CITY ADMINISTRATOR CHIP RERIG’S PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT of The Carmel Pine Cone Guarantees The Carmel Pine Cone Will Not Incite ‘a Groundswell of Public Opinion Among the Residents Through Articles Generally Biased Against the New Administration’

 The Carmel Pine Cone

The local newspaper incited a groundswell of public opinion among the residents through articles generally biased against the New Administration.

SOURCE: CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA A GOVERNANCE REVIEW
Monterey County Civil Grand Jury, 2015

EXHIBIT A:  In an e-mail from City Administrator Chip Rerig to city staff members regarding Rerig’s appointment of former Commander Paul Tomasi to the position of Chief of Police/Director of Public Safety, dated December 16, 2016 at 10:07 A. M., City Administrator Chip Rerig stated to city staff members, in part, as follows: “Good morning. As you're likely aware, I recently appointed Paul Tomasi as our Chief of Police/Director of Public Safety… I was remiss in not sending you the news of Paul's appointment to the entire staff team earlier. You should not have learned of my decision through our local media outlets, and I apologize for this oversight. My only defense is that I wanted to insure that the story was not first reported by a news group other than The Pine Cone.”

Carmel-By-The-Sea Mail - Fwd Paul Tomasi by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

Carmel-by-the-Sea Mall - Fwd: Paul Tomasi

From: Chip Rerig <crerig@ci.carmel.ca.us>

Date: Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 10:07 AM

Subject: Paul Tomas

EXHIBIT B: Realizing that the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea provided city council agendas to The Carmel Pine Cone on Thursday afternoons prior to providing them to the public on Friday afternoons, Carmelite Jeff Baron communicated to the city council on March 7, 2017 that it is “an issue of fairness,” “I don’t think it’s fair that The Pine Cone gets any idea of what’s on the agenda before the public does. You guys in the city, you’re responsible to the public, not to the press.”

REFERENCES:
CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA A GOVERNANCE REVIEW
Monterey County Civil Grand Jury, 2015

Tomasi to become city’s police chief, By MARY SCHLEY, The Carmel Pine Cone, December 16, 2016, 1A & 17A

BARON COMPLAINS ABOUT PINE CONE ACCESS TO COUNCIL AGENDAS, MARY SCHLEY, The Carmel Pine Cone, March 10, 2017, 8A

City Council – March 7, 2017 Video

MAYOR DALLAS & CITY COUNCIL CONFIRM 2015 Monterey County Civil Grand Jury Conclusion ‘That the actions of the Mayor and City Council appeared to place more importance on…unfavorable media exposure…than on conscientious oversight and governance’ Two Years Later

EXHIBIT A:  Compensation overpayment to then-Public Safety Director/Police Chief Michael Calhoun between March 2015 and September 2015 for responsibilities and duties of city administrator after the hiring and commencement of duties by City Administrator Chip Rerig in March 2015, associated CalPERS pension spiking and inflated compensation between October 2015 and retirement in December 2015. While The Carmel Pine Cone neglected to report on the aforementioned facts and circumstances specifically involving City Administrator Chip Rerig, Mayor Steve Dallas, then-Public Safety Director/Police Chief Michael Calhoun, taxpayer monies and CalPERS pension ramifications, The Carmel Pine Cone reported on a similar circumstance involving former Fire Chief of Monterey, Carmel and Pacific Grove Andrew Miller.

EXHIBIT B:  The fake news article published by The Carmel Pine Cone regarding then-Human Resources Manager Maxine Gullo’s “discovery” that the CalPERs cost sharing changes approved by the city council had not been implemented when an examination of city correspondence proves that then-Finance Manager Paul Wood and Finance Specialist Deanna Allen repeatedly communicated to the city their concerns about CalPERS cost sharing implementation several months prior to City Administrator Chip Rerig’s hiring of Maxine Gullo as human resources manager. Interestingly, The Carmel Pine Cone belatedly reported the “resignation” of then-Finance Director Paul Wood on page 12A, March 17, 2017, ten weeks after Paul Wood’s resignation on January 9, 2017.

EXHIBIT C: Consent Agenda Item 19 Consideration of a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Carmel-by—the-Sea adopting the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea General employees union – an affiliate of the Laborers’ International Union of North America, United Public Employees of California, LIUNA/UPEC, Local 792, AFL-CIO; and the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea Management Employees Union - an affiliate of the Laborers’ International Union of North America, United Public Employees of California, LIUNA/UPEC, Local 792, AFL-CIO was approved by the city council at the June 6, 2017 regular meeting. The Staff Report, submitted by Maxine Gullo, Human Resources Manager, and approved by Chip Rerig, City Administrator, included the RESOLUTION, stating the inclusion of Exhibit A, "WHEREAS, the City and LIUNA have reached an agreement which is embodied in the attached Memorandum of Understanding (Exhibit A) for the period of January 1, 2017 through June 30, 2019.” However, not only was Exhibit A not included in the agenda packet for the public or city council members, but the RESOLUTION included the approval of THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE SEA MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES UNION - AN AFFILIATE OF THE LABORERES’ INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA, UNITED PUBLIC EMPLOYEES OF CALIFORNIA, LIUNA/UPEC, LOCAL 792, AFL-CIO AS OF JANUARY 1, 2017 even though city correspondence proves that negotiations and discussions were continuing and ongoing between Ryan Heron, Labor Relations Representative, United Public Employees of California Local 792, and city representatives, on the date of the city council meeting. The Carmel Pine Cone has yet to report on the aforementioned facts.

The 2015 Monterey County Civil Grand Jury report also included FINDING 15. The governance and administration of the City is unduly influenced by the reportorial and editorial practices of The Carmel Pine Cone. In the aftermath of that finding, two years later, it appears that Mayor Steve Dallas and City Council Members place more importance on The Carmel Pine Cone than “conscientious oversight and governance” on behalf of the public and in so doing the current mayor and city council have “vacated their responsibilities of oversight and inquiry” today as well. Déjà vu.

REFERENCES:
CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA A GOVERNANCE REVIEW
Monterey County Civil Grand Jury, 2015

Retired chief suing for bigger pension By KELLY NIX, The Carmel Pine Cone, March 10, 2017, 5A

Taxpayers stuck with $72,000 retirement bill, By MARY SCHLEY, The Carmel Pine Cone, December 2, 2016, 1A & 27A

Mullane resigns as public works director By MARY SCHLEY, The Carmel Pine Cone, March 17, 2017, 1A & 12A

Eight Noteworthy 1 September 2015 City Council Regular Meeting Agenda Items

ABSTRACT: Eight Noteworthy 1 September 2015 City Council Regular Meeting Agenda Items are featured, including ANNOUNCEMENTS, PUBLIC APPEARANCES, Monthly Reports for the Month of July including Contracts With the City Administrator, Community Planning and Building Department Reports, Police, Fire, Ambulance and Beach Reports, Public Records Act Request Logs – City Clerk and Police, Foresters Report and City Treasurer’s Report, Adopting Resolutions Authorizing Professional Services Agreements for Auditing Services, Shoreline Management Technical Assistance and Engineering Services for Streets and Storm Drainage Improvements, Adoption of a Resolution adjusting the City Attorney’s Employment Agreement, Approve Response to the Monterey County Civil Grand Jury Findings and Recommendations, Adoption of a Resolution Creating a New Capital Improvements Project, Sunset Center Master Plan, and Authorizing a Budget for said Project and Expenditures of Said Monies and Extension of Beach Fires Moratorium Urgency Ordinance 2015-005. Council Reports and supporting materials are embedded as document copies.  

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PACKET

REGULAR MEETING

Tuesday, September 1, 2015

AGENDA 09-01-15

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA

REGULAR MEETING

Tuesday, September 1, 2015

CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL, & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, 4:30 P.M.

ANNOUNCEMENTS
Announcements will be made by the Mayor and Council Members, City Administrator, and/or City Attorney as applicable.

CLOSED SESSION

1. Labor Negotiations
Government Code Section 54957.8
Agency Designated Representatives: Zutler
Employee Organization: LIUNA; CPOA

2. Conference With Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Government Code Section 54956.9: 2 cases

3. Public Employee Performance Review
Government Code Section 54957
Title: City Administrator
Title: City Attorney

PUBLIC APPEARANCES
Anyone wishing to address the City Council on matters within the jurisdiction of the City and are not on the agenda may do so now. Matters not appearing on the City Council’s agenda will not receive action at this meeting but may be referred to staff for a future meeting. Presentations will be limited to three (3) minutes, or as otherwise established by the City Council. Persons are not required to give their names, but it is helpful for speakers to state their names in order that the City Clerk may identify them in the minutes of the meeting.

CONSENT CALENDAR
All items on the Consent Calendar are to be acted upon by a single action of the City Council unless otherwise requested by an individual Council Member or the public for special consideration. Otherwise the recommendation of staff will be accepted and acted upon by majority voice vote.

5. Monthly Reports for the Month of July
a. Contracts With the City Administrator
b. Community Planning and Building Department Reports
c. Police, Fire, Ambulance and Beach Reports
d. Public Records Act Request Logs – City Clerk and Police
e. Foresters Report
f. City Treasurer’s Report

Monthly Reports 09-01-15

6. AB 1001 Adopting Resolutions Authorizing Professional Services Agreements for Auditing Services, Shoreline Management Technical Assistance and Engineering Services for Streets and Storm Drainage Improvements

Professional Services Agreements 09-01-15

9. AB 1004 Adoption of a Resolution adjusting the City Attorney’s Employment Agreement

City Attorney's Employment Agreement 09-01-15

20. AB 1012 Approve Response to the Monterey County Civil Grand Jury Findings and Recommendations

Response to the Monterey County Civil Grand Jury 09-01-15

ORDERS
Orders of Council are agenda items that require City Council discussion, debate and/or direction.

