B

C

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2006- 2007 GRAND JURY FINAL REPORTS................................................................ 1

FACTS ABOUT THE GRAND JURY SYSTEM............................................................ 1

FOOTHILL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT ............................................................... 5

FOOTHILL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT BOARD MEETINGS ............................ 9

RESPONSES FROM FOOTHILL FIRE PROTECTION BOARD OF

DIRECTORS AND CALAVERAS COUNTY SHERIFF TO DECEMBER

20, 2006 GRAND JURY REPORT................................................................................ 11

VALLEY SPRINGS/ NEW HOGANNEW HOGAN ANNEXATION......................... 15

NEW HOGAN ANNEXATION.................................................................................... 16

MURPHYS SANITARY DISTRICT............................................................................ 18

MURPHYS SANITARY DISTRICT PLANTMURPHYS SANITARY

DISTRICT SPILL .......................................................................................................... 23

MURPHYS SANITARY DISTRICT SPILL................................................................. 24

CALAVERAS COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTERCALAVERAS

COUNTY AUDIT REPORT ......................................................................................... 27

CALAVERAS COUNTY AUDIT REPORT................................................................. 28

CALAVERAS COUNTY BUILDING DEPARTMENT LAND USE TRUST

FUND........................................................................................................................... . 31

CALAVERAS COUNTY GENERAL PLAN UPDATE.............................................. 33

CALAVERAS COUNTY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PROCESS........................ 35

CALAVERAS COUNTY JAIL..................................................................................... 38

CALAVERAS COUNTY ANIMAL SHELTER FACILITY ....................................... 42

EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT OF ELECTED OFFICIALS..................................... 45

CALAVERAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICTS........................................................ 47

CALAVERAS COUNTY LIBRARY SYSTEM........................................................... 50

RESPONSES TO PRIOR GRAND JURY REPORTS ................................................ 52

RESPONSE FROM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND SHERIFF’S

DEPARTMENT TO ANIMAL SERVICES FACILITY GRAND JURY

REPORT 2005- 2006...................................................................................................... 53

RESPONSES FROM FOOTHILL FIRE PROTECTION BOARD OF

DIRECTORS, JENNY LIND FIRE DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS,

AND LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION TO GRAND JURY

REPORT 2005- 2006...................................................................................................... 63

RESPONSE FROM THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS REGARDING

CALAVERAS COUNTY JAIL AS PART OF LAW ENFORCEMENT

INFRASTRUCTURE TO THE GRAND JURY REPORT 2005- 2006 ................... 69

B

RESPONSE FROM MURPHYS SANITARY DISTRICT BOARD OF

DIRECTORS AND CALAVERAS COUNTY LOCAL AGENCY

FORMATION COMMISSION TO GRAND JURY REPORT 2005- 2006.................. 74

RESPONSES FROM AUDITOR- CONTROLLER, COUNTY

ADMINISTRATOR, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, AND DEPARTMENT

HEADS REGARDING COUNTY AUDIT REPORT TO GRAND JURY

REPORT 2005- 2006...................................................................................................... 81

RESPONSE FROM DIRECTOR OF CALAVERAS COUNTY WORKS

AND HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY TO GRAND JURY REPORT ........................ 88

RESPONSES FROM CALAVERAS COUNTY WATER DISTRICT

BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND GENERAL MANAGER TO GRAND

JURY REPORT 2005- 2006........................................................................................... 90

RESPONSE FROM EBBITTS PASS FIRE DISTRICT BOARD OF

DIRECTORS TO GRAND JURY REPORT 2005- 2006 .............................................. 94

RESPONSE FROM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY CLERK-RECORDER

REGARDING CALAVERAS COUNTY CLERK-RECORDER

TO THE GRAND JURY REPORT 2005- 2006 ...................................... 97

RESPONSES FROM CALAVERAS COUNTY BOARD OF

SUPERVISORS, AUDITOR- CONTROLLER, AND LOCAL AGENCY

FORMATION COMMISSION TO GRAND JURY SPECIAL DISTRICTS

REPORT 2005- 2006...................................................................................................... 99

RESPONSE FROM CHIEF PROBATION OFFICER AND BOARD OF

SUPERVISORS REGARDING ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE BALANCES

TO THE GRAND JURY 2005- 2006........................................................................... 102

RESPONSE FROM THE CALAVERAS COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE

OFFICER AND DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES, AUDITOR-CONTROLLER,

TECHNOLOGY SERVICES, AND BOARD OF

SUPERVISORS REGARDING CALAVERAS COUNTY AUDIT REPORT

AND BI- TECH SOFTWARE IMPLEMENTATION TO THE GRAND

JURY........................................................................................................................... 105

RESPONSES REGARDING THE CALAVERAS COUNTY AUDIT

REPORT TO THE GRAND JURY REPORT 2005- 2006 .......................................... 113

1

2006- 2007 GRAND JURY FINAL REPORTS

FACTS ABOUT THE GRAND JURY SYSTEM

WHAT IS A GRAND JURY?

A grand jury is a judicial body composed of a set number of citizens. Ancient

Greece exhibited the earliest concepts of the Grand Jury System. Another

reference can be found during the Norman conquest of England in 1066. There is

evidence that the courts of that time summoned a body of sworn neighbors to

present crimes, which had come to their knowledge. In 1066, the Assize of

Clarendon appears to be the beginning of the true grand jury system. At that

time, juries were established in two types: Civil and Criminal. Toward the end of

the United States Colonial Period, the Grand Jury became an important adjunct

of government: Proposing new laws, protesting abuses in government, and

influencing authority in their power to determine who should and should not

face trial. Originally, the Constitution of the United States made no provisions

for a Grand Jury. The Fifth Amendment, ratified in 1791, added this protection.

THE GRAND JURY IN CALIFORNIA

The California Constitution, Article 1, Section 23, states: “ One or more Grand

Juries shall be drawn and summoned once a year in each County.” In California,

every county has a civil Grand Jury. Criminal Grand Juries are seated as

necessary.

A civil Grand Jury’s function is to inquire into and review the conduct of county

government and special districts. The Grand Jury system in California is

unusual in that Federal and County Grand Juries in most states are concerned

solely with criminal indictments and have no civil responsibilities.

Grand Jurors are citizens of all ages and different walks of life. Each brings their

own unique personality and abilities. Grand Jurors are selected from the

Department of Motor Vehicles and Voter Registration files. In some counties,

citizens may request to be on the grand jury. Jurors spend many hours

researching; reading, and attending meetings to monitor county government,

special districts, and oversee appointed and elected officials.

A final report is created from the many hours of fact- finding investigations

conducted by the grand jury. This report discloses inefficiency, unfairness,

wrong doings, and violations of public law and regulations in local governments.

The Grand Jury makes recommendations for change, requests responses, and

follows up on responses to ensure more efficient and lawful operation of

government.

2

CALAVERAS COUNTY GRAND JURY

The Calaveras County Grand Jury is a judicial body sanctioned by the Superior

Court to act as an extension of the Court and the conscience of the community.

The Grand Jury is a civil, investigative body created for the protection of society

and enforcement of its laws. The conduct of the Grand Jury is delineated in

California Penal Code, Section 888 through Section 945.

Grand Jurors are officers of the Superior Court, but function as an independent

body. One provision of the Grand Jury is its power, through the Superior Court,

to aid in the prosecution of an agency or individual they have determined to be

guilty of an offense against the people.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE GRAND JURY

The major function of the Calaveras County Grand Jury is to examine County

and City government and special districts to ensure their duties are being

lawfully carried out. The Grand Jury reviews and evaluates procedures,

methods, and systems utilized by these agencies to determine if more efficient

and economical programs may be used for the betterment of the County’s

citizens. It is authorized to inquire into charges of willful misconduct or

negligence by public officials or the employees of public agencies. The Grand

Jury is mandated to investigate the conditions of jails and detention centers.

The Grand Jury is authorized to inspect and audit the books, records and

financial expenditures of all agencies and departments under its jurisdiction,

including special districts and non- profit agencies, to ensure funds are properly

accounted for and legally spent. In Calaveras County the Grand Jury must

recommend an independent Certified Public Accountant to audit the financial

condition of the County.

RESPONSE TO CITIZEN COMPLAINTS

The Grand Jury receives many letters from citizens alleging government

inefficiencies, mistreatment by officials, and voicing suspicions of misconduct.

Anyone may ask that the Jury conduct an investigation on agencies or

departments within the Grand Jury’s jurisdiction. All such requests and

investigations are kept confidential.

The Grand Jury investigates the operations of governmental agencies, charges of

wrongdoing within public agencies, and the performance of unlawful acts by

public officials. The Grand Jury cannot investigate disputes between private

parties, nor any matters in litigation.

Neither official request nor public outcry can force the Grand Jury to undertake

an inquiry it deems unnecessary or frivolous.

3

FINAL REPORT

The Final Report includes the findings and recommendations of the Grand Jury

and is released to the Superior Court Judge by July 1 of each year. It is made

available to the new Grand Jury, the media, the public, and government officials.

It will also be available on the Grand Jury website:

http:// www. co. calaveras. ca. us/ departments/ grand_ jury. asp

HOW TO CONTACT THE GRAND JURY

Those who wish to contact the Grand Jury may do so by writing to:

Calaveras County Grand Jury

P. O. Box 1414

San Andreas CA 95249

Complaint forms may be requested by calling ( 209) 754- 5860. The forms are

available for download on the Grand Jury website and completed forms may be

mailed or faxed to the Grand Jury room at ( 209) 754- 9047.

Photographs by Robert Tarkenton

Courtesy of Kathy Zancanella, Manager Calaveras County Airport

MEMBERS OF THE 2006- 2007 CALAVERAS COUNTY GRAND JURY

Gary Tofanelli, Foreperson

Mike Garland, Foreperson Pro Tem

David Berkowitz Tom Hanzlik

Frank Chavez Peggy Harray

Patsy Clark Helen Kelly

Robert Doty Lynda Kuykendall

Joan Duncan John Milbridge

Joe Fanucchi Robert Tarkenton

Robert Gilman Linda Velasquez

Barry Griffin Paul Westernoff

4

5

FOOTHILL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT

REASON FOR INVESTIGATION

An investigation of the Foothill Fire Protection District ( FFPD) was

initiated by the 2005- 2006 Grand Jury from citizen complaints and carried

over by the 2006- 2007 Grand Jury. The carryover investigation was

expanded to include all phases of district operations, with an emphasis on

administrative functions and completion of the new fire station in Burson

( Station # 1).

PROCEDURES

FFPD board meetings were attended. The FFPD Board Chairman and

interim Chief were interviewed. County Council, Calaveras County

Auditor/ Controller, Planning and Building Department were consulted.

Documents and plans were reviewed and site visits made.

RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION

FINDING 1

The new fire station at Burson has yet to be completed. The planning and

procurement process has raised the following questions:

The district’s original cost and scheduling plan is outdated and

needs to be revised to reflect current conditions and costs. This has

resulted in a disorganized approach to building the new station.

The fragmented process of letting bids for construction raises

questions about bidding and final cost estimates. The bidding

process should comply with the Public Contract Code. Because of

pervasive ambiguities throughout the bidding process, many of the

district’s contractual rights may have been waived or diminished.

( Civil Code § 1654)

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends FFPD write a complete, updated cost and

scheduling plan, which would allow the district board, staff, general

contractor, sub- contractors, building department, and the public to be

fully informed when discussing each remaining phase of building Station

# 1.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

FFPD Board of Directors

FINDING 2

While planning, bidding, and building Station # 1 in Burson, the district

failed to follow the Public Contract Code ( PCC) regarding proper

6

procedure for soliciting and posting of construction contract bids ( PCC §

20813). In addition, provisions requiring analysis of the project impact on

the environment as required in the California Environmental Quality Act

( CEQA) were not followed ( Public Resources Code § 21000). Noncollusion

Certificates were not submitted nor executed as required under § 7106 of

the PCC. Public construction contracts generally include indemnification

requirements ( PCC § 20103.6) and the securing of performance and

payment bonds ( Civil Code § 2819). FFPD did not include indemnification

requirements in any of the contracts executed and did not secure any

performance or payment bonds.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends that FFPD comply with the Public Contract

Code while finishing the construction of Station # 1 and with any future

construction projects.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

FFPD

FINDING 3

The Grand Jury found the following administrative deficiencies:

1. An incomplete policies and procedures manual.

2. No comprehensive training plan.

3. No existing comprehensive long- range plan.

4. No Fire Chief

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends the district complete and implement the

following:

1. An updated policy and procedures manual.

2. A comprehensive fire fighter training plan. This training plan

should establish goals for the number of personnel recommended

at various training levels and skills plus how to achieve these goals

by December 2007.

3. A long- term plan, which should include short and long term

elements. This is critical to establishing funding levels, equipment

needs, staff requirements, and apparatus replacement to meet

infrastructure requirements of FFPD by December 2007. In

addition, the District’s long- term plan should take into account,

and coordinate with, the Calaveras County General Plan update.

4. Hire a Fire Chief.

7

RESPONSE REQUESTED

FFPD Board of Directors

FINDING 4

Station 2 is not only inadequate to house equipment and administration,

but does not appear to meet county building code standards. In a site visit

it was noted that a major portion of a cinder block wall was removed for a

vehicle pass- through with no header and post bracing. The Grand Jury

could find no record of a permit being issued to have this wall removed.

This may constitute a safety hazard to the people working in the building

and the public attending meetings. Further investigation revealed the

initial permits for expansion of the building have not received final

approval.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends Station # 2 be inspected by a licensed

engineer. A signoff by the County Building Department must be

obtained.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

FFPD Board of Directors

Calaveras County Building Department

FINDING 5

FFPD is shorthanded of volunteer fire fighters. Currently there is an

insufficient number of drivers with a Class B drivers license required to

operate four of the larger fire apparatus.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends the district develop a recruitment and retention

program with specific skills and certifications.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

FFPD Board of Directors

FINDING 6

Management and building deficiencies within the district have been

exacerbated by lack of funding. Without a full time fire chief, there has been

a legacy of last minute planning and personnel problems. A shoestring

approach to the completion of the much- needed new Station # 1 has

contributed to the district’s existing problems.

8

How well the district will serve its current and future residents will depend

on the implementation of long range fiscal planning now. Although planned

development and assessed valuation increases within the district can answer

some of the district financial shortcomings, there may not be sufficient

increases in funding for the district to catch up with projected growth and

infrastructure requirements.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends Foothill Fire Protection District immediately

draft a financial strategic plan to meet its current and future needs, possibly

by means of tax provisions afforded to special fire protection districts. An

innovative approach to resolving the continuing funding issues needs to be

studied, adopted, and presented to district voters.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

FFPD Board of Directors

9

FOOTHILL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT BOARD MEETINGS

EARLY PUBLICATION

Normally the Grand Jury publishes reports on investigations at the end of

its term. This report is being published early because it is the opinion of

this Grand Jury that its recommendations require a timely response from

the Foothill Fire Protection District board of directors and the Calaveras

County Sheriff.

REASON FOR INVESTIGATION

Foothill Fire Protection District ( FFPD) Board meetings have become

dysfunctional and unproductive due to the inability of the board to

control willful interruptions during district board meetings.

BACKGROUND

State law requires the business of managing a fire district be done in

public. FFPD meetings are the only opportunity the board has to

complete this function. Continued disruptions and meeting closures

become counterproductive to maintaining a fully functional fire district.

Business of the district cannot be conducted when its meetings become

overly contentious and disruptive. The California Ralph M. Brown Act

provides for public input in an orderly and concise manner. Provisions of

that statute must be adhered to.

FINDINGS

The Grand Jury, after attending meetings of the board over the past 12

months, observed these monthly meetings being disrupted by members of

the public and/ or staff. These disruptions have caused business to be

delayed or not completed. Some meetings were terminated prematurely

due to disruptions. On several occasions law enforcement was called to

restore order.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. The Grand Jury recommends the Foothill Board of Directors request a

Calaveras County deputy sheriff be present at board meetings to help

maintain order. The chairman must conduct meetings according to the

published agenda including time limits. If interruptions by either the

public or staff prevent business from being conducted, the chair

should ask the deputy to help restore order. If order cannot be

restored, the chair should request the disruptive individual or

individuals be removed from the meeting. If the meeting continues to

be willfully interrupted by a group or groups of individuals, then the

10

board will need to request the meeting room cleared and continue in

session in accordance with the Brown Act.

2. The Grand Jury recommends the following written statement be

handed out to all members of the public and staff at the beginning of

each scheduled meeting:

A. This meeting of the Foothill Fire District Board of Directors will be

conducted under the provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act.

Brown Act 54950)

B. Members of the public and staff will be allowed to address the

board on a specific agenda item when recognized by the chairman

and before a vote is taken on that item. Comments will be limited

to three minutes per speaker and 15 minutes per topic. Once a vote

is taken that item is closed to further comment. ( Brown Act

54954.3. b)

C. Members of the public and staff will be allowed to address the

board on any topic not on the agenda at the end of the meeting.

No more than 5 minutes per speaker will be allowed. ( Brown Act

54954.3. a)

D. Should interruptions by either the public or staff prevent business

from being conducted, the chair will ask order to be restored. If

order is unable to be restored, then the chair will need to request

the disruptive individual or individuals be removed from the

meeting. If the meeting continues to be willfully interrupted by a

group or groups of individuals, then the board will need to request

the meeting room cleared and to continue in session. ( Brown Act

54957.9)

SUMMARY

In order to regain control of its regular and special board meetings, the

Grand Jury recommends the Foothill Fire Protection District Board of

Directors take extraordinary steps to ensure security at its meetings by

requesting law enforcement personnel to assist with maintaining order.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Foothill Fire Protection District Board of Directors

Calaveras County Sheriff

11

RESPONSES FROM FOOTHILL FIRE PROTECTION BOARD OF

DIRECTORS AND CALAVERAS COUNTY SHERIFF TO DECEMBER

20, 2006 GRAND JURY REPORT

REASON FOR INVESTIGATION

Foothill Fire Protection District ( FFPD) Board meetings have become

dysfunctional and unproductive due to the inability of the board to control

willful interruptions during district board meetings.

FINDINGS

The Grand Jury, after attending meetings of the board over the past 12 months,

observed these monthly meetings being disrupted by members of the public

and/ or staff. These disruptions have caused business to be delayed or not

completed. Some meetings were terminated prematurely due to disruptions. On

several occasions law enforcement was called to restore order.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. The Grand Jury recommends the Foothill Board of Directors request a

Calaveras County deputy sheriff be present at board meetings to help

maintain order. The chairman must conduct meetings according to the

published agenda including time limits. If interruptions by either the public

or staff prevent business from being conducted, the chair should ask the

deputy to help restore order. If order cannot be restored, the chair should

request the disruptive individual or individuals be removed from the

meeting. If the meeting continues to be willfully interrupted by a group or

groups of individuals, then the board will need to request the meeting room

cleared and continue in session in accordance with the Brown Act.

2. The Grand Jury recommends the following written statement be handed out

to all members of the public and staff at the beginning of each scheduled

meeting:

A) This meeting of the Foothill Fire District Board of Directors will be

conducted under the provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act. ( Brown

Act 54950)

B) Members of the public and staff will be allowed to address the board on

a specific agenda item when recognized by the chairman and before a

vote is taken on that item. Comments will be limited to three minutes

per speaker and 15 minutes per topic. Once a vote is taken that item is

closed to further comment. ( Brown Act 54954.3. b)

C) Members of the public and staff will be allowed to address the board

on any topic not on the agenda at the end of the meeting. No more

than 5 minutes per speaker will be allowed. ( Brown Act 54954.3. a)

12

D) Should interruptions by either the public or staff prevent business from

being conducted, the chair will ask order to be restored. If order is

unable to be restored, then the chair will need to request the disruptive

individual or individuals be removed from the meeting. If the meeting

continues to be willfully interrupted by a group or groups of

individuals, then the board will need to request the meeting room

cleared and to continue in session. ( Brown Act 54957.9)

RESPONSE BY FOOTHILL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT

The Board of Directors has received the subject Early Publication. In accordance

with your recommendations, the Board has prepared a memo that will be

distributed at each meeting to attending public and staff members. It is attached

and forms a portion of our response. ( Exhibit B)

The Calaveras County Sheriff’s office will be contacted and provided a copy of

the Early Publication to solicit and confirm their efforts that they will be able to

provide on our behalf.

We appreciate the timeliness of the release of your findings that hopefully will

better equip the Board with regaining control of the District’s business in an

orderly fashion.

GRAND JURY DETERMINATION 2006- 2007

The Grand Jury attended board meetings and interviewed the chairman of the

district board to verify its response and determines the response from Foothill

Fire Protection District to the December 20, 2006 Report is adequate. The Grand

Jury noted the date on Exhibit B is inconsistent.

RESPONSE BY CALAVERAS COUNTY SHERIFF

On December 20, 2006 the Calaveras County Grand Jury published a Report on

the Foothill Fire Protection District.

The report discussed willful interruptions by members of the public of district

board meetings, and resulting unproductively. The Grand Jury recommended

the Foothill Fire Protection District request the presence of a Calaveras county

Deputy Sheriff at their monthly board meetings.

Due to the inability to take a deputy away from their assigned beat coverage thus

reducing the response time to emergency calls for public safety it was decided

that the sheriff’s Office would provide a deputy to the Foothill Fire Protection

District Board Meetings on an overtime basis ( in accordance with the

Memorandum Of Understanding between the County of Calaveras and the

13

Calaveras County Deputy Sheriff’s Association) paid by the Foothill Fire

Protection District. The Sheriff’s Office has been providing this service since the

Grand Jury issued its report in December 2006.

GRAND JURY DETERMINATION 2006- 2007

The Grand Jury interviewed the Calaveras County Sheriff to verify the response

and determines the response from Foothill Fire Protection District to the

December 20, 2006 Report is adequate.

14

Exhibit B

15

VALLEY SPRINGS/ NEW HOGAN

16

NEW HOGAN ANNEXATION

REASON FOR INVESTIGATION

A development, Valley Springs Estates, was proposed for annexation to the New

Hogan Lake County Fire Protection Area. This raised the question of which fire

protection district would provide fire protection. The County Planning

Department referred the issue to the Local Agency Formation Commission

( LAFCO) for a determination.

PROCEDURES

The 2006- 2007 Grand Jury interviewed the LAFCO Executive Officer, Foothill

( FFPD) and Jenny Lind ( JLFPD) fire protection district administrative officers,

and conducted a site tour. The LAFCO Municipal Service Review for fire

protection districts was reviewed. The “ Fire and Emergency Response Services

in the New Hogan Lake Area” report, ordered by LAFCO, was reviewed. A

review of County Planning and Building department records for the area was

reviewed. County tax records were reviewed and the office of Auditor-

Controller was interviewed.

RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION

FINDING 1

LAFCO designated the New Hogan area to be within the FFPD sphere of

influence in 2000 when the County Fire Department was divided into the

existing special fire protection districts. Annexation of the New Hogan area was

requested by FFPD in 2006 and a waiver of LAFCO fees for this process was

requested when development of a small portion of the area began. LAFCO fees

were originally waived for all of the newly formed districts at the time of

formation in 2000. However, in 2006, LAFCO refused to waive the $ 2000

annexation fee for FFPD due to the delay in completing the process as originally

planned.

FINDING 2

The fire protection portions of county property taxes from the New Hogan area

have been going to FFPD. Fire protection for New Hogan area development is

being provided and not in question. Annexation of the area, however, has not

been completed.

FINDING 3

There is no financial incentive for annexation of New Hogan or other comparable

areas by any special districts, until there is a buildup of a significant portion of

the area. Development would then increase a special district’s portion of the

assessed valuation. It is too late for needed infrastructure planning once there is

17

a significant buildup of an area. Although annexation, then, becomes a financial

reward, it does not assure that planning for critical infrastructure will occur.

RECOMMENDATION

The 2006- 2007 Calaveras County Grand Jury recommends the Calaveras County

LAFCO reconsider its procedure for annexation of the New Hogan area and

other comparable areas. Either FFPD or JLFPD or both could logistically serve

portions of the New Hogan area. Since FFPD has the equipment and is

logistically better situated for protection at the New Hogan Dam area, it would

best serve that portion of the area. However, the western portion accessed via

Milton Road does not appear to logistically fit with FFPD. FFPD would literally

have to drive past the JLFPD station on Milton Road to access any development

or medical emergency in the area. JLFPD has within its sphere of influence the

Rock Creek area, accessed via Milton Road. The County Planning Department

already has a development request for this area.

