Turlock school board responds to [Stanislaus County civil] grand jury regarding Career Tech initiatives

The Turlock Unified School District has made a plan to better promote its Career Technical Education courses to all English learners as part of the district’s response to a report released by the Stanislaus County Civil Grand Jury in June.

By law, the district had 90 days to officially respond to the jury’s findings and recommendations regarding Career Technical Education. The response must include whether the district agrees or disagrees with the recommendations with accompanying explanations.

According to Assistant Superintendent of Educational Services Heidi Lawler, former Director of CTE and Program Equity Tami Truax and current director John Acha worked alongside school administrators and data systems staff to gather the data requested immediately after the jury’s report was released. Acha presented the findings and the proposed response to the Board prior to their unanimous vote.

“We're excited to share with you this report, and I say excited because this is what I enjoy most about my job: Identifying the great things that TUSD is doing already, as well as instilling change… We always need to evolve and we always have ways to improve and I appreciate the Civil Grand Jury,” Acha said.

Acha began by sharing that the district currently offers over 40 CTE courses with 31 teachers teaching them. After taking a closer look at the current state of the programs, Acha and the research team came to the conclusion that TUSD should agree with 8 of the 14 findings and recommendations.

One of the first topics listed by the SCCGJ that Acha suggest the district agree with was the fact that all English Language Learners in the district have the ability to enroll in CTE course. While that is the case, Acha and the team also agreed with the recommendation that the district can do a better job at promoting the courses to all students, including English learners. This recommendation also correlates with the finding regarding participation, as Acha agreed with the jury that enrollment tends to vary by schools and districts in Stanislaus County.

“[It’s} something we want to look into,” Acha told the Board. “Why is that? What is it that one site may be doing better versus another or what could have caused that? It’s good information to focus on.”

Acha and the team also acknowledged the jury’s finding that CTE completion rate amongst English learners is fairly low. According to data presented to the Board, the CTE course completion rate amongst English learners at Turlock High was only 10% in 2018 and 2019. At Pitman High, there was a 5% completion rate.

“My goal as the Director of CTE and Program Equity is to increase our pathway completion rates, which are called New Career Readiness rates,” Acha said.

Acha shared similar sentiments to the jury’s finding regarding graduation rates at continuation schools in Stanislaus County. Acha explained that while graduation rates varied dramatically by campus, Turlock’s Roselawn High had one of the higher rates in the county. Nevertheless, Acha believes there is always room for improvement.

Amid the long list of agreements, Acha did have some disagreements regarding the jury’s findings and recommendations.

Staying on the topic of continuation schools, Acha and his team partially disagreed with the finding that TUSD offers limited CTE programs to continuation students.

“We disagree partially here as we already as a district are incorporating some of the recommendations,” Acha said. “We already have multiple CTE courses available. At the continuation high schools, it's difficult sometimes with smaller staff just like it would be for a very smaller school, and that is a challenge, but it’s nothing you can't overcome or continue to work on.”

Another disagreement that came about was the jury’s finding that schedule conflicts limit English learners’ participation in CTE programs.

“Coming from my previous job building the master schedule at Pitman High School, I know the work that I did to reduce and limit the amount of complex issues for all students,” Acha said. “Absolutely I want every student to take every class they possibly can, but it's not possible. And it's not limited to English learners. At some point, there may just not be a way to make it work.”

Acha added that the Aeries software can usually assist in resolving schedule conflicts and that there is already an increased effort to decrease conflicts for English learners.

The SCCGJ also listed in their report that there could be eased financial burdens on students interested and participating in CTE courses, a finding that Acha and the team partially disagreed with as current policies and practices are being implemented to remove this barrier for TUSD students. There was a similar partial disagreement as it related to necessary technology. Acha explained that the devices all students are provided with can be compatible with over 130 languages, but acknowledged that steps to access those tools could be better promoted and taught.

All other findings and recommendations released by the SCCGJ were neither agreed or disagreed with as TUSD has already implemented the changes or have already motioned to make the recommended changes before the end of the current calendar year.

Now that the Board has approved the response, a CTE Task Force will be put together for this school year. The Task Force will conduct a comprehensive review of SCCGJ report with counseling and admin teams at Turlock, Pitman and Roselawn High and ultimately develop action plans to address the jury’s findings and implement recommendations.

Turlock Journal
Christopher Correa
September 9, 2022

EDHCSD at odds with [El Dorado County] grand jury

El Dorado Hills Community Services District board members accused the El Dorado County Grand Jury of subpar performance in a draft of its formal response to an investigation regarding the CSD’s management of Landscape and Lighting Assessment Districts.

“…the district expresses its dismay at the slipshod manner in which the grand jury conducted and concluded its investigation,” the 16-page letter reads. The term “strategically forced ignorance” is being suggested as a possible edit. “Both the oral testimony and the documentation provided by the district demonstrated the inaccuracy of many of the inquiries made by the grand jury during its investigation.”

Released June 30, the grand jury report focused on calculation of assessment amounts, the appeals process, rental income credits and possible conflicts of interest between the CSD and LLADs.

