For the third time this year the City is writing to respond to yet another Grand Jury report. As has been the case with the two prior reports, there is little more than unsupported and/or attributed allegations that form the basis of the report. Nonetheless we are fulfilling our obligation to respond.
FINDINGS:
F 1. Disagree. There have been no verified reports of any harassment or retaliation against any interviewees. Any city document that an interviewee provided to the Grand Jury is available to the public and city officials.No City Officials would have the need to “demand” that City documents be turned over to said officials. They have access to these documents whenever needed.
F 2. Agree.
F 3. Disagree. At the time of this report the City had two fire engines that were operable. In the past it was necessary to borrow an engine from Edwards Air Force Base.
F 4. Agree. It is standard practice for fire departments the size of CCFD to assign multiple duties to various staff. The Fire Marshall will continue to manage these functions until the department grows to the size where additional personnel would be added and the work load justified allocating some of these functions to another officer.
F 5. Partially Agree. The cannabis industry does present potential health and safety hazards. Actual experience shows that these hazards are well within the capacity of a normally trained fire department. The CCFD has a five-person Hazardous Materials Team, comprised of two HAZMAT Specialists and three HAZMAT Technicians. Their ongoing hazardous materials training includes any issues unique to the cannabis to their training schedule.
F 6. Disagree. Overtime is a basic element of any public safety operation. No agencies can afford to budget for staffing to ensure adequate staff will be available to answer every potential incident without calling back off-duty staff on overtime. The City has a grant from the State to manage the OHV areas surrounding the City. This grant provides the payment of overtime to those officers who choose to work at OHV. The schedule for OHV work is posted and all officers can sign up for the shifts they would like to work. A secondary benefit of the OHV project is that in emergencies officers working OHV can be called upon to respond to calls in the City. The City is examining using only part-time retired law enforcement officers in the next grant cycle.
F 7. Disagree. All issues involving the receipting and handling of cash at OHV were addressed in 2017 and continue to be managed correctly.
F 8. Agree.
F 9. Partially Agree. Yes, that is what was reported. However, the information about the proposed parcel tax is partially incorrect. The proposed ballot measure would impose a parcel tax at a rate of up to 50 cents per day. But if it is approved by the voters, the city council has the discretion to impose the tax at a lower rate.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
R 1. To this date the City has no evidence that the purported harassment or retaliation has occurred. Nevertheless, the City has begun an investigation into these allegations and will take the appropriate steps once this investigation is completed.
R 2. The City will continue to train its firefighters in all skills needed to respond to calls for service which includes the proper handling of hazardous materials.
R 3. As noted in the response to F 6, the OHV grant is written expressly to pay overtime to those CCPD and CCFD personnel who choose to work at OHV. If some officers, choose not work available shifts then others will step up to work those shifts. The current process used to staff the OHV area already includes the opportunity for all appropriately certified CCPD and CCFD personnel to work.
R 4. The City implemented a secure method for handling OHV fees and depositing cash on weekends back in 2017. That process is still being used.
R 5. The City Council has already done this by scheduling a special election for July 31, 2018 to consider the adoption of a Special Police and Fire Parcel Tax to be used only for police and fire operations. This is the only tax available to California City that would be able to generate sufficient revenue to fund current and future police and fire operations.
This report, “Code Red” has been based on incorrect facts, on unsubstantiated allegations and on innuendo. It is a mystery how the City is expected to investigate any of the issues raised in the report without talking to all the employees with knowledge of the areas of concern or examining the purported documents supporting the allegation, without violating the non-disclosure agreement required by the Grand Jury, which clearly restricts the confronting of employees who have been interviewed by the Grand Jury Committees.
In many cases there are only one or two employees who would have the knowledge of the alleged incidents and it is likely that any investigation would entail talking to each employee. Hiring outside investigators for the allegations made in the three Grand Jury Reports is beyond the City’s capacity to reasonably fund at this time. We will continue to encourage our citizens and employees to bring their concerns to our attention so we may respond quickly and start finding solutions.
Regards, Robert Stockwell, City Manager
July 23, 2018
Mojave Desert News
No comments:
Post a Comment