The county and future residents of the un- annexed areas would be better served

if LAFCO required immediate incorporation of all un- annexed areas into a fire

protection district. If this does not happen, as a significant increase in density of

a portion of an un- annexed area occurs, LAFCO should demand immediate

annexation by the most appropriate fire protection district.

Either remedy would force fire protection districts into the planning process and

better assure infrastructure needs be assessed before development can

detrimentally impact an area due to a lack of critical planning review. Further,

the annexation of an area could then be funded by the development rather than

by a district and its current taxpayers.

There are additional un- annexed sphere of influence areas within the county.

Since the county has relinquished its long- term fire protection infrastructure

planning to the various districts, it is incumbent on these special districts to plan

for growth in their areas and to annex their areas when appropriate. County and

special district planning must be coordinated to assure infrastructure

requirements are planned for and implemented with growth.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

LAFCO

Planning Department

Board of Supervisors

Foothill Fire Protection District

Jenny Lind Fire Protection District

18

MURPHYS SANITARY DISTRICT

REASON FOR INVESTIGATION

The current Grand Jury elected to investigate Murphys Sanitary District ( MSD)

based on unresolved issues in the 2005- 2006 Grand Jury report and complaints

alleging disorganized management and its inability to deal with critical issues

facing the district both the short and long term.

PROCEDURES

The Grand Jury interviewed past and present district engineers, District Counsel,

and district management. In addition, County Counsel was consulted. A private

party with an ongoing contract to accept treated effluent with the district was

interviewed. Relevant documents were requested and reviewed. The California

Regional Water Quality Control Board ( RWQCB) was consulted. Site visits were

made to the wastewater treatment plants in both Murphys and Angels Camp.

RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION

FINDING 1

The District has a Capital Improvement Plan ( CIP) to address long- term

infrastructure issues; the District still does not have a plan in place to address

district- wide future needs.

RECOMMENDATION

The District should develop a 10- year plan separate from the CIP. This plan

should address future population growth, current treatment plant issues, needs

for additional sources of discharge, and probable plant upgrades to deal with

anticipated state wastewater standards that are becoming more stringent.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Murphys Sanitary District

FINDING 2

While conducting interviews with district and plant management, the Grand

Jury learned two separate policies and procedures manuals ( aka operations

manuals) exist. One manual contains policies and procedures regarding

operation of the wastewater treatment plant while the other is for the pump

station ( headworks). These two manuals are dated 2000 and 2002 respectively

and are out of date. Contact personnel and contact phone numbers are incorrect.

Although a new employee handbook, dealing with personnel issues within the

district, was adopted in 2006, a comprehensive, combined policies and

procedures manual has yet to be written by district management and adopted by

the board of directors. The CIP and employee handbook do not adequately

19

address the specifics of day- to- day operations, job definitions, emergency

procedures, etc.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends the district write and adopt a comprehensive

policies and procedures manual by January of 2008. A policies and procedures

manual must be separate from any other document such as the CIP or the

Employee Handbook. Due to the limited number of operation and maintenance

personnel and the high turnover rate, an up- to- date policies and procedures

manual is essential.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Murphys Sanitary District

FINDING 3

The wastewater treatment plant was upgraded in 2002- 2003. Originally intended

to operate in an automatic mode, the plant still has to be run manually because

the upgrade was not completed as originally specified. According to the district

engineer, he has received no direction from the district Board to rectify this

deficiency.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends the Board immediately upgrade the wastewater

treatment plant to operate in automatic mode to produce either tertiary or

secondary disinfected effluent. This is a decision that has been debated by the

board for more than a year and needs immediate resolution.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Murphys Sanitary District Board of Directors

FINDING 4

The Grand Jury finds that little or no progress has been made on obtaining additional

sources of discharge. This problem has been known and studied for a number of

years without being resolved.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends the district enter into immediate discussions with

owners of sources for discharge with the goal of obtaining at least one additional

source no later than the end of 2007. The district should also join other local

public utilities such as Calaveras County Water District and Union Public Utility

District to investigate additional long- range solutions such as regionalization.

Another option would be to join with the “ private party” and request the

20

RWQCB modify the new license to be a ‘ Master Reclamation Permit’ in

conjunction with MSD. This option would enable MSD to take advantage of

other sources of discharge with a minimum amount of permit process time.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Murphys Sanitary District

Union Public Utility District

Calaveras County Water District

FINDING 5

The district received a Notice of Violation ( NoV) from the CRWQCB in January

2007 identifying violations from 2005 and 2006. Correction of the NoV is very

expensive and time consuming. Since the district has a part- time manager it has

limited resources to deal with the NoV.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends the district hire a full- time manager until all issues

cited in the NoV are properly addressed to the CRWQCB’s satisfaction.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Murphys Sanitary District Board of Directors

FINDING 6

Minutes of previous board meetings are being approved only when board

members who attended those meetings are in attendance. No board action was

made regarding this process. Minutes are often approved in batches at board

meetings, and some are two to three months old.

RECOMMEDATION

The Grand Jury recommends minutes of previous meetings be approved at the

following regular board meeting. Waiting to approve minutes does not improve

accuracy and risks minutes never being approved in cases of illness or board

vacancies.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Murphys Sanitary District Board of Directors

FINDING 7

On most agendas for regular meetings the board indicated that it would go into

closed session to discuss pending litigation. There is no pending litigation.

21

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends that where the agendas state that the closed

sessions are for discussion of pending litigation, the wording be changed to

possible litigation.

RESPONSE

Murphys Sanitary District Board of Directors

SUMMARY

The MSD has a large number of critical issues facing it in the very near term.

Management reorganization will help resolve some procedural issues but the

board needs to address funding, infrastructure, discharge, and additional

capacity as well. An early report dealing with emergency spill reporting

procedures and violations was published mid- term and is included elsewhere in

the final report. The district has run out of time to deal with most of these issues

piecemeal and will need a short term plan to guide it within ninety days.

Conservation is a partial solution that has yet to be promoted by the district with

its ratepayers. High staff turnover leaves the district relying on an inadequate

number of qualified staff to operate the wastewater treatment plant.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends a moratorium on new hookups, as recommended

by last year’s Grand Jury, immediately be instituted until:

1. The treatment plant can operate continuously in automatic mode.

2. The NoV has been dealt with to the satisfaction of the CRWQCB.

3. An alternate source of discharge has been obtained.

4. A comprehensive emergency policy is written to include duties of all

personnel and an accurate reporting policy. Copies of the emergency

policy should follow both state and county reporting guidelines, be

posted in all offices and plants, and be given to all district personnel

including members of the board after having been reviewed and adopted

by the district board.

The Grand Jury also recommends:

A. The district reorganize its management policy and procedures,

including the hiring of a full time district manager. The district also

institute a hiring and training program, including pay adjustments

where appropriate, to reduce high staff turnover.

B. A comprehensive policies and procedures manual be drafted and

adopted by December 2007 that spells out all functions necessary for

normal plant operation, special procedures that may be required from

22

time to time, and emergency procedures including accurate and

lawful reporting methods.

C. Long range planning be implemented, including a comprehensive

district wide plan to deal with short term and long- range goals.

D. Innovative funding solutions need to be explored due to the need for

a large number of infrastructure requirements necessary within the

next five years, and could include bonding arrangements with

potential developers, grants from federal and state resources, and

assessment districts where needed.

E. With an eye on the limited capacity of the wastewater treatment

facility, the district should promote an aggressive district wide water

conservation policy in conjunction with UPUD.

RESPONSE

Murphys Sanitary District Board of Directors

Union Public Utilities District

23

MURPHYS SANITARY DISTRICT PLANT

24

MURPHYS SANITARY DISTRICT SPILL

REASON FOR INVESTIGATION

It came to the attention of the Calaveras County Grand Jury that a Notice of

Violation ( NoV) was issued to Murphys Sanitary District ( MSD) by the California

Regional Water Quality Control Board ( CRWQCB). The NoV contained

reference to a spill of approximately 150,000 gallons of raw sewage into Angels

Creek ( aka Murphys Creek) in Murphys over the weekend of November 26th and

27th 2006. Angels Creek is a source of drinking water for the City of Angels. The

Grand Jury learned that the spill was not reported to the Governor’s Office of

Emergency Services ( OES) as required by law. ( Proposition 65 - Safe Drinking

Water and Toxic enforcement Act of 1986, and § 9030 of the California Labor

Code.)

PROCEDURES

The Grand Jury contacted and interviewed the Calaveras County Department of

Environmental Health, Calaveras County Department of Public Health, and

MSD. Documents from the CRWQCB, OES, MSD, Calaveras County

Environmental Health Department ( EH) and City of Angels Wastewater

Treatment plant were reviewed. The California Department of Fish and Game

was contacted by phone to confirm the findings.

RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION

FINDING 1

The first call made by MSD to report the spill was inadvertently made to the U. S.

Environmental Protection Agency and not to OES. As a result, OES, in charge of

disseminating information about the spill to all state and local agencies, has

never been able to inform local agencies of the spill. A call to the City of Angels

wastewater treatment plant was made by MSD notifying the treatment plant of

the spill of raw sewage into Angels Creek. A call and fax reporting the spill was

made by MSD to the CRWQCB. As of the writing of this report OES still has no

record of being notified.

RECOMMENDATION

The Calaveras County Grand Jury recommends MSD adopt and follow

procedures for reporting as specified on the OES Website at www. oes. ca. gov

titled ‘ FACT SHEET – Reporting Sewage Releases’ dated July 2006. California Water

Code § 13271, et seq. and California Health and Safety Code § 5411, et seq.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Murphys Sanitary District

25

FINDING 2

Media notification and Public Posting of sewage spills in excess of 1000 gallons is

required by order of the Calaveras County Health Officer in compliance with

§ 13271 of the California Water Code. A ‘ Memorandum’, dated March of 1999,

from the Calaveras County Health Officer was sent via certified mail to all

County sanitary districts specifying procedures for notification, public and

media. The spill of raw sewage into Angels Creek, November 26 and 27, 2006

received no public posting or media notification from MSD.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends the district prepare public notification and media

releases in advance, so when spills occur, all notification procedures will be

followed according to the law. This includes having laminated spill posters

prepared and forms for the media notification.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Murphys Sanitary District

FINDING 3

The spill occurred over a weekend and was discovered early Monday, November

27th 2006. When MSD staff first reported the spill to the Calaveras County

Environmental Health Department, a message reporting the spill was left on the

department’s voice mail because the office had not yet opened. Once the

message was heard, the department did not follow up, because the department

did not have an internal follow up policy in place to be sure the spill was

receiving all necessary attention.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends the County Environmental Health Department

institute a policy to follow up on all voice mails indicating spills in excess of 1000

gallons. In addition, the Grand Jury recommends the voice mail message direct

callers to 911 to report emergency spills after hours and when the department is

closed. ( Proposition 65 - Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986)

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Calaveras County Department of Environmental Health

SUMMARY

MSD currently uses three documents to guide its operations: 1) An employee

handbook, dated October 2006; 2) A document titled ‘ Ordinance # 2’, dated September

2006, which details rules and procedures for dealing with ratepayer hookups; 3) A

Capital Improvement Program ( CIP), dated February 2006, describing both short and

26

long range infrastructure plans. None of these documents comprise a

comprehensive policies and procedure manual for dealing with the day- to- day

operation of the district, the wastewater treatment plant, and contingences for

emergency reporting. As a result, neither the public, nor the media and some

required agencies received notification of this large spill of raw sewage into Angels

Creek.

RECOMMENDATION

The district should immediately draft and adopt a comprehensive policy on

emergency procedures with required actions spelled out in detail so whoever is on

duty at the plant will be able to notify proper authorities as prescribed by law. The

district should also conduct immediate training for all plant personnel on these

procedures. Notification forms, public posting signs and media notifications should

be prepared and on hand. The Grand Jury also recommends MSD start drafting a

comprehensive policy and procedures manual, with a goal of having the manual

complete and adopted by the Board of Directors by year end.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Murphys Sanitary District

27

CALAVERAS COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER

28

CALAVERAS COUNTY AUDIT REPORT

REASON FOR INVESTIGATION

Section 925 of the California Penal code states, “ The Grand Jury shall investigate

and report on the operations, accounts, and records of the officers, departments,

or functions of the county…”.

