Introduction

Foreperson's Statement

Introduction to the Grand Jury

Editor's Message (Edit and Publications Committee Report)

Committee Reports

Animal Health Committee

City of Los Angeles Department of Animal Regulation

Criminal Justice Committee

Committee Report

Citizen Complaints

Sheriff's Department Inmate Welfare Fund

Education and Government Operations Committee

Centinela Valley Union High School District

Implementation of Proposition 227

Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum - Health and Safety Concerns

Health and Human Services Committee

Committee Report

Welfare Fraud Prevention and Investigation

Emergency Medical Services

Restaurant and Food Market Inspections

Jails Committee

Jail Inspections

Juvenile Hall Facilities

Food Service in Juvenile Detention Camps

Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus in Jails and Lockups

Pomona Superior Court Juvenile Holding Area

Whittier Court House: Safety & Privacy Concerns

Research and Follow Up Committee

Analysis of Implementaion of Prior Grand Jury Recommendations

Audit Committee Report

Complaints Committee Report

Speakers and Events Committee Report

Appendix A - Cost Effectiveness Analysis

Appendix B - Funding Requirements for Grand Jury Activities

To: Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors

Residents of Los Angeles County

It gives me great pleasure to present to you the Final Report of the 1998-99 Los Angeles County Grand Jury. This report is the product of 23 citizens from communities throughout the County representing a cross section of economic, ethnic, age and educational backgrounds.

Each member possessed an independent mind and strong principles, which sometimes led us into spirited discussions. However, we soon recognized that it was precisely from our diversity and intensity of opinion that we drew our strength as a deliberative body. We learned to respect and value our differences. It was a challenging and demanding year, yet a very worthwhile one of significant accomplishment.

Those selected to serve on the Grand Jury have completed their task with a high degree of dedication and commitment, while serving as volunteers with both professionalism and distinction. They contributed a year of their lives to perform an important judicial function and to assist the County and other local government agencies to improve their fiscal management as well as administrative operations. The achievements embodied in this report represent the collective efforts of this dedicated group.

The Grand Jury holds criminal hearings in cases involving major crimes. These include investigative and indictment hearings. In the latter, using the standard of "strong suspicion," the jury evaluates evidence presented by the District Attorney and determines whether persons should be charged with those crimes and tried in Superior Court. The cases we typically hear are the serious, complicated, and/or high profile matters. The hearings included such offenses as murder, extortion, insurance fraud, narcotic trafficking and conspiracy.

During the first eleven months, this jury devoted 35 percent of its time to criminal matters. We conducted 32 indictment hearings and 3 investigative hearings. We heard from approximately 429 witnesses, during 76 days of testimony and indicted 121 persons. Given this workload, it is estimated that if these cases came before a judge in a preliminary hearing, the cost to the judicial system would exceed $2 million. With the cost of the Grand Jury's proceedings estimated at less than $200,000, one can easily see that the savings to the taxpayer through the use of the Grand Jury is significant.

Civil Investigations

The civil function of the Grand Jury consists of investigating city and county government and special districts of local government. Civil investigation results in recommendations to save taxpayers' dollars and improve services. This Final Report reflects the best collective efforts of the Grand Jury in carrying out its responsibility to study and report on the economy and efficiency of government. The Grand Jury held two formal training sessions to assist us in this endeavor. I recommend that future grand juries continue this practice.

All jurors volunteered to serve on two or three study committees, and responded with enthusiasm to whatever assignment was given to them. I want to express my heartfelt appreciation for their dedication and commitment.

Each of our six study committees proposed several worthwhile audit topics. Since our budget was inadequate to pursue all but a few areas of investigation we identified as critical, we had to prioritize our studies. Four major audits were conducted by the audit firm, and even these were limited in scope due to budget constraints. Ten more studies were performed by the Jury committees themselves. Several other pertinent requests for specific investigations came to us mid-year, and were rejected for lack of funds. In addition to the formal audits and committee studies contained in this report, the committees made numerous preliminary inquiries that did not lead to formal studies or reports.

As we pursued our duties, we learned a great deal about local government. We found, by in large, it is being administered by capable and conscientious public officials and employees who deserve more credit than the public generally affords them. There are, of course, always areas for improvement and this report identifies some, along with some constructive suggestions. We appreciate the many officials and their staffs who responded openly and courteously to our questions.

On behalf of the Grand Jury I would like to especially thank our Legal Advisor, Stephen Licker, for his outstanding guidance and extreme patience in the face of seemingly endless questions on our part. Our Secretary, Velma Moore, and Bailiff Tim Fox served us admirable, as did Richard Colby the Grand Jury Court Reporter. We owe special thanks to Shellie Gilmore who was responsible for the production of this Final Report.

I know that I speak for every member of the Grand Jury when I say that it has been an honor and a privilege to serve the residents of Los Angeles County in this capacity.

Sincerely,

Jeanne L. Kennedy

Foreperson

INTRODUCTION TO THE GRAND JURY

The Los Angeles County Grand Jury is a volunteer body of 23 Los Angeles County citizens charged and sworn to conduct criminal indictments, respond to citizen complaints, and inquire into matters of civil concern within the boundaries of Los Angeles County and incorporated cities within these boundaries. In addition, the Grand Jury is required to inquire into alleged public offenses committed or triable within the County. Grand Jury duties, powers, responsibilities, qualifications, and the selection process are set forth in the California Penal Code section 888 et seq.

