ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Grand Jury Foreman’s Letter………………………………………………………..…..…………..….….iv

Grand Jury Member’s List……………………………………………………..…………….…….……….v

Grand Jury Members Disclaimer and Signature Page….………………………………..…………..…….vi

Grand Jury History and Function……………………………………………………………………...……1

California Grand Juries…………………………………………………………………………………..…2

Distribution List……………………………………………………………………….….………………...3

Responses to Grand Jury Reports……………………………………………………..……………….……4

Respondent’s Procedure……………………………………………………………..………………….…..5

Introduction………………………………………………………………………..……………………......6

High Desert State Prison…………………………………………………………..……………………..…7

California Correctional Center…………………………………………………………………..………...10

Lassen County Adult Detention Facility……………………………………………………………..……13

Lassen County Juvenile Detention Facility………………………………..………………………………15

Lassen County Health and Social Services…………………………………………..……………………17

Lassen County Public Works/Road Department……………………………………………..……………18

Lassen County Education Report……………………………………………………………………..…...26

iii

June 16, 2010The Honorable F. Donald Sokol Presiding Judge Lassen Superior Court 220 South Lassen Street Suite 6Susanville, California 96130

Dear Judge Sokol:

Please find attached the final report of the Lassen County 2009/2010 Grand Jury. This report is a collectiveeffort put forth by a group of dedicated citizens representing Lassen County. The experience of serving asthe Foreperson has been very rewarding and educational to me as well as the other members of the GrandJury.

During this year the Grand Jury reviewed several governmental agencies within Lassen County, as well asthe Lassen County school system. The Grand Jury found the representatives of these agencies to beprofessional, organized, and very knowledgeable. During these meetings the reoccurring theme was thebudget constraints placed upon the agencies due to the current economic conditions. The Grand Jurycommends the leadership of these agencies who have managed to get the job done with the resources athand during these tough economic times.

The Grand Jury takes this opportunity to thank Judge Bradbury for his leadership and guidance with issueswhich occurred during the beginning of the Grand Jury session. Additionally, we wish him well in hisretirement from service as Presiding Judge Lassen Superior Court.

The Grand Jury also thanks Suzie Faulkner, Lassen County Jury Commissioner for her assistance throughoutthe year. She was instrumental in the success of this year’s Grand Jury.

It has been an honor to have served on the Lassen County Grand Jury for the past two years. I am personallyproud to have had the opportunity to serve with the other members of Lassen County Grand Jury. Eachmember dedicated their personal time to insure that Lassen County is fairly represented.

Finally, Judge Sokol, I would like to thank you for your support and guidance. The Grand Jury recognizesthe difficulty of assuming responsibility for the Grand Jury as Presiding Judge Lassen Superior Court inmid-term.

Sincerely,

Charles Bolls Foreman

iv

MEMBERS OF THE 2009-2010 LASSEN COUNTY GRAND JURY

Charles Bolls, Foreperson*

Joanne Darlington, Secretary*____________________________

Kenneth Bishop*

Rob Deboer*

Shirley Gifford

Beverly Hibbitts

Richard Holmes

Joe Hunter*

Steve MacDonald

Lori McDonald

Max Moore

Nancy Murray

Deborah Pernot

Joseph Ritz*

Larry Rogers

Penny Valentich

Tammie Vial

Kay White*

*Retuning members from 2008-2009

v

vi

JURY MEMBERS’ DISCLAIMER AND SIGNATURESThe Grand Jury recognizes that a conflict of interest may arise in the course of its investigation. In suchinstances, the juror may ask to be recused from all aspects of an investigation. Those members may choosenot to investigate, attend interviews and deliberations, or assist in the making and acceptance of a finalreport that may result from an investigation.

Therefore, whenever the perception of a conflict of interest exists on the part of a member of the 2009-2010Lassen County Grand Jury, that member abstains from any investigation involving such a conflict andfrom voting on the acceptance or rejection of any related subject. By signing this final report, I approve iteven though I may have recused myself from, or voted against, certain individual reports which the majorityapproved.

LASSEN COUNTY GRAND JURY 2009-2010

GRAND JURY HISTORY AND FUNCTION

The first formal Grand Jury was established in Massachusetts in 1635. By 1683, Grand Juries in some formwere established in all of the colonies. The first cases considered by the Grand jury were murder, robberyand wife beating. Cases in Pennsylvania included Grand Jury indictments for: holding a disorderly meetingin 1651, witchcraft in 1683 and for other crimes in 1685. Various public evils were added to the range ofinvestigations by the Grand Jury in 1685, and began to set a precedent for future Grand Jury interests.

The original United States Constitution which was written in 1787 did not contain a reference to the GrandJury, but the Fifth Amendment provided the remedy for the omission. It states: “No person shall be heldto answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a GrandJury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time ofWar or public danger…”

The fourteenth amendment in 1868 made most of the provisions of the Bill of Rights applicable to theStates. Some of the states have interpreted this amendment to mean that prosecution of crimes no longermandated a Grand Jury indictment. A study done by Deborah Day Emerson in the year 1984, shows thatfour states require a Grand Jury indictment for all crimes, 14 states and the District of Columbia requireindictments for all felonies, six states mandate Grand Jury indictments for capital crimes only, 25 states(including California) make indictments optional. In a single state, Pennsylvania, the Grand Jury lacks thepower to indict.

1

CALIFORNIA GRAND JURIES

The California Penal Code describes the organization, powers and the duties, and general structure of theGrand Jury. All of California’s 58 counties are required to have Grand Juries. There have been recentchanges in Section 904.6 of the Penal Code (1991) which permits any county to have an additional GrandJury at the discretion of the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court. The Penal Code also allows countydistrict attorney’s the option of utilizing special Grand Juries in the handling of criminal cases. Althoughthis alternative is offered in Penal Code §904.6, some counties choose to maintain their regular use ofGrand Jury for criminal and civil duties.

The major function of a Civil Grand Jury is to oversee all aspects of the legislative and administrativedepartments that make up county, city and special district governments. It has the power to examine andguarantee that those who are given the responsibility of managing these offices are: truthful, dedicated, andsincere in their efforts to serve the public. There are forty-two states that have some form of Grand Jury,but California and Nevada mandate the impaneling of a Grand Jury each year. The Lassen County GrandJury is a judicial body of nineteen (19) citizens impaneled to watch over the citizens of Lassen County.

