[Tuolumne County] Grand jury finds adult protective services resources lacking

A lack of resources and understaffing in adult protective services puts Tuolumne County’s vulnerable elderly and dependent residents at greater risk for becoming victims of abuse, according to the 2020-22 [Tuolumne] county Civil Grand Jury’s latest report released Friday.

The 20-page report is the second to be released by the jury this year and details the citizen-led watchdog group’s first comprehensive review of the county’s adult protective services program in seven years.

“The U.S. population continues to age,” the jury stated in a summary of the report. “As the older group of citizens grows, unfortunately, the cases of elder abuse may be growing as well.”

An estimated 27% of the county’s population is 65 or older, roughly 15,000 people, who are now defined as “elder,” according to the report.

Adult protective services, or APS, is a branch of the Tuolumne County Department of Health and Human Services Agency, which also includes the Behavioral Health, Public Health and Social Services departments, among others.

Staff at APS investigate situations where dependent and elder citizens are abused or exploited, or where they can’t care for themselves, the report stated.

An “elder” adult is defined as anyone 65 or older, while a “dependent” adult is anyone between 18 and 64 who has physical or mental limitations that restrict their ability to carry out normal activities, according to the report.

One out of every 10 elders will suf­fer abuse at least once in their life, five cases go unreported for every one that is reported, and 90% of perpetrators of such crimes are someone the victim trusts as a family member, friend, neighbor, caregiver, or court-appointed guardian, according to statistics from the National Center on Elder Abuse that the jury cited in its report.

Currently, the equivalent of 2.5 full-time social workers or supervisors are assigned to APS in the county who each handle between seven and 15 open cases at any given time, the jury reported.

The jury looked at data covering Jan. 21, 2021, through Sept. 27 and found that the agency received 426 intake reports or referrals in that time, with 80% to 90% of those becoming cases assigned to a social worker.

Allegations of financial exploitation against elder or dependent adults were the most common, compromising 42% of all reports or referrals over the nine month period investigated by the jury. psychological or mental abuse was the second most common at 20%, followed by neglect at 19%.

Despite the workload, the jury found the county’s “highly capable and dedicated” staff for APS were able to meet the goal of closing a case within 30 days of being opened in 79% of the cases from January through August last year.

The jury also noted that APS staff provide other services that include direct aid, counseling, and connecting clients with other resources for additional help like rides, meals and in-home care.

Part of the problem based on interviews with management in the county Health and Human Services Agency is social workers leaving for better pay in surrounding counties.

A salary comparison conducted by the jury found that, while the pay for the social services supervisor in Tuolumne County at $67,678 per year was comparable with counterparts in Calaveras, Amador and Stanislaus counties, the compensation for social worker positions was as much as 11% to nearly 18% lower.

The mid-range annual salary for a “social worker II” was $49,184 in Tuolumne County, compared with $57,866 in Calaveras County, $58,018 in Amador County and $54,798 in Stanislaus County.

A “social worker I” in Tuolumne County earned a mid-range annual salary of $44,514, while one in Calaveras County earned $52,520, though neither Amador nor Stanislaus employed such a position for comparison.

In addition, the jury’s investigation found a lack of community awareness about APS and the services it provides, including among agencies and organizations that also serve the elder population.

The jury said only two out of more than a dozen organizations and agencies it visited said they would direct someone to contact APS if they were concerned about elder abuse, while only one had a brochure about APS available.

There was also a common misunderstanding of what APS is able to do and how any elder or dependent adult has the right to refuse assistance.

“It should be understood that APS workers are advocates for elders in need, and work to provide them as much independence as possible, with assistance from appropriate outside sources, and to keep them in the safest and most comfortable environment, namely their own homes whenever possible,” the jury stated.

The jury also found that there was no structured or formal training within the county Health and Human Services Agency specifically for social workers in APS, with most learning primarily via on-the-job experience or shadowing.

Some people in professions considered to be “mandated reporters” of suspected elder abuse or neglect, including self-neglect, were also unaware of their requirements, the jury found.