The Grand Jury reviews and evaluates procedures, methods, and systems used by governmental agencies to determine whether they comply with the state objectives of the agency and if their operation can be made more efficient and effective. It may inquire into any aspect of county/city government, including special legislative districts and joint powers agencies, to ascertain that the best interest of Los Angeles County residents are being served.

The Grand jury functions lawfully only as a body; no individual grand juror acting alone has any power or authority. Meetings of the Grand Jury are not open to the public. All matters discussed before the Grand Jury and votes taken are required, by law, to be kept private and confidential. The end result of inquiries into civil matters are released to the public via a final report which is approved, prior to release, by the Supervising Judge of the Superior Court.

The Penal Code requires the Grand Jury to:

• Inquire into the condition and management of jail within the County,

• Investigate and report on the operations, accounts, and records of county officers, departments, and functions,

• Inquire into the willful or corrupt misconduct in office of public officers,

• Submit a final report of its findings and recommendations, no later than the end of its term, to the Supervising Judge of the Superior Court. Agencies to which these recommendations are directed are required to respond to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors within 90 days after the final report is released.

The Grand Jury also conducts indictment proceedings wherein the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office presents evidence and witnesses, under oath, in criminal matters. The Grand Jury must determine whether there is sufficient evidence, i.e. a strong suspicion that a criminal offense was committed and the alleged suspects were involved, to bring an indictment. It requires a vote of 14 members of the Grand Jury to indict.

Grand juror candidates must meet all of the following qualifications:

• be a citizen of the United States.

• be at least 18 years old

• be a resident of California and Los Angeles County for at least one year immediately prior to selection.

• possess ordinary intelligence, sound judgment, and good character.

• possess sufficient knowledge of the English language to communicate, both orally and in writing.

In addition, a candidate cannot;

• be serving as a trial juror in any California court.

• have been discharged as a grand juror in any California court within one year of the beginning date of service, July 1.

• be serving as an elected public officer.

Grand Jurors are paid per diem based on actual days worked (currently $25.00 per day) and provided free parking. Holidays, vacation and other time off are taken without remuneration. Mileage is reimbursed for travel between jurors' residences and the Grand Jury office and for travel on Grand Jury business (currently 27.5 cents per mile).

An interested person who meets the required qualifications should request further information from:

The Los Angeles county Grand Jury

13-303 Criminal Courts Building

210 West Temple Street

Los Angeles, CA 90012

(213) 974-3993

Also visit the Grand Jury website http://www.co.la.ca.us/grandjury

One of the major goals of each Grand Jury is the assembling and final publication of the jury's Final Report in keeping with the mandated end-of-term date of June 30th of each year. In order to assure the on-time completion of this task, an Edit and Publication Committee was formed early on in the term of the `98-'99 Grand Jury. The various committee studies and full-blown audits which were conducted must be performed on a schedule which does not conflict with the indictment function of the Grand Jury. This required that committee members, and especially edit and publications staff, work after hours, evenings, or on weekends, in order to edit, format, review for content, and implement final printing arrangements, in keeping with the mandated June 30th deadline.

The `98-'99 Final Report is the product of the concentrated group activity and contains a number of important study subjects and key recommendations, which, if acted upon, should contribute significantly to improving many aspects of county and city governmental operations. This report will be directed to the Board of Supervisors for review, response and, hopefully, action, in appropriate areas under its jurisdiction. It will also be widely distributed to agencies studied, all communications media, school districts, libraries, public interest groups, superior court judges and support personnel, District Attorney, Sheriff, and chiefs of police, Probation Department, as well as being available on-line on the Internet.

It is the strong desire of the Committee that this level of increased exposure will lead to an increase in the awareness of the workings of the Grand Jury and will lead to a substantial broadening of the pool of available citizen talent willing to volunteer for this valuable and unique public service.

As a further incentive to motivate additional prospective grand jury candidates, a detailed cost effectiveness log was compiled which documented, in fairly precise monetary terms, the cost savings accruing to the county through the use of the grand jury indictment procedure versus a Municipal Court preliminary hearing. While the grand jury indictment process is designed to afford accused individuals all appropriate legal safeguards under the law, it also serves to shorten the time required to determine whether a full trial is warranted, protects the identity of witnesses, prevents prejudicial pretrial publicity, and generally improves the efficiency of the entire judicial system with its emphasis on timely adjudication of the facts presented. Grand jury hearings and procedures mitigate against unwarranted delays and strongly support the old axiom which states, "Justice delayed is justice denied."

The cost effectiveness log for the 1998-99 Grand Jury, documenting cost savings of $2.0 million plus through the services of this body, along with a budget increase request letter are attached as Appendix A in this Final Report. It is respectfully suggested that members of the Board of Supervisors closely review these Appendix A exhibits with respect to county budget allocation decisions currently underway for the 1999-2000 fiscal year.

James F. Slatic, Chairman

Deborah R. Last

Ruth Sakovich