Grand jurors are forbidden by law, to disclose any evidence acquired during investigations, or disclose thenames of complainants or witnesses.

After investigations are completed, it is the responsibility of the Grand Jury to recommend changes thatshould be made in order to increase efficiency, and improve services to the general public. Some of therecommendations made by the Grand Jury are to save the taxpayer money.

Special commendations may be made to departments or agencies for excellence in management. Thereports that are released to the public, have been collected, voted on by the 12 members, and the resultscarefully edited by the editing committee for a Final Report at the end of the 2009-2010 Grand Jury’s termof office.

The Final Lassen County Grand Jury Report is distributed to the public and to public officials. Itsdistribution also includes: Lassen County Times newspaper, KSUE/KJDX radio station, the SusanvilleLibrary and is available in the Jury Commissioner’s office at 220 S. Lassen Street, Susanville, California96130. The telephone number is (530) 251-8109.

2

DISTRIBUTION LIST

Lassen County: Education:

Superior Court Judge F. Donald Sokol Lassen County Office of Education

Board of Supervisors (5) Lassen Community College Board of Trustees (7)

District Attorney President of Lassen Community College

Sheriff Long Valley Elementary School District

County Counsel Big Valley High School District

Treasurer/Tax Collector Shaffer Elementary School District

Chief Administrative Officer Johnstonville Elementary School District

Probation Department Susanville Elementary School District

Department of Child Protective Services Lassen Union High School District

Fair Department Westwood Unified School District

Health and Social Services Department Janesville Elementary School District

Public Works/Roads Department Richmond Elementary School District

Community Development and Planning Department

OTHERS:

City of Susanville: State of California Attorney General’s Office

City Council (5) Lassen County Times Newspaper

City Administrative Officer KSUE/KJDX Radio Station

Community Development Department Susanville District Library

Corrections Facilities: 2009-2010 Grand Jurors

California Correctional Center California Grand Jurors’ Association

High Desert State Prison Susan River Fire District

3

RESPONSES TO GRAND JURY REPORTSSUMMARY OF PC 933.05

A compendium of all codes pertaining to Grand Jury was produced by the Governor’s Office of Planningand Research. This document is available to Grand Juries through the Superior Court in respective counties.Since the compendium was assembled the following has become law:

Penal Code §933.05 provides for only two (2) acceptable responses with which agencies and/or departments(respondents) may respond with respect to the findings of a Grand Jury report:

1. The respondent agrees with the finding.

2. The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the findings, in which case therespondent shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall includean explanation of the reasons therefore.

Penal Code §933.05 provides for only four (4) acceptable responses with which agencies and/or departments(respondents) may respond with respect to the recommendations of the Grand Jury:

1. The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action.

2. The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be in the future, with a time frame for implementation.

3. The recommendation requires future analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis, with a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency/department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six (6) months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury Report.

4. The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with a detailed explanation therefore.

However, if a finding and/or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel mattersof a county agency/department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the GrandJury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel mattersover which it has some decision making authority. The response of the elected agency or department headshall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency/department.

4

RESPONSE PROCEDURE TO GRAND JURY REPORTSSUMMARY OF PC §933.05

The governance of responses to Grand Jury Final Report is contained in Penal Code §933 and §933.05.Responses must be submitted within 60 to 90 days. Elected officials must respond within 60 days.Governing bodies (for example: the Board of Supervisors) must respond within 90 days. Please submitall responses in writing and digital format to the Presiding Judge, the Grand Jury Foreperson and the CEO’soffice.

Report Title:______________________________________ Report Date:_________________

Response By:______________________________________ Title:_______________________

Findings:I (we) agree with the findings numbered:

______________________________________________________________________

I (we) disagree wholly or partially with the findings numbered:

______________________________________________________________________

Recommendations:

Recommendations numbered:______________________________________________have been implemented. (Attach a summary describing the implemented actions)

Recommendations numbered:______________________________________________require further analysis. (Attach an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer and/or director of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed; including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six (6) months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury Report).

Recommendations numbered:_____________________________________________will not be implemented because they are not warranted and/or are not reasonable.(Attach an explanation)

Date:______________________Signed:_____________________________________________

Total number of pages attached:_________

5

INTRODUCTION

The Lassen County Grand Jury received ten (10) written complaints during the fiscal year of 2009-2010.As the letters and formal complaints were received and presented to the Grand Jury, there was carefulconsideration of each complaint as to the validity and content. Each grievance was inspected and actedupon in a professional and conscientious manner by the Grand Jury. Confidentiality has been strictlymaintained as Grand Jury members were cautioned throughout the 2009-2010 term by the Jury Foreman,Charles Bolls.

The following Grand Jury Reports are based on interviews and information which was brought to theattention and investigated by the Grand Jury.

6

HIGH DESERT STATE PRISON

Reason for Inquiry: California Penal Code § 919(b) mandates that the Grand Jury “inquire into theconditions and management of all detention facilities within their county.”

The 2009-2010 Lassen County Grand Jury received one (1) complaint from an inmate incarcerated at HighDesert State Prison (HDSP).

Background: HDSPopened in 1995 and islocated on 325 acres,adjacent to the CaliforniaCorrectional Center(CCC), seven milesnortheast of Susanville.The primary mission ofHDSP is to provide asecure environment forhigh security risk (LevelIV) and high-mediumsecurity risk (Level III)inmates. The minimumsupport facility (MSF)and the reception center(RC) were originallydesigned to house 200inmates. Additionally, theHDSP houses 1120sens i t ive needs yardinmates. The HDSP isdesigned to house inmates with disabilities who require specialized placement to accommodate accessibilityissues.

HDSP provides educational programs and work assignments for inmates.

There is a Correctional Treatment Center (CTC) to provide for Health Care.

The 2009/2010, Lassen County Grand Jury toured HDSP on October 27, 2009.

Findings: Overall Assessment for High Desert State Prison as of fiscal year 2009/2010, the followingstatistics apply:Number of Custody staff: 997Number of Support Services staff: 534Total number of staff: 1,531

7

Designated Bed Space and Count:Facility Level Design Capacity CountI 200 304II Unavailable Unavailable III 300 709IV 1,516 2,844Reception Center 200 570ASU 456 323Total 2,672 4,750The above figures can change on a daily basis.

