[Stanlislaus County] Watchdog wants more accountability in Modesto-area efforts to reduce homelessness

While commending the efforts of government and others in Stanislaus County to take on the complex and challenging problem of homelessness, a government watchdog says despite spending huge amounts of money, homelessness continues to grow.

The Stanislaus County Civil Grand Jury also reports that it is hard to evaluate the coordination, effectiveness and accountability of these efforts because they are fragmented and there is not enough accountability in how effectively the money is being spent.

The grand jury’s investigation of the efforts to reduce homelessness are detailed in its 2021-22 report.

“The (grand jury) found that while efforts to coordinate all these agencies and their activities are being pursued, accountability is lacking,” according to the report. “Given the significant dollars spent to address homelessness, this lack of accountability is problematic and can undermine the public’s confidence in our public agencies.”

(The California Constitution requires counties to form civil grand juries annually. The juries are made up of 19 citizens and investigate how well the county, cities, school districts and other local governments perform. This grand jury’s term ended June 30.)

Read more at: https://www.modbee.com/news/local/article264159106.html#storylink=cpy

The Modesto Bee
Kevin Valine
August 8, 2022

[Mendocino County] Grand Jury issues report on MUSD Special Ed Program

Due to multiple parent complaints resulting in lawsuits alleging that Mendocino Unified School District had denied special education services to students within the district, the Mendocino Grand Jury initiated an investigation.

The Grand Jury noted that the parents’ lawsuit ruling had found MUSD at fault for failing to properly identify and provide mandated special education services to several students. The report also noted the district had been ordered to pay all the parents’ personal costs for special education services including travel, professional educational consultants, and legal fees dating from January 2021 to June 2022.

The Grand Jury faulted the school district for its disregard of services for students with individualized education plans and its failure to inform parents of the free diagnostic services offered by the North Coast Diagnostic Center. The Grand Jury also found that the SELPA board’s practice of routinely earmarking budget funds for future legal settlements provided the Mendocino district with the option of settling parental lawsuits to avoid expensive judgments.

In spite of settlements, all parents chose to move their children to other school districts rather than continue to confront perceived negative viewpoints about special education’s encroachment on the school district’s general funds. The Grand Jury stated that non-disclosure agreements tied to settlements hampered its ability to interview a number of parents about their experiences with the school district.

The report details the Grand Jury’s findings and recommendations to the school district and to the county’s SELPA governing board which oversees all of the local schools’ special education budgets.

To view the entire report, go to https://www.mendocinocounty.org/government/county-organization/grand-jury/2021-2022-reports

The Mendocino Beacon/Fort Bragg Advocate News
Mary Benjamin
August 4, 2022

 

Tuolumne County Grand Jury finds juvenile hall costs down, usage up

The average number of kids being held each day at the Mother Lode Regional Juvenile Detention Facility in Sonora has nearly doubled since it opened in April 2017, while the net cost to Tuolumne County per youth has declined by about 50%, according to report released this week by the 2020-22 Tuolumne County Civil Grand Jury.

In the 22-page report titled “A Model for Youth Detention,” the Grand Jury details progress made in recent years at containing the facility’s costs and heaps praise on the rehabilitative programs and services offered by its staff.

“The Grand Jury found that MLRJDF provides an exceptional and positive environment for detained youths through trauma-informed services that encourage respect, responsibility and safety,” the report stated.

An analysis of the costs to operate the facility that’s included in the report found that the county’s net expense per youth had declined from $452 in the 2017-18 fiscal year to $228 through the first three quarters of the 2021-22 fiscal year that ended on June 30.

At the same time, the average daily population at the 30-bed facility had increased from 5.6 per day from when the facility opened on April 10, 2017, through Dec. 31, 2017, to 13.4 per day from Jan. 1 through Dec. 31 last year.

The facility can currently only hold a maximum sixteen youths due to lacking the required staffing needed to utilize all 30 beds at the facility, the report noted.

That increase in the average daily population since the opening is attributed in part to outside counties sending more of their youths to the facility as it has become more established within the region.