PROCEDURES

The outside auditing firm of Bartig, Basler, & Ray ( BB& R) was under contract to

examine the financial statements of Calaveras County and provide an opinion on

the accuracy and reliability of these financial statements for the year ending June

30, 2006. As a normal function of this audit, BB& R submitted a document

entitled, “ County of Calaveras Management Report for the Year Ended June 30, 2006,”

( Management Report) to all County Departments. It is the responsibility of the

departments, where named in the Management Report, to provide a written

response to recommendations within 60 days and prior to final publication of

Management Report. The Grand Jury reviewed the Management Report along with

the Calaveras County’s “ Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year

Ended June 30, 2006.” County Auditor- Controller, Sheriff’s Department Animal

Control Officer, and the County Administrative Officer were interviewed to

verify findings and recommendations.

AUDIT FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

AUDITOR- CONTROLLER

Financial Statement Preparation, Staffing And Turnover

BB& R cited “ problems with excessive workload of the accounting staff”. This

condition exists in part because one individual is given the task of preparing the

County financial statement, along with other daily accounting duties. The report

recommends the Auditor- Controller recruit additional staff and cross- train

existing staff where appropriate.

Management Response

The Auditor- Controller concurs with the recommendation and will propose a

process to rectify the condition through an office reorganization and hiring plan.

Recommendation

The Grand Jury recommends the Auditor- Controller recruit and retain additional

qualified staff to more efficiently manage the workload. Additionally, the Grand

Jury recommends departmental cross training.

29

Response Requested

Auditor- Controller

ANIMAL CONTROL

Segregation Of Duties

BB& R noted the same person collecting payments was also posting deposits into

the department accounting system. An alternative control would be to require

supervisory personnel to review daily collections.

Management Response

A log to track collections has been implemented and reviewed by a supervisor on

a monthly basis with plans to review the new log weekly in the future.

Grand Jury Recommendation

The Grand Jury recommends weekly supervisory review of collections and

deposits be instituted by August 1,2007.

Response Requested

Calaveras County Sheriff

Accounts Receivable— Two Systems

With the implementation of Chameleon software, the department was using two

computer systems to manage customer receipts, accounts receivable, and

invoices. The redundant systems pose a threat of errors in accounting.

Management Response

Effective December 31, 2006, the department transferred all customer accounts to

the Chameleon software system and eliminated the redundancy.

Response Requested

The Grand Jury has verified management’s response. No additional response

requested.

Accounts Receivable

The department’s accounting software does not produce an aging report

showing outstanding receivables and delinquency. The report recommends

using a Chameleon software feature, “ Crystal Reports”, to remedy this

deficiency.

30

Management Response

The department reported the “ Crystal Reports” software has been installed but

training in the use of the software had yet to be given to staff.

Grand Jury Recommendation

The Grand Jury recommends training in use of the software be completed by

August 1, 2007.

Response Requested

Calaveras County Sheriff

Tracking For Non- Computer Issued Receipts

Animal control officers were collecting fees in the field using a receipt book, but

not using a central log.

Management Response

The department is no longer collecting fees from customers in the field.

Grand Jury Recommendation

The Grand Jury finds the management response adequate.

Restrictive Endorsement Of Receipts

The management report noted the department was not restrictively endorsing

checks when received.

Management Response

All staff within the department is now restrictively endorsing all checks when

received.

Grand Jury Recommendation

The Grand Jury finds the management response adequate.

Lockbox Key

The report noted the key to the lockbox for cash held pending deposit was kept

near the lockbox.

Management Response

All cash, excepting up to $ 35 for change, is kept inside the safe pending deposit.

Grand Jury Recommendation

The Grand Jury finds the management response adequate.

31

CALAVERAS COUNTY BUILDING DEPARTMENT LAND USE

TRUST FUND

REASON FOR INVESTIGATION

The Grand Jury received a complaint alleging Calaveras County had

misappropriated Building Department generated funds to the General Fund and

not to the Building Department as specified by California State Health and Safety

Code Section § 17951.

PROCEDURES

The Grand Jury interviewed Director of Community Development, Principal

Administrative Analyst, County Counsel, and Auditor/ Controller. Reviewed

were the California Health and Safety Code § 17951, and Board of Supervisors

Resolutions 04- 235 and 90- 356.

RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION

FINDING 1

The 1990 & 2004 Board of Supervisors resolutions, 90- 356 & 04- 235, addressing

Building Department revenue and appropriation by the establishment of a Land

Use Department Trust Fund are not strictly in compliance with California Health

and Safety Code § 17951.

FINDING 2

California Health and Safety Code § 17951 ( c) states “ The amount of the fees

prescribed pursuant to subdivisions ( a) and ( b) shall not exceed the amount

reasonably required to administer or process these permits… and shall not be

levied for general revenue purposes”. Fees collected, which exceed

expenditures, can be carried over to the next fiscal year but are to be allocated

only to the Building Department. The intent of the code is to prevent additional

taxation when fees are collected and used for purposes other than to fund

Building Department operations.

Through the Supervisors resolution of 1990, 90- 356, the Land Use Trust Fund

could be used to “ fund various expenditures associated with the operations of

the Surveyor, Planning, Building and Environmental Health Departments”, as

well as the Building Department, in violation of California Health and Safety

Code § 17951.

FINDING 3

In 2004 the Board passed Resolution 04- 235 which amended 90- 356, effectively

allowing funds which had been deposited only into the Land Use Trust Fund to

go into the General Fund. The amendment was a violation of the California

Health and Safety Code § 17951.

32

FINDING 4

In 2006 at the behest of the Director of Community Planning, the County

Administrator’s Office began drafting a resolution intended to bring the funding

process into compliance with California Health and Safety Code § 17951. The

resolution is expected to be presented to the Supervisors before the end of the

2006- 2007 fiscal year.

In addition, the Administrator’s office has the task of researching budgets since

1996 to determine funds which should be returned to the Building Department

budget. This research is to include the establishment of all Building Department

costs not charged in the budget. An accounting standard, A87 charges, allows

for recovery of indirect costs not originally included in department budgets.

RECOMMENDATION

The Calaveras County Grand Jury recommends the Board of Supervisors adopt a

resolution which will place any and all funds generated in excess of costs directly

back into the Building Department budget for the new fiscal year to bring county

accounting practices into full compliance with California Health and Safety Code

§ 17951.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Calaveras County Board of Supervisors

Calaveras County Counsel

Calaveras County Auditor/ Controller

Calaveras County Administrator

33

CALAVERAS COUNTY GENERAL PLAN UPDATE

REASON FOR INVESTIGATION

In 2006 the Calaveras County Board of Supervisors ( BOS) initiated an update to

the Calaveras County General Plan. California law requires each county and city

to adopt a general plan for its future development ( Government Code § 65300).

The Calaveras County Grand Jury selected the Calaveras County General Plan

revision and update process for review as a part of its oversight function.

PROCEDURES

The Grand Jury interviewed BOS members, County Director of Community

Development, County Planning Department, Calaveras County Water

Department ( CCWD) Manager, special district board members, and Local

Agency Formation Commission Manager. Reviewed current General Plan,

Community Development Agency ( CDA) update plan, and planning consultant

work program. Attended the BOS General Plan update and moratorium

meetings.

RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION

FINDING 1

The current General Plan, adopted in 1996, does not meet the statutory

requirements of the state Government Code. California requires each county and

city to adopt a general plan for its future development ( Government Code

§ 65300). In 2006, the BOS decided to initiate a General Plan update. The plan

update is anticipated to take two to three years; during that time a quasi-moratorium

is in place to curtail certain types of development.

FINDING 2

At this time within the County there are two general viewpoints regarding the

proposed General Plan:

1.) A community vision to guide decisions about development and

land use.

2.) A State mandated, legally defensible document of land use

restrictions.

Both viewpoints are incorporated within the proposal submitted by contracted

planning consultants, Mintier and Associates ( Mintier).

FINDING 3

Costs to the county for the update have been estimated to be $ 1,350,000, which

includes the estimated consultant fee of $ 1,000,000. This estimate is most likely

unrealistic since real costs for the update do not tabulate all of the direct and

34

indirect costs to all of the county agencies involved in the process. Cost

estimates also do not include overruns generated by possible litigation.

FINDING 4

After reviewing the work plan proposed by CDA and Mintier, the Grand Jury

concludes that ample consideration for land use planning has been given to the

Calaveras County general public. Input regarding the general vision for

planning as well as specific input by special interest groups and individuals is

part of the Public Input sections of the draft.

FINDING 5

Special interest requests have already come to the BOS during the kickoff

meeting with the public. Two basic approaches to the update process are

planning either from the general to specific or from specific to the general.

Working from the general to specific ( community and special interest planning)

is the approach represented by Option 2 work plan supported by the CDA.

SUMMARY

Community development as represented by the General Plan is a lengthy and

contentious process. It is the opinion of the Grand Jury that the public would be

better served with a General Plan starting from a general overall vision and

moving to specific community planning. Delays created by planning starting

with specific and local needs can cause significant delays and therefore increased

costs to the citizens.

Obtaining public input on a vision for the county general plan is planned during

the public comment process. That overall vision statement is currently lacking in

the current General Plan draft. Vision is a generalized statement regarding land

use and future of the county. Specifics of the plan can grow out of a general

vision.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends the BOS adopt and support Option 2 of Mintier and

Associates and proceed with the County General Plan update in a timely and

comprehensive manner. Public comment regarding a vision for county needs to

be sought and reflected in the outcome. The Grand Jury further recommends the

process and progress be monitored by future Grand Juries to assure individual

community plans are reflected in the final document.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Calaveras County Community Development Agency

Calaveras County Board of Supervisors

35

CALAVERAS COUNTY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PROCESS

REASON FOR INVESTIGATION

The Grand Jury received several complaints citing the County Planning,

Building, and special districts with inconsistencies and irregularities in

development plan approval processes.

PROCEDURES

Interviewed the County Director of Community Development, County Planning

Director, Calaveras County Water District ( CCWD) Manager, and special district

board members, and Local Agency Formation Commission Manager ( LAFCO).

Reviewed Draft Agency Proposal, application process ( Exhibit A).

RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION

FINDING 1

The 14 step application process being refined and proposed ( Exhibit A) by the

Community Development Agency ( CDA) appears to have instituted key steps in

an effort to resolve misconnects which may have developed during the process

in the past. Those steps involve infrastructure and service aspects of a

development.

FINDING 2

The Pre- application meeting ( step 2, Exhibit A) between the developer and

county planning staff is intended to assist in the completion of the application, to

expedite the process and issues, which might arise on the application itself. It

does not imply acceptance, merely to resolve questions in the application

process.

FINDING 3

After a site visit by the Planning Department and the application is deemed

complete for processing ( step 4 and 5 Exhibit A), the recently added Technical

Advisory Committee ( TAC) meeting ( step 6 Exhibit A) is to be held. The

purpose for adding the TAC meeting is to bring all “ impacted/ involved”

agencies and special districts together with the developer in order to identify and

discuss all aspects of the plan on the infrastructure. “ Only County” agencies are

required to be present.

FINDING 4

The remaining steps 7 through 14 complete the process with public input

included in Planning Commission and Board of Supervisor reviews, steps 13 and

14.

36

SUMMARY

In general, the process as being proposed by the Community Development

Agency appears to streamline the application process with several refinements.

If actual positive results come from the innovative step 6 TAC meeting, many

past problems of infrastructure and service district misconnects could be

resolved.

The process requests “ impacted/ involved” agencies attend the meeting but

further states only county agencies are required to attend TAC meetings.

Infrastructure and service district input is critical to orderly development.

Inadequate long term planning by service districts can be illuminated through

this process.

RECOMMENDATION

While the process proposal appears to have met the “ streamlining and

simplifying” goals, the Grand Jury believes infrastructure and service district

input is still lacking in the process. The TAC meeting step should include review

by all impacted/ involved special districts within the county, not just County

agencies. Impact of development on infrastructure such as roads, schools, and

even law enforcement must also be considered and adequate long term planning

by all special districts within the county be required. The Grand Jury

recommends these infrastructure consideration steps be strengthened and the

Board of Supervisors adopt the procedure.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Calaveras County Community Development Agency

Calaveras County Board of Supervisors

37

Exhibit A

DRAFT AGENCY PROPOSAL – January 30, 2007

1. Pre- Application- Could be a phone call just to verify their zoning or a

drop in at the counter. Review if general plan/ zoning change and/ or

use permits are required for the use.

a. Non discretionary permit – entitled project under zoning

b. Discretionary use permit – needs some sort of conditions to be

met.

