HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 07172001 - C.140 C.140
a
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on July 17, 2001, by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Gioia, Gerber, DeSaulnier, Glover and Uilkema
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
The Board ACCEPTED the Grand Jury Report No. 0109, "Compliance and
Review Committee Report", and REFERRED the report to the County
Administrator.
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of
an action taken nd entered on the minutes of the
Board of Sup isors on the date shown.
Attested:
John Sw n,CI r of the oard
of Sup isors and County Administrator
By:
Deputy Clerk
Grand JuryCjOntl 725 Court Street
P.O. Box 911
Costa Martinez, CA 94553-0091
Im
County C'• /TV
SE
rra,coiiK'�`
RECEIVE®
June 26, 2001
JUN 2 6 2001
CLERK BOARD 01 SUPERVISORS
CONTRA COSTA CO.
Board of Supervisors
651 Pine Street, 1 st Floor
Martinez, CA 94553
Re: Report No. 0109
Dear Board of Supervisors:
Attached is Contra Costa County Grand Jury Report No. 0109 for your information. No
response is required.
CAROL THEWS, Foreman
2000-2001 Contra Costa County Grand Jury
CT:
Enclosure
A REPORT BY
THE 2000-01 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY GRAND JURY
725 Court Street
Martinez; California 94553_ DECEIVED
JUN 2 6.2001
Report No. 0109
CLERK ON RARD�OSTACO ISO RS
COMPLIANCE AND REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT
- - p
APPROVED BY THE GRAND JURY:
Date: c,
CAROL THEWS
GRAND JURY FOREMAN
ACCEPTED FOR FILING:
Date: Q ,Z=
MICHAEL R. COLEMAN
JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
1 Ci�Q
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY GRAND REPORT NO. 0109
r
Compliance and Review Committee Report
The Contra Costa County Civil Grand Jury is impaneled annually to investigate city and county
governments, special districts and certain non-profit corporations to ensure functions are
performed in a lawful, economical and efficient manner. Findings and Recommendations
developed from these investigations are contained in reports signed by the Superior Court Judge
presiding over the Grand Jury. Responses to these reports must be made within certain time
constraints and in accordance with specific formats pursuant to §§933 and 933.05 of the
California Penal Code.
This Compliance and Review Report is prepared by the 2000/2001 Grand Jury and contains the
Findings, Recommendations and target Responses thereto to reports produced by the prior
1999/2000 Grand Jury. A second Compliance and Review Report of the 1999/2000 Grand Jury
activities has been been prepared specifically for the County Clerk and for State of California
archives pursuant to Section 933(b) of the California Penal Code. This second report contains
copies of the target responses in their entirety, including all attachments thereto.
A copy of all Grand Jury Final Reports can be found in County libraries. A copy of complete
responses from targets may be obtained from local clerks of public agencies, the Office of the
County Clerk or Mayors (Penal Code §933(c)) or by writing to:
Contra Costa County Civil Grand Jury
Post Office Box 911
Martinez, CA 94553-0091
Title Pape
Report 0001: Property and Evidence Storage Facility 35
0002: Adult Detention Facilities 37
0003: Juvenile Detention Facilities 39
0004: Juvenile Home Supervision and Electronic Monitoring Program 43
0005: The Sheriff's Marine Patrol 45
0006: Martinez Marina, Martinez, California 48
0007: .Mentally Ill and the Criminal Justice System 56.
0008: Neglect of the Byron Airport 59
0009: The Difficult Job of the Social Caseworker I & II 65
0010: Hercules City Council, Hercules, California 71
0011: Mt. Diablo Unified School District 74
0012: San Ramon USD Use of Measure D Bonds 77
34
Report No. 0001: Fire Supression at the Property and Evidence Storage Facility
401 Escobar Street, Martinez, CA
Response by the Office of the Sheriff and the Board of Supervisors
BACKGROUND
The Property and Evidence Storage Facility at 401 Escobar Street in Martinez (40 1) is a
windowless building which contains property seized or recovered by the Sheriffs Department as
well as evidence of crimes the Sheriff's Department has obtained as a result of investigations.
The building contains an office and a large barn-like storage area. The storage area contains
shelving and scaffolding. The scaffolding provides two levels for storage of property and
evidence. Material is mostly stored in grocery-type paper bags. The facility is very densely
utilized and is severely overcrowded. In addition to the building there is a small outdoor yard for
large objects such as automobiles.
The building also contains a walk-in freezer for storing items which may deteriorate at room
temperature and a small room, with ventilation, for storing dangerous chemicals and
ammunition. No large quantities of chemicals or ammunition are stored in this room, only
samples.
FINDINGS
I. There are three smoke detectors in the building, two on the ceiling of the main
room, and one in the small room for storing chemicals and ammunition. These
smoke detectors are powered by the building electrical service and have a battery
backup system.
Response: The Office of the Sheriff agrees with the finding.
2. The smoke detectors have an annunciator in the office and also send.a signal to an
external monitoring facility. In the event a detector is actuated, it is noted by a
person at the monitoring facility who is then required to contact the fire
department. The external monitoring facility is staffed 24 hours per day, seven
days per week.
Response: The Office of the Sheriff agrees with the finding.
3. There are a number of fire extinguishers within the facility, but the Sheriff's
Department policy states they are only to be used for"small" fires considered
easily suppressible without outside help.
Response: The Office of the Sheriff agrees with the finding.
4. Sheriff's Department policy states that if a fire is detected, 911 is to be called and
the building evacuated.
Response: The Office of the Sheriff agrees with the finding.
3S
5. A fire at this facility would be devastating to pending prosecutions.
C '
i
Response:
A. The Office of the Sheriff disagrees, in part, with Finding No. 5
B. Any loss of evidence, whether by fire, water damage, theft, earthquake,
accidental release, temperature extremes, rodents, or other means, may
make the prosecution of a case more problematic. However, when
reasonable efforts have been taken to preserve the integrity of evidence,
alternatives to the evidence may be introduced in court. .Such alternatives
may include photographs, .samples, witness testimony or written
documentation. Furthermore, that evidence which tends to be most
critical in the prosecution of cases, such as firearms, items contaminated
by biological fluids and lifted latent fingerprints, are not at risk in the
Property and Evidence Storage Facility. We feel that we have taken
reasonable efforts.
6. The building met the fire codes at the time the Sheriffs Department took
occupancy.
Response: None provided
RECOMMENDATION
0
The 1999-2000 Contra Costa Grand Jury recommends:
The Sheriff immediately take steps to have an adequate automatic fire suppression system
installed at 401 if this building is to continue to be used for evidence and property storage.
Response:
A. I he recommendation will not be implemented because it is not reasonable.
B. the County has entered into a purchase agreement for a new property storage
facility at 2099 Arnold Industrial Way. A design study has been completed for the
remodel of the building. Construction drawings are currently being developed
the remodel will include fire sprinklers as well as other safety features not
available in the existing facility. It is anticipated that the Property and Evidence
Storage function will be relocated from 401 Escobar.Street to the new building
within the next twelve months. Given the pending relocation of the Property and
Evidence Storage function, it is not reasonable to expend funds modifying the
existing, inadequate building.
f
36
Report No. 0002: Adult Detention Facilities
Response by the Office of the Sheriff and Board of Supervisors
BACKGROUND
Paragraph 919(b) of the Penal Code requires that the Grand Jury inquire into the conditions and
management of County detention facilities. The Grand Jury made visits to each of the adult
detention facilities of Contra Costa County (Martinez Detention Facility, West County Detention
Facility, and the Marsh Creek Detention Facility). The Grand Jury also reviewed the latest
reports furnished by the California Board of Corrections. Additionally, the Grand Jury inquired
into the operation of the Inmate Welfare Fund (Fund), its income and expenditures.
FINDINGS
1. The detention facilities were found to be clean and well operated.
Response: Agree.
2. Overcrowding exists at the Martinez facility. In particular, holding cells use for
court transport and staging are overcrowded, as are modules Q and C.
Response:. Agree.
3. More inmates are requiring segregation because of gang involvement and other
issues.
Response: Agree.
4. Minor problems were outlined in the Board of Corrections inspection reports for
all three facilities. These were promptly addressed and corrected by the Sheriff's
Office.
Response: Agree.
5. Expenditures from the Fund are controlled by the Sheriff with the advice and
counsel of the Welfare Fund Committee.
Response: Agree.
6. The Fund derives income primarily from contracts for collect telephone service
for the inmates. The charges for a completed call are paid by the inmate's
families, or others, who accept the charges when a call is placed to them by an
inmate. There is a recorded message placed at the beginning of each call which
states that it is a collect call and explains the charges for the connection. No other
telephone service is available to the inmates.
Response: Agree.
37
. Gf fes.
7. The recipient of a collect call from a prison inmate is free to reject such a call.
The charges are high. If calls are rejected, the inmates have other methods of
communicating with their families and the outside world (mail, Friends Outside,
inmate visits, etc.).
Response: Agree.
8. Penal Code section 4025(e).allows funds from the Fund not needed for inmate
welfare to be spent by the Sheriff for maintenance of jail facilities. An itemized
report of expenditures is required to be submitted annually to the Board of
Supervisors.
Response: Agree.
RECOMMENDATIONS
i '
The 1999-2000 Contra Costa County Grand Jury makes the following recommendations:
I
1. The Sheriff should continue working with the County Administrator to
implement expansion of the West County Detention.Facility to eliminate
overcrowding at the Martinez Detention Facility.
Response: the recommendation requires further analysis, The Office of the
Sheriff continues to seek alternatives for addilional housing at the West
County Detention Facility. The Office of the Sheriff has been working
- internally to explore options such as a construction grant, but the
responsibility and authorlly for obtaining construction capital lies with the
County Administrative Officer. Funding may be located, but that is not within
the exclusive control of the Sheriff and would require CAO involvement.
2. Some organization, not affiliated with the Sheriffs Office, should audit the
expenditures from the Inmate Welfare Fund regularly to assure that the Fund
is not being abused.
Response: The recommendation has been implemented The County Auditor.
has previously performed audits on this Fund Our last audit, October 23,
1999, reported all accounting practices met County.standards. An audit was
recently conducted by the Auditor's Office and we are awaiting a final report.
38
Report No. 0003: Juvenile Detention Facilities
Response by Board of Supervisors and.Office of the Sheriff
BACKGROUND
Under the California Penal Code Section 919(b), the Contra Costa County Grand Jury is required
to inspect and observe the conditions and management of the Contra Costa County detention
facilities. The Probation Department of Contra Costa County manages two juvenile detention
facilities: Juvenile Hall in Martinez and the Orin Allen Youth Rehabilitation Facility (The
Boys Ranch) in Byron. The Boy's Ranch was visited by the Grand Jury in 1999 and again in
early 2000.
The Probation Department also has two juvenile residential treatment centers that house
juveniles with severe emotional and behavioral problems. The Summit Facility for Boys is
located in an older building adjacent to Juvenile Hall and houses 20 male juveniles. The Chris
Adams Center for Girls (opened in December 1999) has the capacity to house 20 residential
juveniles, with an additional 15 for day treatment. The Grand Jury has inspected each facility,
met with the staff and reviewed the required annual state inspection reports for compliance.
FINDINGS - JUVENILE HALL
1. The daily number of juveniles in residence often exceeds.the authorized
capacity of 160 youths by as many as 30.
Response:Agree.
2. At night, the overflow population is housed in the recreation room, sleeping
on the floor in portable fiberglass "canoe-like" beds.
Response: Agree.
3. By mid-2000, the Tamalpais dormitory construction project will add 10 more
beds, but not enough to reduce the overcrowding.
Response: Agree.
4. The required State fire inspection was not performed in 1999.
Response:Agree.
5. In the event of a fire, some of the sleeping areas require up to seven doors to
be manually unlocked in order to release the juveniles.
Response: Agree.
