Home
Trinity County California Grand Jury reports and responses
To link to this object, paste this link in email, IM or document
To embed this object, paste this HTML in website
Trinity County California Grand Jury reports and responses
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
|
|
2000- 2001 TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY
COMMITTEE ROSTER
Judicial Committee Education Committee
Jacqueline Rogers Dwight Glass
Raymond Patton Herschel Dunaetz
Herschel Dunaetz Phil Erath
Ellen Cooke Raymond Patton*
John Humborg*
Finance & Administration Committee Social Services
Charshie McDonald Dwight Glass
Ellen Cooke Edna Kaya
Herschel Dunaetz Jacqueline Rogers
Charlie Fitch Leo Schussman
Phil Erath * Helen Gravette*
Health & Human Services Committee Special Districts Committee
Charslie McDonald Raymond Patton
Edna Kaya Donald Stewart
Ellen Cooke Charlie Fitch
Jacqueling Rogers James Taylor*
Leo Schussman*
Special Committee/ Edit Review and Procedures
Alton Turner ( resigned) Alton Turner ( resigned)
Frank Aschert Regan Wood
Charlsie McDonald * John Humborg
Frank Aschert*
Development and Special Investigation Committee
Environmental Committee Ellen Cooke
Helen Gravette Regan Wood
Regan Wood Donald Stewart
Frank Aschert Charley Fitch*
Donald Stewart*
TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY
FINAL REPORT
2000- 2001
DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE
TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY
2ooo- zoos
F I L E D
DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE
This report was approved
On June 12, 2001
FINAL REPORT
CITIZEN COMPLAINT
DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES
JUN 2 9 2001
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF TRINITY
BY: DONNA REGNANT, DEFUTYCLERK
PURPOSE:
FINDING # 1 :
2000- 2001 TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY
DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE
FINAL REPORT
CITIZEN COMPLAINT
This is an investigation of a citizen's complaint against a county agency.
BACKGROUND:
A complaint against the county was received by the Grand Jury. The complaint
charges that the Trinity County General Services Department has refused to furnish the
complainant a key to the Hayfork Solid Waste facility so that said complainant might
access the facility after hours. The complainant also charges discrimination in that his
business competitor does have a key to the facility providing access as needed.
METHOD OF INVESTIGATION:
Two members of the committee met with the Director of General Services and
learned the following facts. The committee reviewed correspondence between the
Director of General Services and the complainant .
The Report of Station Information for the Hayfork Transfer Station and Title 14
of the California Code ofRegulations, plus the Solid Waste Operation Permit require the
following:
Title 14 - Article 6.2 Section 17409.5 requires load checking upon entering
the facility .
Title 14 - Article 6 .35 Section 17418.1 Site Security, states that the County
must discourage access to the site after operational hours .
Title 14 - Article 6.35 Section 17418.2 Site Security, states that the facility
shall have an attendant present during operational hours.
RECOMMENDATION # 1 :
Rules and regulations as stated in finding number one should be adhered to
eliminating preferential treatment.
FINDING # 2:
A letter of August 18, 2000 signed by the Director of General Services states that
the complainant's competitor has been given a key and " grand- fathered in", giving the
competitor unlimited access .
RECOMMENDATION # 2:
Allow all septic service businesses equal access to transfer sites in order to
provide equal business opportunity .
CONCLUSION:
Basic California Code ofRegulation, plus Solid Waste Operations Permit
requirements are being followed with the exception of septic waste dumping. Grand-fathering
of access to one septic service provider presents equal business opportunity for
all septic service providers in the county.
The county should look into related health issues including the need to address
emergency septic disposal, during closed hours.
RESPONSE:
Trinity County Board of Supervisors, County Administrative Officer, Director of General
Services.
INIITY COUNTY
September 14, 2001
GENERAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT
P. O . BOX 2700 -- FAX ( 530) 623-- 5015
WEAVERVILLE, CA 96093
R E C E I V E D
TO :
Honorable John K. Letton
Presiding Judge of the Superior Court
FROM:
John Whitaker, General Services Director
SUPERIOR COURT
JUDGE'S CHAMBERS
SUBJECT: Response to Recommendations of 2000- 01 Grand Jury
DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE FINAL REPORT
CITIZEN COMPLAINT - DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES
Finding # 1 :
The Report of Station Information for the Hayfork Transfer Station and Title 14 of
the California Code of Regulations, plus the Solid Waste Operational Permit require the
following:
D
Title 14 - Article 6.2 Section 17409.5 requires load checking upon entering the
facility.
D
Title 14- Article 6.35 Section 17418.1 Site Security, states that the County must
discourage access to the site after operational hours.
Title 14- article 6.35 Section 17418.2 Site Security, states that the facility shall
have an attendant present during operational hours.
RESPONSE :
We agree with the findings.
Recommendation 1 Citizen Complaint.
" Rules and regulations as stated in finding number one should be adhered to eliminating
preferential treatment."
Response:
We agree in part. The part we agree to is that the Grand Jury has correctly stated the
regulations regarding the operation of the facility . The Grand Jury's narrow
interpretation of the rules does not account for contracted services and the right of entry
for the services .
Finding 2 Citizen Complaint:
A letter of August 18, 2001 signed by the Director of General Services states that
the complainant's competitor has been given a key and " grand- fathered in"; giving the
competitor unlimited access.
Response:
We agree in part and disagree in part. Grand Jury takes a phrase from a letter, and
misconstrues the meaning and content of that letter. The letter was written to the
complainant, and quotes the regulations for site security and site permitting . The letter
states that the key- holder was " grand- fathered in" to provide contracted services, which
is the same service they supplied to our sites through Timberline Disposal .
Recommendation 2 Citizen Complaint.
" Allow all septic service businesses equal access to transfer sites in order to provide
equal business opportunity."
Response:
We disagree wholly with the recommendation ; it will not be implemented because it is
not warranted nor adhere to the California Code of Regulation sections quoted above.
Plus the committee misleads the reader. They clearly state the applicable codes,
however the issue of access is misstated . The disposal site is open six days a week,
for 9 hours each day. The complainant has access during those hours. The current key
holder provides and has provided contracted service to that site for many years. The
code allows for contracted service providers access after hours.
For the past seven years the key holder's septage disposal logs and their customer logs
for the amount septage removed have matched, and payments for disposal have been
made on time. With the complainant, this is not the case. His disposal logs and his
customer logs do not match . This matter has been turned over to the Environmental
Health Department who has jurisdiction .
The committee's conclusion is also flawed; there is no equal opportunity question here
and no preferential treatment.
If a health and safety emergency existed, County would
accommodate disposal. The fact that the complainant says there is one does not
constitute any health and safety risk or equal opportunity issue. He, like the key holder,
should at all times schedule his disposal needs around the site hours of operation.
We request that this response be published .
TO :
The Honorable John K. Letton,
Presiding Judge of the Superior Court
FROM:
SUBJEC
JNT: wt
eannie Nix- TempCounty Administrative Officer
Response to Recommendations of 2000- 01 Grand Jury
Development and Environment Committee Final Report
Citizen Complaint - Department of General Services
DATE:
September 14, 2001
rr~- I`; i
- I- f
, T TT r~ I' : ~ T
ire / fj11
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Administration - Human Resources - Risk Management
Grant Management - Information & Technology
P. O. Box 1613
Weaverville, CA 96093- 1613
County Administrator Phone:
( 530) 623- 1382
Human Resources Phone ( 530) 623- 1325
FAX ( 530) 623- 4222
JEANNIE NIX- TEMPLE, County Administrative Officer
RECEIVED
SUPrERIOR COURT
JUDGE'S CHAMBERS
The Grand Jury Development and Environment Committee has requested a written
response to their final report on the Citizen Complaint concerning the Hayfork Transfer Station .
In my capacity as County Administrative Officer my response is a follows:
Finding # 1 : I agree with the finding as stated in the California Code of Regulations.
Recommendation # 1 : This recommendation has been implemented . There does not
appear to be any reason to allow any more access than is already provided. I agree that rules and
regulations as stated in finding # 1 should be adhered to. There are exceptions to the regulations.
Exceptions should be clearly stated so that everyone understands what they are and why.
Finding # 2 : I agree with this finding in that the General Services Director has indicated
that there is a current exception from the California Code of Regulations stated in Finding # 1 . I
believe it is appropriate for contracted service providers to have access after hours to service the
port- a- potties located at the transfer site .
Recommendation # 2 : This recommendation will not be implemented . There is no need
to provide more access than is currently provided. All providers should be able to schedule their
disposal needs around the site hours of operation.
Conclusion :
I do not agree with the conclusion of the Grand Jury.
I do not think that
with the current hours of operation there should be any perception of preferential treatment.
I
have checked with our environmental health staff and have been informed that we actually
permit 8 septic pumpers.
Each one has a holding capacity of approximately 2000 gallons .
It
would be unreasonable to issue keys to providers. In the unlikely event that we were in need of
an emergency disposal during closed hours, we would open the facility .
TO :
The Honorable John K. Letton
Presiding Judge of the Superior Court
FROM:
R. Bee
~ C
an
Trinity County Board of Supervisors
SUBJECT:
Trinity County Grand Jury Development and
Environment Committee Final Report
Citizen's Complaint
DATE:
October 2, 2001
RBS : wt
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
P. O. Drawer 1613
( 530) 623- 1217
WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 96093
Dero B. Forslund, Clerk
Jeannie Nix- Temple, County Administrative Officer
The Grand Jury Development and Environment Committee has requested a written
response to their final report on the Citizen Complaint concerning the Hayfork Transfer Station.
In my capacity as Chairman, and on behalf of the Board of Supervisors, by response is as
follows:
Finding # 1 : We agree with the findings as stated in the California Code of Regulations
articles and sections listed for the Hayfork Transfer Station and the Solid Waste Operation
Permit .
Recommendation # 1 : The recommendation has been implemented . The rules are
regulations are for everyone to adhere to. However, out contracted service provider must have
keys because not all transfer stations are open on the same days and hours.
Finding # 2 : We concur . The Director of General Services is doing a good job.
Recommendation # 2 : The recommendation will not be implemented . All providers
should be able to have more than adequate access with the current hours of operation.
Response to Conclusion :
We do not agree with the Grand Jury's conclusion .
If we
were to conclude that all septic pumpers should have equal access for business opportunity, we
would have to issue a key to all six permitted pumpers. This would not be reasonable. If there is
some reason for an emergency disposal after hours, we will open the facility .
RECEIVED
0CT - 9 2001
SUPERIOR COURT
JUDGE'S CHAMBERS
CHRISERIXSON
BILLIEMILLER
R9LPHMODINE
BERRYSTEWART
ROBERTREISS
District 1
District 2
District,?
District 4
District 5
This report was approved
On May 8, 2001
TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY
2000- 2001
F I L E D
11IAY 3
1
,
EDUCATION COMMITTEE
FINAL REPORT
PUBLIC EDUCATION IN TRINITY COUNTY
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF TRINITY
BY., DONNA REGNANI, uEaurrcLERlc
PURPOSE:
BACKGROUND:
2000- 2001 TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY
EDUCATION COMMITTEE
FINAL REPORT
PUBLIC EDUCATION IN TRINITY COUNTY
Grand Juries are mandated to investigate the operations ofthe various
governmental agencies within the county from time to time. This report focuses on
academic performance and career counseling in the Trinity County public schools.
Various standardized tests are taken by the students in our schools each year,
some mandatory and others voluntary. The test scores are a measure of knowledge and
academic performance that can, in the case of nationally normed tests, be used as a basis
for comparison with other students nationwide.
Utilization of test scores plays a major role in the future of our students. For
instance, assessment of student knowledge and progress, future educational opportunities,
and school financing are all influenced by test scores.
Individual student test results are confidential, with access to individual scores
restricted to the student, his or her parent or guardian, and school officials. Combined
class and school results are, however, publicly available where individual confidentiality
is not compromised.
A.
California Mandated Testing:
The California Public Schools Accountability Act establishes an Academic
Performance Index ( API) for the purpose ofmeasuring performance and growth
at schools. The API is a numeric index that ranges from a low of200 to a high of
1000; and a school's score on the API is an indicator of a school's performance
level. Schools that meet API growth targets may be eligible to receive monetary
rewards through three state awards programs; the Governor's Performance
Awards, School State Performance Bonus, and Certified State Performance
Incentive.
The API is presently based on only the state's Standardized Testing and Reporting
( STAR) program. The STAR results presently consist of only the Stanford 9
Achievement Test, Ninth Edition ( Stanford 9), which is a standardized, nationally
normed test taken by California Students in the 2° d through 11th grades.
This mandated state test may, by law, be declined by a student's parents, thus the
test is not taken by every student in California. In the future other standardized
tests may be added to the STAR program; and other indicators such as graduation
and attendance rates may be included in the computation of school API's.
In addition to the above mentioned, Stanford 9 test California has mandated a
California High School Exit Exam. All students, beginning with the Freshman
class of the 2000- 2001 school year must pass this test as a requirement to
graduate. The test is being given on a trial basis this school year. The High
School Exit Exam is not a subject of this report.
B.
Voluntary Testing:
Voluntary standardized tests that are nationally normed include the Scholastic
Aptitude Test ( SAT), the Preliminary Scholastic Aptitude Test ( PSAT), and the
Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery ( ASVAB), all ofwhich are high
school level tests.
The SAT test is the most widely used college placement admission test in the
United States. It is administered by the College Board, a not- for- profit
association of 3800 schools, colleges, universities, and other educational
associations. The SAT measures verbal and mathematical reasoning abilities
which are related to successful performance in college . The PSAT test is a
practice test for students preparing for the SAT.
The ASVAB is a voluntary test taken by high school students. Students enlisting
for military service are required by the military to take this test.
METHOD OF INVESTIGATION:
Educators from the county level to the local school districts were contacted and
interviewed to gain insight into the function ofthe local education process. The Trinity
County Superintendent ofSchools, superintendents and principals of most ofthe
individual schools, and the high school academic counselors were interviewed. Test
results from the Stanford 9 tests, SAT, PSAT, and ASVAB were reviewed. Additional
information was obtained from published descriptions ofthe above test programs and
from the STAR and college Board websites .
FINDING # 1 :
API scores provide one useful means of comparing the performances of
individual California schools, both with respect to other schools and from year to year.
API scores are not nationally normed and thus do not provide a means ofcomparison
with schools outside of California .
API scores are calculated for schools in which less than 100 students are tested,
but those schools are not ranked by the State Department ofEducation and are not
eligible for the previously mentioned performance awards; thus eight ofthe eleven
elementary schools in Trinity County are ineligible for those awards.
The State Department ofEducation uses API scores to rank school performance
on both an overall statewide basis and on a similar schools basis. Identification of
" similar" schools appears to be subjective at best; and the corresponding ranking's
deserve to be viewed with some skepticism.
The awards programs are largely based on improvement in API scores and
therefore tend to provide the most benefit to schools that initially are among the lowest
scoring schools. If, as contemplated, other standardized tests are added to the STAR
program and other indicators are included in the computation of school API's the validity
ofthe calculation of year- to- year improvement is jeopardized for years in which new
factors are added to the computation . Somewhat similarly, the addition of indicators such
as graduation and attendance rates to the API computation will reduce the correlation
between a school's API and the level of knowledge achieved by the students.
API scores for local schools based on Spring 2000 tests have been reported by the
media, including the Trinity Journal and Record Searchlight newspapers. Those reports
show significant improvement in the Trinity County schools' API scores from Spring
1999 to Spring 2000 .
RECONIMENDATION # 1:
The Grand Jury does not have any recommendations with regard to the state API
program, but believes that school officials and the general public should maintain an
awareness ofsome ofthe above mentioned perceived strengths and weaknesses ofthat
program. The Grand Jury has chosen not to report on the specific API scores of the
Trinity County schools because that information has already been widely reported
elsewhere ; but the Grand Jury commends the schools for the improvement in those
scores.
FINDING # 2:
Nationally normed academic tests such as the Stanford 9 are not the only indicator
of student and school performance . For example, academic tests typically do not
measure motivation, creativity, or special talents. Such tests are, however, the best single
indicator ofthe level ofknowledge the student has attained by means of his education.
The Stanford 9 test results show how the student performed on the test compared
with other students throughout the United States. This information is presented in terms
of National Percentile Rank ( NPR). NPR simply indicates the relative standing of a
student in comparison with all the students, nationwide, that took the test at a comparable
time. For instance, an NPR of 62 indicates that the student's score was equal to or
greater than the score of 62% of the students nationwide and less than the scores of 3 8%
ofthe students nationwide. The NPR's for the individual students has been used to
READING
MATH
LANGUAGE
calculate the average NPR for groups of students such as class average, school average,
and countywide average. Table 1 presents the average NPR by subject by grade level and
overall for the 1698 Trinity County students that took the Stanford 9 test in Spring 2000.
Table 2 presents the average NPR, by subject, for each of the county public schools.
Some of the limitations and concerns applicable to the NPR's shown in the tables are
mentioned later in this report and should be given due consideration by the reader.
TABLE 1
TRINITY COUNTY SCHOOLS
TEST RESULTS
STANFORD 9 SCORES, SPRING 2000
NATIONAL PERCENTILE RANK ( NPR)
GRADE
SUBJECT ~- 2nd
3rd
4th
5a'
7th6'°
8th
9th
10th
11th AVE
61 52 58 60 59 56 64 47 41 47 54
64 65 58 64 69 60 60 64 48 51 60
51 53 54 54 59 59 64 59 43 52 55
SPELLING 53 44 52 45 44 50 45 -- -- -- 48
SCIENCE __ __ __ __ __ __ __ 55 53 61 56
SOCIAI.
SCIENCE
55 50 65 56
NOTES : 1 . 1698 students tested.
2. -= Not Applicable
3 . " AVE" = Mean Percentile of all Trinity student scores
RECOMMENDATION # 2:
FINDING # 3:
TABLE 2
TRINITY COUNTY SCHOOLS
TEST RESULTS
STANFORD 9 SCORES, SPRING 2000
NATIONAL PERCENTH. E RANK ( NPR)
SUBJECT
Social
SCHOOL
Reading Math Language Spelling Science Science
ALL TRINITY COUNTY SCHOOLS ( 1698)
54
60
55
48
56
56
TRINITY HIGH ( 347)
51
61
55
--
62
62
HAYFORK HIGH ( 128)
45
49
53
--
52
53
SOUTHERN TRINITY HIGH ( 42)
41
54
50
--
52
49
WEAVERVILLE ELEMENTARY ( 349)
60
65
58
51
--
--
HAYFORK VALLEY ELEMENTARY ( 243)
53
52
46
43
--
--
DOUGLAS CITY ELEMENTARY ( 118)
59
69
61
42
--
--
LEWISTON ELEMENTARY ( 98)
47
51
50
41
--
--
VAN DUZEN ELEMENTARY ( 89)
57
66
51
51
--
--
JUNCTION CITY ELEMENTARY ( 63)
69
64
70
52
--
--
BURNT RANCH ELEMENTARY ( 61)
55
57
55
49
--
--
TRINITY CENTER ELEMENTARY ( 35)
72
74
76
58
--
--
HOAGLIN ZENIA ELEMENTARY ( 22)
68
71
68
58
--
--
COX BAR ELEMENTARY ( 14)
52
77
62
48
--
--
HYAMFOM ELEMENTARY ( 10)
65
62
56
43
--
--
COFFEE CREEK ELEMENTARY ( 5), See Note 4
--
--
--
--
NOTES : 1 . -- = Not Applicable
2.(
) = Total students tested
3 . Scores shown are the mean NPR ofTrinity students
4. Test results for Coffee Creek Elementary are not included because of the limited number of
students tested and the unavailability of language and spelling scores from that school.
The Grand Jury makes no value judgment on the NPR's contained in Tables 1 and
2. The tables are provided for information and consideration by the reader.
The SAT provides a means ofcomparison of students preparing for college . SAT
scores are intended to supplement the secondary school records and help admissions
officers put local data - such as course work, grades, and class rank - in a national
perspective. SAT scores are the single most important indicator used in determining
admission at most highly regarded universities . SAT tests are usually taken only by
students considering attending a college or university ; and a high SAT score is essentially
a requirement at many universities. Average NPR's for the PSAT and SAT for the
Trinity County high school students that took those tests in the year 2000 are summarized
in Table 3 .
As shown in Table 3 the average NPR of Trinity County students that took the
SAT test ranged from 47 at Hayfork High School to 58 at both Trinity High School and
So. Trinity High School. The NPR's of 58 indicate that the average student score at
Trinity High School and So. Trinity High School was above the 50th percentile
nationwide. Looking at the SAT scores from the perspective ofthe high scores necessary
for admission to colleges and universities which admit only a small percentage of
applicants, nine Trinity County students had SAT NPR's between 80 and 89, and one
student had a SAT NPR between 90 and 100.
RECOMMENDATION # 3:
Again, the Grand Jury has chosen to make no value judgment on the student test
scores. The Grand Jury does recommend that school administrators and teachers
continue to emphasize to students and parents the need for high performance by those
students intending to attend major colleges and universities. Additionally, the Grand Jury
recommends that the Trinity County Board of Education and the school trustees promote
those efforts .
TEST
SCHOOL
STANFORD 9, SPRING 2000, GRADES 9- 11'
Trin'
Ha ork
So. Trinity
READING
51 45 41
MATH
61 49 54
LANGUAGE
55 53 50
SCIENCE
62 52 52
SOCIAL SCIENCE
62
53
49
PSAT, YEAR 2000, GRADE 11'
rCOMBINED VERBAL AND MATH
SAT, YEAR 2000, GRADE 12'
COMBINED VERBAL AND MATH
ASVAB, FALL 2000, GRADE 12
[ VERBAL
TABLE 3
TRINITY COUNTY HIGH SCHOOLS
TEST RESULTS
NATIONAL PERCENTILE RANK ( NPR)
Trinity
Hayfork
So. Trinity
51
58 472 2
Trinity
Ha ork
So. Trini
58
47
582
Trinity
Ha ork
So. Trinity
59% 3 56% 3 50% 3
' Scores shown are the mean NPR of the students that took the test except for the ASVAB scores which are explained in Note 2.
s Less than 11 students tested .
3 Percentage of students scoring above the national average . This is not NPR NPR is not available for ASVAB.
FINDING # 4:
The results ofthe ASVAB, taken by students contemplating enlistment in the
military, are summarized in Table 3 . One- half or more ofthe students that took the test at
each high school had scores higher than the national average. As could be expected there
is noticeable correlation between scores on the ASVAB and the Stanford 9 test.
RECOMMENDATION # 4:
FINDING # 5:
The Grand Jury has no recommendations on ASVAB .
National Percentile Rank ( NPR) is a valuable indicator of student and school
performance, but certain limitations need to be taken into consideration when drawing
conclusions .
First, the Stanford 9 test is not perfectly aligned with California state curriculum
standards. Most school officials in Trinity County do not consider this to be a major
problem and consider Stanford 9 to be a good, if imperfect, performance indicator.
Second, average scores for small schools can be misleading because when few
students take the test the absence or addition of one or more particularly high or low
scoring students can significantly affect the average score ofthe school. Great care must
therefore be taken in reaching conclusions based on average scores for a particular year in
a very small school.
Third, conclusions about schools should not be based on cursory examinations of
scores and their relationships should not be reached without due consideration ofthe
complexities of geographies, demographics, and economics. There is broad acceptance
ofthe beliefthat socio- economic factors ( such as local culture, family income, family
stability and guidance, and exposure to drugs and alcohol) all affect student performance
but are beyond the schools' control.
Despite the above mentioned limitations, test results of nationally normed tests
such as Stanford 9 are being used in Trinity County public schools and are
enthusiastically endorsed by some school administrators and teachers. Expressions of
support for the Stanford 9 tests were found at some ofthe schools with the lowest test
scores because ofthe belief that test scores help identify weaknesses that can be
corrected.
The Grand Jury found significant variation in the interest ofthe school district
trustees in the NPR results of the nationally normed tests . It is believed that this is at
least partially attributable to the emphasis on API scores and the associated monetary
awards. Similarly, parents of students are reportedly more aware and interested in API
scores and the corresponding ranking ofCalifornia schools than in NPR's; though parent
interest in NPR is increasing as the parents become more aware of and familiar with the
significance ofusing NPR to interpret test results .
RECOMMENDATION # 5:
The Grand Jury recommends that awareness and consideration of NPR's from
nationally normed tests such as Stanford 9 and SAT be continued by school officials, and
that school district trustees take an increased interest in NPR data as an important
indicator of school performance. It is further recommended that school officials foster an
increase in student and parental interest in NPR as a primary indicator of individual
student performance.
FINDING # 6:
In general, the Grand Jury finds that smaller school and class size is an advantage,
up to a point. In Trinity County the elementary schools in particular appear to benefit
from smaller school and class size. A full complement of college preparatory classes are
not generally offered by the smaller high schools, thereby placing an additional burden on
individual students who plan to attend a college or university. In most areas, extra
classes are offered through junior college or college extension programs. The problem of
availability ofcollege preparatory classes is recognized by the smaller Trinity County
high schools, and effort is being exerted to mitigate the problem.
RECOMMENDATION # 6:
The Grand Jury recommends that the high schools continue to increase efforts that
will facilitate the admission of Trinity County students into colleges and universities .