Staffing: The staffing of Correctional Officers at HDSP has continued to improve over the past fiscal year.HDSP has continued to struggle with cuts from the State cutting 15% of Correctional Officers pay. Theeducation program is also seeing cuts this year with cuts in staff. The prison offers academic education forthe inmate population. Academic classes provide instruction to upgrade math and reading skills, with anultimate goal of achieving a GED. In December 2004, HDSP implemented a high school diploma programassisting inmates in obtaining a high school diploma.

Facilities: During our tour of HDSP, the Lassen County Grand Jury visited Facility “A,” the Grand Juryinspected a plumbing chase. The plumbing chases have been repaired; the electrical lights/sockets beingexposed to water leaking from the plumbing have been removed and repaired since the last Grand Jury visit,all work orders have been submitted to the Grand Jury showing repairs.

Medical Services: The Lassen County Grand Jury walked through the Correctional Treatment Center(CTC). HDSP operates a 32 bed licensed, Correctional Treatment Center (CTC) which provides emergencymedical services, emergency dental care, and mental health crisis care. Currently under the FederalReceivership, the CDCR, Health Care Services Division has been mandated to expand to current HDSPmedical services buildings. Each Facility A, B, C, D, and E all currently have a clinic on the yard. Fivenew buildings will be built on the respective yards, as well as support buildings and a new MedicalAdministrative Building. (Due to budget cuts, all five buildings were cancelled.)

Community Activities: It is important to note the efforts made by HDSP employees that contribute to theneeds of our local community. Fundraising is a large part of HDSP. The Warden directs the annual HolidayFood Basket Program at HDSP. The funds raised through this program go to the clients of the Far NorthernRegional Center in Susanville and provides Christmas presents to families and children staying in thedomestic violence shelter in Susanville. For the last four years, HDSP employees have donated funds andapproximately 150 holiday food baskets have been delivered each year to the clients of the Far NorthernRegional Center.

The American Cancer Society sponsors a “Daffodils Days” where HDSP employees are offered anopportunity to purchase daffodils to raise money for cancer treatment and research, as well as for promotingeducation and awareness. This is a popular program according to the information that has been receivedand employees continue to donate over a thousand dollars a year.

8

Each year HDSP conducts a chili cook off to benefit the victims of crime in conjunction with the NationalCrime Victim’s Rights Week (April 18-24). Employees cook their own chili, bring it into the institutionand compete for the title of best chili. The cost for employees to sample all of the chili is two dollars perperson. All proceeds from the event are collected at the door by representatives from Lassen Family Serviceshere in Susanville. The Warden and Chief Deputy Warden judge the competitors and award a grandprizewinner.

Recommendations: None.

Response Required: None.

9

CALIFORNIA CORRECTIONAL CENTER

Reason for Inquiry: California Penal Code § 919(b) mandates that the Grand Jury “inquire into theconditions and management of all detention facilities within their county.”

Background:Opened in 1963, theCalifornia CorrectionalCenter’s (CCC) primarymission within theCalifornia Departmentof Corrections andRehabilitation (CDCR) isto receive, house andtrain minimum custodyinmates for placementinto Northern Californiaconservation camps.CCC currently maintains19 camps, locatedthroughout NorthernCalifornia, to work withthe California Department ofForestry and Fire Protectionin fire–suppression activities. The secondary mission is to provide meaningful work assignments for thesupport of the institution, as well as educational and training opportunities for inmates, including thosewho do not qualify for the camp program. A multi-level educational program provides students withcourses leading to a General Education Degree (GED), vocational training, or a high school diploma.College classes are also offered that can lead to a college degree.

CCC expanded in 1987 with construction of the Lassen Unit, specifically to house Level III (mediumcustody) inmates in a cell configuration. Lassen Unit has an electric fence for security.The 2009-2010 Lassen County Grand Jury visited the California Correctional Center on January 22, 2010.

Findings: Overall Assessment for California Correctional CenterNumber of Custody staff: 798Number of Non-Custody staff: 319Number of Medical staff: 150Total number of staff: 1267

10

As of fiscal year 2009-2010, the following statistics apply:Facility Level Design Capacity CountI (Cascade/Arnold Unit) 1557 1535II (Sierra/Main Gym) 1203 1224III (Lassen Unit) 950 933Camps 2029 1823 Total Inmate Population: 5739 5559

Wastewater and Water Conservation Update:

The Susanville Wastewater Treatment Plant Modifications include the following:• Construction of three new earthen treatment ponds and three effluent storage ponds involving

650,000 cubic yards of earthwork.• Installation of 60 mil HDPE liner material in 115 acres of six new ponds and five existing storage

ponds.• The replacement of all headwork’s equipment.• Construction of a new storage facility building.• Construction of two major recirculation pumping stations.• Installation of a new effluent disposal center pivot (254 acre) irrigation system.• Construction of more than 5.3 miles of 32”, 24”, 18”, and 16” HDPE buried piping.

Laundry: During the tour of the laundry area, the Grand Jury noted that the clean laundry and dirty laundryareas are being kept separate. The clean laundry is brought in through one sally-port door and the dirtylaundry is brought in through a different sally-port door, never crossing the clean with the dirty laundry.The folding tables are wiped down with sanitizer between each load of clean laundry.

Main Kitchen: During the tour of the kitchen area the Grand Jury did not see any standing water oroutstanding issues. OSHA did an inspection on April 22, 2009 and found no problems with the floor in thekitchen. California Correctional Center also had an inspection done by an outside engineer, whom alsofound no problems with the kitchen floor.

Pups on Parole: Pups on Parole is a partnership between the California Correctional Center and theLassen County Humane Society. The program which saves dog’s lives is also intended to help with therehabilitation of inmates. Currently, they have seven kennels, 124 pups have been adopted by the publicsince June 21, 2007. The dogs get individualized obedience training at the firehouse.

11

Education Accomplishments for 2009General Educational Development/High School Diplomas: 125College Students: 116Physical Fitness Training: 1507Academic Students currently enrolled: 477Vocational Students: 1288

The education program has applied and received grants for 15 smart boards in their class rooms.

The CCC holds self-help Groups for inmates. In 2009 the Self-Help Group attendance was as follows:

AA Meetings: 5264NA Meetings: 1986All Other Self-Help: 3747Religious, Services: 17990

Youth Diversion: This program began in 2008. Youths must be 18 years of age or older to participate.The inmates volunteer to share their story with the youths on probation. Each month a seven to eight hoursession is conducted. Inmates also participate in the “Every 15-Minutes” program at local high schools.

