Home Grand Jury final report

Reference URL

Add tags

Comment

Rate

To link to this object, paste this link in email, IM or document

To embed this object, paste this HTML in website

Grand Jury final report

View Description

View PDF & Text

Download

small (250x250 max)

medium (500x500 max)

large ( > 500x500)

Full Resolution

PDF
Text

Text Search...

GLENN COUNTY

GRAND JURY

Butte City Cemetery, East Side Of County Road Y,

One Mile South Of Hwy 162

FINAL REPORT

2000 – 2001

July 10, 2001

Superior Court Judge

The Honorable Donald C. Byrd

526 West Sycamore Street

Willows, CA 95988

Judge Byrd:

Enclosed herewith is the Final Report of the 2000- 2001 Glenn County Grand Jury.

Following the swearing- in ceremony last July, the nineteen Grand Jury members met,

established rules of procedure and formed committees. The full Grand Jury met twice

monthly alternating between Orland and Willows. Committees met as often as necessary.

The Grand Jury conducted the tasks that grand juries are charged with, including

inspecting county facilities, reviewing financial documents and responding to citizen

concerns. Each committee prepared reports of their activities which were reviewed by

the full Grand Jury, and upon the concurrence of the required twelve members,

committee reports were included in this final report. In addition, the Grand Jury

reviewed the responses made by the various agencies and departments to the previous

Grand Jury recommendations, and commented upon the adequacy of those responses.

We would like to express our appreciation to the many department heads and their staffs

for providing us with material and information as requested.

We believe that the recommendations and comments in this report will be valuable tools

to the various agencies and departments as they continue their efforts to improve upon the

public’s understanding of their decisions and services.

Sincerely,

William A. Murphy

Grand Jury Foreperson

2000- 2001 Glenn County

Grand Jury

526 West Sycamore Street

Willows, California 95988

2000- 2001 Glenn County Grand Jury Members

Timothy Asbury

Mary Brubaker

Sandra Chaney ( Secretary)

Trina Darby

Nancy Farrell

Ginger Flowerdew

Theresa ( Tina) Fodge

Robert Gaines, Jr.

Susan ( Kathy) Gilmore

Dan Green

James Jacobs

Richard ( Ned) Kelly ( Foreperson, Pro- Tem)

Jackie Lane ( Sergeant- at- Arms)

Sandra Martin

Sharon McMahon

William ( Bill) Murphy ( Foreperson)

Margaret Noraas

William Schroer

THE ROLE OF THE GRAND JURY

The Grand Jury is primarily an investigative body created by the U. S.

Constitution’s Fifth Amendment and the California Constitution.

Nineteen residents of Glenn County are selected after reviewing 30 to 40

people. Grand Juries are impaneled annually and are officers of the Court,

but work independently. Most of the work is done by committees, which

may include Public Safety, Public Works, Administration, Education, Social

Services, Health Administration, City Government, and Special Districts.

Other committees may be appointed as needed.

The Grand Jury and committees meet several times a month. They meet

with County and City officials, visit local government facilities, and conduct

research on matters of interest and concern. The proceedings of the Grand

Jury are kept confidential. Jurors may not discuss the business of the Jury

with other individuals.

The Grand Jury receives letters from citizens expressing concern over a

particular matter of local government. Anyone can file a complaint with the

Grand Jury. The Grand Jury chooses which complaints to investigate. The

Grand Jury cannot investigate disputes between private parties. All

complaints to the Grand Jury are confidential.

All Grand Jury findings and recommendations are issued in written reports.

Each report must be approved by at least 12 members. At the end of the

term ( June 30th), the Jury issues a final report. Copies of the report are

distributed to public officials, libraries, news media, and any entity that is

the subject of a report. Within ninety days following the issuance of the

report, officials responsible for matters addressed are required to respond in

writing.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

2000- 2001 Glenn County Grand Jury Members

Role of the Grand Jury

GRAND JURY REPORT

CITY AND COUNTY GOVERNMENT

Glenn County Board of Supervisors

Purchasing Procedures …………………………………………. 1

Final Budget ……………………………………………………. 3

Butte City Cemetery District …………………………………… 5

Orland City Counc il

Dismissal of City Manager ……………………………………... 6

ASSESSOR’S OFFICE ……………………………………………………… 8

BUILDING DEPARTMENT ………………………………………………… 10

FINANCE

Finance Department ………………………………………………… 12

HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT ………………………………. 13

PUBLIC SAFETY

Glenn County Jail ………………………………………………….. 15

Jane Hahn Juvenile Hall …………………………………………… 17

Orland Police Department ………………………………………… 19

Willows Police Department ………………………………………. 21

Orland Volunteer Fire Department ……………………………… 23

Willows Fire Department …………………………………………. 24

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT …………………………………. 25

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA COOPERATIVE EXTENSION … 27

WILLOWS AIRPORT

Repair Road and Parking Lot ………………………………………. 28

APPENDIX

2000- 2001 Response Report ……………………………………………. 1

Cover photo by David Brown, photographer, Colusi County Historical Society Wagon

Wheels

GLENN COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

Purchasing Procedures

I. PURPOSE:

The Grand Jury reviewed the Finance Department, including purchasing

procedures.

II. BACKGROUND:

In the past year, the Department of Public Works purchased 56 customized

wristwatches as employee awards at a cost of $ 46.49 each, for a total cost of

$ 2,792.19.

III. FINDINGS:

· The Department of Finance rejected an invoice for payment for the

watches, which were purchased without prior approval of the Board of

Supervisors.

· The Department of Public Works sought retroactive approval of the

purchase from the Board, which was approved.

· The Board of Supervisors on November 21, 2000, adopted a resolution to

amend the Glenn County Administrative Manual, Title II, Awards and

Recognitions, as follows:

Agency heads shall have the option to recognize employee and

volunteer efforts through promotional items, such as food,

refreshments, and plaques and other minor awards. Awards in

excess of $ 25 per employee must be pre- approved by the Board of

Supervisors.

· The Administrative Manual has not yet been updated.

IV. CONCLUSION:

The Grand Jury commends the Glenn County Board of Supervisors and the

Finance Department for its careful processing of this purchase and amending the

procedures to avoid future errors.

V. RECOMMENDATION:

01- 01 The Administrative Manual should be updated to reflect the new

language.

VI. RESPONSE REQUIRED:

Board of Supervisors: ( 01- 01)

Finance Department: ( 01- 01)

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

Glenn County Final Budget

I. PURPOSE:

The Grand Jury reviewed the Glenn County fiscal documents and the Final

Budget for Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2001.

II. BACKGROUND:

In addition to reviewing the budget with the Finance Director to answer questions

about policies and programs, the Grand Jury reviewed the fiscal documents to

determine whether or not the budget and its adoption process are clearly readable

and accessible to general citizenry.

III. FINDINGS:

· The annual budget is adopted by the Glenn County Board of Supervisors

in accordance with the California Law known as the County Budget Act.

· The adopted Final budget is a comprehensive document, well prepared

and inclusive of the necessary information for the operation of the County

Government and the Special Districts in the county.