FINDING # 7:
One- on- one academic and career counseling takes place at least once each year
with every student in all ofthe Trinity County high schools. Trinity High School has a
full- time counselor; and, in Summer 2001, will extend counseling and academic
preparation down to 7th and 8m grade students that are expected to attend Trinity High
School . Hayfork High School and Southern TrinityHigh School, being smaller schools,
do not have a full- time counselor, but have comprehensive counseling and student
tracking programs.
At Hayfork High School the counseling is performed by the school principal who
meets with 8m grade students to discuss careers and academic pathways. One- on- one
counseling begins in the 9th grade, with parent participation encouraged. Many parents of
Hayfork High School students take advantage ofthis opportunity to participate .
At Southern Trinity High School academic coordination and career counseling is
performed on a part- time basis by a dedicated member ofthe teaching staff. College
catalogs and news articles on bestjobs and best colleges are used to inform and create
student interest . The Southern Trinity High School web page contains a " Counselor's
Comer" which has a menu of information on colleges and careers . The web page is a
good source of information for both students and parents .
RECOMMENDATION # 7 :
The Grand Jury, in the belief that early career and academic counseling is an
important contributor to student achievement, endorses the above mentioned counseling
activities. Ajoint review, coordinated by the County Office of Education, ofthe
counseling programs, with the aim of identifying the best aspects of the counseling at
each school, might make the counseling more effective.
CONCLUSIONS:
Education is only one aspect of life and should not be viewed as the only
indication ofa useful and successful place in our society. Education is, however, of
increasing importance as our society becomes more complex.
Nationally normed tests are an important indicator of a student's preparation for
further education and future employment in the national work force. Comparisons with
other students throughout the nation by means of test scoring, such as National Percentile
Rank, is vital because competition for educational opportunities and employment are
national in character. Such comparisons can identify strengths and weaknesses in
education that can be used to improve the education ofthe individual student and the
entire schools system. NPR scores are believed to be the most important single indicator
ofthe academic knowledge achieved by a student. Comparison of " like" schools is
subjective and tends to obscure the message that is contained in nationally normed test
scores.
Career counseling is important and beneficial in identifying, for students and
parents, career opportunities and the corresponding education requirements . Course
selection has lifelong implications ; so early selection by students and parents is critical .
Finally, test scores are a good indicator of school performance ; but, the limitations
must be considered when reaching conclusions, particularly when only a small number of
students are tested. The test results included in this report are oversimplified in that only
averages are reported.
Parents and others interested can obtain additional information on standardized
testing and test scores from sources including the following: Trinity County Office of
Education ; School administrators at the Trinity County schools; California Department of
Education ( 916- 657- 2757); California School Board Association ( 800- 266- 3382)
RESPONSE REOUESTED FROM:
Trinity County Board ofEducation, Trinity County Superintendent of Schools, The
Boards ofTrustees ofthe following school districts: Burnt Ranch, Coffee Creek, Cox
Bar, Douglas City, Junction City, Lewiston, Trinity Center, Weaverville, Trinity Union
High School, Mountain Valley Unified, Southern Trinity Joint Unified.
Responses from superintendents and principals ofthe Trinity County public schools are
optional but will be appreciated.
Honorable Judge Letton
June 11, 2001
P. O. Box1117
RECEIVED
Weaverville, Ca. 96093
JUN 1 2 2001
Dear Judge Letton,
Below is my response to the 2000- 01 Grand Jury Report as required
by law.
I would like to thank the Grand Jury for their review of academic
achievement in Trinity County schools. I will address each
recommendation individually by number.
1. concur
2. concur
3. I would add the following to sentence # 2, " the need for high
performance by all students", not just those attending major
colleges and universities . The majority of our students do not
attend major colleges and universities. They attend Shasta College,
Chico, and Humboldt State.
4. concur
5. Our office will address NPR in our Annual Report to the Public.
6. concur
7. Our office meets several times per year with school officials to
review counseling in the schools, and concur that it is increasingly
important for effective transition to adult life.
Sincerely,
c : Bob Lowden, THS
Joan Hair, MVUSD
David Albee, STJUSD
im French
rinity County Supt. Of Schools
James B. French, TdnHy County Superintendent of Schools
http :// www, tcoe. trinMy. k12 . ca. us
SUPERIOR COURT
JUDGE'S CHAMBERS
P. O. Box 1256 " 201 Memorial Drive " Weaverville California 96093- 1256 " ( 530) 623- 2861 Fax ( 530) 623- 4489
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
P. O. Drawer 1613
( 630) 623- 1217
WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 96093
Dero B. Forslund, Clerk
TO:
The Honorable John K. Letton, Jeannie Nix- Temple, County Administrative Officer
Presiding Judge ofthe Superior Court
FROM:
Trinity County Board of Supervisors
SUBJECT:
Response to Recommendations of2000- 01 Grand Jury
Education Committee Report
SUPERIOR COURT
Public Education in Trinity County
JUDGE'S CHAMBERS
DATE:
November 13, 2001
The Grand Jury Education Committee has not requested a written response to their Final
Report on Public Education in Trinity County, however, to be thorough in its responses
to the Grand Jury's efforts the Board of Supervisors responds as follows:
Finding # 1 and Recommendation # 1 : The Board agrees with the findings and there was
no recommendation.
Finding # 2 and Recommendation # 2: The Board agrees with the findings and there was
no recommendation.
Finding # 3 and Recommendation # 3 : The Board agrees with the findings and supports
the Grand Jury recommendation that school admudstrators and teachers continue to
emphasize to students and parents the need for high performance ( on standardized
performance tests) by those students intending to attend major colleges and universities .
Finding # 4 aril Recommendation # 4: The Board agrees with the findings and there was
no recommendation.
Finding # 5 and Recommendation # 5 : The Board agrees with the findings and
recommendation.
Finding # 6 and Recommendation # 6 : The Board agrees with the findings and
recommendation.
Finding # 7 and Recommendation # 7: The Board agrees with the findings and reserves its
opinion on the recommendation. As the Board has no statutory authority over the
schools, we feel that it would be inappropriate for us suggest program changes to the
County Office ofEducation.
RECEIVED
DEC 1 1 2001
C1ERISEMrSON ArLaEMILLER
District i
District 2
District 3
District 4
Districts
RALPMMODEiI'E BERRYSTEW, 4RT ROBERTREISS
Conclusion: The Board agrees that testing is a valuable tool in evaluation performance.
We also appreciate the tirne and effort that the Grand Jury spent in their review ofthe
status ofPublic Education in Trinity County.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond.
Sincerely,
IAZ~ r R Berry Stev6at, Chairman
Trinity County Board of Supervisors
TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY
FINAL REPORT
2000- 2001
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY
2000- 2001
F I
L E
D
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF TRINITY
BY: DONNA REGNANI, DEPUTY CLERK
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
This report was approved
On April 10, 2001
FINAL REPORT
ELECTIONS
- 23-
PURPOSE:
2000- 2001 TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
FINAL REPORT
The Grand Jury is charged with reviewing county government operations to
assure that residents of the county are being well served in general . Members ofthe
Trinity County Grand Jury are normally requested by the County Clerk to observe the
vote counting process.
BACKGROUND:
Trinity County began using semi- automated vote counting machines at each
precinct in 1999. The automated vote collection, counting, storage, and reporting system
is called the " Accu Vote Optical Scan System" . The system has been introduced and
used successfully with only relatively minor difficulties, the most recent useage being the
November, 2000 general election. The Final Report of the 1999- 2000 Trinity County
Grand Jury Election Committee contains additional background information as well as
some findings and recommendations.
This report follows up on the recommendations and responses to the above Grand
Jury report and also addresses some issues raised by the difficulties encountered by the
State ofFlorida when counting the votes from the November, 2000 U. S. presidential
election.
METHOD OF INVESTIGATION:
FINDING # 1 :
ELECTIONS
Grand Jury members observed the counting of the November, 2000 election
absentee ballots at the elections office. Automated collection and tabulating at the
elections office ofthe results from the precincts following the close of the polls was also
observed. In addition, the Finance and Administration Committee interviewed the
County Clerk, who also serves as the Elections Officer, following the November, 2000
election.
Precinct voting and reporting went well for the November, 2000 elections. Minor
difficulties with the use ofthe equipment were promptly corrected, and Trinity County
was one of the first California counties to report election results . Precinct workers were
better trained with approximately 95% ofthe workers having attended pre- elections
training sessions, typically at the polling places.
- 24-
RECOMMENDATION # 1 :
The Grand Jury again recommends that all paid precinct workers be required to
receive pre- election training.
FINDING # 2:
Communication between the Elections Office and the precinct workers has
improved and is an ongoing consideration.
RECOMMENDATION # 2 :
FINDING # 3:
The 1999- 2000 Grand Jury recommended that the Elections office have a post-election
" Lessons- Learned" meeting to which all election workers would be invited.
Such a meeting had not been held as ofearly April, 2001 ; but the County Clerk is
planning to conduct the meeting in the next few weeks.
RECOMMENDATION # 3:
The Grand Jury recommends that, in the future, post- election meetings be held
within 30 days ofthe election.
FINDING # 4:
The Grand Jury endorses the effort to improve communications .
The Accu Vote machines read the ballots optically . As a result, votes on ballots
that are not clearly marked in accordance with the voting instructions may or may not be
counted by the machine. Instructions on how to properly mark ballots are included on
sample ballots, on actual ballots, and are posted inside every voting booth. Despite those
instructions, a few voters did not mark their ballots properly during the November 2000
election. Trinity County's election officer does not plan to change the voting instructions
except as possibly part of any state wide uniformity requirements that may be adopted.
Consideration is being given to having precinct workers emphasize to voters the necessity
of marking ballots properly; and the County Clerk is also considering a newspaper notice.
The Grand Jury finds that the instructions for marking ballots are good and sufficient, but
increased emphasis may be beneficial.
RECOMMENDATION # 4:
The Grand Jury endorses any additional reasonable and practical effort that the
Elections Office makes to instruct voters regarding the proper marking of ballots and the
possible consequences of inadequate marking.
- 25-
FINDING # 5 :
Since the Accu- Vote machine may or may not count votes on ballots that are
improperly marked, it is sometimes possible during a manual recount to ascertain the
intent of the voter even though the machine did not detect the mark. This situation raises
questions about the responsibility of the voter to mark a ballot in accordance with the
instructions; and also opens the possibility of legal challenges to recounts in the case of
close elections . The Trinity County Clerk is aware of the need for the preparation and
adoption of a written vote counting policy that addresses the above described problem
and that will withstand legal challenges. This is being done as part of a multi- county
effort by users ofthe Accu- Vote system .
RECOMMENDATION # 5 :
The Grand Jury endorses the adoption ofa vote counting policy and procedure
and recommends that it be in place before the next election.
FINDING # 6 :
The Grand Jury observers noticed some minor differences in the counting of
absentee ballots as compared with voting at the polling places. The Grand Jury finds that
the ballots were counted properly and the election results were valid and correct despite
the differences in conducting the count.
RECOMMENDATION # 6:
The Grand Jury endorses the intent that the vote counting policy and procedure
mentioned in recommendation # 5 above include provisions to address identical counting
ofabsentee ballots and ballots cast at the polling place.
CONCLUSION:
The November 2000 election was well conducted by the Election Office and the
precinct workers. Additional training and increased familiarity with the " Accu- Vote"
system used by Trinity County contributed to the success . Adoption of the above
recommendations will hopefully improve and strengthen the election system.
RESPONSE REQUESTED FROM:
Trinity County Clerk/ Elections Officer and Trinity County Board of Supervisors .
July 20, 2001
John K. Letton Presiding Judge
Trinity County Superior Court
P. O. Box 1258
Weaverville, CA 96093
Tom- - A
INT- Tf V- 1=
Registrar of Voters
P. O . Box 1215
Weaverville, CA 96093
Phone : ( 530) 623- 124~
Fax: ( 530) 623- 8398
C
.
E f V
D
JU( Z 3 200,
wOGEsio
HaoURT
McERS
Re: Trinity County Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee Final Report - Elections
Dear Judge Letton
In Response to the Grand Jury report on Elections I offer the following :
Finding # 1 We concur- Since we have stopped requiring the precinct workers to come to Weaverville and
we have gone to them the number of workers being trained is much better .
Recommendation # 1 We concur - Our policy is to always provide precinct worker training before each
election and to require workers to attend.
Finding # 2 We concur - Because almost all of the precinct workers are attending training we have much
better communication . The training is done at the polling place so we can see first hand what precinct
workers have to deal with.
Recommendation # 2 We concur - We expect to see continued improvement here.
Finding # 3 We concur - Post election meetings of election workers will be a standard part of the election process
Recommendation # 3 We concur - Post elections meetings will be scheduled
Finding # 4 We concur - We will ask precinct workers to remind each voter of the proper method to mark a
ballot . In order to insure that the intent of the voter is properly registered by the vote counting equipment
the ballot must be properly marked.
Recommendation # 4 We concur - This will continue to be an important part of the training the precinct
workers receive .
Finding # 5 We concur - All California counties using the Accu- Vote system are participating in
developing a procedure manual that will be adopted by the Secretary of State. These procedures will
include handling poorly marked ballots .
Recommendation # 5 We concur - Once the procedure manual is complete Trinity County will adopt the
procedures called for.
Finding # 6 We concur - Procedures will include standard counting methods for both absentee and precinct
ballots .
tion # 6 We concur - Please refer to Recommendation # 5
nity County Clerk Recorder Assessor
- 27-
September 12, 2001,
" y
CC) 4_ ; ~; T
cl_ iA`'' I', LSc= R . S
John K. Letton, Presiding Judge
Trinity County Superior Court
Box 1258
RE : Trinity County Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee Final Report-
Weaverville, California 96093
Elections
Dear Judge Letton,
The Trinity County Board of Supervisors is pleased with the efforts of the county
elections office to set a good example for rural counties by effectively automating county
elections and by making the election process more user friendly with outreach and
additional voting opportunities . We would respond to the Grand Jury's report on
elections as follows:
Finding # 1
We agree with this finding.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
P. O. Drawer 1613
( 530) 623- 1217
WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 96093
Dero B. Forslund, Clerk
Jeannie Nix- Temple, County Administrative Officer
Recommendation # 1 We agree and county policy continues to be one that has required
election workers to have pre- election training.
Finding # 2 We concur with this finding.
Recommendation # 2 We agree with the recommendation and will continue to make
improvements in communications between the Elections Office and precinct workers.
Finding # 3 We agree. It is expected that a post- election meeting of election workers will
be a regular part of the election process .
Recommendation # 3 We concur with this recommendation and will attempt to have
post- election meetings within the recommended 30 day period after elections .
Finding # 4 We concur . Precinct workers will be reminding voters of the proper way to
mark ballots .
Recommendation # 4 We agree with this recommendation and proper marking of ballots
will be part of the training of precinct workers. .
CHRISERIKSON
BILLIE MILLER
District 1
District 2
_ 28_
RALPHMODINE
Districts
BERRYSTEWART ROBERTREISS
District 4
Districts
2.
Finding # 5 We concur and recognize the need for a written vote counting policy.
Recommendation # 5 We agree and when the Accu- Vote system using counties complete
a common procedural manual then Trinity County will adopt those procedures.
Finding # 6 We concur with this finding .
Recommendation # 6 We agree with recommendation # 6 . The procedural manual, when
adopted, will address the issue of identical counting of absentee and polling place cast
votes.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond.
Sincerely,
R. Berry Sfewart, Chairman
Trinity County Board of Supervisors
TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY
2000- 2001
F I L E D
MAY - 7 201
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF TRINITY
BY: DONNA REGNANI, DEPUrycLEwc
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
FINAL REPORT
GENERAL REVIEW OF COUNTY GOVERNMENT
This report was approved
On April 10, 2001
PURPOSE:
2000- 2001 TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
FINAL REPORT
GENERAL REVIEW OF COUNTY GOVERNMENT
The Trinity County Grand Jury is charged each year to perform a review of
county government operations to make sure that the residents ofthe county are being well
served. This report is a follow- up to a portion ofthe recommendations and responses
contained in the 1999- 2000 Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee Final
Report ofthe same title.
BACKGROUND:
The 1999- 2000 Grand Jury Final Report in " Background" stated that the county
operations are diverse with an annual budget of 32.7 million dollars. Responses to the
Final Report assert that the report is incorrect and that understates the budget.
METHOD OF INVESTIGATION :
The Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee reviewed the 1999- 2000
Grand Jury Final Report, responses to the report, and the " Final Budget, Fiscal Year
1999/ 2000," compiled by the office ofthe Auditor/ Controller and published by order of
the Board of Supervisors. The committee interviewed the foreperson of the 1999- 2000
Grand Jury, the County Auditor/ Controller, the County Administrative Officer ( CAO), all
members ofthe Board of Supervisors ( BOS), and the County Clerk.
FINDING # 1 :
The $ 32.7 million budget quoted in the Grand Jury report corresponds to the
" Final Budget, Fiscal year 1999- 2000", published by order of the board of Supervisors .
The reason for the discrepancy between the Grand Jury report and the responses to the
report has been determined and is explained by the following information prepared by the
Auditor/ Controller at the Grand Jury's request .
The budget totals for the last two fiscal years are:
FY 99/ 00
FY 00/ 01
Governmental Funds
$ 32.7 million
$ 44.3 million
Enterprise Funds
12.0 million
12.3 million
Total
$ 44.7 million
$ 56.6 million
The main enterprise funds are the Hospital and Solid Waste.
Enterprise funds use traditional, full accrual, business accounting which measures
the flow of economic resources to determine if the fund is better or worse off
economically . On the other hand, government funds use what amounts to a
checking account approach which measures the flow of cash to determine what
funds are available for expenditure in the near future.
RECONIMNDATION # 1:
The Grand Jury recommends that publications and correspondence containing
county budget totals clearly indicate whether the total includes or excludes enterprise
funds .
FINDING # 2 :
An enterprise fund is a type of proprietary fund which is used to account for a
government's business- type activities . Business- type activities could be defined
as activities that are funded mainly through user charges.
The total number ofemployees ofcounty government is dependent on whether or
not the employees in the county enterprises are included. The following information was
prepared by the Office ofthe County Administrator at the Grand Jury's request.
County Government Employee Totals
1/ 1/ 99
1/ l/ 00
1/ 1/ 01
Excluding Enterprises
328
345
377
Enterprise Employees
166
168
161
Total
494
513
538
RECOM MENDATION # 2:
FINDING # 3:
Same as Recommendation # 1 above.
The 1999- 2000 Grand Jury recommended that the county adopt a policy of
recording all BOS meetings and that the recordings be permanently archived by the
County Clerk. The responses to the report are all in general agreement with the
recommendation, with some reservations expressed pending. a determination of
methodology, cost, and legal considerations . A schedule or target dates for adoption and
implementation were not included in the recommendation or the responses. The Grand
Jury understands that the above mentioned reservations have now been addressed and
that a plan of implementation, including cost and schedule can now be prepared for
approval by the BOS.
RECOMMENDATION # 3 :
The Grand Jury recommends that a definitive plan and schedule for
implementation be prepared and submitted to the BOS for consideration and inclusion in
the Fiscal Year 2001/ 2002 budget. The recommended date for completion of a plan and
schedule is June 30, 2001, with full implementation and operation by December 31,
2001 .
CONCLUSION:
The Grand Jury concludes that Trinity County is generally well run by officials
and managers committed to good government. The open- minded consideration and
acceptance of many Grand Jury recommendations is appreciated and commendable .
RESPONSE REQUESTED FROM:
Trinity County Board of Supervisors, Trinity County Clerk Recorder, Trinity County
Administrative Officer and Trinity County Auditor- Controller .
TO :
The Honorable John K. Letton,
, Presiding Judge ofthe Superior Court
FROM:
~~ eannie Nix- Te iple, County Administrative Officer
SUBJECT,/
Response to Recommendations of 2000- 01 Grand Jury
On General Review of County Government
DATE:
May 16, 2001
JNT: wt
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Administration - HumanResources - Risk Management
Grant Management- Information & Technology
P. 0. Box 1613
Weaverville, CA 96093- 1613
County Administrator Phone.
( 530) 623- 1382
Human Resources Phone ( 530) 623- 1325
FAX ( 530) 623- 4222
JEANNIE NIX- TEMPLE, County Administrative Officer
RECEIVED
MAY 1 6 2001
SL! p~-: RIOR COURT
J . DGE'S CHAMBERS
The Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee has requested a written
response to their Final Report on the General Review of County Government. In my
capacity as County Administrative Officer, my response is as follows:
Recommendation # 1 & # 2: 1 agree with the Grand Jury. Future publications
and correspondence on the budget shall clearly indicate the inclusion or exclusion of
enterprise funds.
Recommendation # 3 : I agree with the Grand Jury. My staff and I will work
with the County Clerk and the Information & Technology Department to prepare a plan
of implementation for presentation to the Board of Supervisors at regularly scheduled
budget hearings.
I wish to thank the Grand Jury members for their time and attention in
investigating these matters and for providing me the opportunity to respond.
DATE:
May 3, 2001
TO:
John K. Letton, Presiding Judge ofthe Su eri
Court
FROM:
Brian Muir, Auditor / Controller
SUBJECT: IFITI
2000- 2001 Trinity County Grand Jury
rt
General Review ofCounty Government
The following response is provided as requested in the above report:
Recommendation # 1
I agree.
Recommendation # 2
I agree.
Recommendation # 3
MEMORANDUM
BRIAN E. MUIR, COUNTY AUDITOR- CONTROLLER
P. O. BOX 1230, WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 96093- 1230
PHONE ( 530) 623- 1317 FAX ( 530) 623- 1323
RE CEIVED
MAR - 7 2001
JUSuU~' EEij- s2IOR COURT
CHAMBERS
I agree that the appropriate time to submit a plan to record and archive Board of
Supervisors' meetings would be during Fiscal Year 2001/ 2002 budget hearings. The plan should
be implemented in accordance with whatever schedule the Board of Supervisors approves.
July 20, 2001
John K. Letton Presiding Judge
Trinity County Superior Court
P . O. Box 1258
Weaverville, CA 96093
Re: Trinity County Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee Final Report -
General Review of County Government
Dear Judge Letton
i
~, 1~ ~ ''; W" i k~& QKW61,
' m
1 0
i~ rFxiotyxatci'~:~
R
juRl C? F31 V
~ q
JVOGFS~ AM
Pou ORT
eFRs
In response to the Grand Jury report on General Review of County Government I offer
the following:
I have limited my response to Finding # 3 and Recommendation # 3 as these Findings and
Recommendations make reference to the County Clerk.
Finding # 3 I concur - A procedure to store and archive copies ofthe video recordings
made ofthe Board of Supervisor meeting is being developed . In the mean time the tapes
of the meetings are being saved until the archive process is in place.
Recommendation # 3 being implemented - Full implementation will be in place prior to
December 31, 2
i
Dero Forslund, Trinity County Clerk Recorder Assessor
TO:
The Honorable John K. Letton,
Presiding Judge of the Superior Court
FROM:
Trinity County Board of Supervisors
SUBJECT:
Response to Recommendations of 2000- 01 Grand Jury
Finance and Administration Committee Report
General Review ofCounty Government
DATE :
November 13, 2001
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
P. O. Drawer 1613
( 630) 623- 1217
WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 96093
Dero B. Forslund, Clerk
Jeannie Nix- Temple, County Administrative Officer
The Grand Jury Finance and Administration Conunittee has requested a written response
to their Final Report on the General Review of County Government. The Board of
Supervisors responds as follows :
Finding # 1 and Recommendation # 1 : The Board agrees. The Recommendation has been
implemented .
Finding # 2 and Recommendation # 2: The Board agrees. The Recommendation has been
implemented .
Finding # 3 and Recommendation # 3: The Grand Jury recommends that the County adopt
a policy ofrecording all BOS meetings. This has been done for the last three years on
videotape; however, the tapes were not ofarchival quality. The County Clerk/ Recorder
has implemented a new program that digitally records the proceedings. The recordings
will be archived under the Clerk's care as a permanent record.
Conclusion: The Board agrees that the County is generally well run by officials and
managers committed to good government. We also think that a thoughtful, careful Grand
Jury is a part ofthat good local government .
Thank you for the opportunity to respond.
Sincerely,
'/ eX~ al" z~
R. Berry Stewart, Chairman
Trinity County Board of Supervisors
RECEIVED
DEC 1 1 2001
SUPERIOR COURT
JUDGE'S CHAMBERS
CHRIS ERlWSON
BILLIEMILLER
RALPAMODINE
BERRYSTEW. 9BT
ROBERTRETSS
District 1
District S
District 3
District 4
District 5
This report was approved
On May 22, 2001
TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY
zooo- zoos
F I L E D
FINAL REPORT
- 44-
JUN 1 2 20,01
SUPERIOR COURTOF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF TRINITY
BY. DONNA REGNANT, DEPUTY CLERK
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
TRINITY COUNTY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
AND RELATED ACCOUNTING MATTERS
PURPOSE:
This report contains findings and recommendations resulting from the Grand
Jury's inquiry and review ofthe Independent Auditor's Report for the year ended June
30, 2000, the Trinity County general purpose financial statements for that year, and some
related accounting matters.
BACKGROUND:
2000- 2001 TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
FINAL REPORT
TRINITY COUNTY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
AND RELATED ACCOUNTING MATTERS
California Grand Juries are charged to act as the public's " watchdog" by
investigating and reporting upon the affairs of local government .
The general purpose financial statements for Trinity County are the responsibility
of the County's management. Those statements are audited each year by an independent
auditor that has the responsibility to audit and express an opinion on those statements.