“This is a work of fiction,” declared board member Sean Hansen, calling the report “obnoxious and egregiously wrong.” Though the CSD disagrees with 10 of the report’s 13 findings, Hansen admits two are interesting. “For example, LLADs sharing in revenue for field rental programming … it’s a good idea,” he conceded.

The other finding the CSD approved of involved the impact of outsourced contract services on LLAD assessments to which the letter noted could be in the favor of the LLAD members. The CSD agreed all information concerning LLADs is not consolidated on the CSD’s webpage for LLADs.

Hansen took exception to the jury’s reference to conflicts of interest. “This definition by the grand jury is fiction,” he reiterated. “They made it up. There’s a disagreement, not a conflict of interest.”

In addition, the letter attests to the destruction of records relating to the investigation less than a month following the issuance of the report. “Most distressing of all, however, is the admission by the current grand jury foreperson, Marisa Nickles, in an email to District General Manager Kevin Loewen dated July 17, that ‘[a]ll records related to the 2021-22 grand jury investigations have been destroyed,’” the letter revealed.

“What the statute says is that a request can be made for all non-privileged materials on which the grand jury relied in rendering its report,” noted CSD legal counsel David Tyra, who pointed out that there is no prohibition in the code against the destruction of records. “The time period from the date of the report to the recognition in communication to GM Loewen that stated that the records had been destroyed — that was a less than 30-day time period. That seemed odd.”

Board member Noelle Mattock voiced concerns regarding the report’s disputation of standard practices used by districts across the state.

“It’s not just a cavalier brush at us,” she insisted. “Every other district within the county uses the same process. Every other district throughout the state is using this process … we are doing what 99% of the rest of special districts and others do.

“If we’re being called out for errors in the county’s data then every other special district needs to be called out that’s doing these assessment districts as well,” she continued. “So everybody else is failing.”

As to the inaccuracies filed by the CSD, Loewen referred to hours spent verifying the county tax roll given to the assessment engineer, citing outdated information. “The hard part is we don’t know what the mechanism is for us to change the county’s information,” he said. “Not to say we live and die by it but that’s what we utilize, assuming that it’s accurate. We pay for it. Nonetheless, if there’s an error we’ll always rectify it with the homeowner or we’ll have to absorb it.”

Although several recommendations were rejected, more than half were approved and either already implemented or on track for a future date, including defined calculations, improvement lists, boundary maps, rental income credits and added financial transparency.

Loewen has also promised to revive the advisory committee, which failed from lack of community participation in 2018.

“I really respect and appreciate the hard work that the grand jury does,” said Hansen. “Like us, it’s a volunteer position. I thank you all for the hard work that you put into this. But there’s a lot of big issues in this report.”

Final edits to the draft letter were tabled to a special meeting, tentatively set for 5 p.m. Wednesday, Sept. 14. The meeting will be posted on the CSD website and the public is welcome to attend.

Village Life
Sel Richard
September 15, 2022

Ventura County [Grand Jury] urges water providers to improve cybersecurity in wake of attacks

The Ventura County Grand Jury is recommending that local water providers upgrade their cybersecurity in the wake of cyberattacks against seven of them in the last five years.

The 2021-22 grand jury investigated the county's public – not private – water providers and concluded "there is considerable opportunity for improvements of cybersecurity policies and procedures," a report issued in May says.

The jury said that of the 14 water providers it interviewed, seven had "experienced some form of cyberattack within the last five years, ranging from successful phishing attacks to ransomware."

The attacks exploited cyber vulnerabilities such as an attacker's familiarity with the network, vulnerability of connected devices or poor access controls, the report says.

The document does not identify the seven providers or provide more details of the attacks.

Such attacks pose "a serious threat to the public drinking water supply," the report says.

For instance, the study notes, there were two well publicized attempts last year by hackers to poison water supplies in Oldmar, Florida and the San Francisco Bay area.

"The grand jury investigation addressed the vulnerability of Ventura County water providers to similar cyberattacks, which could disrupt clean water availability and/or provider business operations," the report says.

Keith Frost, foreman of the 2022-23 grand jury, said in an email Thursday that he cannot discuss the report.

"Grand jury members cannot comment on the investigation or the drafting of the report due to confidentiality provisions" of the state penal code, he said.

'Complex network'

The report says that according to the EPA, there are 64 community water systems that supply drinking water to Ventura County residents.

About 98% of the county's water is supplied by the 25 largest systems, including the Oxnard Water Department, Ventura Water, Ventura County Waterworks District No. 8, whose board of directors is the Simi Valley City Council, Cal American Water and the Thousand Oaks Water Department, according to the report.

Cyber espionage: 'No country presents a broader threat,' FBI director says of China

More than half of the water delivered to Southern California homes and businesses is imported from Northern California by the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California through the State Water Project and from the Colorado River, the report says.

The MWD allocates a portion of the water to Ventura County. Two wholesale water providers, Calleguas Municipal Water District and United Water Conservation District, are primarily responsible for distribution of the imported water to the county's communities, according to the report.

"The grand jury found that Ventura County relies on a complex network of public and private water wholesalers and retailers," the report says.

The jury's investigation concentrated on the public providers who supply 76% of the county's water users, the study says.

The group examined two primary areas of cyber vulnerability in the water sector: the information technology used to bill consumers and record usage, and the operational technology, which controls the chemical treatment, filtration, storage and distribution of a provider's water.