Costs to operate the facility and low rates of utilization have been a topic of contention for years since the facility opened, with the county Board of Supervisors even considering the possibility of closing the facility in 2020 due to budgetary woes at the time.

The facility cost about $20 million to construct, which was largely paid for by state grants.

Prior to the opening of the facility, the county would send youths to juvenile halls in places such as Bakersfield, Marysville and Nevada City at an average cost of more than $450 per day for each youth, the report stated.

Sending youths to outside facilities presented additional challenges for the county associated with the time and costs it took probation officers to transport youths back-and-forth for court hearings, as well as for their families to visit them.

“Long travel distances and fees were costly for the county, the courts, Probation and Children’s Welfare Services staff, and especially for families,” the Grand Jury stated in its report. “Having a local facility aids family reunification and the return of youths to their local schools and community.”

Additional funding from the state and revenue from outside counties housing youth at the facility were cited in the report as factors that have helped reduce Tuolumne County’s costs per youth per day to less than placing them in other facilities outside of the area.

Calaveras, Mariposa, Amador and Inyo counties have agreements in place to reserve beds for housing their youths at the facility. While the rates charged to each have increased, they remain below the net cost per day.

The county was originally charging counties $100 per bed per day, though that has increased to $150 per bed per day after the contracts were renegotiated in 2020.

Each county pays an annual cost to reserve a certain number of beds whether they are using them or not. Additional beds beyond the reserved number are charged at $175 per day.

Tuolumne County’s net cost for running the facility was about $787,000 in the 2020-21 fiscal year, the last full fiscal year available when the jury conducted its investigation. Total expenses were nearly $1.5 million, 84% of which were for staff salaries and benefits.

Among the Grand Jury’s recommendations was for the county to develop a multi-year plan by the end of this year to provide for additional staffing that would allow more youth to be housed at the facility.

The jury also noted the escape of one detainee at the facility on Oct. 8 last year, who was located and recaptured in Sonora two days later by the Tuolumne County Sheriff’s Office.

Security weaknesses identified at the facility after the escape are planned to be addressed with the help of an outside grant, but the report noted that the county is required to work with several state agencies before implementing the changes.

One of the Grand Jury’s recommendations is to implement the security upgrades before the end of this year.

The Grand Jury also raised concern about low COVID-19 vaccination rates among detainees and staff. Less than half of the staff was fully vaccinated as of February, the report noted, while “only a few” youth have been vaccinated.

“Though there have not been severe outbreaks of COVID in this facility, the Grand Jury is still concerned that low vaccination rates represent a potential vulnerability for the youths and vaccination should be actively encouraged,” the report stated.

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

This year’s Tuolumne County Civil Grand Jury has opted to release standalone reports on each facility and agency as they are completed.

To view the full report on the juvenile hall, as well as other reports released this year on county Adult Protective Services, Tuolumne Utilities District, and the new Dambacher Detention Center, go to https://www.tuolumne.courts.ca.gov/general-info/grand-jury.shtml.

The Union Democrat
Alex MacLean
June 21, 2022 

Humboldt County needs an Office of Tribal Affairs, says grand jury

County agencies have been making progress in collaborating with the area’s tribes when it comes to addressing child welfare needs, but a recently released grand jury report states those efforts aren’t going far enough.

The Humboldt County Civil Grand Jury released a report on Friday that found the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office and Child Welfare Services division of the county Department of Health and Human Services are doing a better job of complying with the Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act, which prioritizes the psychological health of child victims in investigating cases. The report recommends the county follow the state’s lead and create an Office of Tribal Affairs to improve collaboration with the area’s tribes, which is crucial since indigenous children make up a disproportionate number of child welfare cases in the county.

“The Grand Jury found that DHHS-CWS has improved the collaborative process with tribal communities,” the report states. “However, there remains a disparity between the two on the understanding of and approach to child welfare. This Grand Jury recommends the County authorize its own Office of Tribal Affairs to advise the Board of Supervisors on matters of importance to Humboldt County tribal governments and tribal citizens.”

In 2015, about 7% of the county’s children were classified as American Indian and Alaska Native, but they represented 38% of the foster care population. The state received complaints from the area’s tribes that year about the failure of county agencies to comply with child welfare laws.