The Trinity County financial statements for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2000 were
audited by Bartig, Basler, and Ray, A Professional Corporation, certified public
accountants and management consultants, hereinafter referred to as the independent
auditor.
METHODS OF INVESTIGATION:
The Grand Jury in its inquiry and investigation relied on the Independent Auditors
Report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2000, the Trinity County general purpose
financial statements accompanying that report, and interviews of the Trinity County
Auditor/ Controller.
FINDING # 1 :
The Independent Auditors Report is dated September 13, 2000 . The report was
not available to the public or the Grand Jury until April, 2001 .
RECOMMENDATION # 1 :
The Grand Jury recommends that the Trinity County Auditor/ Controller and the
County Administrative Officer ( CAO) determine the reason for the discrepancy between
the date of the report and the date it became available. The Grand Jury recommends that
future contracts for independent audits include a requirement for a timely delivery ofthe
completed audits.
- 45-
FINDING # 2:
The Independent Auditor's Report for the year ended June 30, 2000 is a qualified
report. The report contains the following statement :
" Because of the inadequacy of accounting records for fixed assets, we were
unable to form an opinion regarding the amount at which the General Fixed
Assets Account Group ( stated at $ 22,944,534), and fixed assets and accumulated
depreciation in proprietary fund types ( stated at $ 5,944,728 and $ 1,938,329,
respectively), or the amount of depreciation expense ( stated at $ 382,361) are
recorded in the accompanying financial statements as of and for the year ended
June 30, 2000 ."
The Grand Jury finds that, though accounting for fixed assets is a somewhat
uncertain activity for county government and some other counties may also have
inadequate accounting records, the cited inadequacy ofTrinity County records is, at the
least, undesirable. Most troublesome to the Jury is that the fixed asset, accumulated
depreciation, and depreciation expense records for county enterprises are inadequate.
County enterprises such as Solid Waste are supposed to be conducted as a government's
business- type activities, separate from the General Fund. Inadequate accounting records
for an enterprise make it difficult, ifnot impossible, to determine the financial condition
of that enterprise .
The Grand Jury has been informed that obtaining an unqualified independent
auditor's report would require an additional auditing cost of $ 8,000 per year, plus an
undetermined amount of labor to improve the accounting records. The Grand Jury has
also been informed that government accounting requirements have been revised to
require depreciation and evaluation of all infrastructure assets by the 2002- 2003 fiscal
year.
RECOMMENDATION # 2:
The Grand Jury recommends that accounting records for the Solid Waste
enterprise, as a minimum, and preferably all the Trinity County enterprises, be improved
to the extent that the independent auditor's report for fiscal year 2001- 2002 is released
without qualifications with respect to those county enterprises.
The Grand Jury also recommends that the accounting records and the general
purpose financial statements be improved to the extent that the independent auditor's
report be entirely without qualifications no later than the 2002- 2003 fiscal year.
FINDING # 3:
The general purpose financial statements disclose some unexpectedly significant
year- to- year differences in several accounts, significant variances between budgets and
- 46-
the actual amounts for fiscal year ended June 2000, and significant adjustments to
accounts. After inquiring, the Grand Jury finds that those significant differences and
adjustments are primarily the result of improved accounting, particularly more accurate
classification of revenues, expenses, and liabilities and corrections of inaccuracies
contained in prior year statements.
The Grand Jury concludes that the. improvements in accounting will likely reduce
the year- to- year differences in the accounts, smaller budget variances, and fewer and
smaller adjustments.
RECOMMENDATION # 3:
The Grand Jury recommends continued emphasis on improved accounting and
commends the Auditor/ Controller Department for the improvement's accomplished to
date.
FINDING # 4:
One particularly large adjustment disclosed in the financial statements is a
negative adjustment of $ 3 .040 million in the retained earnings ofthe Solid Waste
Enterprise, which reduced retained earnings from $ 345,000 to a negative $ 2.7 million on
June 30, 2000. This adjustment, which was required to book a loan incurred but not
booked in the prior year, was not explained in the financial statement.
RECOMMENDATION # 4:
The Grand Jury recommends that significant adjustments such as the one
described in Finding # 4 be explained in the notes to the financial statements to disclose
the reason for the adjustments and to facilitate the reader's ability to understand the
financial statements.
FINDING # 5 :
The liability for landfill closure recognized in the financial statements increased
from $ 1 .2 million on June 30, 1999 to $ 2.2 million on June 30, 2000. The notes to the
June 30, 2000 statements include the following: " It is estimated that an additional
$ 1,402,910 liability will be recognized as closure and post- closure maintenance costs
between the date of the balance sheet and the date the landfills are expected to be closed."
The Grand Jury recognizes that the landfill closure and the post- closure maintenance
costs are estimates and are subject to changes such as regulatory requirements . However,
the Grand Jury finds that the increases in estimated costs, if the trend continues, could
adversely affect the financial condition of the Solid Waste enterprise.
RECOMMENDATION # 5:
The Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Supervisors ( BOS), CAO, and
Auditor/ Controller review the estimates ofthe landfill closure and post- closure
maintenance costs with the intent to determine the credibility ofthose estimates and the
possible need for corrective action.
FINDING # 6 :
The financial statements disclose that the County has equipment leases with
interest rates that the Grand Jury finds to be excessively high. As of June 30, 2000 leases
with relatively high interest rates included principal amounts totaling $ 188,602 with
annual interest rates ranging from 9.9% to 15%. The Auditor/ Controller is prepaying
these high interest rates leases to the maximum extent permitted by the terms of the
leases.
RECOMMENDATION # 6 :
The Grand Jury recommends that, if not already in place, the BOS, CAO, and
Auditor/ Controller put in place financial controls to assure reasonable financing rates in
the future. The Grand Jury commends the Auditor/ Controller for his effort and progress
in reducing high interest rate leases .
FINDING # 7:
The Grand Jury finds indications of possible inaccuracies in the cost
apportionment of salaries of county officials that perform the duties of more than one
office.
RECOMMENDATION # 7:
The Grand Jury recommends that salary cost apportionment be included in the Job
Classification and Compensation Study presently being conducted by the County.
FINDING # 8:
A new cashiering procedure requiring unique Auditor/ Controller assigned receipt
numbers for cash receipts has been adopted by the County. The new procedure provides
improved accountability of cash received by the County, which became effective in the
Treasurer/ Tax Collector's office on April 2, 2001 . The Grand Jury has not been able to
confirm that the new procedure has been adopted by all the county government
departments .
- 48-
RECOMMENDATION # 8:
The Grand Jury commends the Auditor/ Controller for improving the cashiering
procedures but recommends that the new procedure, if not yet adopted, be required of all
the county departments that receive cash payments, effective immediately.
SUMMARY:
The Grand Jury recommends that the accounting records ofthe county be
improved to obtain future Independent Auditor's Reports that do not contain
qualifications .
The Grand Jury recommends that action be taken to obtain Independent
Auditor Reports on a more timely basis.
The Grand Jury recommends that immediate attention be given to the
completeness and accuracy of the financial statements for the Enterprise Fund
accounts .
The Grand Jury recommends that the estimated landfill closure and post-closure
maintenance costs be reviewed.
The Grand Jury commends the Auditor/ Controller and the Auditor/ Controller
Department for improvements in the recording and classification of funds.
The Grand Jury commends the Auditor/ Controller for his efforts to reduce the
interest costs of equipment leases.
RESPONSE REQUESTED FROM:
Trinity County Board of Supervisors, Trinity County Administrative Officer, Trinity
County Auditor/ Controller .
The following response is provided as requested in the above report:
Recommendation # 1
Recommendation # 2
Recommendation # 3
7
IV(
3A
Wwli X z Lar X
lkaiokloil) xl_
- 50-
BRIAN E. MUIR, COUNTY AUDITOR- CONTROLLER
P. O. BOX 1230, WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 96093- 1230
PHONE ( 530) 623- 1317
FAX ( 530) 623- 1323
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
June 11, 2001
TO :
John K. Letton, Presiding Judge of the Superior Court
FROM :
Brian Muir, Auditor / Controller
SUBJECT:
2000 - 2001 Trinity County Grand Jury Report
Trinity County Financial Statements and Related Accounting Matters
The reason for the discrepancy between the date of the Independent Auditor's Report and
the date it became available is that the Independent Auditor required the time to prepare the
document. The report was available to the public and the Grand Jury the day after it was
received by the County Auditor / Controller. The County's contract with the Independent
Auditor specifies delivery within six months after the end ofthe fiscal year.
I disagree. The County's accounting records accurately reflect fixed assets and
accumulated depreciation . However, in order to give an unqualified opinion, the Independent
Auditor would need to conduct an inventory and verification of values. The Independent Auditor
quoted a price of $ 8,000 .00 to preform this service. The Board of Supervisors chose not to pay
the additional amount in order to get an unqualified opinion. I agree with their decision that the
citizens would be poorly served by such an expenditure.
The Auditor / Controller Department will continue its emphasis on improving the
County's accounting practices .
R8CEIVED
JUN 1 8 2001
SUPERIOR COURT
JUDGE'S CHAMBERS
Recommendation # 4
Significant adjustments in the County's financial statements should be explained through
notes. However, the statements are produced by the Independent Auditor, and the County can
not control what is presented in the notes . We will request that the Independent Auditor make
greater use of explanatory notes.
Recommendation # 5
The Auditor / Controller's office assists the Solid Waste Department as needed to
estimate the landfill closure and post- closure maintenance costs. The estimates are currently
reviewed by the Integrated Waste Management Board as well as the County's Independent
Auditor. No further review is necessary.
Recommendation # 6
Controls are in place to insure that all contracts and leases, including those involving
financing, are reviewed by the Board of Supervisors, the County Administrative Officer, the
Auditor / Controller, and the County Counsel.
Recommendation # 7
I have reviewed the salary apportionments of County officials, and all apportionments are
being made on a logical basis . However, if the contractor is willing to review salary
apportionment as part of the classification and compensation study without any adjustment in the
total cost to the County, I would certainly have no objection.
Recommendation # 8
The Auditor / Controller's cash handling policy has been implemented in almost all
departments . I am monitoring the few remaining areas to be sure that the policy is implemented
when it is practical to do so.
TO:
The Honorable John K. Letton, JUN 2
Presiding Jud e ofthe Superior Court
SUPERRItO~ RHcAoMuBRETRS
. JUDGE S
FROM: Jeannie Nix- Temple, County Administrative Officer
SUBJECT:
Response to Recommendations of 2000- 01 Grand Jury
Financial Statements and Related Accounting Matters
DATE:
June 21, 2001
~ I T T
1- f ~\ T 1- f ~ l I' ~ l
/ ld / m rT
\ 11 I~
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Administration - Human Resources - Risk Management
Grant Management - Information & Technology
P. O. Box 1613
Weaverville, CA 96093- 1613
County Administrator Phone:
( 530) 623- 1382
Human Resources Phone ( 530) 623- 1325
FAX ( 530) 623- 4222
JEANNIE NIX- TEMPLE, County Administrative Officer
RE CE IV SD.
The Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee has requested a written
response to their Final Report on the Financial Statements and Related Accounting
Matters. In my capacity as County Administrative Officer, my response is as follows:
Recommendation # 1 : The discrepancy in time was the time allowed for the
Independent Auditor to complete their report. Unfortunately we did not have a clause in
the contract for a penalty if the report is late. We plan to develop that in the future.
Recommendation # 2 : 1 am informed that the records accurately reflect fixed
assets and accumulated depreciation . We had an opportunity to contract for this service
to do an inventory and verification of values. The Board of Supervisors chose not to
expend the additional $ 8,000 for that purpose.
Recommendation # 3: 1 concur with the Grand Jury.
Recommendation # 4: 1 concur with the Grand Jury. The Auditor/ Controller has
indicated that he will request that the Independent Auditor make greater use of the notes
in the future.
Recommendation # 5: 1 have no problem reviewing the estimates for landfill
closure and post closure. We will do so if the Board of Supervisors desires . I am
currently confident that since the Independent Auditor and the Integrated Waste
Management Board review these estimates, they are correct.
Recommendation #: 6 The Board of Supervisors decision to retire high interest
debts has placed the County in a better financial position. We are fortunate that we were
able to do so . Controls are in place . All contacts, leases, and financing are reviewed by
the County Administrative Officer, the County Counsel and the County
Auditor/ Controller . Those amounting to over $ 10,000 are also reviewed and approved by
the Board of Supervisors .
Recommendation # 7: The firm hired to complete the classification and
compensation study is qualified to recommend salaries, benefits and appropriate total
compensation for the job being performed . How those salaries are apportioned is a
County decision and is based on logic. The salary of a county department head that is
responsible for more that one department would be allocated based on the number of full
time equivalent positions under his or her control. This does not necessarily mean that
they would have to spend an equal amount of time with each.
Current salaries are
apportioned properly.
I respectfully disagree with the recommendation of the Grand
Jury.
Recommendation # 8: I concur with the recommendation of the Grand Jury.
I wish to thank the Grand Jury members for their time and attention in
investigating these matters and for providing me the opportunity to respond.
JNT: wt
FROM: 6~ l, G,
Jeanme Nix- Temple' County Administrative Officer
DATE :
July 5, 2001
Finding # 1: I agree with the finding .
Finding # 3 : I agree with the finding.
jjiTT$ R
IVA
11i rU Eli
, - Nyjg i
" ,
, A-N
JON
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Administration - Human Resources - Risk Management
Grant Management - Information & Technology
P. O. Box 1613
Weaverville, CA 96093- 1613
County Administrator Phone:
( 530) 623- 1382
Human Resources Phone ( 530) 623- 1325
FAX ( 530) 623- 4222
JEANNIE NIX- TEMPLE, County Administrative Officer
RECEIVED
J111 10 M1
TO:
The Honorable John K. Letton,
Presiding Judge ofthe Superior Court SUPERIOR COURT
JUDGE'S CHAMBERS
SUBJECT:
Amended Response to Recommendations of 2000- 01 Grand Jury
Financial Statements and Related Accounting Matters
The Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee has requested a written
response to their Final Report on the Financial Statements and Related Accounting
Matters. In my capacity as County Administrative Officer, my amended response is as
follows:
Recommendation # 1 : The discrepancy in time was the time allowed for the
Independent Auditor to complete their report. Unfortunately we did not have a clause in
the contract for a penalty if the report is late. We plan to implement a penalty clause in
future contracts .
Finding # 2: 1 disagree with the Grand Jury's finding . I am informed that the
records accurately reflect fixed assets and accumulated depreciation . We had an
opportunity to contract for this service to do an inventory and verification of values . The
Board of Supervisors chose not to expend the additional $ 8,000 for that purpose.
Recommendation # 2: The recommendation will not be implemented because it
is not reasonable.
Recommendation # 3: The recommendation has been implemented . The
Auditor/ Controller's Office is continually upgrading their accounting systems.
- 54-
Finding # 4 : I agree with the finding .
Recommendation # 4 : The recommendation will be implemented with the
preparation of the next independent audit. The Auditor/ Controller has indicated that he
will request that the Independent Auditor make greater use of the notes in the future.
Finding # 5: I disagree with the finding . I have no problem reviewing the
estimates for landfill closure and post closure . I am currently confident that since the
Independent Auditor and the Integrated Waste Management Board review these
estimates, they are correct.
Recommendation # 5: The recommendation will be implemented if the Board of
Supervisors so desires.
Finding # 6: I agree with the finding .
Recommendation #: 6 The recommendation has been implemented. The Board
of Supervisors' decision to retire high interest debts has placed the County in a better
financial position. We are fortunate that we were able to do so . Controls are in place.
All contracts, leases, and financing are reviewed by the County Administrative Officer,
the County Counsel and the County Auditor/ Controller. Those amounting to over
$ 10,000 are also reviewed and approved by the Board of Supervisors .
Finding # 7: I disagree with the finding .
Recommendation # 7: The recommendation will not be implemented . The firm
hired to complete the classification and compensation study is qualified to recommend
salaries, benefits and appropriate total compensation for the job being performed. How
those salaries are apportioned is a County decision and is based on logic. The salary of a
county department head that is responsible for more that one department would be
allocated based on the number of full time equivalent positions under his or her control .
This does not necessarily mean that they would have to spend an equal amount of time
with each. Current salaries are apportioned properly.
Finding # 8: I agree with the finding .
Recommendation # 8 : The recommendation has been partially implemented.
The Auditor/ Controller's Office is in the process of ensuring all County Department
handling cash have an adequate cashiering system .
I wish to thank the Grand Jury members for their time and attention in
investigating these matters and for providing me the opportunity to respond. I request
that my amended response be published with the final report.
JNT: wt
- 55-
1V E D
CHAIVIBCRS
TO:
The Honorable John K. Letton,
Presiding Judgq, ofthe Superior Court
DATE :
August 21, 2001
FROM:
R. Berry
art, Chairman
Trinity County Board of Supervisors
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
P. O . Drawer 1613
( 530) 623- 1217
WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 96093
Dero B. Forslund, Clerk
Jeannie Nix- Temple, County Administrative Officer
SUBJECT:
Response to Recommendations of 2000- 01 Grand Jury
Finance and Administration Committee Final Report
Trinity County Financial Statements and Related Accounting Matters
The Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee has requested a written
response to their Final Report on the Trinity County Financial Statement and Related
Accounting Matters. In my capacity as Chairman, my response on behalf of the Board of
Supervisors is as follows:
Finding # 1: We agree with the finding. The Auditor's report was made available
to the public and to the Grand Jury when it was received from the independent auditor.
Recommendation # 1 : The recommendation has been implemented. The
contract for fiscal year ending June 30, 2000 required the audit be completed by
December 30, 2000 .
Finding # 2: We disagree with the finding . As we know and understand, fixed
assets and accumulated depreciation are accurately shown on our accounting records .
Furthermore, we do not see the need to spend the citizens' tax dollars for an unqualified
outside opinion.
Recommendation # 2: The recommendation will not be implemented because it
is not warranted and would be not a good use oftaxpayers' money.
Finding # 3 : We agree with the finding .
- 56-
CHRISERIKSON
BILLIEMILLER
District 1 RALPHMODINE
District 2
District .?
BERRYSTEWART
ROBERTREISS
District 9
District 5
Recommendation # 3: The recommendation has been implemented. The
Auditor/ Controller continually works to upgrade systems within the County.
Finding # 4 : We agree with the finding .
Recommendation # 4: The recommendation will be implemented to the extent
possible . We agree with the Grand Jury's recommendation that adjustments described in
the findings should be explained in the notes to the financial statements. The County
Controller will request detailed notes in future audits.
Finding # 5: We disagree with the finding . The finding assumes that there will
continue to be substantial increases in the cost of closure . The increases in 1999- 2000
resulted from additional requirements from the State.
Recommendation # 5 The recommendation will not be implemented, as it is not
warranted .
Finding # 6: We agree with the finding .
Recommendation # 6: The recommendation has been implemented . Financial
controls are already in effect and equipment leases are reviewed by the Board of
Supervisors, CAO, Auditor/ Controller, and County Counsel.
Finding # 7: We agree in part and disagree in part with the finding . We agree
with the suggestion and the Grand Jury's recommendations for salary cost apportionment,
but feel the timing is wrong regarding our contract with the contractor, not to mention the
additional costs.
Recommendation # 7: The recommendation will not be implemented because it
is not warranted .
Recommendation # 8: The recommendation has been partially implemented.
The Auditor/ Controller is working with all departments to ensure they have adequate
cashiering systems.
We wish to thank the Grand Jury members for their time and attention in
investigating these matters and for providing the Board the opportunity to respond.
RBS : wt
Finding # 8: We agree with the finding. .
- 57-
TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY
2000- 200 FILED
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF TRINITY
BY: DONNA REGNANI, DEPUTYCLERK
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
FINAL REPORT
JUN 1 2 2001
TRINITY COUNTY TREASURER/ TAX COLLECTOR
DEPARTMENT AND RELATED COUNTY OPERATIONS
This report was approved
On May 22, 2001
- 58-
PURPOSE:
California Grand Juries are charged to act as the public's " watchdog" by
investigating and reporting upon the affairs of local government. Under Section 925 of
the California Penal Code, Chapter 7, " Powers and Duties of Grand Jury" the Grand Jury
is charged with duty to investigate and report on problems and irregularities in
functioning of local government entities . Section 927 ofthe Penal Code states that a
grand jury may investigate and report on the needs for increase or decrease in salaries of
county- elected officials; and Section 928 states that " Every grand jury may investigate
and report upon the needs of all county officers in the county and the equipment for, or
the method or system of performing the duties of, the several offices."
This report contains findings, recommendations and conclusions resulting from
the Grand Jury's inquiry and overall review ofthe Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department
and some related county government operations .
BACKGROUND:
2000- 2001 TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
FINAL REPORT
TRINITY COUNTY TREASURER/ TAX COLLECTOR
DEPARTMENT AND RELATED COUNTY OPERATIONS
The Trinity County Treasurer/ Tax Collector is an elected county official that is
elected to serve a four year term and has two primary responsibilities. The Treasurer is
responsible for cash management, safeguarding and investing county funds, providing a
full accountability, and maintaining an effective cash flow. The Tax Collector is
responsible for billing and collecting taxes on all secured and unsecured property and
collection oftransient occupancy taxes.
The official duties and responsibilities ofthe Treasurer/ Tax collector are largely
prescribed by the laws ofthe State ofCalifornia . The principal defining documents are
California Government Code, Sections 27000 through 27137, 27400 through 27401, and
53600, et. seq. In the course of fulfilling those duties and responsibilities, the
Treasurer/ Tax Collector supervises and directs a department office staff and coordinates
the activities ofthe department with those of other Trinity County departments in
accordance with the Trinity County Code and the general policies and procedures of the
County government. The 2000- 2001 Department budget is $ 246,467.
The Treasurer provides general banking services for all county departments,
county schools, and special districts. The Treasurer disburses funds by paying county
warrants, electronic payments, and electronic payroll . The Treasurer also has
- 59-
responsibility, under California Law, to manage the county investment portfolio . In
fiscal year 1999- 2000 the Trinity County Treasurer:
D
Processed 2,636 deposits totaling $ 67.5 million
D
Processed 51,163 warrants totaling $ 51 .7 million
D
Managed an investment portfolio of approximately $ 25 million
The Tax Collector bills and collects current and delinquent secured and unsecured
property taxes and transient occupancy taxes. The Tax Collector is also responsible for
follow- up on delinquent taxes and the sale of properties that the county has the power to
sell due to tax defaults. In fiscal year 1999- 2000 the Tax Collector:
D Processed approximately 12,000 secured tax bills
D
Collected $ 6.5 million in secured taxes
D Processed 1,578 unsecured tax bills
D Collected $ 308,000 in unsecured taxes
D Processed 500 supplemental tax bills
D Collected $ 115,000 in supplemental taxes
D Processed 408 transient occupancy tax bills
D
Collected $ 158,000 in transient occupancy taxes
D
Collected $ 416,000 in delinquent prior year taxes
METHOD OF INVESTIGATION:
The Grand Jury, in its inquiry and investigation of the Trinity County
Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department relied on documents, records and personal
interviews .
Background information and an organizational chart for the department were
obtained from a " Department Information" pamphlet published by the Treasurer/ Tax
Collector's Office. California government codes defining county Treasurer/ Tax
Collector duties and responsibilities were reviewed, as was the Trinity County Code. Job
descriptions for the Treasurer/ Tax Collector and the employees ofthe department were
obtained from the county Personnel Department which also provided salary and
employee turnover data.
The current and a proposed revision of" County of Trinity Statement of
Investment Policy" prepared by the Treasurer/ Tax Collector's office and " County of
Trinity Cash Handling Procedures" prepared by the Auditor/ Controller's office were
reviewed. Other documents reviewed include " Trinity County Treasurer's Monthly and
Quarterly Investment Reports" and the notebook prepared by the Treasurer for the March
27, 2001 meeting ofthe Trinity County Treasury Oversight Committee. A listing of
errors in Orders to Receive as received at the Treasurer's Office during the period from
September 12, 2000 through November 6, 2000 was prepared by the Treasurer's Office at
the request ofthe Grand Jury. Selected items of interdepartmental correspondence
applicable to subjects ofthe Grand Jury inquiry were requested and reviewed.
- 60-
The Finance and Administration Committee ofthe Grand Jury interviewed the
Treasurer/ Tax Collector on six different occasions during the period of September 21,
2000 through April 26, 2001 . All ofthe Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department employees
were individually interviewed in early December 2000, and three past employees of the
department were interviewed . A guided tour of the department was conducted for the
Finance and Administration Committee of the Grand Jury prior to the employee
interviews . All the present members and one past member ofthe Trinity County Board
of Supervisors ( BOS), the County Administrative Officer and Head of the Personnel
Department ( CAO), and the Auditor/ Controller were also interviewed.
Finally, a survey of Treasurer/ Tax Collector salaries for 14 counties in Northern
California was conducted by mail.
Internal financial audits are conducted by the Trinity County Auditor/ Controller,
and the county financial statements are audited annually by an independent auditor . The
Grand Jury's inquiry into the independent Auditor's Report is described in a separate
Grand Jury Report.
The Grand Jury chose not to conduct a full management audit, but to inquire and
investigate several selected aspects ofthe Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department
operations. The primary topics of inquiry were :
D The performance of the primary mandated Treasurer/ Tax Collector duties and
responsibilities
D Employee turnover and training
D Cash handling procedures
Proposed operational improvements such as electronic download of hospital
payroll and school warrants into the check management system
D Delinquent tax collection and property sales for taxes in default
D Interdepartmental relations and teamwork involving the Treasurer/ Tax
Collector, Auditor/ Controller, CAO and BOS
D The Treasurer/ Tax Collector's salary
FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS # 1:
The Grand Jury finds that the Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department despite being
short staffed in 1999 and 2000 has performed its essential functions in a timely manner.