6. The 1998 inspection report by the State Fire Marshall indicated that fire drills
are performed, but not always recorded. The Hall's records indicate that
during 1999 there were eight fire drills.
39
Response:Agree.
E
7. Funds have been allocated for the building of a new juvenile detention facility
and construction is expected to begin in November of 2000 with completion
set for mid-2003.
Response:Agree.
8. There is a continuing problem of attracting and maintaining qualified staff.
Overtime in 1999 was $535,350 because of staff shortages.
Response:Agree.
i
9. Juvenile Hall is an aging facility with over fifty years of service but the Hall is
clean and well maintained.
Response:Agree.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The staff at Juvenile Hall needs to make fire safety a top priority and to pursue
the State Fire inspectors to make annual visitations.
.Response:Has been implemented The state fire inspection is usually completed
toward the end of each calendar year. In 1998, the fire inspection wascompleted
on October 9, 1998. The State Fire Marshall was reminded about their; 1999
inspection, but they were one month late in completing the Juvenile Hall
inspection. The Chief Duty Probation Officer assigned to Juvenile Hall will take
personal responsibility for making.sure the State Fire Inspectors have adequate
notice to complete their annual'visitations.
2. Due to the aging and overcrowding of this facility, fire drills need to be
conducted monthly and recorded.
Response: Has been implemented The Chief Deputy Probation Officer, assigned
to Juvenile Hall will take responsibility for making sure that the supervisor
assigned to this duty completes these fire drills and records their results on a
monthly basis.
3. The Probation Department needs to increase recruitment of staff to.help.
decrease overtime costs.
Response: Has been implemented We have worked closely with the Department
of Human Resources to institute a hiring process using "band certification".
This allows us to fill our permanent.staff vacancies much quicker than before.
We still have a shortage of qualified temporary Probation Counselors. Once
again, the Chief Deputy at Juvenile Hall will take responsibility to insure that a
Probation Manager increases recruitment efforts at our local colleges and other
sources ofpotential employees.
40
FINDINGS - THE BOYS RANCH (THE ORIN ALLEN YOUTH REHABILITATION
{ FACILITY)
1. All of the required inspection reports were reviewed for compliance and were
found to be current with the exception of an overdue State Fire Marshal's
report.
Response: Agree.
2. Two dormitories house up to 100 youths and the older one has no air
conditioning.
Response:Agree.
3. The small kitchen has a residential type freezer.
Response:Agree.
4. The furniture and equipment in the older dormitory is at the end of its life.
Response:Agree.
5. The parking lot is in disrepair.
Response: Agree.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Replace worn and outdated furniture and equipment.
Response: Not yet implemented but will be. Initial steps have been taken to
replace damaged and torn furniture. The Chief Deputy Probation Officer in
charge will continue to update equipment and furniture at the facility as funds
become identified and available.
2. Install air conditioning equipment in the old dormitory.
Response: Not yet implemented but will be. Steps have been take to have air
conditioning installed in the old dormitory. This project will be completed in
fiscal year 2000/2001. The Chief Deputy will monitor this project's progress.
3. Repave the parking lot.
Response: Not yet implemented but will be. The pat-king lot and access road are
in need of repaving. This project will be submitted for consideration to Courity
Administration and will be moved upon as funds become available. To date there
have been no monies identified to complete this project, however, the County
General Services Department is preparing an estimate of the cost. There is also
the possibility that grant monies may become available in the near future for this
and other needed maintenance.
P
41
FINDINGS - THE CHRIS ADAMS GIRLS CENTER
: 1
1. The Center is clean and well maintained.
Response:Agree.
2. The single.classroom is large and open-spaced with ample room for the
students.
Response: Agree.
3. Therecreation room lacks furniture, a television and other equipment; which
would make the Center's environment more habitable and home-like.
Response:Agree.
RECOMMENDATION
1. That the Center purchase furniture, a television and other amenities.
Response: Not yet implemented but will be. The Sheriff;s Posse has donated a
large.screen television, parents have donated some "work-out" equipment, and
the Juvenile Hall Auxiliary has purchased a gas barbeque for the Chris Adams
Center. There is still a "wish list" that will be displayed at the opening of the
"ARF-Terry Starr Kennel" on December 4, 2000. This recommendation has been
- partially implemented and as the budget allows will be a continuing process.
FINDINGS - THE SUMMIT BOYS CENTER
1. The Center's furniture is worn and in disrepair.
Response: Agree.
2. The interior of the facility is worn.
Response:Agree.
RECOMMENDATION
1. Replace furniture and equipment that is in disrepair.
Response: Not yet implemented but will be. As the budget allows, items that are
worn and in disrepair are being replaced.
r
i
42
i
G'J�4
7-12 mod/
Report No. 0004: Juvenile Home Supervision and Electronic Monitoring Program
Response by Board of Supervisors and Office of the Sheriff
BACKGROUND
Under the California Penal Code Section 919(b), the Contra Costa County Grand Jury is required
to inspect and observe the conditions and management of the Contra Costa County detention
facilities and related programs. Grand Jury members met with the staff of the Juvenile Home
Supervision and Electronic Monitoring Program to review the program that allows non-violent
juvenile offenders, who would otherwise be incarcerated at Juvenile Hall, to remain at home and
attend school.
FINDINGS
1. The staff maintains close contact with the juvenile's parents/guardians to ensure.
compliance with the Program's protocols.
Response:Agree.
2. The staff is enthusiastic and committed to maintaining a high degree of
compliance.
Response:Agree.
_ f
3. The cost of maintaining a juvenile in this program is about $20.00 per day,
compared to the estimated cost of$125.00 per day at Juvenile Hall.
Response:Agree.
4. The Program has an average daily population of about 180 juveniles who are
monitored by home supervision or electronic means. With either method, a
visit with a Probation Department staff person is required on a daily basis.
Response:Agree.
5. Contact is also maintained by random phone calls and unannounced visits to
either home or school.
Response: Agree.
6. School attendance is mandatory and absence is grounds for remanding the
juvenile to Juvenile Hall
Response: Agree.
43
RECOMMENDATION
The 1999-2000 Contra Costa County Grand Jury recommends that the Juvenile Home
Supervision and Electronic Monitoring Program be expanded since it is clearly an example of
prudent management of juveniles in custody.
Response: Not yet implemented but will be. With the support of County
Administration we have included four additional positions for the Home
Supervision and.luvenile Electronic Monitoring program. These positions are
included in the preliminary budget request.
j
i
i
44
Report No. 0005: The Sheriff's Marine Patrol
Response by the Office of the Sheriff and Board of Supervisors
BACKGROUND
The Sheriffs Marine Patrol is a part of the Patrol Services Division of the Field Operations
Bureau in the Office of the Sheriff. A sergeant is in charge of the daily operations of the four
regular deputies and volunteer reserves assigned. The Patrol mostly operates out of Delta
Station at Oakley. The Patrol operates around the clock, 365 days per year, on the waterways of
Contra,Costa County. Seven boats are assigned of which four are normally on patrol at any one
time, weather permitting.
FINDINGS
1. Contra Costa County's shorelines abut approximately 200 miles of navigable
waterway extending from Richmond through San Pablo Bay, the Carquinez Strait,
Suisun Bay to Pittsburg at New York Point and then eastward on the San Joaquin
River to Mandeville Island and Old River where the county line follows Old
River south. It is the largest waterway in the State of California. East of
Martinez, within the Delta, there are over 1000 miles of navigable sloughs and
cuts and numerous small,islands.
Response:Agree.
2. Duties of the Marine Patrol include but are not necessarily limited to:
a. Enforcing the law.
b. Overseeing and enforcing water safety and recreational boating.
C. Providing a deterrent to criminal activity and interdicting criminal and
environmental offenses.
d. Investigating and reporting on accidents, which occur on the waterways.
C. Clearing waterways of abandoned and derelict boats and other hazards.to
boating and water.recreation.
f. Providing emergency assistance to boaters in distress.
g. Assisting in search and rescue operations with other agencies.
Response: Agree.
3. Approximately 38,000 boats,jet skis and other watercraft are registered in Contra
Costa County.
Response:Agree.
45
4. Total expenditures for the Marine Patrol for fiscal.year 1998/1999 were $917,085.
Total revenues were $267,408. All of the revenues received during FY 98-99
came from the State Department of Boating and Waterways. Of the total revenue,
$86,400 was grant money from the State to assist in removal of derelict vessels
from the Delta Waterways. Net cost to the County was $649,677.
Response: Agree.
5.. Marine Patrol Manpower:
a. The Patrol is essentially staffed by five full time officers, a sergeant and
four deputies. There is authorization for two additional full time.deputies
but due to the present lack of funding the positions have not been filled.
b. The Patrol has four level tow reserve deputies and one level four reserve
deputy. The reserves assist the full time deputies and volunteer to serve
two shifts per month on the weekends. This volunteer effort enables the
Patrol to have more boats on duty when needed.
C. Level two reserve deputies are uniformed and armed and have peace
officer authority. They work under the direct supervision of a regular
deputy. They provide most needed assistance during crime and/or
accident scene control and when transporting prisoners and evidence.
They also assist in the seamanship operation of the patrol boats. The level
four reserves wear uniforms but are not armed and are being phased out
due to the State's requirement to have peace officer status.
Response: Agree.
6. The Patrol cooperates with other law enforcement agencies, the U. S. Coast
Guard, the California Department of Fish and Game and the marine patrols of
other counties.
Reslyon.ve: Agree.
7. The Sheriff has seven patrol boats. The top speed of these boats is between 35
and 45 mph. Boats are equipped with VHF marine radio, sheriffs radio,;radar,
global positioning system, depth sounder, loud hailer, emergency lights and
equipage for basic towing, limited firefighting and boat salvage operations.
Additionally, the Marine Patrol works closely with the Sheriff's helicopter which .
is on call for emergencies and, when airborne, normally makes sweeps over the
Delta.
Response: Agree.
8. The Marine Patrol provides an essential service to the public at large and,to the
boating public specifically. The increasing need for recreational facilities are
causing the public to view the waterways as an available resource. With'a more
affluent public, boating and other water-based activities will increase requiring
greater law enforcement capability.
46
Response:Agree.
s
9. In the event of a major catastrophe, such as an earthquake, the ability to travel on
the water to assist in disaster relief would prove to be of utmost importance were
roads and bridges to become impassable.
Response: Agree.
RECOMMENDATIONS
I. The Sheriff s Office should increase the available manpower of the patrol to a
level which will permit.all available units to be deployed in an emergency.
Response: 7hi.s recommendation is accepted. Efforts are underway to
accomplish this within existing staffing constraints by July 1, 2001.
2. The Emergency Services Division should consider and plan for the use of the
Patrol and other waterborne assets that can be made available or acquired in the
event of a catastrophic failure of the roads and bridges or acts of terrorism.
Response: This recommendation is accepted. The Emergency Services
Division currently both considers and uses the Marine Patrol as well as the
Marine Posse and citizens of the marine community in addressing all manner
of emergencies on or near the water.
l
47
Report No. 0006: Martinez Marina
t Martinez, California
Response by Council, City of Martinez
BACKGROUND
The Grand Jury inquired into the deteriorating condition of the Martinez Marina (Marina). The
City of Martinez, California (City) received $4,032,000 from the California Department of
Boating and Waterways (State) through six loan contracts to build, restore and renovate the
Marina, and recently was approved to receive another $1.7 million. To date, the City has been
unable to produce any records for the expenditure of funds received from the State for the Marina.
After thirty-nine years of operating the Marina the City Council of Martinez, (Council)
proclaimed it was no longer able to support the Marina as needed and therefore accepted, in
response to a Request for Proposal, WESTREC Marinas' (WESTREC) proposal to manage,
operate and maintain the Marina. The State has deferred payment on the remaining debt balance
until a contract agreement with WESTREC is reached and approved by the State- interest
however, continues to accrue. To date, no significant improvement in the financial and material
conditions of the Marina is apparent.