A state judge agreed with the tribes in 2018, citing the county’s numerous violations of the law. The Sheriff’s Office, Child Welfare Services and the state Attorney General’s Office entered into an agreement that included the county agencies having to make changes that would get them in compliance with child welfare laws and a monitoring period to ensure those changes were being made.

Among those changes were starting to systematically collect data about practices related to indigenous children as part of a continuous quality improvement process and creating staff positions to receive, track and address complaints related to the county’s handling of child welfare cases.

“A feedback loop of those delivering services and those receiving them is extremely important for the overall welfare of children and families,” the report states.

In January 2021, the county also launched a local version of the 1978 Indian Child Welfare Act, which focuses the county’s efforts on maintaining and strengthening children’s relationships with their tribes while keeping them safe from abuse and neglect.

One area where the county is falling short is its requirement to create child welfare protocol agreements with the area’s tribes. So far, the county only has one with the Hoopa Valley Tribe, one of eight federally recognized tribes in the county.

“The County is currently in the process of negotiating with tribes for a universal MOU,” the report states. “Tribal representatives have told the Grand Jury they are reluctant to enter into this type of agreement with the County. Reluctance is based not just on differing opinions on child welfare protocols with the County but differing opinions between tribes. Tribal members and consultants expressed to the Grand Jury that with two sovereign nations operating in the same environment, there is the tendency for differing opinions, but with eight, collaboration becomes even more of a challenge.”

Eureka Times-Standard
Sonia Waraich
June 20, 2022

Grand Jury Report finds no issues with El Dorado County jails or Juvenile Treatment Center

The 2021/22 Grand Jury report on the El Dorado County jails and Juvenile Treatment Center (JTC) was released Monday, and they found no major issues at any of the three facilities.

They conducted its annual physical inspections of the sites in Placerville on January 5, 2022, and in South Lake Tahoe on November 10, 2021, including interviews with staff. It had been two years since a physical inspection was done as COVID-19 forced the inspections to be virtual in 2020-2021.

The South Lake Tahoe Jail was originally built in 1973 and modified in the 1980’s. It can house 158 inmates. At the time of inspection there were 102 inmates - 81 males and 21 females. Of the 102, 64 inmates were awaiting trial and 38 were convicted and serving a sentence. Twenty-three of the convicted inmates have been housed longer than one year.

Since the previous virtual Grand Jury ins, one inmate committed suicide, and there were nine attempted suicides. There were no deaths by other causes. An inmate awaiting trial escaped in November 2021 and was captured in March 2022. It was noted during the inspection that many of the inmate programs had not been operating due to COVID and lack of staffing and volunteers. All the programs have resumed since the inspection except for the Parenting Class due to no instructor.

Maximizing space is always a challenge and an ongoing effort. Plans were explored to reconfigure the “old side” of the jail, adding an eight-person housing unit and converting the “old yard” into a more accessible recreation area, in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The plans were not implemented as they were considered cost-prohibitive, and the facility’s needs had changed.

The Grand Jury recommendation is to get that position staffed so the class can resume.

The Placerville Jail was built in 1988. The maximum capacity of the facility is 303 inmates. When inspected, it housed 208 inmates. There were 159 inmates awaiting trial and 49 convicted and serving a sentence; 38 of those convicted have been housed longer than one year.

Since the previous virtual Grand Jury inspection, there were no escapes or deaths; however, there were four attempted suicides.

It was noted during the inspection that many of the inmate programs had not been operating due to COVID and lack of staffing and volunteers. All the programs have resumed since the inspection except for Moral Recognition Therapy classes due to no instructors.

A $25 million grant, provided under California Senate Bill 844, has allocated funds for the jail’s expansion. The expansion includes a separate housing unit for female inmates, a new medical wing increasing beds to 14, construction of several ADA-compliant cells, technical and programming spaces, and a computer lab.

The Grand Jury recommended staff be hired so the Moral Recognition Therapy classes could resume.