The investigation focused on the cyber vulnerable component of operational technology, the supervisory control and data acquisition system, which remotely manages it.

"Malicious actors can take advantage of network vulnerabilities and/or weak access controls in either IT or OT," the report says.

Findings and recommendations

Based on its investigation, the jury made a number of findings:

•  Cybersecurity of both IT and SCADA systems is essential to safe and effective delivery of water.
•   Levels of cybersecurity for IT and SCADA systems are inconsistent among the investigated water providers.
•   Levels of cybersecurity training are also inconsistent.
•   Levels and frequency of cybersecurity assessments are inconsistent too.
•   Knowledge of cyber incident reporting requirements is inadequate among the investigated water providers.
•   There is insufficient information exchanged among the interviewed water providers regarding cybersecurity threats, attacks, protections and remedies.
•   There is insufficient awareness among public water providers of available federal and state expert cybersecurity services and support for their systems.
•   Some of the investigated water providers’ business recovery plans did not address recovery from a cyber incident.

The jury also made recommendations for the water providers it investigated:

• They should regularly assess their cybersecurity, addressing both IT and SCADA consistent with recommended best practices of the EPA and Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency.
•  They should regularly share and exchange information regarding cybersecurity threats, attacks, protections and remedies, and provide training, using such forums as the Association of Water Agencies Ventura County.
•  They should use free federal and state expert assistance to enhance cybersecurity.
•   They should regularly conduct cybersecurity awareness training.
•   They should address recovery from cybersecurity incidents in their business recovery plans.
•   They should establish Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency-compliant internal protocols for reporting cyber incidents.

"Although the grand jury did not interview all of Ventura County water providers, the grand jury recommendations could serve as a model to strengthen the cybersecurity of all," the report says.

Required responses

Pursuant to the penal code, recipients of the grand jury's report are required to inform the jury whether they agree with the report's findings. They must also report how they propose to address, or have addressed, the report's recommendations.

Responses to the jury so far include Thousand Oaks, whose public works department said the city has implemented five of the six recommendations, including requiring all employees to attend and pass cybersecurity training.

"The city has (also) implemented regular random phishing attack tests for staff," the reply says.

The city says it's working on enacting the other recommendation to address recovery from cybersecurity incidents in its business recovery plan.

Schools targeted: Two Ventura County school districts affected by cyber attack

The Triunfo Water District, which supplies water to more than 30,000 people in east Ventura County, said in its response that it "has not experienced a cybersecurity event and informs its IT vendor, Frontier Technology Inc., of any suspicious activity in a timely manner."

It says it has enacted three of the recommendations and plans to carry out the other three.

The Ventura County Public Works Agency and the Oxnard Public Works Department said in their responses that they've implemented all the recommendations.

Camarillo said it has put into practice five of the recommendations and will implement the other one, establishing an internal protocol for reporting cyber incidents.

The Camrosa Water District, based in Camarillo, has implemented five of the six recommendations. It says it has to further analyze the other recommendation to share and exchange information about cybersecurity on public forums, which it doesn't currently do.

Ventura Star
By Mike Harris
September 12, 2022

Anaheim Pushes Back on [Orange County] Grand Jury Allegations

The City of Anaheim will respond this week to a grand jury report that found the city’s handling of the $320 million Angel Stadium deal was rushed, lacked transparency, and betrayed constituents.

A 4–2 vote by the city council Aug. 23 gave staff the approval it needed to send a letter (pdf) to the Orange County Grand Jury addressing recommendations made in “The Big A Lack of Transparency,” a reference to the stadium’s nickname, report released in June.

In Anaheim’s response, City Manager James Vanderpool pushed back against several findings about transparency and the alleged violation of state land act regulations.

The multi-year negotiations to buy the stadium and surrounding land for $320 million were fraught with controversies and fell apart in May. The Anaheim City Council voided the sale after allegations of possible back-door dealings surfaced in an FBI affidavit.

According to the affidavit, former Anaheim Mayor Harry Sidhu was accused of giving insider information to the baseball team in an effort to earn a substantial campaign donation. Sidhu resigned as mayor in April and has not been charged with a crime.

And this week, Angels baseball team owner Arte Moreno announced he was exploring a sale of the team.

In its response to the grand jury report, Anaheim disagreed that it violated the “spirit” of California’s Brown Act, an open meeting law that addresses, among other actions, how city councils can discuss real estate negotiations and payments.

“The City met all Brown Act requirements for the regularly scheduled 2013 meeting,” the city manager wrote. The city also said that the actions of an entirely different city council and staff made nearly a decade ago had no bearing on the recent sale agreement with the Angels.

Anaheim also disagreed with the grand jury’s finding that appointing Sidhu to the team negotiating the stadium deal was unusual. The Brown Act allows them to appoint elected officials to real estate negotiations, according to the letter.

Vanderpool said he also found it “unusual” for the grand jury to suggest the city should appoint more than one council representative to any negotiating committee. Adding more elected officials would further politicize the matter.

The city agreed, however, that more briefings with the city council would have provided more awareness to the public about some of the details and progress of the stadium sale negotiations.