FINDINGS
I 1. Evidentiary material which includes interviews with advisory commissioners,
elected Martinez City officials and City staff and documents relevant to Marina
operations, did not produce an explanation as to the reasons for, or causes of, the
deterioration, or the significant reduction in berth occupancy.
Response: Partially Disagree. Various statements have been made in writing
and to the Grand Jury that the City lacked the fiinding to perform all necessary
maintenance for the Marina. Akey component of maintenance is to complete
dredging on a timely basis to ensure accessibility to berths. Without such
accessibility, occupancy rates will go down; the City will not be in a position to
charge competitive berthing rates;funds will not be available to make
necessary ongoing improvements to the docks; and maintenance will suffer.
The City acknowledged this condition by issuing an operation with the
knowledge of what actions need to be taken with regard to revenues to
complete necessary improvements and provide for an on-going maintenance,
thus preventing the kind of deterioration that had taken place previously..
2. In 1960, in a Memorandum of Agreement, the State granted the City an initial loan
of$1,300,000 to build a small boat harbor and formed a joint committee for
"review and approval of leases and contracts for development and for other
purposes specified."
Response: Agree.
48
. Gam:/yam
3. Since 1973, the State granted five additional loans totaling $2,732,000 for the
revitalization of the Marina. Each loan contract included a feasibility study, a
requirement for insurance coverage and a description of projects to be
accomplished, e.g.,
a. dredging
b. constructing buildings
c. constructing and repairing the breakwater
d. fabricating, installing and rehabilitating berths
e. installing utilities, gates, fences
f. refurbishing of buildings, utilities, rest rooms, roads, andscape..
Response: Partially Agree. The implication of this statement is that the City
has received$2,732,000 in additional loans from the State. Although there
have been five additional loans granted by DBA W, the City did not draw down
on the last of these loans ($1,05 7,000) and DBAW has consented to include this
loan authorization as part of the $2,9 73,000 loan application that was
approved by the Commission in March of this year. The remaining four loans
were drawn down by the City and expenditures made in compliance with State
(DBA W) requirements.
4. In 1973, the State required the City to deposit all funds received from the State into
a `.`Martinez Marina Construction Account."
Response: Agree.
5. In February 1999, Council Resolution 020-99 proclaimed the City was unable to
operate, maintain and manage the Marina. The Council selected a proposal from
WESTREC to operate, maintain and manage the Marina subject to a six month due
diligence to resolve dredging requirements, breakwater repairs, demolishing old
berths and buildings, slope and bank protection of the Marina basin, upgrading
landscaping, roadways, utilities, and restructuring of the City's outstanding debt to
the State. Since then, the due diligence period had been extended to April 2000.
Response: Partially Agree. The City Council approved Resolution No. 020-99 on
March 3, 1999, approving a contract with Westrec Marinas for the management
and operation of the Martinez Marina. As part of that resolution, the City
indicated that it had been unable to make debt service payments to DBAW and that
costs had exceeded revenues over the past fiscal year. The resolution further
indicated that Westrec agreed to invest funds in the Marina to assist in the
revitalization funds that the City did not possess at that point in time. 'The intent of
the wording in this resolution-was to show that Westrec was in a better position
than the City to properly operate the Marina due to its long history of operating
public marina facilities.
The issue of the due diligence period is not contained in the resolution cited.
Although Westrec at one point in time had a due diligence date for the completion
of certain activities of April 2000, that date was modified to be June 30, 2000.
Westrec has completed its required activities and has submitted a letter to the City
indicating compliance with the requirements.
49
zl()
7-i�
The stated intent by Westrec and the City at the time of this resolution was to
proceed with a plan which would result in the development of Long-Term;Lease
that would provide a sound financial footing for management, operation and
maintenance of the Marina for the next 50 years. 1he City Council approved an
Option to Lease with Westrec Marinas on June 29, 2000, encompassing the
financial and operational elements of the Business Plan dated March 14,;2000.
More explanation of the Long-Term-Lease concept is provided in the response to
number 10 below.
6. After several years of reduction in berth occupancy, City reports indicated annual
revenue for Marina berth rentals as $463,304 in 1997, $447,400 in 1998 and
$421,916 in 1999. The present occupancy rate for the Marina berths is about 52%.
Response: Partially Disagree. The current occupancy rate for the Marina is 67%,
having increased with the operation of the Marina by Westrec beginning in April
1999.
7. As'of March 2000, $193,000 for engineering-inspection and $246,00 for
contingencies were included in the loan contracts without any specifications,
guidance or description by the State as to use. Insurance costs are not known by
the City.
Response: Disagree. Without a more definitive reference of loan contract(v) being
addressed by the Grand Jury, the city is unable to respond to this finding: The City
may agree or partially agree, but there is no way of validating the finding.
The finding regarding insurance lacks any context and, therefore, cannot;be
addressed
8. As of February 2000, the City had not been able to produce any records for the
expenditure of funds loaned by the State for Marina projects.
Response: Disagree. The loan contracts between the State and City that have
been completed are between 10 and 35 years old lite Citywas required.to
.submit documentation to the State of California for payments on these contracts
based on the work completed by contractors that is in compliance with the loan
contracts. The City complied with this requirement. Subsequently the annual
independent audits of the city's financial operations for-the prior year
documented the incoming and outgoing funds for Marina improvements
(including the payments of construction contracts) and concluded the
expenditures to be appropriate. Once this compliance has been achieved, there
was not a need to retain the contractor billings and City payments for the
contractor's work. A copy of the relevant pages from the independent auditor's
statements of 1959 through 1984 (the time period accounting for actual
disbursement of loan proceeds to the City) is enclosed.
The implication of this finding by the Grand Jury is that the City acquired the funds
from the State and then used the funds for other than the intended purposes.
Neither the State nor City auditing practices would allow this to occur. 1,he City
explained to the Grand,Jury that each of the loan contracts with the State of
50
California were approved contingent on completing specific improvements. The
State and the independent auditor were diligent in reviewing expenditures to
ensure they were in compliance with the provisions of the loan contracts.
9. The WESTREC Business Plan proposes a future fee increase from $6.00 to $8.95
per foot of berth. Additionally, the plan mentions the use of"adjacent properties"
(property other than the waterfront) and "requiring annual reserves will be
contributed" which was explained to mean the City will continue to provide funds
to support the Marina.
Response: Partially Disagree. The Business Plan referred to in this finding is not
Westrec's Business Plan. It is the City's plan of how certain activities related to
the Marina will be fiinded. The City worked with Westrec in determining what the
market would bear in terms of rental rates for berths in the Marina.
As part of the Business Plan representation to DBA W, the City agreed to use funds
coming to the City that are derived from Marina related sources for only Marina
activities. In other words, revenues coming to the City from Marina properties will
be used to support the Marina. The City Council will, of course, retain its
authority and responsibility for determining as part of its annual budget process
the distribution of funds in the best interests of the City of Martinez.
The Grand fury:s reference to "adjacent properties" is taken out of context in this
finding. 7'he adjacent properties'concept in the Business Plan (the Plan dated
January 13, .1999) relates to the fact that there are properties in the area of the
Marina that are not part of the docking/berthing facilities. The Business Plan
contemplates that Westrec would become responsible for upgrading and operating
some of those facilities/properties if it were to be approved for a Long-Term Lease.
Those properties are spelled out in the updated Business Plan dated March 14,
2000 (copy withdrawn by.the Grand Jury). It is in the City's best interest to have
facilities such as the bait shop, restaurant, restrooms, etc., upgraded in order to
increase revenues of those properties in the Marina area that will continue to be
maintained by the City. Any increased revenues that might be made available to
the City from Marina-related activities reduce any demand that might be placed on
its Genet-at Fund for Marina maintenance.
10. WESTREC's proposed Business Plan includes a"Management Plan" describing
how WESTREC will accomplish its Business Plan. It states:
"The Management Plan provides the City with a viable strategy for putting the
Marina in a positive cash flow within the first two years of operations. Over the
ten year period of the contract (assuming the original period is extended) the
Martinez Marina will be self sufficient and have much better docking facilities and
protection from flooding than exists at the present time. The docking facilities will
not, however, be properly configured to deal with the long term demands by
boaters. The returns of the City will not be sufficient to provide for the
construction of ancillary facilities that will enhance the attractiveness of the Marina
and provide for the necessary cash flow to cause a full restoration and
reconfiguration of the docks that is necessary in the time frames of the contracted
management plan. The strategy provides for a good ten year return but does not
f build a facility for the longer term."
51
G�-!fid
Response: Partially Agree. The Business Plan to which the Grand Jury is
referring is the work of the City of Martinez. It is not a Westrec Business Plan.
The quote stated in this finding is not the same wording as that contained in the
Business Plan dated January 13, 1999. The full text of the section of that Plan
is as follows: i
"The Management Plan provides the City with a viable financial.strategy for
putting the Martinez Marina in a positive cash flotiv position within the first two
years of operation. Over the ten-year period of the contract (assuming the
original period is extended) the Marina will be self-sufficient and have much
better docking facilities and protection from flooding.than exists at the present
time. This scenario does not provide sufficient cash flow to enable a rebiulding
of all of the docks or a substantial recon-figuration of the slips to match.with
the projected long-term demand by boaters. Also, there is not sufficient cash
flow to construct ancillary facilities to enhance the attractiveness of the
Marina. A ten-year Management Plan provides sufficient cash flow to me ke
debt service payments, cover all operating costs and provide some positive cash
flow for the City. It is projected that additional years of Management Plan
operation (beyond 10) would continue the City's ability to sustain an operating
marina. However, the lack of addressing fixture demand(for both wet and dry
storage)jeopardizes the long term viability of the Marina and increases the
prospects of requiring additional loans to address capital maintenance needs. "
(Page 8,paragraph 1 of the Business Plan).
The Business Plan referred to in•this finding contained two sets of analyses.
_ The first was for a Management Plan that is referenced in the paragraph;
quoted above. The conclusion of that analysis was that certain improvements
could be made, but they would fall short of what is needed by the boating public
in the future and the revenues would not be sufficient to complete all the capital.
improvements that would be needed to maintain the Marina without an it fusion
of capital from some other source.
The implication of this quote in isolation is that the Plan does not provide for
the necessary.capital resources to complete the full set of improvements needed
to make the Marina viable. The section of the Business Plan immediately
following the misquote provided in this finding addresses an option to the
Management Plan which provides a Long-Term-L ease calling for a full set of
improvements to return the Marina to a quality status. In addition to achieving
a substantially higher revenueflow to the City to complete specific
improvements, it called for developer contributions of approximately$16.3
million to a wide range of facilities that will further enhance the viability of the
Marina. The quote from the Business Plan regarding a Long-Term-Leas.e puts
the intent of the City in much better perspective:
"The Management Plan provided for a bigger net income return to the City in
the early phases of operation as compared to the Long-Term-Lease Plan'as a
result of not putting large capital contributions into upgrading the Marina with
an eye toward the longer term fixture. The overall revenues to the City are
considerably greater, but more must be used to cover the debt service to the
State. The result of the partnership with the private operator is, however, a
significantly greater improvement to the full area of the Marina. This type of
52
-17-.
improvement will act as an attraction to other businesses to become part of the
development,fostering a longer term attractiveness for the boating public due
to the City's ability (through the private operator's financial resources) to
continually make the changes needed by the boaters for quality storage
facilities.. This scenario provides availability to a much greater range of boat
.storage needs with the addition of the dry.storage facility. It also provides for
a much greater array of landslide services to the boater. In comparison to the
Management Plan, this option: will provide for services that will be used by the
non boating public with the revenues gained from these activities used to
maintain and upgrade the required boating facilities.