Commendations: The Grand Jury would like to commend the staff of the California Correctional Centerfor their efforts in supporting the community through charitable contributions, and work with youth in thecommunity.

Recommendations: The Grand Jury was not met by the Warden or his designated representative uponarriving at the Correctional Center. This is a recurring problem which was noted in last years GrandJury Report. The Grand Jury believes there is a lackadaisical attitude towards their official visit. It isrecommended that prior to visits, the California Correctional Center refine their protocol procedures forgreeting official visitors.

Response Required: Yes.

12

LASSEN COUNTY ADULT DETENTION FACILITY

Reason for Inquiry: The California Penal Code 919(b) mandates that the Grand Jury “inquire into thecondition and management of all detention facilities within their county.”

Inquiry Procedures: The Grand Jury toured the Lassen County Adult Detention Facility (LCADF).Members walked through the facility with the presence of command staff.

Background: The LCADF is located on Sheriff Cady Lane in Susanville California near the Lassen CountyJuvenile Detention Facility (JDF) and next door to the Lassen County Sheriff’s Office. The current facilitywas built in 1991 to house both county and state inmates.

Facility:

The kitchen was clean and well organized. The culinary staff is assisted by 12-18 inmates per shift, twoshifts each day. The kitchen provides thousands of meals per year to LCADF and JDF.

The equipment in the kitchen with the exception of a new oven is old and in need of replacement. One ofthe steam jacketed kettles used for preparing soups and other meals is slow to heat and at times pops thecircuit breakers. Another steam kettle does not work. The dish washer is outdated and is repaired on amonthly basis.

The grills have no knobs and do not heat evenly. We were informed exposed electrical wires, when theyget wet, also cause the circuit breaker(s) to trip.

The LCADF heating and air conditioning system does not function properly. We were told by staff thatthe heating system is either “on or off”. The thermostats’ throughout the building do not control thedesired temperature causing inmate complaints about being too cold or to warm. The heating systemcurrently needs to be “manually” turned on or off from inside the facility maintenance shop.

The Grand Jury members were told the control boards which allow inmate movement and the locking andun-locking of doors throughout the facility are outdated and replacement parts for them are becoming moredifficult to locate.

While walking through the facility we observed numerous water stains on the interior of the roof, loungeand inside the inmate dorm areas. The water stains were reportedly from design flaws and twenty-yearsof weather exposure.

The LCADF operates a motor pool program on the site for county vehicles. A crew of approximately6-12 inmates works inside the area.

The LCADF operates an outside state inmate work crew consisting of 8-12 inmates who work in thecommunity completing various work projects, snow removal, fire breaks and other tasks.

13

The crew works at different sites throughout the county and completes many hours of service for theBureau of Land Management, United States Forest Service, City of Susanville and many other agencies.

At present only one state inmate crew is being operated. In years past, LCADF utilized two state inmatecrews and one county crew throughout Lassen County.

Staffing: The LCADF has a staff of approximately sixty employees. This consists of sworn andnon-sworn staff. At the time of our visit LCADF had one correctional officer vacancy. Two correctionalofficer vacancies have been frozen as a result of the 2009-2010 budgets. A teaching position was alsovacant during our tour.

All correctional officers are required to obtain 176 hours of CORE training at a cost of approximately$1,600 per staff member. This is one-time required training for each new correctional officer. Eachcorrectional officer is required to receive 24 hours of training each year as set forth by the CaliforniaDepartment of Corrections and Standards Authority. Training records are audited every year by CorrectionsStandards Authority and have received an above average report each year.

Staffing Equipment: While speaking with LCADF staff, it was observed, the majority of the staffcarried only one piece of personal protection equipment. None of the officers carried collapsible batons andsome did not even carry some type of chemical agents for protection. While walking through the SpecialHousing Unit, which houses pre-sentenced and sentenced inmates on various violent and non-violentcharges, members of the Grand Jury observed a lone officer in charge of the unit. The only personalprotection was a small can of chemical agent.

Recommendations: The Sheriff’s Office should seek funding for upgrades and replacement of worn outequipment in the facilities kitchen area. The Sheriff’s Office should seek funding to upgrade the twenty-yearold facility in regards to the HVAC system, roof, control boards and overall repairs that are needed.

The Sheriff’s Office should provide adequate levels of personal protection equipment for its staff as wellas the required training.

Response Required: Yes.

14

LASSEN COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION FACILITY

Reason for Inquiry: California Penal Code § 919(b) mandates that the Grand Jury “Inquire into thecondition and management of all detention facilities within their county.”

Inquiry Procedures: The Grand Jury met with Letha Martin, Lassen County Chief Probation Officer; andKen Crandall, Lassen County Mental Health Director. The Grand Jury toured the Lassen County JuvenileDetention Facility (LCJDF) on November 9, 2009.

Background: In June 2000, the original facility was upgraded to accommodate 50 juveniles, but due tobudgetary restraints, the facility currently houses only 20 juveniles with no plans of increasing thatnumber. A Group Home has been opened on the other side of the Juvenile Detention Facility renting thespace from Lassen County.

Findings: Facility and Placements: At the time of the Grand Jury’s visit, the facility appeared clean andwell organized. The staff was cooperative and responded to all questions asked by jury members.

The average length of stay for juveniles detained in the LCJDF is three to four weeks, but juveniles havebeen detained for as long as fifteen months.

Parents of detained juveniles residing in the LCJDF are charged as much as $15.00 per day. The charge isbased on the parent’s income using a sliding scale. Plumas, Sierra, and Modoc Counties contract withLassen County to house juveniles at the LCJDF. A per diem rate of $110.00 for each 24-hour period ischarged to those counties for each detained juvenile. A reimbursement charge is also collected formedical, psychological, and educational services. There are a limited number of out-of-county juvenileshoused at the LCJDF.

Lassen County also contracts with Crystal Creek Juvenile Detention Facility, the Bar-O-Boys Ranch, andthe Fouts Springs Youth Facility for placement of juveniles committed to camp. High-risk offenders aretransferred and housed with the California Youth Authority at a cost of $4,000 to $6,000 per month.