Such jobs classified as mandated reporters include health care providers, licensed and unlicensed social service providers, paid or unpaid caretakers or custodians, clergy, and other professions of trust.

The jury contacted eight licensed pharmacists and pharmacy technicians, who are mandated reporters, and only half knew they were mandated reporters. Only two had received any training to recognize signs of elder abuse, while none were aware of the state’s SOC341 form that initiates the APS case intake process.

“APS has not adequately addressed public education and awareness in Tuolumne County and appears understaffed and underpaid,” the jury stated.

Among the jury’s recommendations was for the county Board of Supervisors to aggressively seek additional state and federal funding, as well as adding at least one fulltime social worker position for APS by the end of the current calendar year.

Another recommendation for the board was to consider increasing the pay level of the respective social services staff.

The jury also recommended that APS formalize training of new social services staff, develop a formalized approach to raising public awareness by creating a temporary position or hiring an independent contractor within six months, actively reach out to other organizations about its services, and spearhead a campaign to educate mandated reporters about their responsibilities.

“The Grand Jury believes that the recommendations in this report will serve to not only raise awareness of the existence of APS, but also improve the administration of the services the agency provides,” the summary of the report concluded. “This will further protect elders from serious abuse or neglect. Our seniors are an important part of our community, and serving them also adds to the greater good of Tuolumne County as a whole.”

The jury also gave a commendation to the current staff and leadership of APS, whom it found were giving “100% of themselves to making a dif­ference in the lives of the seniors in Tuolumne County.”

“They should be applauded for their understanding, commitment, hard work, and sincere loving care they are giving to our community,” the jury stated. “The APS system for intake, referral, and case management is well understood by the employees in each of their individual roles to process and protect elders in need of help.”

Steve Boyack, assistant director of the county Health and Human Services Agency, said in an email Friday that the agency still had to review the report before providing comment or answering questions, which he hoped they would be able to do by early this week.

Each year, superior courts in all 58 California counties are required by state law to impanel a civil grand jury that consists of ordinary citizens who volunteer their time for the purpose of reviewing local detention facilities and investigating complaints against other public agencies and officials.

State law requires the governing body of any public agency that a civil grand jury investigates to respond within 90 days of the report’s release. If a department or agency is headed by an elected county official, such as the sheriff for the jail, that elected official must also respond within 60 days.

Civil grand juries in the county typically serve from July 1 one year to June 30 the following year, though the county’s 2019-20 jury’s term was extended through Dec. 31, 2020, to give its members additional time in light of complications caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

The county’s current jury was impaneled in February 2021 for a term that goes through June 30 this year. It has decided to release a report on each agency investigated as they are completed, as opposed to all at once as some juries have done in the past.

A so-called “continuity report” following up on how agencies responded to the previous grand jury’s recommendations was the first to be released in February. All of the reports and written responses from agencies can be viewed in full online at https://www.tuolumne. courts. ca. gov/ general- info/ grand- jury. shtml.

Union Democrat
April 19, 2022
Alex Maclean

[Sacramento County] Grand Jury Validates, Vindicates Public Health Officer

Dr. Olivia Kasirye Praised For COVID Response Despite Being ‘Abandoned’

The Sacramento Grand Jury investigating Sacramento County’s use of federal COVID-19 funds has validated Dr. Olivia Kasirye, the Black woman who has led the region’s pandemic response.

The Grand Jury has found that the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors “abandoned the Public Health Office as COVID-19 emergency engulfed Sacramento.” Following a nearly year-long secret investigation, the Grand Jury concluded that the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors “made questionable and opaque maneuvers that skirted the intent of the CARES Act, to the benefit of County coffers and with scant regard for the needs of its citizens.”

As first reported by the Sacramento OBSERVER, the County Board of Supervisors allowed then County Executive Nav Gill to give $132.86 million of its federal pandemic response funds for payroll for public health and safety employees, with the Sheriff’s Department receiving 78%, $104.2 million, of that money. The OBSERVER obtained documents from a whistleblower back in 2020 that detailed the spending.

