields to the current business license database program, in order to be able to determine and list businesses by the type of business, not just a category, i. e.: service. This could be done with the addition of a ‘ type of business’ entry in the computer database, with a new field of search usage on the County’s Computer systems; i. e.: Bed & Breakfast.

3. Implement a new business license application form for information to be entered into the County Computer System, which would automatically request the name of business, and owner, as well as type of business, and other relevant information currently built into the current business license applications.

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 25

a. The TOT business license application should also include the number of units of lodging available at the business.

b. Consider adding a new computerized self- registration system that could be made available to new business owners at a new business license application window in the Tax Collector’s Office.

4. Create a new computer program for the County of Madera Tax Collector’s Office to manage and record the receipt of the TOT taxes from businesses, which would note the date when the payment was received, and the postmark date if mailed.

a. If the payment included a late fee, the amount should be listed in a separate field, with an added total paid field to show the total amount paid.

b. The computer program should be designed to determine automatically, upon entry of the postmark/ date paid, whether the payment is late under the late fee policy.

c. This system should automatically generate billing forms and notices of late fees due.

5. Payments received in the Tax Collector’s Office should be able to maintain, and list umbrella payments for each property when multiple properties are owned, and amount, on the newly created computer program. This should also include the ability to create sub- property listings for businesses owning or managing separate properties, such as management companies with multiple rentals. Each rental property should pay its tax separately.

6. Require as part of doing business under the TOT rules, that each business within Madera County provide income verification on the rental income, if requested by the Tax Collector. This should be done yearly, to verify payments are made accurately, rather than the current ‘ honor system’ policy.

7. The daily collection of taxes, in the Tax Collector’s Office, should be processed for deposit daily, rather than the current holdover process.

8. Revise the RETURN ON TRANSIENT ROOM TAX form to include the name of the business, the name of the owner, address, mailing address, phone number of business if changed line, and note the type of business. The form should include in the OFFICIAL USE ONLY section, a line for the entry of the postmark date from the envelope when mail received.

9. Recommend that the Madera County Board of Supervisors adopt a resolution for the usage of some of the revenues from the Transient Occupancy Tax to be used for promoting the businesses that pay this tax. An example of this would be creating a website sponsored by the Board of Supervisors, specifically for the listing of businesses which offer lodging in Madera County and pay this Tax.

10. Recommend that the Tax Collector work with the Auditor, and County Counsel, to determine whether retroactive collections of taxes may be assessed against businesses that have not been paying taxes under the TOT rules.

ENTITES TO RESPOND:

1. Madera County Board of Supervisors ( See Response at end of this Report)

2. Madera County Auditor

3. Madera County Tax Collector ( See Response at end of this Report)

4. Madera County Assessor ( See Response at end of this Report)

5. Madera County Office of Business Licenses

6. Madera County Counsel ( See Response at end of this Report)

25

PAG E 2 6 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 27

PAG E 2 8 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 29

PAG E 3 0 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 31

PAG E 3 2 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

2004 Madera County Grand Jury

P. O. Box 534

Madera, California 93639- 0534

( 559) 662- 0946

2004 Madera County Grand Jury

Final Report On

The Rolling Hills Citizen’s Association

Special Assessment Tax

Auditing Error

INTRODUCTION

The Madera County Grand Jury received a written complaint from a Special District 19 Board

Member, referring to funds that had been removed from the District- 19 reserve account. The amount missing was in excess of $ 58,000.00. These funds, according to the complaint, had come from taxes col1ected in the Rolling Hills community ( SA19). The Rolling Hills Citizens Association was deeply disappointed in the response from the Auditor- Controller’s Office to this issue. This group suggested that manipulation or “ cooking- of- the- books” had occurred, and called into question the County's fiduciary obligation to the Special District 19 community. The Madera County Grand Jury voted to inquire into the propriety of this event.

SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION

The following were interviewed:

The Assistant Auditor was interviewed twice.

The complaining party ( Rolling Hills Citizen’s Association)

was contacted by phone for verification information

The following documents were reviewed and attached to this report.

The letter of complaint from the Board Members of The Rolling Hills

Citizen’s Association

The Complaint Form received from the Rolling Hills Citizens Association

The records from the Auditors Office

FINDINGS

The above statement, that $ 58,000.00 was removed from SA 19’ s maintenance account inappropriately, is incorrect. An internal audit found a computer error in the tax rate applied to the amounts deposited to the SA 19 account. The records at the Auditors office indicated that a readjustment of tax collected by Madera County from the years 1999 to 2003 was performed, due to an error in collections, which was in turn due to a computer error in the tax rate. It was not apparent to the auditor or to the District 19 Citizen’s Association that an over- payment was made. In fact, no money was taken inappropriately; the funds were redistributed as per the appropriate tax rate. The Madera County Auditor’s Office simply failed to notify the appropriate members of the Board of District 19’ s Rolling Hills Citizen’s Association of the misapplication of taxes, and the subsequent reallocation of these taxes to the appropriate fund.

RECOMMENDATION

In the case of errors, which affect the balance of accounts, the Auditors Office shall send an official notification to all affected parties, and explanation of remedies shall be given to the parties involved, when adjustments are 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 33

performed to resolve such errors. This report would not have come before the Grand Jury had the Auditors Office notified the parties involved at the time the incident was realized. This incident is a classic lack of communication.

RESPONSES

1. Madera County Board of Supervisors

2. Madera County Auditors Office

3. Special Dist 19 Board ( Rolling Hills Citizen’s Association)

RESPONSE REQUIRED FOR RECOMMENDATION

1. Madera County Board of Supervisors

2. Madera County Auditors Office

PAG E 3 4 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 35

PAG E 3 6 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

2004 Madera County Grand Jury

P. O. Box 534

Madera, California 93639- 0534

( 559) 662- 0946

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury

Review of

The 2003 Madera Grand Jury

Final Report On the

Janitorial Services Contract

For County Buildings in Eastern Madera County

INTRODUCTION

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury was not formally charged with following up on the Janitorial Services Contract issues identified by the 2003 Grand Jury. However, it was determined to be an issue that needed further review after the responses from the County of Madera had been received.

With the full Grand Jury in support of this review, the County Committee of the 2004 Madera County Grand Jury investigated all the allegations originally made in 2001, with follow- up letters to the persons responsible for each building in Madera County. The Grand Jury first investigated the Janitorial Contract itself. This contract stipulates when and what cleaning work is to be done in each building, as well as what is considered a breach of contract. Specifically, the contract stipulates, “ The County may terminate this contract at any time upon the COUNTY giving a ninety ( 90) day written notice to CONTRACTOR; however the COUNTY may terminate the contract immediately without notice in the event any terms or conditions of this contract are violated.” 3

FINDINGS

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury sent a copy of Exhibit “ B” 4 ( see attachment at end of this report), to all heads of departments of County Buildings located in the Eastern District of Madera County. The responses showed that most departments were upset with the poor quality of janitorial services. The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury resolved to investigate by touring the facilities to verify the problem. On July 6, 2004, the County Committee of the Grand Jury toured the Eastern District of Madera buildings, including the Health Department’s Clinic in Oakhurst, the Oakhurst Library, as well as the Sheriff’s Sub- Station and Probation Office in Oakhurst. Also toured were the Bass Lake Government Center and the North Fork Library.

The tours showed on obvious lack of cleaning, both on a daily and quarterly schedule. All the buildings were toured in the early morning to ensure that the visits were after the cleaning was scheduled and before any usage that day.

In every case, except the North Fork Library, the restrooms showed a complete lack of cleanliness, and in most cases, trashcans were not emptied and were overflowing.

In the Oakhurst Library, no toilet seat covers were evident, though the supply closet showed an ample supply available. The shelves of books, which were to be dusted according to the Contract, did not show any signs of

cleaning and were layered in dust. The librarian’s employee kitchen had stains in the sinks, food spots were not cleaned, and the floor had dead bugs and leftover food particles everywhere. The drinking fountain was filthy.

3 County of Madera, Agreement No. 6603- C- 2000, pg. 2, subsection 1, paragraph 2.

4 County of Madera, Agreement No. 6603- C- 2000Exhibit B, list of cleaning schedule. 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 37

The toilets were clearly not cleaned. The toilet bowls and the floors around them had urine and other stains. The bathrooms showed clear signs of a lack of mopping, dirt buildup and scuffmarks. Stains from human usage were everywhere. Cobwebs, with dusting of age, were evident in the recesses of the building; the carpets and floors were stained, with litter and small bits of trash still evident. The windows and glass doors showed prints and smears of all type, which appeared not to have been cleaned in several weeks.