A two-week notice was issued about a special city council meeting to consider an agreement for the stadium sale and made the draft agreement available for public review, Vanderpool wrote.

The city disagreed with a report finding that said it failed to proactively promote public participation by not conducting community workshops or other opportunities to engage the community. The city held two informational meetings about the sale, according to Vanderpool’s letter.

Anaheim also disagreed with allegations about violating the state’s Surplus Land Act that requires the land to first be offered to affordable housing developers. The state’s Department of Housing and Community Development issued a notice of violation to city attorneys in December 2021 but reached a settlement with the city this year.

“The truth is that [Housing and Community Development] and the City had a dispute as to whether the [Surplus Land Act] was violated or not. And rather than fight that battle in court, HCD and the City were able to reach a compromised settlement,” Vanderpool wrote.

Anaheim will require that affordable housing remain a part of any future redevelopment of the stadium property and a 15 percent set-aside of affordable housing units for very low-, low- and moderate-income households, according to the response.

The city will also make any future transactions regarding the stadium public for at least 30 days before the city council takes action.

City councilmen Jose Moreno and Avelino Valencia declined to support the response. Moreno said he did not agree with the wording in the response and Valencia said he had reservations because he was not on the council when the events occurred.

Councilman Jose Diaz supported the staff’s effort to answer the grand jury.

“I respect the role of the Orange County Grand Jury, but I also respect the time city staff put into the response,” Diaz said. “This is not a political statement. This is just a response to the grand jury.”

Epoch Times
Jill McLaughlin
August 24, 2022

[Kern County] Grand Jury’s report cites Cal City woes

California City — Instability in city leadership, which has contributed to expensive legal problems, and a lack of communication with residents are among the problems with California City government outlined in a 2021-2022 Kern County Grand Jury report.

On Tuesday, City Manager Doug Dunford presented the city’s response to the report’s recommendations for improvement.

“I think this Council’s been pretty conscientious. We really tried to implement polices to protect the city, because, at the end of the day, we don’t want any more lawsuits,” Mayor Jeanie O’Laughlin said. “We are committed to trying to do the right thing and try to move the city forward.”

The report was the result of a complaint received from a resident, which detailed 46 areas of concern, according to the released report.

The Grand Jury investigated the complaint through interviews with Cal City officials and residents, and studied City Council agendas, minutes, financial statements and previous Grand Jury reports.

While many of the concerns could be readily addressed, according to the report, there remained 10 findings of problems within the city and nine recommendations for addressing them.

The top of the report’s findings regards instability in city management, where departments are led by interim managers and there is frequent turnover.

“To describe Cal City’s leadership as being in ‘crisis mode’ is an understatement,” the report states in its first finding. “The City of California City’s leadership must be stabilized with qualified department heads for Cal City to survive. The practice of filling leadership positions with interim staff is not sufficient for long-term good governance.”

Cal City was led by an interim city manager for nine months, until Dunford began, May 1. All other department heads, with the exception of Fire Chief Jeremy Kosick, are interim positions or vacant.

The city is actively recruiting for these positions but was unable to fill them by the Sept. 30 deadline in the report, Dunford said, due to the employment shortage.

The city has taken steps by hiring interim Public Works Director and Human Resources Director, and is interviewing Police Chief candidates, on Monday.

To aid in communication with the public, the report recommends scheduling quarterly town hall meetings, by Sept. 30.

“Unfortunately, we are playing catch-up with a lot of the issues and trying to get our budget moving forward,” Dunford said. “That’s one reason why we’re not having town hall meetings, but we’ll schedule those afterward.”

Two recommendations regarded training for City Council. The first called for training in the Prop. 218 legislation, which regards setting taxes and fees. The second recommended an ethics course in human resources, including state and federal labor laws.

Dunford replied that such training is planned for after the November election, in order to ensure that all Council members receive the same instruction.

The report found that the city’s “water line replacement program can only be described as derelict and incompetent. Previous City Officials have continually passed the buck. The ‘buck’ needs to stop somewhere.”

To correct this, the report recommended hiring an outside contractor, by June 30, 2023, to finish water line replacements, something Dunford said is in process, releasing bids, this month, to get a number of projects moving forward.

The report also criticized the city’s financial state, with unaudited books, and recommended the city’s books be organized and prepared for financial audit at the end of each fiscal year.

Dunford replied that the city’s audits have been caught up to 2020-2021 and the 2021-2022 audit is due, next month.

The Grand Jury found issues with the city-owned Tierra Del Sol Golf Course, stating it “may be an unrealistic dream,” due to debt and insufficient revenue to sustain it.

The report recommended a feasibility study for the golf course, by March 1, 2023, to determine adequate greens fees to support it, as well as whether private sponsorships or government grants are available. If the course is not on an upward trend, by March 2024, the city should prepare to lease, sell or otherwise divest itself of the facility.

The city is engaging a firm for a citywide user fee study to update fees and make sure they meet actual costs, Dunford said. Any decision on the future of the golf course will wait until the full financial picture is available.

The report also recommended, by the end of the year, the city contract with a private agency for human resources and personnel matters for advisement on employment and termination practices.

The city has already contracted with Beauchire Consulting for all of its human resources issues, and has labor attorneys retained for termination practices, Dunford said.