· Glenn County Department heads and their staff members describe the

operations of the budget units under their jurisdictions to the board of

supervisors at budget hearings and throughout the year, but such

descriptions of the budget units are not included in the Final Budget.

· The Finance Department this year is requiring a narrative description for

each budget unit to be submitted by the departments together with the

proposed departmental budgets for fiscal year 2001- 2002.

IV. CONCLUSIONS:

The Board of Supervisors and the Finance Department are to be commended for

the attention to detail and accessibility of the county’s financial documents and

approval process.

While financial activities of Glenn County are handled in an open and

professional fashion, citizen satisfaction with the process could be enhanced with

documents made available to the public that provide narrative and other

illustrative descriptions of each of the budget units.

V. RECOMMENDATIONS:

01- 02 Publish the narrative descriptions and other illustrative material,

such as charts and graphs that describe the individual budget units

in the Annual Proposed Budget for review by the board of

supervisors and the public at annual budget hearings in June. The

Final Budget, which would reflect any changes made by the board

to the Proposed Budget, could still be prepared and adopted

separately in August as it is currently done, in accordance with the

Budget Act.

VI. RESPONSE REQUIRED:

Board of Supervisors: ( 01- 02)

Finance Department: ( 01- 02)

GLENN COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

Butte City Cemetery District

I. PURPOSE:

The neglected condition of the Butte City Cemetery located on County Road “ Y”

in southeastern Glenn County has caught the attention of concerned citizens,

including Grand Jurors.

II. BACKGROUND:

The Butte City Cemetery ( sometimes called the “ Pioneer Cemetery”) is an old

public cemetery that has received attention from time to time by journalists and

scholars and occasional maintenance by volunteers over the years, but there has

not been a burial there in 70 years. Recently, concerned citizens have complained

about the apparent neglect of the cemetery.

III. FINDINGS:

· The cemetery consists of twenty- seven gravesites, some with significant

monuments, most burials taking place before the turn of the 20th century.

· The land is listed as public land with the Glenn County Assessor, but it is not

registered with the Glenn County Finance Department or with the California

Board of Equalization.

· No records could be found of the formation or dissolution of the district and

its governing board neither in either Glenn County nor in Colusa County for

the years prior to the formation of Glenn County.

IV. CONCLUSION:

It is the Grand Jury’s conclusion that the Butte City Cemetery District on County

Road “ Y” near Afton is an abandoned public cemetery.

V. RECOMMENDATION:

01- 03 The Board of Supervisors should take the necessary steps to

recognize the Butte City Cemetery District as a legitimate Glenn

County entity and arrange for the Cemetery’s restoration and

regular maintenance.

VI. RESPONSE REQUIRED:

Board of Supervisors: ( 01- 03)

ORLAND CITY COUNCIL

Dismissal of City Manager

I. PURPOSE:

Citizens and Grand Jury members expressed concern about the manner in which

the Orland City Council dismissed the city manager and then changed its decision

at a subsequent meeting.

II. BACKGROUND:

The Orland City Council dismissed the city manager on March 20, 2001

following a closed session. One city council member complained that the council

violated the Brown Act in its closed session deliberation. At a subsequent City

Council meeting, the council re- considered its action and decided to re- employ

the manager. While the council has the authority to dismiss the city manger, it is

required to follow certain procedures in the conduct of its meetings where such

action is taken.

III. FINDINGS:

· Since the action was taken in a closed session, the public is unaware of the

actual discussion.

· It is understood that personnel matters must be confidential, but the city

manager was not included in the closed session, and the agenda item was

not adequately noticed.

· City Council action in personnel matters found to be improper, could be

costly to the local agency.

· The City Council subsequently participated in a public training session

that emphasized council responsibility in similar issues.

IV. CONCLUSION:

The City Council is commended for participating in the public training session.

However, the apparent mishandling of an important decision – the dismissal of

the city manager - causes many citizens to be suspicious of other council action.

V. RECOMMENDATION:

01- 25 City Council and staff should adhere closely to Brown Act

provisions when preparing agendas, conducting meetings and

making decisions.

VI. REQUIRED RESPONSES:

Orland City Council: ( 01- 25)

City Attorney: ( 01- 25)

ASSESSORS’S OFFICE

I. PURPOSE:

The Assessor’s Office has not been reviewed recently. No specific complaint was

raised.

II. BACKGROUND:

In June 1997, the Assessor’s Office was consolidated with the Recorder, Clerk to

the Board of Supervisors, Elections and Micrographics. So, not only is the

Assessor the County Assessor, but he serves as head of other departments as well.

III. FINDINGS:

· The County Assessor’s Office does not have at the present time an in-house

Auditing Appraiser. The work done by an Auditing Appraiser is

currently being accomplished by an outside agency, which this Grand Jury

has found to be doing a satisfactory job.

· Each year the Micrographics Department budgets $ 5,000.00 for the

restoration of the County’s historical maps. At this time, they are still in

the process of restoring the maps. At present, the only documents being

digitized are those that are recorded in the Recorder’s Office on a daily

basis. There are however old books from the Assessor’s Office and the

Clerk’s Office that have been restored on microfilm which are stored in

the County vault. Old documents and historical artifacts have been found

in a storage room that have not been restored. Each County Department

Head oversees the restoration and preservation of their documents as well

as deciding what is historical and what is not.

· There is not a central storing location for all departments to store and

preserve departmental documents.

IV. CONCLUSIONS:

The Assessor’s Office seems to be running smoothly along with the Recorder and

the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. There is no one person in charge of

overseeing the restoration and preservation of all the County’s documents and

artifacts nor is there a central location for storing them. There is a great concern

for this historical need.

V. RECOMMENDATION:

01- 05 Establish a unit within the Recorder’s Office that will restore and

preserve the County documents and artifacts.

01- 06 Designate a centralized location for storage of all restored

documents and historical artifacts.

01- 07 Purchase necessary scanning equipment for the proper restoration

of all County documents and historical artifacts.

01- 08 Consider utilizing citizen volunteers to assist in historic record and

artifact preservation.

VI. RESPONSES REQUIRED:

Board of Supervisors: ( 01- 05, 01- 06, 01- 07, 01- 08)

Assessor: ( 01- 05, 01- 07, 01- 08)

Building & Grounds: ( 01- 06)

BUILDING DEPARTMENT

I. PURPOSE:

Response to citizen complaints.

II. BACKGROUND:

The Grand Jury received three complaints about how building inspections are

conducted. These complaints dealt with consistency of inspections by different

inspectors. Also, whether it was proper for an inspector to not approve an

electrical job that was completed and had passed inspection ( the permit being for

electrical work only) because the inspector observed building code violations

unrelated to the work covered under the electrical permit, and therefore refused to

allow the properly completed electrical service to be connected to the utility

company line.

III. FINDINGS:

· The Grand Jury met with one of the complainants who is a building

tradesman. The complainant cited several examples of construction

projects where disputes arose over interpretation of building codes. The

complainant felt the inspector made arbitrary decisions and in some cases

could not cite the appropriate code for the changes demanded. The

complainant said that due to construction delays and schedules the

changes would be made, as it would be too costly to delay the project.

The complainant felt there should be consistency in enforcement by all

inspectors, saying that one inspector approves a part of a construction

project, then another inspector comes out to inspect something else and

finds fault with the completed work already approved by the previous

inspector requiring more changes to be made.