Finally, this Long Term Lease Plan provides for not only payment of debt
service requirements and operating costs, but will also provide the cash flow
necessary to perform capital maintenance related to core needs (breakwater,
docks and dredging) of the Marina without further loans. " (Page 9,
paragraphs 3 and 4 of the Business Plan).
The City has consistently stated that it intends to move to along-Term-Lease to
ensure the Marina is properly returned to a quality condition and then
maintained in that manner. Again, a quote from the Business Plan dated
January 13, 1999 is appropriate for stating the City's intentions:
For the purposes and ease of description, the City's financial business plan will
be presented as two scenarios in both the sections and the attachments to
follow. It should be understood, however, that the. City and Wes•trec prefer to
move from the first phase (management/operations) to the second(long term
lease) within the first two to three years of operation. The contractual .
documents between the two parties have been written to facilitate a transition
from phase 1 to phase 2 by mutual agreement following approval by DBAW of
those elements relating to the City's financial commitments to the State
agency. " (Page 6,paragraph. 4 of the Business Plan).
This intent was reiterated and made a requirement by DBA Wfor the application
for a new loan approved in March of this year. It is reflected throughout the
Business Plan update that is dated March 14, 2000 (copy enclosed).
11. City officials indicate the City does not have a contingency plan if WESTREC
withdraws.from their proposal or fails to fulfill the due diligence resolutions.
Response: Disagree.. The City has worked with Westrec Marinas for over two
years and has done substantial checking of the firm's ability to perform the
obligations that are called for in the current Operating Agreement and are
proposed in the Business Plan dated March 14, 2000. The firm has expended
considerable time and money in developing a detailed plan of infrastructure
improvements to the Marina and properties immediately adjacent to the Marina.
The City has no reason to think that the firm will not be able or not want to
continue in the role of management of the Marina. If for some reason, however,
the firm were unable to continue, the City would be prepared to place public
employees in place until another operator could be retained to perform the
t
necessary tasks.
53
12. The City has a commitment from the State for an additional $1.7 million loan for
j the Marina.
Response: Disagree. The.City has received approval from DBA W for dtt
additional$1.7 million in loans contingent on the City meeting specific
contingencies. The City must enter a bong-Term-Lease that will provide;the
revenues to ensure repayment of DBAW loans.in the amount of$2.973 million.
Inorder for the Lease to be approved, all existing loans, with the exception of
the original loan, must be repaid(including interest) and the City-must have the
necessary entitlements (permits) to complete the infrastructure rehabilitation
noted in the Business Plan dated March 14, 2000.
13. The function of the joint State-City committee to oversee Marina projects;is not
defined and does not appear to serve a purpose.
Response: Partially Agree. The joint committee called for in the Government
Code at the time of the original loans to the City was ill def ned and there was
no monitoring apparatus in place to see that it functioned as it was originally
intended. The oversight fiinction, however, was assumed by DBWA in terms of
reviewing projects put for consistency with the loan approvals. DBAW.staff
has been vigilant in its oversight of projects. DBAW also approves
disbursement of loan funds against construction contracts.
14. The role of the Marina Commission is generally ignored by Council.
3 Response: Disagree. The Marina Commission has been responsible for!the
planning and oversight in the Management of the Marina for many years The
Commission includes representatives from many interested parties (Last Bay
Regional Park .,Uartinez Yacht ClublMartinez Park and Recreation
Comtrii.ssiott/Communily At-Large). The Martinez City Council has depended
on the Marina Commission for advisory input and recommendations on Marina
matters. The Commissions input and recommendations are always.seriously
considered and a majority of the adopted by the City Council
15. The evidentiary material obtained from all sources does not explain how the City
plans to pay down its debt or restore the Marina to "its original status as a
community focal point and regional draw" as stated in the 1998-99 Council Annual
Progress Report.
Response. Disagree. The Business Plan.developed in 1999 and the update of
that plan dated March 14, 2000 (copy withdrawn by Grand Jury)provides the.
data for how the City will finance its debt to DBA W for the loans that will be
used to rehabilitate and upgrade the Marina. Specifically, the lessee is to pay
off the existing loans (principal and interest) with the exception of the initial
loan made in 1960, (this loan being subject to different conditions written into
State law). New loans will be paid from revenues generated from all sources of
revenue derived from Marina operations.
i
54
RECOMMENDATIONS
The 1999=2000 Contra Costa Grand Jury makes the following recommendations to the Martinez
City Council:
I. Through the joint State-City committee develop an agreement with the State to
provide a plan whereby, if WESTREC withdraws from its proposal, the State will
continue to support Marina operations which will allow the people of Martinez and
surrounding communities to enjoy the revitalization of the Marina.
Response. T he City will not be implementing this recommendation. The
process of acquiring loans from the State included development of a reasonable
plan that will provide the means of paying off the loans. Incumbent to this
process is the acceptance on the part of the City for repayment of the loan
using a business plan that also shows how general and infrastructure
maintenance will be accomplished in a manner that continues the revenue
stream. It is the C'ity's responsibility to continue the operations if a lessee
withdraws from commitment made as part of a long-term lease. The
acceptance of the City's loan application in March of this year is DBA Ws
statement of confidence for the plan rehabilitation and operation of a long-term.
Marina in the City of Martinez.
2. Authorize a more active and responsible role for the Martinez Marina
Commission.
Response: The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be
implemented in the future.
Although we disagree that the Marina Commission has not played an active
role in the planning and administration of the Martinez Marina over these
many years, we do agree that a new role for the Commission needs to be
identified and authorized by the City Council.
Now that privatization of the Martinez Marina is soon to be a reality, the role
(?f the Commission is changing. No longer will the Commission be dealing with
the day-to-day administration and maintenance of the Marina. 'These issues
will be under the purview of the Marina operator. However, citizen advisory
input is still necessary and desired with respect to the oversight of the private,
operator and the fiaure enhancement of the Marina for the public good.
However, it must be kept in mind that the Marina Commission is an advisory
body to the City Council, the body elected by the people. .
A Subcommittee of the City Council and Marina Commission will be
c:onvenened after January 1, 2001. The privatization process is nearing
completion and the new role for the Commission can then be fully defined. We
anticipate this process to be completed prior to the end of the Fiscal Year (June
30, 2001).
55
Report No. 0007: Mentally Dl and the Criminal Justice System
Response by Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
BACKGROUND
Landmark legislation in mental health, the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act (LPS), was enacted in the
late 1960s to curb abuses that occurred in the warehousing of the mentally ill in state mental
hospitals. The intent of this legislation was to remove the mentally ill from an institutional setting
and place them back in their local communities where both inpatient and outpatient services would
be available. This effort to improve the plight of the mentally ill has not been successful; as our
County along with many others in the state, has failed to deliver adequate mental health services
and support for this population. Consequently, many of the mentally ill who lack private
resources for treatment have become the core population of the non-violent misdemeanor/minor
felony offenders who repeatedly recycle through our jails. A survey taken by the Justice
Department found that, nationwide, 16 percent of inmates are mentally ill. A great majority of
them also have substance abuse problems. Our jails have become the "mental institutions" of our
community, and this has had the unfortunate effect of criminalizing persons with serious,mental
illness.
The financial costs to the community are high, as these mentally ill offenders repeatedly tax the
resources of the criminal justice system and local jails. As a result, there is a growing movement
in the judicial community nationwide to establish"mental health courts". These courts provide a
-f single forum whereby members of the legal community who have been educated in the needs of
the mentally ill work together with mental health and substance abuse professionals to coordinate
the management and treatment of the offender. The collaboration usually begins at the time of
disposition of the criminal case, or in some courts following the arrest of specific offenders.
Treatment can be tailored to the offender's mental health needs as a condition of the terms of
probation.
These specialized courts have shown promising results in reducing recidivism while stabilizing
the offender's mental illness. The mental health court in Broward County, Florida(the oldest in
this country), has found that it has enhanced the expediency, effectiveness and quality of judicial
administration. The chief public defender of Broward County, Howard Finklestein, stated, "The
Mental Health Court is a resounding success not just because it is extremely efficient and cost
effective, but because it has brought a humanity to people who have been abused by the criminal
justice system for way too long."
Also recognizing the unique problems presented by mentally ill offenders, several California
counties, including Santa Clara, Riverside, and Sonoma have recently established such courts.
FINDINGS
1. Contra Costa County has a large number of mentally ill offenders who are
repeatedly incarcerated for misdemeanors of felonies. Of these, "revolving door
offenders, up to 30 are housed in the mental health unit (M module) of the Martinez
Detention Facility, where they receive mental health services. Up to 70 others may
be integrated with the general jail population.
56
r
Response: Agree.
6
2. In 1998,jail statistics indicated a readmission rate of 25% for mentally ill
offenders.
Response: Agree.
3. A survey conducted in San Bernardino County found that the mental ill offender
stayed in jail on an average of six times longer than other inmates (an average of
140-160 days as compared to 23 to 25 days for other offenders).
Response: Partially agree. In Contra Costa County, severely mental ill inmates
are, on average, incarcerated for longer periods than their mentally healthy
counterparts. Mentally ill offenders may be incompetent to stand trial or
participate in their defense, causing court dates to be delayed and jail stays to be
extended.
Inmates with less serious mental disorders, requiring the use of antidepressants,
for example, and who are housed on the general population modules, are generally
not incarcerated for longer periods than inmates who are not receiving mental
health treatment.
4. The incarcerated offender accepts psychiatric medication which usually alleviates
the symptoms of illness, e.g., paranoia and hallucinations. After release, however,
the offender will often stop taking this medication. Consequently, a downward
spiral begins with behavior that all too frequently culminates in another minor.
felony or misdemeanor.
Response: Agree.
5. In this County, an aggressive adversarial stance taken by prosecutors and defense
attorneys often operates to the detriment of the mental health needs of the
individual. There has been little effort to create effective interactions between the
criminal justice and mental health systems. Consequently incarceration, not
treatment, becomes the only choice available. This phenomenon occurs repeatedly,
as the mentally ill offender too often is punished over and over again for conduct
beyond his control.
Response: Disagree. Most people with mental illness do not commit crimes.
With regard to the stances taken by prosecutors and defense attorneys,public
prosecution is the first priority of the District Attorney. Criminal offenders are
prosecuted and ultimately incarcerated for committing crimes, not fora perceived
mental illness. The Public Defender's obligation is to zealously pursue the best
possible defense and fight for the least onerous disposition of each case.
Incarceration has not become the only choice available for mentally ill offenders.
The courts presently have the ability to order treatment programs as a condition of
probation. The courts can also dismiss misdemeanor cases when the defendant has
been found mentally incompetent.
57
6. In 1999, Contra Costa County applied to the State Department of Corrections for a
Mentally Ill Offender Crime Reduction Demonstration Grant. The development of
this application demonstrated a collaborative effort by the Sheriff, Probation, and
Mental Health Departments, along with the Judiciary of our County, to address the
need for finding appropriate alternatives to incarceration for the mentally;ill
offender. Although the grant was not funded, it did describe in detail how our
County agencies would work together, and may serve as a model for future
collaboration.
Response: Agree.
RECOMMENDATIONS
i
1. The Board of Supervisors should urge the judiciary to establish one or more Mental
Health Courts in Contra Costa County with the cooperation of the District
Attorney, Public Defender, Probation and Mental Health Departments, in order to
divert certain non=violent mentally ill offenders from jail into more appropriate
treatment.
Response: The recommendation is not accepted The establishment of courts is not
within the purview of the Board of Supervisors, therefore it would be inappropriate
of the Board to presume what is the best organization for the courts. Furthermore,
the County has no provision for the additional.staffing necessary to make a mental
health court operational.
Additionally, the Mental Health Court concept does not address the problem of
how the court can enforce treatment without custody.
2. Each Mental Health Court should consist of officers of the court who have been
trained in mental health issues, and who will be assigned to cases in such a manner
as to provide consistency and coordination in their disposition.