2. Pre- Application meeting – Planner meets with applicant to discuss the

project; may include Planning Director or Community Development

Director. Planner will assist the applicant with preliminary

information needed to fill out application, then it is given to applicant

to identify additional needs and complete remaining items prior to

coming in with the completed application. Planner will help identify

which items need to be submitted with the application and which can

be submitted after application.

3. Application submitted – Stamped as received, but not considered

complete until additional review is completed.

4. Planning site visit – Completed by the same planner from the pre-application

meeting to make sure everything on the application and

plans is reflected on site. Identify any environmental issues.

5. Application accepted as complete. County has thirty days to deem

complete for processing, beginning the date application is submitted

and fees are paid. ( Government Code Section 65920)

6. Technical Advisory meeting – To bring impacted/ involved agencies

together to identify and discuss all issues. Potential participants

include Planning, Building, Public Works, CDF, Environmental

Health, Water District, Sewer District, Fire Districts, Fish & Game, and

Army Corp. Only County agencies will be required to be there.

7. Applicant commissions additional studies. Based on results of staff

and technical advisory meeting.

8. Initial agency circulation of project – Notification sent out to all

agencies involved letting them know about project and giving them

the opportunity to comment on proposed environmental review.

9. Initial comments received & additional studies approved.

10. Preparation of Negative Declaration, Mitigated Negative Declaration

or Environmental Impact Report.

11. Public circulation of environmental documents - Circulated to

agencies and the public; publish a public notice.

12. Staff report prepared. Report includes project and environmental

documents, and a recommendation of approval or denial.

13. Planning Commission – Reviews public records and takes public

testimony. Basis of decision/ recommendation has to be based upon

substantial facts.

14. Board of Supervisors – Additional step required for general plan

changes, zoning changes & ordinance changes. Final approval.

38

CALAVERAS COUNTY JAIL

REASON FOR INVESTIGATION

In accordance with Penal Code Section 919 ( b), the 2006/ 2007 Grand Jury shall

inquire into the condition and management of public prisons within the county.

SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION

The investigation focused primarily on the jail, condition of confinement, daily

operation, staffing, and the safety and security of staff and inmates.

PROCEDURES

The Grand Jury conducted a physical inspection of the Calaveras County Jail,

located in the Government Center adjacent to the Calaveras County Superior

Court in San Andreas. The Grand Jury observed the performance of duties by

staff and the inter- action of staff and inmates as well as physical conditions of the

facility.

The County Sheriff, Under- sheriff, custodial staff, support staff, Calaveras Air

Pollution Control Officer, Inspector for the Environmental Management Agency,

representatives of the Calaveras Public Health Department, and some inmates

were interviewed.

The 2006 Local Detention Facility Health Inspection Report, Fire / Life Safety

Inspection Report, Fire Inspection Report training logs, the Calaveras County

Sheriff’s Department inmate discipline reports, inmate grievances/ complaints,

and 2005/ 2006 Calaveras County Grand Jury final report were reviewed.

RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION

FINDING 1

The jail itself continues to be inadequate and obsolete due to the increase in

crime. The jail was constructed in the early 1960’ s to house an inmate population

of 47. The crime rate of Calaveras County continues to grow at a rapid pace with

no expansion feasible within the existing jail structure. A court order mandates

the capacity of the jail not to exceed 65 inmates. As a result, some inmates are

periodically released on a case- by- case basis, taking into consideration public

safety prior to the completion of their respective jail terms.

It is further noted that this adult jail facility in San Andreas is the only jail within

the county serving City of Angels Police Department, the Sheriff’s Department as

well as the local arrests initiated by the California Highway Patrol, Department

of Fish and Game, and other State and Federal agencies.

39

FINDING 2

Security and safety issues exist due to the physical layout of the jail. Blind spots

hamper officers from maintaining visible observations of inmate and staff movement

in certain locations within the jail. Other locations would not provide an ingress or

egress route in an emergency situation should a fire erupt or during an inmate

related disturbance. Additional manpower required to monitor inmates arrested for

substance abuse offenses restricts staff from monitoring the remainder of the

inmates.

FINDING 3

Regarding the overall daily operation of the jail, the Grand Jury found the condition

of confinement under Federal, State and local laws is being met. The kitchen was

observed to be clean and healthy dietary nutrition is being provided to the inmate

population with a cost per meal of approximately $ 1.30.

Medical services are being provided with medical personnel on site with quick

response or transfers to a medical facility in an emergency situation.

Inmate recreation is provided via the enclosed recreation yard, writing materials,

television, and library books. Providing various activities has resulted in the

utilization of additional deputy support from the field to meet compliance. This does

impact police response in the community in order to maintain inmate control within

the jail.

The outer perimeter of the jail constitutes a security and safety issue. There is no

secure area outside the jail when moving inmates to and from vehicles and the

courthouse.

RECOMMENDATION FOR FINDINGS 1- 3

The Grand Jury recommends Calaveras County build a new jail. The Sheriff

must continue to submit Federal and State grant requests to assist in this effort.

The Board of Supervisors must present a complete funding plan to be released to

the public by December 1, 2007.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Calaveras County Board of Supervisors

Calaveras County Sheriff

FINDING 4

Jail staff expressed concern to the Grand Jury about airborne exposure to

asbestos because inmates poke holes in the ceiling. Asbestos left undisturbed is

40

not considered a problem. However, when tampered with, asbestos becomes

airborne and a potential health risk when tiny fibers are inhaled.

A state certified asbestos consultant in March 7, 2005 report found “ the jail

contains a sprayed acoustical ceiling which is considered Friable- Hazardous

Material that will require enclosure or abatement as soon as possible to prevent

and alleviate exposure to asbestos airborne fibers to inmates tampering with it.”

The Sheriff reports the ceiling was sealed and continues to be maintained. The

county’s annual jail inspection report did not identify any asbestos related health

risks.

RECOMMENDATION

The county should immediately make a current definitive assessment of health

risks due to possible asbestos exposure at the jail. In addition, a state certified

asbestos consultant should re- inspect the jail for asbestos conditions.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Calaveras County Sheriff

Calaveras County Administrator

Calaveras County Environmental Health Department

FINDING 5

Although staff is vigilant in the performance of their duties, two locations have a

high volume of paper products, which may constitute a fire hazard:

1. The storage area in the kitchen, next to an exit door, has an accumulation

of empty cardboard boxes.

2. Control Center has a large quantity of paper products stored in this

secured area. In the event of a fire in this location, it could lessen

deputies’ ability to control other areas within the jail.

Only two air packs were on hand.

Insufficient staffing continues to be a matter of concern, especially during the late

evening and early morning shift with only two deputies on duty:

1. One in communications control

2. One to respond in case of an emergency situation, i. e. fire evacuation

The evacuation maps on the control room window are very small. Although

staff may be familiar with exit procedures during an emergency situation ( i. e.

fire) visitors might have difficulty reading the small exit map.

High employee turnover has been attributed to conditions of the jail facility.

41

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends paper products next to exit doors be removed. The

large amount of paper products in the control room needs to be evaluated and if

not required, removed to minimize combustible items within the area. An

assessment should be conducted to determine if more air packs are needed for

staff. Safety concerns require additional staff for the early morning shift need to

be provided. Appropriation of one additional staff should be considered.

Evacuation maps should be more visible.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Calaveras County Sheriff

Board of Supervisors

SUMMARY

The 2006- 2007 Grand Jury agrees with past Grand Jury findings that the only viable

solution is to construct a new jail. The Board of Supervisors and the Sheriff have

initiated the primary steps in an effort to construct a new jail. A proposal in the form

of an architectural program and conceptual design for an adult detention facility and

sheriff’s administration building was designed by TRG Consulting Firm, Indian

Wells California and was submitted to the Calaveras County Board of Supervisors

and Sheriff on December 8, 2006. This proposal provided for the construction of a

new 240- bed adult detention facility, a new sheriff’s administration building, and the

associated site development.

The Sheriff has submitted grants at the Federal and State level to offset the cost

for the construction of a new jail. If the county is successful in obtaining state

funding, notification will be in November 2007. If state funding is achieved, the

allocation will not cover the total cost of a new jail and Calaveras County will be

required to provide the additional funding necessary to build the new jail.

42

CALAVERAS COUNTY ANIMAL SHELTER FACILITY

REASON FOR INVESTIGATION

The 2006- 2007 Grand Jury continues to assess the condition of the facility, animal

health and welfare, safety, and overall operation of the animal shelter.

BACKGROUND

The Calaveras County Sheriff has the responsibility and accountability for the

management and daily operation of the County Animal Control Department.

The Board of Supervisors has the task of ensuring the fiscal resources are

available.

A veterinarian consultant is contracted to ensure the animals confined within the

shelter are properly sheltered and provided with medical care; evaluate the

health of the animals and recommend to staff the steps necessary for the proper

care of the animals.

The Animal Control Department has a dual role, specifically, the animal shelter

and animal control. While both operations have separate responsibilities, they

function in concert within the animal shelter department.

PROCEDURES

Members of the Grand Jury conducted an inspection and tour of the animal

services facility including a review of facility procedures. The 2006- 2007

budgetary allotments for animal services facility were examined. Animal

services staff and a representative from the Calaveras County Humane Society

were interviewed.

RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION:

FINDING 1

A facility upgrade recommended by a special audit in 2006, remains unresolved.

The proposed plan submitted by Nacht & Lewis Architects to the County

Administrator includes acquisition of space, construction of a new animal

shelter, and repairs to the existing facility. A timeline to review the plan has not

been developed. Repair and renovations to the existing facility have not been

made because the Board of Supervisors has not allocated funding.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends the Sheriff develop and the Board of Supervisors

approve a plan with a designated time line to implement the corrections needed.

The Board of Supervisors allocate the necessary funding.

43

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Calaveras County Board of Supervisors

Calaveras County Sheriff

FINDING 2

A recent visit to the animal shelter revealed a new modular building has been placed

at the animal shelter site and the office is operational to provide the necessary

services to the community. The building was found to have adequate space for the

staff with a much larger foyer area where visitors can conduct business at the facility.

The Grand Jury recognizes the positive effort and commitment of the Board of

Supervisors and Sheriff for the much needed improvements.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury is satisfied that the office area of the Animal Shelter that provides the

administrative function of the facility has been corrected.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

None

FINDING 3

Not all kennels have been replaced or repaired and no time frame has been

designated to complete the projects. The heating element in the kennel floors is

inoperable. Staff reported that three standing heaters have been ordered but as

of the date of the Grand Jury tour, the heaters were not in place.

The Plexiglas fixture to cover the front panel of the quarantine kennel had not

been completed and continues to need repair.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends that a corrective action plan be developed to repair

the identified deficiencies before November 1, 2007.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Calaveras County Sheriff

FINDING 4

Written procedure manuals have been developed to standardize procedures in the

areas of:

1. Safety Training and Universal Precautions

2. Euthanasia policy

3. Staff dress code, grooming, and equipment

4. Feline shelter protocol

5. Pet of the Week procedure

44

A problem exists in maintaining the procedure manuals in a centralized location and

in the proper format. These procedures should be reviewed as needed, revised on an

annual basis and approved by the Sheriff. Three of the existing procedures are in

proper format and contain signature approval of the Sheriff. The Pet of the Week

procedure is in proper format but does not contain signature block for the Sheriff.

The Feline Shelter protocol is not in proper format and does not have a signature

block for the Sheriff approval. The procedure manuals were not located in a

centralized location, available for all staff. Although the procedure manuals have

been developed, there is no indication staff has been provided training or read these

procedures to ensure they are familiar with the requirements of these procedure

manuals.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends the Sheriff develop a training program for staff

assigned within Animal Control, including a method of written substantiation

that this training is being provided on an annual basis and part of orientation for

newly hired staff.