Tax bills and notices have been mailed by required deadlines and tax payments have been
processed promptly. Cash deposits from other county departments have been handled
daily, as required; and county warrants have been reconciled daily. The county
investment portfolio has been monitored on a daily basis and a summary report has been
distributed to the Auditor/ Controller, CAO, and BOS monthly.
Because of being short staffed as mentioned above and later in this report, some
activities that were not essential to the day- to- day departmental operations were delayed
and postponed until the third quarter of fiscal year 2000- 2001 . The Grand Jury concludes
- 61-
that, though postponements were undesirable ; the essential departmental functions were
not adversely affected and the priorities established by the Treasurer/ Tax collector were
correct. The responses to the Public Service Questionnaires, that are available at the
service counters of all the county departments, have reportedly been favorable for the
Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department, and the Grand Jury found no public dissatisfaction
with the department.
The Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department is located in the basement of the Trinity
County Courthouse in Weaverville . The physical location in the building is less than
ideal; but the work- stations are thoughtfully arranged, the department has an organized
but busy appearance, and there is good counter space for service to the public. The
Grand Jury concludes that the windowless facility and the furnishings are adequate
though somewhat spartan.
RECOMMENDATION # 1 :
The Grand Jury has no recommendation regarding Finding and Conclusions # 1 ;
but believes that the public is being well served by the Treasurer/ Tax Collector
Department and commends its performance .
FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS # 2:
The Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department is logically organized. The organization
consists of the elected Treasurer/ Tax Collector, a Chief Deputy Tax Collector that reports
directly to the Treasurer/ Tax Collector, two Account Technicians that perform tax
collections and related duties and one Account Technician that performs treasury duties.
A third Account Technician position for tax collection is unfunded. Temporary help is
employed on an as- needed basis to handle peak workloads that occur concurrent with
preparation ofproperty tax bills and receipt ofproperty tax payments.
Training consists primarily of on- the- job training by the Treasurer/ Tax Collector
and the Chief Deputy. Considerable effort has gone into preparing and maintaining
procedures manuals and job descriptions, and the staff is unanimously complimentary
about the training and the written procedures .
Employee turnover in the Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department has been higher
than in other comparable departments. The present employees of the department were all
hired in the year 2000. The time needed to replace employees in 1999 and 2000 coupled
with the time required to train new employees placed a strain on the department;
however, essential operations were conducted in a timely manner. Since there are few
employees in the department and the department is staffed at a minimum level, any
vacancy has a significant impact on employee workload and department capability.
- 62-
The Grand Jury concludes that there was no single factor that caused the high
turnover; but all of the following are contributing causes :
D A demanding working environment in which accuracy is absolutely essential,
deadlines must be met, and workloads are heavy at times.
D Opportunities for increased compensation elsewhere .
D A perception by some employees that their salary is not commensurate with
their duties.
D Limited opportunities for advancement within the department because of its
small size.
D The windowless basement environment was also mentioned by some of the
people interviewed .
Despite the fact that the workload is heavy at times, all of the present employees
and the past employees interviewed by the Grand Jury stated that their workload was not
unreasonable . No employee grievances have been filed. The morale in the department is
good at the present time, the atmosphere is congenial, and the staff appears to be happy
and not looking to leave.
RECOMMENDATION # 2:
The Grand Jury recommends continuation of the effort to maintain and improve
morale within the department. Similarly, continued attention to on- the- job training and
maintenance ofgood written procedures is encouraged, as they affect both efficiency and
morale.
In the interest of improving employee job satisfaction and reducing turnover, the
job classifications and salary ranges for the department employees should be carefully
reviewed as part ofthe county government job classification and compensation study
presently being conducted by the county.
The Grand Jury recommends that the Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department
continue to be staffed at its present level; but that filling any future staffvacancies as they
occur be given the highest practical priority.
FINDINGAND CONCLUSIONS # 3:
As mentioned earlier in this report, job vacancies and the training of new
employees in the Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department caused some management
functions to become delinquent. One result was that some employee performance
reviews were delayed. That situation has now been corrected and there are no past due
performance reviews. The Treasurer/ Tax Collector has now set up an intradepartmental
database to track performance review due dates. Timely periodic employee performance
reviews are an essential part of good management practices .
- 63-
RECOMMENDATION # 3:
The Grand Jury recommends that the Treasurer/ Tax Collector and the Personnel
Department make a cooperative effort to ensure timely employee performance reviews.
Implementation of a computerized data base to track the status and alert managers of
pending due dates for performance reviews of all county government employees should
be considered. Ideally, the data base would not only flag pending due dates but also
trigger transmittal of forms and follow- up by the Personnel Department.
FINDING # 4:
California Government Code, Section 27130 - 27137 establishes the requirement
for a county treasury oversight committee . The committee is, by code, advisory in nature
with the charge of reviewing the county's investment policy and causing an annual audit
of compliance with the code. Committee meetings shall be open to the public.
The formation of the oversight committee in Trinity County was delayed after the
original formation attempt in late 1996 until early 2001 . Causes included job vacancies
in the Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department and the flooding and subsequent restoration of
the office and documents in 1997 . The first meeting ofthe committee was held February
28, 2001, followed by a meeting on March 27, 2001 . The committee is now functioning
and meetings will be held quarterly, with the next meeting scheduled for June, 2001 .
The Grand Jury finds that the delay in formation of the Trinity County Treasury
Oversight Committee caused friction in the relationship between the Treasurer/ Tax
Collector, the CAO, and some members ofthe BOS. There was no adverse impact on the
investment of county funds because the committee has an oversight role that is advisory
in nature, investments were managed by the Treasurer/ Tax Collector in accordance with
the California Code and the existing Trinity County Investment Policy and the investment
portfolio is monitored on a daily basis. An investment report is distributed monthly by
the Treasurer to the Auditor/ Controller, CAO, and BOS and quarterly to the schools and
special districts that participate in the county investment pool.
The objectives when investing and managing public funds are defined in
California Government Code 53600.5 in order of importance:
1 .
Safeguarding ofPrincipal
2 . Liquidity
3 .
Return on Invested Funds.
The Treasurer/ Tax Collector has complied with these objectives. As ofMarch
31,2001 a total of approximately $ 25 million was invested, of which approximately $ 21
million was invested with the State of California Local Agency Investment Funds ( LAIF)
and approximately $ 3 million was invested in money market accounts and mutual funds.
At that time the average annual yield on investment was approximately 5.8%. There
have been no realized losses ofinvestment principal . The Grand Jury concludes that the
- 64-
Treasurer/ Tax Collector has managed the investment of county funds wisely and in
accordance with legal requirements with the exception ofthe previously mentioned delay
in formation of the Trinity County Treasury Oversight Committee.
RECOMMENDATION # 4:
The Grand Jury recommends that Treasurer/ Tax Collector continue to invest
county funds without significant change in investment policy. Meetings of the Trinity
County Treasury Oversight Committee should continue on a regularly scheduled basis to
improve the understanding and support of the Treasurer/ Tax Collector's investment
decisions.
FINDING # 5 :
The Treasurer/ Tax Collector has the power to sell property five years after taxes
are in default. Interest and penalties accrue in delinquent taxes until the delinquent taxes
are paid or the property is sold by the county . Tax sales require a significant amount of
labor and expenditure of funds to satisfy all the presale legal requirements . For that
reason, efforts to collect delinquent taxes are normally more cost effective than tax sales
and are an essential part of the Tax Collector's duties.
Trinity County's last tax sale was in 1996 . As of October, 2000 there was a total
of $ 405,000 of delinquent taxes and penalties for which the Treasurer/ Tax Collector had
power to sell. A significant but unknown portion of the $ 405,000 will not be recoverable
through a property sale because of a number of factors, including property with little or
no market value, property with market value less than the accrued taxes and penalties,
and property for which no bids are received.
The Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department has started preparations for a tax sale
which is tentatively scheduled for Spring 2002.
RECOMMENDATION # 5:
2002 .
FINDING # 6:
The Grand Jury recommends continuing with preparations for a tax sale in Spring
New cash handling procedures were instituted in 2000 in accordance with
comprehensive document, " County of Trinity Cash Handling Procedures", prepared by
the Auditor/ Controller's office. Departments depositing money into the County Treasury
must normally do so daily and deliver the money with an order to receive ( OR), which is
essentially a deposit receipt, to the Treasurer's office. Each ORmust have a number
which is assigned by the Auditor's Office. Under the new procedure the error rate in the
OR number for OR's delivered to the Treasurer's office is significant . A tally prepared at
the Grand Jury's request shows that 16 OR's with incorrect ORnumbers were delivered
- 65-
to the Treasurer's office from September 12, 2000. through November 6, 2000 . The
Grand Jury concludes that the OR error rate is not a major problem ( most errors are
caught and corrected promptly), but it is desirable for efficiency reasons to reduce the
error rate.
RECOMMENDATION # 6:
The Grand Jury recommends that the Cash Handling Procedures be jointly
reviewed by the Auditor/ Controller and the Treasurer/ Tax Collector with the aim of
reducing the number of error's in OR's. The Grand Jury suggests that the error rate could
be reduced by routing OR's to the Auditor's office, which has responsibility for OR
numbers prior to delivery ofthe OR to the Treasurer's office.
FINDING # 7 :
The Treasurer/ Tax Collector must approve payment of county warrants by the
bank on a daily basis. Included in those warrants are school warrants and hospital payroll
warrants. The schools issue approximately 2000 warrants per month totaling
approximately $ 1 .8 million per month. Hospital payroll warrants, excluding electronic
deposits, are fewer in number with a total of 50 to 60 each month.
The " checks issued" files produced by the hospital payroll computer system and
the school computer system have formats that cannot be electronically downloaded by the
Auditor's Office into the county check management system at the present time. The
hospital payroll warrants are hand keyed daily into the county check management system
by the Auditor's office; which, although a small job, is inefficient compared to electronic
transfer and is prone to human error. The school warrants are never entered into the
county check management system; thus the Treasurer is unable to perform appropriate
checks and balances on school warrants.
The Treasurer/ Tax Collector, in the beliefthat it is economically practical,
included computerizing the transfer of school and hospital payroll warrant data to the
county check management system as a goal in her memorandum to the BOS on July 26,
2000. The Treasurer/ Tax Collector, Auditor/ Controller, Superintendent of Schools, and
the staff have now attended meetings on this subject; but there is no plan to eliminate
hand keying ofhospital payroll warrant data, and a firm plan and commitment to proceed
with electronic transfer of school warrant data has not been made.
RECOMMENDATION # 7 :
The Grand Jury, in the belief that it is feasible, recommends that an economically
practical plan for electronic transfer of school warrant data be prepared and executed in
the reasonably near future. The Grand Jury believes that a cooperative effort by the
Treasurer/ Tax Collector, the Auditor/ Controller, the Data Processing Department and the
Trinity County Superintendent of Schools is needed.
- 66-
The Grand Jury further recommends that the Auditor/ Controller and the
Treasurer/ Tax Collectorjointly again review and reconsider the practicality of
eliminating hand keying of hospital payroll warrant data.
FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS # 8:
A ten county salary survey for department heads was conducted by the Trinity
County Personnel Department in 1997. The survey showed that the Treasurer/ Tax
Collector was one of the most underpaid elected officials in Trinity County. Despite
salary increases since 1997, little progress has been made to close this gap. As of April 1,
2000 the Treasurer/ Tax collector's salary of $ 3,852 per month is 75% ofthe average
salary of other Trinity County elected officials ( excluding members of the BOS) and 84%
of the next lowest elected official's salary. The Treasurer/ Tax Collector is also the
lowest paid Trinity County department head, either elected or appointed. The Grand Jury
finds that elected officials' salaries should generally be higher than appointed officials'
salaries because ofthe generally greater responsibilities, the cost of running for elected
office, and the uncertainty ofbeing re- elected.
The 1997 salary survey showed that the average Treasurer/ Tax Collector salary in
the ten small northern California counties surveyed was $ 828 per month greater than the
salary of the Trinity County Treasurer/ Tax Collector. The April, 2001 survey of the same
counties shows that the difference is now $ 684 per month.
In 1997 the BOS adopted a policy of granting salary increases to county officials
based on longevity of service. In January, 2001 the Treasurer/ Tax Collector was up for a
5% longevity increase. That increase was not recommended by the CAO nor granted by
the BOS on the basis ofthe deferred Treasurer/ Tax Collector functions mentioned earlier
in this report and disagreements on managerial effectiveness .
The BOS conducts annual performance reviews of appointed department heads
that report to the CAO and BOS. The performance of elected officials is not subject to
annual review by the BOS because elected officials are elected by the public to perform
the duties and responsibilities ofthe office to which they are elected in accordance with
statutory requirements. Being representatives ofthe public, duly elected to office, and
answerable to the public through the election system, elected officials do not have a role
subservient to the BOS and thus are exempt from annual performance reviews. By
requiring actions and managerial style changes that are beyond statutory requirements as
a prerequisite condition for a salary increase the CAO and BOS have created a defacto
performance review of an elected official and, in doing so have overstepped their
authority .
The Grand Jury has not found any withholding of longevity based salary increases
for Trinity County elected officials other than the one described above.
- 67-
RECOMMENDATION # 8 :
The Grand Jury recommends that the salary of the Trinity County Treasurer/ Tax
Collector be increased by 5% retroactive to January 1, 2001, to conform to the longevity
increase due at that time . The Grand jury also recommends, in accordance with Section
927 of the Penal Code, that the salary of the Trinity County Tax Collector be increased
by an additional 8% effective July 1, 2001 . These recommended actions will bring the
Treasurer/ Tax Collector's salary up to a point essentially equivalent to the next lowest
paid department head in Trinity County government .
FINDING AND CONCLUSION # 9:
The Grand Jury finds and concludes that in the interest of encouraging long term
employment, salary increases based on longevity are justifiable for appointed officials
and managers. The county benefits from a stable and experienced workforce.
The Grand Jury, on the other hand, finds no such justification for longevity based
salary increases for elected officials. Elected officials are elected to perform their duties
in accordance with statutory requirements and length of service is determined by the
electorate, with dedication by the official to long term service being only an ancillary
consideration. Awarding salary increases based on longevity to elected officials will
surely lead to the illogical and irrational situation in which a newly elected official that
obtains office by defeating an incumbent will receive a lower salary than the incumbent
was receiving, despite being chosen by the electorate as the best candidate for that office.
RECOMMENDATION # 9:
The Grand Jury recommends that the BOS eliminate longevity based increases for
elected officials in Trinity County. The Grand Jury recommends that salaries of elected
officials be based solely on the duties and responsibilities ofthe office. When
determining salaries, due consideration should be given to the salaries of the elected and
appointed officials in Trinity County, the salaries of officials in the same office in similar
counties, and prevailing local wages. This recommendation should not be construed as a
recommendation for a salary decrease for any elected Trinity County official that may
have received a longevity based salary increase.
FINDING # 10:
A contract has been awarded for a Trinity County Government Job Classification
and Compensation Study. This study, which is scheduled for completion in April, 2002
will cover the complete range of county government jobs from elected officials, including
the BOS, to entry level positions .
During the Grand Jury's review and investigation ofthe Treasurer/ Tax Collector's
salary, the Grand Jury found indications ofprobable inequities in the salaries of other
Trinity County Government Department Heads and the BOS . The Grand Jury did not
- 68-
conduct an investigation sufficient to justify a specific recommendation regarding those
perceived inequities .
RECOMMENDATION # 10:
The Grand Jury enthusiastically endorses the Job Classification and
Compensation Study as a means of correcting any compensation inequities that may be
identified.
FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS # 11 :
The Grand Jury finds that Trinity County Government officials are dedicated to
performing their duties well and to good government in general. The Grand Jury does
find, however, friction and personal conflict in the relationships between various
department heads, the CAO and some members ofthe BOS . This undermines morale,
cooperation, and teamwork. The Grand Jury concludes that improvement in this area is
desirable and achievable.
RECOMMENDATION # 11 :
The Grand Jury believes that a spirit ofcooperation between various offices
within the County government is in the best interest ofthe citizens ofthis county. To this
end it is recommended that all Department Heads actively pursue respectful and
cooperative relationships with other departments and department heads. It is understood
that many personalities are involved, however, relationships should be conducted
professionally . The citizens ofthe County should expect no less.
The Grand Jury further recommends that individual members of the BOS that are
concerned about the performance of any department or department head personally visit
that department for a first hand review.
SUMMARY:
D The citizens of Trinity County have been and are being well served by the
Treasurer/ Tax Collector Dept.
D The Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department operations were hampered by high
rate of employee turnover, but essential services were not adversely affected.
D The Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department employee morale is good and the
workforce appears to have stabilized.
D The Treasurer/ Tax Collector has an ongoing interest in improving efficiency
and integrity of treasury and tax collection operations . Numerous
improvements have been made and others are under consideration by the
Treasurer/ Tax Collector and other related departments .
D The Treasurer/ Tax Collector is severely underpaid and the Grand Jury
recommends immediate increases .
- 69-
D The Grand Jury recommends abandonment of longevity based salary increases
for elected officials and that it be replaced with a reasonable process to keep
the salary of elected officials in parity with similar positions .
RESPONSE REQUESTED FROM:
Trinity County Board of Supervisors, Trinity County Administrative Officer,
Trinity County Auditor/ Controller, Trinity County Treasurer/ Tax Collector,
Trinity County Superintendent of Schools
DATE:
June 14, 2001
TO:
John K. Letton, Presiding Judge of the Superior Court
FROM:
Brian Muir, Auditor / Controller
SUBJECT :
2000- 2001 Trinity County Grand Jury Report
Trinity County Treasurer / Tax Collector Department and Related County
Operations
The following response is provided as requested in the above report:
Recommendation # 1
The Treasurer / Tax Collector Department completes the essential functions needed to
keep County government running.
Recommendation # 2
I agree.
Recommendation # 3
It is an essential duty of each department head, not the Personnel Department, to ensure
that employee performance reviews are completed in a timely manner. Failure to complete
reviews has a detrimental effect on morale .
Recommendation # 4
n -[~\ TT
rm rf T ~ PfT"
T
BRIAN E. MUIR, COUNTY AUDITOR- CONTROLLER
P . O . BOX 1230, WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 96093- 1230
PHONE ( 530) 623- 1317
FAX ( 530) 623- 1323
MEMORANDUM
JUSDUGPEE'RSIOCRHACMOBUERRTS
The Treasurer / Tax Collector should work with the County Treasury Oversight
Committee to develop a better return on invested funds while still safeguarding principal .
RECEIVED
JUN 1 8 2001
Recommendation # 5
I agree. In addition, a tax sale should be conducted on an annual basis. Conducting a sale
- 71-
once every five years deprives the County and its citizens ofproperty tax revenue.
Recommendation # 6
I disagree. Cash handling procedures are the sole responsibility of the County Auditor /
Controller. The current method of handling OR's eliminates the need for a trip to the Auditor /
Controller's office by employees making a deposit in the treasury. Errors do not present a
problem as they are easily corrected with a telephone call.
Recommendation # 7
I disagree. It is unnecessary to have electronic transfer of school warrant data.
Inexpensive alternatives to electronic transfer have been discussed with the Trinity County
Superintendent of Schools. Since the schools would bear the cost of implementing an electronic
system, I have informed the County Superintendent that the Auditor / Controller's office will
support whatever decision he makes in this matter.
The decision on how hospital payroll data is entered in the accounting system rests with
the Auditor/ Controller . I have determined that the most cost effective way is to hand key the
entries . The citizens would not be well served by paying for the automation ofa task which takes
one person about 20 minutes per month.
Recommendation # 8
It is inappropriate for me to comment on the Treasurer / Tax Collector's compensation .
However, in my opinion the Board of Supervisors has done an excellent job of setting
department head salaries after considering the availability of funds, the nature of the position, the
necessary education, and, most importantly, the performance of the incumbent.
Recommendation # 9
Salaries of elected officials should be based on performance on the job as well as the
duties and responsibilities of the office. Ifthe Board of Supervisors feels that performance
improves with experience in office, then the current system makes sense.
Recommendation # 10
I agree.
Recommendation # 11
I agree. It is my experience that County department heads do maintain respectful and
professional business relationships with one another. I also find that members of the Board of
Supervisors visit County departments on a regular basis .
- 72-
TO :
The Honorable John K. Letton,
Presiding Judge of the Superior Court
FROM: i-/ Tefnp1To ' d
,
y
ministrative Officer
SUBJECT:
Response to Recommendations of 2000- 01 Grand Jury
Finance and Administration Committee Final Report
Trinity County Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department
And Related County Operations
DATE :
June 21, 2001
Recommendation # 1 : There are no recommendations necessary.
° 73-
i _
T`'
T- f
~ lT TT r~ I" ~ l
i( N rV I - F '
N~ T " I I -
`~. 9
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Administration - Human Resources - Risk Management
Grant Management - Information & Technology
P. O. Box 1613
Weaverville, CA 96093- 1613
County Administrator Phone:
( 530) 623- 1382
Human Resources Phone ( 530) 623- 1325
FAX ( 530) 623- 4222
JEANNIE NIX- TEMPLE, County Administrative Officer
RECEIVED
J UN 2 2 2001
SUPERIOR COURT
JUDGE'S CHAMBERS
The Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee has requested a written
response to their Final Report on the Trinity County Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department
and Related County Operations . In my capacity as County Administrative Officer, my
response is as follows:
Recommendation # 2: The job classifications and compensation for employees is
being reviewed for all county departments . It has been over 15 years since a
Classification and Compensation Study has been undertaken . All county employees are
looking forward to the results .
Recommendation # 3: The Grand Jury proposes that our Personnel Department
make a cooperative effort to ensure timely employee performance reviews, including
creation of a database to track said reviews. Within six months our Human Resources
and Information Technology Departments plan to establish an automated system for this
purpose . In the meantime, all department heads have a responsibility pursuant to Trinity
County Policy number 1- 99( P) to evaluate employees annually. Our current system
provides reminders to department heads who are delinquent in their responsibility to
evaluate employee performance . Failure to complete employee evaluations is a violation
of county policy and has a negative effect on employee compensation and morale if the
employee is eligible for a merit increase.
Recommendation # 4 : I agree that the Treasurers Investment Oversight
Committee should continue and be expanded to increase understanding and dialogue
about county investments .
Recommendation # 5 : I strongly agree that the Treasurer/ Tax Collector should
proceed with a Tax Sale in the spring of 2002 . I am very pleased that those plans are
being made .
Recommendation # 6 : Any modification to the process of handling cash is the
responsibility ofthe Auditor/ Controller .
Recommendation # 7: 1 believe that any decisions regarding electronic transfer
of school warrant data should be made by the Auditor/ Controller in cooperation with the
Superintendent of Schools .
Any decision regarding input of hospital payroll data should be left up to the
Auditor/ Controller .
Recommendation # 8 : The County Administrative Officer and the Board of
Supervisors do have authority and control over budgetary issues for all county
departments . The CAO with authority delegated by the County Board of Supervisors is
the Risk Manager for the county. County Department heads, whether elected or
appointed, have the ability to create significant liability for the County. The County
Board of Supervisors has adopted policies that relate to the operation of county
government and reduction of losses. The CAO has a responsibility to see that those
policies are followed. The only control over elected department heads is either their
salary or their budget . I respectfully disagree with the Grand Jury's recommendations
regarding salary for any individual department head.
Recommendation # 9: The longevity based increase for department heads was
developed through a department head salary survey conducted over 4 years ago by our
former director of Human Resources . The survey indicated that longevity pay increases
for department heads was not an uncommon practice in many counties. Organizations
generally benefit from the experience a long- term employee brings to the job. I
respectfully disagree that the practice should be eliminated for elected department heads.
Recommendation # 10: I concur with the Grand Jury. The classification and
compensation study will shed light on many inequities, real or perceived.
Recommendation # 11 : I concur in part with the Grand Jury. It is in the best
interest of the citizens of the County that a spirit of cooperation exists between the
various County departments . I believe, however, that the condition currently exists. In
the operation of any organization ofthis size, there are bound to be some disagreements . I
believe that when they occur they are handled in a respectful way.
I wish to thank the Grand Jury members for their time and attention in
investigating these matters and for providing me the opportunity to respond.
JNT: wt
- 74-
Memo
Fronx
Lynda Hymas, Treasurer- Tax Collector
CC:
Trinity County Board of Supervisors
Date:
August 1, 2001
The following are responses requested in the above report .
Recommendation # 1 :
Recommendation # 2:
I agree with the finding .
Recommendation # 3:
I agree with the finding .
Recommendation # 4 :
I agree with the finding .
- 7 5-
Trinity County
Lynda Hymas
Treasurer- Tax Collector
AUG - q, Zoo,
SUP
JUDGE'S
ERIOR COURT
CHAMBERS
To:
The Honorable John K. Letton, Presiding Judge of the Superior Court
RECEIVED
LOW
RE:
Trinity County Grand Jury 2000- 2001
Finance and Administration Committee Final Report
Trinity County Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department and Related County Operations
The Grand Jury made no recommendations. The Treasurer- Tax Collector thanks the Grand Jury for
commending the department's performance and service to the public .
On the job training and written procedures continue to be a high priority. Procedures are maintained in shared
files on PC's and are revised as needed.