· Another complaint received was from a parent who complained that when

the parents were absent a building inspector told their 13- year old child

that due to code violations their house may be “ red tagged.” The parent

felt this was inappropriate as it caused the child unnecessary anguish.

· The Grand Jury met with the Building Maintenance & Inspection Director

and a member of his staff. These issues were discussed at length. The

Director outlined the many functions of his department. Grand Jurors

referenced the 1998- 1999 Grand Jury Report Recommendation 99- 64 that

suggested the creation of a Board of Appeals to resolve building code

enforcement disputes. The Director and staff stated that there previously

had been a Board of Appeals similar to the model outlined in the Uniform

Building Code, which was never utilized by disputants. The Director told

Jurors that if a citizen disputes a decision made by one of his inspectors,

the citizen may appeal directly to him. If that does not resolve the dispute

the citizen may appeal to the Glenn County Board of Supervisors.

IV. CONCLUSIONS:

The Grand Jury realizes that building code enforcement can be controversial

because of the changing code requireme nts. Jurors can understand the frustration

of citizens when there is inconsistency between inspectors in interpretation of the

various building codes.

V. RECOMMENDATIOINS:

01- 16 When an inspector notes a discrepancy and the permit holder

disputes the inspector’s finding, the inspector should issue a

written notice to the permit holder defining the code section in

violation.

01- 17 Inspectors that inspect the same job site at different times should

insure that subsequent decisions are consistent with prior

inspections.

01- 18 Consider the development of a process that allows a contractor to

receive a certificate of code compliance at job completion when

the work performed meets all the requirements a permit was issued

for. This would allow the contractor to seek payment from the

customer, even if the customer had other issues that prevented the

inspector from issuing a final clearance because of other code

violations discovered on the job site unrelated to the work the

permit was issued for.

VI. RESPONSE REQUIRED:

Board of Supervisors: ( 01- 18)

Building and Maintenance Inspection Director: ( 01- 16, 01- 17, 01- 18)

FINANCE DEPARTMENT

I. PURPOSE:

The Grand Jury reviewed the activities of the Finance Department.

II. BACKGROUND:

The issue of the County’s requirement for excessive liability insurance on an

employee’s personal vehicle was brought up by Grand Jury members as a

concern.

III. FINDINGS:

· The County currently requires employees to carry liability insurance

coverage on their personal vehicles if they intend to seek mileage

reimbursement from the County for work related business. The County

requires employees to have a minimum liability coverage of

$ 100,000/$ 300,000 for their personal vehicles. There is concern as to why

this amount is set so high. Employees who do use their own vehicle for

County use do not get mileage reimbursement if they do not have the

required coverage. The existing policy is cost prohibitive to lower income

employees who may because of job necessity, have to utilize their private

vehicle. In the last 21 years, there has not been any reported employee

personal vehicle accidents while on County business.

IV CONCLUSIONS:

The Grand Jury has determined that in some instances county owned vehicles just

are not available, the refore, employees must use their own vehicles, but cannot

claim mileage reimbursement because they cannot afford the higher insurance

required.

V. RECOMMENDATIONS:

01- 04 The current requirement for employee liability insurance on their

personal vehicles should be lowered to the State minimum

requirement, which is $ 15,000 per person for bodily injury;

$ 30,000 per incident for bodily injury; and $ 10,000 for property

damage.

VI. RESPONSE REQUIRED:

Board of Supervisors: ( 01- 04)

Finance Department: ( 01- 04)

Golden State Risk Management Authority: ( 01- 04)

HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT

I. PURPOSE:

This was a routine inspection of the Glenn County Health Services Department.

There were no complaints filed.

II. BACKGROUND:

There are approximately seventy employees in the Health Services Department,

which has an allocation of seventy- five employees. Approximately 85 – 90% of

this Agency’s budget is funded from State or Federal sources. The committee met

with the Director and interviewed several employees.

III. FINDINGS:

· Professional level vacancies seem to take a long time to fill. There is a

severe human resource shortage statewide and the competition for these

positions is a problem that has always faced this county. Although the

hiring procedures are being followed as mandated by law, the county

needs to look into more productive methods of hiring on a more timely

basis.

· Morale had been low in the past. The department had given a survey to

the rank and file, and asked the employees to express their concerns.

Morale has since improved and has proven that communication is an

essential factor to employee/ supervisor relations. Annual surveys would

continue to allow all employees to communicate their concerns.

· The Policies and Procedures Manual has been updated since the last Grand

Jury Report, but the Grand Jury does not want to see it set aside again as a

low priority. Continued updating will ensure a current information

resource for all employees.

· Long Term Care for our county is at a critical stage. There is a shortage of

facilities and the elderly population is increasing at alarming rates. There

is no plan in effect to meet this huge burden of housing and medical care.

The Director and his staff are aware of the problem and it has been

identified as a statewide concern.

IV. CONCLUSIONS:

The Health Services Department is moving in the right direction to improve

communication with all employees, continues to fill vacancies as mandated by

law, and is aware of the need for implementing new programs for our elderly

population.

V. RECOMMENDATIONS:

01- 21 Inquire into more timely and productive methods of hiring

procedures to reduce open vacancies.

01- 22 It is recommended that the department conduct annual

surveys of all employees for continued improvement in

communication.

01- 23 Update Policy and Procedure Manual annually.

01- 24 Develop plan to accommodate increased demands for Long

Term Care for our elderly.

VI. RESPONSE REQUIRED:

Board of Supervisors: ( 01- 21, 01- 24)

Health Services: ( 01- 21, 01- 22, 01- 23, 01- 24)

GLENN COUNTY JAIL

I. PURPOSE:

In accordance with California Statutes, the Glenn County Grand Jury performed a

physical inspection of the Glenn County Jail.

II. BACKGROUND:

Glenn County Jail was built in 1990; it is a Type II facility housing both male and

female inmates. It also houses illegal immigrants for the Immigration

Department. The Glenn County Sheriff’s Department is responsible for the

operation and maintenance of this facility. The inspection of this facility by the

Grand Jury is an annual requirement by the State of California.

III. FINDINGS:

· The jail is staffed with 1 Lieutenant, 1 Sergeant and 18 line Officers. With

training, vacation and sickness this leaves the staffing a little short and it is

recommended that the Board of Supervisors and Personnel investigate the

possibility of increasing the number of Officers.

· The pay scale would appear to be approximately 20% lower than in

surrounding Counties. Although pay increases have been agreed to, they

are over a period of three years after which these Officers will still be

behind those of other Counties. This discrepancy leads to the problem of

hiring and retaining well- qualified Officers.

· Most of the improvements addressed by the two previous Grand Juries had

not yet been completed and are scheduled for November 2001. The

following are considered safety items and should be addressed as soon as

possible. They are:

1. Replace generator

2. Widen sally port entrance

3. Provide secure walkway between the jail and courthouse

4. Security of the fenced area outside the kitchen

· Because of a computer problem, the Policy Manual has still not been

completed. We urge that this be finished as soon as possible.