Antelope Valley Press
August 28, 2022
Allison Gatlin

SUSD board disputes nearly half of SJ [San Joaquin] grand jury findings

The Stockton Unified School District Board of Trustees voted 5-2 to accept their formal response to the San Joaquin County Grand Jury report disputing nearly half of the grand jury’s findings at the Aug. 23 board meeting. 

The board or district disagrees disputes or “will not comply” with 23 of the 50 findings in the grand jury report showing financial mismanagement, poor business practices and a lack of transparency. Trustees AngelAnn Flores and Maria Mendez voted no.

Just before the vote, Flores said being a minority vote on the board has rendered her unable to do her duly elected job. She said she played no part in the board’s response and encouraged the community to contact Judge Michael Coughlan — who the district’s response is addressed to — and the San Joaquin County Superior Court.

“We did not follow protocols … We did not go through the due protocol process for hiring our CBO (Chief Business Officer Marcus Battle). We did not go through the due process of hiring directors. We did not receive public input in a lot of the business that this district has done,” Flores said. “This grand jury (report) is valid. I thank the community for coming, speaking up and having the courage to speak on your behalf.” 

The formal response comes after the board made a commitment to the community to hold town halls and to participate in public discussion about the report. After trustees remained silent at an Aug. 4 town hall filled with concerned citizens, Board President Cecilia Mendez said, “No town halls. We’re not having any more town halls right now,” at the Aug. 16 special board meeting, ending any hopes for a two-way conversation before the district’s formal response was prepared. 

There was no talk of any further town halls at the Aug. 23 board meeting. 

Stockton Unified has been allotted more than $241 million in one-time federal COVID-relief funds. The June grand jury report states that Stockton Unified has no master plan that shows how these, Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) funds are or will be spent, and the Business Services Department is unable to provide data and accounting for ESSER expenditures.

The state’s Financial Crisis and Management Assistance Team (FCMAT) is midway through an AB139 Extraordinary Audit of Stockton Unified to determine fraud, misappropriation of funds or other illegal fiscal practices. The San Joaquin County Office of Education hired FCMAT in response to the school district’s projected deficit of at least $30 million by 2024. 

In response to four findings addressing Stockton Unified’s budgeting and deficit woes, the Board’s response letter states: “The District disagrees with this Finding.” No additional explanation is provided. 

A tale told before

If the board’s response seems familiar, it's because it is. 

Just a year ago, a 2021 grand jury report directed at Stockton Unified found that the district’s Board of Trustees had failed as district leaders and will likely continue to do so. In their response, the board declined to implement many of the recommendations and said the civil grand jury “ignored the weight of evidence, and that it instead has generally chosen to support the views of a disgruntled minority.” 

Recordnet.com
Ben Irwin – The Record
August 24, 2022

Stockton Unified trustees vote to cancel town halls on [San Joaquin] grand jury report

Activists are now calling for some Stockton Unified School District trustees to resign.

STOCKTON, Calif. — In a 5-2 vote during their special board meeting Tuesday, Stockton Unified School District trustees moved to suspend any public town hall meetings about this summer's scathing grand jury report, which found mismanagement and a lack of transparency at Stockton’s largest school district.

The vote followed nearly 20 minutes of discussion among board members and one person who filed a public comment card on the item.

In early August, the school district announced a two-hour long town hall meeting allowing members of the public to address board members regarding the grand jury report for up to three minutes.

The move to create the town hall was an action called upon by community members such as recent Stockton Early College Academy graduate and critic of the district’s board, David Sengthay.

“I was disappointed but not surprised,” Sengthay said following Tuesday's vote. “They were unable to take the criticism well and I think that their move to cancel any further town halls was, in fact, a way to prevent more negative press and to prevent that sort of publicity around the school district.”

The June grand jury report found poor business practices, an inadequate duty of care, and a lack of transparency at the district are pushing it towards a $30 million budget shortfall by the 2024 fiscal year.

The report said the state's Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team has been brought in to conduct an audit of the financial issues faced by SUSD to avoid a potential state-ordered takeover by the San Joaquin County Office of Education.

SUSD has until Sept. 15 to submit a formal response to the grand jury.

Sengthay says by canceling any future town hall meetings on the report, the school district, also California’s 13th largest, is perpetuating issues outlined in the report.

“The decision to vote on these town halls was done during a special board meeting, which means it wasn't publicized well, and it was done during work hours -- at 1 p.m.,” Sengthay said. “The town hall was definitely a way for the public to get involved and stay engaged and now we're losing that sort of aspect."

Board president Cecilia Mendez made the motion to cancel any future town hall meetings saying the district should first formulate a response to the report and then allow the community to speak on the drafted response during the board’s next regular meeting, before the board votes to approve or revise the response.

The motion was approved by trustees Alicia Rico, Ray Zulueta, Scot McBrian and Zachary Avelar.

“No town halls, we’re not going to have any more town halls right now,” Cecelia Mendez said during Tuesday’s meeting. “We have to finish to respond to the grand jury, we need to do this, you know we have to do this."

Trustee Rico said if more town hall meetings were held, she would decline to participate due to a lack of respect from community members.