Security: The LCJDF currently uses video cameras that are placed strategically around the facility tomonitor activity. These cameras do not have the ability to record and are only used for monitoring. TheLCJDF staff expressed a need for a recording system for the facility, as it would document incidents thatoccur and would greatly assist with the safety and security of the facility. The LCJDF staff is pursuing fundingto upgrade their video system. This issue continues to be brought before the Grand Jury’s attention year afteryear with no resolution due to budget constraints.

Staffing: The Grand Jury inquired about the current staffing levels at LCJDF. They were in compliancewith California Code of Regulation, Title 15, Section 1320 and 1321 in regard to appointment and staffing.Although the facility is being staffed at the required levels, the turnover rate appears to impact their abilityto retain experienced detention officers. Lower wages and benefits in Lassen County compared to othercounties seem to be a direct result of staff turnover and lack of staff retention.

15

Training: All LCJDF staff members receive 20 hours of initial training on site and 170 hours of CoreTraining at an academy. Additionally, all employees receive a minimum of 40 hours of PC 832.5 off posttraining per year. With staffing turnover rates, it is a challenge to keep up with required training.

Services Offered: The LCJDF is primarily a housing facility and provides limited rehabilitation programsand services to detained juveniles. The services offered include the following:Education: The County Office of Education provides a teacher and an assistant who conducts daily classeson site. Individual educational programs are developed and followed for each student. The classroom wasfurnished as a public school classroom, computer workstations, desks, and bulletin board displayingstudent’s projects.

The students in the education program receive transferable credits for completed classes.Alcohol and Drug Programs: Lassen County Drug and Alcohol provides an Alcoholic Anonymouscounselor and/or volunteer 16 to 20 hours per week.Health and Dental Care: Medical care is provided daily through a county contract with Dr. Hal Meadows.Dr. Meadows also monitors psychological medications that have been prescribed by Dr. Shep Green ofLassen County Mental Health.

Dental care is provided through a county contract with the Susanville Dental Group.

Commendations: The Grand Jury commends the Lassen County Probation Department, the LassenCounty Department of Mental Health, and the Lassen County Juvenile Detention Facility for initiating aprogram to improve mental health services for detained juveniles.

Recommendations: Security: The Grand Jury recommends that the Lassen County Juvenile DetentionFacility staff continue to pursue every course available to secure additional funding for a video recordingand monitoring system. The Grand Jury recommends that the Lassen County Juvenile Detention Facilitystaff look into some vocational trade classes for the juveniles while in the facility, such as a communitygarden or small engine repair. Additionally, it is recommended that the issue of staff retention be addressed,and efforts to upgrade the pay and benefits for the staff working at LCJDF. The Grand Jury recognizes theLassen County Supervisor’s oversight of the LCJDF budget: however, the issues mentioned in the GrandJury’s recommendations are a note-worthy concern that still has not been addressed.

Response Required: No.

16

LASSEN COUNTY HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICESCHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES

Reason for Inquiry: One complaint, review procedures and policies pertinent to complaint.

Inquiry Procedure: The Grand Jury met with Teri O’Brien, Director of the Child Protective Services. Shegave a detailed overview of the functions and state mandated requirements of the Child ProtectiveServices.

Background: The Child Protective Services employs a staff of ten social workers whose classificationsrange from CPS II to CPS IV. There are supervisors for emergency cases and court cases, while unit clerksor office assistants handle the phones and paperwork. Presently, the department receives approximately45 reports of abuse per month. Sources include teachers, school bus drivers and others. All incidents arescreened and many are determined to be unfounded, inconclusive or substantiated. This process iscompleted by a social worker utilizing a computerized risk assessment tool and interviews. For emergencysituations, children are placed in a “certified home” for two weeks while the investigation proceeds.Following a state mandated process and court proceedings, a judge will determine the placement of thechild/children. Cases are reviewed every six months. At the 12 months evaluation in a placement case(Foster care, living with a relative), a determination is made as to performance. At present, there are 48children in placement. The department’s goal is “children will remain in the family home only when it is safe.”

Recommendations: None.

Commendation: The Lassen County Grand Jury commends Mrs. O’Brien and the Child ProtectiveServices for maintaining a process that satisfies the needs of the youth in Lassen County.

17

LASSEN COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS/ROAD DEPARTMENT

Reason for Inquiry: Public Interest

Inquiry Procedures: On November 12, 2009 the Grand Jury interviewed Mr. Larry Millar Director ofPublic Works and Director of Public Transportation.

Background: Mr. Millar furnished the Grand Jury with a written “Overview of the Public Works Department”which gave a relatively complete picture of the operation of the Department.

Findings: The Department appears to be well organized and managed. As with all County departments,budget constraints dictate the extent of activities within various divisions.

Commendation: Mr. Millar came to the Grand Jury well prepared for his interview and demonstrated thathe has a significant understanding of his department and his duties.

Recommendations: Continue working with Diamond Mountain Casino to arrive at a memorandum ofunderstanding regarding the County roads that service the Casino and some land near Herlong. Thiseffort is to encourage the Casino, et al for the mutual benefit of all parties.

Response Required: None

The Lassen County Department of Public Works is comprised of five (5) main divisions which includeRoads, Public Works, Transportation, Surveyor and Natural Resources. These main divisions are furtherbroken down into the following units and/or budget units:

1) Road: (Operating, Construction, Traffic Relief)

2) Public Works: (Building and Grounds, Parks, Animal Control, Rabies Control, Cemeteries, Aviation,Capital Projects)

3) Transportation: (Local Transportation, Lassen Transit Service Agency, Local Transportation FundAccount, State Transit Assistance Fund Account)

4) Surveyor: (Surveyor)

5) Natural Resources: (Susanville Ranch Park)

The Department of Public Works overall Mission Statement is as follows:“Department of Transportation/Public Works is charged with the responsibility to plan, design, construct,operate and maintain the public roads, bridges, facilities (buildings), drainage, parks, airports, cemeteriesand public transportation of the County as well as administer and manage the animal control, rabies controland surveying functions for the County and the public. This overall mission is to protect the health and welfareof the public and to preserve the County’s infrastructure investment.”

18

Road Division: The Road Division includes the Road Operating Budget, the Road Construction Budgetand the Traffic Relief Budget.