· It was noted in the kitchen that the only covering on the meat slicer were

dishtowels. This can hardly be classified as secure. This is a safety item

reported b the previous Grand Jury and should receive immediate

attention.

IV. CONCLUSION:

The jail is being run in an efficient manner. Improvements are being addressed

and in time should be in effect.

V. RECOMMENDATIONS:

01- 09 Complete a study of the staffing requirements of the jail. Consider

a further study of the salaries to make these positions more

attractive thereby improving the recruitment and retent ion of the

staff of the Sheriff’s Department and the jail staff.

01- 10 In the interests of safety and security it is again recommended that

the planned improvements be expedited.

01- 11 Once again, and for the same reasons, a cover for the slicer must

be found.

VI. RESPONSE REQUIRED:

Board of Supervisors: ( 01- 09, 01- 10)

Personnel Department: ( 01- 09)

Sheriff: ( 01- 10, 01- 11)

JANE HAHN JUVENILE HALL

I. PURPOSE:

It is a requirement of the State of California that the Grand Jury perform an

annual inspection of the Juvenile Hall.

II. BACKGROUND:

Glenn County Probation Department is responsible for the operation of the

Juvenile Hall. This facility was built in 1994 to house juveniles on a temporary

basis. In 1994 it was changed to a long- term facility to provide housing for up to

one year. It has six rooms, four with one bed and two with two beds. It has a staff

of 10.

III. FINDINGS:

· Although the Juvenile Hall was built as an eight- bed facility at the time of

visiting there were twelve juveniles being held, at times there are as many

as sixteen. The extra children were sleeping on the floor between beds.

Emphasizing again the need to expedite the remodeling that is planned.

· The plans for the remodeling were very well explained. It was also

pointed out that it should be completed a year ahead of schedule.

· The vehicles in use were described as badly in need of maintenance and it

was indicated that there was a need for a bus or van to accommodate their

needs.

· It was pointed out that there was a problem with leakage around the

windows in the holding rooms. These should be sealed as soon as

possible.

IV. CONCLUSIONS:

The staff of Juvenile Hall is performing a very valuable service to this

Community. They should be commended for their performa nce under very trying

and overcrowded conditions.

V. RECOMMENDATIONS:

01- 12 We again urge the completion of the remodeling as soon as

possible, as the overcrowding is unacceptable.

01- 13 The windows in the cells should be sealed, as the present facility

will probably still be in use during the next wet season.

01- 14 Transportation needs, such as maintenance and need for a larger

capacity vehicle, should be investigated.

VI. RESPONSE REQUIRED:

Board of Supervisors: ( 01- 12, 01- 14)

Chief Probation Officer: ( 01- 12, 01- 14)

Building and Grounds Department: ( 01- 12, 01- 13)

ORLAND POLICE DEPARTMENT

I. PURPOSE:

Conducted a routine visit to Orland City Police Department. No complaints

received.

II. BACKGROUND:

Orland Police Department serves the City of Orland with a population of just less

than 6000. Manpower consists of the Chief, two Sergeants, nine Officers and five

reserves. The Department operates five vehicles leased and maintained by the

County. The Department also operates a volunteer force known as VIPS

consisting of twenty- two volunteers and two donated cars. The Department is

fully computerized and laptops are being installed in all cars, digital cameras are

used for crime scenes and suspects.

III. FINDINGS:

· Benefits for the Officers appears to be very good, however it was noted

that the pay scale for the Chief and Officers were lower than surrounding

areas.

· The City or County does not have firing range facilities; Orland PD must

perform the firearms training at a neighboring County facility.

IV. CONCLUSIONS:

Orland PD appears to be in good shape. The Chief has done much to bring this

department into the computer age. Officers have access to computers to check

cases and this is being expanded to include laptop communication in all vehicles.

There appears to be a good working environment and good relationship with the

community, especially with regards to the schools and any associated problems.

All manuals have been brought up to date. A good Volunteer Program ( VIPS) is

in place and is a working unit.

V. RECOMMENDATIONS:

01- 26 The Orland City Council conduct research into the wage scale for

all Officers and endeavor to bring them to par with other

Communities.

01- 27 City or County should investigate the possibility of securing a

piece of land to be used by all County Law Enforcement Agencies.

It is understood that a parcel of land near Black Butte was under

consideration.

VI. RESPONSE REQUIRED:

Orland City Council: ( 01- 26, 01- 27)

Board of Supervisors: ( 01- 27)

Sheriff: ( 01- 27)

WILLOWS POLICE DEPARTMENT

I. PURPOSE:

Conducted a routine visit to Willows City Police Department. Some citizens

questioned arrest procedures and allegations of use of excessive force by arresting

Officers.

II. BACKGROUND:

The Willows Police Department is responsible for security in the City of Willows,

with a population of approximately 6300. The Department manpower is made up

of the Chief, two Sergeants, an investigating Officer and six Officers. There is no

Reserve Officer program, mainly due to a lack of volunteers willing to undergo

the lengthy training period. Four vehicles are leased and maintained through the

County.

III. FINDINGS:

· There appears to be some concern on the part of the citizens of Willows

that the arresting practices of the Willows PD might be excessive. The

Chief believes that his Officers behave correctly and the concerns may

have been exaggerated by the local Media, also a lack of understanding of

arrest procedures by the populace.

· There is a serious problem of space, especially storage for records,

evidence, etc. There is a possibility of added space, but it depends greatly

on financing for the Library to move and is three to five years down the

road.

· Presently Willows PD must share firing range facilities in neighboring

Counties. At present, none exists in Glenn County. Some consideration

had been given to a parcel near Black Butte.

IV. CONCLUSIONS:

The Department appears to be in good shape. Officer training receives a high

priority. Manuals have been updated. Communications have improved with the

upgrade of the Red Mountain repeater. The Department needs to upgrade its

computer/ internet facilities to avail itself of better communication with other Law

Enforcement Departments. The Department needs to address its Community

Relations problems to improve its image with the citizens of Willows.

V. RECOMMENDATIONS:

01- 28 Willows PD should embark on an extensive program to improve its

image and Community Relations. Every effort should be made to

demonstrate the valuable services performed by this Department

and that the Department is always aware of the concerns of the

citizen.

01- 29 In Officer training, reinforce the need for proper restraint on the

part of an arresting Officer, safety of both parties still being the

main concern.

01- 30 Willows PD, as a manpower consideration, should explore the

need for Reserve Officers or a VIPS program as used in

neighboring Communities, giving a greater visibility to the PD at

Schools and Community functions.

01- 31 The need of more space is still of great concern. If a move to a

larger facility is impossible then temporary, secure storage space

should be sought.

01- 32 Upgrading of the computer/ internet communications should be

given a high priority thus making all sources of information

available to the Officers and Department.

01- 33 Willows PD, together with other Law Enforcement Agencies in

Glenn County, have to share firing range facilities in other

Counties. Glenn County should give consideration to this much-needed

training facility for use by all law enforcement in this

County. We understand that consideration had been given to a

parcel of land near Black Butte.