Policies and procedures should be reviewed and revised annually as needed in a

consistent format. All policies and procedures should contain the Sheriff

signature for approval prior to implementation. The policies and procedures

should be available as follows:

1. Master copy in the Sheriff’s office

2. Centralized location in the Animal Control office

3. Copies for staff as needed

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Calaveras County Sheriff

FINDING 5

A review of the visitor logbook revealed that not all volunteers are signing in as

required.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends the logbook be maintained for all volunteers. All

volunteers should be required to sign in and out including time entered and time

left. This practice would ensure the accountability of volunteers gaining access

into the facility and provide staff with a resource document for future reference.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Calaveras County Sheriff

45

EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT OF ELECTED OFFICIALS

REASON FOR INVESTIGATION

One of the Grand Jury’s responsibilities is periodic auditing of county and city

government policies and procedures. Selected for review is the process of

expense reimbursement to elected officials of Calaveras County and City of

Angels.

PROCEDURES

The Grand Jury met with the following county and city officials:

Assistant County Administrative Officer, Auditor/ Controller, and City of Angels

Finance Officer.

Expense reimbursement policies, procedures, and compliance were reviewed,

including examination of line item charges for May and June 2006, supported by

individual expense documentation compared to budget. Examination also

included review of credit card policies and auto usage oversight.

RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION

FINDING 1

Calaveras County has a written policy “ Calaveras County Travel and

Reimbursement Policy, adopted by Board of Supervisors March 01, 2004”. The

policy provides flexibility to comply with annual California state law and

reimbursement rate changes without changing written policy annually. The

administration, auditor and board members can discuss changes as needed in

study sessions; changes need Board of Supervisors’ approval. The

Auditor/ Controller has responsibility to ensure all documentation complies with

policy and reimbursements are issued accordingly. Operating procedures with

proper oversight appear in order and meet county requirements.

FINDING 2

The City of Angels recently incorporated its written “ Expense Reimbursement

Policy” into its manual as required by Government Code sections 53232.2 and

53233.3. The policy provides flexibility to comply with annual state law and

reimbursement rate changes without changing written policy annually. The

Finance Officer and City Council members can discuss changes as needed in

study sessions and approve changes as needed. The Finance Officer has

responsibility to ensure all documentation complies with policy and

reimbursements are issued accordingly. Operating procedures with proper

oversight appear in order and meet city requirements.

46

SUMMARY

After examining reimbursement practices of elected officials for both Calaveras

County and City of Angels, the Grand Jury found sound accounting practices

and supporting checks and balances are currently being used.

47

CALAVERAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICTS

REASON FOR INVESTIGATION

As part of its ongoing responsibility, the 2006- 2007 Grand Jury selected for

review all Calaveras County School districts. The primary purpose of this

investigation was to review policies and procedures concerning the safety and

welfare of the students, teachers and staff in the County school districts, with

special attention to school bus inspection records.

PROCEDURES

The Grand Jury interviewed the County Superintendent of Schools and District

superintendents of Bret Harte Union High School, Calaveras Unified, Mark

Twain Union Elementary, and Vallecito Union school districts.

Transportation directors, bus drivers, and mechanics were interviewed regarding

bus safety. In addition principals, teachers, counselors, custodial, and

maintenance personnel were interviewed. The Calaveras County Public Works

Deputy Director of Operations and Maintenance was interviewed. The Deputy

Sheriff School Resource Officer was interviewed.

The safety and welfare goals and programs designed to achieve these goals for

each district were examined. Bus maintenance and driver records were audited.

Also examined were procedures and programs instituted to respond to concerns

reported by students, staff, the school resource deputy sheriff, and the

counselor/ social worker. Bus routes were reviewed and buses were ridden by

the Grand Jury.

RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION

FINDING 1

County school districts are now developing and implementing action plans to

manage current safety and welfare issues based on the 2005 California Healthy

Kids Survey and observations by staff and teachers. This survey was conducted

at Bret Harte and Calaveras high schools.

Deputy Sheriff School Resource Officer, teachers and administrators

interviewed reported the major problem is alcohol and marijuana abuse.

Incidents of harassment, theft from lockers, and unattended purses were also

reported.

Bret Harte Union School District received a $ 455,225 grant provided by the state

departments of Justice and Education, to fund programs to prevent school

violence. The district has started a character education program that includes

peer counseling, group and individual counseling and after- school activities

designed to create an atmosphere of tolerance and respect on campus and to

48

reduce or eliminate harassment in all its forms. The counselor/ social worker at

Bret Harte is directing these programs. Bret Harte has also hired a substance

abuse counselor to work with individuals or with groups. The grant is also

paying for a Calaveras County sheriff's deputy to spend time on the Vallecito

High School campus observing, enforcing, and interacting with students.

Two programs with newly trained leaders have been introduced: “ Reconnecting

Youth” at Vallecito High and “ Too Good for Drugs and Alcohol” at Bret Harte

High. They focus on developing self- management skills and on learning to make

good decisions.

According to counselor reports, Bret Harte High is recognizing the potential for

the existence of gang activity. District superintendents and Deputy Sheriff

School Resource Officer report that the districts have not yet experienced gang-like

violence. Gang colors and attire are not allowed on campuses.

Administrators acknowledge that training and resources for aides and teachers

are needed to enable them to manage harassment, disruptive, and anti-social

behavior in the classroom and on campus.

RECOMMENDATION

All districts are encouraged to continue evaluating school violence and

harassment issues and to apply for grants such as those administered by the state

departments of Justice and Education that might be available to fund appropriate

programs.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Superintendent of Bret Harte Union High School District

Superintendent of Calaveras Unified School District

Calaveras County Superintendent of Education

FINDING 2

Bus maintenance records in all districts were well maintained and the

inspections by the Department of Motor Vehicles showed high marks of

approval. The districts are purchasing new buses to replace older busses and

constructing new maintenance facilities as budgets permit.

RECOMMENDATION

None

FINDING 3

The Grand Jury became aware of bus route and bus stop safety problems within

the county. The Grand Jury selected the Pettinger Road bus route for detailed

49

observation and found excessive patching causing a rough uneven road with

unsafe shoulders. Heavy traffic between Jenny Lind and Highway 12 during

morning bus travel intensifies the danger. Transportation Director of the

Calaveras Unified School District and bus drivers report the road to be unsafe.

The Calaveras County Public Works Deputy Director of Operations and

Maintenance reported that road safety is their main concern and that no

complaint had been received from the Calaveras Unified School District.

Therefore only routine attention was being paid to this road. The Deputy

Director reports, equipment to monitor peak usage of this road will be set up and

attention will be given as to whether the condition of the road and usage deserve

priority for possible resurfacing or repair.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends that Calaveras County Public Works Department

increase the safety for school transportation by allocating funds for resurfacing,

widening the road, and repairing the shoulders on Pettinger Road.

Transportation personnel should report unsafe bus route road conditions to the

County Public Works Department.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Calaveras County Board of Supervisors

Superintendent of Calaveras Unified School District

Calaveras County Public Works Department

Calaveras Council of Governments

SUMMARY

School district personnel appear aware and proactive in integrating new

approaches to deal with school violence and safety. Continued vigilance is

required and commended. New resources for providing programs and services

beneficial to safety and welfare of students appear available in the form of grants

and should be given appropriate priority by districts not currently using these

funds.

50

CALAVERAS COUNTY LIBRARY SYSTEM

REASON FOR INVESTIGATION

As part of its ongoing responsibility, the 2006- 2007 Grand Jury selected for

review the Calaveras County Library.

PROCEDURES

The Grand Jury interviewed the County librarian and branch librarians to

determine priority of needs with special emphasis on computer usage, how

staffing determines hours and days of library operation, and space limitations of

branch libraries.

RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION

FINDING 1

All computers in the branches and main headquarters have Internet DSL

connectivity through the libraries’ computer system. Proposed wireless service is

anticipated to allow the public to connect their personal computers to the

Internet. A request for wireless connectivity is to go to the Board of Supervisors

for approval for San Andreas, Murphys, and Mokelumne Hill libraries.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends the Board of Supervisors approve the request for

wireless service at the libraries.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Calaveras County Board of Supervisors

FINDING 2

Libraries reported a need for increased hours of operation, which requires

increased staffing. In lieu of finding millions of dollars for new libraries, Friends

of Library and Library Commissioners are seeking grants of $ 200,000 to $ 300,000

to move seven employees from part- time to full- time to provide more hours of

operation at San Andreas Library. An additional professional librarian position,

additional clerical assistants, and trained volunteers are needed at Central

Library. Additional funding for increased staffing is also requested at branch

libraries to increase hours of operation.

Data from the 2006 California Library Statistics publication showed that in 2005-

2006 Tuolumne County with a population of 58,504 allocated $ 679,813 for library

staff salaries and benefits whereas Calaveras County with a population of 44,796

allocated only $ 407,190. In previous years, no increase has been provided for

additional staffing. Status quo funding for library books and materials has been

in effect for several years, the librarian reports.

51

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends the Calaveras County Board of Supervisors allocate

funding for additional staff in the Library system to improve and expand service

to the public.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Calaveras County Board of Supervisors

52

RESPONSES TO PRIOR GRAND JURY REPORTS

Each year, the Grand Jury is charged with monitoring and reporting on

responses received from agencies and public officials as a result of the previous

year’s recommendations and requests for response.

All respondents are provided specific criteria to follow when responding to the

Grand Jury. Penal Code Section 933( c) provides requirements for response to the

Grand Jury Final Report. The governing body of any public agency must

respond within 90 days. The response must be addressed to the presiding Judge

of the Superior Court. All elected officers or heads of agencies that are required

to respond must to so within 60 days to the presiding Judge of the Superior

Court with and information copy provided to the Board of Supervisors. These

responses are subsequently forwarded to the current year’s Grand Jury for

review and follow- up.

The following is a detailed account of the follow- up completed by this year’s

Grand Jury as directed result of previous Grand Jury’s requests for response.

A final report containing current investigations will be issued by this Grand Jury

at the end of its term, June 30, 2007.

53

RESPONSE FROM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND SHERIFF’S

DEPARTMENT TO ANIMAL SERVICES FACILITY GRAND JURY

REPORT 2005- 2006

REASON FOR INVESTIGATION

The 2005- 2006 Grand Jury received a complaint from a citizen of Calaveras

County against Animal Control, now known as the Calaveras County Animal

Services Facility. The complainant specified many issues pertaining to the

condition of the facility, animal health and welfare, public shelter safety, and lack

of supervision in the shelter.

FINDING 1

Physical conditions in the dog kennels that require attention:

1) Kennel flooring is damaged.

2) Kennel doors are difficult to open in a fluid motion and rub against the

concrete flooring due to rusting.

3) The kennel drainage system is antiquated and allows fecal contact from one

kennel to another during cleaning and flushing excrement down each kennel

trough to the main drain.

4) The kennel floors have heating elements in them, but staff reported to the

contractor that they no longer function.

5) One kennel used for quarantine dogs has no Plexiglas covering to prevent the

public from putting their fingers in the kennel.

The above conditions leave the County open to liability.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury agrees with the following MOA’s recommendations:

1) Animal Services needs to replace all kennel doors that are not functioning

properly.

2) The heating elements in the floor of the dog kennels must be repaired prior to

the winter months.

Plexiglas must be replaced on the quarantine kennel.

RESPONSE FROM THE SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT

The physical conditions listed within the report are accurate. The repairs

recommended in the report are expensive to repair individually and the Sheriff’s

Department and the County Administrator are currently in contact with Nacht &

Lewis Architects to correct them. A proposed plan has been submitted and

when finalized will correct this finding. An additional 5,000 square feet

( approximate of new space) would be added to the east area of the existing

shelter and the existing shelter would be renovated.

54

To properly address these issues a multi- phased project will be incorporated. It

is essential that at the time the existing shelter is renovated, the first phase

addition is completed and ready to house the displaced animals.

At the time of this response there is no estimated time when the improvements

will be made and will require approval from the Board of Supervisors.

To ensure that the animals have adequate heating during the winter months,

standing heaters will be used.

The final piece of Plexiglas to cover the front panel of the quarantine kennel will

be in place by August 11, 2006.

RESPONSE FROM THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

The Board concurs with the responses provided to the Grand Jury by the Sheriff.

It appears that the steps taken and planned to be taken by the Sheriff are

appropriate. As noted by the Sheriff, he is currently working with the CAO and

a retained architect firm with a view toward providing additional shelter space.

The Board approves of this step. Beyond that, it would be inappropriate for the

Board to make a commitment to provide this additional space until a specific

plan is proposed and its costs are known.

GRAND JURY DETERMINATION 2006- 2007

The 2006- 2007 Calaveras County Grand Jury has reviewed the August 18, 2006

response from the Sheriff’s Department regarding the condition and service

within the Animal Shelter. The Grand Jury has determined not to accept this

response.