"I hear the video, the audio from the last town hall you guys had, it was nasty. There is no respect for people," Rico said. "We're not doing nothing against them. By the way, they come to the meetings and start saying a lot of things, this is not a community that we need. We need community to resolve these issues, not to make those issues worse."

Trustees Maria Mendez and AngelAnn Flores voted against the motion, citing calls from community members who requested the town halls and to discuss the report with board members before a response is drafted.

“This is not very transparent and not very respectful to the community voice,” Flores said during Tuesday's meeting. “By taking this vote the way we are in the motion for this vote, is in clear disrespect to the results of the grand jury report. This is exactly what they called us out on.”

In a statement to ABC10, SUSD Interim Superintendent Traci Miller said in light of the board's decision, she will begin hosting her own public meetings across the district.

“I will be hosting meetings with the public called Community Conversations. I am anticipating having fruitful discussions on matters of the school district,” the statement said. "I plan to host at the school district and in each of the 7 areas of the district. I am willing to put in the work to make improvements where needed.”

Following the Tuesday vote, Sengthay and other activists are calling for the five board members who voted in favor of canceling the town hall meetings to resign.

"We had some board trustees ridicule the public for only demanding transparency and respect saying it was too much," Sengthay said. "It's ridiculous for a board trustee to go public and say that we don't deserve them as a community when it's in fact the community that voted them in."

An online petition calling for the resignation of Trustees Cecilia Mendez, Rico, Zulueta, McBrian and Avelar has gained over 160 signatures in less than a day.

McBrian, Avelar, Flores and Maria Mendez's seats on the board are all up for election in November.

The district's legal consultant Jack Lipton said he believes the district's response to the grand jury report will be ready for consideration at the board's next meeting on Aug. 23.

ABC10 - KXTV
Gabriel Porras
August 18, 2022

[Lake County] GJ: Inconsistencies in the chain of custody procedures at Coroner’s Office

Jury report also cites issues with response times

Lakeport— The Civil Grand Jury Final Report included a review of the Lake County Sheriff’s responsibilities as coroner and contractual obligations of the mortuary. The report found that there were inconsistencies in the chain of custody procedures and enforcement of response times, giving the Sheriff’s department 60 days and the Board of Supervisors 90 days to respond to their findings.

The Lake County Sheriff’s Coroner Office is located at 1220 Martin St. in Lakeport and serves the entirety of Lake County including the cities of Lakeport and Clearlake. Responsibilities of the Sheriff-Coroner include determining the cause of death, investigation of necessary mortalities, notifying next of kin as well as performing autopsies. Although the Sheriff assumes the role of coroner during administrative hours, the Grand Jury stated “During the hours from 4:30pm to 8 am, coroner duties are performed by the Sheriff Lieutenant/Deputy Coroner who serves as the Chief Deputy Coroner and oversees the day-to-day operation and routinely reports to the sheriff. Each of the Lake County sheriff deputies serves as deputy coroners.” Deputy coroner responsibilities include reporting and documentation, collaboration with other agencies and contacting the mortuary for removal of remains. The Sheriff’s Office also contracts a part time physician who conducts autopsies one day each week at the primary contracted mortuary.

According to the Grand Jury “The current 2021–2022 budget for the Sheriff-Coroner contract is $10,330,672. The current contract does not have an expiration date and was automatically renewed, despite the general governmental practice of having a five year limit.” This was one of the issues cited with the Grand Jury suggesting “That the Sheriff-Coroner review the contract and RFP (request for proposal) every five years.”

As part of their research the Grand Jury discovered “that a resident had to wait with her deceased loved one for three hours before the mortuary arrived to retrieve the body. Meanwhile, the Deputy Sheriff remained outside in his patrol vehicle.” The Jury found that this was a violation of the contract noting, “The agreement for mortuary services line item six states, “The mortuary shall respond, when dispatched, within 30 to 45 minutes but in no event shall mortuaries’ response time exceed 60 minutes.” Moving forward the Jury suggests stricter enforcement of the response requirement in the mortuary contract.

The Grand Jury also found that “The Lake County Sheriff–Coroner’s office does not have a formal chain-of-custody procedure for release of a body to the mortuary.” This practice helps keeps accountability and transparency. The Grand Jury recommends “That the Lake County Sheriff-Coroner’s office implement a chain- of-custody process for the movement of remains that includes a signature, printed name, date, and time.”

The full Grand Jury report on the Sheriff/Coroner as well as other final reports are available on the Lake County website lakecountyca.gov.

Lake County Record Bee
Nikki Carboni
August 19, 2022

Placer [County] Supervisors approve county responses to Grand Jury report

The Placer County Board of Supervisors approved responses generated to address the 2021-22 Grand Jury report findings during its consent agenda Tuesday. The report examined homelessness and the condition of jail and holding facilities within the county.

Following its investigation, the Grand Jury found there was no single county leader overseeing the homeless issue, a lack of information made it difficult to accurately report the number of homeless individuals residing within the county, and Health and Human Services, which provides aid through several programs, lacked “knowledge as to the specific amount of funds available, allocated to the homeless, and how it is spent on remedying the problem.”