The JTC in South Lake Tahoe was built in 2003 and is a 40-bed facility. At the time of the inspection, the JTC housed five male youths. The age range for youth placement in the facility is 14 to 25 years old.

Since the previous virtual Grand Jury inspection, there were no escapes or deaths; however, there were eight attempted suicides. JTC staff work to meet the youths’ physical and health needs. The facility contracts with Wellpath for medical care. An RN is onsite in the morning, seven days a week, and a physician is at the facility one day a week. On-call medical services are also available. In addition, a mental health care program coordinator, therapist, psychiatrist, and other medical staff provide mental health care.

Daily educational classes continued without interruption during COVID, with online instruction via the Internet. In-person classes have resumed at the facility. Visitations are conducted in person and by Zoom.

The Grand Jury had no recommendations for the JTC.

SouthTahoeNow.com
Paula
June 30, 2022

Grand Jury praises new Tuolumne County jail despite early glitches

A new report by the Tuolumne County Civil Grand Jury praises the new $51 million county jail known as the Dambacher Detention Center as a vast improvement over its predecessor, despite some early glitches that resulted in sporadic losses of hot water and air conditioning during the summer months.

The 16-page report titled “A New Day for Tuolumne County” documents the jury’s first investigation of the new jail, which began housing inmates in January 2021 after more than a decade in development.

Previous grand juries skewered the county’s former jail located on Yaney Avenue for numerous problems ranging from an outdated design that didn’t meet modern safety standards to sewage leaking into employee locker rooms because of plumbing issues.

Those earlier reports about the former jail were frequently cited as justification for the construction of the new facility, of which $33 million was funded by state grants and $18 million by the county through lease-revenue bonds that used other county-owned buildings as collateral.

All 58 California counties are required by state law to impanel a civil grand jury each year consisting of ordinary citizens who volunteer their time for the purpose of reviewing local detention facilities and investigating complaints against other public agencies and officials.

Much of the 2020-22 Grand Jury’s report on the new jail focuses on the improvements over the old one.

“The Grand Jury finds the facility to have vastly improved security, aesthetics, and offers an improved environment for inmates and jailers alike compared to the old jail,” the report stated.

Some specific improvements cited include an increased capacity — from 144 to 230 inmates — as well as the addition of medical and dental facilities that reduce the need to transport inmates for outside services, more classrooms, exercise yards and a layout that allows inmates to be moved around more safely.

The new jail has four yards with mesh steel overhead to provide direct sunlight and are connected directly to housing pods, which allows easier access and more outdoor time for inmates. The old jail had one yard on the roof that required inmates to be walked through hallways and up two flights of stairs to access.

Extra capacity allows for jail commanders to better separate inmates into compatible groups and provides more safety against inmate violence, as the report noted that “tension between different groups of inmates can still be a potential problem”

A new intake area also allows new detainees to be processed “effectively, efficiently and more safely,” while being located next to the new state-funded $70 million Tuolumne County Superior Courthouse that opened earlier this year.

There’s also a “state-of-the-art kitchen” at the new jail that’s equipped to accommodate food preparation, storage and teaching food-service skills, the report said. It also prepares food for the Mother Lode Regional Juvenile Detention Facility located across the street.

However, the report also noted some mechanical problems with the new jail’s HVAC and hot-water systems that were still ongoing while the jury was conducting its review.

Staff and inmates both noted to the jury a lack of hot water that caused grievances by inmates who must shower in cold water and cannot have hot beverages, because the same water supply is used for both.

The HVAC system would also shut down at times during the hottest days in the summer and cause a loss of air conditioning, which the jury stated can be “particularly dangerous for the inmates with health conditions or who are taking medications that make them vulnerable to excessive heat.”

Jail staff was reportedly no longer receiving complaints from inmates about hot water by the end of the year, according to the report, which noted that training for facilities maintenance staff was not completed until November last year.

Deputy Ashley Boujikian, spokeswoman for the Sheriff’s Office, said jail staff relayed to her that the problems were mainly occurring shortly after the opening of the jail and have since been fixed.

The Grand Jury also noted in the report that staffing shortages have been an ongoing issue carried over from the old jail that could be contributing to employee burnout and attrition.