Response: N/A. See response to Recommendation No. 1.
i
58
Report No. 0008: Neglect of the Byron Airport
Response by Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
FINDINGS
1. The Byron Airport is a County-owned facility located in the East County near
Byron. It became a part of the County airport system in 1988. Construction
occurred in the early 1990's with a combination of Federal, State and County funds
and it has been operational since 1994.
Response:Agree.
2. The Byron Airport is intended to be a reliever facility for the extensively used
Buchanan Airport, also a County-owned facility, located in Concord.
Response:Agree.
3. The long-term use of the Byron Airport is ill-defined and its development has
received very limited attention or priority from many levels of the County
government, including several Commissions and Boards.
Response: Partially disagree. The long-term use of the Bryon Airport and its
development is defined in the "Last Contra Costa County Airport Master Plan
Report Summary", dated May 1986 Because of the Airports Enterprise Fuad
deficit.since.1990, application for Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)funding
for Master Plan updates did not occur.
During the past three years, the Airport Management has significantly reduced the
Airports Enterprise Fund deficit. Master Plan updates for both Byron and
Buchanan Airfield Airports has been identified for consideration under the Federal
Aviation Administrations (FAA)Airport Improvement Capital Program (AICP).
FAA funding is targeted for federal fiscal year 2001/2002. The Public Works
Department, Airports Division will be responsible for implementation.
,Subsequently, "...priorityfrom many levels of the County government, including
.several Commissions and Boards"has been prudent and commensurate
considering the fiscal state of the Airports Enterprise Fund since 1988.
4. The Byron Airport is taxpayer-financed by a combination of Federal funds
(approximately $20 Million), State funds (approximately $41,000) and Local funds
(approximately $2.5 Million). Currently, the facility is party of a County
Enterprise Fund which also includes the Buchanan Airport.
(An Enterprise Fund receives revenue from rentals, fees and non-operating
sources. Such a Fund is intended to be self-sufficient as opposed to
deriving its income from the General Fund or other taxes.)
59
Response: Partially disagree. The respondent agrees with the finding only with the
F following correction: 1) the Byron Airport, as well as Buchanan Field Airport, is
not technically "taxpayer financed". A11 Federal and State funding are
accomplished through a combination of aviation user fees. Furthermore; the
Airports Enterprise Fund is also not "taxpayer-financed" but derives its:income
from aviation and.non-aviation user fees from both Airports.
i
5. The Airport Enterprise Fund (Fund) was originally established in 1970 for the
Buchanan Airport. Operation of Byron Airport was added to the Fund in::fiscal
year 1990/91. Over the period June 1991 through June 1999, the Airports reported
their financial status separately. During this period, Buchanan Airport generated a
profit while Byron Airport reported a loss. This loss is currently being offset by
profits from Buchanan Airport.
Response: Partially disagree. The respondent agrees with the finding only with the
following correction: 1) the operation of the Byron Airport was added to the
Enterprise Fund in fiscal year 1988189, not fiscal year 1990191 as identified in the
Grand Jury Report.
6. As of June 1999, the Fund owed the County Treasurer approximately $81,3,000 for
cash advances to cover disbursements. The cash overdraft is due to an
accumulation of annual operating losses at Byron Airport. Because of profit
generated by Buchanan Airport, this loss to the Enterprise Fund is projected to be
eliminated by fiscal year 2007/08, although the Byron Airport component:will
continue its annual loss.
Response: Partially disagree. The respondent agrees with the finding only with the
following corrections: 1) according to the `Audited Financial Statements of the
Airport Enterprise Fund, Contra Costa County, For the Fiscal Years Ended June
30, 1999 and 1998 and June 30, 1998 and 1997", the Enterprise Fund hada .
Retained Deficit, End of Year-June 30, 1999 of$675,166; and 2) the loss to the
Enterprise Jund is projected to be eliminated by fiscal year 2006107.
7. Three organizations provide oversight for the County on activities and
developments of public use Airports. Specifically:
♦ County Board of Supervisors Airport Subcommittee, was created to
investigate and evaluate the economic impact of both airports.
♦ Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) is a County organization authorized
by the State to assure that land use surrounding a public airport is
compatible with airport operations and public safety.
♦ Aviation Advisory Commitee (AAC) is a County organization responsible
for advising on operations within the boundaries of the Byron and
Buchanan Airports.
60
i
i
Response:Partially disagree. The respondent agrees with the finding only with
` following clarification: 1) The Airport Land Use Commission (AL UC) is a County
organization authorized by State law to formulate land use policies to guide local
agencies in limiting development to uses that are compatible in terms of public
,safety and noise sensitivity to planned airport operations.
8. An interim Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan to control land utilization
surrounding the Airport was issued in 1991 by the ALUC. The ALUC is
responsible for identifying limitations to the use of land surrounding airports and
recognized at that time an updated Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan would be
needed to allow for additional development consistent with the protection of
Airport operations. This updated plan will also provide local communities and
property owners with information for developing their own interests consistent with
Airport operations. The need for the updated plan was also recognized by the
Board of Supervisors in a report by the Finance Committee in 1995 titled "BYRON
AIRPORT ACTION PLAN" (Consent Item 99, November 11, 1995 Board
Agenda) which, among other things, provided a tentative schedule for its
accomplishment by May 1997, subject to funding.
Response:Agree.
9. The need for an updated Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan was recognized.in
1991, but action to obtain it was delayed until March 1998, when a contract was
finally awarded to a consultant to.do the work. The initial delay may have been
due to funding problems, but differing priorities within the Community
Development Department played a significant role. Continuing delays have
occurred during the course of this contract, principally due to priority problems
with the Community Development Department. This has resulted in the need to
extend the time for contract performance from a completion date of December 31,
1999 to December 31, 2000.
Response: Partially disagree. The delay in the completion of a plan proposal was
not principally due to Community Development Department priority problems.
While staffing shortages did result in reducing the priority of the land use plan, the
delay was caused primarily by problems with the consultant whom the County
hired to assist staff in the preparation of the plan. Also contributing to the delay
where public workshops that were conducted to allow the public to review
proposed plans and concepts for the Byron Airport area.
10. The development of an updated Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan, which
began as a known need in 1991 and scheduled by.the Board of Supervisors for
accomplishment by May 1997, will not be satisfied until late 2000 or later.
Presently, there are conflicts in proposed residential uses in certain areas around the
airport between those proposed by the community of Byron and the future County
Comprehensive Land Use Plan.
Response: Partially disagree.
61
i
A. The Board of Supervisors did tentatively schedule the adoption of the
Airport Land Use Commission plan by May 1997, but subject to finding
availability. No funds became available to the County to undertake the
plan review until 1998. As recognized by the Board of Supervisors, no plan
.study could commence until funding had been secured i
i
B. the residential uses around the airport proposed by the Byron Municipal
Advisory Council have no legal standing; it is merely a proposal by a
public body. Before these proposed residential uses might become a
conflict with the airport, the Counly General Plan would have to he
amended to allow such use.
I
T he applicable land use policies around the Byron Airport are contained in
the Land Use Element of the General Plan. With the exception of the
existing developed area of the town of Byron, that plan provides for
exclusive open space (agricultural lands) uses around the airport.; The uses
in the County General Plan do not conflict with the planned airport
operations.
11. Overall planning for the optimal use of Byron Airport is limited to a Master Plan
prepared by a consultant (Hodges and Schutt, Aviation Planning Services) in 1986
as part of the initial planning processes. This-Master Plan provides the design
concepts for airport construction and identifies potential facilities to support an
expanded airport operation 20 years in the future, a period which expires in 2006.
Response: Agree.
1
12. The current infrastructure at Byron Airport (roads, bridges, water, power,;sewer
etc.), while suitable for today's limited operations, is inadequate for any long-range
use. No effort is being made at this time to develop a long-range plan.
Response:Agree. The respondent agrees with the finding. A long-range flan for
infrastructure support will have to be consistent with and part of an updated Byron
Master Plan. Identification for Master Plan updates for both Byron and.'Buchanan
Airfield Airports has been identified for consideration under the Federal Aviation
Administrations (FAA)Airport Improvement Capital Program (AICP). FAA
futaditig is targeted for federal fiscal year 2001/2002. The Public Works
Department, Airports Division-will be responsible for implementation.
i
RECOMMENDATIONS
The 1999-2000 Contra Costa County Grand Jury makes the following recommendations to the
Board of Supervisors:
1. Clearly delineate lines of authority and responsibility between the Board of
Supervisors, the Aviation Advisory Committee and the Airport Land Use
Commission.
62
Response: Has been implemented. The lines of authority and responsibilities
among the Board of Supervisors, the Aviation Advisory Committee and the Airport
Lane Use Commission are clearly delineated through.State law and the applicable
Board Order citations.
2. Develop policy and actions with greater public involvement and input.
Response: Has been implemented. As a demonstration of the public outreach that
has been practiced to date, the effort to update the ALUC Plan has resulted in two
public workshops in the Byron area in December 1998 and again in October 1999.
prose workshops allowed the public to become acquainted with the function of
airport land use planning and to review concepts that were being specifically
advanced for the Byron Airport area. Additional opportunity for public input will
be available when the Commission schedules the proposed AL UC Plan for public
hearing.
3. The ALUC, AAC and Board members should share information with each other on
issues involving the Byron Airport. In turn, the Board should take prompt action
on recommendations from advisory committees.
Response: Will not be implemented The Board of Supervisors continues to take
prompt action on issues as brought forth by the Airport Land Use Commission
(ALUC) and the Aviation Advisory Committee (AAC). Furthermore, the ALUC and
AAC regularly communicate with one another concerning activities that each body
is undertaking with respect to the Byron Airport. One of the members of the ALUC
_ is appointed by the Board of Supervisors at the recommendation of the Commission
1 to serve as its representative on the AAC. 71st member also serves as direct
liaison between the two bodies. At each meeting of the ALUC, that individual is
regularly provided the opportunity to discuss any relevant matters that the AAC is
considering relative to Byron Airport. In the same manner, that person also
regularly communicates to the AAC on pertinent activities that the ALUC is
conducting of each AAC meeting.
4. Evaluate the feasibility of modifying the consultant contract for the development of
the Comprehensive Land Use Plan to separate Byron Airport from Buchanan
Airport,.with the view of concentrating on and expediting the Byron Airport
development.
Response: Has been implemented T here is no need to modify the existing
consultant contract. The existing contract, as amended, allows the County to
detach the Buchanan Field Airport plan component from the updated plan project
to allow expedited review and adoption of an updated Byron Airport plan, if
deemed appropriate.
The Community Development Director will determine whether or not to detach the
Buchanan Field Airport plan by Monday, October 16, 2000. On July 7, 2000, the
AL UC was mailed the draft update of the plan for both airports. ney are
tentatively scheduled to conduct a.study session on the draft plan at the
Commission's August and possibly extended to September, 2000 meetings. As a
result of those study sessions, the Commission may suggest changes to the draft
plan before a hearing is scheduled.
63
If the Community Development Director determines that any changes which the
Commission might suggest to the Buchanan Field Airport component of., draft
plan would significantly impede the Commission's ability to review and:adopt an
updated Byron Airport Plan, then the Director will take action to defer fyrther
review of the Buchanan Field Airport portion of the plan in order that the Byron
Airport component of the plan to be allowed to proceed. That would involve
informing the Commission, and directing the consultant to limit their scope of work
to the Byron Airport component as provided under the existing contract.:
i
There are no constraints that would prevent the implementation of the above action
within (.calendar Year 2000.
5. Suggest that the Community Development Department and the Airport Director
report jointly and frequently to the Board of Supervisors on progress being made
on the development and-implementation of the Comprehensive Land UsePlan for
Byron Airport.