The first recommendation of nine was for the county to designate a homeless “czar” with the authority, budget and resources to oversee Placer’s services for the homeless. According to the county’s response, there is no single entity, agency or individual responsible, as homelessness is a cross-jurisdictional, multi-faceted issue.

“Placer County has already established a staff task force, led by a deputy county executive officer in coordination with elected and appointed officials, which meets regularly to address homelessness issues at the Placer County Government Center,” the response states of the Regional Homelessness Ad-Hoc Committee.

Within the response, it is noted the Phase 2 report is expected in 2023.

Another recommendation from the Grand Jury included the county creating an expense report on funding received and expended on homelessness.

According to the response, the county’s homeless services are embedded in or overlap with other programs, projects and services, which makes it infeasible to capture costs, expenses and funding on programs related to homelessness.

The Grand Jury also recommended the Board of Supervisors immediately seek and obtain funding for low-barrier shelters throughout Placer.

“While low-barrier shelters may provide another short-term housing option, some remain concerned on how they are implemented and potential community impacts, and thus require additional analysis by the Regional Homelessness Ad Hoc Committee,” the response says.

The county confirms the ad-hoc committee is exploring options for low-barrier shelters and funding and expects to make final recommendations in February 2023.

Additionally, the Grand Jury recommended the board evaluate the 2004 and 2015 homeless consulting reports with the Placer Homelessness Response Emerging Strategies Phase 1 Report to determine why little or no action has been taken on report recommendations. The county’s response confirms as services have been implemented and expanded since the completion of the 2004 and 2015 reports, it will focus future actions on the regional ad-hoc committee’s recommendations when developed.

The response also addresses the findings of county jail and holding facilities from the Grand Jury’s annual inspection.

One recommendation included the Placer County Sheriff’s Office enabling a camera system to read license plates in and near the parking lots of the Auburn Historic Courthouse. The response notes the current camera system was selected due to increased coverage and the inability of high-zoom capabilities does not hinder security operations at the courthouse.

The response also confirmed disagreement with the jury’s finding of the Auburn Jail holding cells being unclean. According to the county, the holding cells are cleaned twice a day by inmate workers, at minimum.

“... It is likely their (Grand Jury) inspection fell at a time between the twice-daily cleaning sessions. It is common for arrestees to leave trash in the holding cells or mark up walls, which would have been visible between the cleaning sessions,” the response states.

The county also confirmed cells are inspected and cleaned with a hand-held spray gun that contains a spray solution which “deodorizes, disinfects and acts as a fungicide to sterilize the cell” anytime an arrestee is removed from the holding cell.

Board Chair and District 5 Supervisor Cindy Gustafson pulled the item from the consent agenda to request that in the future staff provide the county's responses and the Grand Jury report within the staff report to "be helpful to the public and honor the great work of the Grand Jury."

The board also received one comment noting the item should not have been on the consent agenda due to being a "contentious item" and that the board should consider the Grand Jury's recommendations, as the responses "seemed dismissive."

The board approved the responses in a unanimous vote. According to the staff report, the responses will be provided to the Grand Jury and the presiding judge of the Placer County Superior Court.

Gold Country Media
Stacey Adams
August 23, 2022

[Sonoma County] Grand jury takes note of department progress

A Sonoma County civil grand jury found the Rohnert Park Department of Public Safety has made improvements to address gaps in operations that created an environment “ripe for misconduct” in the years since two officers were indicted for conspiracy and extortion, but said the department can take additional steps to prevent future incidents. The 18-member panel acknowledged department procedures have been updated and a new command structure provides nearly round-the-clock supervision of officers. Morale among officers has improved and support among residents remains high, the jury said.

Still, jurors recommended additional checks and balances be implemented.

The report specifically looked at how lax enforcement of department policies and gaps in supervision allowed a former sergeant and officer teamed up on the city’s controversial drug interdiction program to illegally confiscate drugs and cash during traffic stops between 2015 and 2017.

The allegations were first reported in 2018 by Kym Kemp, author of Humboldt County’s Redheaded Blackbelt news blog, and by KQED, and were broadened in an investigation by The Press Democrat.

The extortion scandal prompted civil rights lawsuits, various internal and outside investigations and the federal prosecution of Brendon “Jacy” Tatum, a former sergeant once honored by the city for his drug interdiction work, and Joseph Huffaker, an officer who resigned in 2019 after being paid $75,000 in a severance deal approved by the City Council.

The revelations led to the abrupt retirement of the department’s chief, the restructuring of its command structure and a broader examination of policing in Sonoma County’s third largest city.

Tatum resigned in June 2018 while under investigation and last year pleaded guilty to extortion, falsifying police reports and tax evasion. He is expected to be sentenced in December while Huffaker’s case is going to trial.

The grand jury returned seven recommendations that included requiring annual performance reviews of the department director, getting officer feedback as part of that process and creating more opportunities for the City Council and public to weigh in on department matters geared to further improve department oversight.

“While significant steps have been taken to improve supervision and enforcement of departmental regulations and policies, further improvements are needed to enhance the oversight of the department by the city manager and the City Council and to further enhance adherence to departmental regulations,” the jury wrote in its report finalized in June.

The City Council is expected to discuss the report and consider the city’s response on Tuesday. A copy of the city’s proposed response shows officials contested many of the jury’s findings and said the department has made improvements that have reduced the risk of officer misconduct.