A 2021 compensation survey provided to the jury by the county Humans Resources Department showed jail deputies made about 13% less on average than their counterparts in neighboring counties.

“The new facility provides a safe environment with good aesthetics that may contribute to improved staff morale and attract new recruits, but lower wages are difficult to overcome,” the report stated.

One of the Grand Jury’s recommendations was to have the county Board of Supervisors consider increasing the pay of jail staff.

The Grand Jury also looked at the new jail’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, noting that a large outbreak began on Jan. 22 this year and infected 78 inmates in three of the four housing units. Three of the inmates tested positive during the intake process, the report said.

About 47% of the staff at the jail were fully vaccinated for COVID-19 as of March, the report stated. About 65% of adults 18 and older in the county were fully vaccinated as of Wednesday, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

To view the full Grand Jury report, go to https://www.tuolumne.courts.ca.gov/general-info/grand-jury.shtml.

The Union Democrat
Alex MacLean
 June 20, 2022

SLO [San Luis Obispo] County fails to provide adequate mental health services, Grand Jury finds

A resent[sic] Grand Jury investigation determined San Luis Obispo County has failed to create and maintain a safe, orderly, effective and efficient means for ensuring that people suffering from mental health issues receive the care they need, according to a July 26 report.

In SLO County, people on mental health holds are kept in local hospitals rather than mental health facilities, resulting in inadequate care for the mentally ill as the hospitals are not staffed with mental health professional. In addition, requiring hospital staff to oversee mentally ill patients reduces the quality of emergency care.

The Grand Jury also discovered that the county does not provide mental health services to juveniles or adults who do not fit the criteria for treatment at the County Psychiatric Health Facility. Most mentally ill patients are transported to out of county facilities.

About four years ago, the county contracted with a private company, Sierra Mental Wellness Group (SMWG), to operate a four-bed Crisis Support Unit, located near the Psychiatric Health Facility in San Luis Obispo. The facility is supposed to offer mental health care to those not under a mental health hold.

The contract initially required SMWG to provide a full-time registered nurse. SMWG, however, failed to meet the requirement.

The county amended the contract in 2021 to only require either a registered nurse, a psychiatric technician or other psychiatric service provider at the facility when clients are present.

Staff at the county Psychiatric Health Facility regularly ask staffers at the Crisis Support Unit to admit patients from their facility. On multiple occasion, SMWG staffers claimed they were at their four-patient capacity, even though they had no clients, according to surveillance cameras located in the facility.

“Unaware that any clients were in the Crisis Support Unit at that time, Psychiatric Health Facility staff checked the cameras and saw that the Crisis Support Unit was empty except for SMWG staff members,” according to the Grand Jury report. “When questioned about the situation, Crisis Support Unit staff responded by taping sheets of paper over the cameras, rendering them useless.”

The Grand Jury is asking the county to relieve the hospitals of the responsibility to warehouse mentally ill individuals by integrating and improving county services.

“SLO County should commit to creating a single, integrated and unified mental health services center that houses the Psychiatric Health Facility, the Crisis Support Unit, the Mental Health Evaluation Team, outpatient coordination, juvenile mental health services, and that includes a medical health triage and screening facility where all held persons, regardless of age, categorization or insurance status, can be medically cleared prior to placement in an appropriate section of the mental health facility.

Abiding by the recommendations will likely be difficult for the county, as it is currently working to further outsource and divide county mental health services. In June, SLO County administrators announced plans to outsource inpatient mental health services at the Psychiatric Health Facility to a private entity.

During the past decade, administrators at the Psychiatric Health Facility have been under fire for alleged mistreatment of the mentally ill. The allegation has led to a federal investigation and continuous turnover of staff.

The doctor in charge of the unit, the Behavioral Health Department’s Medical Director Daisey Ilano, is under investigation for her actions in the treatment and death of Andrew Holland.

Holland, a 36-year-old a mentally ill man, died in Jan. 2017 after jail guards left him strapped in a restraint chair, also known as the “Devil’s Chair,” for more than 46 hours.