Response: Has been implemented the Community Development Director and the
Director of Airports will report quarterly to the 'Transportation, Water and
Infrastructure Committee until the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for Byron
Airport is adopted. There are no constraints that would prevent the
implementation of the above action within Calendar Year 2000. �
6. Separate the Enterprise Fund for.the Byron and Buchanan Airports, thereby
providing County citizens with realistic financial accountability.
Response: Will not be implemented The accounting method for separating the
Buchanan Field Airport and Byron Airport presently exits. Although the Airport
Enterprise Fund ispresently represented by one fund code (Fund 1401),!their own
respective organizational numbers separates the two Airports by Operation and
Maintenance (O&M), Capital Improvement(Non-FAA funded) and Capital
Improvement (FAA funded).
7. Require that the Airport Director prepare a long-range master plan for the Byron
Airport covering infrastructure needs, identifying future possible users, creating
comprehensive marketing plans and defining capital. improvements.
Response: Not yet implemented but will be. The Public Works Department,
Airports Division has filed and application with the FAA for Master Plan updates
for both Bryon Airport and Buchanan Field Airports. FAA funds for these projects
will not be eligible until the federal government's fiscal year 200112002 if FAA
approved
I,
64
Report No. 0009: The Difficult Job of the Social Caseworker I & H
Response by The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
BACKGROUND
Since July 1999, the Contra Costa Grand Jury has investigated the restructured Children and
Family Services (CFS), a Bureau of the Employment and Human Services Department. Past
Grand Juries have explored various aspects of the Bureau and, with minor exceptions, have been
favorably impressed.
A key element in a maze of children, families, workers, supervisors and the courts is the Social
Casework Specialist I & II (SCS). Most SCS have a Master's level degree, frequently work over
forty hour weeks and must perform many diverse tasks on a schedule primarily mandated by State
or Federal Government requirements. In addition, they must deal with a sophisticated and
complex court system, often-dysfunctional family groups and sometimes-dangerous situations
involving the children of this County.
FINDINGS
1. During the past year, CFS has served more than 3,000 children, has provided
oversight to over 475 County licensed foster homes and used other counties'
licensed foster homes as backup and emergency care.
- ) Response:Agree.
2. Training programs for SCS caseworkers have a low priority within CFS. New
caseworkers often are assigned a workload prior to receiving any initial training.
Response: Partially disagree. LHS Staff Development offered a total of 152 :
training classes this past fiscal year to social workers. 'Phis does not include the
numerous training sessions that workers and supervisors were given release time
to attend that were.sponsored by others. 7hi.s past year, a.staff development
trainer with social casework experience in child welfare was hired in order to
better meet the training needs of the casework specialist.
With respect to new caseworker training, new worker training was provided to 54
new workers last fiscal year. This training included risk assessment, interviewing
skills, court-related skill development, child welfare laws and regulations, Child
We fare/Case Management System, and other child welfare topics. While it is true
that these workers had assigned cases, every attempt was made to reduce and
.simplify caseloads for those in training.
3. SCS caseworkers do not have adequate time to attend scheduled training. For the
caseworker, participation in a one, two or three day training seminar requires
finding time from a busy schedule of visits, court appearances and report writing.
As a result, training is often sacrificed in order to keep up with other mandated
assignments.
65
Response: Agree. In spite of the pressure, .social workers have managed to attend
numerous training sessions.
4. Studies indicate that, in the future, our universities will not produce an adequate
number of qualified graduates to fulfill anticipated needs for professional social
workers. Alternative job classifications, designed to assist caseworkers (and thus
increase their effectiveness) have partially solved this problem in other counties.
i
Response: Agree.
5. Because of inexperience due to frequent turnover, supervisors are not able to
provide caseworkers needed guidance or support with many common work
problems. They are often unavailable because of meetings and/or administrative
duties, and do not fully communicate or explain CFS policy. Supervisors are not
trained to counsel those under them in the many intricacies of court-mandated
requirements, CFS policy and Child Welfare law.
Response: Partially disagree. Many new supervisors have been appointed as a
result of program expansion, promotions, and retirements. Supervisor availability
to workers has been less than desired due to the variety of the other duties that are
required of supervisors. However, most.supervisors are well versed in child
welfare law and policy. It is true that workers complain that policy is n(it always
fully explained to them and due to the complexity of Child welfare law,
consultation is often needed
-_-� 6. The relationship between the Court system and SCS caseworkers is at a low point.
The time required by a caseworker to prepare Court mandated reports and
petitioner, make Court appearances, and contend with numerous Court delays,
when combined with other duties such as child visits, finding foster homes, data
entry and visiting parents or guardians, often makes meeting Court deadlines
impossible.
Response: Agree.
7. Caseworkers believe their role with the Court is made worse by the lack of respect
(even civility) accorded them-by lawyers involved with child placement acid
welfare cases. Caseworker's views and professional opinions are often ignored or
not taken seriously by either the Court or the lawyers representing the client.
Response: Partially disagree. The respondent believes the Court does not ignore
the opinions of the caseworker and, in fact, most recommendations by the worker
to the Court are accepted. However, the perceptions and feelings of workers in the
Court process are very real, and must be addressed.
8. The Child Welfare Service/Case Management System (CWS/CMS), a data
collection and report system designed by the California Department of Social
Welfare, is ineffective, inefficient and accounts for a great proportion of the
overwork and stress faced by SCS caseworkers.
4 66
Response: Partially disagree. IBM designed the CWS/CMS in conjunction with the
California Department of Social.Services, and representatives from counties. It
has, indeed, been cumbersome and has gone through redesign to make the various
modules more user friendly. It has created new workload, which required the
development of new skills by workers and an increase in the number of clerical
staff to assist with data input. However, the CWS/CMS does provide an improved
level of automated support to Social Workers.
Much of-the overwork and stress experienced by SCS caseworkers may be
attributed to the new mandates created by the legislature and case law, which
resulted in higher expectations on existing caseloads. In short, it is the work, not
just the computer system that contributes to job stress.
9. Overwork has caused excessive use of the"Exception Criteria for Less Than
Monthly Visit" form (this form is used if an SCS is unable to visit a client within
each required month).
Response: Wholly disagree. the "Exception Criteria for Less Than Monthly Visit"
is a waiver that is accepted by the California Department of Social Services
allowing for less than monthly visitation with a child if certain conditions are met.
:Those conditions include a stable living condition for the child and monthly visits
for at least three consecutive months. In some cases, the child may also be having
monthly contacts with a therapist or another professional. Therefore, a worker
cannot "over-utilize"an Exception Criteria since the criteria mandate the
application.
rMany workers would like to see all their clients monthly and perhaps good social
work practice would suggest that this be encouraged. However, the Workload
Study recently completed indicates that the workload activity required on each case
and the funding provided by the State is seriously out of balance. Undercurrent
funding, social workers cannot possibly see every client each month, and must
prioritize those cases that do not have monthly contact exceptions.
10. The working relationship between top CFS management and the union is poor and
does not contribute to the effective and efficient management of the Bureau nor to a
healthy.work environment for the staff.
Response: Partially disagree. Relationships are two-way partnerships. There are
many examples of positive outcomes between top CFS management and the union,.
however, this working relationship could be strengthened and improved through a
joint effort.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Training of SCS caseworkers as well as Bureau supervisors must become a top
priority for CFS. Adequate time must be provided to caseworkers for attending
training programs and seminars.
1
67
Response: Has been implemented. At the time this report was issued, the
department was already delivering new social casework specialist training to
seventeen (17) workers through its newly designed training program. This
program was designed after a consultant was hired earlier in the year from the Bay
Area Training Academy to review existing new worker training and provide
recommendation.
f
This training involves,six weeks of core curriculum where staff has no assigned
cases. They are provided classroom training, opportunities to shadow experienced
workers, courtroom training and other job-related experiences. At the end of six
weeks, they will begin to have cases assigned to them while .still in training. They
will be assigned to their district at the end of the eight-week training.
Supervisors will attend.specific training classes if they have not had experience in
particular areas when they were casework specialists. Additionally, the Bay Area
Academy is being used to deliver specific supervisory training on casework
consultation.
I
2. CFS should continue developing alternative job classifications creating worker
positions with clerical and administrative assistant skills to assist SCS caseworkers.
CFS should use more creative approaches to solve the manpower shortages they
face both now and in the future.
Response: Has been implemented. The Department worked with the Union on a
Casework Specialist Assistant (CSA) classification, and has recently received
approval to hire permanent staff. The oral board to develop the hiring list is
t scheduled for July 2000. Once a list is promulgated, 10 CSA positions will be
filled In the interim, temporary workers are being utilized
We will be participating on a Statewide Work Group, which will be looking at job
classification issues, and recruitment and retention of social workers statewide.
the lack of qualified individuals for this profession is not only a Statewide, but also
a national issue.
The Department Personnel Officer has developed a recruitment and retention plan,
which is currently under consideration by the County Human Resources;
Department. This plan will continue efforts to recruit qualified social workers.
3. All CFS supervisors should be required to complete County management and
leadership training courses. In addition, training in the complexities of.State and
Federal mandated Child Welfare programs should be on-going.
Response:Has been implemented The Staff Development Division, and CFS work
together to ensure that supervisors receive leadership training over the next fiscal
year.
As supervisors, it is expected that when promoted, they were already well grounded
in the delivery of child welfare services. However, ensuring that supervisors keep
current by attending training is the responsibility of the supervisors andtheir
managers.
68
• J—/7 aoo/
4. All CFS supervisors should be required to set aside sufficient time and be held
accountable for assisting caseworkers•in solving problems.
Response: Has been implemented. It is,the Department's expectation that
supervisors at a minimum have conferences with their caseworkers every other
week to review their work. In come situations, supervisors are expected to have
weekly conferences. Additionally, three new supervisory positions have been
added, which will reduce the number of workers in some of the larger units. One of
the new positions is a `floater supervisor" that will fill in for supervisors during
extended absences such as vacations, sick leave, and family leave, providing more
time for supervisors to attend to their own workers.
5. CFS should immediately provide the leadership in finding solutions to time,
personnel and performance difficulties with the Court. Consideration should be
given to-.a full-time liaison person to interact between the Court and the Bureau
with full responsibility to overcome the deep-seated problems between the two
entities that now exist.
Response: Has been implemented. 1 he Bureau has been working oil this issue and
has contracted with a consultant to do an assessment and provide
recommendations. 'Phis consultant has already held focus groups with staff, met
with different members of the judiciary, and observed court proceedings. She has
attended the monthly meetings held between the bench and the department. She
plans to.submit a report in September 2000 that will also be presented to the Court.
--1 The Bureau already has a Program Analyst who is assigned to Court as its major
r espon.sibility.
6. CFS must find a way-to communicate to the Court and attorneys the need for
improving their appreciation of the value of the SCS caseworker. Resolving this
problem will go a long way toward overcoming the resentment felt by the
caseworkers in dealing with the Court system.
Response: Has been implemented Please refer to answer number five.
7. Caseworker training in the use of the CWS/CMS system must be improved as soon
as possible.
Response: Will not be implemented. On-going training is provided for workers on
the system. In addition to classroom training for new workers, Application
Training Mentors (A7Ms) in the District offices provide individual training and
troubleshoot problems for workers.
Marry of the problems experienced by the workers are the result of applications
that are not "user friendly"and equipment that is too slow for the application.
Both of these issues are being addressed by the State. Faster equipment should be
installed at all the workstations by September. Much of the application has been
revised; however, there.still remains work to be completed on some of the essential
modules.
4
69
7 l?-a tea/
8. A staff position should be created to serve as a field resource to the caseworkers in
each office. This senior caseworker would handle technical questions regarding
Bureau policy and government mandates. In addition, management and senior staff
members must become more involved in handling technical questions regarding
Bureau policy and government mandates.
Response:. Will not be implemented. It is agreed that.senior staff including
Supervisors and Managers should understand technical issues regarding Bureau
policy and mandates. The department will continue to include this information in
regularly.scheduled management team and supervisor meetings. They have the
primary responsibility of providing answers to technical and policy questions.