Members of the Grand Jury conducted a follow- up inspection during the month

of October 2006 to verify that the corrective measures identified in the Sheriff’s

response were completed.

Proposed plans for repairs have been submitted by Nacht & Lewis, Architects, to

County Administrative Officer. To date, the plans have not been implemented

nor funded. In addition:

- Not all kennel doors had been replaced and no time frame has been

targeted to repair the remaining doors.

- When the inspection was conducted, on duty staff stated that three

standing heaters would be in place prior to the end of the year. This issue

should have already been corrected as stipulated in the initial August 18,

2006 Sheriff response.

55

- The Plexiglas fixture to cover the front panel of the quarantine kennel

had not been completed although the Sheriff’s response indicates this

would be corrected by August 11, 2006.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Board of Supervisors

Sheriff’s Department

FINDING 2

Each officer cleans the kennels by their own methods. There is no standardized

procedure for cleaning and disinfecting the kennels.

The water pressure used in the kennel area is too low to properly remove feces and

debris from the kennels.

There are no standard operating procedures outlining steps to be taken to reduce

the spread of disease and limit disease exposure for healthy animals. Dogs that

present signs of illness or become ill at the shelter remain housed in the main

kennels. Healthy cats are group housed with ill cats.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury agrees with the MOA as follows: Calaveras County must

develop standard kennel operations which outline procedures for cleaning and

disinfecting all animal enclosures including those that house ill animals; isolation

of those animals, and preventive measures to be taken by staff when handling ill

animals. Animal Services must specify bleach concentrations ( 1: 32 dilution), in

their Manual of Procedures, train Animal Control Officers and future Animal

Care staff on the proper dilutions, and monitor staff to make sure directives are

being followed. The disinfectant to be used must always be in stock.

Water pressure must be increased to clean the dog kennels properly. Staff must

clean cages and kennels housing healthy animals first and ill animals last.

Policies and procedures must be developed to isolate ill dogs and cats and

provide proper medical treatment.

RESPONSE FROM THE SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT

The cleaning protocols have been addressed in the Veterinarian Consultant’s

reports. Daily cleaning protocol is in place and disinfecting solutions are being

used on a daily basis.

A “ Safety, Training and Universal” policy has been written and implemented.

This policy addresses disease reduction and prevention. The staff is being

supervised to ensure compliance.

56

Dogs:

There are two kennels that are used to quarantine dogs displaying signs of

illness. Complete isolation is not possible at this time but is being addressed in

the Shelter renovation project.

Cats:

Obviously ill and potential contagious cats are isolated in the euthanasia room.

This area is limited to three animals. In the event that there are more than 3 cats

sick and the illness is not contagious, the cats are housed in the isolation room.

To further address potentially ill cats, 30 stainless steel cages are on order. Upon

arrival the kennels will be used to house feral cats and to isolate ill cats.

Sick or injured animals are housed at the County’s contract veterinarian’s facility.

RESPONSE FROM THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

The Board of Supervisors concurs with and approves the response provided by

the Sheriff’s Department.

GRAND JURY DETERMINATION 2006- 2007

The Grand Jury determines the response from the Sheriff’s Department and

Board of Supervisors is adequate.

FINDING 3

There is no standardized feeding protocol that identifies certain types of foods to

be fed to the animals. The type of food being fed to the animals is dependent on

what is donated.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury agrees with the Management and Operational Analysis ( MOA) of

the Calaveras Animal Control Department as follows: Food is fed dependent on

what has been donated. For this reason, the staff may not have the specific diets

needed to feed each type of animal housed at the shelter. Animal Services staff

must ensure that they have a supply of age appropriate food for all animals.

RESPONSE FROM THE SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT

Animal Services is still accepting donated dog food, however the only food

accepted is of the highest quality such as Science Diet.

High quality cat food is being purchased by the department. This food “ Eagle

Prism” is appropriate for both adult cats and kittens. Puppies are fed age

appropriate food.

57

Dry erase boards have been placed on the kennels, which detail the amount of

food to be provided to each animal.

RESPONSE FROM THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

The Board of Supervisors concurs with and approves the response provided by

the Sheriff’s Department.

GRAND JURY DETERMINATION 2006- 2007

The Grand Jury determines the responses from the Sheriff’s Department and

Board of Supervisors are adequate.

FINDING 4

The MOA recommended that Animal Services replace the current Animal Control

Officers’ trucks with new vehicles containing standard cage mounts that prevent

exposure to the weather and have cooling and heating units.

The Grand Jury found that Animal Services has the following vehicles:

A) Two older 4- wheel drive vehicles with open compartments that expose

animals to extreme weather conditions. The Grand Jury learned that during

the winter months, animals being transported in these vehicles have arrived

to the shelter cold and wet even when blankets were provided.

B) Two used animal control trucks were recently purchased which have no

cooling or heating units but rather two fans installed on top of each vehicle

that only moves air through the six animal compartments. The two trucks do

not have the 4- wheel drive needed for severe weather mountain conditions.

The intent of the Sheriff’s Department is to transport animals immediately to the

shelter during inclement weather. However, given the large size of Calaveras

County, transporting animals across the County could take at least an hour or

more, causing discomfort or possible death for an animal in extreme weather.

RECOMMENDATION

Animal Services must either acquire vehicles that have cooling and heating units or

have the current vehicles retrofitted. The Grand Jury also recommends that any

vehicle purchased in the future have 4- wheel drive.

RESPONSE FROM THE SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT

Currently there are two Animal Services vehicles that are fully enclosed and

concerns for the animals being transported were noted. Turbo coolers were

ordered and received. These coolers will be installed starting August 7, 2006.

Heaters for these vehicles are being researched.

58

The remaining two non- enclosed vehicles will be phased out and replaced with

new 4- wheel drive vehicles with heating/ cooling units as needed and when

funding is available.

RESPONSE FROM THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

The Board of Supervisors concurs with and approves the response provided by

the Sheriff’s Department.

GRAND JURY DETERMINATION 2006- 2007

The Grand Jury does not accept the response. At the time of the October 2006

inspection, coolers had been installed but the heaters had not. The Animal

Control transportation vehicle continues to be a matter of concern.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Board of Supervisors

Sheriff’s Department

FINDING 5

The Grand Jury confirmed complaints received by the consultant that cats without

sedation were being euthanized by intracardiac injection. Also, the Grand Jury

found there were complaints of abusive treatment of animals being taken to the

euthanasia room.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends all animals scheduled for euthanasia be humanely

transported from their holding area to the euthanasia room and euthanized

according to state law, and employees found in violation of state euthanasia laws

be prosecuted.

RESPONSE FROM SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT

All animals are being humanely euthanized according to state law. Policy and

Procedures and training have been implemented.

RESPONSE FROM THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

The Board of Supervisors concurs with and approves the response provided by

the Sheriff’s Department.

GRAND JURY DETERMINATION 2006- 2007

The Grand Jury determines the response from the Sheriff’s Department and

Board of Supervisors is adequate.

59

FINDING 6

The Grand Jury found Calaveras County Animal Services, when compared to similar

counties, is under funded. Budget amounts for 2006 divided by population resulted

in the following:

Name of County Population Budget for 2006 Cost per person/ per year

Calaveras County 49,000 $ 343,823 $ 7.02

Amador County 38,000 $ 798,211 $ 21.00

Tuolumne County 57,000 $ 823,000 $ 14.44

El Dorado/ Westslope 68,100 $ 1,260,000 $ 18.50

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends the Board of Supervisors provide more funding to

the Calaveras County Animal Services Facility, so it can make the necessary

improvements recommended in this report.

RESPONSE FROM THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

The Board notes that significant steps have been taken by the Board to provide

the funding necessary to correct Animal Services deficiencies. Specifically,

additional staffing has been provided. By December 2006 there will be a new

modular for Animal Services Offices. Electrical infrastructure is completed. The

Board has included in the 2006/ 2007 budget $ 450,000 for shelter work.

Construction of additional shelter space is currently under study.

The comparative costs for Animal Services provided by the Grand Jury are

noted. The Board agrees that the apparent discrepancy in per capita spending

raises legitimate questions regarding the adequacy of funding. The Board notes,

however, that the cost of current and future planned expansions may result in a

significant change in these ratios. Additionally, without further information

regarding the details of the Animal Services budgets in the neighboring counties,

it is not possible to determine whether these amounts in fact reflect direct

comparisons.

RESPONSE FROM THE SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT

The Sheriff’s Department agrees with the Grand Jury report and requires

additional funding to correct these findings. As noted in the report additional

funding will be required for renovation of the shelter. To date, the staffing level

of Animal Services has been increased by three positions. These new positions

have made significant improvement in the operation of Animal Services;

however, this current staffing level still does not meet the full criteria to run both

the facility and field operations. It is anticipated that when the shelter is

renovated a minimum of two new Shelter Assistants, three Animal Services

60

Officers, and one Sheriffs Technician will be needed to operate the department

along with additional service and supply costs.

GRAND JURY DETERMINATION 2006- 2007

The Grand Jury determines the responses from the Sheriff’s Department and

Board of Supervisors are adequate.

FINDING 7

The Grand Jury finds inadequate communication between Animal Services and the

Calaveras Humane Society. Several animals selected for “ Pet of the Week” or for

transport to another facility were euthanized due to poor communication between

Animal Services and the Humane Society. Animal Services developed “ Pet of the

Week” procedures, issued on March 3, 2006 to improve communications between

Animal Services employees and volunteers of the Humane Society.

Without the Humane Society’s 50 volunteers, it would be difficult to operate the

Calaveras County animal shelter. These volunteers find foster families and

permanent homes for the animals and help out with a variety of other tasks.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends that the Animal Services management team hold

regularly scheduled meetings with the Humane Society to achieve better

communication.

RESPONSE FROM THE SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT

The Sheriff’s Department agrees that the Calaveras County Humane Society is a

valuable asset to the shelter.

In the early part of the transition of Animal Control to the Sheriff’s Department

there was an inadequate understanding of the roles of each entity. From the

beginning Humane Society representatives and the Sheriff’s Department have

had monthly meetings to discuss issues related to the shelter. These meetings

are ongoing.

Volunteer procedures have been updated.

GRAND JURY DETERMINATION 2006- 2007

The Grand Jury determines the response from the Sheriff’s Department is

adequate.

FINDING 8

The Calaveras County Animal Services Facility is in need of developing and revising

their Policies and Procedures Manual, job descriptions, methods for training and

61

evaluating its staff and volunteers. Animal Services has mentioned implementing a

new tracking software program to maintain a more effective database. Animal

Services management intends to have all the above items completed and in place by

January 2007.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends that Animal Services continue to work with its

current consultant to update and develop a policy and procedure manual. The

Grand Jury recommends that the new tracking software program be

implemented by January 2007.

RESPONSE FROM THE SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT

The new animal tracking software program has been installed and is being used.

Numerous Policies and Procedures have been written. The Sheriff’s Department

is waiting for a proposal from the prior consultant to review remaining policies

and procedures.

RESPONSE FROM TECHNOLOGY SERVICES

To correct the issues addressed in the BB& R report, Animal Services has with the

assistance of Technology Services purchased and installed the Animal Tracking

and Shelter software Chameleon.

The Chameleon software is directly associated to the accounting of all money

received by Animal Services and maintains a database of all receipts.

The Calaveras County Auditor’s Office has direct access to the information

entered into the system. As a result all receipts issued to Animal Services can be

tracked on a daily basis.

This application does not allow for any corrections to a previously entered

incorrect amount or receipt number and a separate journal entry must be made

to record the error to prevent duplications or misappropriation of funds.

All dog licenses are being tracked on an inventory log and are being secured

within a locked cabinet.

RESPONSE FROM THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

The Board of Supervisors concurs with and approves the response provided by

the Sheriff’s Department.

62

GRAND JURY DETERMINATION 2006- 2007

The Grand Jury determines the response from the Sheriff’s Department,

Technology Services and Board of Supervisors is adequate.

GRAND JURY RECOMMENDATION 2006- 2007

The Grand Jury recommends the Board of Supervisors and Sheriff’s Department

complete a long- range plan for Animal Services Facility and implement

recommendations presented in the 2005- 2006 Grand Jury final report.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Board of Supervisors

Sheriff’s Department

63

RESPONSES FROM FOOTHILL FIRE PROTECTION BOARD OF

DIRECTORS, JENNY LIND FIRE DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS,

AND LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION TO GRAND

JURY REPORT 2005- 2006

REASON FOR INVESTIGATION

The Grand Jury learned Foothill Fire Protection District ( FFPD) purchased a

metal building that has been left unerected in the weather for several years.