The county mental health facility had refused to admit Holland. Ilano claimed at the time that the county facility was full and could not admit any inmates, while allegedly storing boxes in some patient rooms.

San Luis Obispo County officials are required by law to respond to the Grand Jury recommendations.

CalCoastNews.com
Karen Velie
August 3, 2022

Alameda County Grand Jury Report Cites Probate Conservatorship Cries Out for Reform

Alameda County needs a radical transformation in the way legal defense services are provided, said Venus Gist, a ‘Shout Out Justice’ advocate. “As things now stand, these services almost always result in a conservatorship being granted. There are no trials. No appeals. Less restrictive alternatives are not seriously explored,” she went on.

Last week, the Alameda County Grand Jury released its final report on the Alameda County Probate Court and found numerous deficiencies that have been criticized by probate reform groups for decades.

The Grand Jury found that:

·       Probate Court staff is severely overworked and understaffed;

·       The Public Defender’s office has no monitoring system to ascertain the service it renders to beneficiaries to assure their needs are addressed;

·       Guardians are not provided formal training;

·       There is no formal grievance process;

·       Beneficiaries who are poor do not get the same level of service as those with means

·       Involuntary conservatorship can drain estates quickly because of lack of oversight.

The Grand Jury report has given hope to probate reform advocates, who have been protesting these deficiencies for years with little or no success.

Spectrum Institute has been calling for Probate Court reform for eight years, especially in regard to beneficiaries with disabilities.

“The report of the Grand Jury sends a signal to the Alameda County Board of Supervisors that the status quo of unnecessary and overreaching conservatorships must end,” said Spectrum Institute Director Tom Coleman. “In terms of the responsibility to stop conservatorship abuses, the buck stops with the Board of Supervisors.’

Coleman suggested that the board should look to Nevada for solutions. “It should adopt a new system for providing legal defense services to seniors and people with disabilities who are targeted by these proceedings,” he said.

Recommendations from the Grand Jury are that the Alameda County Defender’s office transfer the responsibility of conservatorship to a separate agency with a contract specifying standards be met in order to receive funding from the County.

The Grand Jury is also advocating for a “Zealous Advocate,” a legal representative who assures that the desires of the conservatee are addressed.

Conserved involuntarily, Katherine Carter had to be ‘kidnapped’ from a long-term care facility by her daughter, Venus Gist, a ‘Shout Out Justice’ advocate.

Carter had been neglected to the degree that the facility had arranged hospice care. Risking arrest and prosecution, Gist “illegally” removed her mother from the facility. Katherine Carter lived an additional four years after being given 3 to 6 months to live.

“As both an advocate and a victim of the probate court, I think it’s exceptional that the Grand Jury of Alameda County has finally filed a report addressing the issues of conservatorship within the Public Guardian’s Office,” Gist said. “Abusive conservatorships are occurring nationwide and seldom are public servants such as judges, attorneys, conservators, fiduciaries, etc. held accountable and convicted of criminal acts committed towards their clients.…. it’s rarely talked about, and families and caregivers are mostly blamed.”

Alameda County needs a radical transformation in the way legal defense services are provided., Gist said. “As things now stand, these services almost always result in a conservatorship being granted. There are no trials. No appeals. Less restrictive alternatives are not seriously explored,” she went on.

She agrees with Coleman that the board should hire an outside firm to audit the public defender and “look seriously at adopting the Nevada model for legal defense services in Alameda County.”

To prevent abuses such as the Carter family encountered, the Grand Jury recommends that a neutral third-party entity be selected to conduct annual reviews of conservatorships to assess attorney compliance and determine compliance with probate rules.

The Grand Jury also recommended that attorneys take ongoing educational training in probate conservatorship and establish annual performance evaluations. They also recommend that a licensed health professional evaluate each client.

Although encouraged by the Grand Jury report, Gist feels it did not go far enough and wishes they had interviewed citizens who have been violated. Gist says, “If they are investigating, conduct it thoroughly, it requires the whole truth.”