VI. RESPONSE REQUIRED:

Board of Supervisors: ( 01- 33)

Willows Police Department: ( 01- 28, 01- 29, 01- 30, 01- 31, 01- 32, 01- 33)

Willows City Council: ( 01- 28, 01- 29, 01- 30, 01- 31, 01- 32, 01- 33)

Sheriff: ( 01- 33)

ORLAND VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT

I. PURPOSE:

This was a routine inspection of the Orland Volunteer Fire Department. There

were no complaints filed.

II. BACKGROUND:

Orland VFD serves the City of Orland, the Orland Rural District and assists the

California Forestry Department when requested. In addition to the Chief, there

are between thirty and fifty volunteers. Six are qualified EMT’s. The Officers

meet monthly and there are also two business meetings. Training is performed at

the 3- 4 per monthly meetings, at times some specialized training must be done out

of town. Vehicles range from the mid- 70’ s to the latest equipped, modern engine.

There are also a large number of older vehicles of the early 1900’ s, which are

restored and maintained by the firemen for display purposes. Regular

maintenance is funded out while cleaning and oil changes are performed by the

firefighters. Funding comes from City and County and through fundraisers by the

Department. Calls are through Pratt’s answering service and all firefighters have

pagers, average response time is 4- 5 minutes. Approximately 300 calls per year

are answered. They have expanded to larger building, which serves as storage for

equipment and the older vehicles. Plans are on the way for a heli- pad.

III. FINDINGS:

· There is no policy manual as such. All the latest information is

maintained up to date in a folder.

IV. CONCLUSIONS:

It is the opinion of this Grand Jury that the Orland Volunteers Fire Department is

well maintained, well equipped, well trained and continues to plan for the future.

The Chief, his Officers and Volunteers should be highly commended for the

superb duty they perform for the city of Orland and surrounding Rural District.

V. RECOMMENDATIONS:

01- 34 The Department heads should formulate a Policy Manual of

standard practices employed in the Department for the instruction

of new Officers following in line.

VI. RESPONSE REQUIRED:

Orland VFD: ( 01- 34)

WILLOWS FIRE DEPARTMENT

I. PURPOSE:

This was a routine inspection of the Willows Fire Department. There were no

complaints filed.

II. BACKGROUND:

The Willows Fire Department serves the City of Willows, the Willows Rural

Area, County and when required the California Department of Forestry. One Fire

Chief, thirty to forty volunteers and five permanent firefighters provide the

manpower. There is one Training Officer for fire fighting techniques. The

Department operates three vehicles, 1972 grassfire truck, 1978 ladder truck and

2001 International with all the latest equipment. There is also the use of a CDF

truck if needed for City, County or forest fires when called upon. Maintenance is

provided by the City/ County yard, the firefighters perform routine cleaning and

oil changes. Bids are put out for spare parts, etc. Manuals are updated regularly.

The Willows City, Rural Fire Department and fundraisers by the fire fighters

provide funding for this facility.

III. FINDINGS:

· Communication facilities, intercom, phones, wireless, etc. were in the

process of being updated.

IV. CONCLUSIONS:

It was the opinion of the Grand Jury that this Department was operated in a highly

efficient and professional manner. There were no apparent problems and the

Chief and his Department deserve the highest recognition and recommendation

for a job well done.

V. RECOMMENDATIONS:

01- 35 In the interests of safety it is recommended that the upgrade of all

communications equipment be completed as soon as possible.

VI. RESPONSE REQUIRED:

Willows Fire Department: ( 01- 35)

PUBLIC WORKS AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AGENCY

I. PURPOSE:

Response to a citizen inquiry.

II. BACKGROUND:

The Grand Jury received a letter from a citizen wishing verification that the heavy

equipment purchased for the Glenn County landfill had in fact been handled

through the vendor’s Willows facility. A portion of the sales tax is returned to the

governing body for sales transactions occurring within its jurisdiction. The

vendor in question has sales outlets in other jurisdictions within California. The

Public Works and Development Services Agency Director had written a letter

stating that the vendor had informed him that the sale had been handled through

the Willows store.

III. FINDINGS:

· The Grand Jury contacted the City of Willows Finance Director for

assistance in determining if in fact the above sales tax was being received

by the City of Willows. The Finance Director with the assistance of the

Glenn County Department of finance determined the following:

The County entered into a lease agreement with Caterpillar Financial

Services Corporation to lease/ purchase both pieces of equipment.

Sales tax is charged and collected ratably over the life of each lease. As

such, as the County pays each annual installment, sales tax is collected by

Caterpillar and paid to the California Board of Equalization.

Since the sales tax is paid ratably, no significant “ spike” in sales tax was

noted in the Caterpillar account, nor will it be expected over the life of the

lease.

Caterpillar Financial Services Corporation has verified that the tax paid

with the first installment of the lease was credited to Glenn County as part

of its sales tax reporting. Please note that of the 7- 1/ 4% sales tax ( 7%

after 1/ 1/ 01) 6% goes to the State, and the remaining 1- 1/ 4% is allocated

1% to the City and ¼ % to the County ( if the location of sale is outside the

city limits, then the County is allocated all 1- 1/ 4%).

III. CONCLUSIONS:

The lease/ purchase of the heavy equipment for the Glenn County Landfill was

handled through the Caterpillar sales facility in the City of Willows resulting in

the allocation of sales tax to the City of Willows and the County of Glenn.

IV. RECOMMENDATIONS:

01- 15 Government entities with Glenn County should make every effort

to ensure that purchases that can be credited to a point of sale

within Glenn County are in fact so credited as such. This will

return a portion of sales tax revenue to local jurisdictions.

V. RESPONSE REQUIRED:

Board of Supervisors: ( 01- 15)

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA

COOPERATIVE EXTENSION

I. PURPOSE:

The Grand Jury performed a routine review of U. C. Cooperative Extension

Office of Glenn County.

II. BACKGROUND:

The U. C. Extension Office had not been evaluated by a Grand Jury in several

years.

III. FINDINGS:

· The Cooperative Extension Services is a cooperative services supported

by the University of California and the County of Glenn.

· The Cooperative Extension provides important agricultural information to

local farmers and other residents.

· The local 4- H program is organized and administered by U. C.

Cooperative Extension.

IV. CONCLUSIONS:

Cooperative Extension provides a direct connection with the University of

California. Staff are to be commended for their willingness to assist local farmers

and other residents with their agriculturally related problems and for their

enthusiastic involvement in the local community with educational services, such

as 4- H.

V. RECOMMENDATIONS:

None.

VI. RESPONSE REQUIRED:

None.

WILLOWS AIRPORT

Repair Road and Parking Lot

I. PURPOSE:

Follow- up on recommendations of previous Grand Juries.

II. BACKGROUND:

The 1998- 99 Grand Jury recommended that the roads and parking lot at the

Willows Airport needed repair. The Public Works Department responded that the

repairs would be scheduled contingent upon the availability of road crews and the

airport budget. The 2000- 2001 Grand Jury visited the airport to evaluate the

facility.

III. FINDINGS:

· Road and parking lot conditions remain poor at the airport.

· It has been two years since the Department of Public Works agreed to

schedule repairs.

· Travel along the roadway and in the parking lot is uncomfortable and

dusty.

IV. CONCLUSIONS:

Driving on the airport roadways and parking lots could cause damage to an

automobile. Walking along the road and in the parking lot could present a trip

and fall danger to pedestrians. The condition of the access and parking areas

present a poor public image.