22. AB 1014 Adoption of a Resolution Creating a New Capital Improvements Project, Sunset Center Master Plan, and Authorizing a Budget for said Project and Expenditures of Said Monies

Sunset Center Master Plan 09-01-15

PUBLIC HEARINGS
Public Hearings consist of Zoning amendments, General Plan amendments, appeals of Commission decisions and other State-mandated items. If the Public Hearing is an appeal, appellants are allowed a total of 10 minutes to speak on their own behalf after the staff report and at the close of public comment in order to have an opportunity to rebut public comments. Other speakers will be allowed three minutes.

23. AB 1017 Extension of Beach Fires Moratorium Urgency Ordinance 2015-005

Extension of Beach Fires Moratorium Urgency Ordinance 09-01-15

Extension of Beach Fires Moratorium Urgency Ordinance 2015-005

Carmel Resident Carolyn Hardy: ‘…it was clear they were sweet-talked by a silver-tongued smoothie who had the ability to charm. The GJ fell, hook, line and sinker.'

ABSTRACT: For a cogent and accurate analysis of the Stilwell/Paul tenure in the context of the Monterey County Civil Grand Jury Report entitled “CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA A GOVERNANCE REVIEW, read Carolyn Hardy’s “assortment” of comments on the MCCGJ, the report, PRA Inquires, Regarding contracts, Hiring of Sue Paul, Legal Counsel Issues and Missing Alcock Report on MONTEREY BAY PARTISAN, GRAND JURY REPORT: Pine Cone’s slanted coverage created Carmel City Hall crisis by Royal Calkins on June 20, 2015 .

GRAND JURY REPORT: Pine Cone’s slanted coverage created Carmel City Hall crisis by Royal Calkins on June 20, 2015, MONTEREY BAY PARTISAN

Comments, Carolyn Hardy June 23, 2015, 11:39 pm

COMMENTARY ‘No Credible Evidence’ of ‘Wrongdoing’ by Ex-City Administrator Jason Stilwell & Ex-Administrative Services Director Susan Paul?

FINDING 12 of the 2014/15 Monterey County Civil Grand Jury (MCCGJ) Carmel Investigative Committee’s Report entitled CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA A GOVERNANCE REVIEW states “There was no credible evidence to support allegations of contract splitting, cronyism or any other wrongdoing under Mr. Stilwell or Ms. Paul.”

Yet, the MCCGJ Report on Carmel Governance contains acts of “wrongdoing,” as defined as improper conduct, misconduct or misdoing, including acts of omission and commission, that are directly attributable to former City Administrator Jason Stilwell and former Administrative Services Director Susan Paul. To wit, referring to Forensic Examiner Mark Alcock’s second and third contracts with the City, “There appeared to be a practice of allowing the consultant to overrun the contract amounts, followed by a “catchup” City Council-authorized contract amendment.”

Moreover, the Report states “A review of the files covering contracts generated during their tenure showed that a number contained the same issues that they were trying to remedy—missing statements of work, payment schedules, and milestone measurements.”

And the MCCGJ Report states “It is the responsibility of the Administrator to make certain that municipal laws and ordinances are enforced, to oversee fiscal and budgetary matters, to manage all employee actions, and to provide administrative direction for the day-to-day operations of all departmental activities."  But, according to FINDING 18, “There was no evidence of any systematic review of contracts in excess of $25,000 by legal counsel as to form or content."  Certainly with all the contracting with outside legal counsel authorized by then-City Administrator Jason Stilwell, Mr. Stilwell certainly should have contracted with legal counsel to review contracts “as to form or content.” And Mr. Stilwell was certainly in a position to make certain that the City Treasurer was not “isolated from any meaningful role in the contract/invoice disbursements and tracking system.” Yet, FINDINGS 17 states “The City Treasurer was isolated from any meaningful role in the contract/invoice disbursements and tracking system.”

Additionally, with respect to the City Security System Audit Report (2013), a report estimated to be 150 pages identifying “800 security vulnerabilities,” that the MCCGJ made RECOMMENDATION 3 “The City immediately procure or upgrade to an appropriate IT System and secure the data network” is evidence that then-City Administrator Jason Stilwell failed to remedy IT issues which arguably should have been remedied early during his three-year tenure.