Additionally, the.Information & 'Technology Bureau is working on putting manuals
on-line to assist both workers and Supervisors in finding policy information.
Additional positions indicated to field response workers cannot be justified. Ally
new findings will be prioritized to case-related activity.
9. Bureau management should re-examine the atmosphere within which it interacts
and deals with the caseworker's union. Personal attitudes and poor documentation
have interfered with the handling of Bureau disciplinary actions which, in:,turn,
have contributed to poor caseworker morale.
Response: Has been implemented The department has already instituted an
informal monthly meeting between the Union and CTS management. The purpose
is to allow both the union and management to stay informed of issues that are of
-1 mutual concern. Many times the union has only partial n formatiorn and does not
know what management is doing on issues expressed by line workers. Ibis meeting
will allow for a fuller exploration of these issues in an atmosphere conducive to
joint problem solving.
Personal attitudes have not interfered with the handling of disciplinary problems.
Most workers are working optimally and do not present disciplinary problems.
However, if employees see poor performance or attitude on the part of a colleague
that goes unaddressed, morale often deteriorates. Training is being conducted to
better inform Supervisors on the progressive disciplinary process and the need for
accurate documentation.
70
i
/
Report No. 0010: Hercules City Council, Hercules, California
Response by Mayor, City of Hercules
BACKGROUND
The Grand Jury inquired into the City of Hercules (City) chaotic City Council (Council) meetings
and accusations of racial preference in City employment. Evidentiary material obtained includes
formal interviews of,all City Council members, the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, City
Attorney, Chief of Police, reviewing video and audio tapes of Council meetings and attending
Council meetings. Video and audio recordings of Council meetings reviewed by the Grand Jury
provided relevant evidence of disorderly behavior, unauthorized digression from the published
agenda for a meeting and disregarding the Council's Rules of Procedures by the Council member,
then mayor. Grand Jury members'attending Council meetings observed disruptions and disorderly
conduct by a member that was characterized by the Council's Rule and Policies sub-committee as
"inconsistent with the role and responsibilities," of Council members and "offensive to other
Council members, staff and public."
FINDINGS
1. In February 1999, Alexander Quentos Paras as Mayor and Council member
disregarded the Council's Rules of Procedures and violated the Brown Act of the
California Government Code by introducing non-agenda items into the Consent
j Calendar portion of the meeting, and inappropriately invited a person from the
audience to speak on a non-agenda item.
Response: The respondent agrees with the finding.
2. In March 1999, because of Mr. Paras' disorderly conduct, and after repeated
warnings and counseling by other Council members, including requests to attend
"team building" seminars which he did not attend, the Council by majority vote
reorganized its leadership and Mr. Paras was temporarily replaced as Mayor.
Response: The respondent agrees with the finding.
3. In April 1999, after an agreed upon reconciliation period, Mr. Paras was
determined by the other Council members to have not sufficiently modified his
disorderly behavior at public meetings and therefore the Council permanently
appointed another Council member to complete Mr. Paras' term as Mayor.
Response: We agree with this finding.
4. The California Government Code Section 36813 provides: "The council may
establish rules for the conduct of its proceedings. It may punish a member or other
person for disorderly behavior at a meeting."
Response: The respondent agrees with the f nding.
71
5. The Council's Rules of Procedures require four votes for disciplining a member
and support from the City Attorney. Discipline measures include: censure, civil
charges and recommending recall.
Response: the respondent agrees with the finding.
6. On October 24, 25 and 26, 1999, Mr. Paras by-passed the City's written;
administrative guidelines and faxed separate, nearly identical packages each day to
the Assistant City Manager with instructions to distribute copies to each Council
member, key City Staff members and to make copies for public distribution. Each
package contained at least seven exhibits of public letters, memos, press releases,
Council memoranda and extracts from Council reports.
Response: The respondent agrees with the finding.
I
7. On November 9, 1999, the City Attorney opined Mr. Paras was disruptive at
Council meetings.
Response: We agree with this finding.
8. On January 18, 2000, the Council's sub-committee on Rules and Procedures
presented a proclamation to the Council censuring Mr. Paras. The City Attorney
opined that Mr. Paras was censurable for his past conduct. The proclamation failed
to obtain the required four affirmative votes.
-1 Response: The respondent agrees with the finding.
9. Council members' records indicate that Mr. Paras' conduct was considered as
unacceptable and disorderly as early as December 1998. However, no official
action was taken until October 27, 1999 when a Council member wrote a formal
letter of complaint to the Council. Although Mr. Paras' disorderly behavior
continued even after he was removed as Mayor in March 1.999, the Council delayed
taking any action to curtail his conduct until January 2000.
Response: The respondent agrees with the finding.
10. The Mayor adjourned the.March 14, 2000 Council meeting due to Mr. Paras'
failure to yield to a Point of Order by a member and refused to obey the Call to
Order by the Mayor. Video recording of the meeting was ordered stopped by the
Mayor.
Response: The respondent agrees with the finding.
I l. .On March 28, 2000, the Council approved a motion to censure Council member
Paras for his conduct on March 14, 2000 and before. Public comment at;that
overflowing council meeting supported the Council's move to censure Mr. Paras.
Indignation was expressed during the Public Communications portion of the
meeting by members of the audience for his conduct on March 14; some 'suggested
recall or resignation as appropriate discipline.
72
Response: The respondent agrees with the finding.
12. The use of City credit cards, cell phones and fax machines are not subject to control
by written procedures. After review by the City Manager and notification of
possible inappropriate use, Council members determine the acceptability of their
use of credit cards, cell phones, and fax machines.
Response: T he respondent agrees with the finding.
13. The Grand Jury did not discover any evidence that indicates any unlawful act of
racial.preference in City employment by any Council member, City staff or City
employee.
Response: The respondent agrees with the finding.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The 1999-2000 Contra Costa Grand Jury makes the following recommendations to the Council:
1. 'Take steps to eliminate divisiveness and lack of proper decorum at Council and
Redevelopment Agency meetings. A disorderly meeting should be recessed.
Response: 7hi.s recommendation has been implemented.
2. Meet with City staff and City employees and resolve any doubts as to its ability to
_. provide leadership and direction.
Response: This recommendation has been implemented
3. Obtain an independent outside review in response to any future accusations relating
to the City's employment policies, procedures, and implementation.
Response: This recommendation has been implemented.
4. 'Undertake a series of"Town Meetings" urging the public to participate to assist the
Council in eliminating divisiveness.
Response. This recommendation will not be implemented at this time. We agree
that such a recommendation would be practical with an environment not so
vulnerable to the arbitrary and unstable conduct of Mr. Paras; however, within the
existing environment it could well represent an opportunity for Mr. Paras to
further fracture the community through personal attacks on its members.
5. Initiate official written procedures to provide control and accountability for the use
of City credit cards, phones, fax machines and any other service provided by the
City to Council members.
Response: This recommendation has been implemented.
73
} Report No. 0011: Mt. Diablo Unified School District
i
Response by Superintendent, Mt. Diablo School District
i
BACKGROUND
In 1975, Pacifica High School, located in West Pittsburg (now named Bay Point) was closed by
the Mt. Diablo Unified School District (MDUSD). Local residents from the Bay Point area have
maintained that MDUSD had promised free bussing for their students attending Mt. Diablo High
School in Concord, the nearest high school within the District. Further, some residents claim that
their families cannot afford to pay for bussing, and that the eight miles to Concord precludes Bay
Point students from participation in extra-curricular activities. The distance and the cost of
bussing have been reported by some residents to be major contributors to an estimated 50%
dropout rate for Bay Point students. The residents now seek a new high school to be located in
Bay Point and/or free bussing.
FINDINGS
1. No evidence can be found in the record of the 1975 MDUSD Board of Education
minutes that free bussing was offered to Bay Point students. Further, no evidence
can be found in newspaper articles covering the Pacifica High School closing that
free bussing was offered or promised.
Response: Agree.
2. According to MDUSD, 1,131 high school students live in Bay Point. Of these
students, 59%attend Mt. Diablo High School. Only 29% use the bus service
provided by MDUSD to get to Mt. Diablo High School. The remaining students
utilize other means of transportation to get to school. Free bussing is offered to
families who meet specific low-income criteria. Some Bay Point students attend
different high schools in the area. A very small number attend private schools.
Response: Agree.
3. Based on current schedules and costs, public transportation from Bay Point to Mt.
Diablo High School is available, but time consuming and costly.
Response:Agree.
4. Cost of bussing varies with the number of family members using the District
service. The fees charged by the District vary with the number of students in a
family from an annual payment of$250 for one student up to $675 in a family with
five high school students.
Response: Agree.
l -
74
5. District transportation for students participating in school related after-hour
activities are not available. The District Athletic Department provided bussing for
students participating in athletic activities but discontinued the program due to poor
ridership. No effort has been made by the District to survey students regarding the
need for after-hours school related activities transportation.
Response: Partially disagree. Effective with the 2000-200.1 school year an activity
bus is provided for students from Mt. Diablo High,School to Bay Point four days a
week, Monday through Thursday. There is no charge for this service.
6. District officials presented detailed statistics to the Grand Jury that indicated the
District's current dropout rate was under the 2.9% statewide average. These
statistics on student attendance and dropout rates refutes the community contention
that approximately 50% of the Bay Point High School students dropped out of high
school before graduating. Of the 1,131 high school students in MDUSD, only 33
were classified as dropouts.
Response: Agree.
7. The population of the Bay Point area within the District is increasing rapidly. The
District has no plan for a future high school in Bay Point even though the District's
own statistics indicate that Bay Point students make up approximately half of the
enrollment at Mt. Diablo High School.
Response: Agree
S. Communication between District officials and the Bay Point community was'
apparently non-existent until the District's new Superintendent recently visited the
Bay.Point Municipal Advisory Council.
Partially disagree. I have no evidence to support or refuse this.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Initiate a program of discussions with the Bay Point community groups on a
regular basis to keep them fully informed of the status of educational issues of
concern to the community.
Response: This has been implemented. Beginning in December of 1999 we have
met with the Bay Point Municipal Advisory Committee at least twice as well as
Community organizations.
2. Conduct.a study of the Bay Point area future high school needs because of that
community's rapidly expanding population.
Response: Not yet implemented. The District will be establishing a facilities
committee to review the District's facilities needs district-wide including Bay
Point.
75
i�ao1/
I ; ,
3. Continue discussions with the community to determine what actions the District
j might take to improve the bussing situation for both regular school hours and extra
curricular activities.
Response:Has been implemented As part of our regular discussion with Bay
Point and community groups, we already have received suggestions on how to
improve the bussing situation to Bay Point.
I
i
i
i
i
i
I
i
I ,
I
1
i
I
76
i
Report No. 0012: San Ramon Valley Unified School District
Use of Measure D Bonds
Response by San Ramon Valley Unified School District Board of Trustees
FINDINGS
1. Measure D, a $70 Million Bond Initiative for facility construction and
modernization in the San Ramon Valley Unified School District (District), was
passed by the voters in 1997. Earlier attempts to pass bond measures for school
construction were defeated.
Response: Partially disagree. The District passed(reauthorized) a tax override
in 1991 with a 69%majority and failed to pass an.$82Mgeneral obligation in
March and November, 1995, receiving 62%and 66%yes votes, respectively.
Measure D passed in April, 1998, with a 77%majority.
2. In preparing for Measure D, the District's Board of Trustees (Board) convened
a Citizens Advisory Committee to develop a list of specific projects for
improvement and/or construction. The Citizens Advisory Committee unanimously
presented this list to the voters and this list, along with cost estimates, formed the
basis for the Measure D election.