The Treasurer- Tax Collector staff completed the job classification studies, which were reviewed by both their
supervisor and department head, then forwarded to the contractor performing the study. Each member of staff
and the department head requested and met with the contractor for further clarification .
The department head and Chief Deputy work with Personnel to fill vacancies as quickly as possible when they
occur.
There are no past due performance evaluations at this time. The department is now utilizing a database
created for this department to track due dates. I agree that a countywide system of tracking and early
notification to managers by personnel would be useful to all departments.
The Trinity County Treasury Oversight Committee has been formed, and met on 2/ 28/ 01 and 3/ 27/ 01 . The next
scheduled meeting will be 8/ 14/ 01 . A committee member binder has been prepared and delivered to all
committee members prior to the Feb. 2001 meeting. A public binder is available at each public meeting. The
bmianrdkeerts iinnfcolrumdea, tiaonm. ong other items; pertinent government codes, investment reports, investment policy, and
Response to Grand Jury Report 2000- 2001 Trinity County Treasurer- Tax Collector Department
- Continued
I agree that the Committee members serve in an advisory capacity, as stated in code. The purposes of the
Committee are: 1 .) To review and monitor the Treasurer's investment policy . 2.) Cause an annual audit.
Section 27137 of Government Code states : Nothing in this article shall be construed to allow the county
treasury oversight committee to direct individual investment decisions, select individual investment advisors,
brokers, or dealers, or impinge on the day- to- day operations of the county treasury.
Recommendation # 5 :
I agree with the finding .
A tax sale takes a number of months and many steps to process. There are a number of mandated
notifications and deadlines in order to legally notify someone that they will lose their property at a public auction .
A tax sale should not be considered only for its potential to increase county revenues . A tax sale can result in a
loss due to expenses paid to outside vendors, even if a property does not sell . I have started the process for a
tax sale, and if fully staffed should be able to complete for Spring 2002. Tax sales require a commitment from
county officers to budget the required funding and staffing to complete a tax sale. For the majority of the last 12
years this office has not received budget funding
Click tabs to swap between content that is broken into logical sections.
Description
| Rating | |
| Title | Trinity County California Grand Jury reports and responses |
| Subject | California. Grand Jury (Trinity County)--Periodicals.; Trinity County (Calif.)--Politics and Government--Periodicals. |
| Description | Annual; Description based on 2005/2006.; Title from home page (viewed on May 7, 2007).; Harvested from the web on 2/22/07 |
| Creator | California. Grand Jury (Trinity County) |
| Publisher | Trinity County Grand Jury] |
| Type | Text |
| Identifier | http://digitalarchive.oclc.org/request?id%3Doclcnum%3A124041499; http://www.trinitycounty.org/Departments/Admin-Bos-Cao/Fr99grnd.htm |
| Language | eng |
| Title-Alternative | Final report of the Trinity County Grand Jury |
| Format-Extent | 1 web site : PDF files. |
| Relation-Requires | Mode of access: Internet.; System requirements: Adobe Acrobat Reader. |
| Transcript | 2000- 2001 TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY COMMITTEE ROSTER Judicial Committee Education Committee Jacqueline Rogers Dwight Glass Raymond Patton Herschel Dunaetz Herschel Dunaetz Phil Erath Ellen Cooke Raymond Patton* John Humborg* Finance & Administration Committee Social Services Charshie McDonald Dwight Glass Ellen Cooke Edna Kaya Herschel Dunaetz Jacqueline Rogers Charlie Fitch Leo Schussman Phil Erath * Helen Gravette* Health & Human Services Committee Special Districts Committee Charslie McDonald Raymond Patton Edna Kaya Donald Stewart Ellen Cooke Charlie Fitch Jacqueling Rogers James Taylor* Leo Schussman* Special Committee/ Edit Review and Procedures Alton Turner ( resigned) Alton Turner ( resigned) Frank Aschert Regan Wood Charlsie McDonald * John Humborg Frank Aschert* Development and Special Investigation Committee Environmental Committee Ellen Cooke Helen Gravette Regan Wood Regan Wood Donald Stewart Frank Aschert Charley Fitch* Donald Stewart* TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT 2000- 2001 DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY 2ooo- zoos F I L E D DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE This report was approved On June 12, 2001 FINAL REPORT CITIZEN COMPLAINT DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES JUN 2 9 2001 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF TRINITY BY: DONNA REGNANT, DEFUTYCLERK PURPOSE: FINDING # 1 : 2000- 2001 TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE FINAL REPORT CITIZEN COMPLAINT This is an investigation of a citizen's complaint against a county agency. BACKGROUND: A complaint against the county was received by the Grand Jury. The complaint charges that the Trinity County General Services Department has refused to furnish the complainant a key to the Hayfork Solid Waste facility so that said complainant might access the facility after hours. The complainant also charges discrimination in that his business competitor does have a key to the facility providing access as needed. METHOD OF INVESTIGATION: Two members of the committee met with the Director of General Services and learned the following facts. The committee reviewed correspondence between the Director of General Services and the complainant . The Report of Station Information for the Hayfork Transfer Station and Title 14 of the California Code ofRegulations, plus the Solid Waste Operation Permit require the following: Title 14 - Article 6.2 Section 17409.5 requires load checking upon entering the facility . Title 14 - Article 6 .35 Section 17418.1 Site Security, states that the County must discourage access to the site after operational hours . Title 14 - Article 6.35 Section 17418.2 Site Security, states that the facility shall have an attendant present during operational hours. RECOMMENDATION # 1 : Rules and regulations as stated in finding number one should be adhered to eliminating preferential treatment. FINDING # 2: A letter of August 18, 2000 signed by the Director of General Services states that the complainant's competitor has been given a key and " grand- fathered in", giving the competitor unlimited access . RECOMMENDATION # 2: Allow all septic service businesses equal access to transfer sites in order to provide equal business opportunity . CONCLUSION: Basic California Code ofRegulation, plus Solid Waste Operations Permit requirements are being followed with the exception of septic waste dumping. Grand-fathering of access to one septic service provider presents equal business opportunity for all septic service providers in the county. The county should look into related health issues including the need to address emergency septic disposal, during closed hours. RESPONSE: Trinity County Board of Supervisors, County Administrative Officer, Director of General Services. INIITY COUNTY September 14, 2001 GENERAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT P. O . BOX 2700 -- FAX ( 530) 623-- 5015 WEAVERVILLE, CA 96093 R E C E I V E D TO : Honorable John K. Letton Presiding Judge of the Superior Court FROM: John Whitaker, General Services Director SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE'S CHAMBERS SUBJECT: Response to Recommendations of 2000- 01 Grand Jury DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE FINAL REPORT CITIZEN COMPLAINT - DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES Finding # 1 : The Report of Station Information for the Hayfork Transfer Station and Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, plus the Solid Waste Operational Permit require the following: D Title 14 - Article 6.2 Section 17409.5 requires load checking upon entering the facility. D Title 14- Article 6.35 Section 17418.1 Site Security, states that the County must discourage access to the site after operational hours. Title 14- article 6.35 Section 17418.2 Site Security, states that the facility shall have an attendant present during operational hours. RESPONSE : We agree with the findings. Recommendation 1 Citizen Complaint. " Rules and regulations as stated in finding number one should be adhered to eliminating preferential treatment." Response: We agree in part. The part we agree to is that the Grand Jury has correctly stated the regulations regarding the operation of the facility . The Grand Jury's narrow interpretation of the rules does not account for contracted services and the right of entry for the services . Finding 2 Citizen Complaint: A letter of August 18, 2001 signed by the Director of General Services states that the complainant's competitor has been given a key and " grand- fathered in"; giving the competitor unlimited access. Response: We agree in part and disagree in part. Grand Jury takes a phrase from a letter, and misconstrues the meaning and content of that letter. The letter was written to the complainant, and quotes the regulations for site security and site permitting . The letter states that the key- holder was " grand- fathered in" to provide contracted services, which is the same service they supplied to our sites through Timberline Disposal . Recommendation 2 Citizen Complaint. " Allow all septic service businesses equal access to transfer sites in order to provide equal business opportunity." Response: We disagree wholly with the recommendation ; it will not be implemented because it is not warranted nor adhere to the California Code of Regulation sections quoted above. Plus the committee misleads the reader. They clearly state the applicable codes, however the issue of access is misstated . The disposal site is open six days a week, for 9 hours each day. The complainant has access during those hours. The current key holder provides and has provided contracted service to that site for many years. The code allows for contracted service providers access after hours. For the past seven years the key holder's septage disposal logs and their customer logs for the amount septage removed have matched, and payments for disposal have been made on time. With the complainant, this is not the case. His disposal logs and his customer logs do not match . This matter has been turned over to the Environmental Health Department who has jurisdiction . The committee's conclusion is also flawed; there is no equal opportunity question here and no preferential treatment. If a health and safety emergency existed, County would accommodate disposal. The fact that the complainant says there is one does not constitute any health and safety risk or equal opportunity issue. He, like the key holder, should at all times schedule his disposal needs around the site hours of operation. We request that this response be published . TO : The Honorable John K. Letton, Presiding Judge of the Superior Court FROM: SUBJEC JNT: wt eannie Nix- TempCounty Administrative Officer Response to Recommendations of 2000- 01 Grand Jury Development and Environment Committee Final Report Citizen Complaint - Department of General Services DATE: September 14, 2001 rr~- I`; i - I- f , T TT r~ I' : ~ T ire / fj11 OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Administration - Human Resources - Risk Management Grant Management - Information & Technology P. O. Box 1613 Weaverville, CA 96093- 1613 County Administrator Phone: ( 530) 623- 1382 Human Resources Phone ( 530) 623- 1325 FAX ( 530) 623- 4222 JEANNIE NIX- TEMPLE, County Administrative Officer RECEIVED SUPrERIOR COURT JUDGE'S CHAMBERS The Grand Jury Development and Environment Committee has requested a written response to their final report on the Citizen Complaint concerning the Hayfork Transfer Station . In my capacity as County Administrative Officer my response is a follows: Finding # 1 : I agree with the finding as stated in the California Code of Regulations. Recommendation # 1 : This recommendation has been implemented . There does not appear to be any reason to allow any more access than is already provided. I agree that rules and regulations as stated in finding # 1 should be adhered to. There are exceptions to the regulations. Exceptions should be clearly stated so that everyone understands what they are and why. Finding # 2 : I agree with this finding in that the General Services Director has indicated that there is a current exception from the California Code of Regulations stated in Finding # 1 . I believe it is appropriate for contracted service providers to have access after hours to service the port- a- potties located at the transfer site . Recommendation # 2 : This recommendation will not be implemented . There is no need to provide more access than is currently provided. All providers should be able to schedule their disposal needs around the site hours of operation. Conclusion : I do not agree with the conclusion of the Grand Jury. I do not think that with the current hours of operation there should be any perception of preferential treatment. I have checked with our environmental health staff and have been informed that we actually permit 8 septic pumpers. Each one has a holding capacity of approximately 2000 gallons . It would be unreasonable to issue keys to providers. In the unlikely event that we were in need of an emergency disposal during closed hours, we would open the facility . TO : The Honorable John K. Letton Presiding Judge of the Superior Court FROM: R. Bee ~ C an Trinity County Board of Supervisors SUBJECT: Trinity County Grand Jury Development and Environment Committee Final Report Citizen's Complaint DATE: October 2, 2001 RBS : wt BOARD OF SUPERVISORS P. O. Drawer 1613 ( 530) 623- 1217 WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 96093 Dero B. Forslund, Clerk Jeannie Nix- Temple, County Administrative Officer The Grand Jury Development and Environment Committee has requested a written response to their final report on the Citizen Complaint concerning the Hayfork Transfer Station. In my capacity as Chairman, and on behalf of the Board of Supervisors, by response is as follows: Finding # 1 : We agree with the findings as stated in the California Code of Regulations articles and sections listed for the Hayfork Transfer Station and the Solid Waste Operation Permit . Recommendation # 1 : The recommendation has been implemented . The rules are regulations are for everyone to adhere to. However, out contracted service provider must have keys because not all transfer stations are open on the same days and hours. Finding # 2 : We concur . The Director of General Services is doing a good job. Recommendation # 2 : The recommendation will not be implemented . All providers should be able to have more than adequate access with the current hours of operation. Response to Conclusion : We do not agree with the Grand Jury's conclusion . If we were to conclude that all septic pumpers should have equal access for business opportunity, we would have to issue a key to all six permitted pumpers. This would not be reasonable. If there is some reason for an emergency disposal after hours, we will open the facility . RECEIVED 0CT - 9 2001 SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE'S CHAMBERS CHRISERIXSON BILLIEMILLER R9LPHMODINE BERRYSTEWART ROBERTREISS District 1 District 2 District,? District 4 District 5 This report was approved On May 8, 2001 TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY 2000- 2001 F I L E D 11IAY 3 1 , EDUCATION COMMITTEE FINAL REPORT PUBLIC EDUCATION IN TRINITY COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF TRINITY BY., DONNA REGNANI, uEaurrcLERlc PURPOSE: BACKGROUND: 2000- 2001 TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY EDUCATION COMMITTEE FINAL REPORT PUBLIC EDUCATION IN TRINITY COUNTY Grand Juries are mandated to investigate the operations ofthe various governmental agencies within the county from time to time. This report focuses on academic performance and career counseling in the Trinity County public schools. Various standardized tests are taken by the students in our schools each year, some mandatory and others voluntary. The test scores are a measure of knowledge and academic performance that can, in the case of nationally normed tests, be used as a basis for comparison with other students nationwide. Utilization of test scores plays a major role in the future of our students. For instance, assessment of student knowledge and progress, future educational opportunities, and school financing are all influenced by test scores. Individual student test results are confidential, with access to individual scores restricted to the student, his or her parent or guardian, and school officials. Combined class and school results are, however, publicly available where individual confidentiality is not compromised. A. California Mandated Testing: The California Public Schools Accountability Act establishes an Academic Performance Index ( API) for the purpose ofmeasuring performance and growth at schools. The API is a numeric index that ranges from a low of200 to a high of 1000; and a school's score on the API is an indicator of a school's performance level. Schools that meet API growth targets may be eligible to receive monetary rewards through three state awards programs; the Governor's Performance Awards, School State Performance Bonus, and Certified State Performance Incentive. The API is presently based on only the state's Standardized Testing and Reporting ( STAR) program. The STAR results presently consist of only the Stanford 9 Achievement Test, Ninth Edition ( Stanford 9), which is a standardized, nationally normed test taken by California Students in the 2° d through 11th grades. This mandated state test may, by law, be declined by a student's parents, thus the test is not taken by every student in California. In the future other standardized tests may be added to the STAR program; and other indicators such as graduation and attendance rates may be included in the computation of school API's. In addition to the above mentioned, Stanford 9 test California has mandated a California High School Exit Exam. All students, beginning with the Freshman class of the 2000- 2001 school year must pass this test as a requirement to graduate. The test is being given on a trial basis this school year. The High School Exit Exam is not a subject of this report. B. Voluntary Testing: Voluntary standardized tests that are nationally normed include the Scholastic Aptitude Test ( SAT), the Preliminary Scholastic Aptitude Test ( PSAT), and the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery ( ASVAB), all ofwhich are high school level tests. The SAT test is the most widely used college placement admission test in the United States. It is administered by the College Board, a not- for- profit association of 3800 schools, colleges, universities, and other educational associations. The SAT measures verbal and mathematical reasoning abilities which are related to successful performance in college . The PSAT test is a practice test for students preparing for the SAT. The ASVAB is a voluntary test taken by high school students. Students enlisting for military service are required by the military to take this test. METHOD OF INVESTIGATION: Educators from the county level to the local school districts were contacted and interviewed to gain insight into the function ofthe local education process. The Trinity County Superintendent ofSchools, superintendents and principals of most ofthe individual schools, and the high school academic counselors were interviewed. Test results from the Stanford 9 tests, SAT, PSAT, and ASVAB were reviewed. Additional information was obtained from published descriptions ofthe above test programs and from the STAR and college Board websites . FINDING # 1 : API scores provide one useful means of comparing the performances of individual California schools, both with respect to other schools and from year to year. API scores are not nationally normed and thus do not provide a means ofcomparison with schools outside of California . API scores are calculated for schools in which less than 100 students are tested, but those schools are not ranked by the State Department ofEducation and are not eligible for the previously mentioned performance awards; thus eight ofthe eleven elementary schools in Trinity County are ineligible for those awards. The State Department ofEducation uses API scores to rank school performance on both an overall statewide basis and on a similar schools basis. Identification of " similar" schools appears to be subjective at best; and the corresponding ranking's deserve to be viewed with some skepticism. The awards programs are largely based on improvement in API scores and therefore tend to provide the most benefit to schools that initially are among the lowest scoring schools. If, as contemplated, other standardized tests are added to the STAR program and other indicators are included in the computation of school API's the validity ofthe calculation of year- to- year improvement is jeopardized for years in which new factors are added to the computation . Somewhat similarly, the addition of indicators such as graduation and attendance rates to the API computation will reduce the correlation between a school's API and the level of knowledge achieved by the students. API scores for local schools based on Spring 2000 tests have been reported by the media, including the Trinity Journal and Record Searchlight newspapers. Those reports show significant improvement in the Trinity County schools' API scores from Spring 1999 to Spring 2000 . RECONIMENDATION # 1: The Grand Jury does not have any recommendations with regard to the state API program, but believes that school officials and the general public should maintain an awareness ofsome ofthe above mentioned perceived strengths and weaknesses ofthat program. The Grand Jury has chosen not to report on the specific API scores of the Trinity County schools because that information has already been widely reported elsewhere ; but the Grand Jury commends the schools for the improvement in those scores. FINDING # 2: Nationally normed academic tests such as the Stanford 9 are not the only indicator of student and school performance . For example, academic tests typically do not measure motivation, creativity, or special talents. Such tests are, however, the best single indicator ofthe level ofknowledge the student has attained by means of his education. The Stanford 9 test results show how the student performed on the test compared with other students throughout the United States. This information is presented in terms of National Percentile Rank ( NPR). NPR simply indicates the relative standing of a student in comparison with all the students, nationwide, that took the test at a comparable time. For instance, an NPR of 62 indicates that the student's score was equal to or greater than the score of 62% of the students nationwide and less than the scores of 3 8% ofthe students nationwide. The NPR's for the individual students has been used to READING MATH LANGUAGE calculate the average NPR for groups of students such as class average, school average, and countywide average. Table 1 presents the average NPR by subject by grade level and overall for the 1698 Trinity County students that took the Stanford 9 test in Spring 2000. Table 2 presents the average NPR, by subject, for each of the county public schools. Some of the limitations and concerns applicable to the NPR's shown in the tables are mentioned later in this report and should be given due consideration by the reader. TABLE 1 TRINITY COUNTY SCHOOLS TEST RESULTS STANFORD 9 SCORES, SPRING 2000 NATIONAL PERCENTILE RANK ( NPR) GRADE SUBJECT ~- 2nd 3rd 4th 5a' 7th6'° 8th 9th 10th 11th AVE 61 52 58 60 59 56 64 47 41 47 54 64 65 58 64 69 60 60 64 48 51 60 51 53 54 54 59 59 64 59 43 52 55 SPELLING 53 44 52 45 44 50 45 -- -- -- 48 SCIENCE __ __ __ __ __ __ __ 55 53 61 56 SOCIAI. SCIENCE 55 50 65 56 NOTES : 1 . 1698 students tested. 2. -= Not Applicable 3 . " AVE" = Mean Percentile of all Trinity student scores RECOMMENDATION # 2: FINDING # 3: TABLE 2 TRINITY COUNTY SCHOOLS TEST RESULTS STANFORD 9 SCORES, SPRING 2000 NATIONAL PERCENTH. E RANK ( NPR) SUBJECT Social SCHOOL Reading Math Language Spelling Science Science ALL TRINITY COUNTY SCHOOLS ( 1698) 54 60 55 48 56 56 TRINITY HIGH ( 347) 51 61 55 -- 62 62 HAYFORK HIGH ( 128) 45 49 53 -- 52 53 SOUTHERN TRINITY HIGH ( 42) 41 54 50 -- 52 49 WEAVERVILLE ELEMENTARY ( 349) 60 65 58 51 -- -- HAYFORK VALLEY ELEMENTARY ( 243) 53 52 46 43 -- -- DOUGLAS CITY ELEMENTARY ( 118) 59 69 61 42 -- -- LEWISTON ELEMENTARY ( 98) 47 51 50 41 -- -- VAN DUZEN ELEMENTARY ( 89) 57 66 51 51 -- -- JUNCTION CITY ELEMENTARY ( 63) 69 64 70 52 -- -- BURNT RANCH ELEMENTARY ( 61) 55 57 55 49 -- -- TRINITY CENTER ELEMENTARY ( 35) 72 74 76 58 -- -- HOAGLIN ZENIA ELEMENTARY ( 22) 68 71 68 58 -- -- COX BAR ELEMENTARY ( 14) 52 77 62 48 -- -- HYAMFOM ELEMENTARY ( 10) 65 62 56 43 -- -- COFFEE CREEK ELEMENTARY ( 5), See Note 4 -- -- -- -- NOTES : 1 . -- = Not Applicable 2.( ) = Total students tested 3 . Scores shown are the mean NPR ofTrinity students 4. Test results for Coffee Creek Elementary are not included because of the limited number of students tested and the unavailability of language and spelling scores from that school. The Grand Jury makes no value judgment on the NPR's contained in Tables 1 and 2. The tables are provided for information and consideration by the reader. The SAT provides a means ofcomparison of students preparing for college . SAT scores are intended to supplement the secondary school records and help admissions officers put local data - such as course work, grades, and class rank - in a national perspective. SAT scores are the single most important indicator used in determining admission at most highly regarded universities . SAT tests are usually taken only by students considering attending a college or university ; and a high SAT score is essentially a requirement at many universities. Average NPR's for the PSAT and SAT for the Trinity County high school students that took those tests in the year 2000 are summarized in Table 3 . As shown in Table 3 the average NPR of Trinity County students that took the SAT test ranged from 47 at Hayfork High School to 58 at both Trinity High School and So. Trinity High School. The NPR's of 58 indicate that the average student score at Trinity High School and So. Trinity High School was above the 50th percentile nationwide. Looking at the SAT scores from the perspective ofthe high scores necessary for admission to colleges and universities which admit only a small percentage of applicants, nine Trinity County students had SAT NPR's between 80 and 89, and one student had a SAT NPR between 90 and 100. RECOMMENDATION # 3: Again, the Grand Jury has chosen to make no value judgment on the student test scores. The Grand Jury does recommend that school administrators and teachers continue to emphasize to students and parents the need for high performance by those students intending to attend major colleges and universities. Additionally, the Grand Jury recommends that the Trinity County Board of Education and the school trustees promote those efforts . TEST SCHOOL STANFORD 9, SPRING 2000, GRADES 9- 11' Trin' Ha ork So. Trinity READING 51 45 41 MATH 61 49 54 LANGUAGE 55 53 50 SCIENCE 62 52 52 SOCIAL SCIENCE 62 53 49 PSAT, YEAR 2000, GRADE 11' rCOMBINED VERBAL AND MATH SAT, YEAR 2000, GRADE 12' COMBINED VERBAL AND MATH ASVAB, FALL 2000, GRADE 12 [ VERBAL TABLE 3 TRINITY COUNTY HIGH SCHOOLS TEST RESULTS NATIONAL PERCENTILE RANK ( NPR) Trinity Hayfork So. Trinity 51 58 472 2 Trinity Ha ork So. Trini 58 47 582 Trinity Ha ork So. Trinity 59% 3 56% 3 50% 3 ' Scores shown are the mean NPR of the students that took the test except for the ASVAB scores which are explained in Note 2. s Less than 11 students tested . 