As for other possible “wrongdoing” by then-City Administrator Jason Stilwell and then-Administrative Services Director Susan Paul, the MCCGJ Report’s failure to address their actions and conduct regarding the two separate investigations of IT Misconduct; one investigation into Plaintiffs possible criminal activity ("Criminal Investigation"), and the second investigation into the IT Misconduct and related job performance of Plaintiff in his capacity as an employee of the City ("Administrative Investigation"), and the decision to not forward the “Criminal Investigation” findings to the Monterey County District Attorney’s Office given Search Warrant No. 7682 checked statements of “Property or things used as a means of committing a felony” and “Property or things that are evidence that tends to show a felony has been committed, or tends to show that a particular person has committed a felony,” is significant due to the nature of the Criminal Investigation and to its noticeable absence from the MCCGJ Report. Subsequent to the MCCGJ Report, on June 17, 2015, the City settled the McInchak’s matter for $275,000.

In short, given the aforementioned improper conduct, misconduct and misdoing, including acts of omission and commission, directly attributable to then-City Administrator Jason Stilwell and then-Administrative Services Director Susan Paul as stated in the MCCGJ Report on Carmel Governance, it is evident to any reasonable individual that the MCCGJ Report should have recognized these acts as acts of a kind of “wrongdoing.” Instead the MCCGJ made FINDING 10 and FINDING 11, as follows: 

F10. Mr. Stilwell was a well-qualified City Administrator who recognized and diligently addressed widespread City management problems and tried to implement shifting City Council priorities, maintaining a professional attitude in spite of external pressure and criticism. He may have avoided much of the upheaval surrounding his administration by having a clearer perception of the nature of small-town government and exercising a more thoughtful and measured approach to change.

F11. Ms. Paul was an experienced Administrative Services Director who quickly recognized areas of mismanagement and risk for the City and implemented solutions within what she understood to be her areas of authority with due diligence and proper municipal procedure. Her decisive by-the-book actions and abrupt manner caused resentment among longtime employees and City residents, which may have been avoided with more sensitivity on her part to the City’s culture.

Written & Published by L. A. Paterson

NOTE: Jason Stillwell was hired as deputy city manager for Santa Maria; Stilwell started Monday, June 15, 2015.
Source: ‘Well-Respected Administrator’ Named Deputy City Manager for Santa Maria By Janene Scully, Noozhawk North County Editor | @JaneneScully | Published on 06.18.2015 9:14 p.m.

2014-2015 Monterey County Civil Grand Jury Report: CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA A GOVERNANCE REVIEW

ABSTRACT: The 2014-2015 Monterey County Civil Grand Jury Report “CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA A GOVERNANCE REVIEW” document copy is embedded. Importantly, “CONCLUSION The 2014/2015 Monterey County Civil Grand Jury was asked by the Mayor of Carmel to review the City’s policies and internal controls and to make recommendations. In addition, a formal Citizens’ Complaint was filed requesting that the MCCGJ examine City governance and failed oversight. This Report is as comprehensive as possible, given the constraints of time and resources, and the systematic lack of cooperation by the City. However it could not purport to address all the complaints, issues and problems of Carmel-by-the-Sea’s management and governance.”
"...the City engaged in a “request and deny” strategy, which served only to cause many weeks of delay. The investigation was further hampered by instructions from the City Attorney and private legal counsel advising some interviewees not to answer MCCGJ questions relating to personnel matters of which they had direct, personal knowledge."
Waiver of Attorney-Client Privilege 

Because of the considerable use by the City of outside legal counsel between 2012 and 2014 for employee terminations, Public Records Act (PRA) request reviews, HR matters, contract matters, and general legal services at a cost to the City of more than $475,000, the MCCGJ wanted to know more about the involvement of the City Attorney in such services and whether he has a regular procedural role in a defined list of City matters or is “on call” when needed. The MCCGJ also wished to speak with the outside attorneys who acted for the City in the areas noted above, to gain clarity about the appropriate use of separately retained counsel and to help determine if charges of cronyism were founded. For these, and only these, purposes the MCCGJ requested a waiver of attorney-client privilege. 
In response to this request, the City staff used outside counsel to inform the MCCGJ that it would not waive attorney-client privilege, preventing the Grand Jury from examining this critically important area.
Waiver of City Council Closed Session Privilege
To further its investigation and gain insight into City Council processes regarding establishment of key initiatives and priorities, approval of contracts, supervision of the City Administrator, (and City Attorney, Treasurer and Engineer), public records request positions, and knowledge of major personnel actions taken, the MCCGJ requested waiver of the City Council’s closed session privilege for these, and only these, purposes for the period 2012-2014.
In response to this request, the Mayor and Council voted on Feb. 10, 2015 to table the request until outside counsel could be consulted. The waiver was subsequently not granted.

And the "Investigative Report on City of Carmel-by-the-Sea Contracts,"dated May 5, 2015, was footnoted, as follows:  1 The MCCGJ is not able to accept this report because of its limited and selective scope, its failure to recognize the City’s historic and systemic contract process problems, the conspicuous lack of an interview with the City Administrator who was in office, and the absence of an audit prepared according to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, as would have been provided by the use of a Certified Public Accountant.
FINDINGS, RECOMMENDATIONS and RESPONSES REQUIRED sections are reproduced.