The Oakhurst Sheriff’s Sub- Station’s Unisex restroom was so dirty that Grand Jury members were not able to step into the facility, due to the amount of trash on the floor and the odor of urine and feces. The floors in all the rooms, including the oft- used detectives lounge, were so dirty that it was evident that no attempt had been made to even sweep the area. The officers noted that it was often necessary to either do some sweeping themselves or to kick the trash aside and hope that eventually the cleaning staff would sweep the area. The windowsills in this building were so full of dead flies and insects that it was clear that months had gone by since the last cleaning of this important area. It is noted that the Parole ( Probation) Department maintains its own office because the area is locked for security reasons, and can only be cleaned if Probation Officers are in the area at the same time the cleaning staff is in the building.

The Government Center in Bass Lake was as bad as all the other facilities, and it must be noted that even within the Presiding Judge’s Chambers, the private restroom showed no evidence of any cleaning. The floors, windows, doors, jail cells, ashtrays, trashcans, and counters at the Government Center also showed a lack of regular cleaning. It is noted that the staff within the Government Center often ends up doing most of the cleaning that should be done by cleaning services, and the Grand Jury heard their justified complaints.

The Health Department’s Clinic in Oakhurst at first glance appeared to be clean; however, upon entering the employee areas it was clear that the Janitorial Service’s cleaning staff simply did the minimal cleaning possible in the outer lobby. In the rest of the building there was dust on the window blinds, no windows cleaned, dead flies on the sills and floor, trash in the trashcans and dust and dirt under the desks. Only the client lobby appeared presentable.

The North Fork Library was a surprise to the Grand Jury members, because it was very clean. However, it turned out that the volunteers at the library had taken it upon themselves to clean the library at the end of each day. The Janitorial Staff has never been seen entering the building to either inspect or do any cleaning.

In August 2004, as the Grand Jury was ending the investigation of the Janitorial Services Contract, a meeting was held with the County Librarian, Linda Sitterding. During this meeting, Ms. Sitterding noted that the Oakhurst Branch Librarian had already recommended the termination of the Janitorial Service Contract, though no action had ever been taken on her recommendation. It is noted also that after the first two- year contract term, the Janitorial Service Contract had been renewed through the fiscal year ending June 30, 2004. Currently, the contract is out for bid, with multiple companies expressing interest. The company currently contracted for cleaning the facilities, North American Building Maintenance, Inc., no longer has an extended contract and is cleaning on a temporary month- to- month basis. Also noted during the review of the facilities were the statements by volunteers and employees of Madera County, who had ended up doing the cleaning themselves, that they should be paid for the cleaning.

CONCLUSIONS

Though the heads of the departments located in these facilities have written, faxed, and called the Janitorial Services in regard to the lack of cleaning, and requested corrections be made, no real improvements have

PAG E 3 8 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

been seen. The contract appears to have been renewed without due consideration to the actual cleaning ability of the Contracted Service Company, and it’s staff. The cost to the County of Madera per month is so low, that the Grand Jury cannot determine how the crews are being paid even minimum wages to clean these facilities.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury recommends the immediate cancellation of the contract with the Janitorial Services Company, due to the requirements of cleaning having not been met, per County of Madera, Agreement No. 6603- C- 2000, pg. 2, subsection 1, paragraph 2.

2. That the Board of Supervisors bid these services out for contract as individual cleaning contracts, by building, and that all attempt be made to contract to companies, or persons, who live in the area of Eastern Madera County.

3. That the County of Madera perform reviews, and survey the employees or volunteers of the departments affected, of the cleaning ability of the contracted companies or persons, to ensure compliance with the contracted cleaning schedules, and that this be done at least every sixty ( 60) days.

4. Should the County of Madera find substandard performance during the reviews as recommended in item 3, that the County demand performance, and if the contractor fails to perform, then the County shall terminate the contract.

5. All contracts for Janitorial Services should be done with the stipulation that no contract may be sub- contracted.

6. All contracts should be done as to ensure that the amount of service provided meet the State of California minimum hourly rates for these services.

RESPONSES:

1. Madera County Board of Supervisors

2. Madera County Administrative Officer

3. Madera County Counsel

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 39

DOCUMENT USED DURING INVESTIGATION OF EASTERN MADERA JANITORIAL SERVICES

EXHIBIT B ATTACHMENT

4 County of Madera, Agreement No. 6603- C- 2000Exhibit B, list of cleaning schedule.

Cleaning Responsibility FREQUENCY Performed

Times Times Times

Week Month Year Y/ N

Gather and dispose of all waste paper 5

Clean all sinks located within departments 5

Sweep and dust mop all floor surfaces 5

Vacuum all carpeted areas ( under desks using vacuum 5

Dust all office furniture ( except desks and all items on desks) 1

Dust counters and file cabinets, etc. 1

Dust all ledges and other flat surfaces within reach 1

Properly arrange furniture in offices 1

Remove fingerprints from woodwork, walls, partitions 1

Clean Baseboards 1

Clean restrooms fixtures and chrome fittings 5

Clean and refill all restroom dispensers from stock 1

Spot wash restroom walls, tile, partitions, and doors 5

Clean all restroom mirrors 5

Sweep and wet mop restroom floors 5

Sanitize toilets, toilet seats, urinals ( inside and outside) 5

Wash all drinking fountains ( inside and outside) 5

Sweep and or dust stairs, landings, handrails 5

Clean lobby and entry ways ( inside and outside) 5

Wash doors and entry way door glass ( inside and outside) 5

Leave only designated night lights on 5

Check windows and doors upon completion of work 5

Refill all soap, towel, and toiler tissue dispensers 5

Clean up any floor “ mess” created by the public 5

Remove fingerprints from door & partition glass 1

Clean all sand urns on outside of building 2

Dust high partition ledges and moldings 2

Mop, wax, and polish all tile floors 2

Clean all metal hardware throughout offices 1

Shampoo carpets 4

Wash all exterior windows 4

Dust all window blinds 3

Vacuum all window draperies 3

Clean all light fixtures 4

Bleach all bathroom tiles 2

Empty all ash trays located near doors on outside of building 2

Remove spider webs from ceilings 1

Strip wax and refinish all tile floors 1

Clean bathrooms and hose down floor in holding cell area 2

Clean all baseboards 1

Please note yes or no for each item and return to the Grand Jury in the envelope provided.

PAG E 4 0 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 41

PAG E 4 2 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 43

2004 Madera County Grand Jury

P. O. Box 534

Madera, California 93639- 0534

( 559) 662- 0946

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury

Final Report

On The

Prison Crimes Case Tracking Log

INTRODUCTION

The Valley State Prison for Women ( VSPW), located in Chowchilla, California, is a State- run Penal Institution. The inmates housed at this facility often commit additional crimes within the prison itself. Depending on the crime committed, and the severity of the crime, the incident may be forwarded to the local District Attorney’s Office for prosecution of these crimes.

FINDINGS

On the last visit to the VSPW, the Chairman of the Public Safety & Welfare Committee was asked to check on the status of the ‘ Prison Crimes Case Tracking Log’ for 2002- 2003, as well as the status of the incidents on file for 2004. Tony Bacci, the VSPW Legal Representative, provided the Logs and was the person that requested the status up the logs with the District Attorney’s Office.

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury contacted the District Attorney’s Office and spoke with John Bell, the Accounting Manager for the District Attorney’s Office. Mr. Bell researched the information and gave the Grand Jury a copy of the status sheets for the cases listed in the logs, which were subsequently provided to Mr. Bacci at the VSPW.

CONCLUSION

The crime incidents at VSPW are confidential, and are not published in this Grand Jury Final Report. However, the request for information assistance is considered a Grand Jury duty, and is noted herein, as a matter of public record.

RECOMMENDATIONS: None

RESPONSES: Warden, Valley State Prison for Women, Chowchilla, CA

PAG E 4 4 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

2004 Madera County Grand Jury

P. O. Box 534

Madera, California 93639- 0534

( 559) 662- 0946

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury

Final Report on

The Chukchansi Indian Casino Gambler’s Anonymous Payments

Date: Sept 20,2004

To: 2004 Madera County Grand Jury

From: 2004 Madera County Grand Jury Committee on Special Districts & Issues

Subject: Final Report on the Payment of Gamblers Anonymous Funds

by the Chukchansi Indians Tribe, dba: Chuckchansi Indian Casino

The Madera Grand Jury received an inquiry regarding the Chukchansi Indian Casino, from a member of the Madera County Mental Health Board. The issue was the status of the required payment of the $ 15,000.00 per- year payment to the Gamblers Anonymous Fund.