3 Percentage of students scoring above the national average . This is not NPR NPR is not available for ASVAB. FINDING # 4: The results ofthe ASVAB, taken by students contemplating enlistment in the military, are summarized in Table 3 . One- half or more ofthe students that took the test at each high school had scores higher than the national average. As could be expected there is noticeable correlation between scores on the ASVAB and the Stanford 9 test. RECOMMENDATION # 4: FINDING # 5: The Grand Jury has no recommendations on ASVAB . National Percentile Rank ( NPR) is a valuable indicator of student and school performance, but certain limitations need to be taken into consideration when drawing conclusions . First, the Stanford 9 test is not perfectly aligned with California state curriculum standards. Most school officials in Trinity County do not consider this to be a major problem and consider Stanford 9 to be a good, if imperfect, performance indicator. Second, average scores for small schools can be misleading because when few students take the test the absence or addition of one or more particularly high or low scoring students can significantly affect the average score ofthe school. Great care must therefore be taken in reaching conclusions based on average scores for a particular year in a very small school. Third, conclusions about schools should not be based on cursory examinations of scores and their relationships should not be reached without due consideration ofthe complexities of geographies, demographics, and economics. There is broad acceptance ofthe beliefthat socio- economic factors ( such as local culture, family income, family stability and guidance, and exposure to drugs and alcohol) all affect student performance but are beyond the schools' control. Despite the above mentioned limitations, test results of nationally normed tests such as Stanford 9 are being used in Trinity County public schools and are enthusiastically endorsed by some school administrators and teachers. Expressions of support for the Stanford 9 tests were found at some ofthe schools with the lowest test scores because ofthe belief that test scores help identify weaknesses that can be corrected. The Grand Jury found significant variation in the interest ofthe school district trustees in the NPR results of the nationally normed tests . It is believed that this is at least partially attributable to the emphasis on API scores and the associated monetary awards. Similarly, parents of students are reportedly more aware and interested in API scores and the corresponding ranking ofCalifornia schools than in NPR's; though parent interest in NPR is increasing as the parents become more aware of and familiar with the significance ofusing NPR to interpret test results . RECOMMENDATION # 5: The Grand Jury recommends that awareness and consideration of NPR's from nationally normed tests such as Stanford 9 and SAT be continued by school officials, and that school district trustees take an increased interest in NPR data as an important indicator of school performance. It is further recommended that school officials foster an increase in student and parental interest in NPR as a primary indicator of individual student performance. FINDING # 6: In general, the Grand Jury finds that smaller school and class size is an advantage, up to a point. In Trinity County the elementary schools in particular appear to benefit from smaller school and class size. A full complement of college preparatory classes are not generally offered by the smaller high schools, thereby placing an additional burden on individual students who plan to attend a college or university. In most areas, extra classes are offered through junior college or college extension programs. The problem of availability ofcollege preparatory classes is recognized by the smaller Trinity County high schools, and effort is being exerted to mitigate the problem. RECOMMENDATION # 6: The Grand Jury recommends that the high schools continue to increase efforts that will facilitate the admission of Trinity County students into colleges and universities . FINDING # 7: One- on- one academic and career counseling takes place at least once each year with every student in all ofthe Trinity County high schools. Trinity High School has a full- time counselor; and, in Summer 2001, will extend counseling and academic preparation down to 7th and 8m grade students that are expected to attend Trinity High School . Hayfork High School and Southern TrinityHigh School, being smaller schools, do not have a full- time counselor, but have comprehensive counseling and student tracking programs. At Hayfork High School the counseling is performed by the school principal who meets with 8m grade students to discuss careers and academic pathways. One- on- one counseling begins in the 9th grade, with parent participation encouraged. Many parents of Hayfork High School students take advantage ofthis opportunity to participate . At Southern Trinity High School academic coordination and career counseling is performed on a part- time basis by a dedicated member ofthe teaching staff. College catalogs and news articles on bestjobs and best colleges are used to inform and create student interest . The Southern Trinity High School web page contains a " Counselor's Comer" which has a menu of information on colleges and careers . The web page is a good source of information for both students and parents . RECOMMENDATION # 7 : The Grand Jury, in the belief that early career and academic counseling is an important contributor to student achievement, endorses the above mentioned counseling activities. Ajoint review, coordinated by the County Office of Education, ofthe counseling programs, with the aim of identifying the best aspects of the counseling at each school, might make the counseling more effective. CONCLUSIONS: Education is only one aspect of life and should not be viewed as the only indication ofa useful and successful place in our society. Education is, however, of increasing importance as our society becomes more complex. Nationally normed tests are an important indicator of a student's preparation for further education and future employment in the national work force. Comparisons with other students throughout the nation by means of test scoring, such as National Percentile Rank, is vital because competition for educational opportunities and employment are national in character. Such comparisons can identify strengths and weaknesses in education that can be used to improve the education ofthe individual student and the entire schools system. NPR scores are believed to be the most important single indicator ofthe academic knowledge achieved by a student. Comparison of " like" schools is subjective and tends to obscure the message that is contained in nationally normed test scores. Career counseling is important and beneficial in identifying, for students and parents, career opportunities and the corresponding education requirements . Course selection has lifelong implications ; so early selection by students and parents is critical . Finally, test scores are a good indicator of school performance ; but, the limitations must be considered when reaching conclusions, particularly when only a small number of students are tested. The test results included in this report are oversimplified in that only averages are reported. Parents and others interested can obtain additional information on standardized testing and test scores from sources including the following: Trinity County Office of Education ; School administrators at the Trinity County schools; California Department of Education ( 916- 657- 2757); California School Board Association ( 800- 266- 3382) RESPONSE REOUESTED FROM: Trinity County Board ofEducation, Trinity County Superintendent of Schools, The Boards ofTrustees ofthe following school districts: Burnt Ranch, Coffee Creek, Cox Bar, Douglas City, Junction City, Lewiston, Trinity Center, Weaverville, Trinity Union High School, Mountain Valley Unified, Southern Trinity Joint Unified. Responses from superintendents and principals ofthe Trinity County public schools are optional but will be appreciated. Honorable Judge Letton June 11, 2001 P. O. Box1117 RECEIVED Weaverville, Ca. 96093 JUN 1 2 2001 Dear Judge Letton, Below is my response to the 2000- 01 Grand Jury Report as required by law. I would like to thank the Grand Jury for their review of academic achievement in Trinity County schools. I will address each recommendation individually by number. 1. concur 2. concur 3. I would add the following to sentence # 2, " the need for high performance by all students", not just those attending major colleges and universities . The majority of our students do not attend major colleges and universities. They attend Shasta College, Chico, and Humboldt State. 4. concur 5. Our office will address NPR in our Annual Report to the Public. 6. concur 7. Our office meets several times per year with school officials to review counseling in the schools, and concur that it is increasingly important for effective transition to adult life. Sincerely, c : Bob Lowden, THS Joan Hair, MVUSD David Albee, STJUSD im French rinity County Supt. Of Schools James B. French, TdnHy County Superintendent of Schools http :// www, tcoe. trinMy. k12 . ca. us SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE'S CHAMBERS P. O. Box 1256 " 201 Memorial Drive " Weaverville California 96093- 1256 " ( 530) 623- 2861 Fax ( 530) 623- 4489 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS P. O. Drawer 1613 ( 630) 623- 1217 WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 96093 Dero B. Forslund, Clerk TO: The Honorable John K. Letton, Jeannie Nix- Temple, County Administrative Officer Presiding Judge ofthe Superior Court FROM: Trinity County Board of Supervisors SUBJECT: Response to Recommendations of2000- 01 Grand Jury Education Committee Report SUPERIOR COURT Public Education in Trinity County JUDGE'S CHAMBERS DATE: November 13, 2001 The Grand Jury Education Committee has not requested a written response to their Final Report on Public Education in Trinity County, however, to be thorough in its responses to the Grand Jury's efforts the Board of Supervisors responds as follows: Finding # 1 and Recommendation # 1 : The Board agrees with the findings and there was no recommendation. Finding # 2 and Recommendation # 2: The Board agrees with the findings and there was no recommendation. Finding # 3 and Recommendation # 3 : The Board agrees with the findings and supports the Grand Jury recommendation that school admudstrators and teachers continue to emphasize to students and parents the need for high performance ( on standardized performance tests) by those students intending to attend major colleges and universities . Finding # 4 aril Recommendation # 4: The Board agrees with the findings and there was no recommendation. Finding # 5 and Recommendation # 5 : The Board agrees with the findings and recommendation. Finding # 6 and Recommendation # 6 : The Board agrees with the findings and recommendation. Finding # 7 and Recommendation # 7: The Board agrees with the findings and reserves its opinion on the recommendation. As the Board has no statutory authority over the schools, we feel that it would be inappropriate for us suggest program changes to the County Office ofEducation. RECEIVED DEC 1 1 2001 C1ERISEMrSON ArLaEMILLER District i District 2 District 3 District 4 Districts RALPMMODEiI'E BERRYSTEW, 4RT ROBERTREISS Conclusion: The Board agrees that testing is a valuable tool in evaluation performance. We also appreciate the tirne and effort that the Grand Jury spent in their review ofthe status ofPublic Education in Trinity County. Thank you for the opportunity to respond. Sincerely, IAZ~ r R Berry Stev6at, Chairman Trinity County Board of Supervisors TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT 2000- 2001 FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY 2000- 2001 F I L E D SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF TRINITY BY: DONNA REGNANI, DEPUTY CLERK FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE This report was approved On April 10, 2001 FINAL REPORT ELECTIONS - 23- PURPOSE: 2000- 2001 TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE FINAL REPORT The Grand Jury is charged with reviewing county government operations to assure that residents of the county are being well served in general . Members ofthe Trinity County Grand Jury are normally requested by the County Clerk to observe the vote counting process. BACKGROUND: Trinity County began using semi- automated vote counting machines at each precinct in 1999. The automated vote collection, counting, storage, and reporting system is called the " Accu Vote Optical Scan System" . The system has been introduced and used successfully with only relatively minor difficulties, the most recent useage being the November, 2000 general election. The Final Report of the 1999- 2000 Trinity County Grand Jury Election Committee contains additional background information as well as some findings and recommendations. This report follows up on the recommendations and responses to the above Grand Jury report and also addresses some issues raised by the difficulties encountered by the State ofFlorida when counting the votes from the November, 2000 U. S. presidential election. METHOD OF INVESTIGATION: FINDING # 1 : ELECTIONS Grand Jury members observed the counting of the November, 2000 election absentee ballots at the elections office. Automated collection and tabulating at the elections office ofthe results from the precincts following the close of the polls was also observed. In addition, the Finance and Administration Committee interviewed the County Clerk, who also serves as the Elections Officer, following the November, 2000 election. Precinct voting and reporting went well for the November, 2000 elections. Minor difficulties with the use ofthe equipment were promptly corrected, and Trinity County was one of the first California counties to report election results . Precinct workers were better trained with approximately 95% ofthe workers having attended pre- elections training sessions, typically at the polling places. - 24- RECOMMENDATION # 1 : The Grand Jury again recommends that all paid precinct workers be required to receive pre- election training. FINDING # 2: Communication between the Elections Office and the precinct workers has improved and is an ongoing consideration. RECOMMENDATION # 2 : FINDING # 3: The 1999- 2000 Grand Jury recommended that the Elections office have a post-election " Lessons- Learned" meeting to which all election workers would be invited. Such a meeting had not been held as ofearly April, 2001 ; but the County Clerk is planning to conduct the meeting in the next few weeks. RECOMMENDATION # 3: The Grand Jury recommends that, in the future, post- election meetings be held within 30 days ofthe election. FINDING # 4: The Grand Jury endorses the effort to improve communications . The Accu Vote machines read the ballots optically . As a result, votes on ballots that are not clearly marked in accordance with the voting instructions may or may not be counted by the machine. Instructions on how to properly mark ballots are included on sample ballots, on actual ballots, and are posted inside every voting booth. Despite those instructions, a few voters did not mark their ballots properly during the November 2000 election. Trinity County's election officer does not plan to change the voting instructions except as possibly part of any state wide uniformity requirements that may be adopted. Consideration is being given to having precinct workers emphasize to voters the necessity of marking ballots properly; and the County Clerk is also considering a newspaper notice. The Grand Jury finds that the instructions for marking ballots are good and sufficient, but increased emphasis may be beneficial. RECOMMENDATION # 4: The Grand Jury endorses any additional reasonable and practical effort that the Elections Office makes to instruct voters regarding the proper marking of ballots and the possible consequences of inadequate marking. - 25- FINDING # 5 : Since the Accu- Vote machine may or may not count votes on ballots that are improperly marked, it is sometimes possible during a manual recount to ascertain the intent of the voter even though the machine did not detect the mark. This situation raises questions about the responsibility of the voter to mark a ballot in accordance with the instructions; and also opens the possibility of legal challenges to recounts in the case of close elections . The Trinity County Clerk is aware of the need for the preparation and adoption of a written vote counting policy that addresses the above described problem and that will withstand legal challenges. This is being done as part of a multi- county effort by users ofthe Accu- Vote system . RECOMMENDATION # 5 : The Grand Jury endorses the adoption ofa vote counting policy and procedure and recommends that it be in place before the next election. FINDING # 6 : The Grand Jury observers noticed some minor differences in the counting of absentee ballots as compared with voting at the polling places. The Grand Jury finds that the ballots were counted properly and the election results were valid and correct despite the differences in conducting the count. RECOMMENDATION # 6: The Grand Jury endorses the intent that the vote counting policy and procedure mentioned in recommendation # 5 above include provisions to address identical counting ofabsentee ballots and ballots cast at the polling place. CONCLUSION: The November 2000 election was well conducted by the Election Office and the precinct workers. Additional training and increased familiarity with the " Accu- Vote" system used by Trinity County contributed to the success . Adoption of the above recommendations will hopefully improve and strengthen the election system. RESPONSE REQUESTED FROM: Trinity County Clerk/ Elections Officer and Trinity County Board of Supervisors . July 20, 2001 John K. Letton Presiding Judge Trinity County Superior Court P. O. Box 1258 Weaverville, CA 96093 Tom- - A INT- Tf V- 1= Registrar of Voters P. O . Box 1215 Weaverville, CA 96093 Phone : ( 530) 623- 124~ Fax: ( 530) 623- 8398 C . E f V D JU( Z 3 200, wOGEsio HaoURT McERS Re: Trinity County Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee Final Report - Elections Dear Judge Letton In Response to the Grand Jury report on Elections I offer the following : Finding # 1 We concur- Since we have stopped requiring the precinct workers to come to Weaverville and we have gone to them the number of workers being trained is much better . Recommendation # 1 We concur - Our policy is to always provide precinct worker training before each election and to require workers to attend. Finding # 2 We concur - Because almost all of the precinct workers are attending training we have much better communication . The training is done at the polling place so we can see first hand what precinct workers have to deal with. Recommendation # 2 We concur - We expect to see continued improvement here. Finding # 3 We concur - Post election meetings of election workers will be a standard part of the election process Recommendation # 3 We concur - Post elections meetings will be scheduled Finding # 4 We concur - We will ask precinct workers to remind each voter of the proper method to mark a ballot . In order to insure that the intent of the voter is properly registered by the vote counting equipment the ballot must be properly marked. Recommendation # 4 We concur - This will continue to be an important part of the training the precinct workers receive . Finding # 5 We concur - All California counties using the Accu- Vote system are participating in developing a procedure manual that will be adopted by the Secretary of State. These procedures will include handling poorly marked ballots . Recommendation # 5 We concur - Once the procedure manual is complete Trinity County will adopt the procedures called for. Finding # 6 We concur - Procedures will include standard counting methods for both absentee and precinct ballots . tion # 6 We concur - Please refer to Recommendation # 5 nity County Clerk Recorder Assessor - 27- September 12, 2001, " y CC) 4_ ; ~; T cl_ iA`'' I', LSc= R . S John K. Letton, Presiding Judge Trinity County Superior Court Box 1258 RE : Trinity County Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee Final Report- Weaverville, California 96093 Elections Dear Judge Letton, The Trinity County Board of Supervisors is pleased with the efforts of the county elections office to set a good example for rural counties by effectively automating county elections and by making the election process more user friendly with outreach and additional voting opportunities . We would respond to the Grand Jury's report on elections as follows: Finding # 1 We agree with this finding. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS P. O. Drawer 1613 ( 530) 623- 1217 WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 96093 Dero B. Forslund, Clerk Jeannie Nix- Temple, County Administrative Officer Recommendation # 1 We agree and county policy continues to be one that has required election workers to have pre- election training. Finding # 2 We concur with this finding. Recommendation # 2 We agree with the recommendation and will continue to make improvements in communications between the Elections Office and precinct workers. Finding # 3 We agree. It is expected that a post- election meeting of election workers will be a regular part of the election process . Recommendation # 3 We concur with this recommendation and will attempt to have post- election meetings within the recommended 30 day period after elections . Finding # 4 We concur . Precinct workers will be reminding voters of the proper way to mark ballots . Recommendation # 4 We agree with this recommendation and proper marking of ballots will be part of the training of precinct workers. . CHRISERIKSON BILLIE MILLER District 1 District 2 _ 28_ RALPHMODINE Districts BERRYSTEWART ROBERTREISS District 4 Districts 2. Finding # 5 We concur and recognize the need for a written vote counting policy. Recommendation # 5 We agree and when the Accu- Vote system using counties complete a common procedural manual then Trinity County will adopt those procedures. Finding # 6 We concur with this finding . Recommendation # 6 We agree with recommendation # 6 . The procedural manual, when adopted, will address the issue of identical counting of absentee and polling place cast votes. Thank you for the opportunity to respond. Sincerely, R. Berry Sfewart, Chairman Trinity County Board of Supervisors TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY 2000- 2001 F I L E D MAY - 7 201 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF TRINITY BY: DONNA REGNANI, DEPUrycLEwc FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE FINAL REPORT GENERAL REVIEW OF COUNTY GOVERNMENT This report was approved On April 10, 2001 PURPOSE: 2000- 2001 TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE FINAL REPORT GENERAL REVIEW OF COUNTY GOVERNMENT The Trinity County Grand Jury is charged each year to perform a review of county government operations to make sure that the residents ofthe county are being well served. This report is a follow- up to a portion ofthe recommendations and responses contained in the 1999- 2000 Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee Final Report ofthe same title. BACKGROUND: The 1999- 2000 Grand Jury Final Report in " Background" stated that the county operations are diverse with an annual budget of 32.7 million dollars. Responses to the Final Report assert that the report is incorrect and that understates the budget. METHOD OF INVESTIGATION : The Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee reviewed the 1999- 2000 Grand Jury Final Report, responses to the report, and the " Final Budget, Fiscal Year 1999/ 2000" compiled by the office ofthe Auditor/ Controller and published by order of the Board of Supervisors. The committee interviewed the foreperson of the 1999- 2000 Grand Jury, the County Auditor/ Controller, the County Administrative Officer ( CAO), all members ofthe Board of Supervisors ( BOS), and the County Clerk. FINDING # 1 : The $ 32.7 million budget quoted in the Grand Jury report corresponds to the " Final Budget, Fiscal year 1999- 2000", published by order of the board of Supervisors . The reason for the discrepancy between the Grand Jury report and the responses to the report has been determined and is explained by the following information prepared by the Auditor/ Controller at the Grand Jury's request . The budget totals for the last two fiscal years are: FY 99/ 00 FY 00/ 01 Governmental Funds $ 32.7 million $ 44.3 million Enterprise Funds 12.0 million 12.3 million Total $ 44.7 million $ 56.6 million The main enterprise funds are the Hospital and Solid Waste. Enterprise funds use traditional, full accrual, business accounting which measures the flow of economic resources to determine if the fund is better or worse off economically . On the other hand, government funds use what amounts to a checking account approach which measures the flow of cash to determine what funds are available for expenditure in the near future. RECONIMNDATION # 1: The Grand Jury recommends that publications and correspondence containing county budget totals clearly indicate whether the total includes or excludes enterprise funds . FINDING # 2 : An enterprise fund is a type of proprietary fund which is used to account for a government's business- type activities . Business- type activities could be defined as activities that are funded mainly through user charges. The total number ofemployees ofcounty government is dependent on whether or not the employees in the county enterprises are included. The following information was prepared by the Office ofthe County Administrator at the Grand Jury's request. County Government Employee Totals 1/ 1/ 99 1/ l/ 00 1/ 1/ 01 Excluding Enterprises 328 345 377 Enterprise Employees 166 168 161 Total 494 513 538 RECOM MENDATION # 2: FINDING # 3: Same as Recommendation # 1 above. The 1999- 2000 Grand Jury recommended that the county adopt a policy of recording all BOS meetings and that the recordings be permanently archived by the County Clerk. The responses to the report are all in general agreement with the recommendation, with some reservations expressed pending. a determination of methodology, cost, and legal considerations . A schedule or target dates for adoption and implementation were not included in the recommendation or the responses. The Grand Jury understands that the above mentioned reservations have now been addressed and that a plan of implementation, including cost and schedule can now be prepared for approval by the BOS. RECOMMENDATION # 3 : The Grand Jury recommends that a definitive plan and schedule for implementation be prepared and submitted to the BOS for consideration and inclusion in the Fiscal Year 2001/ 2002 budget. The recommended date for completion of a plan and schedule is June 30, 2001, with full implementation and operation by December 31, 2001 . CONCLUSION: The Grand Jury concludes that Trinity County is generally well run by officials and managers committed to good government. The open- minded consideration and acceptance of many Grand Jury recommendations is appreciated and commendable . RESPONSE REQUESTED FROM: Trinity County Board of Supervisors, Trinity County Clerk Recorder, Trinity County Administrative Officer and Trinity County Auditor- Controller . TO : The Honorable John K. Letton, , Presiding Judge ofthe Superior Court FROM: ~~ eannie Nix- Te iple, County Administrative Officer SUBJECT,/ Response to Recommendations of 2000- 01 Grand Jury On General Review of County Government DATE: May 16, 2001 JNT: wt OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Administration - HumanResources - Risk Management Grant Management- Information & Technology P. 0. Box 1613 Weaverville, CA 96093- 1613 County Administrator Phone. ( 530) 623- 1382 Human Resources Phone ( 530) 623- 1325 FAX ( 530) 623- 4222 JEANNIE NIX- TEMPLE, County Administrative Officer RECEIVED MAY 1 6 2001 SL! p~-: RIOR COURT J . DGE'S CHAMBERS The Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee has requested a written response to their Final Report on the General Review of County Government. In my capacity as County Administrative Officer, my response is as follows: Recommendation # 1 & # 2: 1 agree with the Grand Jury. Future publications and correspondence on the budget shall clearly indicate the inclusion or exclusion of enterprise funds. Recommendation # 3 : I agree with the Grand Jury. My staff and I will work with the County Clerk and the Information & Technology Department to prepare a plan of implementation for presentation to the Board of Supervisors at regularly scheduled budget hearings. I wish to thank the Grand Jury members for their time and attention in investigating these matters and for providing me the opportunity to respond. DATE: May 3, 2001 TO: John K. Letton, Presiding Judge ofthe Su eri Court FROM: Brian Muir, Auditor / Controller SUBJECT: IFITI 2000- 2001 Trinity County Grand Jury rt General Review ofCounty Government The following response is provided as requested in the above report: Recommendation # 1 I agree. Recommendation # 2 I agree. Recommendation # 3 MEMORANDUM BRIAN E. MUIR, COUNTY AUDITOR- CONTROLLER P. O. BOX 1230, WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 96093- 1230 PHONE ( 530) 623- 1317 FAX ( 530) 623- 1323 RE CEIVED MAR - 7 2001 JUSuU~' EEij- s2IOR COURT CHAMBERS I agree that the appropriate time to submit a plan to record and archive Board of Supervisors' meetings would be during Fiscal Year 2001/ 2002 budget hearings. The plan should be implemented in accordance with whatever schedule the Board of Supervisors approves. July 20, 2001 John K. Letton Presiding Judge Trinity County Superior Court P . O. Box 1258 Weaverville, CA 96093 Re: Trinity County Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee Final Report - General Review of County Government Dear Judge Letton i ~, 1~ ~ ''; W" i k~& QKW61, ' m 1 0 i~ rFxiotyxatci'~:~ R juRl C? F31 V ~ q JVOGFS~ AM Pou ORT eFRs In response to the Grand Jury report on General Review of County Government I offer the following: I have limited my response to Finding # 3 and Recommendation # 3 as these Findings and Recommendations make reference to the County Clerk. Finding # 3 I concur - A procedure to store and archive copies ofthe video recordings made ofthe Board of Supervisor meeting is being developed . In the mean time the tapes of the meetings are being saved until the archive process is in place. Recommendation # 3 being implemented - Full implementation will be in place prior to December 31, 2 i Dero Forslund, Trinity County Clerk Recorder Assessor TO: The Honorable John K. Letton, Presiding Judge of the Superior Court FROM: Trinity County Board of Supervisors SUBJECT: Response to Recommendations of 2000- 01 Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee Report General Review ofCounty Government DATE : November 13, 2001 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS P. O. Drawer 1613 ( 630) 623- 1217 WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 96093 Dero B. Forslund, Clerk Jeannie Nix- Temple, County Administrative Officer The Grand Jury Finance and Administration Conunittee has requested a written response to their Final Report on the General Review of County Government. The Board of Supervisors responds as follows : Finding # 1 and Recommendation # 1 : The Board agrees. The Recommendation has been implemented . Finding # 2 and Recommendation # 2: The Board agrees. The Recommendation has been implemented . Finding # 3 and Recommendation # 3: The Grand Jury recommends that the County adopt a policy ofrecording all BOS meetings. This has been done for the last three years on videotape; however, the tapes were not ofarchival quality. The County Clerk/ Recorder has implemented a new program that digitally records the proceedings. The recordings will be archived under the Clerk's care as a permanent record. Conclusion: The Board agrees that the County is generally well run by officials and managers committed to good government. We also think that a thoughtful, careful Grand Jury is a part ofthat good local government . Thank you for the opportunity to respond. Sincerely, '/ eX~ al" z~ R. Berry Stewart, Chairman Trinity County Board of Supervisors RECEIVED DEC 1 1 2001 SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE'S CHAMBERS CHRIS ERlWSON BILLIEMILLER RALPAMODINE BERRYSTEW. 