FINDINGS

Findings F1 through F6 apply to the time period prior to the hiring of Mr. Jason Stilwell in late 2011.

F1. In the time period note above, City operations were undisciplined, as City policies were outdated, nonexistent or ignored. With several empty Department director positions, employees worked hard to keep up and paid little attention to standard municipal procedures.

F2. In the time period noted above, there were serious flaws and vulnerabilities in network system security, placing the City at risk financially and legally.

F3. In the time period noted above, contracts were mismanaged with regard to public bidding, purchase order processing, and services provided with expired contracts.

F4.In the time period noted above, the City Council was not provided with contract payment schedules or accumulated payment tracking reports.

F5. In the time period noted above, the Human Resources process was mismanaged with regard to pay grades, progressive discipline, and proper staff training, and was lacking in leadership.

F6. In the time period noted above, the Public Records Act request process was unstructured, noncompliant, and ad hoc.

F7. The Mayor and City Council did not fully execute their responsibilities of inquiry and oversight.

F8. Neither the Mayor nor the City Council members received any formal training or substantive orientation on the responsibilities of their positions.

F9. The Mayor and the City Council members were more responsive to political pressure than to the need for effective governance.

F10. Mr. Stilwell was a well-qualified City Administrator who recognized and diligently addressed widespread City management problems and tried to implement shifting City Council priorities, maintaining a professional attitude in spite of external pressure and criticism. He may have avoided much of the upheaval surrounding his administration by having a clearer perception of the nature of small-town government and exercising a more thoughtful and measured approach to change.

F11. Ms. Paul was an experienced Administrative Services Director who quickly recognized areas of mismanagement and risk for the City and implemented solutions within what she understood to be her areas of authority with due diligence and proper municipal procedure. Her decisive by-the-book actions and abrupt manner caused resentment among longtime employees and City residents, which may have been avoided with more sensitivity on her part to the City’s culture.

F12. There was no credible evidence to support allegations of contract splitting, cronyism or any other wrongdoing under Mr. Stilwell or Ms. Paul.

F13. The General Law/Weak Mayor structure was often misunderstood by Carmel citizens and the City Council.

F14. The local media provided easy access for City employees to vent their side of a story when the City’s hands were tied by employee privacy restraints.

F15. The governance and administration of the City is unduly influenced by the reportorial and editorial practices of The Carmel Pine Cone.

F16. The position of City Treasurer is underutilized and so provides little benefit to the City.

F17. The City Treasurer was isolated from any meaningful role in the contract/invoice disbursements and tracking system.

F18. There was no evidence of any systematic review of contracts in excess of $25,000 by legal counsel as to form or content.

F19. A significant amount of money is spent on outside counsel as it supplements the City Attorney position in numerous matters including but not limited to labor and employment concerns, public records requests, general business and facilities, joint powers agreements, municipal law, and miscellaneous lawsuits.

F20. Historical averages of amounts spent on outside legal services over the past five years would support a full-time City Attorney and staff where such attorney would have experience in contracts, employment matters, and Public Records Act requests, as well as municipal law.

F21. The City Council seriously failed to exercise its power of inquiry in its decision-making process regarding rehires, by excluding the City’s outside defense counsel from the process and by negotiating hasty settlements of claims in the early or pre-litigation stages, which precluded any meaningful scrutiny of these employment issues.

RECOMMENDATIONS

R1. The City require all elected officials to undergo The League of California Cities “New Mayors & Council Members Academy” formal training, for each new term of office.

R2. The Mayor and City Council conduct a structured review of the City’s departments each month, to ensure proper oversight of City operations and more aggressive use of their power of inquiry.

R3. The City immediately procure or upgrade to an appropriate IT System and secure the data network.

R4. The City immediately hire an experienced Human Resources Director and fill all open positions as quickly as possible.

R5. The City define and utilize a formal, mandatory progressive discipline system to be consistently applied for all employee disciplinary matters.

R6. The City require that all employees undergo formal training, with specific focus on job responsibilities, City policy, and Municipal Code guidance for their specific positions.

R7. The City immediately procure and implement appropriate, full-function financial management software.

R8. The City review the contract awarding process to ensure that the Carmel Municipal Code provisions are being followed at departmental levels, and that where called for, public bidding is used.

R9. The City review (or rewrite if necessary) the purchasing process, to ensure that the Carmel Municipal Code provisions are current, complete, and are being followed.

R10. The City adopt a procedure whereby all major contracts are reviewed and signed off by the City Attorney and City Treasurer.

R11. The City report periodic payments under contracts to the City Council, in a manner which reflects the total contract amount and total payments to date, as well as the current monthly payment.