V. RECOMMENDATIONS:

01- 19 Repair the damaged roads and parking areas at the airport.

01- 20 Heavy trucks be required to park in designated area with signs to

direct them.

VI. RESPONSE REQUIRED:

Board of Supervisors: ( 01- 19, 01- 20)

Public Works: ( 01- 19, 01- 20)

Airport Advisory Commission: ( 01- 19, 01- 20)

2000- 2001

GLENN COUNTY GRAND JURY

APPENDIX

2000- 2001 RESPONSE REPORT

RESPONSE COMMITTEE REPORT

The duties of the 2000- 2001 Grand Jury Response Committee are to review the responses

made to the findings of the previous Grand Jury and to determine their level of adequacy.

GLENN COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

00- 01 The Board of Supervisors should review creating and filling a County

Administrative Officer position.

RESPONSE: Board of Supervisors

The Board will review and consider the position of a County Administrative Officer

position.

2000- 01 Grand Jury Evaluation:

This recommendation has not been implemented.

00- 02 The Board of Supervisors should review its sole source purchasing policy

and eliminate, as much as practical, non- competitive purchasing.

RESPONSE: Board of Supervisors

The Board believes the purchasing policy is clear and has been reviewed

over the past two years; however, will continue to review for any changes

that may need to be made. In addition, this has been thoroughly reviewed

by the Revenue, Expenditure and Fiscal Committee and changes that have

been made have been made, have come as their recommendation.

2000- 01 Grand Jury Evaluation:

This recommendation has been implemented.

00- 03 Review staff reports and research should be of higher quality.

RESPONSE: Department of Public Works

There are several incorrect statements of fact in the report concerning this

item. Competitive bidding was in fact pursued through the California

Multiple Award System ( CMAS) which is based on statewide bids

available to any public agency. The price received for the items of

equipment was that price available to all agencies through CMAS. The

bidder whose equipment was selected was the only manufacturer willing

to offer a guaranteed ceiling on maintenance costs. At the time the report

was published, no money had changed hands so the statement regarding

the sales tax is in error. The dealer has been instructed to record the sale

in Glenn County and thus the sales tax, when received will be credited

here. All of this information was contained in a lengthy and detailed

analysis of the item which was reviewed by the Board of Supervisors on

May 2, 2000, appended hereto as Attachment A.

2000- 01 Grand Jury Evaluation:

The Department of Public Works failed to address recommendation 00- 03.

00- 04 When County Counsel is required to review and make comments prior to

Board of Supervisor action, Counsel should have more input than

“ Approved As To Form”, as required in Title 4, Section 4.02.01 of the

Administrative Manual.

RESPONSE: County Counsel

The recommendation should be directed to the Board of Supervisors. The

recommendation indicates a desire for the County Counsel to participate in

policy decisions instead of reviewing documents for legal sufficiency.

This would be a significant change from existing practices and the job

description of the County Counsel. Unless the Board of Supervisors

formally directs the County counsel to provide policy guidance in

document review, the role of the County Counsel is limited to reviewing

the legal sufficiency of documents.

2000- 01 Grand Jury Evaluation:

This response avoids the issue. This recommendation should be reviewed

by future Grand Juries.

ORLAND FREE LIBRARY

00- 05 Explore funding opportunities to expand the Library building.

RESPONSE: Orland City Council

The City has long been desirous of expanding the facility presently

housing the Orland Free Library. For many years, it has been documented

that usage of the building and services is 50% Orland residents and 50%

Glenn County residents. Funding for operation and maintenance of the

Library has not been equally shared by Glenn County, which has

contributed about 40% in the recent past. There is no indication that

Glenn County will share in cost of expansion. Nevertheless, 4 years ago

the City applied for and received grant to study the possibility of

expansion of Library. The report recommended reorganizing existing

facilities to create greater space. Those recommendations, where felt

appropriate, have been implemented. The Capital Improvement Plan for

the city includes a line item for expansion of Library, but has yet to

develop a funding source. Presently each new residence constructed in the

City of Orland pays an amount into a Library impact fund. These moneys

are available for capital expansion or capital maintenance. As of June 30,

2000, this fund was slightly over $ 20,000. It is estimated that it will cost

significantly more than this to construct addition to present Library

facility. Staff has been directed to explore funding options including

grants, bequests, foundations, donations, and whatever else may become

available. As you may be aware, moneys have been allocated for

Libraries from bond issue to be provided by State of California. The City

Librarian will prioritize needs for these funds and present report to City

Council for action. We will continue to explore all options.

RESPONSE: Orland City Librarian

See City Council response.

2000- 01 Grand Jury Evaluation:

This response is acceptable.

00- 06 Actively pursue funding and hiring for a Children’s Library.

RESPONSE: Orland City Council

Based on budgetary realities, prior City Counc ils have eliminated a part-time

position and full- time Children’s Librarian position from the Library

staff. The city’s budget position has not changed significantly in the

interim and demands for additional police support have received priority

over other department requests for expenditure. During consideration of

the 2000- 2001 preliminary budget, it was agreed by City Council

members present to try to find funding for this position. At this time, the

City Librarian is preparing report on additional services that would be

provided and cost benefit analysis. The City Council has agreed to

consider refunding this position if financially feasible and a higher priority

than requests yet to be funded for other departments.

RESPONSE: Orland City Librarian:

See City Council response.

2000- 01 Grand Jury Evaluation:

This response is acceptable.

WILLOWS PUBLIC LIBRARY

00- 07 Increase part time employee hours and ensure that salaries are comparable.

RESPONSE: Willows City Council

Pursuant to guidelines established by the Pubic Employees Retirement

System ( PERS), part- time employees are limited to nineteen ( 19) hours

per week. If the City exceeds the hours established by PERS, the City is

subject to the imposition of retirement and other benefits that would

exceed the City’s ability to fiscally support the position. Since his arrival,

the City’s Librarian has attempted to set the average part- time employee’s

hours at nineteen ( 19) hours per week.

With respect to salaries, the City of Willows is aware that comparable

salaries play a role in attracting and retaining qualified personnel in all

City departments. The City will continually explore new opportunities for

increased revenue in order to ensure comparable salaries for all city

personnel.

RESPONSE: Willows City Librarian

See City Council response.

2000- 01 Grand Jury Evaluation:

This response is acceptable.

00- 08 Enact a policy for time limits for computer use.

RESPONSE: Willows City Council

A policy establishing time limits, as well as other criteria for the use of

library computers, was enacted by the Library Board of Directors at their

meeting of February 10, 2000. This policy appears in the Library

Procedure Manual as Procedure 5, along with the Internet User Agreement

Form.

RESPONSE: Willows City Librarian

See City Council response.

2000- 01 Grand Jury Evaluation:

This recommendation has been implemented.

00- 09 Explore avenues such as grants or corporate donations to increase the

number of computers and/ or ports available for use.