Two members of the 2004 Madera County Grand Jury checked with County Administration Office and the Auditors Office. We found that the tribe had been billed within the prior two weeks. After two weeks to give time for the appropriate payment, the Grand Jury learned that the payment had been received, in the amount of $ 30,000.00.

We found no failure to comply, as the tribe paid the amount in a timely manner.

Submitted,

2004 Madera County Grand Jury Committee on Special Districts and Issues

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 45

2004 Madera County Grand Jury

P. O. Box 534

Madera, California 93639- 0534

( 559) 662- 0946

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury

Final Report

On the City of Chowchilla Police Department and Jail

INTRODUCTION

Members of the Madera County Grand Jury toured the Chowchilla Police Department at 122 Trinity Avenue, Chowchilla California, on July 14, 2004, pursuant to § 919( a) of the California Penal Code to, “… inquire as to county prisons.”

FINDINGS

The Chief of Police in Chowchilla has a staff of 17 full time sworn officers. Among them is a sergeant who assists with administration and manages information technology (“ 911” software, and hardware). Also included on the staff are four Community Service Officers, one Officer who performs the functions of animal control and evidence technician, and one School Resources Officer. The Officers are organized into four teams that staff the Police Department and jail and patrol the city 24 hours per day, 7 days a week on twelve hour shifts that change at 6 am and 6 pm. In addition to the full time staff, there are four relief Community Service Officers who work part time ( approximately 20 hours per week).

The Police Chief reports that, on average, the jail processes one inmate per day, but rarely more than two. The jail performs preliminary booking and then either cites and releases the inmate, or transports them to the Madera County Department of Corrections.

The Chowchilla Jail is a temporary holding facility with one two- person holding cell and one “ cage” type cell. A camera monitors the holding cell. The State of California Board of Corrections audited the facility in 2003 at which time the “ cage” cell was deemed substandard. In response to the audit, funds were earmarked in the 2004- 2005 City of Chowchilla General Operating Budget for removal and replacement of the cage cell.

On the date of the Grand Jury’s visit, the jail was undergoing a process of renovation and expansion to double its area. The modernized facility now has an interview room, dispatch area, report writing area, investigations office, Sergeants’ office, lunchroom/ kitchen, conference room, and evidence room with a vault. The jail now has two cells, rather than one, plus the ‘ cage cell’.

The Grand Jury was very favorably impressed with the renovation. The Grand Jury commends the contractor and construction workers who performed the work. The City of Chowchilla is fortunate to have a contractor and construction workers as city employees who have performed such an excellent job in an expeditious manner.

The Grand Jury notes that the jail is one of the few agencies remaining that still takes fingerprints manually using the ink- and- roll method rather than by digital scan of the fingers on the LiveScan system. Inked fingerprints are sent to the California Department of Justice for identification, and receipt of the results may take from 90 days to a year. Alternately, the Chowchilla jail may avail itself of Madera County’s LiveScan system at a cost of $ 75 per scan with results available within 30 minutes.

PAG E 4 6 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

CONCLUSION

The Grand Jury found the condition of the jail to be excellent and the management to be professional. The now completed renovation to the jail is clean and well organized with efficient use of space. The Jury is especially impressed that such a small city with limited resources has performed so well. With so many cities reducing city services due to budgetary constraints exacerbated by State budget issues, it is important to note the City of Chowchilla’s commitment to providing for it’s long- term needs while still providing the basic services that have been cut or reduced by other cities and communities.

RECOMMENDATION

1. The Grand Jury recommends that the Chowchilla Police Department procure a LiveScan fingerprint system. The Jury is concerned that the City of Chowchilla is not taking advantage of current technology and may miss opportunities to contribute to the safety of the community at this time of heightened security awareness. The LiveScan system may in the long- term provide additional savings by reducing the cost to the Police Department for the processing of fingerprints manually.

ENTITIES TO RESPOND

1. Madera County Board of Supervisors

2. City of Chowchilla Chief of Police

3. Chowchilla City Council

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 47

2004 Madera County Grand Jury

P. O. Box 534

Madera, California 93639- 0534

( 559) 662- 0946

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury

Tour of

The Madera County Juvenile Detention Facility

INTRODUCTION

Members of the Madera County Grand Jury toured the Madera County Juvenile Detention Facility, on February 20, 2004.

FINDINGS

The Detention Facility is in a new building, less than two years old, located at 28219 Avenue 14. The facility has a capacity for seventy youths and there are now between forty and fifty youths in residence. There is room at the premises to build an expansion that would increase the capacity to 130, if and when needed.

The facility accepts boys and girls from Madera and Mariposa Counties, who are being held while going through the legal system. The youths may be anywhere in the legal process from arraignment through preliminary hearing, disposition, and into additional supervision, through the Juvenile Courts. Any child from as young as five years old may be housed at the facility and, in fact, a nine year old child has actually been received there. The average stay is eleven days. The facility is under contract to receive youths from Mariposa County on a space available basis. Madera County is paid for the expense of housing youths from Mariposa, but does not profit from the arrangement. Youths who are under the influence of drugs or alcohol are not admitted directly to the facility, but are sent to a hospital until they are sober. Half of all youths detained in Madera County come from families who are receiving Temporary Aid to Needy Families ( TANF).

Each housing area of the facility has dormitory rooms, which surround a day room with an adjoining yard. Boys and girls are housed in separate areas. The areas are bright, roomy, and exceptionally clean. The youths do all the cleaning and the facility is in excellent condition. Television, including HBO, may be viewed by the youths at the officers’ discretion. There are no telephones for use by the youths, but payphones may be installed in the future in order to raise money to buy more computers for the classrooms. Staff would monitor telephone calls. Youths are allowed to receive visits from grandparents, parents, and siblings only.

Meals are provided through a contract with ARAMARK food service, and other supplies are provided through UNISOURCE. The State provides $ 80,000 per year, and the Federal Government an additional $ 15,000 for nutritional programs. Last year the facility was budgeted $ 120,000 for food service by the Madera County Board of Supervisors. As a result of contract services with ARAMARK, the Juvenile Detention Facility ended its contract year with actual costs of $ 92,500. The funds provided by the State and Federal programs are grant- style, and do not require all monies to be used nor any unused monies to be returned.

Each youth is issued three sets of clothing so that one may be worn, one is on the shelf, and one is in the laundry. The laundry has its own industrial size laundry machines. The youth’s do their own laundry.

Medical care is provided under contract, and a physician is on duty at the facility one day each week and as needed. Asthma, allergies, and bronchial disorders are the most common ailments among the youths. Staff is trained in first aid and cardiopulmonary resuscitation. They rely on paramedics for medical emergencies.

PAG E 4 8 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

The detainees' day begins at 6: 45am, with attendance at school until 2: 30pm. The school day is followed by time in the yard, showers, homework, time in the day room, and dinner.

There are 25 officers at the facility over two twelve- hour shifts, seven days per week. Staff members make rounds of the facility every fifteen minutes. The rounds are documented electronically by use of an electronic key card system wherein the staff member inserts a key card into a scanner at each station on the round to verify a presence at that location. Night shifts consist of five officers.

An administrative segregation unit is closed because there is no staff available to run it. The unit has been used once in the history of the facility. The staff responds to gang fights by locking down the facility for three days.

The Madera County Office of Education provides education by certified teachers with 15 students per class. There are also two teachers of English as a Second Language. The Enterprise School provides education for the learning disabled, as well as specialized classes on the effects of violent crime, and sexual abuse. Classes are also given on life skills and other specialty subjects. Mental health issues are addressed by the Madera County Mental Health Department.

A safety cell is available for those youths who need one. The cell is checked every five minutes. Madera County Mental Health staff members check on youths within one hour of initially being placed in safety cells. Only licensed professionals may touch the youths during strip searches.

The administration at the facility places a heavy emphasis on training for its staff and also offers training to surrounding agencies. Each officer at the facility receives 24 hours of training and sergeants receive 40 hours per year. Training includes beginning, intermediate, and advanced coursework in weaponless defense, use of OC pepper spray, physical restraints, handcuffing, and POST ( Peace Officer Standards and Training). Unfortunately, the training program is being impacted because funds received from the State of California for " Standards and Training for Corrections" has been cut entirely from the training program, though the mandate for training in this category must still be implemented. It is also noted that the Superintendent provides training in excess of that mandated by the State and other government agencies.