“An extensive investigation into the handling of the COVID-19 crisis by the Sacramento County Office of Public Health (OPH) has led the Grand Jury to find that the County Board of Supervisors ignored its Public Health Officer for five months before finally engaging in any sort of dialogue regarding the County’s COVID-19 activities and its impact on County residents,” reads a statement released earlier this month.

Being well-versed in public health crises like ebola and the H1N1 flu of 2009, Public Health Officer Kasirye responded immediately when the current coronavirus pandemic hit in early 2020 and continually sought the funds and support to protect County residents.

“Despite asking for assistance early on, Public Health Officer Dr. Olivia Kasirye was allowed to appear before the County Supervisors only after Board members received a confidential email from Dr. Kasirye,” the Grand Jury’s statement reads. “The Board’s apathy during the most significant public health emergency in over a century, one that impacted every resident of Sacramento County, delayed needed OPH program funding and undercut public health order enforcement.”

During August 2020 board meetings, Gill repeatedly maintained that “anything (departments) asked for they got.” He practically dared Dr. Kasirye to contradict him.     

Kasirye stood her ground and remained adamant that her department needed more funds to respond to the continued pandemic, which was forecasted to still be making an impact well into 2021. That was before the Delta and Omicron variants wreaked havoc.     In documents obtained by The OBSERVER, Dr. Kasirye originally requested $90 million for public health costs related to COVID-19.

Needs included laboratory operations support, personal protective equipment, two vehicles for pop-up COVID-19 testing, a strike team that would conduct mass testing in congregate settings like nursing homes and other areas where outbreaks have occurred; paying for eight laboratory technicians and four microbiologists needed to process tests including on evenings and weekends to meet the demand; paying for four epidemiologists to conduct data analysis and monitor vulnerable populations; and paying for four health educators to help with community outreach efforts.

Dr. Kasirye said the process for the first request from Gill’s committee to submit what their needs were was “unclear” and they continued to get mixed messages and erroneous information about requesting funds. She and then-County Health Director Dr. Peter Beilensen were forced to repeatedly ask the Board of Supervisors for more money in piecemeal fashion.

Dr. Kasirye was among those who filed several lawsuits against Gill, who was ultimately made to step down from his position after the Board of Supervisors issued a vote of no confidence against him in light of the CARES Act funding scandal. While she didn’t want the details of the lawsuit played out publicly, Dr. Kasirye did issue a statement at the time.

“Nav Gill made it clear to me from the beginning of this pandemic that he was not pleased with my request to declare a Health Emergency. From then on, through intimidation and manipulation, he created blocks at every step in issuing Health Officer Orders,” she said. “He withheld resources despite our multiple requests for funding, and sought to silence me and alienate me. All this caused me a lot of anxiety, and were it not for support from the Public Health staff and County Counsel, I would not have been able to do my job.”

Foreperson Deanna Hanson said the Grand Jury was dumbfounded that the County Board of Supervisors seemed completely disconnected from the Office of Public Health in the midst of the pandemic crisis.

The Grand Jury is recommending that the County Board of Supervisors, Gill’s successor Anne Edwards, and the County Office of Public Health jointly develop a public health emergency response plan that will aid in the implementation of future public health orders and best ensure the safety of Sacramento County residents.

Dr. Kasirye previously told The OBSERVER that it was hard for her, her staff and volunteers to face people’s vitriol about the pandemic, the restrictive mandates and vaccination. Getting blocked by County officials, who were supposed to be on the same team, had to be crushing. However, she “went high” and remained focused.

“What I have found is that people do respect the office that I hold, regardless of what other thoughts they might have about me,” she said. “So what I always remind myself is that the important thing is the words and the advice that I provide, always trying to make sure that I provide good information, always trying to show that I’m doing my best to take care of the communities that I’m responsible for.”

The Observer
By Genoa Barrow
April 18, 2022

Nottoli, county supe. candidates respond to [Sacramento County] grand jury's criticism of county BOS

In a recent report on the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors’ handling of the early months of California’s COVID-19 situation, the Sacramento County Grand Jury determined that the board “abandoned” the county’s public health office.