The Road Operating Budget is responsible forthe day to day administration, operation andmaintenance of the County Road System whichcurrently consists of 881 miles (2008 CountyMaintained Road Mileage) and 59 bridges. Thisincludes the labor force of 39.65 Full TimeEquivalents (FTE) as well as the equipment andvehicles. The overall County is divided into fiveRoad Districts which are similar to the SupervisorDistrict Boundaries

The Department utilizes a mix of purchasingmaterials from outside vendors and Countymanufacturing in order to do the most for thelimited dollars available to maintain the Countyroads and bridge system. The Department is alsoresponsible for snow removal, flood control andassisting with other natural disasters. Fundingconsists of restricted State and Federal fundswith no General Fund contribution.

The current FY 2009/2010 road operating budgetis $6,574,846 which is approximately the sameas last FY. The department currently has four (4) vacant positions (two (2) in engineering and two (2) onthe road crew) which they plan to not fill until funding becomes more stable.

The Road Construction Budget includes rehabilitation and construction projects within the County MaintainedRoad System which utilize State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) funding or other State andFederal Funding. These types of projects may consist of asphalt concrete overlay projects, bridge and roadrehabilitation projects, bridge replacement projects and new road construction projects. The current FY2009/2010 road construction budget is $9,131,613 which is an approximate 5% decrease from last FY.Projects included within this year’s budget are Skyline Road Extension, Leavitt Lane Bridge replacement,Lambert Lane Bridge replacements (2 structures) and the Termo-Grasshopper overlay project. TheTermo-Grasshopper project was funded with stimulus funding.

The Traffic Relief Budget includes projects which utilize Traffic Relief Funding. These projects includeasphalt concrete overlay projects, chip seal projects and maintenance projects. Generally, the Departmentutilizes this funding for materials and utilizes the Road Department equipment and labor force to maximizethe amount of work which can be accomplished. The current FY 2009/2010 traffic relief budget of$1,200,064 is for the anticipated proposition 42 funds that are expected. These funds will be utilized fora chip seal project for Richmond Road and Gold Run Road.

19

20

The Public Works Division is further divided into Building and Grounds, Parks, Animal Control, RabiesControl, Cemeteries, Aviation and Capital Projects.

The Building and Grounds Division isresponsible for the administration andfacility work for the maintenance,custodial and minor construction/remodeling of Lassen County’sfacilities (buildings and grounds).These include facilities locatedthroughout the County. In addition,this Division provides custodial andgeneral maintenance services to severalLeased Buildings. The Building andGrounds Division is responsible forthe utilities for the majority of theCounty facilities. Funding isthrough the General Fund with somereimbursement through other CountyDepartments for specific maintenanceprojects and through rental fees for some of thebuildings. The current FY 2009/2010 building andgrounds budget is $894,710 which is an approximate8% decrease from last FY. This budget consists ofa total of 8.12 full-time employees (FTE) with onevacant position (building and grounds worker) which they are not planning onfilling.

Lassen County Buildings1) Bieber Library2) Westwood Library, Westwood Community Center3) Jolly Elders4) Doyle Community Center5) Standish 4-H6) Campfire USA, Agricultural Administration, Alexander Street, Courthouse, CourthouseAnnex

The Parks Division is responsible for the administration, maintenance, and construction of park facilitieswithin Lassen County. As the majority of the park facilities have been constructed utilizing State ParkGrants the County is required to maintain them in a safe and operational condition. Funding for the day today maintenance of these facilities is through the General Fund for services and supplies while the laborforce is through the Building and Grounds Division and through Inmate Work Crews. The current FY2009/2010 parks budget is $25,470 which is an approximate 16% decrease from last FY.

Lassen County Parks1) Beiber2) Little Valley3) Stones Boat Ramp4) Spalding Boat Ramp5) Lake Forest6) Susanville Ranch7) Johnstonville8) Janesville9) Lake Leavitt

10) Milford11) Cowboy Joe12) Dixon13) Doyle14) Clear Creek

The Animal Control Division is responsible for the administration and operation of the Animal Shelter forthe County and the City of Susanville. This includes assisting the Rabies Control Division with thelicensing and handling of dogs and cats and public health and safety as it relates to animals. Another majorrole is to oversee the Adoption Program for dogs and cats. This Division is responsible for the utility costsand other expenses in operating the Animal Shelter. Funding consists of a General Fund contribution in theamount of 60% of the annual budget for the County and 40% from the City of Susanville. The current FY2009/2010 animal control budget is $134,895 which is an approximate 16% decrease from last FY. Thisbudget consists of a total of 1.5 FTE.

21

The Rabies Control Division is responsible for the administration and operation of the animal controlprogram for the County. This program is responsible for the protection of the public health and safety byassuring that all dogs and cats are vaccinated and licensed for rabies. It is also responsible for the handlingof complaints regarding vicious and dangerous animals, picking up stray, injured, sick or dead animals,removing stray and abandoned animals, and providing assistance with other problems associated with thecontrol of animals. Funding consists generally of State funding with General Fund contribution whennecessary. The current FY 2009/2010 rabies control budget is $124,978 which is approximately the sameas last FY. This budget consists of a total of 2.1 0 FTE.

The Cemetery Division is responsible for the administration, maintenance and operation of LassenCounty’s fourteen cemetery sites located throughout the County. This Division is also responsible for theutilities at each of these facilities.Funding consists of a portion ofproperty taxes and revenuesfrom the sale of grave sites,however, a General Fundcontribution is generally alsorequired to meet the annualbudget. This Division also reliesheavily on assistance from InmateWork Crews. The current FY2009/2010 cemetery budgetis $148,370 which isapproximately 1 % down fromlast FY. This budget consists of atotal of 1.25 FTE.

Lassen County Cemetaries1) Bieber 8) Susanville2) Madeline 9) Westwood3) Ash Valley 10) Diamond Valley4) Dry Valley 11) Stacy5) Ravendale 12) Janesville6) Secret Valley 13) Milford7) Lassen 14) Doyle

22

The Aviation Division is responsiblefor the administration, operation andmaintenance of Lassen County’sfour airports located throughout theCounty (see attached map). ThisDivision is also responsible for theutilities at each of these facilities.Funding consists of State Fundingfor the day to day operation andState and Federal Grants for capitalimprovement projects. The currentFY 2009/2010 aviation budget is$384,288 which is an approximate5% decrease from last fiscal year.This budget consists of a total of0.15 FTE and funding for twoimprovement projects (Spauldingairport widening and Ravendaleairport crack sealing and stripping).