RESPONSE: Willows City Council

The computers currently utilized within the Library are primarily the result

of successful grant proposals. The use of grant funding for future

expansion and upgrade of the Library’s computer system is under on-going

review. Three ( 3) computers were recently ( June 2000) added to the

Library, as a result of using equipment left over from an upgrade grant

from “ The Library Corporation.” A difficulty that currently exists is

finding space for the computers and their stations that are close enough to

the circulation desk to allow appropriate monitoring. Currently the

Willows Library has within its computer inventory a total of fifteen ( 15)

computers, two ( 2) circulation computers, seven ( 7) computers for internet

use, and six ( 6) computers for cataloging, etc.

RESPONSE: Willows City Librarian

See City Council response.

2000- 01 Grand Jury Evaluation:

This recommendation has been implemented.

FINANCE DEPARTMENT

00- 10 Continue with employee training as well as Purchasing Officer training on

the proper use of the Cal- Card.

RESPONSE: Finance Department

The Department of Finance is currently developing a new document that

will outline the responsibilities, liabilities, and limits of each Cal- Card

user. The document will require signature attestation by each user that

they understand the authorized use of the Cal- Card. Additionally, each

department’s authorized Cal- Card liaison, who will be responsible for

obtaining the signature attestation, will be trained in the proper use of the

cards.

2000- 01 Grand Jury Evaluation:

This response is accepted and the procedures for the Cal- Card use has

been implemented.

00- 11 Designate a centralized County Purchasing Agent to handle more

complicated purchases or those that affect many Departments.

RESPONSE: Board of Supervisors

This position has been reviewed by the Board of Supervisors in the past.

The Department of Finance response to this recommendation outlines the

current research done on implementing this position. Refer to attached to

response from Department of Finance dated August 4, 2000.

RESPONSE: Finance Department

If the Grand Jury is proposing an Independent Purchasing Agent with their

own Centralized Department, I disagree with this recommendation. The

costs of a Centralized Purchasing Department in a county this small would

offset the benefits. Glenn County is already implementing a number of

procedures that would be used by a Centralized Purchasing department,

such as countywide contracts with certain vendors, to obtain more

favorable pricing, cooperative purchasing of items used by numerous

departments, and mandated competitive bid processes. Any additional

savings obtained using an Independent Purchasing Agent would be

minimal.

2000- 01 Grand Jury Evaluation:

This recommendation has not been implemented.

00- 12 With Cal- Cards numbering more than 100, we recommend that a

department designate a person to hold on to cards and check them out to

traveling employees as needed. This would allow for safekeeping.

RESPONSE: Board of Supervisors

The Board concurs with the response of Department of Finance ( below).

RESPONSE: Finance Department

I agree with this recommendation and note that a number of departments

are already using this procedure to control access to the Cal- Card. I will

notify each department of this recommendation procedure by August 31,

2000.

2000- 01 Grand Jury Evaluation:

This response is accepted and each department was notified of this

recommendation. Departments using Cal- Cards have implemented this

procedure.

HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT

00- 13 Review the hiring process so that positions can be filled more expediently

and the workloads could be more equitably distributed.

RESPONSE: Director of Health Services

The hiring process at the Health Services Agency has been reviewed and

is expediently followed. When the filling of a new position is required,

the paperwork is completed within the first 24 to 48 hours and forwarded

to the Personnel Department to begin the recruitment process. There are

four individuals in the Agency with signature authority to ensure that the

request for recruitment does not get delayed at the Agency level.

This recommendation is intended to allow workloads to be equitably

distributed. I find this somewhat confusing since in the report by the

Grand Jury it states, “ There are approximately 70 employees in the Health

Services Department which has an allocation of 75 employees.” This is a

very low vacancy rate at any given time for an agency the size of the

Health Services Agency. However, without specifics by the Grand Jury, I

suspect that the focus of the recommendation is on the professional level

classifications since this is the area of greatest turnover. Given this

assumption, I want to report that applications for staff vacancies at the

professional level are few in number and success in recruitment is less

than ideal for reasons that are similar to every county in the State of

California. There is a severe human resource shortage in the professional

health services arena statewide and for every professional graduate there

are 6 to 10 jobs. Competition amongst the counties for this scare resource

has resulted in the problems I believe the Grand Jury is referring to with

this recommendation. We hope that the new classification and salary

study, soon to be completed, will help address some of these recruitment

problems.

RESPONSE: Personnel Director

This Department provides recruitment and testing services to all County

Departments. Unlike the private sector which can hire anyone they choose

with little or no process involved; County’s and other public entities are

bound by “ Merit System Principles”, statutes, regulations, and case law

which make the recruitment process a time consuming and lengthy

process. In the past year, this office has added an additional extra- help

clerical position to improve turn around time. However, it should be noted

that the individual department’s internal process, background

investigations and mental fitness evaluations might also delay the process.

The Personnel Department strives to provide the most streamlined

recruitment process we can within the constraints with which we must

operate. Had the Grand Jury discussed this matter with this Department

before the release of the report, I believe we could have addressed many of

their concerns regarding the recruitment process.

2000- 01 Grand Jury Evaluation:

The Health Services Department hiring procedures are being followed as

mandated by law, including specific time limitations.

00- 14 Department supervisors continue to meet with staff at all levels to

encourage communications.

RESPONSE: Director of Health Services

The supervisors do meet with their staff at all levels on a regular basis.

See attachment of the master meeting schedule of all units and their

regularly scheduled meeting times and dates. This schedule is distributed

to all units in the Agency so that supervisors are able to attend other unit

meetings when necessary and appropriate. In addition to these scheduled

meetings, there are other meetings that line staff have with department

management.

Every four to six weeks, line staff meet with top management without the

supervisors in attendance. The meetings are held at a local restaurant with

management providing coffee or other beverages for the meeting. Each

unit in the Agency has at least one representative from line staff to meet

with the Director and the Deputy Directors in order to ensure ongoing

clear communications, answer questions that do not easily flow through

the formal chain of command, hopefully quell rumors and develop intra-agency

social events and training events.

The combination of the regularly scheduled meetings with the supervisors

and the regular line staff meetings with top administration will continue as

a proven effective way of encouraging communication.

2000- 01 Grand Jury Evaluation:

Regularly scheduled meetings with supervisors and regular line staff

meetings with top administration are being implemented. Continued

meetings will ensure ongoing communication in the Agency.

00- 15 Provide equitable salaries.

RESPONSE: Director of Health Services

Equitable salaries are intended to be addressed through the current salary

study initiated by the Board of Supervisors.

RESPONSE: Board of Supervisors

The Board concurs with the attached response of Health Services Director

dated July 17, 2000. The implementation process is on going.

2000- 01 Grand Jury Evaluation:

This item appears to be a continuous and on- going problem for all small

counties. All salaries are reviewed and compared to larger counties and

raised accordingly, only to have the larger counties raise their salaries

again. The resulting seesaw appears to keep Glenn County salaries lower

than most. Also, many employees have bargaining units to address salary

issues. The Grand Jury concurs that providing equitable salaries is on

going.

00- 16 Update Policies and Procedures Manual. It would be a resource for

employees who have questions, but may not be able to obtain an

immediate answer from a supervisor.

RESPONSE: Director of Health Services

The Policies and procedures Manual is in the process of being updated

from its last update of 1995/ 1996. By September of this year, all sections

will have been updated and we will continue to maintain the effort to

update the manual on an annual basis. The Manual continues to be

available at all units for reference by all employees.