The report notes that after an extensive investigation, it was determined that the supervisors ignored the county public health officer for five months prior to engaging in dialogue pertaining to the county’s COVID-19 activities and the pandemic’s impact on its residents.

It is also mentioned in the report that although Public Health Officer Dr. Olivia Kasirye asked for assistance early in the COVID-19 situation, she was allowed only one appearance before the board.

That appearance came after she sent a confidential email message to the supervisors, detailing the public health office’s range of pandemic response efforts and the heavy burden that staff and volunteers underwent to protect the community.

The grand jury determined that the public health office’s pandemic response efforts were in stark contrast to Board of Supervisors efforts, and that the board’s “apathy” during this public health emergency, and that the supervisors’ inactions delayed necessary public health program funding and undercut public health order enforcement.

It was recommended by the grand jury that the Board of Supervisors, the county executive and the county Office of Public Health work together to establish a public health emergency response plan to approach future public health orders and best ensure the safety of county residents.

County Supervisor Don Nottoli, who represents Elk Grove in District 5, told the Citizen this week that the pandemic was a learning experience for his board.

“Could things have been smoother?” he asked. “Probably in all likelihood they could have been. But again, I’m not one to make excuses or say that the board didn’t have an appropriate role. We do. We’re the elected representatives for folks in the county.

“But there is a structure by which we operate, as well. There’s a lot of moving parts, and, of course, it was a time that none of us had experienced. Again, that’s not an excuse, but things were unfolding very quickly.”

Nottoli mentioned that the Board of Supervisors will, in the “near future,” present a formal, written response to the Grand Jury’s findings, as well as a response to the Grand Jury’s recommendations.

“We are required by law to respond, but we will, I think, be thoughtful in the way we approach it and give the county’s point of view as it relates to what the Grand Jury has certainly reported,” he said.

Nottoli’s District 5 encompasses more than 650 square miles and includes the Elk Grove, Galt, Rancho Cordova, and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta communities. He will not run for reelection this year.

Elk Grove City Council Member Pat Hume, one of the candidates seeking to become the next District 5 representative in this June’s election, responded to the grand jury’s findings.

“It was obviously an unprecedented time, changing landscape and environment,” he said. “But the most important thing is that there’s a new executive team in place at this point. So, the recommendations might be going back to how the old (chief administrative officer) handled things.”

Hume added that he supports the Grand Jury’s recommendation to have a better plan in place for the board to handle future public health emergencies.

“I think all of that is a good recommendation,” he said. “But I think that it’s kind of poking a dead horse a little bit about what didn’t happen at the time when everyone was caught by surprise.”

Former Elk Grove Mayor Steve Ly, another candidate for the District 5 supervisor seat, also responded to the Grand Jury’s report.

“Decision makers cannot be complacent when it comes to public health and public safety of all residents,” he said. “Elected officials, especially, in any capacity are obligated to do their due diligence in responding to and protecting the people they serve. Listen to and work with your expert staff in serving your constituents.”

Cosumnes Community Services District Board President Jaclyn Moreno, who is also a candidate in the District 5 county supervisors race, said she supports the Grand Jury’s findings and recommendations.

“I agree,” she said. “People were suffering greatly during this time, and I think, unfortunately, politics got in the way, especially in terms of enforcing the mask mandate.

“As I look back to that time as an elected official myself, I felt a lot of pressure to make sure that we were responding quickly and utilizing funding to best support the needs of the community.”

Moreno added that had she been a supervisor on that board, she would have asked for a “quick and swift response” to the financial challenges and other needs of county residents.

District 5 candidate Alex Joe, who also ran for the same seat in 1994 and 1998, noted that he is concerned with the Grand Jury’s findings regarding the Board of Supervisors.

“It is concerning to me, because of the fact that there’s just evidence all over the news every day about deaths in the city, the county, the state, the nation,” he said.