The Capital Projects Budget is responsible for the administration of Capital Projects for the County. Thisincludes significant building maintenance, renovation or improvements as well as the current park projectsunder the 2002 Park Bond Grant. Funding consists of State and Federal funds as well as some GeneralFund contribution. The current FY 2009/2010 capital projects budget is $703,000 which consists mainlyof the completion of park improvement projects (Janesville, Lake Forest, Leavitt Lake, Doyle and Spaulding)which were funded through a Per Capita State Park Grant.

The Transportation Division includes the Local Transportation Budget, Lassen Transit Service AgencyBudget, Local Transportation Fund Account and the State Transit Assistance Fund Account.

The Local Transportation Budget is responsible for the administration and planning of transportation forthe Lassen County Transportation Commission (LCTC) which is a joint commission of the City ofSusanville and Lassen County. County employees act as support staff for the Lassen County Transportation

23

Lassen County Airports1) Beiber2) Spaulding3) Ravendale4) Herlong5) Susanville

Commission. These salaries as well as operating expenses are paid out of this budget. The majority ofthe funding for this budget is through Regional Planning Assistance (RPA) funding as well as LocalTransportation Funds. The current FY 2009/2010 transportation budget is $652,631 which is approximatelythe same as last FY. This budget unit consists of a total of 2.37 FTE which is up slightly from last FY.

The Lassen Transit Service Agency Budget is responsible for the administration, operation andmaintenance of the Lassen Rural Bus System and the administration and planning for the LassenTransit Service Agency (LTSA) which is a joint agency of the City of Susanville and the County of Lassen.County employees act as support staff for the Lassen Transit Service Agency. The LTSA contracts with MYTransportation, Inc. to provide the operation of the Lassen Rural Bus System which consists of a fixedroute with complementary Dial-a-Ride service to the City of Susanville and routes from Susanville toHerlong, Doyle and Westwood areas as well as with Lassen Senior Services for specialized transportationservices to the elderly and disabled. In addition, the LTSA contracts for taxi services. The funding for thisbudget is through Transportation Development Act Funds in both Local Transportation Funds and StateTransit Funds. Additional funding is also provided through Federal Assistance Funds. The current FY2009/2010 LTSA budget is $2,715,654 which is an approximate 30% increase over last FY. The increasefunding is contributed to the receipt of some grant funding and stimulus funding we were successful inobtaining for the purchase of 2 replacement buses and for some capital work to the bus shop (addingsecurity fencing and adding on to the existing shop facility with an additional shop bay).

The Local Transportation Fund Account was created to track the Local Transportation Fund. Revenuesfrom the Local Transportation Fund (1/4 cent local sales tax) from the State are received in this accountand then are subsequently distributed to eligible claimants which are Lassen County, City of Susanville andthe Lassen Transit Service Agency. The current FY 2009/2010 LTF budget is $2,301,883 which is anincrease over last FY due to the additional grant and stimulus funding.

The State Transit Assistance Fund Account was created to track the State Transit Assistance Funds whichare distributed throughout the State to transportation planning agencies. These funds are received into thisaccount and then are subsequently distributed to eligible claimant’s which is the Lassen Transit ServiceAgency. This funding may only be used for transit. The current FY 2009/2010 STA budget is $356,214which is an approximate 14% decrease from last FY. This is due to a decrease in State revenues.

The Surveyor Division is responsible for providing services to the public and various governmentalagencies and in providing the mandated review of Final Maps, Parcel Maps, Record of Surveys, CornerRecords, and Legal Descriptions and their conformance with State and Local Ordinances. In addition, theDivision is responsible with coordinating of the physical address system for the County. Staffing consistsof County employees to complete the day to day operation of the Division and the use Consultants toprovide the function of Deputy County Surveyor and the final review and stamping. Currently thisDivision must contract out for the services of County Surveyor as they have been unable to successfullyretain a Licensed Surveyor on staff. Funding consists of fees for providing these services as well asGeneral Fund contribution providing these services. FY 2009/2010 surveyor budget is $132,402 which isapproximately the same as last FY. This budget has a total of 1.07 FTE.

24

The Natural Resources Division is responsible for providing administration, maintenance, constructionand planning for the Susanville Ranch Park which is a 1,100 acre shared use recreation area. In addition,this Division is responsible for overall trail planning and coordination for the entire County. Funding con-sists of contributions from BLM, County of Lassen and the Lassen County Transportation Commission.The current FY 2009/2010 natural resources budget is $110,604 which is an approximate 20% decreasefrom last fiscal year, mainly due to lack of some grant funding they were able to obtain in last year’s budget.This budget unit has a total 1.0 FTE.

25

LASSEN COUNTY EDUCATION REPORT

Office of Education Report

On August 19, 2009, Mr. Jud Jensen, Superintendent of Schools for Lassen County, provided the Grand Jurywith the status of Westwood School District’s finances. Mr. Jensen gave a detailed account of hisinvolvement with the Westwood School District finances, why he got involved and what the findings werewhich were presented to him by the Fiscal Crisis & Management Assistance Team (FCMAT). The FCMATrepresents the State of California in regards to finance and school districts. The findings from FCMATdocumented many irregularities in the finances of Westwood School District, Westwood Charter School andWestwood Charter School Services Inc. This matter has been referred to District Attorney Bob Burns andhe forwarded it to the State Attorney General’s Office. The state has assigned a prosecutor to work on thiscase. The Grand Jury commends Mr. Jensen for his detailed report and his efforts on behalf of theresidents of Lassen County.

Lassen Union High School

On October 21, 2009, Dr. Todd Cutler, Lassen Union High School Superintendent, spoke to the LassenCounty Grand Jury. Dr. Cutler provided a very frank and honest presentation regarding Lassen HighSchool. He began by saying that Lassen Union High School (LUHS) is in fairly good financial shape at thistime but must be ready to deal with further cuts in education the State of California is expected to make.His goals for the future include improving student academic success, improving teaching delivery systemsto students, and improving LUHS relationship with the communities it serves. Dr. Cutler provided verydetailed and down to earth ideas and methods to achieve these goals in the future. He was passionate inhis resolve to make LUHS the best school it can be.

