HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 06221993 - 1.108 1. 108
THE BOARD OR SUPERVISORS OF
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on June 22, 1993 by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Powers, Smith, Bishop, McPeak, Torlakson
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: Grand Jury Report
IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the 1992-1993 Contra
Costa Grand Jury report entitled "Threat to the Grand Jury
Process" (No. 9314) is REFERRED to the County Administrator and
Internal Operations Committee.
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of
an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of SupervisorsAn the date shgt n.
ATTESTED: / 3
PHIL BA7 ELOR,Clerk of the Board
of Supervisors and County Administrator
by �L�/ .fi_�_� Deputy
cc: Grand Jury
County Administrator
Internal Operations Cte.
RECEIVED P.
JUN 1 5 1993
CLE R CONTRA OS A CO ISORS
A REPORT BY
THE 1992-1.993 CONTRA COSTA GRAND JURY
1020 Ward Street
Martinez, California 94533
(510) 646-2345
REPORT No. 9314
THREAT TO THE GRAND JURY PROCESS
`,r the Board of Stgxn+isors fmm Grand Jwrns to sandize the County for
Grand Jury service, it orrdd rm*in w4bming the pawn that the brand
Jury is not intended to rqrmw all ge mraphic and socio-t�mmnic aegmew of
the County's population,'
Approved by the Grand Jury:
Date:/
emarie Go ds in
Grand Jury Fordman
Accepted for Filing:
Date:
Richard S. Flier
Judge of the Superior Court
-87
SECTION 933 (c) OF TfiIE CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE
Sec. 933. Findings and recommendations; com-
ment of governing bodies, elective officers,
or agency heads
(c) No later than 90 days after the grand jury submits
a final report on the operations of any public agency
subject to its reviewing authority, the governing body of
the public agency shall comment to the presiding judge of
the superior court on the findings and rerotnraendatiors
pertaining to matters under the control of the governing
body, and every elective county officer or agency head for
which the ?rand jury has responsibility pursuant to
Section 91 .1 shall comment within 60 days to the
presiding judge of the superior court, with an information
copy sent to the board of supervisors,on the findings and
recommendations pertaining to matters under the control
of that county officer or agency head and any agency or
agencies which that officer or agency head supervises or
controls. In any city and county, the mayor shall also
comment on the findinss and recommendations. All
such comments and reports shall forthwith be submitted
to the presiding judge of the superior court who impan-
eled the grand jury. A copy of all responses to grand
jury reports shall be placed on file with the clerk of the
public agency and the office of the county cleric, or the
mayor when applicable, and shall remain on file in those
offices. One copy shall be placed on file with the
applicable grand jury final report by, and in the control
of the currently impaneled grand jury, where it shall be
maintained for a minimum of five years. (Added by
Stars 1961, c 1284, § 1. Amended by Stats 1963, c 674,
§ 1; Sram 1974, c 393, § 6; Stats 1974, c 1396, § 3,
Stats 1977, c 107, § 6,• Stats 1977, c 187, § 1; Scars
1980, c 54.:, § 1; Stats 1981, c 203, § 1; Stam 198Z c
1408, § 5,- Stats 1985, c 221, § 1; Stars 1987, c 690,
§ 1; Stars 1988, c 1297, § 5.)
Former § 9:3, added be Stats.1982, c. 1:03. § 6, amended by
Stats.1985,c_"l.§ Z,operative Jan. 1. 1989,was repealed by Stats.1987,
c. 690, § 2.
Former § 933, added by Stars.1959, c- 501. § Z. was repealed by
Stats.1959. C. isl?, § 3.
-88-
Flndini!s:
1. The Grand Jury is the official "watchdog" of all local governments. It is charged with
the authority to investigate the accounts, operations, and records of local government
and is armed with the power of subpoena to aid it in its work.
2. The Grand Jury inspects entities for inefficiencies, irregularities; and when necessary,
it brings indictments or accusations against county employees, officers, or departments
for wrongful performance of duties. To date the 1992-93 Grand Jury has responded to
over 170 communications of concern from citizens.
3. The State of California requires that each county pay Grand Juror expenses from the
general fund of the county. (Penal Code §§890 and
nd 890.1) The State has established
minimum compensation at $10 per Jury meeting. While only one Committee meeting
per day is reimbursed, many Contra Costa Grand Jury members attend two or more
during the course of a day and evening.
4. Last year's Grand Jury expenditures were $101,887, which included rental of office
space, outlay for telephone charges, publishing costs, secretarial help, outreach and
recruitment costs, and other necessary expenses.
5. The County Administrator's Office has arbitrarily recommended a budget of$55,000 for
the Grand Jury, without regard to prior years' expenses.
6. Qualifying mileage and meal costs are reimbursed to Grand Jurors on the same schedule
as county employees.
7. The State Controller's review of Grand Jury appropriations for comparable California
counties in fiscal year 1991-92 found that Alameda County's per capita costs were$.21,
Maria's $.21, San Mateo's $35, while Contra Costa's were $.09.
8. If the County Administrator's recommended budget is approved by the Board of
Supervisors, the per capita cost to the residents of Contra Costa County for.its Grand
Jury will be reduced to approximately$.06 and will force jurors to subsidize the County.
9. Recruitment efforts are made to include representatives of all ethnic, geographical and
socio-economic groups within the County.
10. Grand Jurors are expected to commit a minimum of 20 hours per week to the work of
the Grand Jury. The hours spent by the Foreman and Committee Chairs are substantially
more than 20 per week.
11. Based on the average meeting attendance, Grand Jury members receive $120 a month.
That equates to approximately $1.50 per hour.
-89-
12. Because of budget cuts, the time allotted this year for jury assistance by the assigned
Superior Court secretary has been reduced by 50 percent from the previous year. Jury
reports, correspondence, general typing,and other clerical chores are now done by jurors
at home, on their own time.
Conclusions:
1. The budget recommended by the County Administrator's Office will cripple the Grand
Jury's ability to perform its mandated functions.
2. Forcing jurors to subsidize the County for Grand Jury service could risk losing equal
representation of all geographic and socio-economic groups within the County.
3. A comparison of past Grand Jury budgets with those of other Counties demonstrates that
Contra Costa County has grossly underfunded its Grand Jury.
4. The County Administrator puts at risk the Grand Jury's ability to perform the over-sight
responsibilities.the State legislators were addressing when they required counties to pay
Grand.Juries out of county general funds.
Recommendations:
The 1992-93 Contra Costa Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Supervisors:
1. Accept the proposed $107,800 1993-94 Grand Jury budget.
2. Reaffirm the policy that Grand Jury members will receive compensation and will
be reimbursed for mileage and meal expenses at the same rate as county
employees.
Comment:
If the Board of Supervisors forces Grand Jurors to subsidize the County for Grand Jury
service, it could result in confirming the percpetion that the Grand Jury is not intended
to represent all geographic and socio-economic segments of the.County's population.
-90-