In June, the Yolo County Grand Jury came out with a report that alleged that Yolo County Sheriff Ed Prieto had been responsible for a wide variety of issues within his department, ranging from mismanagement, bad behavior and poor leadership, to non-compliance with county policies and procedures.
Critics have alleged that the Grand Jury report was vague and insufficient. Nevertheless, the Yolo County Board of Supervisors is required by statute to respond to each of the Grand Jury’s recommendations.
Recommendation 1 By September 30, 2014, the HR Department shall review and revise the County nepotism policies and existing practices including prevention, monitoring and reporting of conflicts of interest.
Yolo County Deputy CAO/HR (County Administrative Officer/Human Resources) Director response: This recommendation will be implemented by December 31, 2014.
Recommendation 2 The HR department will annually review nepotism practices in the Sheriff’s Department. Such a review shall ensure ethical standards are established and a procedural firewall exists between related employees. This annual review will be presented to the Board of Supervisors with findings and recommendations by December 1, 2014 and each following year.
Yolo County Deputy CAO/HR Director response: By December 1, 2014, and periodically thereafter, Human Resources will review adherence to the nepotism policy in the Sheriff’s department.
Recommendation 3 By September 30, 2014, the CAO shall review and revise the County’s mandated training requirements and compliance with the State of California Public Service Ethics as directed by AB 1234.
Yolo County CAO response: The recommendation has been implemented. Staff have completed a review of the mandated training requirements and confirm the County is in compliance with AB 1234.
Recommendation 4 By November 30, 2014, the Sheriff’s Department in collaboration with HR shall review and revise the evaluation standards (written and unwritten) used for all department job classifications to establish a fair and objective set of written guidelines.
Yolo County Deputy CAO/HR Director response: Human Resources has developed a set of written guidelines designed to ensure fair and objective evaluations. However, this recommendation will not be implemented because it is not within the authority of Human Resources. The State constitution provides independent authority to elected department heads thus limiting the role of County administration. Appointed county staff strive to provide advice and assistance whenever possible. Ultimately, however, the Sheriff is an independently elected department head and not directed or evaluated by County administration. Upon request of the Sheriff, County staff are available to assist the Sheriff with this recommendation.
Recommendation 5 By September 30, 2014, the Sheriff’s Department in collaboration with HR shall develop a plan to reinforce the authority of the command staff. This plan shall define the level of authority of supervisors and managers for supervising, evaluating and effectively recommending personnel actions for the staff they oversee.
Yolo County Deputy CAO/HR Director response: This recommendation will not be implemented because it is not within the authority of Human Resources. The State constitution provides independent authority to elected department heads thus limiting the role of County administration. Appointed county staff strive to provide advice and assistance whenever possible. Ultimately, however, the Sheriff is an independently elected department head and not directed or evaluated by County administration. Upon request of the Sheriff, County staff are available to assist the Sheriff with this recommendation.
Recommendation 6 By June 30, 2015, the leadership of the Sheriff’s Department, in collaboration with HR, shall develop and implement an internal training program to promote and encourage upward mobility within the department up to and including the elected official’s position. Such a training program will serve as a blueprint for department succession planning.
Yolo County Deputy CAO/HR Director response: Human Resources stands ready to assist the Sheriff in implementing this recommendation if he so chooses. It is important to note, however, that Human Resources cannot unilaterally implement this recommendation as the State constitution provides independent authority to elected department heads thus limiting the role of County administration. Appointed County staff strive to provide advice and assistance whenever possible. Ultimately, however, the Sheriff is an independently elected department head and not directed or evaluated by County administration. Upon request of the Sheriff, County staff are available to assist the Sheriff with this recommendation.
Recommendation 7 By December 1, 2014, HR shall review and update Harassment and Ethics online training programs and implement a training program that includes classroom (in-person) training.
Yolo County Deputy CAO/HR Director response: This recommendation will be implemented. Like most cities and counties, Yolo relies on online trainings and coursework from organizations such as the Attorney General’s Office. The AB 1234 training and Harassment Prevention training, though online, are updated annually. These mandated programs have been available online in Yolo County for six years; that timeframe makes now a good time to evaluate their effectiveness. Should Human Resources determine that a classroom training is a more effective method to deliver the training, those opportunities will be made available. By December 1, 2014, Human Resources will pilot classroom training for Harassment Prevention and obtain evaluations from participants in order to assist with the determination of effectiveness.
Recommendation 8 By November 1, 2014, the CAO shall revise and extend the current 360 degree evaluation process to include an opportunity for all elected department heads to
Yolo County CAO response: This recommendation has already been implemented. Since the implementation of 360 evaluations in October 2012, all Yolo County elected department heads have been extended the opportunity to be evaluated in this manner; only one has taken advantage of this opportunity to date.
A week after the Grand Jury’s allegations emerged, the county proposed a new way forward. Yolo County Sheriff-Coroner Ed Prieto and the Yolo County Board of Supervisors announced a path forward to assess the items of concern identified in the recent Yolo County Grand Jury report concerning the internal operations of the Yolo County Sheriff’s Office.
Former Woodland Mayor Skip Davies agreed to chair an independent working group charged with completing an evaluation of the issues identified in the Grand Jury report, and to make recommendations where appropriate to improve the operational environment within the sheriff’s department. Sheriff Prieto has encouraged representatives of the five labor organizations that serve the department to actively participate with Mayor Davies in the working group. The Board of Supervisors and the sheriff recognize and appreciate Mayor Davies’ willingness to assist in this effort.
The Board of Supervisors and Sheriff Prieto are working with Mayor Davies to identify the scope and methodologies for the working group. Areas of analysis are expected to include the issues raised in the Grand Jury report, plus a comprehensive look at the workplace climate, hiring processes, current training practices and employee evaluation processes.
“It is important to me not only that the issues raised by the grand jury be fully analyzed, but also that all of the employees within the Sheriff’s department be provided an opportunity to be heard,” said Yolo County Sheriff-Coroner Ed Prieto back in June. “I fully support this effort and believe it will enhance my personal commitment and the department’s commitment to excellence and the performance of our duties with increased professionalism and integrity.”
The Board of Supervisors and the sheriff take these issues very seriously. “The Board of Supervisors is encouraged by the Sheriff’s support of a comprehensive evaluation,” said Yolo Board of Supervisors Chair Don Saylor. “A safe and supportive work environment for all county employees is very important to the board, and any effort to strengthen that foundation is a step in the right direction.”
Will this approach enable the county to move forward?
The Grand Jury report itself has been accused of embellishment, and failure to substantiate the most serious charges. As Supervisor Matt Rexroad indicated, it was unclear from the report whether a number of the statements made by the Grand Jury had been factually proven or whether these were simply allegations.
“This thing is written so poorly that I can’t tell whether …” he started. “There’s certainly enough in here for my mind that gives us every reason to go in and look at this operation very carefully.” However, he was concerned as to whether all of these statements by the Grand Jury were facts that they verified or whether these are just accusations.
Or, as he put it another way, “The Grand Jury took it about halfway there, in my mind. It leaves a lot of questions that are unanswered and I think we have a responsibility to follow up on that.”
—David M. Greenwald reporting
is there anything more useless than the county’s official response?
July 31st’s piece on light pollution?