There is significant turnover among the staff due to low pay and the absence of benefits such as " safety" retirement.

CONCLUSION

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury found the Madera County Juvenile Detention Facility to be very clean, well run and maintained. The safety and care of the detainees seemed to be a high priority for all of the staff. The facility is under- staffed by eight positions. The Superintendent is to be commended for the high standards at the facility.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. The Superintendent should be granted the funding for adequate staffing.

2. The Board of Supervisors should consider increasing the funds for training to offset the funding cuts by the State of

California, without decreasing the funding of the overall current funding provided to the Detention Facility.

RESPONSES REQUIRED

1. Madera County Board of Supervisors

2. Superintendent, Madera County Juvenile Detention Facility

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 49

2004 Madera County Grand Jury

P. O. Box 534

Madera, California 93639- 0534

( 559) 662- 0946

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury

Tour of

Central California Women’s Facility Tour

INTRODUCTION

Members of the Grand Jury toured Central California Women’s Facility, an institution of the California Department of Corrections, on March 25, 2004, pursuant to the duty to " inquire into the condition and management of the public prisons within the county" as prescribed in § 919( b) of the California Penal Code.

FINDINGS

The primary mission of the Central California Women’s Facility ( CCWF) is to process and incarcerate California female offenders in a secure, safe, disciplined, and ethical institutional setting. CCWF provides inmates academic education, work, and vocational training, counseling, and specialized programs for their successful reintegration into society after release.

CCWF opened in October 1990, covers 640 acres. There are currently 3,680 inmates, 560 are serving life sentences while 15 are on “ Death Row”. CCWF has a staff of 984, including guards, management, and other staff, with an annual budget of $ 82,000,000.

The inmate dress code is casual, with blue and white colors for the general population, orange for new arrivals, and lime green for inmates that work outside the prison grounds. “ Death Row” inmates wear the same clothing as the general population; though “ Death Row” inmates and those in the general population may choose to wear civilian clothing during non- work hours. New arrival inmates are the only population segment that may not wear civilian clothing. The option to wear civilian clothing is a recent change to the California Prison clothing policy, and is only for inmates while within the prison grounds. Inmates that work outside the perimeter fence, or are being transported must wear prison clothing.

CCWF’s specialized health and medical services provide a licensed medical facility. CCWF also encourages personal health responsibility.

There are many vocational education programs available for inmates who choose to participate. These programs include:

~ Auto- Body Repair & Refinishing

~ Computer Technology

~ Cosmetology

~ Electronics

~ Graphic Arts

~ Cabinet Making

~ Silk Screening

~ Small Engine Repair

PAG E 5 0 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

~ Upholstery

~ Welding

The Prison Industry Authority not only benefits from the farms’ production, but also has at this facility:

~ Dental Manufacturing ( to produce dental devices for the California Department of

Corrections Inmates)

Unlike regular inmate jobs, public- private partnerships allow inmates to earn a prevailing wage, similar to those in the public environment. A public- private partnership, known as The Joint Venture Program, an electronic manufacturing program, exists between the inmates and a private manufacturing company. Deductions are taken from the inmate’s wages for room and board, victim compensation funds, prisoner- family support, and mandatory savings for release. These public- private partnerships save the CDC untold monies in educational instruction and help the State’s businesses and economy. These partnerships also allow the inmates to learn a new skill, as well as earn additional monies to further their educational opportunities after release.

The prison also offers Adult Education, High School G. E. D., English as a Second Language, and Literacy Programs.

The inmates are provided three meals each day, including hot meals at breakfast and dinner. A boxed lunch is provided to each inmate as they exit the mess hall after breakfast. A dessert is served with the dinner meal, and varies, based on ingredients available. The diet appears to be nutritious and is made of high quality ingredients.

CONCLUSION

The inmates appear to be well provided for and the staff and administration appears to perform their duties in a professional manner. The grounds of the facility are very well maintained.

RECOMMENDATIONS

None.

RESPONSES NOT REQUIRED

Madera County Board of Supervisors

California Department of Corrections, Central California Women’s Facility, Warden

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 51

2004 Madera County Grand Jury

P. O. Box 534

Madera, California 93639- 0534

( 559) 662- 0946

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury

Final Report On The Tour of

The Central California Women’s Facility

Fire Department

INTRODUCTION

Members of the Grand Jury toured Central California Women’s Facility ( CCWF), an institution of the California Department of Corrections, on March 25, 2004, pursuant to the duty to " inquire into the condition and management of the public prisons within the county" as prescribed in § 919( b) of the California Penal Code.

FINDINGS

The primary mission of the Fire Department located on the grounds of CCWF, is to provide professional fire protection for itself and the adjacent facility, Valley State Prison for Women ( VSPW), which are located near Chowchilla.

One Fire Chief, five ( 5) Captains, and nine ( 9) trustee inmate firefighters staff the Fire Department. There is also one dispatcher/ cook position, which is performed by a trustee inmate who is also qualified to fight fires when needed. In the first eight months of 2004, the Fire Department responded to 805 medical and fire related emergencies for CCWF, VSPW, and other areas within Madera County. In 2003, the Fire Department participated in over 1200 events including calls for assistance.

The Fire Department provides:

~ Fire & rescue services within a 10- mile radius, including fire suppression and protection

~ Medical aid to persons in need, when requested through the Fire Dispatch Center

~ Fire extinguisher servicing for extinguishers within the two State Prisons

~ Hazardous material protection and assistance to HazMat teams, as well as removal of material

~ Responses, when requested, to fire and rescue requests within 150 square miles, including wild fires

and highway accidents.

~ a response crew, including one Captain, and four firefighters.

~ over 1500 community service hours each year.

~ over 400 responses to Madera County official requests each year.

The Fire Department is equipped to deal with accidents, fires, rescues, and other issues with two Type I Fire Engines, each of which have 300 gallon “ pump & roll” capabilities, allowing the engines to perform without access to outside sources of water. “ Pump & roll” means to pump water into the tanks and drive the engine to the fire without the need for fire hydrants. A deck- mounted water gun and 1400 feet of three inch Fire Hose is also on each Engine. Each Engine includes, and is equipped with the “ Jaws of Life” device, and a crew of 4- 5 inmate firefighters.

The inmate firefighters are assigned to the Fire Department, and live in the Fire Department’s living quarters, in similar fashion as other Fire Departments nationwide. Prior to being assigned to the Fire Department, the inmates must first be nominated by their Prison Counselor, recommended for this job by an inmate committee, approved

PAG E 5 2 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

by the Institution’s Jobs Committee, and finally, approved by the Warden of the Prison and the Fire Chief. All the conditions must be met before formal training is begun and prior to inmates being transferred to the Fire Department facility.

Inmate Firefighters are expected to:

~ live at the Fire Department

~ be available for duty 6am – 3pm

~ provide emergency responses 24/ 7

~ be physically fit through mandatory firefighter training

~ display a proficiency in operation and use of all available power tools, including the “ Jaws of Life”,

apparatus and pumps

~ Share in the cooking duties on weekends

Inmate Firefighters also provide emergency services to the local community. From January 1, 1999 to June 30, 2004 the Inmate Firefighters have made over 1500 emergency responses and performed over 6,000 hours of community service.

CONCLUSION

The Fire Department is responsive to the needs of the County and its population. The Fire Chief maintains strict discipline over the inmate firefighters. With the assistance of the Captains, the Fire Department ensures that responses that are requested of the CCWF Fire Department are handled in a professional and immediate manner. During the tour, the inmate firefighters showed the Grand Jury their proficiency with the equipment. The Grand Jury commends the inmates for their dedication and the duties they perform. These firefighters are often found fighting wildfires side- by- side with firefighters from other locations throughout California.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The CCWF Fire Department is in serious need of parts and repair assistance to maintain the aging Fire Engines. The current engines are aging and in need of maintenance which is often beyond the budget of the Prison System and the State of California. In the past, reciprocal agreements with the County of Madera have assisted in some repairs, but time and usage continues to deteriorate the aging engines. The Grand Jury recommends that the Madera County Board of Supervisors work with the Fire Chief to locate funds, grants, equipment, and parts to help maintain this vital link to the Madera County Community.

