Wednesday, August 5, 2015

[Plumas County] Supervisors respond to grand jury report


Problems with the county jail historically dominate the annual grand jury report and this year was no different.
The Plumas County Board of Supervisors issued its response to the report, July 21, addressing the jail and the county’s emergency communications system, also a focus of the report.
“For the most part, the response agrees with the findings and recommendations,” said County Counsel Craig Settlemire, as he presented the response to the supervisors for approval.
Deputy County Counsel Steve Mansell wrote the response, drawing on input from the supervisors.
This year, the grand jury released portions of the report as they were completed, rather than waiting until the end to release one comprehensive report.
 This gives us more time to respond to each,” Supervisor Sherrie Thrall said.
The board approved the response without discussion.
The jail
“New jail inspection, same old problems,” read the title of the grand jury’s report pertaining to the jail.
The report enumerated four findings, ranging from inadequate to noncompliant, all of which the supervisors agreed with.
The report went on to make six recommendations that the board has implemented to varying degrees.
Recommendation 1: That the board of supervisors “fully commit to build a new jail to replace the current jail facility, which is antiquated and inadequate.”
Response: Implemented. “The Board of Supervisors is fully committed to exploring every avenue available. …”
Recommendation 2: That the board “continue to support the grant writing opportunity that has been started by CGL.” If the grant is awarded, the board “should facilitate the building of the new jail facility in Plumas County immediately.”
Response: Implemented. The board fully supports the grant application and if it is awarded, “anticipates that construction will begin as soon as reasonably possible.”
Recommendation 3: If the grant is not awarded, the board should “fund the replacement of kitchen equipment” in the current jail.
Response: Implemented. The equipment has already been replaced.
Recommendation 4: That the jail be brought into compliance with the ADA.
Response: Partially implemented. The board describes compliance as “an ongoing process,” that, hopefully, will be rendered moot if a new jail is built.
Recommendation 5: That the jail’s sobering cell be brought into compliance with state guidelines.
Response: Not yet implemented. If a grant for the new jail is not secured, then funding to address the sobering cell will be sought.
Recommendation 6: That the board pursue other funding opportunities if the grant is not awarded for the new jail.
Response: Not yet implemented. If the grant is not received, Plumas County “will continue to be aggressive in pursuing other potential avenues to fund a new jail facility.”
Emergency communications
The grand jury made five findings and 10 recommendations to address the county’s emergency communications system. The supervisors agreed with all of the findings, which addressed issues such as reliability, effectiveness, cost and technology.
Many of the recommendations have already been implemented, or will be soon.
Recommendation 1: That the supervisors and the county’s Office of Emergency Services “negotiate with the power company to prevent potential disconnects on public service radio sites due to non-payment.”
Response: Will be implemented in the future. The director of the OES will spearhead the effort.
Recommendation 2: Testing backup power systems at all radio sites on a regular basis.
Response: Not fully implemented. The board understands that the “OES director and sheriff are already pursuing such testing.”
Recommendation 3: That the sheriff’s office and fire districts conduct field-testing to identify areas that are known to be “poor communication zones.”
Response: Not fully implemented. The board agrees that it is important to know where the gaps are and to support efforts to identify them.
Recommendation 4: That the board of supervisors, sheriff and OES director set up a working committee to meet periodically to address communication issues.
Response: Implemented.
Recommendation 5: That the board work with “Cal Fire for interoperability into the Cal Fire mobile radio system.”
Response: Implemented.
Recommendation 6: That the board and OES “review potential rate increases and explore measures and alternatives that ensure the stability of the Emergency Medical System radio system.”
Response: Implemented. “The Emergency Medical Care Council is currently investigating various funding options and working to ensure consistency with the three hospitals throughout the county.”
Recommendation 7: That the board works with the sheriff to build “their own sites at specific locations where private carrier activity is affecting and pushing rental costs at shared site tower and vaults beyond affordability.”
Response: Implemented. “The sheriff’s office is actively pursuing establishing county-owned sites, where feasible.”
Recommendation 8: That all entities stay “informed on technology and work closely with vendors and experts to find a system that can provide reliable service and widespread coverage.”
Response. Implemented.
Recommendation 9: Pursue a cooperative relationship with Plumas Sierra Rural Electric Cooperative “in considering the possibility of using their fiber network as means to provide an alternative to the present radio system.”
Response. Will be implemented. The board “agrees that such a relationship should be explored.”
Recommendation 10. That “more attention … be focused on training with what we presently have, and finding resolutions to all the inherent problems that have been outlined in this report.”
Response: Implemented. “This will continue to be a high priority for the county.”
August 3, 2015
Plumas County News
By Debra Moore

No comments: