Budgetary concerns for San
Benito County took center stage in the 2014-15 San Benito County Grand Jury
Report, which was published in early June. The grand jury also evaluated
patient grievances and employee complaints against the San Benito County
Behavioral Health Department regarding improper administration of drug
medication, finding the claims valid and that "many patient grievances
were handled by management with little compassion."
In its report, the grand jury
questioned the amount of funding it received from the county in
the 2014-15 budget and the members investigated why so many county
department heads are considered interim employees.
In both cases, the grand jury
recommended that the county Board of Supervisors provide more funding to allow
the grand jury and county staff to effectively conduct business as well as to
make the county a more competitive employer.
The purpose of the grand jury,
a 14-member body of local citizens, is to “weigh criminal charges, weigh
allegations of misconduct against public officials, and to act as the public’s
‘watchdog’ by investigating and reporting upon the affairs of local
government," the report states.
According to the California
Penal Code, each agency listed in the report has 90 days to respond to the
grand jury’s findings and recommendations.
In terms of its own annual
funding, the grand jury found that the $25,321 budget it was given in 2014-15 by
county supervisors was inadequate and caused the group to drop several
investigations and cut short its work on other cases. In fact, according to the
report, the grand jury had exhausted its funds by February and all work came to
a stop.
For 2015-16, the grand jury
proposed an increased budget of $37,050.72, which includes $9,904.32 for grand
jury general meetings and training sessions; $13,050 for committee meetings and
interviews as well as $8,250 for additional supplies and administrative
expenses. This budget would allow for two general meetings per month for
the grand jury, as well as three meetings per month for each grand jury
committee.
More permanent employees needed
As for county staff, the grand
jury found that interim directors currently make up 30 percent of San Benito
County department directors. While these interim positions cost the county
approximately 12 percent more than “pay, and benefits listed for the positions
for a regular county employee director,” the county faces several obstacles in
its effort to recruit leadership.
In addition to competing
against higher salaries offered by surrounding counties -- making it
difficult to attract qualified personnel -- the grand jury also found that
the CalPERS Pension Reform Act of 2013 created two tiers of retirement formulas
for county employees.
“As a result, some talented and
experienced employees do not want to be considered for promotion because it may
trigger a reclassification in their retirement formula,” the report states.
Patient grievances against
behavioral health department
The grand jury also weighed in
on patient grievances and employee complaints against the San Benito County
Behavioral Health Department, finding that “all the complaints and grievances
were valid” and that “There needs to be an improvement in management's
relationship to employees, their interaction with patients, and their responses
to grievances and complaints.”
Specific concerns cited in the
report relate to many complaints “regarding improper medical prescriptions
written by psychiatrists…Management seems unable or unwilling to confront and
correct complaints against psychiatrists.”
The grand jury recommends that
the department hire a full-time medical doctor as medical director, add a
clinician or nurse to the management team that reviews employees concerns,
improve ability of top management to communicate in regards to their patient’s
concerns, bring compensation in line with surrounding counties, and review its
contracts with its consultants.
Furthermore, the county counsel
should determine if a conflict of interest exists, the grand jury recommended,
given that the director of the behavioral health department is a past
employee of Idea Consulting. In addition, the grand jury alleges that three
department employees “violated the admonition that was given to them during
their interviews” by “discussing what questions and information the Grand Jury
was seeking.”
Lease clarification
Another issue investigated
by the grand jury this year included questions concerning the agreement that
allows the nonprofit Community Services and Development Corporation to lease
its offices at 1131 San Felipe Road in Hollister from the county.
The grand jury found that the
county had misclassified the kind of commercial lease the county has entered
into with the agency. In its report, the grand jury states that the county
should have identified the lease as a capital lease to the State of California,
rather than an operational lease. This distinction is important because under
an operational lease, the county could receive reimbursements from the state.
Capital leases, however, are not eligible for reimbursements.
In this case, the grand jury
recommends that San Benito County “remove from the lease the option to extend
the lease for an additional 99 years at a rate of $1 per year.”
High school bond oversight
San Benito High School
District’s bond issue, Measure G, also appeared in the grand jury’s report. The
$42.5 million bond that was approved by voters in June 2014 would provide
for a variety of improvements to San Benito High School, both to the physical
buildings as well as the technology provided to students.
In its report, the grand jury
“calls on District Leadership to improve its practices as it relates to public
relations regarding Measure G, which narrowly passed, and to establish and
maintain a high-functioning and successful Bond Oversight Committee (BOC) to
ensure compliance with legislation as well as financial and ethical
accountability.”
Migrant housing center capital
improvements needed
The grand jury’s report also
included an investigation into the county’s obligations regarding the Family
Migrant Housing Center and Single Migrant Workers Dormitories. The center, one
of 23 migrant housing centers permitted by the Office of Migrant Services, is
funded by the State of California and operated by the San Benito County’s
Health and Human Services Agency. It houses migrant family workers during the
peak season and offers an emergency winter shelter for low-income families in transition
during the off-season.
The grand jury found that the
center does not adversely impact San Benito County’s finances because of
funding to support the program from the state. The grand jury does recommend
that the county and other agencies connect in supporting the center make
several capital improvements to the site.
D.A.'s office improvements
San Benito’s District
Attorney’s Office was also reviewed by the grand jury. Its last review by a
grand jury was in 2002.
Recommendations for the
department included a call to upgrade phone services so that callers have the
option to leave messages during non-business hours; to hold staff meetings on
at least a monthly basis; to provide for a safe with restricted access; to
perform performance reviews for all employees at least annually; to upgrade the
computer system; to ensure that janitorial services are provided by an outside
service, and that the office's budget preparation and management should be
performed by district attorney's office personnel.
Jail 'well-run and maintained'
The grand jury’s report
includes a review of the San Benito County Jail as well, which the group
found to be “well-run and maintained” despite an “enormous amount of
overtime being paid due to understaffing.” Another concern is that the jail
does not have 24/7 on-site medical staff.
The report
does recommend that the county hire additional correctional officers as well as
hold medical training for all personnel and display medical posters
illustrating proper techniques for life saving procedures.
June 30, 2015
Benito
Link
Posted
by Jessica Shillings-Barrera
No comments:
Post a Comment