RESPONSES REQUIRED

1. Madera County Board of Supervisors

2. Madera County Counsel ( See Response at end of this Report)

3. Warden, Central California Women’s Facility ( See Response at end of this Report)

4. Fire Chief, Central California Women’s Facility Fire Department

RESPONSES FOLLOW THIS REPORT

49 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 53

PAG E 5 4 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 55

PAG E 5 6 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

Madera County Grand Jury

P. O. Box 534

Madera, California 93639- 0534

( 559) 662- 0946

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury

Final Report on The Public Safety and Welfare Committee’s Review of

The Madera County Department of Social Services Fraud Unit, Income and Eligibility Verification System

And The Madera County District Attorney’s Office, Special Investigation Unit

INTRODUCTION

The 2003 Madera County Grand Jury and previous Grand Juries investigated the Madera County Department of Social Services. In the 2003 Final Report, the Grand Jury recommended that the 2004 Grand Jury continue to monitor the Department. The 2004 Grand Jury chose to focus on the Department's Fraud Unit.

FINDINGS

There are two crucial departments, the Special Investigative Unit of the District Attorney's Office ( SIU) and the Income and Eligibility Verification System of the Department of Social Services ( IEVS), which must cooperate with one another and coordinate their efforts in order to investigate fraud by welfare recipients.

The Grand Jury found that SIU and IEVS failed to perform fraud prevention and prosecution of offenders in a comprehensive and timely manner due to discord between the two departments. In spite of protocols intended to facilitate communications, personal animosities prevailed.

This issue has been addressed repeatedly by successive Grand Juries. The two Departments have recently developed corrective measures, and plan a joint training session in order to come to a common understanding of each one’s specific responsibilities.

The Grand Jury finds it curious that heretofore no manager at any level has put a stop to the discord that has interfered with the Departments’ functions.

CONCLUSION

After continuing mediation by members of the 2004 Grand Jury, SIU and IEVS have developed a new set of protocols and training that they feel will bring the departments together to overcome their differences. The Grand Jury finds that this function should have been accomplished by management and should never have become the job of the Grand Jury.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. That the 2005 Grand Jury insures that the new protocols for communication and cooperation between SIU and IEVS are effectively implemented and practiced.

ENTITIES TO RESPOND

1. Madera County Board of Supervisors

2. Madera County Department of Social Services Director

3. Madera County District Attorney

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 57

2004 Madera County Grand Jury

P. O. Box 534

Madera, California 93639- 0534

( 559) 662- 0946

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury

Final Report on The

Eastern Madera County Sheriff’s Facility

INTRODUCTION

The Madera County Grand Jury toured the Eastern Madera County Sheriff’s Facility on July 15, 2004, pursuant to Penal Code 925, charging the Grand Jury with investigation of, “ County officers, departments or functions; operations, accounts and records; investigations and reports”.

FINDINGS

The Madera County Sheriff met and welcomed the Public Safety Committee of the Grand Jury. He introduced the Sergeant who is in charge of the Bass Lake Division. He explained the patrol operations on Bass Lake. During the summer season, May through September, they have four sworn and four non- sworn personnel assigned. Non- sworn ( volunteer) officers perform oversight and control issues on Bass Lake, and report incidents to the sworn officers. Sworn officers have peace- officer powers, including the enforcement of California Law. They enforce boat speed limits, operating under the influence, etc. Jet ski operators cause the most problems and accidents, according to information provided by the Sergeant. They have specific areas of use on Bass Lake for jet skis.

The Sergeant is also in charge of the other volunteer operations such as ‘ Search and Rescue’. This unit is well trained and primarily used in the mountain and remote areas. They continuously train in order to be prepared when an emergency occurs.

The Sergeant is also in charge of the Dive Team. They must be trained to dive in murky water with only a few feet of visibility, swift- water rescue and recovery, and water containing hazardous debris. They must be exceptionally well trained for their own survival. The Sergeant is also the coordinator for the SWAT Team, which is a multi- agency operational task force. All members of SWAT Team are sworn personnel.

The Sergeant then introduced the Grand Jury members to the Lieutenant who is in charge of the Eastern Madera Sheriff’s Operations. He escorted us into the Government Center where we observed the Dispatch and Clerical Operations. From there the Grand Jury tour continued to the two holding cells. The cells are strictly temporary holding units, which appeared to be well maintained. One detriment of the facility is a nearby sewage- processing system, which is very evident. The Lieutenant then took us through the rest of the center and showed us the courtroom. The Grand Jury’s tour then proceeded up a long driveway, around the rear of the Government Center to a small house that had been converted to the needs of the Detective Division. The Detective Division has offices and a “ Briefing/ Report Writing Area”. The space appeared to be quite adequate. There is a shortage of detectives. At the time we were there, the Detective Division had one Sergeant and two Detectives, but both of the detectives were leaving shortly thereafter - one on a medical leave and the other for emergency leave.

The Grand Jury then went to the Sheriff’s Mountain Area Headquarters in Oakhurst. It is a converted doctor’s office. It had one large room, where meetings or briefings can be held, a break room with a refrigerator where the

PAG E 5 8 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

deputies can relax and eat their lunches, etc. The remaining areas consist of offices. They have both phone service and radio contact from this location. This enables the officers to be available to handle calls when needed.

The Grand Jury then requested that the Sheriff provide a personnel roster covering the Mountain Division. This roster uncovered and revealed that the Board of Supervisors had supplied the five deputies from the existing Sheriff’s staffing, rather than providing for five additional deputies as required by the Memorandum of Understanding ( MOU). The MOU is the Agreement between the Chukchansi Tribe and The Madera County Government regarding Casino Operations. When the Chukchansi Gold Casino opened and agreed to pay for five deputy positions, it sounded like a good boost to security in the Mountain community. However, this is not the case.

The County accepted the money, from the Chukchansi Tribe and Casino, but instead of adding the five additional deputies that Chukchansi paid for, they transferred the five deputies from the existing Patrol Deputy allotment. This means that the five deputies are assigned to the Coarsegold area around the Casino. This leaves nine deputies assigned to patrol to handle enforcement in the remainder of Eastern Madera County. One of these deputies is assigned to Yosemite High School, leaving eight deputies to protect the rest of Eastern Madera County. It requires five deputy positions to provide one deputy around the clock. This means that there are less than two deputies per shift to cover the area from the San Joaquin River to North Fork up to the Mariposa County line and across to the Valley Division Line. An article in the Sierra Star newspaper, September 17, 2004, had headlines that state, “ Sheriff won’t lose deputies with budget.” This is misleading because there is a hiring freeze that does not allow vacancies to be filled. The Madera County Board of Supervisors transferred Sheriff’s personnel to meet the requirements of the Chukchansi Tribe & Casino, to fund the police security at the Casino and within the Coarsegold area as mandated in the agreement.

CONCLUSION

The antiquated space at the Government Center for the Sheriff’s Station is used efficiently. The Sheriff and his staff should be commended for the job they do with the limited number of personnel. Currently, the staffing requirements at the Bass Lake Station is under- staffed by three positions. The budget of the Sheriff’s Department appears in need of additional funds.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. The Board of Supervisors review the level of protection they provide to the residents of the Mountain Area.

2. The two frozen positions in Patrol are filled.

3. The money received for the five additional deputies that Chukchansi paid for should be used only for those five additional deputy positions and not taken out of the Sheriff’s Budget.

4. The Board of Supervisors fund the Sheriff’s Department Budget adequately to hire the additional detectives necessary to maintain the Detectives Division at the Bass Lake Government Center.

5. The Board of Supervisors provides funding for the deputies to staff the main force of the Sheriff’s Department at pre- Chukchansi Casino levels.

RESPONSES

1. Board of Supervisors

2. Madera County Sheriff’s Department

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 59

2004 Madera County Grand Jury

P. O. Box 534

Madera, California 93639- 0534

( 559) 662- 0946

2004 Madera County Grand Jury

Final Report On

The City of Madera Finance Department

As Regards Business Licenses for Rental Properties

INTRODUCTION

Members of the 2004 Madera County Grand Jury went to the Finance Department of the City of Madera pursuant to Code 925( a) charging the Grand Jury to " investigate and report upon the fiscal matters of any such city or joint powers agency." The Grand Jury met with the Finance Director on June 15, 2004 to learn about the collection of business license fees for rental properties.

FINDINGS

The Rental Business License Fee Ordinance is found in City of Madera Municipal Code § 6- 1.28 RENTAL PROPERTIES, “ Every person conducting or maintaining real property in the city for rental as a dwelling unit, whether as a single- family, two family, or multi- family residential unit, except the Housing Authority of the city and owners of motels and hotels, which are taxed pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 3 of Title 8 of this code, shall pay an annual license tax based upon the average monthly gross receipts for such rental units in accordance with the schedule set forth in § 6- 1.22 of this chapter. Applications for issuance of a business license for residential income properties shall be submitted to the Director of Finance together with a fee of $ [ according to a set schedule] as set by Council Resolution no later than June 17, 1994 or within one calendar year of commencement of the use of the property as rental income property, either as a new use or as a change of use.”