R12. The City establish a content list for City contract files and assure that such files contain (as applicable): bidding process compliance (RFP); vendor proposal and all attachments; legal review; staff summary report to the City Council; City Council resolution; and where there are contract amendments, all of the foregoing as appropriate.

R13. The City enhance the role of the City Treasurer such that the position has responsibility in the day-to-day financial management, including tracking the status of all contracts, identifying payment overages, and reporting to the City Council.

R14. The City make the City Attorney position a full-time City employee requiring meaningful experience in the areas of contracts, employment law, and Public Records Act requests, as well as municipal law.

R15.  The City Attorney manage the selection, and oversee the engagement of outside legal counsel, including the review and approval of their billings.

RESPONSES REQUIRED

Pursuant to Penal Code Section 933.05, the MCCGJ requests responses to all Findings (except F10, F11, and F14) and all Recommendations from the following governing body:

• The City Council, Carmel-by-the-Sea

Carmel-By-The-Sea a Governance Review Report MCCGJ 2015

CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

A GOVERNANCE REVIEW
June 19, 2015
(26 pages)

2014-2015 Monterey County Civil Grand Jury Report: SALINAS CITY COUNCIL MEMBER JOSÉ CASTAÑEDA

ABSTRACT: The 2014-2015 Monterey County Civil Grand Jury Report “SALINAS CITY COUNCIL MEMBER JOSÉ CASTAÑEDA” document copy is embedded. FINDINGS, RECOMMENDATIONS and RESPONSES REQUIRED sections are reproduced.

FINDINGS

F1. José Castañeda is currently serving a four-year term, until the end of 2016, as one of the seven elected members of the Salinas City Council. He was elected to the Council in November 2012 to represent District 1.

F2. At the time of his election to the City Council, José Castañeda was President and a long-term member of the Alisal Union School District Board of Trustees (“Alisal Board”).

F3. The law is clear that a person who is serving in a city as both a member of a school board and member of the city’s council is holding incompatible offices and must resign the first office that he was elected to.

F4. Mr. Castañeda refused to resign from his position with the Alisal Board, forcing the City of Salinas to hire outside counsel to bring a court action (“the incompatible office case”) seeking an order to remove him from the Alisal Board.

F5. On September 20, 2013 a Judgment was entered in the incompatible office case removing Mr. Castañeda from his position with the Alisal Board and ordering him to pay a fine to the State of California in the sum of $5,000.

F6. The incompatible office case cost the City of Salinas the sum of $26,555 in legal fees.

F7. Mr. Castañeda has failed and refused to pay the $5,000 fine.

F8. Subsequent to the Judgment in the Action, the City began collection efforts, including a demand that Mr. Castañeda pay the $5,000 fine, but it gave up efforts when it was learned that he had no attachable assets and he had other civil judgments against him.

RECOMMENDATIONS

R1. José Castañeda immediately pay the $5,000 fine that is outstanding in the incompatible office case.

R2. The City of Salinas pursue the appropriate post-judgment proceedings in the incompatible office case to enforce payment of the $5,000 fine from José Castañeda to the State.

R3. The City explore amending the City’s Charter to provide for the removal of a City Council Member upon conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude or the failure to pay a fine imposed by a court.

RESPONSES REQUIRED

Pursuant to Penal Code § 933.05, the MCCGJ requests responses to all Findings and Recommendations R2 and R3 from the following governing body:

• Salinas City Council (minus José Castañeda)

The MCCGJ invites José Castañeda to respond to all Findings and Recommendation R1.

Salinas City Council Member Castaneda MCCGJ Rpt 2015

SALINAS CITY COUNCIL MEMBER JOSÉ CASTAÑEDA
June 19, 2015

(9 pages)

2014-2015 Monterey County Civil Grand Jury Report: FAMILY AND CHILDREN’S SERVICES—A STRESSFUL WORK ENVIRONMENT

ABSTRACT: The 2014-2015 Monterey County Civil Grand Jury Report “FAMILY AND CHILDREN’S SERVICES—A STRESSFUL WORK ENVIRONMENT” document copy is embedded. FINDINGS, RECOMMENDATIONS and RESPONSES REQUIRED sections are reproduced.

FINDINGS

F1. The FCS Branch may place staff social workers in new positions without sufficient and necessary orientation and training.

F2. The FCS Branch may place supervisors in assignments without sufficient orientation or training.

F3. Conditions and priorities in the work environment make it difficult for staff to attend training sessions if the training is on site.

F4. There are some supervisors who communicate to subordinates in an unacceptable, demeaning manner.

F5. Some supervisors use the removal of the 9-80 schedule as punishment for work issues that could be handled in a less threatening manner, and in a way that wouldn’t compromise office function.

F6. FCS Branch talks about team building but does not uniformly implement it in a pragmatic manner.

F7. There appears to be a lack of knowledge and application of emotional intelligence in the FCS Branch.