Response: Partially Disagree. The Citizens Advisory Committee unanimously
=- presented a report to the Board of Education recommending a $70Mgeneral
obligation bond and a corresponding list of projects. The Board of Education
took action to place the $70M bond on the April, 1998 ballot and directed staff
to prepare the appropriate legal documents. The ballot statement and related
legal documents did not include cost estimates for individual projects.
3. After passage of Measure D, a Facilities Advisory Commitee was appointed by the
Board to provide oversight over the District's implementation of the bond measure,
including spending, planning, design and construction review, scheduling,
contracting and other matters relating to the performance of
Measure D.
Response:Partially disagree. The Facilities Advisory Committee's specific .
charge as approved by the Board of Education on February 3, 1998, is as
follows:
Provide oversight of Measure D projects and expenditures in order to
assure that bonds are expended in a cost effective manlier;
Review district enrollment trends and facilities needs on an ongoing basis
and make recommendations as appropriate;
Review revenue sources for school facilities including State Building
Program and developer fees and mitigation agreements, and make
recommendations as appropriate;
77
♦ Review district facilities maintenance plans and program and make
1 recommendations as appropriate;
♦ Provide input to the annual review of facilities needs as presented by the
District's Director of Facilities and staff.
4. The Facilities Advisory Committee.(Committee) is presently composed of.sixteen
members, several of whom served on the earlier Citizen's Advisory Committee.
I
Response: Partially disagree. The current Committee is composed of 14�members,
seven of whom served on the earlier Citizens Advisory Committee.
I
5. The unanimity reached by the Citizens Advisory Committee in 1977 was the result
of an accommodation between proponents of a larger bond amount and those
members desiring a lower amount, in order to assure a unanimous recommendation
to the School Board and the Community.
Response: Partially disagree. The Committee's recommendation was in;1997, not
1977.
i
6. After voter approval of Measure D, additional State matching funds became
available along with funds from local sources.! These additional State and local
funds increased the moneys available to the District from $70 million to
approximately $100 million, allowing the Committee to revise upward the,Measure
D projects and their estimates.
Response: Partially disagree. 1 he District has received and continues to apply for
State matching grants for many of Measure D projects. The District has also.
received local grants from the City of San Ramon, Town of Danville, R7 A, and
Pool 2000 Citizen's Committee to enlarge the gymnasiums at Iron House:and Los
C.'erros Middle Schools, to build a second gymnasium at Pine Valley Middle
School, and to build a swimming pool at Monte Vista High School.
The State matching grants have not been used to "revise upward the Measure D
projects and estimates. " The additional State grants have been used to pay for
expanding the scope of specific projects, upgrades, and unforeseen changes
including construction related changes such as asbestos abatement and price
inflation. Please refer to the Facilities Advisory Committee's• "Report to,the Board
of lsducation"dated June, 2000.
7. The Committee has become overly contentious as to the scope, cost and intent of
the original Measure D projects.
Response: Disagree. the phrase "overly contentious"is subjective. There is a
difference between healthy debate and "overly contentious. " Healthy debate leads
to consensus; "overly contentious doesn't. the Board intentionally appointed
members to the committee who represented various interests in the community.
. i
78
0
The scope of each project was not defined until the design committee at each site
completed the conceptual drawings, after the passage of Measure D. Committee
members participated on every design team, and the Committee and Board of
Education approved the conceptual designs. While many of the designs were
discussed at length, the Committee concurred with all projects. We commend the
members for their time and efforts.
Some of the specific differences relate to-
a. the sanctity of the project scope and cost estimates developed by the initial
Citizen's Advisory Committee and contained in the Measure D election
literature.
Response:Partially disagree. The initial(1997) Citizens Advisory Committee did
not recommend that a specific budget amount be attached to each project, and
none of the official election documents provided by the district contained project
estimates. When 7LCD architects and the Committee developed statements of
probable costs, this was done to give an approximate value needed to determine the
size of the bond measure. After Measure D passed, district staff, school design
teams, andarchitects worked together to determine the scope and conceptual cost
estimate for each project. A member from the current Advisory Committee has
participated on each design team, and the conceptual plans have been reviewed
and approved by the current Committee and the Board
b. the quality of the original cost estimates.
t Response: Agree.
C. how the state matching fund program should be used, that is, to subsidize
Measure D projects or accommodate other needed projects. The Measure D
authority contains language permitting inclusion of other facilities"to the
extent of available funds".
Response: Partially disagree. The Committee makes recommendations with
respect to the entire Measure D program which includes the original Measure D
projects,--partnership projects, and expanded projects. Recommendations to the
Board of 1ulucation have included expanding the scope of many of the original
projects as well as proceeding with the conceptual design of four modernization
projects not listed on the Measure D ballot. The Board has approved these
recommendations. It should be noted that the Measure D authority with language
permitting inclusion of other facilities "to the.extent of available funds"refers to
the $70 million general obligation bond only. Decisions with respect to the
expenditure of State matching grants or local grants rest with the Board of
Education and are not within the Measwre D authority. The Committee has and
Will continue to make recommendations with respect to the use of this money and
the expanded Measure D program.
d. whether or not the costs of architectural design services, contingencies,
furniture and equipment, anticipated cost inflation, contracting procedures
and/or interim housing for students during construction are included in the
estimated cost.
79
Response:Partially disagree. The Committee has always agreed that the;original
statements of probable costs included 14%for fees and 10% construction
contingency. T he Committee now agrees that the original statements of probable
costs did not include estimates for furniture and equipment, interim housing, or
construction management. Contracting procedures were never addressed by the
1997 Committee.
e. the experience and background of District personnel responsible for key
design and construction contract decisions.
Response: Agree. It should be noted that hiring decisions are the responsibility of
the Board of Education and not the Advisory Committee.
f. the extent to which the original Measure D cost estimates assumed,
that State and matching funds would be available in addition to
the $70 million bond limit.
Response: Agree. I
8. The District's facilities staff has limited experience in managing complex, major
design and construction programs. The staff is augmented by architectural firms
under contract for design of specific projects and by a State-required construction
inspection service for periodic on-site visits.
Response: Disagree. We.strongly disagree that staff has limited experience in
6 managing complex, major design and construction programs. OurAssistant
Superintendent of Business has 20 years experience as a Chief Business Officer
with responsibility for contract development and IS years experience in facilities;
our b"acilities Director is a licensed architect with 19 years in construction
management including management of a $133Mgeneral obligation bond for the
Vallejo Unified School District; and our four Construction Coordinators have a
combined 46 years experience.
The District construction program is in fill compliance with all State school
construction and legal requirements. Project management is consistent with
school and industry standards. The District.staff is not augmented by architectural
firms and the State-required construction inspection service. The District contracts
with state-licensed architectural firms for design and project administration. The
architect selection process included review of responses to an RFQ by 30 firms by
a selection committee, which included members with construction background from
the Advisory Committee. The selection process included a review of written
materials as well as site visits to prior construction jobs. Firms selected have
experience in designing large-scale school projects and demonstrated performance
records. In compliance with State law, the District also has hired sixfull=time
state-approfed inspectors licensed to oversee school construction projects.
9. The elected San Ramon Valley Unified School District Board of Education has
overall responsibility for the effective and efficient use of Measure D bond;funds
within the spirit and intent of written materials published in promoting its passage
i
by the electorate.
80
Response:Partially disagree. The.Board of Education has overall responsibility
for the effective and efficient use of Measure D bond funds consistent with State
law and all legal documents prepared by the District with respect to the Measure D
election. The San Ramon Dalley Unified School District cannot and did not fund
the election campaign or prepare or send any of the election materials. All the
materials we received were factual.
10. Citizen advisory groups are a highly desirable management and control feature of
any political body. They provide a valuable, non-partisan input from a variety of
personal perspectives and experiences. But these groups are advisory, not decision
makers.. It is the elected Board which must stand the ultimate test of voter approval
based on its decisions.
Response:Agree.
11. With all the public rhetoric being expressed over the past year by individual
members of the Facilities Advisory Committee and the District staff on Measure D
intent, conditions and expenditures, nothing has been heard from the Board as a
body except for the input of its liaison member to the Committee. However, on
June 6, 2000, the Superintendent of the District presented a report to the Board
covering implementation of Measure D.
Response: Disagree. The entire Board is well aware of the rhetoric expressed by
individual members of the 1%acilities Advisory Committee. To improve
communication between the Board and the Committee, the Board appointed a
board member as a liaison to the Committee.
7he.entire Board receives all the Committee agendas and supporting
documentation. All Measure D discussion and action items are posted in
compliance with the Brown Act. Discussion and votes have occurred in open
public session. Committee members have been present at Board meetings for
project presentations. The Board has debated and voted to approve all project
designs and bid awards in public session and has been actively involved with the
implementation of the Measure D projects. All Board actions on Measure D
projects have been reported to the public in local newspapers, Board Highlights,
the District's Inside Your Schools community-wide publication, PTA and school
newsletters, and presentations by the Superintendent and Board members at
service clubs and other organizations.
On June 6, 2000, the Advisory Committee, not the Superintendent, presented the
Interim Measure D Progress Report, which was approved unanimously by the
committee and accepted unanimously by the Board of Education:
81
i
RECOMMENDATIONS
The 1999-2000 Contra Costa County Grand Jury makes the following recommendations to the San
Ramon Valley Unified School District Board of Education-
1. It is time for the full Board to weigh in on the issues to provide its guidance on
proper interpretation of the Measure D provisions and conditions - and topublicly
so inform the electorate. Therefore, publish an information report to the electorate
on the Board's position concerning the various issues faced by the School:District
in the implementation of Measure D, including opposing views that have surfaced.
Response: Implemented. The Board has acted on Measure D projects, and its
actions have been reported in local papers, district publications, and throrugh
various other communications. The Facilities Advisory C'ommittee's Report to the
Board of Education has been accepted by the Board, reported in local newspapers,
and made available to the public. District staff is working with members;of the
Advisory Committee and Board members to produce and mail a district-wide
communication that will include the construction and financial status of all
Measure D and partnership projects as well as information from the Advisory
Committees Interim Report.
2. Immediately contract with an experienced professional construction management
firm to provide technical augmentation and assistance services for this extremely
large construction project.
_- Response: Implemented. Several months ago staff talked with marry construction
management firms seven of which were interested in working with the District.
Three of the firms were eliminated because they did not have personnel available
to work on a new project, and two were eliminated because they did not have
experience with school construction. Of the two remaining firms, Doti T odd
Associates were.selected and began working in our district full-time on April 10,
2000.
i
3. Immediately contract with an independent auditor to review in detail District
management practices in implementing Measure D (and other fund sources in
support of Measure D and to identify the amount and reason for cost differences
that have occurred from that proposed in Measure D.
Response: Implemented: The finance sub-committee of the District Facilities
Advisory Committee spent over three months analyzingMeasure D construction
projects. The members examined the time frame for implementing each project, the
reasons for cost differences from the original 1997 statements of probable costs
including a breakdown of project costs, i.e. construction,fees,furniture and
equipment, interim housing, contingency, and change orders. The individuals who
prepared the report have extensive background in the construction industry. "Their
findings and conclusions are detailed in the Committees'Interim Report as of June,
2000, which received unanimous approval of the Committee and was accepted by
the Board of Education at its,lune 6, 2000 meeting. "l he findings have been
communicated to the community through the local newspapers and through a
special facilities publication, (enclosed), mailed to all homes in the district in
September, 2000.
i
82
i
7 i-7 ate/
In addition to the Advisory Committee's Interim Report, the district's external
auditor, Vavrinek, Trine &Day, audits all funds annually, including the Measure D
fund. Their audit verifies that Measure D expenditures and records are in
compliance with all legal requirements. In addition, this year the district
contracted with another external auditor, Gilbert Accountancy, to review financial
control practices. This audit concluded that the district is in compliance with
standard accounting procedures and State requirements. The current, ongoing
audit from Vavrinek, Trine &Day will be completed and presented to the Board in
December, 2000.
e
r
83