There were also numerous complaints filed during the year concerning various

Brown Act violations.

FINDING 1

The Board committed violations of the Brown Act over the course of the year.

These violations included not posting notices 72 hours in advance of a meeting,

not holding a public meeting before and after a closed session to inform the

public of its decision on related matters, and other violations that are still under

investigation at this writing.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends the members of this board educate themselves with

the Brown Act. This can be done by attending seminars or taking advantage of

county sponsored ethics training. The District should also purchase several

copies and make sure each member has a copy available at all district board

meetings.

RESPONSE BY FOOTHILL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT

All violations were acknowledged by the Board and rectified following advice of

County Counsel. The meeting where the agenda was two hours late of the

required posting and the public comments omitted from an agenda were null

and void and new meetings were held. All Directors have copies of the Brown

Act and are doing business under its guidelines. A copy is brought to each

meeting. The Chairman attended a Brown Act training seminar and the other

directors will attend the County- sponsored ethics training.

GRAND JURY DETERMINATION 2006- 2007

The Grand Jury determines the response from Foothill Fire Protection District is

adequate.

FINDING 2

For several years, Foothill Fire Protection District has been receiving tax dollars

from an area to the south of Hogan Dam, accessed off of Hogan Dam road, that

has not been annexed by the district. During a recent Local Agency Formation

64

Commission ( LAFCo) meeting, Jenny Lind Fire District voiced interest in

annexing this area into their district.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends LAFCo, The Foothill Fire Protection District, and

the Jenny Lind Fire District determine the sphere of influence for each district to

ensure proper fire protection for all property owners within the affected area.

RESPONSE BY FOOTHILL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT

The Board’s attention was brought to this matter in 2005 when a Municipal

Service Review completed by Mr. Dickenson indicated that the annexation was

not completed by LAFCo during their formation of the District in 1999- 2000. The

sphere of influence was approved by LAFCo and the tax base was approved to

be paid to FFPD by the County Supervisors. Since the tax money was collected

by FFPD, this matter was considered closed. Unknowingly, neither LAFCo nor

the District knew that necessary documents were not completed. Now the

annexation is proceeding and Jenny Lind Fire has come into the picture due to

development of 31 acres at the edge of their district in the overall area of Hogan

Dam Road. This developer does not have a preference of which district serves

the area. The people of Hogan Dam Road were given an opportunity in 1999-

2000 to vote which fire district they wished to provide fire services – their

decision was FFPD.

RESPONSE FROM JENNY LIND FIRE DISTRICT

This area has historically been a part of the sphere of influence of the Foothill Fire

Protection District having been so designated by L. A. F. C. o. on or about and

during the transition time between County Fire Protection and the formation and

subsequent formation of the Foothill Fire Protection District. This particular area

however; at present time, can only be accessed through the Jenny Lind Fire

Protection District. Furthermore, one of our stations ( station 2) is in closer

proximity to the at- issue area thereby reducing response time if this district

provided fire protection for the property south of Hogan Dam.

That being said this district participated in a study conducted by L. A. F. C. o.

wherein this noted agency commissioned a consultant to determine which fire

district ( Foothill or Jenny Lind) was best suited to protect this at- issue area. This

district and our members, including two members of the board of directors, the

chief, assistant chief, and battalion chief, met and conferred with the consultant

during her study and continued to do so up to and until the time of her

published report back to L. A. F. C. o.

Therefore, and on or about September 6, 2006, this district and our members,

including two members of the board of directors, the chief, assistant chief,

65

battalion chief, and our administrative assistant met with members of the Grand

Jury regarding this same property south of Hogan Dam.

This district has participated and cooperated to the best of our ability in

providing information, statistics, and other relevant information to both the

L. A. F. C. o. consultant and to members of the Grand Jury. Additionally, this

district stands ready to proffer protection to the at- issue property south of Hogan

Dam if called upon to do so in the future. This district is neutral as to any future

annexations relevant to this at- issue property south of Hogan Dam into the Jenny

Lind Fire Protection District; the real issue has been, is and still remains a matter

of public safety and to provide the best possible fire protection to the citizens of

this noted area.

RESPONSE FROM LAFCo

LAFCo adopted an updated Sphere of influence in accordance with the

requirements of the Cortese- Knox- Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization

Act of 2000 herein after referred to CKH Act on November 21st, 2005, after a

noticed public hearing. The area in question is within the Sphere of Influence for

the Foothill Fire Protection District. Recently, LAFCo received an application for

annexation to the Foothill Fire Protection District by a private party of a portion

of the territory previously designated to be within the Sphere of Influence of the

Foothill Fire Protection District. Jenny Lind Fire questioned whether or not the

area should be in the Sphere of Influence for the Jenny Lind Fire Protection

District and not the Foothill Fire Protection District.

LAFCo has engaged a private consultant to prepare an evaluation of the

provision of fire and emergency response services within the territory in

question and provide recommendations to the LAFCo Commission regarding

who would be the most efficient and effective fire and EMS service provider in

the short and long term. This study is expected to be released and discussed at

the August 21st 2006 LAFCo meeting. A copy of the study, once completed, will

be forwarded to the Grand Jury.

Depending upon the results of this analysis, a Sphere Amendment of Change

may need to occur within the territory. However, this is unknown as of the

writing of this letter.

GRAND JURY DETERMINATION 2006- 2007

The Grand Jury determines the responses from the Foothill Fire Protection

District, Jenny Lind Fire District, and LAFCo are adequate.

66

FINDING 3

In the course of the Grand Jury investigation, it was learned that the emergency

response vehicles are poorly equipped with oxygen cylinders. When these

cylinders are exhausted, a firefighter must take the empty cylinder to San

Andreas to be refilled. There are no extra cylinders at the station.

RECOMMENDATION

The fact that emergency response vehicles need the proper amount of cylinders

available to service the district’s boundaries, and other districts to which it has a

mutual aide agreement, is unquestionable. The Grand Jury recommends that

Foothill Fire Protection District enter into an agreement with a local gas vendor

providing a proper supply of full cylinders. When cylinders become empty, the

vendor can replace them for full cylinders on, at least, a weekly basis ensuring

oxygen will be available for emergency responses.

RESPONSE BY FOOTHILL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT

It was noted at a regular meeting held in May 2006 that each fire vehicles was not

properly stocked with a spare oxygen tank. The problem escalated with the

reduced service from Valley Springs Ambulance who had previously refilled the

tanks and was readily available. The Board too immediate action by soliciting

bids for its own in- house Cascade System to be operable very soon.

GRAND JURY DETERMINATION 2006- 2007

The Grand Jury determines this response from Foothill Fire Protection District is

adequate.

FINDING 4

Although available for several years, Foothill Fire Protection District has yet to

break ground for station # 1. At this time, Foothill Fire Protection District’s only

station is a rented building in Valley Springs, and this building is inadequate to

house the district’s equipment. A majority of the district’s equipment is left

outside in the weather, possibly leading to unnecessary maintenance costs.

RECOMMENDATION

The Grand Jury recommends Foothill Fire Protection District’s Board of Directors

immediately break ground and construct Station # 1 to house equipment. It is

recommended this be completed by the end of 2006. The Grand Jury also

recommends the District’s board of directors immediately search for adequate

housing for its equipment.

67

RESPONSE BY FOOTHILL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT

Due to many reasons, the construction of Station # 1 has faced many delays. The

situation that Chairman West inherited is this: He was told by a previous

chairman that the building permit had been approved. The excavation company

was contacted to begin work that had been approved by the previous Board. The

Chairman proceeded to pick- up the permit only to be told that the District

needed a grading and landscaping plan that had not been previously provided.

A previous director was assigned to address these issues and had spent several

months trying to get the plans from the plan developer, and then that director

resigned. The Chairman then called the plan developer who stated that they had

not begun them, were very busy but promised to complete them in a week. A

letter was sent by the County addressing those two items. The County Planning

Office notified the Chair that the conditional use permit had expired on 12- 30- 05.

A letter was written to the Planning Commission requesting an extension, but

they stated FFPD would have to start the permitting process over, no extension

could be given. The District’s Supervisor was also called upon to speed up the

process but could not help. A new application was filed and the review process

started again.

During the first Conditional Use Permit timeframe, there was a demand by

Public Works that in order to do this project FFPD would be required to rebuild

Helisma Road from an F to a C road type. After many hours of review of the

General Plan it was noted that the fire station construction can be done on any

grade level road which allowed for an exemption on the first CUP. When the

second CUP documents were created it included the same criteria as per road

development.

The road level issue was considered to be settled and after many months of delay

the new CUP was finally approved. At the time the permit was to be picked up,

the road grade level issue resurfaced. It now had to go before the Planning

Commission agenda for an exemption – which was granted.

After this long delay, there was still a 30- day grievance period required before

the permit could be picked up.

It was at this time that the District also learned that it was not exempt from

permit fees as they had been previously told. The Building Dept. did waive fees

but the Environmental Health ( well) and Public Works ( road encroachment

permit and deposit) were not waived. The Chairman immediately paid these

permit fees so the building permit could be issued from his personal account and

sought District reimbursement.

68

After the many delays and required County- required processes and the recent

inclement weather, the permit to build was granted on February 15, 2006.

The well was installed first before the continuous rains and the septic installation

was started. The severe rainstorms caused the septic tank to float and with the

high ground water content ground drying was required to allow for tractor

work.

Finally, in June 2006 the septic system was completed, the footings have been

dug and the cement contractor is ready to set the foundation forms.

GRAND JURY DETERMINATION 2006- 2007

The response by the Foothill Fire Protection District Board does not adequately

meet the recommendation of the 2005- 2006 Grand Jury. The construction of

Station # 1 still has not been completed as of January 2007. Equipment is still not

being housed properly.

RESPONSE REQUESTED

Foothill Fire Protection District Board

69

RESPONSE FROM THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS REGARDING

CALAVERAS COUNTY JAIL AS PART OF LAW ENFORCEMENT

INFRASTRUCTURE TO THE GRAND JURY REPORT 2005- 2006

ORIGINAL REASON FOR INVESTIGATION

Penal code section919 requires the Grand Jury inquire annually into the

condition and management of public prisons located within the county,

including Board of Supervisors responses to previous years.

FINDING 1

Since the jail facility’s construction in 1963, the population within Calaveras

County has nearly quadrupled. The jail was originally constructed for an inmate

population of 47 to serve a county residency of 11,000. With its increase in size,

the jail will now house up to 65 inmates while the population it serves has

swelled to over 43,000. The county adult detention facility in San Andreas is the

only county jail within the county, serving the Angels Camp Police Department

as well as the Sheriff’s Department.

RESPONSE FROM THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

The Board of Supervisors agrees with this finding.

FINDING 2

The 2004- 2005 Grand Jury, the Needs Assessment Consultant, and the Sheriff’s

Department have judged the current jail facility not expandable as well as

inadequate. The current jail is a labyrinth of corridors, passages, exits, entries,

and holding areas that are in some cases remote from central control. Current jail

architecture standard strives to have all holding cells be circumferential to a

common observation and control station. The remote and convoluted current

facility requires increased officer participation for the safety of officers as well as

inmates. Several sections of the facility are not visible from the control station

and there is no way to route remote monitors through the walls to central

control. In the case of a fire, entrance and exit from some areas of the facility

could become untenable.

RESPONSE FROM THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

In general, the Board agrees with the various physical limitations in the jail

facility. The Board agrees that a new and larger jail facility would allow for a

larger inmate population with enhanced inmate and custodial officer safety. The

Board notes, however, that the Jail is operated in a way that minimizes the effect

of these physical limitations. First and foremost of these is the limitation of the

population to 65 inmates.

70

FINDING 3

Currently there exists no “ sally port” or enclosure outside the jail for moving

inmates to or from the jail. This situation exposes officers as well as the public to

increased risk while transporting inmates. Prisoners, although restrained during

transport, pass through a wide- open area adjacent to the entire Government

Center. This issue has been addressed by previous grand juries.

RESPONSE FROM THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

The Board agrees with this finding.

FINDING 4

The jail is well run and meets state and l