F8. Social workers within FCS are passionate about their work but don’t feel supported or appreciated by some supervisors and management.

F9. Emergency calls often interfere with lunch breaks; often these breaks are not taken because of the amount of work required of each employee.

F10. FCS Branch and the Monterey County DSS offices are difficult for the public to locate due to lack of both exterior and interior signage.

RECOMMENDATIONS

R1. The FCS Branch implement a “Zero Tolerance Policy” for anger in the interactions between all staff.

R2. The FCS Branch provide training for emotional intelligence, work stress, and communication skills for all staff.

R3. The FCS Branch enforce the policy of requiring supervisors to meet with employees one-on-one on a monthly basis.

R4. The FCS Branch provide time for employees to devote to training without interruption.

R5. The FCS Branch assign supervisors to units only after those supervisors have had experience and training in those units.

R6. The FCS Branch assign supervisors and staff to jobs that reflect individual abilities and provide training and sufficient orientation to develop and support those abilities.

R7. The monthly supervisory meetings be used, and documented, to resolve all individual matters such as personal leave, workload efficiency, and general progress. There should be no surprises at evaluation time.

R8. Staff meetings, both for individual units, programs, and all staff be held regularly. Program managers should attend these. The agency director should also attend “all staff” meetings, and solicit input from line staff so that they maintain an awareness of the morale of the office.

R9. FCS Branch require transparency in procedures and case assignments.

R10. The FCS Branch management be observant regarding whether employees have had a half-hour respite at appropriate times.

R11. The building at 1000 South Main Street in Salinas be provided with signage to clearly inform the public that it is the location of the Monterey County Department of Social Services and the FCS Branch.

R12. The building be provided with interior signage to help guide the public to the appropriate offices.

RESPONSES REQUIRED

Pursuant to Penal Code Section 933.05, the MCCGJ requests responses to all Findings and Recommendations as follows:

• Monterey County Board of Supervisors

Family & Childrens Services-MCCGJ RPT 2015

FAMILY AND CHILDREN’S SERVICES—A STRESSFUL WORK ENVIRONMENT
June 19, 2015
(9 pages)

2014/2015 MONTEREY COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY (MCCGJ) REPORTS

ABSTRACT: “The Civil Grand Jury investigates and provides reports on the operations of local government in Monterey County, including the County, Cities and the numerous Special Districts that exist to serve the residents of the County. The Civil Grand Jury undertakes investigations on its own initiative, but also encourages residents to submit written complaints that it may investigate,” according to the Monterey County Civil Grand Jury (MCCGJ) website.  The 2014-2015 MCCGJ Jurors, by name, and the communities which they reside, are listed. The 2014-2015 Monterey County Civil Grand Jury Reports published on the County of Monterey website are listed and each Report is featured in successive posts with FINDINGS, RECOMMENDATIONS and RESPONSES REQUIRED sections reproduced.

The Jurors for the 2014-15 Monterey County Civil Grand Jury (MCCGJ), and the communities within which they reside, are:

Brandon Hill, Foreperson (Salinas)
Patrick Healy (Carmel by the Sea)
Louis Panetta, Foreperson Pro Tem (Monterey)
Peter Hiller (Carmel)
Robert Barry (Prunedale)
Barbara Mejia (Salinas)
Michael Berube (Carmel Valley)
Vicki Nohrden (Carmel)
Timothy Blomgren (Carmel)
Roger Powers (Salinas)
Gary Breschini (Salinas)
Judee Timm (Carmel)
Francis M. Small, Jr. (Carmel)
Jeane Errea (San Ardo)
Alis Gumbiner (Monterey)
Kathleen Wall (Monterey)
Sol Gonsalvo (Salinas)
Olivia Yates (Pebble Beach)
William Harris (Carmel)

2014-2015 Monterey County Civil Grand Jury Reports

• Over Militarization of Local Police Departments: Myth or Fact? (10 pages)
• “Fly Monterey” The Monterey Regional Airport (11 pages)
• Inquiry into Moss Landing Infrastructure Fund  (6 pages)
• A Glass Half Full?  The Monterey Peninsula Water Management District and the Marina Coast Water District (16 pages)
• Housing Authority of Monterey County Preserving Resources for Qualified Residents  (9 pages)
• Education A “No Excuses” Approach to English Language Learning in Monterey County (20 pages)

2014-2015 Monterey County Civil Grand Jury Report: EDUCATION A “NO EXCUSES” APPROACH TO ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNING IN MONTEREY COUNTY

ABSTRACT: The 2014-2015 Monterey County Civil Grand Jury Report “EDUCATION A “NO EXCUSES” APPROACH TO ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNING IN MONTEREY COUNTY” document copy is embedded. FINDINGS, RECOMMENDATIONS and RESPONSES REQUIRED sections are reproduced.