Oakland Post
Tanya Dennis
July 30, 2022

[Solano County] Grand JURY reports Solano falling behind electric vehicle charging needs

FAIRFIELD — Solano County will not have sufficient charging stations to serve the elective vehicles in the county in the immediate future or by 2035 when the state has set a goal of having no new gas-powered vehicles.

“There will not be enough electric vehicle charging stations in Solano County to support the state’s goals for electric vehicles identified in Executive Order N-79-20,” the 2022 the 2021-22 Solano County Civil Grand Jury stated as it first finding in a report on electric vehicle infrastructure.

Executive Order N-79-20 was issued by Gov. Gavin Newsom to eliminate all new gas-powered vehicles in the state by 2035.

The grand jury recommendation is to have the “Solano Transportation Authority board members commit to programs to increase the number of electric vehicle charging stations in their jurisdictions at a rate sufficient to meet (the state order).”

The grand jury reported that at the end of 2020, there were 471 shared public and private chargers in Solano County. The state Energy Commission and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory estimated the need at 1,648 with and estimated 5,036 electric vehicles in the county. That number increased to 7,213 vehicles by the end of 2021.

The estimates for the number of chargers needed by the end of 2022 is 2,559. That increases to 5,020 by 2025; to 12,612 by 2030; and to 22,535 by 2035, as reported by the grand jury.

There were four additional findings listed in the grand jury report, each with at least one recommendation to meet that need.

• FINDING 2: In 2018, the STA adopted an Electric Vehicle Transition Program and the website (solanoev.org) for Solano County. The website is no longer working which is of no value; the EVTP is no longer current, minimizing its value and applicability.

The recommendation is for “STA (to) update the EVTP and its website (solanoev.org) to provide accurate and current information for Solano County residents.”

• FINDING 3: In the 2018 EVTP, the STA board approved a plan to install trailblazing signs to identify locations of electric vehicle charging stations. As of 2022, there is no evidence of progress on that plan.

The recommendation is that the “STA board work with jurisdictions and agencies to install signage denoting the location of existing charging stations and to include appropriate signage as a component of future installations.”

• FINDING 4: The 2018 STA EVTP was intended to serve as regional guidance for the transition to electric vehicles, but this guidance has not been effectively communicated.

The first recommendation is to have “STA increase staff time available for implementation and oversight of the Electric Vehicle Transition Plan,” and the second recommendation is to have “STA add dedicated grant writing staff to bring this function in-house rather than relying on third-party vendors.”

• FINDING 5 : (State laws) require all California cities and counties to develop an expedited, streamlined permitting process for electric vehicle charging stations. Not all jurisdictions in Solano County have complied.

The recommendation is to have “all Solano County jurisdictions comply with streamlined permitting requirements, including adoption of an ordinance and checklist as required by (state law).”

Gov. Jerry Brown established the original target of reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 40% below the 1990 level by 2030, and set a target of having 5 million no-emission vehicles on the California roadways by 2030 to meet his clean air objective. The state Air Resources Board now believes 8 million vehicles are needed to meet that emission goal.

The report requires responses, to some or all the findings, by the county, the seven cities and the Solano Transportation Authority. The report was issued on June 3. No responses have been posted as of Friday on the grand jury Superior Court website.

The full report is available at Solano.courts.ca.gov, and clicking on the Civil Grand Jury link.

Solano County Daily Republic
By Todd R. Hansen
June 28, 2022

Placer [County] Grand Jury investigates county response to homelessness

The Placer County Grand Jury took a close look at homelessness issues this year, finding homelessness is placing a burden on taxpayers and public safety.

Through multiple interviews and a visit to the homeless camp at the DeWitt Center, the team of 19 grand jurors worked to understand the challenges and barriers the homeless experience in entering shelters and available services to gain insight to the day-to-day personnel and operations that work directly with the homeless and to identify who in Placer County takes ownership and responsibility for the strategies used in supporting the homeless.

“The grand jury’s investigation uncovered the fact that there is no single owner or leader in county staff overseeing the homeless issue,” stated the grand jury report, which was released June 30. “The lack of information from Health and Human Services made it difficult to compile specific facts and figures needed to accurately report the number of homeless currently residing in Placer County.”