Public Safety Director Tim Mattos, who was hired to lead the embattled department in December 2018, said he was surprised the grand jury took on the topic years after allegations first emerged. He defended the department’s work to strengthen policies and implement measures to ensure greater accountability.

“Nothing like this has happened again,” he said in an interview. “We can’t seem to get out from under that umbrella, but hopefully now that the grand jury has come out with their report … perhaps this will be what propels us forward and we can get out of the shadow of what happened six years ago.”

Three areas of investigation

The grand jury sought to understand how Tatum and Huffaker were able to operate under the radar of department management and gauge whether steps the city has taken will prevent similar incidents.

Most grand jury investigations are the result of citizen complaints but this case was self-initiated, according to the report.

Jurors interviewed people within and outside the department, reviewed department policies, internal documents, City Council meetings, media reports and council-commissioned audits as part of its investigation.

The city declined to provide jurors a copy of an audit conducted by a consulting firm operated by retired Oakland Police Chief Howard Jordan, citing attorney privilege.

 The jury’s investigation largely fell into three buckets: supervision, enforcement of department policies and broader oversight of the department from city administrators and the City Council.

Here’s what jurors found. Inadequate supervision:

The grand jury concluded that a lack of supervision by top-level command staff allowed the two officers’ actions to continue unnoticed.

At the time, just three commanders oversaw 80 employees and they only worked day shifts, leaving a 14-hour gap in supervision. The department approved a new command structure in December 2018 that led to the creation of two deputy chief positions and four lieutenants and made several internal promotions to fill the new positions.

Jurors found the changes increased managerial supervision of staff to 20 hours daily and that sergeants are available early mornings when command staff isn’t.

Procedures not followed:

The department showed lax enforcement of department policies that could’ve prevented misbehavior, the jury found.

Tatum and Huffaker used unmarked vehicles without the department tracking their use as required, and there was limited tracking of when officers were operating outside the department’s jurisdiction, the report states.

There was poor tracking of evidence, too. Evidence and items seized during traffic stops weren’t placed in the evidence room or were removed without authorization, the report states. That finding and others by the jury were previously reported in The Press Democrat’s investigation and detailed in court documents.

One example jurors cited: Tatum and Huffaker reported seizing more than 750 pounds of marijuana but only booked into the evidence room a 10-pound sample. The remaining marijuana was never found and there is no evidence the department verified it was destroyed.

The jurors also found while the officers were working on the drug interdiction team they didn’t consistently wear body cameras.

Few opportunities for outside oversight: The grand jury found oversight of the department by city administrators and the City Council needed to be bolstered.

Jurors found there was no requirement for the director to meet on a regular basis with the city manager or provide regular department updates to the City Council in public.

While other department heads received annual written evaluations, the public safety chief didn’t. Former Director Brian Masterson, who stepped down in 2018 amid the turmoil, had one evaluation during his five years leading the department, the jurors found.

In 2017, Masterson’s contract was renewed and he received a large pay raise despite officers’ discontent and concerns raised about command staff being disengaged and mandatory overtime, according to the report. Rank-and-file members of the department overwhelmingly supported a no-confidence vote a week later. The jurors found his replacement, Mattos, has only received one written evaluation in three years on the job.

The panel said a formal annual evaluation “could provide early detection of problems and an opportunity to remedy them before they escalate.”

The city said management provides ongoing feedback to staff through counseling memos, emails, phone calls and in-person meetings. While there is no requirement that the director and manager meet, meetings have occurred weekly at City Manager Darrin Jenkins’ request, the city said.

The next steps

Mattos and other city officials, in interviews and in the city’s written response, pushed back on some of the jury’s findings and said the department has taken steps to address department processes and community relations and additional work is underway.

The city plans to adopt some of the jury’s recommendations, including annual job evaluations for the public safety chief and obtaining input from department personnel as part of that process. City management will also begin meeting with the officers’ association.

The city will study the costs of installing GPS devices on all police vehicles, another recommendation, as part of the budget process next year. The department has implemented new procedures since 2017 that require vehicles to be signed out and the new command structure provides better oversight of vehicle use, Mattos said.

Mattos said he was aware revamping the department would be a heavy lift when he was hired nearly four years ago and he and staff have worked hard to be more open and give the public better insight into department practices.

Moving forward and keeping staff morale high has been “tough” as additional allegations, lawsuits and media reports came out in the years after the extortion scandal first broke, he said.

But the chief said he’s glad to have guided the department and he hopes they continue to make changes to move on from the troubled period. The city renewed Mattos’ contract in December for three more years.

“We’re trying to get better,” he said. “The people responsible are long gone and are being dealt with and the people in this department want to move on and they want to be known for what they’re doing, not what happened.”

Mayor Jackie Elward, who ran in 2020 on a platform that included calls for more police accountability, said she was proud of the work the department has done to repair relationships with the community, change department culture and be more transparent.

“As the grand jury acknowledged, the city has made numerous improvements in addressing the concerns that were raised,” Elward said. “The city is heading in the right direction and I’m happy to see the changes happening.”

THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
Paulina Pineda
August 23, 2022