FINDINGS

F1. English Language Learners (ELL) in Monterey County perform far below the minimal academic standards established by the state and continue to be unprepared for college or the workplace, largely due to inadequate progress in learning English.

F2. Monterey County school districts have developed local control accountability plans (LCAP) that are producing uneven results in ELL academic achievement.

F3. The training and support MCOE (Monterey County Office of Education) offers to school districts in development of their LCAP centers primarily on achieving compliance with state requirements and does not include working together to create quality standards or ELL strategies that can produce positive results.

F4. There is an important role for MCOE to play in regularly disseminating ELL best practices and sharing successful ELL strategies countywide.

F5. There was no evidence to suggest that MCOE promotes two-way communication and a partnership approach with school districts that encourages sharing of information and resources or that solicits frank input about the needs of local English Language Learning programs from frontline educators and administrators.

F6. Although the MCOE website contains a variety of information, it is completely lacking in English Language Learner resources and best practices.

F7. There was no evidence to suggest that MCOE or any other professional organization provides opportunities for stakeholders (school boards, parents, students, staff, community members, etc.) to learn about their role and responsibilities in supporting the English Language Learner.

F8. The workshops, trainings and special programs offered by MCOE are often not well subscribed by school districts.

F9. The relatively few ELL professional development trainings that are offered by MCOE do not appear to be scheduled well enough in advance to allow for planning by school district personnel.

F10. It is very difficult for schools in southern parts of the county to take advantage of MCOE trainings, since most are offered at the Salinas location.

F11. MCOE does not offer online professional development programs/training or significant other alternative delivery systems to increase accessibility and participation.

F12. Quality professional development provided by experienced ELL experts (generally not MCOE staff) and focused on proven evidenced-based methods was identified as a need by County school districts.

F13. MCOE has one specified position for an ELL Specialist that is currently vacant.

F14. There is no operational budget beyond salary for the activities listed in the MCOE ELL Specialist job description.

F15. No professional grant writer(s) is on staff at MCOE to offer expertise, guidance and support to school districts.

RECOMMENDATIONS

All the following recommendations are for action by Monterey County Office of Education, under the direction of the Monterey County Board of Education:

R1. Work with school districts to create a set of ELL standards for use or reference in the development of districts’ LCAP, to make it easier for them to set and achieve ELL goals.

R2. Act as a resource for small school districts located in rural, distant areas of South Monterey County in meeting and exploring how they can work together to make most efficient use of shared ELL and other resources.

R3. Establish a satellite office in South Monterey County to increase accessibility and communication of County programs and services by September 2016.

R4. Take on the role of compiling and disseminating successful ELL practices and performance measurements around the County.

R5. Publish best practices and resources for all ELL stakeholder groups on the MCOE or other dedicated website by September 2016.

R6. Establish the regular practice of offering forums that bring together school district ELL personnel with their counterparts at other districts, so they can share information, explore solutions to similar problems, and share strategies and practices by January 2016.

R7. Sponsor and facilitate an annual stakeholder (i.e. representative parents, boards, students, administrators, support staff, etc.) “Summit” to help each group define its roles and responsibilities that influence the English Language Learning process starting in September

2016.

R8. Adopt or develop an online program of professional development workshops to increase access for teachers unable to attend on-site classroom training by June 2017.

R9. Begin a regular practice of soliciting input from all County school districts to determine

professional development needs as a basis for creating an annual calendar of ELL educational

services, workshops, and activities by September 2015.

R10. Make a commitment to bring the best evidence-based state and national programs and expert speakers on English Language Learning for County professional development activities.

R11. Immediately fill the English Language Learning specialist position that has been recently

vacated.

R12. Establish an operational budget for the MCOE English Language Learning specialist to carry out the full scope of duties that support professional development, open communication and cooperation among all County school districts by September 2015.

R13. Hire a full-time grant writer to consistently identify grant opportunities and develop grant applications to raise additional funds in support of district ELL programs.

R14. Benchmark and evaluate County ELL practices and services against practices used by other COEs that are successfully serving ELL stakeholders beyond state compliance requirements.

R15. Perform an organizational audit to determine optimal staffing levels at the Monterey County Office of Education that reflects the diminished scope of required COE services provided under the new Local Control Funding model.

RESPONSES REQUIRED

Pursuant to Penal Code section 933.05, the Monterey County Civil Grand Jury requests responses to all Findings and Recommendations from the following governing bodies:

• Monterey County Office of Education

• Monterey County Board of Education

Education a No Excuses Approach to English Language Learning 06-11-15 MCCGJ Report

2014-2015 Monterey County Civil Grand Jury Report
EDUCATIONA “NO EXCUSES” APPROACH TO ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNING IN MONTEREY COUNTY
June 11, 2015
(20 pages)

RESPONSE:
Civil Grand Jury education report falls short
Nancy Kotowski 8:02 p.m. PDT June 12, 2015
The Californian