The grand jury also highlighted that Health and Human Services, which aids the homeless through several programs, “lacks knowledge as to the specific amount of funds available, allocated to the homeless, and how it is spent on remedying the problem.”

The report stated the grand jury’s attempt to gain financial information was an “act of futility” because county officials were not able to provide answers.

Through interviews, grand jurors learned reasons why the homeless at DeWitt refuse to enter a facility. Many have social, medical and mental health issues, which may impede their ability to make healthy, wise decisions that would improve their overall well-being, the report stated. Another factor is most campers don’t want to conform to authority, maintain a schedule or assume any responsibilities, as would be required in a clean and sober high-barrier facility.

Of the nearly 100 homeless who were camping at DeWitt while the grand jury was conducting its investigation, jurors discovered 98 percent decline services offered by county representatives twice a week.

Jurors discovered alcohol and drug use was prevalent in the encampment, resulting in an average of one overdose a week and crimes such as assaults, thefts, drugs and public intoxication. Placer County Sheriff’s Office statistics show 30 percent of calls for service (between March 2021 and February 2022) were transient related in North Auburn (where the DeWitt Center is located) compared with 7 percent of calls for the rest of Placer County. The county employs a Homeless Liaison Team, which includes six deputies who patrol the homeless 24/7.

“Looking at the statistics provided, the grand jury questions how only six deputies can be expected to cover the entire county without drawing other deputies away from their assigned communities and duties,” the report stated. The jurors went on to say the Homeless Liaison Team was doing an “effective job” and the officers have “excellent rapport and are caring and compassionate when dealing with the campers.”

The grand jury sought to determine total funding spent on homeless programs by the county as part of the Health and Human Services' quarter-billion-dollar budget. County officials interviewed could not expound on this subject because of their lack of knowledge of the financial aspect relating to homeless services, the report stated.

“Because this financial information for homeless services is not available for review, neither the grand jury, nor the public, have any basis for understanding whether funds are being spent responsibly or effectively,” the report stated.

The report stated the homeless population was on the rise due to the Martin v. Boise ruling, which allows campers to not be removed from their encampment if there are no adequate shelters available to house them, such as low-barrier facilities.

The county’s camping ordinance is “inadequate,” the report stated, as it doesn’t discourage the continued use of encampments. According to the report, only 55-60 percent of campers at the Placer County Government Center are from Placer County.

The report also highlighted the three previous contracted consultant reports on the homeless issue. The reports, which span nearly three decades, “address the same issues and appear to have similar findings and recommendations and have been ignored by previous and current county officials.”

The report concludes with recommendations for Placer County, including designating a homeless “czar” to oversee all county services and finances for the homeless. The recommendations include creating a Placer County homeless expense report for the public.

Their recommendations also call for the county and all cities within Placer County to obtain funding and establish their own low-barrier homeless facilities. The report calls on the county Board of Supervisors to pass an “effective and enforceable” ordinance to manage and remove unsanctioned camping on county property.

The recommendations also call on the Board of Supervisors to compare and evaluate the two prior homeless consulting reports “to determine why little or no action has been taken on the previous and almost identical report recommendations.”

Placer County has until Oct. 1 to issue a response to the grand jury’s findings and recommendations.

"We appreciate the Grand Jury’s interest and attention to this challenging issue," said Acting Placer County CEO Jane Christenson. "At the Board of Supervisors’ direction, staff has expanded our services and on-site presence in support of the unsheltered residents camping at the government center. Many of the recommendations identified by the Grand Jury have been developed and we look forward to sharing those details with the Grand Jury in our formal response, which should shed further light on the county’s ongoing efforts to assist the unhoused in our community."

Placer County homelessness was just one issue the grand jury investigated; its report also includes an examination of the city of Lincoln’s financial state, cyber security in Placer County and the city of Colfax’s citizen complaint process.

The full Placer County Grand Jury 2021-22 Final Report is available online at http://www.placer.courts.ca.gov/general-grandjury-reports.shtml.

Gold Country Media
Traci Newell
July 09, 2022