9BT ROBERTRETSS District 1 District S District 3 District 4 District 5 This report was approved On May 22, 2001 TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY zooo- zoos F I L E D FINAL REPORT - 44- JUN 1 2 20,01 SUPERIOR COURTOF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF TRINITY BY. DONNA REGNANT, DEPUTY CLERK FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE TRINITY COUNTY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND RELATED ACCOUNTING MATTERS PURPOSE: This report contains findings and recommendations resulting from the Grand Jury's inquiry and review ofthe Independent Auditor's Report for the year ended June 30, 2000, the Trinity County general purpose financial statements for that year, and some related accounting matters. BACKGROUND: 2000- 2001 TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE FINAL REPORT TRINITY COUNTY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND RELATED ACCOUNTING MATTERS California Grand Juries are charged to act as the public's " watchdog" by investigating and reporting upon the affairs of local government . The general purpose financial statements for Trinity County are the responsibility of the County's management. Those statements are audited each year by an independent auditor that has the responsibility to audit and express an opinion on those statements. The Trinity County financial statements for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2000 were audited by Bartig, Basler, and Ray, A Professional Corporation, certified public accountants and management consultants, hereinafter referred to as the independent auditor. METHODS OF INVESTIGATION: The Grand Jury in its inquiry and investigation relied on the Independent Auditors Report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2000, the Trinity County general purpose financial statements accompanying that report, and interviews of the Trinity County Auditor/ Controller. FINDING # 1 : The Independent Auditors Report is dated September 13, 2000 . The report was not available to the public or the Grand Jury until April, 2001 . RECOMMENDATION # 1 : The Grand Jury recommends that the Trinity County Auditor/ Controller and the County Administrative Officer ( CAO) determine the reason for the discrepancy between the date of the report and the date it became available. The Grand Jury recommends that future contracts for independent audits include a requirement for a timely delivery ofthe completed audits. - 45- FINDING # 2: The Independent Auditor's Report for the year ended June 30, 2000 is a qualified report. The report contains the following statement : " Because of the inadequacy of accounting records for fixed assets, we were unable to form an opinion regarding the amount at which the General Fixed Assets Account Group ( stated at $ 22,944,534), and fixed assets and accumulated depreciation in proprietary fund types ( stated at $ 5,944,728 and $ 1,938,329, respectively), or the amount of depreciation expense ( stated at $ 382,361) are recorded in the accompanying financial statements as of and for the year ended June 30, 2000 ." The Grand Jury finds that, though accounting for fixed assets is a somewhat uncertain activity for county government and some other counties may also have inadequate accounting records, the cited inadequacy ofTrinity County records is, at the least, undesirable. Most troublesome to the Jury is that the fixed asset, accumulated depreciation, and depreciation expense records for county enterprises are inadequate. County enterprises such as Solid Waste are supposed to be conducted as a government's business- type activities, separate from the General Fund. Inadequate accounting records for an enterprise make it difficult, ifnot impossible, to determine the financial condition of that enterprise . The Grand Jury has been informed that obtaining an unqualified independent auditor's report would require an additional auditing cost of $ 8,000 per year, plus an undetermined amount of labor to improve the accounting records. The Grand Jury has also been informed that government accounting requirements have been revised to require depreciation and evaluation of all infrastructure assets by the 2002- 2003 fiscal year. RECOMMENDATION # 2: The Grand Jury recommends that accounting records for the Solid Waste enterprise, as a minimum, and preferably all the Trinity County enterprises, be improved to the extent that the independent auditor's report for fiscal year 2001- 2002 is released without qualifications with respect to those county enterprises. The Grand Jury also recommends that the accounting records and the general purpose financial statements be improved to the extent that the independent auditor's report be entirely without qualifications no later than the 2002- 2003 fiscal year. FINDING # 3: The general purpose financial statements disclose some unexpectedly significant year- to- year differences in several accounts, significant variances between budgets and - 46- the actual amounts for fiscal year ended June 2000, and significant adjustments to accounts. After inquiring, the Grand Jury finds that those significant differences and adjustments are primarily the result of improved accounting, particularly more accurate classification of revenues, expenses, and liabilities and corrections of inaccuracies contained in prior year statements. The Grand Jury concludes that the. improvements in accounting will likely reduce the year- to- year differences in the accounts, smaller budget variances, and fewer and smaller adjustments. RECOMMENDATION # 3: The Grand Jury recommends continued emphasis on improved accounting and commends the Auditor/ Controller Department for the improvement's accomplished to date. FINDING # 4: One particularly large adjustment disclosed in the financial statements is a negative adjustment of $ 3 .040 million in the retained earnings ofthe Solid Waste Enterprise, which reduced retained earnings from $ 345,000 to a negative $ 2.7 million on June 30, 2000. This adjustment, which was required to book a loan incurred but not booked in the prior year, was not explained in the financial statement. RECOMMENDATION # 4: The Grand Jury recommends that significant adjustments such as the one described in Finding # 4 be explained in the notes to the financial statements to disclose the reason for the adjustments and to facilitate the reader's ability to understand the financial statements. FINDING # 5 : The liability for landfill closure recognized in the financial statements increased from $ 1 .2 million on June 30, 1999 to $ 2.2 million on June 30, 2000. The notes to the June 30, 2000 statements include the following: " It is estimated that an additional $ 1,402,910 liability will be recognized as closure and post- closure maintenance costs between the date of the balance sheet and the date the landfills are expected to be closed." The Grand Jury recognizes that the landfill closure and the post- closure maintenance costs are estimates and are subject to changes such as regulatory requirements . However, the Grand Jury finds that the increases in estimated costs, if the trend continues, could adversely affect the financial condition of the Solid Waste enterprise. RECOMMENDATION # 5: The Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Supervisors ( BOS), CAO, and Auditor/ Controller review the estimates ofthe landfill closure and post- closure maintenance costs with the intent to determine the credibility ofthose estimates and the possible need for corrective action. FINDING # 6 : The financial statements disclose that the County has equipment leases with interest rates that the Grand Jury finds to be excessively high. As of June 30, 2000 leases with relatively high interest rates included principal amounts totaling $ 188,602 with annual interest rates ranging from 9.9% to 15%. The Auditor/ Controller is prepaying these high interest rates leases to the maximum extent permitted by the terms of the leases. RECOMMENDATION # 6 : The Grand Jury recommends that, if not already in place, the BOS, CAO, and Auditor/ Controller put in place financial controls to assure reasonable financing rates in the future. The Grand Jury commends the Auditor/ Controller for his effort and progress in reducing high interest rate leases . FINDING # 7: The Grand Jury finds indications of possible inaccuracies in the cost apportionment of salaries of county officials that perform the duties of more than one office. RECOMMENDATION # 7: The Grand Jury recommends that salary cost apportionment be included in the Job Classification and Compensation Study presently being conducted by the County. FINDING # 8: A new cashiering procedure requiring unique Auditor/ Controller assigned receipt numbers for cash receipts has been adopted by the County. The new procedure provides improved accountability of cash received by the County, which became effective in the Treasurer/ Tax Collector's office on April 2, 2001 . The Grand Jury has not been able to confirm that the new procedure has been adopted by all the county government departments . - 48- RECOMMENDATION # 8: The Grand Jury commends the Auditor/ Controller for improving the cashiering procedures but recommends that the new procedure, if not yet adopted, be required of all the county departments that receive cash payments, effective immediately. SUMMARY: The Grand Jury recommends that the accounting records ofthe county be improved to obtain future Independent Auditor's Reports that do not contain qualifications . The Grand Jury recommends that action be taken to obtain Independent Auditor Reports on a more timely basis. The Grand Jury recommends that immediate attention be given to the completeness and accuracy of the financial statements for the Enterprise Fund accounts . The Grand Jury recommends that the estimated landfill closure and post-closure maintenance costs be reviewed. The Grand Jury commends the Auditor/ Controller and the Auditor/ Controller Department for improvements in the recording and classification of funds. The Grand Jury commends the Auditor/ Controller for his efforts to reduce the interest costs of equipment leases. RESPONSE REQUESTED FROM: Trinity County Board of Supervisors, Trinity County Administrative Officer, Trinity County Auditor/ Controller . The following response is provided as requested in the above report: Recommendation # 1 Recommendation # 2 Recommendation # 3 7 IV( 3A Wwli X z Lar X lkaiokloil) xl_ - 50- BRIAN E. MUIR, COUNTY AUDITOR- CONTROLLER P. O. BOX 1230, WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 96093- 1230 PHONE ( 530) 623- 1317 FAX ( 530) 623- 1323 MEMORANDUM DATE: June 11, 2001 TO : John K. Letton, Presiding Judge of the Superior Court FROM : Brian Muir, Auditor / Controller SUBJECT: 2000 - 2001 Trinity County Grand Jury Report Trinity County Financial Statements and Related Accounting Matters The reason for the discrepancy between the date of the Independent Auditor's Report and the date it became available is that the Independent Auditor required the time to prepare the document. The report was available to the public and the Grand Jury the day after it was received by the County Auditor / Controller. The County's contract with the Independent Auditor specifies delivery within six months after the end ofthe fiscal year. I disagree. The County's accounting records accurately reflect fixed assets and accumulated depreciation . However, in order to give an unqualified opinion, the Independent Auditor would need to conduct an inventory and verification of values. The Independent Auditor quoted a price of $ 8,000 .00 to preform this service. The Board of Supervisors chose not to pay the additional amount in order to get an unqualified opinion. I agree with their decision that the citizens would be poorly served by such an expenditure. The Auditor / Controller Department will continue its emphasis on improving the County's accounting practices . R8CEIVED JUN 1 8 2001 SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE'S CHAMBERS Recommendation # 4 Significant adjustments in the County's financial statements should be explained through notes. However, the statements are produced by the Independent Auditor, and the County can not control what is presented in the notes . We will request that the Independent Auditor make greater use of explanatory notes. Recommendation # 5 The Auditor / Controller's office assists the Solid Waste Department as needed to estimate the landfill closure and post- closure maintenance costs. The estimates are currently reviewed by the Integrated Waste Management Board as well as the County's Independent Auditor. No further review is necessary. Recommendation # 6 Controls are in place to insure that all contracts and leases, including those involving financing, are reviewed by the Board of Supervisors, the County Administrative Officer, the Auditor / Controller, and the County Counsel. Recommendation # 7 I have reviewed the salary apportionments of County officials, and all apportionments are being made on a logical basis . However, if the contractor is willing to review salary apportionment as part of the classification and compensation study without any adjustment in the total cost to the County, I would certainly have no objection. Recommendation # 8 The Auditor / Controller's cash handling policy has been implemented in almost all departments . I am monitoring the few remaining areas to be sure that the policy is implemented when it is practical to do so. TO: The Honorable John K. Letton, JUN 2 Presiding Jud e ofthe Superior Court SUPERRItO~ RHcAoMuBRETRS . JUDGE S FROM: Jeannie Nix- Temple, County Administrative Officer SUBJECT: Response to Recommendations of 2000- 01 Grand Jury Financial Statements and Related Accounting Matters DATE: June 21, 2001 ~ I T T 1- f ~\ T 1- f ~ l I' ~ l / ld / m rT \ 11 I~ OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Administration - Human Resources - Risk Management Grant Management - Information & Technology P. O. Box 1613 Weaverville, CA 96093- 1613 County Administrator Phone: ( 530) 623- 1382 Human Resources Phone ( 530) 623- 1325 FAX ( 530) 623- 4222 JEANNIE NIX- TEMPLE, County Administrative Officer RE CE IV SD. The Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee has requested a written response to their Final Report on the Financial Statements and Related Accounting Matters. In my capacity as County Administrative Officer, my response is as follows: Recommendation # 1 : The discrepancy in time was the time allowed for the Independent Auditor to complete their report. Unfortunately we did not have a clause in the contract for a penalty if the report is late. We plan to develop that in the future. Recommendation # 2 : 1 am informed that the records accurately reflect fixed assets and accumulated depreciation . We had an opportunity to contract for this service to do an inventory and verification of values. The Board of Supervisors chose not to expend the additional $ 8,000 for that purpose. Recommendation # 3: 1 concur with the Grand Jury. Recommendation # 4: 1 concur with the Grand Jury. The Auditor/ Controller has indicated that he will request that the Independent Auditor make greater use of the notes in the future. Recommendation # 5: 1 have no problem reviewing the estimates for landfill closure and post closure. We will do so if the Board of Supervisors desires . I am currently confident that since the Independent Auditor and the Integrated Waste Management Board review these estimates, they are correct. Recommendation #: 6 The Board of Supervisors decision to retire high interest debts has placed the County in a better financial position. We are fortunate that we were able to do so . Controls are in place . All contacts, leases, and financing are reviewed by the County Administrative Officer, the County Counsel and the County Auditor/ Controller . Those amounting to over $ 10,000 are also reviewed and approved by the Board of Supervisors . Recommendation # 7: The firm hired to complete the classification and compensation study is qualified to recommend salaries, benefits and appropriate total compensation for the job being performed . How those salaries are apportioned is a County decision and is based on logic. The salary of a county department head that is responsible for more that one department would be allocated based on the number of full time equivalent positions under his or her control. This does not necessarily mean that they would have to spend an equal amount of time with each. Current salaries are apportioned properly. I respectfully disagree with the recommendation of the Grand Jury. Recommendation # 8: I concur with the recommendation of the Grand Jury. I wish to thank the Grand Jury members for their time and attention in investigating these matters and for providing me the opportunity to respond. JNT: wt FROM: 6~ l, G, Jeanme Nix- Temple' County Administrative Officer DATE : July 5, 2001 Finding # 1: I agree with the finding . Finding # 3 : I agree with the finding. jjiTT$ R IVA 11i rU Eli , - Nyjg i " , , A-N JON OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Administration - Human Resources - Risk Management Grant Management - Information & Technology P. O. Box 1613 Weaverville, CA 96093- 1613 County Administrator Phone: ( 530) 623- 1382 Human Resources Phone ( 530) 623- 1325 FAX ( 530) 623- 4222 JEANNIE NIX- TEMPLE, County Administrative Officer RECEIVED J111 10 M1 TO: The Honorable John K. Letton, Presiding Judge ofthe Superior Court SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE'S CHAMBERS SUBJECT: Amended Response to Recommendations of 2000- 01 Grand Jury Financial Statements and Related Accounting Matters The Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee has requested a written response to their Final Report on the Financial Statements and Related Accounting Matters. In my capacity as County Administrative Officer, my amended response is as follows: Recommendation # 1 : The discrepancy in time was the time allowed for the Independent Auditor to complete their report. Unfortunately we did not have a clause in the contract for a penalty if the report is late. We plan to implement a penalty clause in future contracts . Finding # 2: 1 disagree with the Grand Jury's finding . I am informed that the records accurately reflect fixed assets and accumulated depreciation . We had an opportunity to contract for this service to do an inventory and verification of values . The Board of Supervisors chose not to expend the additional $ 8,000 for that purpose. Recommendation # 2: The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not reasonable. Recommendation # 3: The recommendation has been implemented . The Auditor/ Controller's Office is continually upgrading their accounting systems. - 54- Finding # 4 : I agree with the finding . Recommendation # 4 : The recommendation will be implemented with the preparation of the next independent audit. The Auditor/ Controller has indicated that he will request that the Independent Auditor make greater use of the notes in the future. Finding # 5: I disagree with the finding . I have no problem reviewing the estimates for landfill closure and post closure . I am currently confident that since the Independent Auditor and the Integrated Waste Management Board review these estimates, they are correct. Recommendation # 5: The recommendation will be implemented if the Board of Supervisors so desires. Finding # 6: I agree with the finding . Recommendation #: 6 The recommendation has been implemented. The Board of Supervisors' decision to retire high interest debts has placed the County in a better financial position. We are fortunate that we were able to do so . Controls are in place. All contracts, leases, and financing are reviewed by the County Administrative Officer, the County Counsel and the County Auditor/ Controller. Those amounting to over $ 10,000 are also reviewed and approved by the Board of Supervisors . Finding # 7: I disagree with the finding . Recommendation # 7: The recommendation will not be implemented . The firm hired to complete the classification and compensation study is qualified to recommend salaries, benefits and appropriate total compensation for the job being performed. How those salaries are apportioned is a County decision and is based on logic. The salary of a county department head that is responsible for more that one department would be allocated based on the number of full time equivalent positions under his or her control . This does not necessarily mean that they would have to spend an equal amount of time with each. Current salaries are apportioned properly. Finding # 8: I agree with the finding . Recommendation # 8 : The recommendation has been partially implemented. The Auditor/ Controller's Office is in the process of ensuring all County Department handling cash have an adequate cashiering system . I wish to thank the Grand Jury members for their time and attention in investigating these matters and for providing me the opportunity to respond. I request that my amended response be published with the final report. JNT: wt - 55- 1V E D CHAIVIBCRS TO: The Honorable John K. Letton, Presiding Judgq, ofthe Superior Court DATE : August 21, 2001 FROM: R. Berry art, Chairman Trinity County Board of Supervisors BOARD OF SUPERVISORS P. O . Drawer 1613 ( 530) 623- 1217 WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 96093 Dero B. Forslund, Clerk Jeannie Nix- Temple, County Administrative Officer SUBJECT: Response to Recommendations of 2000- 01 Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee Final Report Trinity County Financial Statements and Related Accounting Matters The Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee has requested a written response to their Final Report on the Trinity County Financial Statement and Related Accounting Matters. In my capacity as Chairman, my response on behalf of the Board of Supervisors is as follows: Finding # 1: We agree with the finding. The Auditor's report was made available to the public and to the Grand Jury when it was received from the independent auditor. Recommendation # 1 : The recommendation has been implemented. The contract for fiscal year ending June 30, 2000 required the audit be completed by December 30, 2000 . Finding # 2: We disagree with the finding . As we know and understand, fixed assets and accumulated depreciation are accurately shown on our accounting records . Furthermore, we do not see the need to spend the citizens' tax dollars for an unqualified outside opinion. Recommendation # 2: The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted and would be not a good use oftaxpayers' money. Finding # 3 : We agree with the finding . - 56- CHRISERIKSON BILLIEMILLER District 1 RALPHMODINE District 2 District .? BERRYSTEWART ROBERTREISS District 9 District 5 Recommendation # 3: The recommendation has been implemented. The Auditor/ Controller continually works to upgrade systems within the County. Finding # 4 : We agree with the finding . Recommendation # 4: The recommendation will be implemented to the extent possible . We agree with the Grand Jury's recommendation that adjustments described in the findings should be explained in the notes to the financial statements. The County Controller will request detailed notes in future audits. Finding # 5: We disagree with the finding . The finding assumes that there will continue to be substantial increases in the cost of closure . The increases in 1999- 2000 resulted from additional requirements from the State. Recommendation # 5 The recommendation will not be implemented, as it is not warranted . Finding # 6: We agree with the finding . Recommendation # 6: The recommendation has been implemented . Financial controls are already in effect and equipment leases are reviewed by the Board of Supervisors, CAO, Auditor/ Controller, and County Counsel. Finding # 7: We agree in part and disagree in part with the finding . We agree with the suggestion and the Grand Jury's recommendations for salary cost apportionment, but feel the timing is wrong regarding our contract with the contractor, not to mention the additional costs. Recommendation # 7: The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted . Recommendation # 8: The recommendation has been partially implemented. The Auditor/ Controller is working with all departments to ensure they have adequate cashiering systems. We wish to thank the Grand Jury members for their time and attention in investigating these matters and for providing the Board the opportunity to respond. RBS : wt Finding # 8: We agree with the finding. . - 57- TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY 2000- 200 FILED SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF TRINITY BY: DONNA REGNANI, DEPUTYCLERK FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE FINAL REPORT JUN 1 2 2001 TRINITY COUNTY TREASURER/ TAX COLLECTOR DEPARTMENT AND RELATED COUNTY OPERATIONS This report was approved On May 22, 2001 - 58- PURPOSE: California Grand Juries are charged to act as the public's " watchdog" by investigating and reporting upon the affairs of local government. Under Section 925 of the California Penal Code, Chapter 7, " Powers and Duties of Grand Jury" the Grand Jury is charged with duty to investigate and report on problems and irregularities in functioning of local government entities . Section 927 ofthe Penal Code states that a grand jury may investigate and report on the needs for increase or decrease in salaries of county- elected officials; and Section 928 states that " Every grand jury may investigate and report upon the needs of all county officers in the county and the equipment for, or the method or system of performing the duties of, the several offices." This report contains findings, recommendations and conclusions resulting from the Grand Jury's inquiry and overall review ofthe Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department and some related county government operations . BACKGROUND: 2000- 2001 TRINITY COUNTY GRAND JURY FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE FINAL REPORT TRINITY COUNTY TREASURER/ TAX COLLECTOR DEPARTMENT AND RELATED COUNTY OPERATIONS The Trinity County Treasurer/ Tax Collector is an elected county official that is elected to serve a four year term and has two primary responsibilities. The Treasurer is responsible for cash management, safeguarding and investing county funds, providing a full accountability, and maintaining an effective cash flow. The Tax Collector is responsible for billing and collecting taxes on all secured and unsecured property and collection oftransient occupancy taxes. The official duties and responsibilities ofthe Treasurer/ Tax collector are largely prescribed by the laws ofthe State ofCalifornia . The principal defining documents are California Government Code, Sections 27000 through 27137, 27400 through 27401, and 53600, et. seq. In the course of fulfilling those duties and responsibilities, the Treasurer/ Tax Collector supervises and directs a department office staff and coordinates the activities ofthe department with those of other Trinity County departments in accordance with the Trinity County Code and the general policies and procedures of the County government. The 2000- 2001 Department budget is $ 246,467. The Treasurer provides general banking services for all county departments, county schools, and special districts. The Treasurer disburses funds by paying county warrants, electronic payments, and electronic payroll . The Treasurer also has - 59- responsibility, under California Law, to manage the county investment portfolio . In fiscal year 1999- 2000 the Trinity County Treasurer: D Processed 2,636 deposits totaling $ 67.5 million D Processed 51,163 warrants totaling $ 51 .7 million D Managed an investment portfolio of approximately $ 25 million The Tax Collector bills and collects current and delinquent secured and unsecured property taxes and transient occupancy taxes. The Tax Collector is also responsible for follow- up on delinquent taxes and the sale of properties that the county has the power to sell due to tax defaults. In fiscal year 1999- 2000 the Tax Collector: D Processed approximately 12,000 secured tax bills D Collected $ 6.5 million in secured taxes D Processed 1,578 unsecured tax bills D Collected $ 308,000 in unsecured taxes D Processed 500 supplemental tax bills D Collected $ 115,000 in supplemental taxes D Processed 408 transient occupancy tax bills D Collected $ 158,000 in transient occupancy taxes D Collected $ 416,000 in delinquent prior year taxes METHOD OF INVESTIGATION: The Grand Jury, in its inquiry and investigation of the Trinity County Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department relied on documents, records and personal interviews . Background information and an organizational chart for the department were obtained from a " Department Information" pamphlet published by the Treasurer/ Tax Collector's Office. California government codes defining county Treasurer/ Tax Collector duties and responsibilities were reviewed, as was the Trinity County Code. Job descriptions for the Treasurer/ Tax Collector and the employees ofthe department were obtained from the county Personnel Department which also provided salary and employee turnover data. The current and a proposed revision of" County of Trinity Statement of Investment Policy" prepared by the Treasurer/ Tax Collector's office and " County of Trinity Cash Handling Procedures" prepared by the Auditor/ Controller's office were reviewed. Other documents reviewed include " Trinity County Treasurer's Monthly and Quarterly Investment Reports" and the notebook prepared by the Treasurer for the March 27, 2001 meeting ofthe Trinity County Treasury Oversight Committee. A listing of errors in Orders to Receive as received at the Treasurer's Office during the period from September 12, 2000 through November 6, 2000 was prepared by the Treasurer's Office at the request ofthe Grand Jury. Selected items of interdepartmental correspondence applicable to subjects ofthe Grand Jury inquiry were requested and reviewed. - 60- The Finance and Administration Committee ofthe Grand Jury interviewed the Treasurer/ Tax Collector on six different occasions during the period of September 21, 2000 through April 26, 2001 . All ofthe Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department employees were individually interviewed in early December 2000, and three past employees of the department were interviewed . A guided tour of the department was conducted for the Finance and Administration Committee of the Grand Jury prior to the employee interviews . All the present members and one past member ofthe Trinity County Board of Supervisors ( BOS), the County Administrative Officer and Head of the Personnel Department ( CAO), and the Auditor/ Controller were also interviewed. Finally, a survey of Treasurer/ Tax Collector salaries for 14 counties in Northern California was conducted by mail. Internal financial audits are conducted by the Trinity County Auditor/ Controller, and the county financial statements are audited annually by an independent auditor . The Grand Jury's inquiry into the independent Auditor's Report is described in a separate Grand Jury Report. The Grand Jury chose not to conduct a full management audit, but to inquire and investigate several selected aspects ofthe Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department operations. The primary topics of inquiry were : D The performance of the primary mandated Treasurer/ Tax Collector duties and responsibilities D Employee turnover and training D Cash handling procedures Proposed operational improvements such as electronic download of hospital payroll and school warrants into the check management system D Delinquent tax collection and property sales for taxes in default D Interdepartmental relations and teamwork involving the Treasurer/ Tax Collector, Auditor/ Controller, CAO and BOS D The Treasurer/ Tax Collector's salary FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS # 1: The Grand Jury finds that the Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department despite being short staffed in 1999 and 2000 has performed its essential functions in a timely manner. Tax bills and notices have been mailed by required deadlines and tax payments have been processed promptly. Cash deposits from other county departments have been handled daily, as required; and county warrants have been reconciled daily. The county investment portfolio has been monitored on a daily basis and a summary report has been distributed to the Auditor/ Controller, CAO, and BOS monthly. Because of being short staffed as mentioned above and later in this report, some activities that were not essential to the day- to- day departmental operations were delayed and postponed until the third quarter of fiscal year 2000- 2001 . The Grand Jury concludes - 61- that, though postponements were undesirable ; the essential departmental functions were not adversely affected and the priorities established by the Treasurer/ Tax collector were correct. The responses to the Public Service Questionnaires, that are available at the service counters of all the county departments, have reportedly been favorable for the Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department, and the Grand Jury found no public dissatisfaction with the department. The Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department is located in the basement of the Trinity County Courthouse in Weaverville . The physical location in the building is less than ideal; but the work- stations are thoughtfully arranged, the department has an organized but busy appearance, and there is good counter space for service to the public. The Grand Jury concludes that the windowless facility and the furnishings are adequate though somewhat spartan. RECOMMENDATION # 1 : The Grand Jury has no recommendation regarding Finding and Conclusions # 1 ; but believes that the public is being well served by the Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department and commends its performance . FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS # 2: The Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department is logically organized. The organization consists of the elected Treasurer/ Tax Collector, a Chief Deputy Tax Collector that reports directly to the Treasurer/ Tax Collector, two Account Technicians that perform tax collections and related duties and one Account Technician that performs treasury duties. A third Account Technician position for tax collection is unfunded. Temporary help is employed on an as- needed basis to handle peak workloads that occur concurrent with preparation ofproperty tax bills and receipt ofproperty tax payments. Training consists primarily of on- the- job training by the Treasurer/ Tax Collector and the Chief Deputy. Considerable effort has gone into preparing and maintaining procedures manuals