2000- 01 Grand Jury Evaluation:

The Manual has been updated and a program put into place to keep it

current, as well as available to all employees. Recommend yearly updates.

ANIMAL CONTROL

00- 17 Orders to Comply and Notices to Appear should adhere to California

Penal Codes.

RESPONSE: Animal Control Office

There was some confusion with the Judicial Council of California –

Administrative Office approved format. This has since been corrected and

approved with the new Citations.

2000- 01 Grand Jury Evaluation:

Recommendation has been complied with. This was also referred to

County Counsel with the same response.

00- 18 The Cites of Orland and Willows should have a Public Hearing so that the

residents can express their concerns about the problem of stray cats in

their respective City Councils.

RESPONSE: Animal Control Office

The Animal Control Officer agrees.

2000- 01 Grand Jury Evaluation:

This recommendation was intended for action by Orland and Willows City

Councils and was referred to them. There was no response from Orland.

Willows recognized the problem as a reoccurring one, but suggested that it

could be placed on the agenda at the request of a member of the

community. This recommendation was made as a result of complaints to

the Grand Jury and has not been complied with. Suggest we repeat this

recommendation to both City Councils.

00- 19 Develop a Policies and Procedures Manual.

RESPONSE: Animal Control Office

I will be reviewing policies and procedures manuals from other agencies

to see if there would be any benefits or advantages. State and local statues

dictate most of the Animal Control functions, which may be just

duplication in a manual.

2000- 01 Grand Jury Evaluation:

This requires follow- up to ensure compliance.

GLENN COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE

00- 20 As the transition occurs for separating the Family Support Division from

the District Attorney’s Office, re- evaluate the needed number of

investigators in each of the Divisions.

RESPONSE: Board of Supervisors

Transition of the Family Support Division is scheduled for 2003. The

Board of Supervisors will reevaluate prior to the transition, staffing in

each of the Divisions.

RESPONSE: District Attorney’s Office

We concur and will make the necessary evaluation when appropriate. A

similar response was received from the County Supervisors, to whom this

was also referred.

2000- 01 Grand Jury Evaluation:

Transition is not planned until 2003. This might require a follow- up as

that time approaches.

00- 21 Develop a Policy and Procedures Manual for the operation of the District

Attorney’s Office.

RESPONSE: District Attorney’s Office

A Policy and Procedures Manual in the Criminal Division is not warranted

because of the small size of our office. The Child Support Division does

have a Policy and Procedures Manual.

2000- 01 Grand Jury Evaluation:

The requirement for a Policy and Procedures Manual is not determined by

the size of the department, but more by the importance of its function. It

will be used as a guide, not only by those now in the department, but by

those joining at a later date. Suggest this recommendation be reissued.

00- 22 Complete the repairs in the facility housing the District Attorney’s Office.

RESPONSE: Board of Supervisors

In preparation for the transition of the Family Support Division, the first

phase is to move Family Support out of the present facility and then

evaluate the needs of the District Attorney Staff at that time.

RESPONSE: District Attorney’s Office

The Board of Supervisors should insure the necessary repairs are made to

the District Attorney’s Office.

RESPONSE: Department of Public Works

This item should be referred to the Buildings and Grounds Department for

response. Public Works has no authority to take the action indicated in the

report.

2000- 01 Grand Jury Evaluation:

The Grand Jury agrees with the District Attorney. This was referred to the

Board of Supervisors who stated “ in preparation for the transition of the

Family Support Division, the first phase is to move the Family Support out

of the present facility and then evaluate the needs of the District

Attorney’s staff at that time.” They previously mentioned that this

transition would be in 2003. We suggest that this recommendation not be

held over that long and the previous Grand Jury Recommendation be

reissued. This was also referred to Public Works who state that this was

the responsibility of Building and Grounds and therefore this

recommendation be referred to them.

00- 23 Establish a secure storage location for the evidence displays.

RESPONSE: District Attorney’s Office

The Board of Supervisors should insure there is a secure storage area for

evidence displays.

2000- 01 Grand Jury Evaluation:

We agree with the District Attorney. This recommendation should have

been referred to the Board of Supervisors. It is our suggestion that this be

done as soon as possible.

00- 24 The District Attorney facility should meet applicable ADA ( Americans

With Disabilities Act) standards and/ or California Accessibility standards

and codes.

RESPONSE: Board of Supervisors

ADA and/ or California Accessibility standards and codes will be

addressed at the same time as Grand Jury Recommendation 00- 22 above.

RESPONSE: District Attorney’s Office

The Board of Supervisors sho uld insure the District Attorney building is

accessible by all persons.

RESPONSE: Department of Public Works

This item should be referred to the Buildings and Grounds Department for

response. Public Works has no authority to take the action indicated in the

report.

2000- 01 Grand Jury Evaluation:

We agree with the District Attorney. This recommendation was also

referred to the Board of Supervisors. The response was the same as for

00- 22. For the same reasons stated in our review of 00- 22 we strongly

recommend that this be done as soon as possible.

GLENN COUNTY JAIL

00- 25 Security of the fenced area outside the kitchen needs to be addressed to

discourage contraband and escape.

RESPONSE: Glenn County Jail

We have met with County Architect to address this issue. Our suggested

plan is to move the fence further south toward the sidewalk thus providing

an additional secured area for the walk- in freezer and a larger generator.

Once the plan is finalized, we will include the additional security measures

in the budget.

2000- 01 Grand Jury Evaluation:

The Grand Jury agree with the plan as explained and urge an early

implementation.

00- 26 Complete all remodeling and improvements already funded as soon as

possible to ensure the safety of the inmates, staff and community.

RESPONSE: Glenn County Jail

All remodeling in the interior of the facility has been completed. The

improvements should be completed near November 2001. In order of

priority, they will probably be addressed as follows:

1. Install additional closed circuit security cameras in and around the

facility.

2. Install additional walk- in freezer

3. Replace current generator with a larger capacity unit

4. Widen the sally port entrance

5. Provide secure walkway between the jail and the courthouse

All the improvements will be based on the availability of I. N. S. revenue

after Operational expenses. Regarding item 5 ( secured walkway), this

item is part of a courthouse security plan and remodel and will trail until a

decision is finalized on the entire project.

2000- 01 Grand Jury Evaluation:

The Grand Jury agrees with the plans as explained and urge an early

implementation, especially the generator and items of security such as the

closed circuit cameras.

00- 27 Keep meat slicer closed when not in use.

RESPONSE: Glenn County Jail

This issue has been addressed and proper security measures are in place.

2000- 01 Grand Jury Evaluation:

During a committee’s visit to the jail facility kitchen the slicer was

observed covered only with dishtowels. The Grand Jury urges the

immediate implementation of the 1999- 2000 Grand Jury recommendation.

If the manufacturer cannot provide a secure cover then every effort should

be made to manufacture one locally. This provides a threat to the security

of inmates and staff.

00- 28 Streamline the hiring process.

RESPONSE: Board of Supervisors

The Board concurs with the attached response of the Personnel Director,

dated August 29, 2000.

RESPONSE: Personnel Department