The Business License fee for rental properties is collected on a sliding scale. Owners whose rental income is under $ 500.00 a month pay $ 20.00/ year. Owners receiving between $ 500.00 and $ 1,000.00 pay $ 28.00, and so

on. An owner would have to be receiving more than $ 6,000.00 a month, for all rental properties, to pay over $ 100.00/ year.

The Finance Director stated that the City of Madera collects about $ 36,000 a year from Rental Business License Fees. The Grand Jury was concerned about the possibility that quite a few rental property owners might be unaware of this fee. When asked how the public was notified, the Finance Director said that the information was posted in the Public Notices section of the newspapers in the County. The Grand Jury asked if people were informed about this issue when they ordered water and sewer services for a new property. The Finance Director said that an effort had been made to keep clerks aware of this and to have them inform the public at such times, but a large turnover in staff has made it very difficult to be consistent.

In general, the Finance Director expressed concern about budget cuts that have resulted in personnel cuts for his department. He said that it is very difficult to cover all the finance responsibilities with the existing staff.

The Madera County Grand Jury in late August requested documentation from the Finance Department in order to attempt to determine how large a problem there might be with regard to the failure of the Finance Department to collect rental property business license fees. The Grand Jury asked for a list of all properties where the service address was different from the mailing address for billing of water and sewer fees. The Grand Jury also asked for

PAG E 6 0 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

a list of all rental properties on which Business License Rental Fees are being paid. CONCLUSION

The letter that accompanied the materials, that were received based on the documentation previously requested by the Madera County Grand Jury, informed the Grand Jury about a new program that should help in solving the problem of finding rental properties and collecting the revenues for the rental business license fee. The letter mentioned the Local Government Sharing Program ( AB63). This program allows any city in the State of California to request a listing of any resident filing a tax return as a resident of that city that contains a Schedule C. This information will be cross- referenced with the business license database. Individuals not licensed by the

City of Madera will receive a notice of violation and have a specified amount of time to correct the violation or prove that they do not do business within the City Limits. This allows the City of Madera to be sure that they are collecting Business License fees for all City of Madera businesses that also California State tax forms. The City of Madera signed a sharing agreement with the Franchise Tax Board, under AB63, on May 20, 2004. The City of Madera is to receive its first disc in January 2005.

Finally, in December of 2004, another cross- reference is scheduled with the County of Madera database, which will cover rental business licenses. The last cross- reference using the County property tax database was done in January 2003. The Finance Director did not mention this during our June meeting.

The Madera County Grand Jury commends the City of Madera for initiating the use of recent technology in solving revenue collection problems. RECOMMENDATIONS

1. In the belief that it is always better to inform new owners about the Rental Business License Fee when they first acquire the property rather than to locate them after they have become delinquent, the Grand Jury suggests that every person who comes into the City to turn on utilities be given a notice that if the property is to be a rental property, such fees must be paid.

2. Clerks must advise people who ask to have billing sent to an address other than the service address, that a Business License and payment of a Rental Business License Fee might be required.

RESPONSES REQUIRED

1. City of Madera Finance Department

2. City of Madera City Council

RESPONSE NOT REQUIRED BUT ALLOWED

1. Madera County Board of Supervisors

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 61

2004 Madera County Grand Jury

P. O. Box 534

Madera, California 93639- 0534

( 559) 662- 0946

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury

Final Report on

The Madera County Animal Shelter

And

The Roberta J. Wills Trust

INTRODUCTION

The 2003 Madera County Grand Jury received a request to look into the status of the Roberta J. Wills’ Trust and to determine if the County of Madera had formulated plans to enhance the County of Madera’s Animal Shelter in accordance with the Trust. Upon the death of Ms. Wills in 1983, funds from her probated Will were transferred to a named trustee. For personal reasons, the trustee entered into an agreement with the County of Madera for distribution of the funds. Funds from Ms. Wills’ Trust in the amount of $ 268,725.51 were transferred to the County of Madera on May 22, 1984. According to the Last Will and Testament of Ms. Wills, all of the funds are to be used for the County of Madera’s Animal Shelter. Half of the money is to be used for making capital improvements at any existing animal shelter or toward acquisition and construction of a new facility. The other half of the trust’s funds is to be used for administrative purposes. In each instance, it was noted that funds could be used for these purposes at the trustee’s sole discretion. Effectively, there was $ 134,362 in each account.

FINDINGS

One recommendation made by the 2003 Madera County Grand Jury was to have the 2004 Madera County Grand Jury review this matter to determine if progress was being made in a timely manner. On February 11, 2004, in response to the findings, the Animal Control Director advised that shelter improvements had not yet been implemented, and that the Animal Shelter Expansion Advisory Board was continuing to work on planning, coordinating, and implementing the shelter expansion project.

The funds from Ms. Wills trust are held in a separate fund from the County of Madera’s General Fund, and are currently in excess of $ 300,000. Additionally, the City of Madera has allocated $ 45,000 to the project. This allocation of monies specifies it is to be used within two years, which ends February 11, 2005, or it will revert back to the City General Fund. The Auditor for the County of Madera maintains a complete accounting for all transactions concerning the Trust. Overseeing the use of the funds is the Madera County Board of Supervisors. The Friends of the Madera Animal Shelter has been a leading proponent for expanding the Animal Shelter. The Friends of the Madera Animal Shelter is a nonprofit organization, whose mission is dedicated to improving the general well being of animals through community education and outreach.

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury visited the animal shelter on May 12, 2004. The Director of the Animal Shelter provided the members with a tour of the facility. There were crowded conditions, with dogs and cats held in close proximity. Evidence of a lack of cleaning was also noted. There is a shortage of staff at the Animal Shelter, due to budget cuts throughout Madera County’s Government. Approximately twenty animals are ‘ put down’ or euthanised each day. As Madera continues to grow, and new housing developments are completed, the increase in animal populations with no apparent increase in the capacity for housing unwanted pets is resulting in the diminished ability of the animal shelter to perform its primary functions. During a subsequent visit to the Animal Shelter in October 2004, the Grand Jury noted that the facility appeared to be cleaner. The Director of the Animal Shelter noted that this was due to additional volunteers helping out in the last month. Funding by the

PAG E 6 2 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

County is critical. Assistance from other counties in adoption services and medical supplies is ongoing but not on a regular basis. The expansion plan for the Animal Shelter has continued throughout 2004 with many delays for various reasons. The County Engineering Department had been developing plans for the Animal Shelter expansion for many years. The Animal Shelter during those years was not a priority for the Engineering Department. In August, 2003, The Board of Supervisors approved the Animal Shelter Expansion Advisory Board. The newly created Board then found an architect who agreed to draw up the basic plans for free, however, due to exigent circumstances, the architect never completed the plans. The Animal Shelter Expansion Advisory Board didn’t want to spend additional monies on locating a new architect and instead drew up a basic design without the assistance of the Madera County RMA or Building Departments. After this design was reviewed by the Building Department, which wanted changes to meet building codes, the Advisory Board rejected the changes. Finally, the Engineering Department stepped into the issue and revised the basic design of the expansion, as first designed by the Advisory Board into a schematic without code compliant information. This schematic was the basic information provided to contractors and other interested parties in October, 2004, when the bid for proposals was announced. The bid process ended November 12, 2004, at 4: 00pm. At that time the Engineering Department, and the Grand Jury, reviewed the bids. Six companies provided bid information, which was reviewed by the Engineering Department and all bids were rejected, due to various exclusionary reasons.

CONCLUSIONS

In order to retain the $ 45,000 matching funds provided by the City of Madera, the winning contractor must break ground no later than February 11, 2005. There is no reason to delay the construction of this project. The County of Madera has been in control of the funds of the Roberta Wills Trust for twenty years. Due to increased costs associated with building in today’s economic environment, the cost to build this expansion may have increased beyond the level of the Trust’s ability to complete.

Once again, The County of Madera, through the Engineering Department, has managed to delay the expansion of the Animal Shelter, with 20 years of indifference. These delays have resulted in the continued growth of animal populations without the controls in place to deal with them. Due to these delays, the Roberta J. Wills’ Trust Funds no longer have the ability to build and complete the expansion of the Animal Shelter as originally conceived by the Advisory Board. Dogs and cats are and will continue to suffer due to this negligence.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. That The Madera County Board of Supervisors provide the additional funds necessary to complete the expansion of the Animal Shelter if the funds already provided are not enough to cover the costs.