Dr. Cutler has met with Dr. Douglas Houston, President of Lassen Community College (LCC), to improvethe relationship between the two institutions. He would like to see more support and advice given tograduating seniors so they are aware of admission requirements needed to continue their education. He wasdisappointed that he has had limited contact with the college in this area and that not all the pieces are inplace in his opinion at this time.

Dr. Cutler also discussed the new Diamond Mountain Charter School program. He feels that it is off to agood start and will provide a good education experience to students who choose to attend. He alsomentioned that the new building will be used for a variety of activities besides the charter school so thatLUHS can get the most use for the money invested.

Dr. Cutler answered questions from members of the grand jury on a variety of subjects. His straightforward and honest answers were appreciated by the members

26

McKinley Elementary School Visit

On December 2, 2009, members of the Grand Jury Education Committee visited with Donna Wix, Principal,McKinley Elementary School.

The 60 year old facility currently has K through 3rd grade, but will return to K through 5th grade whenDiamond View School is completed. The school has an active School Site Council. The AcademicPerformance Index (API) was 763, which is below the 800 goal. They are actively working to achieve thisgoal. The Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) is in Improvement Status. This is being aggressively resolved.The staff is looking for ways to reduce classroom and office waste. The school is actively using theCharacter Counts Program for the students. The library was well supplied and used daily. The kitchen wassmall but clean and functional.

During our tour of the campus we found the facilities very clean and well maintained. The staff waspositive and morale was good.

Meadow View and Diamond View School Visits

On December 11, 2009, the Grand Jury visited the Meadow View (MV) and Diamond View (DV) schools,both housed on the same campus due to the closing of the DV school building last year. Principals VickyLeitaker (MV) and Patty Gunderson ( DV) addressed the group. They explained how things were runningwith two schools on one campus. Segregating the younger and older students is a big concern. Theirsystem was explained in great detail with tremendous effort given to keeping the student bodies’ separate.Mrs. Leitaker did say that the older students are a blessing this year and are very helpful to the youngerstudents. Both schools are doing the best they can with current finances and are unfortunately expectingmid year cuts that will further impact the operation of the two schools. DV and MV are both on programimprovement status with regards to state testing. They each have one sub group that is not progressing atthe same rate as the others. Strategies have been implemented to address the progress of these groups. Anafter school program for homework has begun at DV. The MV has expended more money for classroomaides in hopes of improving test scores. The School Site Council is active at both schools.

Although there were numerous activities occurring during the visit, it was noted that Mrs. Leitaker andMrs. Gunderson were calm and in control of the situations. They answered our questions honestly andprofessionally. The Grand Jury feels the students are in good hands.

Johnstonville School Visit

On December 14, 2009, Grand Jury members visited with Sally Clark, Principal, Johnstonville School.The school houses kindergarten through eighth grade. The API score for Johnstonville was 785 in 2009,well above the 760 that is required. The School Site Council is very active. They currently meet twice amonth, and is largely responsible for bringing the school up to standards after the resignation of the previousprincipal in April 2009. The current enrollment is 225 students. The school experienced some staff cutsin June 2009, with the potential of more cuts at the end of this school year. Staff morale was very low during

27

layoffs, but is currently showing improvement. Some faculty members have been staying after hours totutor students with no compensation. Another area that was affected due to the budget cuts was bus routeshad to be reduced. The school has some long term goals they are working on: Funding for after schoolprograms; paving around gymnasium; and improving the area where parents pickup their students.

When members of the Grand Jury toured the school, it was apparent the grounds were well maintained.The group also received a tour of the library, various classrooms, multi- purpose room, computer lab, andthe recently completed gymnasium.

Susanville School District

On December 16, 2009, Dr. Gary McIntire, Superintendent of Susanville Schools addressed the GrandJury. He began his presentation by giving a report on the progress of the remodeling of Diamond ViewMiddle School. The removal of asbestos has been completed and construction will begin as soon as theboard approves the contract. The goal is to have Diamond View School open by September 2010. Dr.McIntire gave a detailed plan on how the district will get as much construction completed as possible withthe funding that is available. Dr. McIntire seemed to have a plan for all contingencies and was well awareof problems facing the district. The Grand Jury found his presentation thorough and informative.

Richmond School Visit

On January 7, 2010, members of the Education committee met with Ms. Cynthia Nellums, Principal ofRichmond School. Ms. Nellums gave a short update about the status of the school. She informed thegroup the school is debt free and the enrollment is approximately 210 students with an API of 863. At thetime of the visit, the School Site Council was not very active (only two parents were involved). Futureprojects within the next five years at Richmond include reroofing the gymnasium and remodelingclassrooms. Mrs. Nellums stated the school has an active music program. She also mentioned the needfor a program for higher achievers to qualify for the U.C. system. After the update, members of the GrandJury toured the campus and found the facilities and grounds well maintained. One interesting item ofinterest was the Absorptive Media Removal System used to remove arsenic from the water.

Big Valley School Visit

On March 23, 2010, the Education committee visited Big Valley School in Beiber. SuperintendentDr. Richard Rhodes provided a guided tour of all the schools in his K-12 district. As with all schools inCalifornia, Big Valley is facing tremendous financial challenges. Due to budget constraints, the elementaryschool in Adin was closed and students and staff were moved to the campus in Beiber. This move took agreat deal of planning and meetings with parents and community members so they could understand whythe move, although unpopular, was economically necessary. There have been many layoffs of classifiedand certificated employees and one administrator this year. The average daily attendance is in decline. Ifthis trend continues they may have to look into consolidation with other small districts. Many counties arelooking at possible consolidations next year. A representative from Fresno-Bakersfield area visitedDr. Rhodes to discuss how to consolidate schools in their area so the problem is statewide.

28

Commendation: Even though things are very tough for the schools, Big Valley is fortunate to haveDr. Rhodes as their leader. He works tirelessly to try and provide a quality education for his students. Heis able to make hard decisions and backs up all his decisions with facts so that everyone can see why certainmoves had to be made. The atmosphere at the school is positive with everyone doing what they can toprovide a quality education for the students.

The Grand Jury would like to commend Dr. Rhodes and his staff for their hard work in dealing with theproblems they face.

Lassen Community College

The Grand Jury asked Dr. Doug Houston to respond with a letter regarding the status of the accreditationof Lassen Community College. The following letter was submitted by Dr. Houston.

29

30

31