“So, I mean, they’re tracking people dying, and this is a critical period when the virus is in full swing and there’s a need to respond and we don’t take that action. That’s an experience level that someone on the board should take seriously to the extent that you act.”

Elk Grove Citizen
By Lance Armstrong - Citizen Staff Writer
April 15, 2022

[Kern County] Grand Jury Says Frazier Park Public Utility District Is Responsible In Seeking Remedies

Reporting by a Bakersfield television station last week about the Frazier Park Public Utility District was misleading and left inaccurate impressions with the public. The Kern County Grand Jury issued findings of an investigation into FPPUD on Friday, April 15. They describe the challenges the FPPUD faces, the responsible measures the district’s board has taken to alert and serve the public in a lawful manner, and the management’s efforts to secure vendors to replace a 60-year-old well and casing in the midst of a drought when competent drilling rigs are in high demand.

The grand jury’s report also reviews the glacially-slow annexation of Lake of the Woods Mutual Water District. That will be finalized when all conditions are met to accommodate state funding requirements, including bringing both aging districts up to modern standards. Meanwhile, both districts are maintaining compliance with California Department of Public Health and federal Environmental Protection Agency standards. Both districts are providing healthy drinking water that is in compliance with state and federal standards.

Here is the full Kern County Grand Jury Report

The Mountain Enterprise
Mountain Enterprise Staff
April 16, 2022

San Francisco Struggles To Use And Benefit From Construction Best Practices [per San Francisco Civil Grand Jury]

2021-2022 [San Francisco] Civil Grand Jury Publishes "Shovel Ready: Best Practices and Collaboration to Improve San Francisco's Capital Construction Program"

The 2021-2022 San Francisco Civil Grand Jury today released its report on best practices and collaboration to improve San Francisco's capital construction program. The Jury's interest in investigating this subject stemmed from its desire to follow up on recommendations made in prior Jury reports, including San Francisco's City Construction Program: It Needs Work (2015) and Van Ness Avenue - What Lies Beneath (2021), which City leaders agreed to adopt, but have yet to implement.

San Francisco relies on contractors for most of its capital construction projects, budgeted at $39 billion for the 2020-2029 period. To ensure the greatest chance of success, these projects require relevant experience, use of construction best practices, and close collaboration between the City and contractors.

One recommendation from the 2015 report focused on the need for City departments charged with managing capital construction projects to create and adopt a contractor performance evaluation database. The purpose was to find the best contractor for the job, by requiring these City departments and contractors to evaluate each other's performance during and after a construction project, thus ensuring accountability, transparency and two-way communications. The Mayor, Board of Supervisors and head of each applicable department all agreed the database would have a meaningful and positive impact on project quality, budgets and timelines.

"Six years after the City decided to create this database, and two years after it was developed, the database remains unused," said Michael Hofman, Jury Foreperson. "No department has entered data since February 2020. As a result, there is little contractor information in the database, and since the database isn't being populated with evaluations, it's unlikely to be used in selecting contractors. The City is failing to benefit from lessons learned on construction projects, and given the high stakes nature of the City's capital construction projects, we want to see this change."

The database, however, is only one example of a construction best practice. The Jury's report finds that the City misses opportunities to benefit from other construction best practices too.

About the San Francisco Civil Grand Jury

The Superior Court selects 19 San Franciscans to serve year-long terms as Civil Grand Jurors. The Jury has the authority to investigate City and County government by reviewing documents and interviewing public officials and private individuals. At the end of its inquiries, the Jury issues reports of its findings and recommendations. Agencies identified in the report must respond to these findings and recommendations within either 60 or 90 days, and the Board of Supervisors conducts a public hearing on each Civil Grand Jury report after those responses are submitted.

Civil Grand Jury reports may be viewed online at https://civilgrandjury.sfgov.org/

Cision PR Newswire
San Francisco Civil Grand Jury
April 13, 2022

[Sacramento County] Grand jury finds Sacramento County Board undercut public health response during pandemic

A scathing report from the Sacramento County Grand Jury issued Monday afternoon accuses the County Board of Supervisors of ignoring Public Health Officer Dr. Olivia Kasirye's request for assistance in COVID pandemic response for five months.