2. That the Board of Supervisors includes sufficient funding for the shelter, including staffing, and other support services, for the increased capacity ability of the finished expansion.

3. That the Board of Supervisors continues to fund at levels sufficient to operate both the old and new buildings, and not seek to reduce the capacity or ability of the Animal Shelter from performing its primary function.

4. That the staffing requirements be reviewed by the County’s Human Resources Department, and changes made, if necessary, to ensure that adequate staffing is available for the facility after the completion of the expansion.

5. That an outreach program educating on the necessity of spay and neuter, and humane pet care are implemented and funded by the County of Madera. This funding should be separate from, or in addition to, the normal operating budget of the Madera County Animal Shelter.

6. That ‘ The Friends of the Madera Animal Shelter’ be given County recognition for seeking volunteers to assist the County Animal Shelter with needed services and support.

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 63

7. That the Roberta J. Wills Trust be audited, and completed, no later than December 30, 2005, to determine whether funds have been managed correctly, and that the funds disbursed were according to the Directives of the Trust.

CHARGE OF DUTY TO FUTURE GRAND JURIES

1. We charge the 2005 Madera County Grand Jury with following up on the continued expansion of the Animal Shelter, until such time that the expansion is completed. Due to the twenty- year ongoing delays to expand the Animal Shelter, if the building and opening of the expansion is not completed by the end of the 2005 Madera County Grand Jury term; then we charge each subsequent Grand Jury with the continuation of this important matter.

RESPONSES REQUIRED

1. Madera County Board of Supervisors

2. Madera County Animal Shelter Director

3. Madera County Auditor

4. Madera County Planning and Engineering Department

5. Madera County Human Resources Department

6. Friends of the Madera Animal Shelter

PAG E 6 4 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 65

PAG E 6 6 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 67

PAG E 6 8 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

2004 Madera County Grand Jury

P. O. Box 534

Madera, California 93639- 0534

( 559) 662- 0946

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury

Final Report on

The Madera~ Chowchilla Water and Power Authority

INTRODUCTION

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury investigated the Madera- Chowchilla Water and Power Authority ( MCWPA) in order to review findings made by the 2003 Grand Jury.

Principal members of the MCWPA provided financial and operational data detailing the project since its inception. The president and general manager were interviewed on August 9, 2004. They also conducted a tour of the four power generating facilities on the Madera Canal.

SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION

A review of MCWPA's annual financial statements, income statements, budgets, and related information on the Authority's operation from 1989 to the present was conducted. In addition, the minutes of the Board of Directors' meetings, which covered this same period, were also reviewed.

In conjunction with the above, an August 1981 feasibility study conducted by Parsons- Brinckerhoff- Quade and Douglas, Inc. was analyzed.

FINDINGS

1. Three of the four generating plants were operating during our inspection. The plants appear to be producing electricity at their prescribed levels.

2. Management stated that the water flow from the Friant- Kern canal would continue until September 1, 2004, at which time the supply of water would no longer be available this season for irrigation or production of electrical power.

3. The geographic area that is the source of water for this system has been experiencing a drought for the past seven years. This condition has lowered the generating capacity of the units.

4. The four hydroelectric power plants are owned and operated by MCWPA. An agreement by both the Madera Irrigation District ( MID) and Chowchilla Irrigation district ( CID) guarantees the payment of any deficiency payments on the debt obligations of the MCWPA. This is done on a 50: 50 percentage basis.

5. The MCWPA assumes there would be adequate revenues to pay the costs for all operations, maintenance, and indebtedness in the normal water flow years.

6. The MCWPA currently does not have " boiler and maintenance" insurance for any of its four generating plants. The carrier upon sustaining a catastrophic failure at one site, which cost approximately one million dollars, to repair, canceled a previously existing insurance policy.

7. Current contracts with Pacific Gas and Electric ( PG& E) may not provide adequate sustaining income for the payment of financial indebtedness, and the cost of operation and maintenance of these facilities.

8. A balloon payment of $ 1,264,160 is on the generating units- numbers 1114, 1302, and 1923; this is due September 30,2005.

9. The feasibility study used a 15- year period of normal water availability to sustain the project's operation. 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 69

10. During most of the authority's operation it has been unable to adequately provide needed income to make bond indebtedness payments. The deficiency payments are assessed and paid for on a

50: 50 bases by the MID and CID. In turn, the MID and CID tax the landowners.

11. According to Board minutes of the MCWPA, options to solve the authority's problems are: ( 1)

refinance their debts, ( 2) sell the generating units, ( 3) default on current debts, or ( 4) fund the deficiencies from other sources.

CONCLUSIONS

1. A longer period may have been a more realistic historical measure of the area's ability to sustain this project.

2. If drought conditions persist, or anyone of the plants sustains another catastrophic failure, the MCWP A would likely become a long- term financial burden to the landowners.

3. Without insurance coverage, it is uncertain if the MWPCA or the two irrigation districts combined would have the financial capacity to cover the cost of another substantial mechanical failure to the generating plants.

4. It is not clear whether MCWPA or its two parent irrigation districts will be able to pay the loans when due.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The Madera- Chowchilla Water and Power Authority should pursue the following options:

1. Seek various sources of refinancing the current debt on terms, which would more accurately match the ability of the units to produce income.

2. Obtain insurance to cover unforeseeable equipment and operational failures.

3. Explore the possibility of equipment insurance coverage through the state or federal agencies.

4. Investigate employing an outside consultant with the expertise to negotiate terms relating to the sale of electricity to other sources.

5. Explore the possibility of negotiating a more favorable contract with PG& E or other sources.

6. Explore the possibility of leasing all generating facilities to outside entities.

7. Establish a more realistic five- year budget with assistance of MID, CID, and their accountants.

8. Evaluate once again the original feasibility study to determine if the factual data is germane to future projections.

9. Sell all or a portion of the generating units

10. Continue to monitor the mechanical operation on a 24 hour basis, thus reducing the potential for catastrophic failures.

ENTITIES TO RESPOND

1. President and Board of Directors, Madera Irrigation District

2. President and Board of Directors, Chowchilla Irrigation District

3. President and Board of Directors, Madera- Chowchilla Water and Power Authority

4. Madera County Board of Supervisors

PAG E 7 0 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

2004 Madera County Grand Jury

P. O. Box 534

Madera, California 93639- 0534

( 559) 662- 0946

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury

Final Report on

Madera County Road Conditions on Road 620

INTRODUCTION

Complaints were received by the 2004 Grand Jury regarding road maintenance; specifically dust control and excessive vehicle speed.

FINDINGS

Road 620 is designated a rural dirt road, purportedly a two lane road by the Madera County Road Department. On September 16, 2004 the Grand Jury inspected Road 620/ 628 between Ahwahnee and Highway 41. Primarily the residents use Road 620. Additionally, the road is used for emergency vehicles and normal commerce vehicles, i. e. USPS, building material trucks, propane delivery, etc. Road Department officials indicated that because the road has minimal traffic, the County would only maintain the road to minimal standards. Large emergency vehicles would have difficulty navigating certain portions of Road 620. Rapid transit by emergency/ health vehicles is prohibitive due to the width of the road, the washboard effect present on the road and the many blind turns. Stopping safely is another consideration regarding the washboard effect of the road.

Grading of the road is scheduled only two times a year. However, within a few days after grading, the washboard effect returns due to high traffic. These conditions are exacerbated during rain and snow conditions. In view of the rural dust road designation, during rain & snow conditions, it has the lowest priority for maintenance. The application of asphalt grindings would greatly improve the condition of the rougher parts of Road 620.

In view of the numerous water trucks that may be observed around road and other construction sites, there is most likely an EPA standard regarding dust control. The complaint received by the Grand Jury indicated a dust problem. The excessive speeds in this area could cause an unhealthful dust problem for the residents that live adjacent to Road 620.

CONCLUSION

That the unsurfaced portions of Road 620 do not properly provide for safe travel.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Reassess traffic volume on Road 620.

2. Madera County Road Department should, if possible:

a. Provide more frequent grading of the road.

b. Fill in potholes in those paved portions of Road 620.

c. Repair areas adjacent to U. S. mailboxes on Road 628/ 620.

d. Provide additional asphalt grindings/ gravel in those areas requiring repair.