and job descriptions, and the staff is unanimously complimentary about the training and the written procedures . Employee turnover in the Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department has been higher than in other comparable departments. The present employees of the department were all hired in the year 2000. The time needed to replace employees in 1999 and 2000 coupled with the time required to train new employees placed a strain on the department; however, essential operations were conducted in a timely manner. Since there are few employees in the department and the department is staffed at a minimum level, any vacancy has a significant impact on employee workload and department capability. - 62- The Grand Jury concludes that there was no single factor that caused the high turnover; but all of the following are contributing causes : D A demanding working environment in which accuracy is absolutely essential, deadlines must be met, and workloads are heavy at times. D Opportunities for increased compensation elsewhere . D A perception by some employees that their salary is not commensurate with their duties. D Limited opportunities for advancement within the department because of its small size. D The windowless basement environment was also mentioned by some of the people interviewed . Despite the fact that the workload is heavy at times, all of the present employees and the past employees interviewed by the Grand Jury stated that their workload was not unreasonable . No employee grievances have been filed. The morale in the department is good at the present time, the atmosphere is congenial, and the staff appears to be happy and not looking to leave. RECOMMENDATION # 2: The Grand Jury recommends continuation of the effort to maintain and improve morale within the department. Similarly, continued attention to on- the- job training and maintenance ofgood written procedures is encouraged, as they affect both efficiency and morale. In the interest of improving employee job satisfaction and reducing turnover, the job classifications and salary ranges for the department employees should be carefully reviewed as part ofthe county government job classification and compensation study presently being conducted by the county. The Grand Jury recommends that the Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department continue to be staffed at its present level; but that filling any future staffvacancies as they occur be given the highest practical priority. FINDINGAND CONCLUSIONS # 3: As mentioned earlier in this report, job vacancies and the training of new employees in the Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department caused some management functions to become delinquent. One result was that some employee performance reviews were delayed. That situation has now been corrected and there are no past due performance reviews. The Treasurer/ Tax Collector has now set up an intradepartmental database to track performance review due dates. Timely periodic employee performance reviews are an essential part of good management practices . - 63- RECOMMENDATION # 3: The Grand Jury recommends that the Treasurer/ Tax Collector and the Personnel Department make a cooperative effort to ensure timely employee performance reviews. Implementation of a computerized data base to track the status and alert managers of pending due dates for performance reviews of all county government employees should be considered. Ideally, the data base would not only flag pending due dates but also trigger transmittal of forms and follow- up by the Personnel Department. FINDING # 4: California Government Code, Section 27130 - 27137 establishes the requirement for a county treasury oversight committee . The committee is, by code, advisory in nature with the charge of reviewing the county's investment policy and causing an annual audit of compliance with the code. Committee meetings shall be open to the public. The formation of the oversight committee in Trinity County was delayed after the original formation attempt in late 1996 until early 2001 . Causes included job vacancies in the Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department and the flooding and subsequent restoration of the office and documents in 1997 . The first meeting ofthe committee was held February 28, 2001, followed by a meeting on March 27, 2001 . The committee is now functioning and meetings will be held quarterly, with the next meeting scheduled for June, 2001 . The Grand Jury finds that the delay in formation of the Trinity County Treasury Oversight Committee caused friction in the relationship between the Treasurer/ Tax Collector, the CAO, and some members ofthe BOS. There was no adverse impact on the investment of county funds because the committee has an oversight role that is advisory in nature, investments were managed by the Treasurer/ Tax Collector in accordance with the California Code and the existing Trinity County Investment Policy and the investment portfolio is monitored on a daily basis. An investment report is distributed monthly by the Treasurer to the Auditor/ Controller, CAO, and BOS and quarterly to the schools and special districts that participate in the county investment pool. The objectives when investing and managing public funds are defined in California Government Code 53600.5 in order of importance: 1 . Safeguarding ofPrincipal 2 . Liquidity 3 . Return on Invested Funds. The Treasurer/ Tax Collector has complied with these objectives. As ofMarch 31,2001 a total of approximately $ 25 million was invested, of which approximately $ 21 million was invested with the State of California Local Agency Investment Funds ( LAIF) and approximately $ 3 million was invested in money market accounts and mutual funds. At that time the average annual yield on investment was approximately 5.8%. There have been no realized losses ofinvestment principal . The Grand Jury concludes that the - 64- Treasurer/ Tax Collector has managed the investment of county funds wisely and in accordance with legal requirements with the exception ofthe previously mentioned delay in formation of the Trinity County Treasury Oversight Committee. RECOMMENDATION # 4: The Grand Jury recommends that Treasurer/ Tax Collector continue to invest county funds without significant change in investment policy. Meetings of the Trinity County Treasury Oversight Committee should continue on a regularly scheduled basis to improve the understanding and support of the Treasurer/ Tax Collector's investment decisions. FINDING # 5 : The Treasurer/ Tax Collector has the power to sell property five years after taxes are in default. Interest and penalties accrue in delinquent taxes until the delinquent taxes are paid or the property is sold by the county . Tax sales require a significant amount of labor and expenditure of funds to satisfy all the presale legal requirements . For that reason, efforts to collect delinquent taxes are normally more cost effective than tax sales and are an essential part of the Tax Collector's duties. Trinity County's last tax sale was in 1996 . As of October, 2000 there was a total of $ 405,000 of delinquent taxes and penalties for which the Treasurer/ Tax Collector had power to sell. A significant but unknown portion of the $ 405,000 will not be recoverable through a property sale because of a number of factors, including property with little or no market value, property with market value less than the accrued taxes and penalties, and property for which no bids are received. The Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department has started preparations for a tax sale which is tentatively scheduled for Spring 2002. RECOMMENDATION # 5: 2002 . FINDING # 6: The Grand Jury recommends continuing with preparations for a tax sale in Spring New cash handling procedures were instituted in 2000 in accordance with comprehensive document, " County of Trinity Cash Handling Procedures", prepared by the Auditor/ Controller's office. Departments depositing money into the County Treasury must normally do so daily and deliver the money with an order to receive ( OR), which is essentially a deposit receipt, to the Treasurer's office. Each ORmust have a number which is assigned by the Auditor's Office. Under the new procedure the error rate in the OR number for OR's delivered to the Treasurer's office is significant . A tally prepared at the Grand Jury's request shows that 16 OR's with incorrect ORnumbers were delivered - 65- to the Treasurer's office from September 12, 2000. through November 6, 2000 . The Grand Jury concludes that the OR error rate is not a major problem ( most errors are caught and corrected promptly), but it is desirable for efficiency reasons to reduce the error rate. RECOMMENDATION # 6: The Grand Jury recommends that the Cash Handling Procedures be jointly reviewed by the Auditor/ Controller and the Treasurer/ Tax Collector with the aim of reducing the number of error's in OR's. The Grand Jury suggests that the error rate could be reduced by routing OR's to the Auditor's office, which has responsibility for OR numbers prior to delivery ofthe OR to the Treasurer's office. FINDING # 7 : The Treasurer/ Tax Collector must approve payment of county warrants by the bank on a daily basis. Included in those warrants are school warrants and hospital payroll warrants. The schools issue approximately 2000 warrants per month totaling approximately $ 1 .8 million per month. Hospital payroll warrants, excluding electronic deposits, are fewer in number with a total of 50 to 60 each month. The " checks issued" files produced by the hospital payroll computer system and the school computer system have formats that cannot be electronically downloaded by the Auditor's Office into the county check management system at the present time. The hospital payroll warrants are hand keyed daily into the county check management system by the Auditor's office; which, although a small job, is inefficient compared to electronic transfer and is prone to human error. The school warrants are never entered into the county check management system; thus the Treasurer is unable to perform appropriate checks and balances on school warrants. The Treasurer/ Tax Collector, in the beliefthat it is economically practical, included computerizing the transfer of school and hospital payroll warrant data to the county check management system as a goal in her memorandum to the BOS on July 26, 2000. The Treasurer/ Tax Collector, Auditor/ Controller, Superintendent of Schools, and the staff have now attended meetings on this subject; but there is no plan to eliminate hand keying ofhospital payroll warrant data, and a firm plan and commitment to proceed with electronic transfer of school warrant data has not been made. RECOMMENDATION # 7 : The Grand Jury, in the belief that it is feasible, recommends that an economically practical plan for electronic transfer of school warrant data be prepared and executed in the reasonably near future. The Grand Jury believes that a cooperative effort by the Treasurer/ Tax Collector, the Auditor/ Controller, the Data Processing Department and the Trinity County Superintendent of Schools is needed. - 66- The Grand Jury further recommends that the Auditor/ Controller and the Treasurer/ Tax Collectorjointly again review and reconsider the practicality of eliminating hand keying of hospital payroll warrant data. FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS # 8: A ten county salary survey for department heads was conducted by the Trinity County Personnel Department in 1997. The survey showed that the Treasurer/ Tax Collector was one of the most underpaid elected officials in Trinity County. Despite salary increases since 1997, little progress has been made to close this gap. As of April 1, 2000 the Treasurer/ Tax collector's salary of $ 3,852 per month is 75% ofthe average salary of other Trinity County elected officials ( excluding members of the BOS) and 84% of the next lowest elected official's salary. The Treasurer/ Tax Collector is also the lowest paid Trinity County department head, either elected or appointed. The Grand Jury finds that elected officials' salaries should generally be higher than appointed officials' salaries because ofthe generally greater responsibilities, the cost of running for elected office, and the uncertainty ofbeing re- elected. The 1997 salary survey showed that the average Treasurer/ Tax Collector salary in the ten small northern California counties surveyed was $ 828 per month greater than the salary of the Trinity County Treasurer/ Tax Collector. The April, 2001 survey of the same counties shows that the difference is now $ 684 per month. In 1997 the BOS adopted a policy of granting salary increases to county officials based on longevity of service. In January, 2001 the Treasurer/ Tax Collector was up for a 5% longevity increase. That increase was not recommended by the CAO nor granted by the BOS on the basis ofthe deferred Treasurer/ Tax Collector functions mentioned earlier in this report and disagreements on managerial effectiveness . The BOS conducts annual performance reviews of appointed department heads that report to the CAO and BOS. The performance of elected officials is not subject to annual review by the BOS because elected officials are elected by the public to perform the duties and responsibilities ofthe office to which they are elected in accordance with statutory requirements. Being representatives ofthe public, duly elected to office, and answerable to the public through the election system, elected officials do not have a role subservient to the BOS and thus are exempt from annual performance reviews. By requiring actions and managerial style changes that are beyond statutory requirements as a prerequisite condition for a salary increase the CAO and BOS have created a defacto performance review of an elected official and, in doing so have overstepped their authority . The Grand Jury has not found any withholding of longevity based salary increases for Trinity County elected officials other than the one described above. - 67- RECOMMENDATION # 8 : The Grand Jury recommends that the salary of the Trinity County Treasurer/ Tax Collector be increased by 5% retroactive to January 1, 2001, to conform to the longevity increase due at that time . The Grand jury also recommends, in accordance with Section 927 of the Penal Code, that the salary of the Trinity County Tax Collector be increased by an additional 8% effective July 1, 2001 . These recommended actions will bring the Treasurer/ Tax Collector's salary up to a point essentially equivalent to the next lowest paid department head in Trinity County government . FINDING AND CONCLUSION # 9: The Grand Jury finds and concludes that in the interest of encouraging long term employment, salary increases based on longevity are justifiable for appointed officials and managers. The county benefits from a stable and experienced workforce. The Grand Jury, on the other hand, finds no such justification for longevity based salary increases for elected officials. Elected officials are elected to perform their duties in accordance with statutory requirements and length of service is determined by the electorate, with dedication by the official to long term service being only an ancillary consideration. Awarding salary increases based on longevity to elected officials will surely lead to the illogical and irrational situation in which a newly elected official that obtains office by defeating an incumbent will receive a lower salary than the incumbent was receiving, despite being chosen by the electorate as the best candidate for that office. RECOMMENDATION # 9: The Grand Jury recommends that the BOS eliminate longevity based increases for elected officials in Trinity County. The Grand Jury recommends that salaries of elected officials be based solely on the duties and responsibilities ofthe office. When determining salaries, due consideration should be given to the salaries of the elected and appointed officials in Trinity County, the salaries of officials in the same office in similar counties, and prevailing local wages. This recommendation should not be construed as a recommendation for a salary decrease for any elected Trinity County official that may have received a longevity based salary increase. FINDING # 10: A contract has been awarded for a Trinity County Government Job Classification and Compensation Study. This study, which is scheduled for completion in April, 2002 will cover the complete range of county government jobs from elected officials, including the BOS, to entry level positions . During the Grand Jury's review and investigation ofthe Treasurer/ Tax Collector's salary, the Grand Jury found indications ofprobable inequities in the salaries of other Trinity County Government Department Heads and the BOS . The Grand Jury did not - 68- conduct an investigation sufficient to justify a specific recommendation regarding those perceived inequities . RECOMMENDATION # 10: The Grand Jury enthusiastically endorses the Job Classification and Compensation Study as a means of correcting any compensation inequities that may be identified. FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS # 11 : The Grand Jury finds that Trinity County Government officials are dedicated to performing their duties well and to good government in general. The Grand Jury does find, however, friction and personal conflict in the relationships between various department heads, the CAO and some members ofthe BOS . This undermines morale, cooperation, and teamwork. The Grand Jury concludes that improvement in this area is desirable and achievable. RECOMMENDATION # 11 : The Grand Jury believes that a spirit ofcooperation between various offices within the County government is in the best interest ofthe citizens ofthis county. To this end it is recommended that all Department Heads actively pursue respectful and cooperative relationships with other departments and department heads. It is understood that many personalities are involved, however, relationships should be conducted professionally . The citizens ofthe County should expect no less. The Grand Jury further recommends that individual members of the BOS that are concerned about the performance of any department or department head personally visit that department for a first hand review. SUMMARY: D The citizens of Trinity County have been and are being well served by the Treasurer/ Tax Collector Dept. D The Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department operations were hampered by high rate of employee turnover, but essential services were not adversely affected. D The Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department employee morale is good and the workforce appears to have stabilized. D The Treasurer/ Tax Collector has an ongoing interest in improving efficiency and integrity of treasury and tax collection operations . Numerous improvements have been made and others are under consideration by the Treasurer/ Tax Collector and other related departments . D The Treasurer/ Tax Collector is severely underpaid and the Grand Jury recommends immediate increases . - 69- D The Grand Jury recommends abandonment of longevity based salary increases for elected officials and that it be replaced with a reasonable process to keep the salary of elected officials in parity with similar positions . RESPONSE REQUESTED FROM: Trinity County Board of Supervisors, Trinity County Administrative Officer, Trinity County Auditor/ Controller, Trinity County Treasurer/ Tax Collector, Trinity County Superintendent of Schools DATE: June 14, 2001 TO: John K. Letton, Presiding Judge of the Superior Court FROM: Brian Muir, Auditor / Controller SUBJECT : 2000- 2001 Trinity County Grand Jury Report Trinity County Treasurer / Tax Collector Department and Related County Operations The following response is provided as requested in the above report: Recommendation # 1 The Treasurer / Tax Collector Department completes the essential functions needed to keep County government running. Recommendation # 2 I agree. Recommendation # 3 It is an essential duty of each department head, not the Personnel Department, to ensure that employee performance reviews are completed in a timely manner. Failure to complete reviews has a detrimental effect on morale . Recommendation # 4 n -[~\ TT rm rf T ~ PfT" T BRIAN E. MUIR, COUNTY AUDITOR- CONTROLLER P . O . BOX 1230, WEAVERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 96093- 1230 PHONE ( 530) 623- 1317 FAX ( 530) 623- 1323 MEMORANDUM JUSDUGPEE'RSIOCRHACMOBUERRTS The Treasurer / Tax Collector should work with the County Treasury Oversight Committee to develop a better return on invested funds while still safeguarding principal . RECEIVED JUN 1 8 2001 Recommendation # 5 I agree. In addition, a tax sale should be conducted on an annual basis. Conducting a sale - 71- once every five years deprives the County and its citizens ofproperty tax revenue. Recommendation # 6 I disagree. Cash handling procedures are the sole responsibility of the County Auditor / Controller. The current method of handling OR's eliminates the need for a trip to the Auditor / Controller's office by employees making a deposit in the treasury. Errors do not present a problem as they are easily corrected with a telephone call. Recommendation # 7 I disagree. It is unnecessary to have electronic transfer of school warrant data. Inexpensive alternatives to electronic transfer have been discussed with the Trinity County Superintendent of Schools. Since the schools would bear the cost of implementing an electronic system, I have informed the County Superintendent that the Auditor / Controller's office will support whatever decision he makes in this matter. The decision on how hospital payroll data is entered in the accounting system rests with the Auditor/ Controller . I have determined that the most cost effective way is to hand key the entries . The citizens would not be well served by paying for the automation ofa task which takes one person about 20 minutes per month. Recommendation # 8 It is inappropriate for me to comment on the Treasurer / Tax Collector's compensation . However, in my opinion the Board of Supervisors has done an excellent job of setting department head salaries after considering the availability of funds, the nature of the position, the necessary education, and, most importantly, the performance of the incumbent. Recommendation # 9 Salaries of elected officials should be based on performance on the job as well as the duties and responsibilities of the office. Ifthe Board of Supervisors feels that performance improves with experience in office, then the current system makes sense. Recommendation # 10 I agree. Recommendation # 11 I agree. It is my experience that County department heads do maintain respectful and professional business relationships with one another. I also find that members of the Board of Supervisors visit County departments on a regular basis . - 72- TO : The Honorable John K. Letton, Presiding Judge of the Superior Court FROM: i-/ Tefnp1To ' d , y ministrative Officer SUBJECT: Response to Recommendations of 2000- 01 Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee Final Report Trinity County Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department And Related County Operations DATE : June 21, 2001 Recommendation # 1 : There are no recommendations necessary. ° 73- i _ T`' T- f ~ lT TT r~ I" ~ l i( N rV I - F ' N~ T " I I - `~. 9 OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Administration - Human Resources - Risk Management Grant Management - Information & Technology P. O. Box 1613 Weaverville, CA 96093- 1613 County Administrator Phone: ( 530) 623- 1382 Human Resources Phone ( 530) 623- 1325 FAX ( 530) 623- 4222 JEANNIE NIX- TEMPLE, County Administrative Officer RECEIVED J UN 2 2 2001 SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE'S CHAMBERS The Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee has requested a written response to their Final Report on the Trinity County Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department and Related County Operations . In my capacity as County Administrative Officer, my response is as follows: Recommendation # 2: The job classifications and compensation for employees is being reviewed for all county departments . It has been over 15 years since a Classification and Compensation Study has been undertaken . All county employees are looking forward to the results . Recommendation # 3: The Grand Jury proposes that our Personnel Department make a cooperative effort to ensure timely employee performance reviews, including creation of a database to track said reviews. Within six months our Human Resources and Information Technology Departments plan to establish an automated system for this purpose . In the meantime, all department heads have a responsibility pursuant to Trinity County Policy number 1- 99( P) to evaluate employees annually. Our current system provides reminders to department heads who are delinquent in their responsibility to evaluate employee performance . Failure to complete employee evaluations is a violation of county policy and has a negative effect on employee compensation and morale if the employee is eligible for a merit increase. Recommendation # 4 : I agree that the Treasurers Investment Oversight Committee should continue and be expanded to increase understanding and dialogue about county investments . Recommendation # 5 : I strongly agree that the Treasurer/ Tax Collector should proceed with a Tax Sale in the spring of 2002 . I am very pleased that those plans are being made . Recommendation # 6 : Any modification to the process of handling cash is the responsibility ofthe Auditor/ Controller . Recommendation # 7: 1 believe that any decisions regarding electronic transfer of school warrant data should be made by the Auditor/ Controller in cooperation with the Superintendent of Schools . Any decision regarding input of hospital payroll data should be left up to the Auditor/ Controller . Recommendation # 8 : The County Administrative Officer and the Board of Supervisors do have authority and control over budgetary issues for all county departments . The CAO with authority delegated by the County Board of Supervisors is the Risk Manager for the county. County Department heads, whether elected or appointed, have the ability to create significant liability for the County. The County Board of Supervisors has adopted policies that relate to the operation of county government and reduction of losses. The CAO has a responsibility to see that those policies are followed. The only control over elected department heads is either their salary or their budget . I respectfully disagree with the Grand Jury's recommendations regarding salary for any individual department head. Recommendation # 9: The longevity based increase for department heads was developed through a department head salary survey conducted over 4 years ago by our former director of Human Resources . The survey indicated that longevity pay increases for department heads was not an uncommon practice in many counties. Organizations generally benefit from the experience a long- term employee brings to the job. I respectfully disagree that the practice should be eliminated for elected department heads. Recommendation # 10: I concur with the Grand Jury. The classification and compensation study will shed light on many inequities, real or perceived. Recommendation # 11 : I concur in part with the Grand Jury. It is in the best interest of the citizens of the County that a spirit of cooperation exists between the various County departments . I believe, however, that the condition currently exists. In the operation of any organization ofthis size, there are bound to be some disagreements . I believe that when they occur they are handled in a respectful way. I wish to thank the Grand Jury members for their time and attention in investigating these matters and for providing me the opportunity to respond. JNT: wt - 74- Memo Fronx Lynda Hymas, Treasurer- Tax Collector CC: Trinity County Board of Supervisors Date: August 1, 2001 The following are responses requested in the above report . Recommendation # 1 : Recommendation # 2: I agree with the finding . Recommendation # 3: I agree with the finding . Recommendation # 4 : I agree with the finding . - 7 5- Trinity County Lynda Hymas Treasurer- Tax Collector AUG - q, Zoo, SUP JUDGE'S ERIOR COURT CHAMBERS To: The Honorable John K. Letton, Presiding Judge of the Superior Court RECEIVED LOW RE: Trinity County Grand Jury 2000- 2001 Finance and Administration Committee Final Report Trinity County Treasurer/ Tax Collector Department and Related County Operations The Grand Jury made no recommendations. The Treasurer- Tax Collector thanks the Grand Jury for commending the department's performance and service to the public . On the job training and written procedures continue to be a high priority. Procedures are maintained in shared files on PC's and are revised as needed. The Treasurer- Tax Collector staff completed the job classification studies, which were reviewed by both their supervisor and department head, then forwarded to the contractor performing the study. Each member of staff and the department head requested and met with the contractor for further clarification . The department head and Chief Deputy work with Personnel to fill vacancies as quickly as possible when they occur. There are no past due performance evaluations at this time. The department is now utilizing a database created for this department to track due dates. I agree that a countywide system of tracking and early notification to managers by personnel would be useful to all departments. The Trinity County Treasury Oversight Committee has been formed, and met on 2/ 28/ 01 and 3/ 27/ 01 . The next scheduled meeting will be 8/ 14/ 01 . A committee member binder has been prepared and delivered to all committee members prior to the Feb. 2001 meeting. A public binder is available at each public meeting. The bmianrdkeerts iinnfcolrumdea, tiaonm. ong other items; pertinent government codes, investment reports, investment policy, and Response to Grand Jury Report 2000- 2001 Trinity County Treasurer- Tax Collector Department - Continued I agree that the Committee members serve in an advisory capacity, as stated in code. The purposes of the Committee are: 1 .) To review and monitor the Treasurer's investment policy . 2.) Cause an annual audit. Section 27137 of Government Code states : Nothing in this article shall be construed to allow the county treasury oversight committee to direct individual investment decisions, select individual investment advisors, brokers, or dealers, or impinge on the day- to- day operations of the county treasury. Recommendation # 5 : I agree with the finding . A tax sale takes a number of months and many steps to process. There are a number of mandated notifications and deadlines in order to legally notify someone that they will lose their property at a public auction . A tax sale should not be considered only for its potential to increase county revenues . A tax sale can result in a loss due to expenses paid to outside vendors, even if a property does not sell . I have started the process for a tax sale, and if fully staffed should be able to complete for Spring 2002. Tax sales require a commitment from county officers to budget the required funding and staffing to complete a tax sale. For the majority of the last 12 years this office has not received budget funding |
| PDI.Date | 2001 |
| PDI.Date.Issued | 2001 |
| PDI.Title | Final Report. 2000-2001. |
| OCLC number | 124041499 |
Tags
Add tags for Trinity County California Grand Jury reports and responses
Comments
Post a Comment for Trinity County California Grand Jury reports and responses
Your rating was saved.
you wish to report:
Your comment:
Your Name:
|
|
...