The grand jury found that "the Board’s apathy during the most significant public health emergency in over a century, one that impacted every resident of Sacramento County, delayed needed OPH program funding and undercut public health order enforcement."

The grand jury found that the Officer of Public Health's COVID response activities should have been the Board of Supervisors' top priority and recommends that the County Board of Supervisors, the County Executive and the County Office of Public Health jointly develop a public health emergency response plan.

Capradio
CapRadio Staff
April 4, 2022

[Kern County] Grand Jury: One employee is not enough to cover over 8,000 square miles

The Kern County graffiti abatement program covers approximately 8,163 square miles and right now only one employee manages all that space, according to a Kern County Grand Jury report.

The report said the one employee is constantly buried in requests coming from all corners of the county and is in need of some relief. The City of Bakersfield has 12 trucks, 12 full-time employees and covers less than two percent of what the one county employee is expected to cover.

The grand jury also found that the way graffiti removal requests are processed is highly inefficient and the process needs to be simplified.

Residents and business owners can put in a request online on the city and county pages but some people do not know whether they fall under the county or city jurisdiction, according to the report. This issue causes the county maintenance manager to spend several hours processing graffiti removal requests before being able to process and send an employee to the location to start the removal.

While processing requests are a problem for the county, the grand jury found the county program is extremely underfunded and understaffed. Right now, the county graffiti abatement program relies on other maintenance workers when extra assistance is needed.

The City of Bakersfield budgets $2 million a year for its graffiti abatement program, while the county has allocated less than $81,000 a year since 2018, according to the report.

The grand jury recommends the following:

·       The Kern County Graffiti Abatement Program should have its own dedicated budget.

·       By Fiscal Year 2022-2023, the Board of Supervisors should, at a minimum, double the budget of the Kern County Graffiti Abatement Program.

·       By January 2023, purchase a new vehicle with new equipment.

·       The County should consider purchasing a sandblaster in the next fiscal year.

·       By February 2023, staff should be a minimum of three (one supervisor, one full-time employee, and one extra help).

·       Within six months, a system should be implemented that automatically directs the removal request to the proper authority (between city and county).

A.   The graffiti abatement website needs to include an area map that CLEARLY indicates county and city jurisdictions for the reporter.

B.   When filling out a request for graffiti abatement online, the forms need to specify where the request is needed, in the City or the County.

·       The City and County graffiti abatement staff should meet weekly to address their application problems until they are resolved.

·       Kern County should apply for Federal Grant funds allocated for the homeless and gangs, as they are a major contributor to graffiti.

You can access more Kern County Grand Jury Reports by clicking here.

KGET.com
Mason Rockfellow
March 23, 2022

[Kern County] Grand jury: County employees 'frustrated and exhausted' battling graffiti

The Kern County grand jury released a report Wednesday urging the Board of Supervisors to funnel more resources into the county’s graffiti-abatement program because it is reportedly “buried under the daily requests” to clean graffiti and county staff are “frustrated and exhausted” with the problem.

Kern County’s graffiti-abatement program contains one employee with a truck responsible for about 8,163 square miles, the report states, while also noting this person’s work is “stellar.”

County employees said in the report a minimum of three people and another truck should help stem the vandalism. The grand jury said the city of Bakersfield spends around $2 million per year on graffiti abatement, while the county allocates about $70,000 annually.

“Although graffiti may be regarded as an artistic expression, when a neighborhood is cluttered with graffiti it sends a message that nobody cares about that community,” the report said. “From storefronts to staircases, shop owners worry the unsightly views could possibly cost them business.”

Ryan Alsop, the county’s chief administrative officer, wrote in an email he did not have a chance to review the report, though the Board of Supervisors has 90 days to respond. He also admitted the county’s abatement standards are not where he would like them to be.

“This is a war, and our path to winning is through a rigorous and robust abatement offensive, which is what is being worked on,” Alsop wrote, adding he looks forward to sharing new details about the crackdown on graffiti soon.