3. Further investigation is suggested by the 2005 Grand Jury improvement of road conditions.

RESPONSES

1. Madera County Road Department

2. Madera County Board of Supervisors

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 71

2004 Madera County Grand Jury

P. O. Box 534

Madera, California 93639- 0534

( 559) 662- 0946

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury

Final Report on The

Madera County Office of Education

Funding Shortage

INTRODUCTION

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury conducted an investigation of the Madera County Office of Education and the Madera County Treasurer regarding the issue of unresolved bank statements. This investigation has been ongoing since the original investigation began with the 1999 - 2000 Madera County Grand Jury. The amount of the discrepancy was $ 230,000.00. The date of the discrepancy goes back to the early 1990' s.

BACKGROUND

In 1976, the California State Legislature transferred financial duties and functions from supervision by the County Boards of Supervisors to the County Board of Education. In Madera County, the County Tax Collector was made responsible for transfer of funds in and out of Board of Education bank accounts based on authorization by the County Superintendent of Schools. A problem developed in 1995 and 1996 when local banks handling Board of Education funds were changed. Reconciliation of the bank accounts was discontinued in 1992 when a key employee retired and no one was tasked with completion of the reconciliation. Lack of reconciliation contributed to a problem at closing of the accounts at the Bank handling Board of Education Accounts Payables. A list of 203 checks considered to be outstanding by that bank was presented which exceeded the balance of funds on hand at the Bank when the account closed. Funds were therefore, advanced by the County Treasurer to the Board of Education to cover the discrepancy pending determination as to the status of these checks. It was found that they consisted primarily of checks cancelled, but funds of which were not reversed from the Bank account back to the County Treasurer by the Board of Education.

FINDINGS

The 2003 Madera County Grand Jury recommended that the 2004 Madera County Grand Jury monitor:

1. The reconciliation of the Board’s bank accounts by Madera County Office of Education.

2. The Resolution of issues with the Madera County Treasurer.

3. Continue to request that the Madera County Office of Education advise the sitting Grand Jury on a regular basis, of the status of continuing efforts to bring reconciliation of bank accounts current.

As to the monitoring recommendation # 1- the case is still in litigation and the Grand Jury cannot interfere and/ or investigate when a case is in litigation.

As to the monitoring recommendation # 2 - the Madera County Treasurer turned all reports and documents related to this investigation over to the Madera County Office of Education and has declared no further involvement in this issue.

As to the monitoring recommendation # 3 - the Madera County Office of Education did not keep the 2004 Madera County Grand Jury advised on a regular basis, of their efforts to reconcile and/ or the status of their court case.

PAG E 7 2 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

The Year 2004 Grand Jury consulted with the Madera County Superintendent of Schools and the Madera County Counsel. It was determined that a Madera County Board of Education employee was still dedicated

solely to the task of reconciling the bank accounts. This staffing change was implemented last year when a Madera County Board of Education employee returned from a two- year tour of duty with the military and was immediately assigned to this job duty.

As of this report, the bank account to which the school funds were transferred has been reconciled through January 2001. There are still several more years remaining to be resolved before this situation can be considered current. In the meantime, the cost of this investigation continues to add up with the continuing dedication of one fulltime employee to this task, legal counsel, litigation costs, etc. All of this could have been avoided had proper accounting procedures and practices been in place and followed at the time these bank account changes took place.

CONCLUSION

As the funding shortage is awaiting resolution in the Courts, the current Grand Jury must defer final comment on the case until that action is resolved. It is hoped that the Madera County Superintendent will continue to support and expedite the accounts reconciliation and that this situation will be brought to current and that finally this matter can be laid to rest. As was stated by the Director of Business and Administrative Services for Madera

County, they are currently exploring the ability to reach a decision and resolution either through mediation or arbitration in order to expedite this matter. This is hoped to happen in early, 2005.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. The Madera County Office of Education should continue their efforts to complete the reconciliation of both the closed and replacement accounts.

2. The Madera County Office of Education is requested to advise the sitting Grand Jury on a regular basis, of the status of continuing efforts to bring reconciliation of bank accounts current.

3. The 2005 Madera Grand Jury is requested to continue monitoring the efforts of the Madera County Office of Education to reconcile the Board’s bank accounts.

ENTITIES TO RESPOND

1. Madera County Superintendent of Schools

2. Madera County Board of Supervisors

3. The Madera County Board of Education Trustees

4. Madera County Administrator

5. Madera County Counsel

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 73

2004 Madera County Grand Jury

P. O. Box 534

Madera, California 93639- 0534

( 559) 662- 0946

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury

Final Report on

The Yosemite Union High School District

Board Member Claiming False Residency

Within the Yosemite Union High School District

INTRODUCTION

A complaint was filed with the 2004 Madera County Grand Jury from a private citizen alleging that a member of the Yosemite Union High School District School Board of the Yosemite Union High School District does not reside in the school board area that he has been elected by the voters of the Yosemite Union High School District to represent.

BACKGROUND

This complaint appears to be an ongoing issue with citizens of the Yosemite Union High School District. It was a previous complaint that was investigated with the then Grand Jury's findings published in the final report of the 1998 - 1999 Madera County Grand Jury. Their findings at that time indicated that the Madera County Clerk's Office confirmed that the address listed by the board member is within the boundaries of the Yosemite Union High School District. They also indicated that there was no evidence to suggest that the board member's permanent address is anything other than the address listed on the registered voting polls. With all due respect to the 1998 - 1999 Madera County Grand Jury, their investigation was brief and not in depth. The only investigation cited in their final report was that members of the Grand Jury visited the Madera County Clerk's Office to verify

that the board member's registered address lies within the boundaries of the Yosemite Union High School District. The current Grand Jury went way beyond that in their investigation gathering evidence and spending many hours on this particular case. The summary of our investigation is contained in this report.

INVESTIGATION

Members of the Grand Jury individually interviewed each of the five Yosemite Union High School District School Board of Trustees. The Madera County Superintendent of Schools was also interviewed. The Madera County Clerk's and the Madera County Tax Assessor's offices were consulted and verification of the place where the offending member voted and paid property taxes were verified. It was confirmed that the board member in question indeed did pay property taxes on a parcel owned in the Bass Lake area of the school board and that he consistently votes in Madera County. It was also confirmed that the board member in question owns a home in Fresno and lives there for a majority of his time as his wife owns and operates a business out of that home.

FINDINGS

While it does appear from a technical point of view that this school board member does live in the area that he says he does and so fairly represents this area as their school board member, there are a number of discrepancies.

The two most obvious are that he does own a home in Fresno and does spend the majority of his time there. So what constitutes residency and fair representation on your local school board? The fact that someone owns a home there but does not actually live in it? Or perhaps because, occasionally, they can drive to a polling place and vote?

PAG E 7 4 2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT

Do these really add up to being a valued member of the community? Is this really the way a school board trustee comes to know his community and how the community feels about current issues that are before the school board on an ongoing basis? How is it that the area really does get representation on the school board if the school board member does not live in the community to know how the community thinks and feels?

As the Grand Jury interviewed many people and most agreed and admitted to knowing that this particular board member does not live in the area that he claims to, we as a Grand Jury feel that the Board member should admit this and take appropriate action.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Since a safe assumption would be that the board member does not indeed live full time in the school district area that he is representing, it is a recommendation of this Grand Jury that the school board member should resign his duties as a Trustee of the Yosemite Union High School District School Board.

2. That the Yosemite Union High School District School Board rewrite and refine the school board member requirements. As of this writing the current school board does not have any board policy regarding trustee seats.

3. That all future school board members be held to their integrity and honesty in regards to their residence and other requirements as will be contained in the new board policy or appropriate consequences will be followed.

4. The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury charges the 2005 Madera County Grand Jury with the follow- up of the recommendations as outlined in this Report.

ENTITIES TO RESPOND

1. Yosemite Union High School District School Board

2. Madera County Superintendent of Schools

3. Madera County School Board

RESPONSE ALLOWED, BUT NOT REQUIRED

1. Madera County Board of Supervisors

2004 MADERA COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT PAGE 75

2004 Madera County Grand Jury

P. O. Box 534

Madera, California 93639- 0534

( 559) 662- 0946

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury

Report on

The 2003 Grand Jury

Charge to Follow- up on

The Madera County Court Fines Report

INTRODUCTION

The 2004 Madera County Grand Jury was charged with the duty to follow- up on the collections of court fines that had not been collected, due to procedural and collection issues, as noted in the 2003 Grand Jury Report.

FINDINGS

Members of the County Government Committee of the 2004 Grand Jury met with the Assistant Administrator of the Court Administration Office, in late March 2004, and requested documentation of fines collected from the uncollected amounts that had been outstandin