Kern County launched the Adopt a Wall program, which provides residents with an online form to fill out and then receive supplies to clean the graffiti. However, the report notes county employees said this program’s success has been hampered by COVID-19 and a lack of enthusiasm from the community.

“Although the county supplies the materials to cover the graffiti, community members do not want to do the work,” the report states. “They want county employees to come paint it for them.”

Furthermore, the grand jury reported the county’s graffiti-abatement truck is 15 years old and has 130,000 miles on the odometer; neither the county nor the city of Bakersfield have a sandblaster, which helps to remove the paint; and the county maintenance manager must spend several hours processing graffiti-removal requests because it is often unclear if the vandalism exists in city or county jurisdiction.

Joe Conroy, a spokesman for the city, did not have someone immediately available to comment on the claim the city has no sandblaster.

“The city is aware of graffiti and its effects on the morale of residents as well as the impacts it can have on visitors’ impressions,” Conroy wrote in an email.

In contrast, the grand jury also claims the city of Bakersfield’s graffiti-abatement program continues to “thrive and expand” with 12 trucks and 12 full-time employees, though the city’s jurisdiction is less than 2 percent of the area the county is expected to cover.

The grand jury called upon the Board of Supervisors to double the budget of the Kern County Graffiti Abatement Program, purchase vehicles and equipment by January 2023, hire more staff, clearly indicate which jurisdiction the graffiti falls in and apply for federal grants allocated for homelessness and gangs, because both largely contribute to graffiti.

Bakersfield.com
By Ishani Desai
March 23, 2022

[Kern County] Grand jury report reveals graffiti problem in Kern County

Wednesday a Kern County grand jury came out with their findings about the graffiti problem that has gotten worse in the county over the last 20 years.

"Graffiti has always been an issue on the Kern River, whether it was in the Sequoia National Forest or in the Kern Canyon or even in Bakersfield through Hart Park and Ming Lake areas," Gary Ananian, Executive Director and Founder of the Kern River Conservancy, said. "For some reason taggers love to go down to the river and tag on rocks. I've never understood why but they do it."

Ananian says a new state law has cause the graffiti problem to get worse. We did see a huge, huge rise in graffiti in the Canyon and in Bakersfield. There was just graffiti everywhere and I think it's the lure of the criminals know they're not going to get caught, and they're not going to get caught or if they do get caught they're not going to get prosecuted,'" Ananian, said.

The study reports there's different types of graffiti and different reasons behind it. The report lists 5 types of graffiti: 1) gang graffiti used for threats of violence or to mark territories, 2) copycat gang graffiti, 3) tagger graffiti from someone with a signature art style or more complex art, conventional graffiti-isolated and typically from "exuberant" youth and lastly, 4) ideological graffiti, which sends a political, racial, ethnic or religious message.

Volunteer Chaplain for the Bakersfield Police Department, Angelo Frazier says our young generation needs to be mentored and taught freedom of expression does not mean you have a right to spray graffiti on public property.

"I think we have to first start with our kids and teach them about the value of property and I don't know if that's being taught anymore, and really what the first amendment, freedom of speech means. It's not an absolute right that you can do and write on anything and say whatever you want to anybody.

Eyewitness News spoke to Chaplain Frazier on a section of MLK Jr. Blvd, in Bakersfield, full of graffiti. He says it was ironic we were having this discussion on that street of all places, when you think about what Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. stood for.

"He was about non-violence, he was about non-destruction," Chaplain Frazier, said. "As matter of fact they would always leave a place better than they found it and I think we need to teach out young kids that and we need to value that too."

According to the city of Bakersfield, they have a graffiti abatement program with 12 trucks and 12 full time employees who respond to reports of graffiti and remove graffiti.

The Kern River Conservancy is hosting a cleanup day at the Boulder Gulch Campground in Lake Isabella, Saturday April 23rd from 9:30AM to 1PM, where they will be picking up trash and removing graffiti from rocks.

BakersfieldNow KBAK
by David Kaplan
March 24th 2022